Before the inevitable debate over how high 'high' is, may I submit that everyone--all of us here, certainly--listen to "Mid-fi" systems due to the fact that there is no metric for measuring this particular form of highness as though it was a measure of a physical presence. If anyone ever attains the state of true High-fi--I suppose we'll all hear about it. Maybe before their ascension.
HiFi vs MidFi
I’m a relative noob to the audiophile scene, having just invested in an integrated amp and upscale (for me) speakers. From time to time, I hear the term “MidFi” for some components. Is there an objective or just largely accepted definition for this term? I’d be curious to hear feedback on what constitutes HiFi vs. MidFi across various components.
196 responses Add your response
OMG. Now I have to go all pedantic, explaining no it has nothing to do with what "if" means. If means if. If denotes a hypothetical. Duh. Therefore, asking what do you mean by if, the obvious inference is there is no hypothetical. The original, "If anyone ever attains" well, what if I have? And who is this "we"? The meaning of "we" is not in doubt. There is no need to redefine "we". The only question, who is "we"? Not me! See? Time was everyone could follow such simple logic. Time was no one would even think to redefine words. How far we have fallen. What dark times are these. https://youtu.be/IWCNDbWcSLY?t=171 |
And after two pages (and change) we find that as with all audio terms bandied about as though they mean something, "Mid-Fi" and "Hi-Fi" have as many different meanings as there are people reading/commenting on them. IOW, they are useless as they have no generally accepted definition to the "group" posting here. Timex (’cause RS is dead) = mid-fi Tice = hi-fi Right! Now go listen to some tunes :-) |
@waytoomuchstuff, great experiential summary/fun read, thanks. I find it interesting how much flexibility was built into gear in the past. What did manufacturers have in mind when they gave us A/B/C speaker selectors? I think so That we would put long runs of speaker cable to other rooms outfitting music in an entire home with one receiver. Certainly not to put multiple speakers in the same room and switch the way you see many of today’s audiophiles set up listening rooms. Many receivers Had a switch to reverse L/R , why? mid-fi (mid range of product line) had bass/treble knobs. Hi end of product line included a midrange knob. To tease something more out of your speakers. a Loudness button to contour low volume listening, but I liked it at all volumes. Like sprinkling sugar on strawberries, just makes it better. muting button...why? Too lazy to turn the volume button! having that tone control flexibility..... you could blindfold a listener to A/B speakers where in truth you play the same speaker with/without loudness button. how many of us would be fooled, call A midfi and B hifi?. |
Midrange knob was to tease those great lyrics out of Dylan LPs. Many average consumers just simply wanted what they wanted. I like bass...give me more bass. If I can't turn up the bass, no good. The idea of "the absolute sound" or recreating the recording space was far more of a radical niche concept in those days. Or at least the internet didn't exist to let those in the niche connect 24/7 like we do here. Bell and whistle features for marketing benefit is nothing new nor unique to audio. We still have it today. How many us have DACs with 7 filters but always use the same one that the reviews concluded was best? Cheers, Spencer |
When I purchased my very first high end system to replace my Pioneer Elite receiver, I went with a Rotel combo preamp and amp which was the RB1080). I was told countless times by people including dealers that my Rotel was good “mid-fi” stuff. I bought Def tech BP30 speakers and was told that was mid-fi too. At the time I took it to mean the brand and price. |
Hi bigtex late to respond but ok. Hi-fi High Fidelity ... we are living in a golden age of High Fidelity. The "mid-fi' stuff is just fine. It is more than just fine. The thing is this: There is some music and what is the meaning of that music? This is important despite the fact that I cannot tell you what it is. Why? Because music is music, it is not words. So can have excellent verbal descriptions of paintings or music but music has musical meaning. How do we get that musical meaning? Well by listening with open minds (and maybe some training and experience but that is not all that important). Does the equipment impact on this? Well actually no. No! If you break down a concerto into its components; the melody remains the same whatever the gear is. The key does not differ either. The harmony is not different. Pretty all the music is the the same. You want good hi fi gear : well you will get better timbral accuracy (ie a violin will sound closer to a real violin). This is good and yeah I go for it. But if you have mid-fi gear will you enjoy music less? No. But back to my point about a 'golden age'. My giddy aunt! Marantz, Onkyo, and Yamaha and others will give you a truly superlative amplifier for peanuts. Goodness knows how many great budget speakers are out there. And when I say budget ... let me add my personal experience: I have $20K speakers but my earlier 1K speakers delivered the music. And don't get me started on sources. Dude: Welcome to the world of Hi-Fi. It is really great. There will be tons of people who are zealots and pronounce "it is the music man ..." I say they are kinda right ... actually they have to be right by definition but you have come onto a hi-fi forum and the way I see it is that the gear is fine tuning. |
add my personal experience: I have $20K speakers but my earlier 1K speakers delivered the music. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There is more snakeoil going on in speaker hype that all other snakeoil concerning all things audio,, well, except for the cable snakeoil, Nothing can touch that snakeoil But speakers take 2nd place. My WBer things can outperform any xover speaker in midrange xover types I conisder midfi, WBers hifi. Take Sonus faber, nice speakers, they use Scan Speak. Scanspeak are not going to outperform my WBers in WB fq’s. SF =$$$$$$$$ My WBers = $. There ya go, pay hifii prices, yet you only get midfi midrange. Sure Souns fabers perform well on simply jazz, you get some complex full jazz orchestra /classical orchestra going, the midrange in the Sonus fabers fall short vs midrange of a WBer. Sonus faber on a good amp, WEll my Seas single W18E001 + Millennium will perform equal to this mega priced Sonus faber. Seas W18 $300 + Mundorf 10uf Supreme @ $250 + Millennium @$350 + Mundorf 6 uf cap SESGO @ $300 X 2 = alotttt less than Sounus faber. Equal performance. Now a pair of WBers @ $550. Blows Seas’ away. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlOhiTpZCek&t=17s |
Sonus faber on a good amp, WEll my Seas single W18E001 + Millennium will perform equal to this mega priced Sonus faber.Not true. I have listened to many of your videos, including with the Thors. I have not heard a single video of yours with sound anywhere near the ballpark here. You are standing in the parking lot outside the stadium. I have heard your Wideband drivers too.....not better than even the Seas. There is a level of refinement in the Sonus Faber video that your system is miles away from......Sorry but yours is in the ! |
Now wait just one minute\ Are you saying Scan speak is superior to Seas.. How is this possible Both Midwoofers are 87db True Scanspeak madea very unique midwoofer with the Neo Dymium magnet, which indeed will out perform the Seas in dynamics. But then it all comes down to Carbon Fiber cone vs Magnesium. I'ma Mag fan. I serious doubt I'm going to like Carbon Fiber in upper mids with vocals/instruments classical muisc. This is where it come down to. Which do you prefer Seas Trym Or SonusFaber. I know which will have superior upper bass/lower midrange. The name Sonus Faber in big neon lights, flashing. Works every time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMQi4FgGuIc |
.not better than even the Seas
Well if we put the Thors back together and put 1 Thor on 1 channel, WBer (single 8) on the other. You might wish to vote for Thor. But that low sens will not work for my classical music. The WBer has no resonsnces at low/mid vol Its the only speaker that would work for my cup of tea. Not a panel, horn, stat, xover type. The sony cam does no justice to the WBer's performance. Music starts at 6:41. oh How I loved my Thors. Life like vocals, nice solid punch in the bass. clean smooth mids, no over hang resonances. no fatigue. Will give Sonus Faber 2 ways with the incredible Neo Dymium midwoofer from ScanSpeak, a good run for its money... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFr2NTqTT40 |
You see this is the problem when a speaker has a some sort of super tweeter. Sibilance If you can't hear the hisss Its going to grate on my nerves. + Multi midwoofers also creates issues. SF is trying to compete with Wilson's multi things. Tekton is also trying this mega multi speaker thing. Most drivers made by Scanspeak, Seas have serious flaws. And then we have these labs trying their hand at the idea that **More = better** Sorry ain't buying. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afVwwe9Gyz4 |
And then we have these labs trying their hand at the idea that **More = better** ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ then again , sometimes more is better Music start 8:34 Diana Krall,, never sounded so good. It was only after the DLW4 was added in the mix, is when Diana Krall’s voice took on sensuous charms. Came alive. I was like,,**ohh OK so this is Diana Krall doing her magic** A single DLVX8 just somehow did not capture all Diana has to give. 5 drivers,, more can be better. + New developements soon, Feburary/March. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgWR6IbqOOg&t=12s |
I should have let Diana's sing on the 1st tract, The W4 opened up the magic of that song. Just mind blowing how sensuous Diana 's voice. + I am blabbing too much in that vid.. Here try this test Miles davis comes in at 1:41 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcjYiZztHgM&t=1s |
Are you sayingI am saying that the Sonus Faber sounds better than anything you have shown. Nothing to do with the name, nothing to do with the manufacturer of the drivers. It is about how it sounds. It sounds coherent, yours doesn't, at least to me. Period. I could care less who made the drivers or designed the speaker. It is miles ahead of what I hear from yours. IMO. You like shouty, splashy sound. You think that is high fidelity. I don't agree. It is that simple. |
the Sonus Faber sounds better
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Oh yeah, i see what you are saying Sonus Faber has a big name attached **they have to must sound better* than my Frankensteins.. ok got it. wait til The Speaker Project is complete. Gonna run a WBer 3 way with Beryllium neo tweeter. Lets see what Sonus Faber can do. The Guarneri has the super neo magnet. Thats all it has going for it. Ck out the price, ck out the web page. I never went in for commercial. My Thors came as a kit. Trust me the Guarneri's ain;t going to outshoot a Seas W18EX001 /Millennium. That Guarneri is so over priced. A guy in a Armani suit who has no sensibility to know what is high fidelity. https://www.sonusfaber.com/en/products/guarneri-tradition/ |
Guarneri's made Sterophiles front page. There you go, ck out price on last page My Frankensteins will not ever make Sterophile. So Sonus faber MUST BE superior. A speaker is ONLY great IF it makes Sterophile's front page NEWS. Got it. Not going to stop my The Speaker Project from completion. https://www.stereophile.com/content/sonus-faber-guarneri-tradition-loudspeaker |
Oh yeah, i see what you are sayingWell, no you didn't see what I was saying, because what I actually said was this. Nothing to do with the name, nothing to do with the manufacturer of the drivers. It is about how it sounds. It sounds coherent, yours doesn't, at least to me. Period. I could care less who made the drivers or designed the speaker.Judging of sound quality is on an absolute scale and has nothing to do with price. On the absolute scale, yours don't cut it, IMO. Trust me the Guarneri's ain;t going to outshoot a Seas W18EX001 /Millennium. Well, I actually listened to the videos of both and I couldn't disagree with you more. The SF win that shootout in a landslide. Sorry. A guy in a Armani suit who has no sensibility to know what is high fidelity.If you are referring to me, I don't own an Armani suit. I am just an average working person that happens to think your Frankenstein is not even mediocre sounding. You enjoy it, that is all that matters. You are the one with no clue about high fidelity. Video after video that you have posted prove that beyond any doubt. |
If you are referring to me, I don’t own an Armani suit. ~~~~~~~~The guy listening to the Guarneri hasa Gorgio Armani suit on. AS if that alone is convincing,,a guy with big bucks of course choses only the very best, = Sonus Fqaber What a bunch of snakeoil’ Trust me the Seas Thors if you are not aware are bench mark gold standard 2 ways. Dont believe me, go to Troel Gravesen’s web page. There he shares his opinions on Seas EXCEL speakers. The Excel midwoofers are pure neutral, with zero overhang resonances up to say 1800hz. 2khz its pushing the limit. Which is why i runa 10uf cap up to say 1600hz. Midwoofers such as Scan speak and Seas can’t compete witha good quality WBer. You no doubt have not yet heard a 1st class WBer so you have no idea what I am trying to say. My WBer will outshoot the Guarneri. Why? db sensitivity thats why. I’ve gone over this fact, tested and true, so many times here past few months. I can’t explain further. If we get 10 giolden ear aupdiophiles judgeing between my WBer system vs any Sonus Faber,,of course unanimous vote Sonus Faber, SF gets the Cigar My WBer system get the cigar butt, as a consolation prize. THE Industry must always wins. Stereophile Magazine says yes, this is so true. Out team must always win. Popular vote always wins, Consumerism, commercialism. I just posted 2 vids of my Thors and WBers, can’t you hear?? You may need better computer speakers. Sorry not at all impressed with any of the Sonus Faber models. Miles Davis? Any speaker can pull off Miles Davis. Exception The Bose which is not a speaker any hoot. |
You no doubt have not yet heard a 1st class WBerYou are wrong yet again. At least you are consistently wrong. My WBer will outshoot the Guarneri.Nope, not a chance. Already said that. You may need better computer speakers.I am listening through my Sennheiser HD-58x headphones, which are by far better than your WBer. Sorry not at all impressed with any of the Sonus Faber models.At least the SF are coherent. Frankenstein is an incoherent, shouty mess. |
Heard WBers Check Will not request lab name. Sennheiser HD-58X, the finest, Check vs my Walmart $9.99 computer speakers. So you can hear details I can't Regardless have you ever in your life heard a Seas W18EX/Millennium? Seas top drivers ya know they have to be musical. I wuld not trade in my WBer system for any speaker in the world. New developments for early 2022 planned. Regardless of your opinion, I believe my WBer system in its calss, is the finest speaker in the world. 2nd to none. I would need 5 honest audiophiles blind test, Seas, Sonus Faber and my WBer system. These judges would not be informed what speakers were being tested. All they know is speaker A, B , C. and we swap them around. and we do not tell them OK this is speaker A. All they do is write notes and given 3 test cds, determine which speaker they liked overall performance. If mine lose i will tell they they need to get their hearing cked. |
You mean like Stereophile speaker reviews past 50 years.Actually, Stereophile performs a series of measurements on every speaker that gets reviewed. The text of the review can be taken with a grain of salt. The measurements tell a lot. The measurements are objective and scientific both. I would love to see Frankenstein measured to see how it performs. You know, frequency response, cabinet resonance, spectral decay, off axis response, impulse response. To paraphrase a famous line, you wouldn't be able to handle the truth.😢 |
you wouldn't be able to handle the truth.😢
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yeah Jacks best line ever, The real truth is. most audiophiles /DIYers don't take measurements all that seriously. I just learned how to read a fq/db graph. Tells somethings but only hints at how the speaker ** might perform*. What is most important, Stereophile and Audiophiles never discuss ina speakers construct, TYPE MATERIAL OF CONE (underscore) , StereoP only makes a passing comment, So what do they KNOW. nada + Type magnet + size magnet + db sens. These 4 items are super critcal and determine how a speaker performs. Paper paper composite Carbon Fiber Aluminum Magnesium. The last material is the only cone I consider. Tweeters. well take your pick. Frankenstein can not be measured at Mr Carlson's lab. Won;'t fly,,, He;';ll take 1 look at it and say **what is THIS? some kind of joke**\ So lets not go there. Its a mix mash of sorts. And just wait til I add in a DLVX6. WBer 3 way + Thors. My hunch is, a winner. There is not one speaker at any price that even holds my interest. Especially not the Zu's. This ain't 1970 , this is 2121, soon 2022. The Acoustic Research/Advents were the bang of that era. Not any longer. The WBer has resurrected from the land of the dead. Frankensteins blood is flowing, he has breath. Have you ever in your life heard superior midrange? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qrqv5nOjLuw |
Frankenstein can not be measured at Mr Carlson's lab.Who is Mr. Carlson? He;';ll take 1 look at it and sayAt least you finally got something right. This ain't 1970 , this is 2121, soon 2022.So why are you posting a video of a speaker made in 1929 as an example? I am not impressed with that driver. If you can hear AT ALL, you will note how badly the tonal balance changes once you are more than about 10 degrees off axis. It becomes immediately eliminated as a possibility for me. You double talk better than ANY politician. You hate open baffle, yet promote a video of a speaker playing while not mounted to any baffle. Frankensteins blood is flowing, he has BAD breath.I fixed it for you. Tells somethings but only hints at how the speaker ** might perform*.No, measurements tell you how speakers objectively perform in comparison with other speakers. They are invaluable for culling what is out there for what one may want to audition. You just need to understand what the measurement tells you. Listening will be the ultimate decider every time, but just ignoring available measurements is plain old dumb. Have you ever in your life heard superior midrange?I thought you hated paper cones. That is what that is, in case you didn't notice. More double talk. |
No I said, emphatically I hate paper/carbon in MIDWOOFERs, = upper bass.low midrange. The 1929 Colotura has paper, but it is only performing midrange. As for its upper bass resonances I have no idea. Point is wayyy back in 1929 we had superior midrange/vocals. Life like vocals/mids. Measurments only tell half the story Audiophiles can't read graphs and such. The only thig they are interested in is how it sounds. My WBers have zero distortion = zero fatigue. This is a measurable fact. Midwoofers and tweeters are both flawed 1 in the upper range, the other in the lower range. The 2 can not meet with a seamless STRESS FREE 2khz-3khz bands. This 1khz band is like THE most critical bandwidth. This is a evident experienced fact. If you and others wish to argue and deny, feel free. |
Carlson's Lab, Youtube. Everyone knows Carlson Even IF he canceled my belief the widwoofer/tweeter thing has issues trying to voice the seamless critical 1800hz-3khz with only a modicum degree of success, It would not matter. I know what I hear. I ain't trying to push snakeoil here. Now I know why Troels always cringes when discussing the fq joint of the midwoofer and tweeter. This is the major flaw of a midwoofer/midtweeter. WBers suffer no handicaps in this area. This is the strong point. Cohesive, seamless liebear wide band voicing. There are no speakers like WBers. Not horns, Not stats/panels, Nada. WBers stand alone. These musical wonders don't need an apologist. They sing for themselves no defense necessary. |
Audiophiles can’t read graphs and such.Speak for yourself. I would bet that most can. You can continue to flail away in the dark. You had Bache, who has a lot of experience with designing speakers that utilize wide band drivers. He knows what he is doing and you don’t. Yet you continuously dismiss him out of hand. Only a fool would do that. The 1929 Colotura has paper, but it is only performing midrange.I am now convinced that you can’t hear. It produces as much bass as your wideband. That is not saying much, but it would produce more if mounted in a properly implemented cabinet. It is definitely producing bass and that makes it a midwoofer. And it is made of paper. That video is almost as poorly done as one of yours. Again, if tone changes that much when just slightly off axis, it is a no-go.....not good unless you want to sit with your head in a vice. It then might graduate to not much more than ok. My WBers have zero distortion = zero fatigue.Based on your videos, this is nowhere close to true. To quote you, "I know what I hear." And it is not good. These musical wonders don’t need an apologist.Then why are you continuously defending and apologizing for them? |
Then why are you continuously defending and apologizing for them?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Let me get back to the OP's Q. which is Do speakers bring down a perfectly high fidelity amplification /source, down to **midfi*?? THe answer is yes. Wilson, Sonus Faber's, Zu's, Tektons are only offering more bass/highs Which is not hifi Our music is in the total midrange. Here in this super critical range is where a high fidelity speakers is distinguished from a mid-fidlity,, Mhich term is moot, There exists only high fidelity, If a speaker is not high fidelity, then it is not mid fidelity. The davidLouis yellow cone 6 is ok, but it is not high fidelity. Is it mid? Who cares, I am only interested in high. Mid does not interest me. For me, all tweeters are high fidelity But only down to 3khz. below that is all mid fidelity, Tweeters are flawed below 3k hz. same with Magnesium cone midwoofers, Great speakers below 1800hz. Above that they sound distorted = mid fi = garbage. This is the entire synopsis of my arguments for WBers. That this super duper critcal 2khz -3khz will be voiced HIGH fidelity via a high end WBer. \ xover type speakers are falwed in this tiny in size(1khz), but HUGE in music band width. If you want to deny this age old problem with xover speakers,, you really need to visit Troel Gravesen's web page. He oft mentuiions these issues, which i never quite understood til the other day. WBers stand alone from every other speaker design. WBers are Kings. |
Look I am aware my comments will rock the audiophile world. The issues with xovers/midwoofers is longggg overdue for exposure and yet with understanding. The only way to high fidelity is via knowledge. Denials will only lead to regrets. Miles Davis cd will make any speaker seem to be high fidelity, Which is only a deception. Once we play complex swaing jazz, classical orchestra the glaring defects will be clearly heard all due to the failure in voicing correctly this super critcal 1800hz-3200hz band width. Ck out a classical instrument band width chart. This 1800hz-3200hz is like 70% of the musical imagery. Vocals as well. This band width has to be voiced super strong with power and authority. This is exactly the band width where WBers excell and shine. Basically a WBer is a midrange driver with emblishments on bass and highs. Thats all it is. Midrange speaker. These speakers absoluetly require a midwoofer and tweeter. A single wide band is going to only voice the midrange with high fidelity. If you need bass as we all demand then add any woofer of your choice provided it voices as neutral as the bass of the WBer. Again tweeters area Must. Add in any tweeter as all tweeters have no breakup /distortion above 3khz. Run it down to 5k hz is my recommendation. 8uf cap will take it down to 5khz. I recommend Mundorf EVO Silvergold or if you have the cash SESGO. There is a sonic nuance with the SESGO, But again those lil guys are like $250 EACH!!!!. On midwoofers Supreme Silver Oil 10uf will take midwoofer up to say 1600hz/1800hz. Now your WBer system has been taken to near TRUE bonifide FULL range, down to 40hz and up to the stars on the tweeter. If yopu want sub 40 hz, get any sub woofer ((YUCKKKYY) I HATE sub woofers. A stand alone WBer is mid-fidelity. Just as a xover type speaker is mid-fidelity w/o adding in a high end WBer. Both need each other. But the true Tenor/Sopranos on stage are the WBers, xover types only play a supporting casting roles. Note the word *Supporting** = necessary but not front and center importance. These findings support Bache Audio's spaeker systems. Although Bache prefers super tweeters, Which I don't. Risk of bringing in sibilance. |
Do speakers bring down a perfectly high fidelity amplification /source, down to **midfi*??From what I have heard on your videos, Frankenstein needs to take a big step up to make it to mid-fi. So in that sense, I agree with you. Your speakers drag your system down. These findings support Bache Audio's spaeker systems. Although Bache prefers super tweeters, Which I don't.Nope, wrong again. When implemented properly, they are no different than any other tweeter. They will be less of a problem than the whizzer cones that you love. |
whizzers allow for a wider soundstage. Rolloff? For sure, no big deal. There are 1000 tweeters out there that can sing quite well above 5khz. The only fq's I need from a high end WBer are 40hz-12khz. The 5khz-12khz from a WBer are much greater soundstage presence vs any tweeter's 5khz-12khz. But as for 10khz -20khz, here we absoluetly demand a tweeter for ambience, sheen. Over lapping all fq's brought ina unreal soundstage /presence to the music. Diana Krall never sounded so good as when I brought in the DavidLouis W4 to pad up the DLVX8. This is going further when i add in the DLVX6. xover type speakers A-Z have this critcal band width problems at 1800hz-3200hz. A WBers 3khz-5khz will always smash a tweets 3khz-5khz. Its the nature of the beast. back in 2002 I asked about all speaker designs, flaws and +'s. No one even came close to my discussion of the obvious flaws of the xover types vs the WBer types. Of course back then the 2 main WBers, Fostex, Lowther were not very good, not high fidelity. Now fast forward some 20 yrs, now we have these high fidelity WBers. Old technology born anew. The only commercial speaker that interests me are the Bache Audio Lab. Bache Audio Speakers will deliver the finest sound in all areas. Outshooting Wilson, Dali, Zu, Tekton, Vandersteen, Sonus Faber, Tannoy And all the other xover/ concentric designs. A-Z. WBers always win + midwoofer + tweeter. Cohesive , seamless, full rich, dynamic, life like vocals, presence, lowest coloration, distortion ( these characterists all depends on which midwoofer Bache Audio employs, as I only accept Magnesium, he employs some sort of paper, paper has some unwanted resonances) |
Nope, wrong again. When implemented properly, they are no different than any other
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Its a known fact super tweeters/horn tweets have sibilance. I HATE super T's. The highs stick out like a sore thumb. I believe the BA super tweet is some sort of Fostex and is basically a compression horn. = No go. I prefer dome. Or my paper cone tweeter. Classical music does not need the 15khz=50khz super tweet range. |
Here ya go xover low sens speakers owners, Here is YOUR problem with your speakers. Tangled up mess. Note Troels suggestions, make sure to use high end (=$$$$$) caps. THese things ain't cheap, as i found out and only adds a tiny nuance to tweeters , but a nice size nuance to midwoofers in bass performance. With my WBers, I do not have to deal with this xover headache.\ You do. The type drivers Troel is refering to are very expensive. Just a pair of any of his midwoofers and tweets , equals ,, no make that MORE than a pair my WBers. Add all his midwoofers + tweets + xover components together then cabinets, wayyy out my budget. And if you are doing one of Troel's 3 way projects,,Now you are up to Wilson size prices. Not me. Budget cost for top high fidelity sound. Sonus Faber has a 2 way @ Sixteen G's. wowow weeeee http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Design_criteria.htm |
Back to the OP's all important Q. This topic is the #1 topic of importance in all Audiogon at the moment, In fact I'd say this discussion is THE SINGLE most critical Q in all Audiogon's history as a all thing Audio Discussion forum. So we are speaking of the only thing which makes a system True High Fidelity as defined by Philips Labs and that which lowers our systems to **mid fidelity** which really translates as anti-highfidelity .Which is really NOT fidelity and is what we all want to avoid. Seas Excel are high fidelity, There's no arguing that point. But at under 90db? nah, not my cup of tea, when there are WBers with same high fidelity at 90++ db sensitivity to be had. Jadis stellar amplification connected to a Bose will only result in Mid Fidelity = anti-fidelity -= junk sound. Speakers is THE component which determines whethera system is high fidelity or the OPPOSITE *mid* Fidelity. There is really only 2 camps. Is the speaker suffering resonances in the upper bass/low mids? If the answer is YES Then no amount of high end caps will fix the drivers handicaps, Its crippled, has laryngitis, thus the Tenors notes are coughy, the bass guitar /drums have upper bass fq/low mid fq's agitations. Here is where all the coloration/distortions can be found as the culprit. Midwoofers cone material. Also magnet size/type has some influences. Cone material is the main culprit to lousey upper bass/low midrange. Next we have a tiny VC tweeter attempting to sing low mids, under 2500hz. Its acceptable as per Troels testing. But a tweeter 2khz-3200hz vs a WBers' 2khz-3200hz. , Ridicuolous Tweeters have lower than 90db sens vs a WBers 90++ sensitivity. Complete total annihilation. Due to 2 factors WBer has a much larger voice coil/whizzer + higher sensitivity. Championship wrestling smackdown. This topic is The most important topi9c, ever on all Audiogon, past , present and future. Its ABOUT! D*** Time we get to the bottom of this issue. Lets pretend this problem does not exist. Lets play hide and seek. Lets ignore the facts. Sorry game over folks. The WBer team won, walkoff grand slam. Bottom 9th, 2 outs, 2 strikes. WBers reign as King Tenor Queen Soprano. No design can approach the WBers stellar performance. Not a horn, not a panel, not a ESL. And especially *that other design** can't approach a high end WBer. Caveat, we will need midwoofers/tweeters. |
invalid398 posts10-28-2021 10:31amMy WBers have zero distortion = zero fatigue. This is a measurable fact All speakers distort, they are the weakest link in the chain. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yep 100% agree, Read my post logged just above, In that post i explain all in clear unequivocal language. **Zero* = as best as ya gonna get. Almost un-measurable, not significant degree of coloration. Indeed, THE weakest link. As I clearly explain above. Jadis new KT170 intergrated via B&W will sound JUST like that, B&W sound. = highly colored *mid -fi* = no-fi = distortion/fatigue. |