Stereophile complains it's readers are too informed.

Well boohoo writers should be held accountable for their statements and claims. Bias and BS vs Truth. People should be informed and challenge these writers who are slanted towards those companies and praise equipment they shouldnt be

What really incensed me about this article is that they want to wear the mantle of knowing what good speaker design is by invoking Toole and others, but past articles clearly show they have no clue.

A great example of this was the Crystal Minissimo diamond. I was so angry I wrote a blog post about it:

https://speakermakersjourney.blogspot.com/2016/09/stereophile-slanders-crystal-cable.html

The speaker was deliberately designed for close to wall placement. The measurements show it lacks a baffle step compensation, EXACTLY the way you design a speaker for wall/bookshelf placement.  This yields a neutral speaker with elevated sensitivity than youd' get otherwise.  JA measures all this, writes a half page review, where he notes he could not place the speakers as designed, and then complains they have a deliberately "tailored" treble.

Especially since JA has a penchant for a specific non-neutral treble curve.


Basically everything in this article is proven false. Not only do they not know what a good speaker is, nor do they take the intentions of the speaker designer to heart while listening. It is very hard not to read this article is a disingenuous attempt to cover their lack of either knowledge or impartiality. Pick all that apply.

There should be hundreds of comments on this post. Where the heck is everyone lambasting this pompous magazine

Regression to the mean flavor people like... = $12 Pinot

no thanks....

Erik 
I agree with you. The point of the article  I believe that to many are automatically drawn to speakers that say or they are told have a flat response. Not enough just listen to the speakers and find out they enjoy them. Flat response is great in an anechoic chamber our out doors on the patio....