Tang Band 2145 in action

I’m one of Greg’s customers. My Bache Audio Tribeca’s replaced a PK rebuilt pair of Quad 57’s. The Tang Band drivers in my speakers are modified by Greg and augmented by 2 woofers and a super tweeter. I can testify that the midrange in my speakers is absolutely beautiful. Open and holographic and balanced from top to bottom. No thin distorted sound with these.

Take a look my site  all my speakers based on Tang Band 2145 with bass
support and supertweeter also. i find this is the best, long time ago. The male voices , piano sound natural and fool body, compare with speakers based on one driver, does not matter price ,   all my customers ( not too many) came out from speakers market, But mainstream guys reading bul------t  review  and stay on the market long long time

The Tyler speakers that I mentioned that I owned (Super Tower) have the Millenium tweeter in them, so yes, I am well aware of them and what they sound like

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Did the Tyler ST's have the Seas Excel W18's??
If yes, then you do know exactly some of the issues in both the Seas Millennium and Excel W18E001's

You and I are actually in full agreement.
I did say **worlds finest** based on comparison with B&W, many other very popular xover types, Thors come out a  clean, clean, undeniable winner ..
So recant in due order here. 
In its calss, one of, but not  THE, best sounding 2 way speakers under $2G's.

Now you and I both have issues with Seas Excel
What does this say.
Boiled down...all xover type speakers suffer from some liabilites and handicaps, 
Issues are there.
Things I can not deal with, nor will accept and never again will consider as a  Front Center speaker.
As assists, Yes , here they have a  essential place ina   WBer speaker SYSTEM.

For my orchestra, I need **more the better*** 
If I had a  Buckingham Palace size listening room.
I'd have dual DavidLouis VX8
's. The Seas W26 aluminum/magnesium woofer and  a  good tweeter.


Considering I have so much cash invested in the W18's, I'm will make good use and bring them in as assist on the 8 WBer.. all due to their magneficient magnesium cone which makes bass/upper bass/low mids, nice soft, recessed (87db), no resonances and blends perfectly with the WB's bass.


Sure there are plenty of WBers comming out of china that are garbage.
Just like you have garbage xover types. 

Xover types, the popular brands, all have some issues, No one is denying that here.
And we can all agree a  single 8 incher WB, also may not meet the needs of heavy hard hitting audioophiles that demand massive SPL, powerful SLAM bass, stunning glorious highs.

Maybe a  AER/Voxativ/Feastrex  can achieve this high level of fidelity/powerful soundstage in the 3 fq ranges,,,

I'll never know.

Bottom line
WBers voice a  seamless midrange which hardly no xover types can compete. 
Troels Gravesen speaks of this crisis in the xover points all the time on his site.
Issues which I do not hear in a  high tecg WBer8.

Is there any guarantee the Wilson's big Stonehedge size speakers voice midrange in such a  fashion to  challenge the WBers mids?

You have the attention span of a gnat. Bache is the one that told you about them

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I do suffer froma  bit of alzheimers disease,,,but yeah I am glad we have a  Tang band2145 on board here. Maybe he could chime in on his opinion of that speakers solid bass.


Yes larry and I are in agreement. Adding/padding bass with your fav woofer is a stunning success.
Just don't go too high on the midwoofer is the only requirement,,, all Midwoofers suffer over say 1600hz range,, = breakup.


Tweets also, 6khz is OK, most  good tweets can easily go down to 6k,,I'm crossing at 9kish hz with my paper tweeter. Sounds fantastic with more ambience on the highs..
As larry mention, you have the purists, some did not care for added tweet, each his own.
For large orch, = the more the better. 
Of course your Vandersteen, Wilson's , many other xover types will blow away the 8 WBer in terms of depth , and power of the Timipi drums, 
No contest.

Makes perfect sense to do so (and it's cheap).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Correct
I was listening via the pair of 1.5 inch full range,,sounded ok,,then i  fliped over the sub 3 inch woofer module,,a nd now the bass can be heard much better.
Its far from acutal presence, but gives an idea and smashes the long held notion , myth that WBers  lack some bass extention.
Which may very well have been true with the old dated technology/designs, Lowther and Fostex.
Which is why I distinguish old tech vs new high te4ch.
= Not the same.
Big improvements have been achieved.

Another dis-information that needs to be canceled out.
All WBers are about equal/the same.
Completely not true.
We have garbage
OK/acceptable with issues
Then we have the true Sopranos and Tenors.

I only am interested in the very finest offerings, Sopranos/Tenors. 
Nada mas.

You have got to be kidding.  Even my computer speakers were unable to  "dummy down" the horrible sound of those low-end drivers.

Really, really bad!  I would not put them in my car audio system, or even the car audio system in my children' cars.
Bow-wow, wooooooof!!!

So far I’m the only one here who actually heard the TB2145

You have the attention span of a gnat. Bache is the one that told you about them and he has told you how to improve it. He actually designs speakers and has a clue what he is doing. You don’t. You also have @larryi trying to help you get better sound as well. You dismiss everything he says because it doesn’t line up with what you wish you had. Not what you have, what you wish you had.

I think its clear the shootout went very well for the WBers.

Well, maybe to one of us. Your 10 of 10 on the tympany drums is your opinion. For the power of an instrument like that, the sound needs to have depth and project size. Sorry, but they don’t rate above about a 5 for me with respect to how those drums sounded. Sorely lacking the power and scale they should have.

I don't think, Mark Audio holds up against the Tang band and DavidLouis

On what do you base this? Which Mark Audio driver have you heard? Just more inane rambling.

"WOW
I was listening to the bass YT vid only via the top FR section of my $20 computer speakers,,,I decided to flip over the down firing sub portion, which houses a 3 inch woofer.
Now we are talking
Please do the same to REALLY hear these guys in action on Timipini bass."

OK & Wow...

I'm looking for $30 sub/satellite computer speakers in order that I can truly appreciate your incredible implementation of single driver speakers via your YT videos (which otherwise sound like crap).

Makes perfect sense to do so (and it's cheap).

DeKay

You do realize most of us have had, or have heard full range drivers, right?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Then why so seldom mention around here??

btw I do not like the looks of that Wide  band construction.

Also note, why high SPL???
I never got high spl as something necessary for music.
I listen low/mid vol, maybe 65 spl. Very near field listening, 8 feet.
Most of  the xover low sens groupies have not heard AER and Voxativ.
If you did, there would be more talk about both.
The most popular WBer is the Tang band, as readily avaliable at Parts Express.
TB 1808
TB1772
and what I think is their best the 2145
I don't think, Mark Audio holds up against the Tang band and DavidLouis
 So  far I'm the only one here who actually heard the TB2145 and even moreso, None of you've heard, nor are aware it even EXISTS
The davidLouis VX8.
My posts are EDU 101 in WBers  performance results vs your convention xover types.

I think its clear the shootout went very well for the WBers. 
Lousey for the xover type.
Thors at $2K + my upgardes $1200+, vs a  $550 WBer.

WOW 
I was listening to the bass YT  vid  only via the top FR section of my $20 computer speakers,,,I decided to  flip over the down firing sub portion,  which houses a  3 inch woofer. 
Now we are talking
Please do the same to REALLY hear these guys in action on Timipini bass.

driven full range). I preferred the two-way configuration, but, not because it delivered more highs or better dispersion, but, because I thought the upper midrange sounded smoother and less peaky

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm runninga  paper 3.5 inch tweet and love it..
But am considering adding a  Be with a  Nd magnet.
I like over lap in my fq range. 
The cap is a 2.2 and guess runs from 9khz on up.
So there is a  over lap of Davidlouis 9k on up with the Kasun.
Sounds fantastic.
Same with the W18's, has a  10uf cap and guessing runs up to 1600hz. 
So over laps Davidlouis 
DLVX8 taps into 40ishhz 
W18 40ish hz.
So over lap 
40hz-1600hz
Sounds super.
Ck out the new YT vid above on bass response.
Ain't too shabby for a  WBer. Which has a  stigma of lacking  good bass.

Would that be because someone pointed these things out to you?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No 
due to the DavidLouis has construuct that is cool and neat looking.
Almost a  clone of a   german labs speaker.
Mids were a  tad better in the DLVX8 vs the Tang Band.  Bass near identical. 
Why so, since both cones are completely dif materails,,I have no idea.

Blind test, you'd be lucky to guess which is which, at least on some/most records.

Glad you like your conventional LOUD speakers.
And that you found the WB's lacking. 
Whereas I found them near perfect, if not perfect  for my classical music. 

Here is a  bass test,  4 pieces for Timipini,  Elliott Carter.
I give it  10/10

WB;'s are only 1 speaker option in the wide world of speaker designs.

Here you get a  hint at the bass response.
YMMV

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QtuLPchkt0

I am very much a fan of wide-band drivers, particularly in systems employing them in multi-way systems where the wideband driver covers a very substantial part of the frequency range.

But, even among fans of this type of speaker, there is no consensus on what is better, much less best, and personal taste can dictate widely varying approaches to utilizing such drivers.  At a local dealership that builds custom speakers, I heard a system utilizing a GIP 4165 driver (12" field coil full range driver).  The experiment was between using that driver full range without any other driver, or using a tweeter at a very high nominal crossover point (first order high-pass filter to the tweeter, the 4165 driven full range).  I preferred the two-way configuration, but, not because it delivered more highs or better dispersion, but, because I thought the upper midrange sounded smoother and less peaky.  Most of the other listeners agreed with me, but, not everyone preferred the two-way version; the designer/builder preferred the single driver version.

Allow me to complete the quote for you. He basically states that after mods to the crossover, they could give competition to speakers in the 8-10k range. Not "they would", but "they could". And it doesn't say beat, it says compete. Throw the colorations he mentioned in there and it is not a ringing endorsement for the Thors IMO. It is basically a statement of you should give them consideration. See the full quote right here.

So- what's the bottom line? This standard, basic version gives a real taste of vey high end sound at a true bargain price.
If the "improved" DIY crossovers work as reported, these could give real competion to commercial speakers in the $8-10k class.

Now you admit that......

I cautally can hear things in the YT vid of the TB2145, that is now clear why I stayed with the davidLouis VX8.

Would that be because someone pointed these things out to you?

Not sure if you are aware the Millennium tweet is well known as a very accurate tweeter.

The Tyler speakers that I mentioned that I owned (Super Tower) have the Millenium tweeter in them, so yes, I am well aware of them and what they sound like.

Look if the Focals, KEF's, Vandersteens, Wislon;'s were as special as you suggest,

I have never owned any of them and have never suggested that they were special. Unlike you, I have actually been in the same room with and heard models from all of them at one time or another. Like all speakers, they have their pluses and minuses. I have heard multiple wide band speakers in person as well. None of them have been good enough to my ears to even consider replacing my fully active speakers. Not even close. 

I don't think that the posted videos show problems with the speaker; I don't think it shows any merit to them either.  It is simply the case that you cannot discern anything about the sound of speakers from a video.  If someone is listening to the video on the very kind of speakers that are purportedly defective, how can the sound have been miraculously transformed by first being played on the WB speakers used in the video such that it now sounds good on ANY speaker?  Not one bit of evidence on sound quality can come from a video.  A description of the sound, particularly a comparison to the sound of specific speakers, is at least "evidence" of sorts.

I gather from your video that you put the Tang Band driver in an already made box that was not specifically designed for this speaker.  While it is possible to get "lucky" (I've heard many examples of good sound from just such an experiment), you cannot know if your setup is ideal--there could be more performance to be had in a different cabinet, with different volume, port dimensions, cabinet resonant behavior, damping, etc.  It does not help others trying to experiment for themselves if they don't know specifics such as the Thiele Small parameters of the driver, the cabinet design, specific crossover details, etc.  It would be a miracle if this  one-shot experiment hit upon the perfection that should put the rest of the world of speaker manufacturers out of business.

So- what’s the bottom line? This standard, basic version gives a real taste of vey high end sound at a true bargain price.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Actually  did not read the Thor review, just a  snipet.

So a  taste of VERY high end.
Yeah thats accurate.

Not sure if you are aware the Millennium tweet is well known as a very accurate tweeter.
I sold the new pair off in 2 hours on Ebay at 60% off. 
2 HOURS!!!!
But at 87db , not workable for my preferences with  a   tiny 3/4 inch VC, vs the WBers  gorgeous whizzer, which radiates  wider expanse of  highs. 
I just like the fact all 3  fq's 's are sourced at one point.
 Also
 For a  really nice sound exp for my classical muisc which requires sensitivity to pick up low flute notes, and tiny hits of percussions.
Bottom line, i get everything the Millennium offered, but at a higher sensitivity.

your videos are doing those companies no favors. If I owned the company, I wouldn’t want you speaking for my product at all. You have no clue what you are doing.


There are countless YT vids on A-Z  speakers,, I can trans at least some of the sound present in the vids.
Thats all i am attempting to do,.
Give those interested in WBer's a  tiny morsel, a  taste of what they might expect.

The listener can take it or leave it.

I cautally can hear things in the YT vid of the TB2145, that is now clear why I stayed with the davidLouis VX8. 
(although I could not return the DLVX* back to china..) I was actually thinking in running both as a pair, likea  stacked WBer experiement..
In a large room, it might work. 

Ina  lrage room and folks like high SPL, you could stack duals but both the same.
Dual Tang Band 2145's would work beautifully for a  massive sound stage.
It would be a  **WOW** experience.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxvVk-r9ut8

So- other than the shelved off bass, what else needs help?
There is an emphasis in the mid treble, which does make that range a bit hot to me, with excess sibilance.

the upper mids also seem pushed a bit; this may or may not be due to a 4.8khz. resonance in the woofers.

So- what’s the bottom line? This standard, basic version gives a real taste of vey high end sound at a true bargain price.

I am posting again what I posted several days ago. The quotes above are direct copy and paste from the review you posted. They are his words, not mine. I just agree.

Coloration??
Did you read the link review I posted above.
3rd indepentent party, unbiased, down to earth review of the Seas Thors.

So the answer is yes, I did read the independent 3rd party review, and he agreed with my assessment. Again, you just cherry-picked what agreed with what you are pushing. Not the actual conclusion of the reviewer.

The cease and desist comment was an over exaggeration to make a point. However, your videos are doing those companies no favors. If I owned the company, I wouldn’t want you speaking for my product at all. You have no clue what you are doing.

Look why don't you guys PM each other , come up with a  top dawg xover type  which midrange will match, equal, or surpass the Davidlouis VX8's midrange...
, None of you will come to any agreement,. Everyone will have their own vote and so will never arrive at a   model that makes midrange so beautiful as a  high tech WBer.

Whereas the 2 WB's I mentioned, along with the more expensive models, AER, Voxativ, all 4 will carry midrange with a  high degree of fidelity and  purity, cohesiveness/seamless  imagery.

This is their inner strength.
The heart  and soul of our music is in the midrange. 

listening to the Tang band 2145 in the video,, I know why I chose the DavidLouis VX8 over it.
But I will say at $250, really nice speaker,  almost equal to the Davidlouis, highs a  bit higher.

were the manufacturer of these drivers, I would be looking to have a cease and desist order written for you.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Obvuiously you are biased agaisnt WBers to the point of PRE-judice
Or you need new computer speakers.
The sound in the YT upload is quite accurate as to how they will perform in your system.
I have no idea why you are posting such unfair criticisms.
Really,,,just chill out,...
Cease and desist,,law suits,  .
really, whats wrong, chill out, You don't like the sound in the video, just say so, but don't go on about law suits, and such..I mean really....

So you are trying to boost hits with your links

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
More like trying to acheive a balnace around here. 
The speaker board has been all, 100% about these low sensitivity *LOUD* speakers.
Time for a  change.
My posts will eventually become sources of info for others down the road who would like to understand more about these **out the ordinary* speakers.
They are indeed different.
The low sensitivity box camp will have nothing to do with WBers, and  we will remain faithful to what we know  gives us the high fidelity we've always been searching for.

Again I will point out my experiement some months back/Thors on 1 channel,
WBer on the other.
Seas = The Wet Blanket Speaker.
No thanks.

Seas Magnesiums in them (Tyler Acoustics Super Tower) which exhibited the same coloration. Clearly representative of the driver.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes Tyler and Joseph Audio, both  employ the Magnesium midwoofers.

Coloration??
Did you read the link review I posted above.
3rd indepentent party, unbiased, down to earth review of the Seas Thors.
Sure SB Acoustics makes some beautiful speakers 
No doubt, Scan speak as well.
Troels Gravesen employs all 3 and others.
He only uses the best drivers.
Look I should recant at least part of what i said above.
But not all.
Xover types are doable, if you are willing to accept their inner weaknesses and faults.
If low sens  speakers define high fidelity in your music, great, , I guess its your free choice.
My purpose of this topic is to point out how superior high sens (=92db++) are for classical music, which are hidden many nuances low sens speakers miss out. 
Jazz music as well is much more enjoyable overa a  high sens WBer.
Transforms jazz into a  magical experience. 
.


Look if the Focals, KEF's, Vandersteens,  Wislon;'s were as special as you suggest, why do folks dump them on the used market all the time?
And why can't you guys get a  consensus on which are winners, and which are losers.

You guys have been promoting your own specail house sound speaker, where others are pumping their special flavor.
All low sens speakers have serious  inner flaws, that need very expensive, complex xovers to  attempt to correect these weaknesses
,
Quite a  few tech geeks have already exposed the blantant ugly flaws in xovers, these gadgets suck the life out the  musical  source..,,,and really can not fix the low sens handicap.

Thiels, too flawed, B&W's the worst.
Your camp can't decide on any 1 xover type that can compete with the 2 wide bands above. 

While us WBer cult, we  know what we have, and never even consider going back to the xover low sens speakers.
Been there done THAT.

For Rock, R&B , yeah box speakers will work just fine, No special nuances required. 

Myth buster.
***wide bands roll off both ends, lacks vass slam and dull highs.***

Prejudiced falsehood, based on lack of real exp with these speakers, Only hear-say,
Well here ya go, Stevie Wonders 1973, Too High.

Everything below about 80 hertz is rolled off, and badly. It is hard to tell where the highs roll off. All I hear is shrillness in the mid and low treble. You’re striking out on disproving anything.That is worse than the previous video I listened to and commented on. If it makes you happy, great. Quit saying that is high fidelity, because it is not. If I were the manufacturer of these drivers, I would be looking to have a cease and desist order written for you. The only reason I can think of for the dismal sound is that they are not being fairly represented here.

So you are trying to boost hits with your links.  It's a money scam.
Now I get it.

@ Mozartfan I am happy you find the best wide range with my help ,W8-2145  is the best , The key is bamboo fiber cone, Listen me carefully, the next step to realistic sound, you have to cut parasitic piece of stupid paper called whizzer cone, and add good supertweeter, i can image ---you say WAUUU 

wo different Tang Band full range drivers (I cannot recall the model numbers) and I thought they were good, particularly for the money, but, if given a choice, I would take the BD2 i heard.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TB 1802 TB1775
Both great
I think the TB2145 is their best.

AER's are over priced. Sorry I don't pay for over priced speakers.... 
Some guy left a  comment on my comment about the Vox Wide band..
Says **speakers are grossly over priced** = Vox /AER over priced = not worth the cash.\
I tend to agree.

the AER 1,2,3, maybe 5%/10% superior to the Davidlouis VX8. 
At $550, I am not complaining,
Besides my classical music does not call for the superior quality of the Vox and AER.
The DavidLouis serves quite well.

So, you are dumping on speakers that you have never heard?

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes

discovery is the be all and end all of sound reproduction

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
caveats
1 being, some of us are poor audiophiles./
We just don't have the big bucks like some of you guys, with huge  horn systems.
My goal here is to help other newbies who are just starting out to be aware that there does exist a
~~~~Althernative~~~~ to the conventional,, highly popular and often promoted here on audiogon, The Xover Low sens speakers.
If I did not raise awareness of these speakers,, they would never get any attention here,,which they at least deserve a old dusty corner on Audiogon. 
Kicked under the bus for so long.
I am the lone WBer fanatic pumping these designs.


So I am working OT to make sure they do get at least a  1 minute commercail, before being pushed down to limbo

~Audiophiles can  fork out more and get less and sometimes spend less and get more~~~~

OK, dis/mis-information.
Myth buster.
***wide bands roll off both ends, lacks vass slam and dull highs.***

Prejudiced falsehood, based on lack of real exp with these speakers, Only hear-say, 
Well here ya go, Stevie Wonders 1973, Too High.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_-7t63Oq0Y

If you compalin about Vid quality,, please keep those snides to yourself 
Thanks

So, you are dumping on speakers that you have never heard?

You’re  are making decisions about something you know nothing about.

bit closed minded…

Hey mozartfan - why don’t you check out those new Altec 755 8" drivers that an eBay seller has for around $300 each? Yes they are reproductions but with new higher efficiency magnets! I assume they will be over 90db sensitivity. They look impressive! I would choose them to build an almost-full range speaker. They spec out as going out to 8khz. Yes, you will have to add a tweeter to go higher - but that’s a lot better choice than a driver like a Tang Band with a whizzer cone!

"revelatory"

I can understand the enthusiasm of someone hearing a different kind of sound from speakers that are not conventional boxes. This can be hearing a good horn-based system for the first time, hearing a Walsh bending wave driver, an electrostatic speaker, a planar magnetic speaker, etc.  But, it is just silly to then assume that that new discovery is the be all and end all of sound reproduction.  It made no sense to declare that everything else is a fraud and to dismiss other drivers that are similar in design and application without hearing the driver. 

Someone mentioned the AER BD3, which was dismissed because the OP did not like something they said in their literature.  I've heard the cheaper BD2 driver in both open baffle and in quarter-wave back-loaded horn configuration, and it is a terrific driver.  Someone may prefer the MUCH cheaper Tang Band, but, they can only make such an assessment by hearing the driver (certainly not by hearing a Youtube video).  I've heard two different Tang Band full range drivers (I cannot recall the model numbers) and I thought they were good, particularly for the money, but, if given a choice, I would take the BD2 i heard.  I've heard several other full range drivers that would certainly be in contention, particularly the ones with field coils for their magnetic assembly.

...retaliatory...???

Consider me the counter weight to Stereophile's pumping spakers past 20+ years.
Seas Thors worlds finest speaker.

You said this, not me. You were comparing them to any speakers they have reviewed. You have compared the Thors repeatedly with speakers costing many multiples more that you have never even seen in person, let alone heard when properly set up. There is no context or cost class to your constant rantings. Quit backtracking on what you said.

Not sure if you are aware, Seas is one of the best, if not THE best low sens driver desiner lab in the world.

I am more than aware of Seas and ScanSpeak. What you are clearly not aware of is that there are multiple other driver manufacturers that compete with them and in some cases, surpass them (GASP!). Accuton, ATC, Audio Technology, Eton, Morel, Purifi, SB Acoutstics, Volt, and Wavecor to name some. In short, the Seas Magnesiums are good but absolutely not the best in the world. 

WE were just chatting over the Thors, I mentioned how low coloration,

Magnesium, worlds best material for midwoofer cone musical resonances.

Not true. The review that YOU linked here mentioned three distinct colorations of the Thor that I quoted in my last post. You didn't choose to comment on that though. Interestingly enough, I heard those same colorations in older videos of yours highlighting the Thors. I believe his description of those colorations far more than you saying they have none, because I heard them. I have also owned speakers that had the Seas Magnesiums in them (Tyler Acoustics Super Tower) which exhibited the same coloration. Clearly representative of the driver.

Focals, vandersteens, which I’ve not heard, but judging the book by its cover (woofer cone material), which is guaranteed to have certain muddy resonances in upper bass/low mids.

There is a profound level of ignorance in this statement. So much so, that it is difficult to respond to. I am sure that you can't figure out what it is though.

Midrange too thick for my small listening room. Even in a large room, dual WBers won't really work.

It may or may not be the room. Certainly, it has to do with the fact that you are clueless with respect to speaker design. There are too many variables that you haven't even remotely considered that may cause this rather than using two drivers. It is both comical and sad at the same time.

Josh at Madisound.

guess he’s your tech?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No, what happened was , I was asking Q’s about other speakers listed.
maybe doing a Seas 3 way,, witha midrange..
WE were just chatting over the Thors, I mentioned how low coloration, and near zero fatigue, Josh brought up the value *Neutral* and this descript is really spot on.
Unlike your A-Z xover types, Focals, vandersteens, which I’ve not heard, but judging the book by its cover (woofer cone material), which is guaranteed to have certain muddy resonances in upper bass/low mids.
They all do.
A-Z.
Minus the magnesium, Which is the reason Seas chose that specific material.
Go ask seas why they employ Mag,, my guess is for its neutral characteristics. Is my guess.
You realize (I hope) Seas aint new at this speaker game.
But many of you are not going to like the mag woofer, as you guys are must have your heavy sub bass super slam.
For that super bass, you’ll have to go Scans

.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6B6WjAzuc8&t=137s

My tech likes paper cone woofers.
Old Philips 10 inch and Realistic Nova 7's, 
He likes to stack these speakers.(separately of course, )
I had the Philips 8 inch paper, really nice, but no cigar next to the Seas Magnesium., dual woofers.

The Philips was my 1st entry into high fidelity.
Philips in fact, placed the tag at the top of their speaker.
High Fidelity labatories. 
Which they were in their epoch. 
The Thors destroy them. 
But double stack,, maybe not. 
hard to say.
I had 2 pairs of Philips and had no idea about double stacking. 
With a  single high sens WBer no need for doubling up the WBer.s
I tried  it.
Midrange too thick for my small listening room. Even in a  large room, dual WBers won't really work. 
Wilson  attempts to compete with the WBers high sens, but placing alot of speakers in one cabinet.
I'm sure they are nice  sounding, but no cigar next to a single  WBer in midrange. 
Sensitivity is everything in a  speaker.
makes any amplifier much more efficient.

You do realize most of us have had, or have heard full range drivers, right?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I doubt 1% of all Agon members heard a  NEW high tech.
I am not talking about Lowther and Fostex, 
Neither of which i 've heard. 
But know neither match the 2 new high techs.

I've heard 6+ wide bands, most do not qualify as high fidelity speakers.
To gain that award, a  speaker must make near perfect midrange.
Equal to Seas Thors. 
Most here have yet to hear a  old design. 
I don't believe you.
WBers are more for the  DIY geeks.

Josh at Madisound.

guess he’s your tech?

You conveniently left out the parts that don’t back up what you claim about the Thors. "A taste of high end sound" is not the same thing as "the best in the world". That is some really classic cherry-picking and making up of things that weren’t even stated.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I would hoe you could figure out the context of **worlds finest speaker*** , Knowing the reference is , **In its class size,** dual 6  inch woofers + tweet.
maybe can't6 compete with Wilson;'s massive 8 driver , 1000 lb speaker at $900G's.  . 
And maybe just matches Troel Gravesen's best 2.5 way designs. 
Still the review is spot on saying the speaker does things no other speaker IN ITS CLASS can match.
In this sense 
Worlds Finest Speaker..
Which I always hada  huch it was that  good of a   sound,,IN ITS CLASS>
Don't believe, give Josh at Madisound a  call. 
Not sure if you are aware, Seas is one of the best, if not THE best low sens driver  desiner lab in the world.
Along with Scanspeak.
Perfectly neutral speaker, no coloration, zero fatigue. 
Unlike most low sens xover types with their  muddy  upper bass/low mids.
Vandersteen's and B&W's come to mind, among many others..
Magnesium, worlds best material for midwoofer cone  musical resonances. 

I am thinking it’s the Tekton guy moonlighting for extra cash….

Jesus help us IF he discovers…..springs….

This guy is totally just kenjit right?

@audiogon moderator, please DON'T close this thread ever. It is one of the funniest one in a long time. You will have a lot of users visiting for just this

@dekay 

“mystery box”

:)

"There is no discussion of wide bands on this site, Its almost like a low sens xover cult religion around this forum."

Learn to use the seach feature as I've been posting about single driver speakers here since 2002, and I'm hardly the first to do so.

These were "real" discussions about single drivers (not crappy sounding YT videos of drivers in mystery cabinets followed up with bleat/blather/rinse/repeat rants).

To date you have offered Zero usable information regarding single driver speakers in these forums.

You also denigrate "box" speakers/cabinets, while @ the same time your drivers look to be ill-mounted in "mystery box" cabinets.

DeKay

Did somebody leave you the Jadis ?

Another epic rant.

You do realize most of us have had, or have heard full range drivers, right?

You’re a little late to the game here. It’s great that these are so retaliatory to you. But they are perhaps a bit “last years model” to many.

Anything other than acoustic instruments, and they fall a bit short. In my system gallery, there are a pair of double horns. I built them for a friend,  and live in his space. Wonderful with acoustic recordings. Give them anything “loud”, and they fall painfully short.

https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/9591#&gid=1&pid=7

So- other than the shelved off bass, what else needs help?
There is an emphasis in the mid treble, which does make that range a bit hot to me, with excess sibilance.

the upper mids also seem pushed a bit; this may or may not be due to a 4.8khz. resonance in the woofers.

So- what’s the bottom line? This standard, basic version gives a real taste of vey high end sound at a true bargain price.

You conveniently left out the parts that don’t back up what you claim about the Thors. "A taste of high end sound" is not the same thing as "the best in the world". That is some really classic cherry-picking and making up of things that weren’t even stated.

If the "improved" DIY crossovers work as reported, these could give real competion to commercial speakers in the $8-10k class.

He clearly states that if you spend some coin on fixing the issues with the crossover, you may have something that could compete with an 8-10k speaker. Not "you will have", but "you may". That is a world of difference. They are probably pretty good for the price of the kit, but not much above that unless you are willing to really put in some work to fix the issues. Long story short, they are not the best in the world (maybe in your little corner of the world) by a long shot. Plus, the reviewer is just some guy on Audio Asylum. For all anyone knows, his range of experience with high end sound is no better than yours. Meaning, not very much.

Consider me the counter weight to Stereophile's pumping spakers past 20+ years. 
Seas Thors worlds finest speaker.

Before I closed out this post,,
I decide to google
**Seas Thor  Review***

If you don't believe my opinion, ck this snakeoil-LESS review.

**what  caught my immediate attemtion,,,,,lack of coloration or OBFUSCATION** ,, = NO muddiness, like every xover box design I ever heard in my 40 yrs.
All, A-Z suffer muddy midrange, .
Lone exception is

SEas Thor

You guys just have no faith in my opinions,. 
Trust me Seas made the very finest Midwoofers/Millennium tweeter vs any other midwoofer/tweet on  the palnet (IN ITS DAY, 2004.,,may have been surpassed, in the  tweeter, not the MAGNESIUM midwoofer, which can never be surpassed. 
Magnesium destroys paper composites  due to its lack of coloration neutralness in upper bass/lower mids....
Paper composites have a  deep  punch in lowest bass notes. Like drums.

The WBers equal Seas Exel's neutrality/lack of coloration /detailed soundstage.

Sorry Mr Wilson , your $950K speakers  have their issues.

Issues the Seas Thor has none of



https://www.audioasylum.com/messages/speakers/302966/review-seas-thor-speakers

Having deja vu reading this thread, like the departed master speaker tuner has a doppelgänger…

Its high tgime these low sens speaker get exposed, 
Considering Stereophile has been pushing the snakeoil  on these speakers past 20 years. 
Will we see Stereophile reviewing a  WBer? 
Not going to happen.