Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Richard,

I absolutely agree with you that dipole provides a masking affect from many problems but along with illumination of the badly reproduced bass dipoles inject into music a common denominator of…  dipolenisness….. and this something that removes complexity and “drama” from musicality.

The dipoles, while they are in their zone of acoustic non-shortening do fine: mid-ranges, very upper bass, depends of the design. However, all dipoles soon or later short accusatorially and this sound (while it being shorted) is something that I clearly identify, distinguish and do not appreciate.

I call it “helped” sound.

The dipole bass is very even and with little relation to… Sound. Let me explain what I mean. Bass is a part of sound that being reproduce and I personally like when bass is an ingredient of music that I hear. However, when I hear dipoles I accept bass as a property of room but not as a property of reproduced music. In addition, this ease that you mentioned is not ease, at least for me, but something that removes efforts. This lack of efforts while I listen music is something that I fine very disturbing. It is nice to play straightforward music, while you we drink tea and speak over telephone but it sit too ‘not enough” when we listen a serious material.

 Well, I certainly am not trying to convince you or anybody else that dipoleness is a fundamentally faulty consept (although I believe that it is so) but I would offer you to make some experiments by introducing different dipoles vs. sealed back acoustic system and to monitor the progress of your listening benefits and your listening habits.

I did it…

Rgs,
Romy the Cat

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site