Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Antonio J. wrote:

I have listened to some expensive speakers from B&W, Wilson Audio, Dynaudio, and also owned the SF Amati, you know already. Musically these ones were more musically interesting to me than any of the others, but still weren't something that completely satisfied me.

I do not think that they were more “musically interesting”. They were more “audio interesting” and it was it.  Dynaudio for instance (any model) is an exceptional example how horrible high-end speaker could be and what is ironic that the more expensive Dynaudios are the more ridiculously disgusting they perform.  Perhaps the larger Wilson might be a limited exception but they for thier price-tag have many “issues”.

Antonio J. wrote:

So what musical benefits could I expect from a back loaded horn speaker using a Lowther, Fostex or AER driver? I ask about back loaded horns because they could fit my room, no front loaded horn would fit it, nor any planar speaker.

The drivers you mention are just fine midrange drivers and they must not be used for upper bass of upper mid rage. As far as “back loaded horns” – this is all utopia and celebration of wishful thinking and practically with those so-called full range drivers.  A “dipolness” can perform more or less acceptable at upper frequencies but as soon as load a room with any signs of lower frequencies then any dipole implementations begin to sound ridiculous.  All those semi-scientific evidence and proclamations of the dipole-enthusiasts about the benefit of dipole room loading are juts unnecessary intellectualism of people with brain instead of ears. I would not mention that “back loaded horns” has huge amount of other problem that no one who trued to built the “back loaded horns” was able to overcome. All those back loaded speakers sound as they should – the “helped” sound resembling the sound coming through body of a mammal.

Rgs,
The Cat

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site