I bought a hifi magazine (HiFi News) the other day (long train journey, forgot my book). Many of the items were very high end and the measurements were intriguing. 2 examples of speakers. Now I know that a flat FR on axis is not everything, and some of my favourite speakers are full rangers, BUT
Metaxas Maceophone. 200-20k +/- 6dB. -6dB 67hZ (actually more like -9dB compared with average) Described as a studio monitor!! £25,000
Wilson Watt Alexia Series 2. 200-20k +/- 5.5dB. £64,998
Both are beautifully built.
Metaxas Maceophone. 200-20k +/- 6dB. -6dB 67hZ (actually more like -9dB compared with average) Described as a studio monitor!! £25,000
Wilson Watt Alexia Series 2. 200-20k +/- 5.5dB. £64,998
Both are beautifully built.
You don't buy a high-end audio product purely because it has the best specs - just as you don't by a Rolex (or a Lange/AP/VC/PP) because it is a the most accurate watch
Yes I agree. It just seems odd to go to such technological trouble to make something that is technically flawed. If a Rolex was only accurate to +/- 15 minutes a day, it might lose some of it's kudos.
That's a great analogy and probably true. I've yet to discover the origin of the reality damping field that seems to permeate high end audio.
It does seem rather odd since I strive for better than +/-3dB over 200 - 20kHz at home and sometimes even make it. (Listening position only of course)
It does seem rather odd since I strive for better than +/-3dB over 200 - 20kHz at home and sometimes even make it. (Listening position only of course)
I've yet to discover the origin of the reality damping field that seems to permeate high end audio.
Too funny! I may use that one!
Yes I agree. It just seems odd to go to such technological trouble to make something that is technically flawed. If a Rolex was only accurate to +/- 15 minutes a day, it might lose some of it's kudos.
All about bragging rights. Do you think that fancy wood grain and hand finishing sounds better than chip board?
Attachments
HiFi News used to be a good magazine. Now it reviews USB cables and expensive flawed 'hi end' stuff which few readers can afford. Those who do buy this stuff are not buying for sound quality; they are buying bragging rights (among their friends, but perhaps not among those who understand audio), and a nice piece of furniture.
Quite often with hi end audio you are paying for a nice piece of furniture.
Once audio gets past a certain hi fi it is pretty much irrelevant and that can be done quite cheaply these days.
We used to have 1950's radiogram that was massive. Amazing piece of furniture and performed well.
Once audio gets past a certain hi fi it is pretty much irrelevant and that can be done quite cheaply these days.
We used to have 1950's radiogram that was massive. Amazing piece of furniture and performed well.
Reminds me I have always promised myself a Casio F91W
Could not resist to Google that. Wow! Almost 10 bucks! And the shipping!
Jan
...Metaxas Maceophone. ... Described as a studio monitor!!.....
The maker uses it for near-field location recording monitoring. It may be trustworthy for that application. If it was measured as a full-room speaker it may look very poor.
I do think he is selling sculpture as much as sound.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
- Home
- General Interest
- Everything Else
- High end audio: different rules seem to apply.