Pano,
I am still somewhat of a fan of Altec, but that just can't be my reference for either smooth frequency response, low bass production or even midrange sound in the vocal range. I can't believe we are still trying to use that as the reference standard, that design has been far surpassed to me long ago.
I am still somewhat of a fan of Altec, but that just can't be my reference for either smooth frequency response, low bass production or even midrange sound in the vocal range. I can't believe we are still trying to use that as the reference standard, that design has been far surpassed to me long ago.
I think in Pano's case it's a matter of long term refinement to the design that's resulted in something far more than "VOTT".
Yes Scott, precisely. 
Stock, they were rather dreadful -with all the faults they are famous for.
Stock, they were rather dreadful -with all the faults they are famous for.
I'd also add that it was not about accurate response or brilliant vocals, but about a real illusion. It sounded very un-hi-fi, if there's such a thing. Sure the econowaves image well, in a hi-fi sort of way. But this was so much beyond all that. It was just very real.
Other than the increased directivity and greater direct to reflected ratio in the lower frequencies, I don't see what could've been fundamentally different in these compared to econowaves. Maybe, I'm blinded by my biases 🙂
Other than the increased directivity and greater direct to reflected ratio in the lower frequencies, I don't see what could've been fundamentally different in these compared to econowaves. Maybe, I'm blinded by my biases 🙂
Yes Scott, precisely.
Still, you've got to remember not to sit where your ears are directly on a horn wall section. 😉 😀
I get what you're after, ra7 ... 😉
In both senses, that is: I understand what your goal is, and I usually achieve it, depending on the state of tune of my system ... 🙂
It has very little to do with the size or supposed quality of the speaker, but everything about the electronics driving the beast. Having ultra high sensitivity in the drivers is an easy shortcut, because the power demands on the amplifier are miniscule. However, making sure that the rest of the playback chain is in good shape is probably the better way, at least IME it is, and then you can get "real" sound without using OTT speakers, 😉 ...
Frank
Yes Scott, precisely.
I'm glad that you said that because I had Altec's decades ago and yes they were dreadful. I was thinking that your credibility was going down the tubes. I'm still not conviced that any presumed improvment in directivity at 200 Hz is a factor.
Wow! Thats a new take on the situation! Certainly not my belief that's for sure.
I just bought all new elecronics - a Pioneer receiver on sale at Amazon.com for $239. Probably push my system over the top.
I know, 😀 ...
Hey, it's only because I've experimented in this area that I say this ... and people casually mention this now and again in reviews and such: people have a very powerful amplifier and they hook it up temporarily to a $100 speaker and say something like this: "Wow, this amplifier is so good that it makes even this terrible speaker sound fantastic!! Okay, time to stop mucking around, doing this silly exercise, and connect up a 'proper', expensive speaker to hear how it 'really' performs ..."
There's so much 'hidden' in those types of comments ...
Frank
Earl,
I'm with you that a decent electronics package is fine if the speakers are exceptional, but fas42 always chimes in that poor speakers will be corrected by insane electrical tweaks that can correct all speaker faults and they aren't important. He is contrary in every thread he posts that utterly false assumption. The only people who ever agree are the people who will argue how much better things sound by just changing to audiophile capacitors. Fas42, you are not going to get an agreement in this thread about that here either.
I'm with you that a decent electronics package is fine if the speakers are exceptional, but fas42 always chimes in that poor speakers will be corrected by insane electrical tweaks that can correct all speaker faults and they aren't important. He is contrary in every thread he posts that utterly false assumption. The only people who ever agree are the people who will argue how much better things sound by just changing to audiophile capacitors. Fas42, you are not going to get an agreement in this thread about that here either.
Oh, and by the way, Amazon really does have a sale on a very good Pioneer receivers. It's like 1/2 price.
And a good morning to you too, Kindhornman, 🙂 ...
The thing is, you're missing the point. You can't "correct" a speaker fault by improving the electronics, but you can enable the sound quality to be improved in other key areas such that the speaker inadequacies don't interfere with the musical message. Over and over again in discussion of analogue, TT playback are the comments made that the distortion levels of vinyl recordings are pretty dreadful, the FR can be all over the place, stereo separation of the cartridge is abysmal -- everything is totally wrong in the measurement sense with regards to playing LPs. Yet, on the right TT, with appropriate cartridge, etc, with a pretty miserable recording at a technical level, "magic" happens when the needle drops. Something, a key something, is being done right which makes listening to the "mess" a pleasurable experience ...
Okay then, with the speaker side of things, exactly the same type of process can occur ...
Frank
See, this is where I loose the imaging argument. I've never been to a live concert of any kind where I could close my eyes and pin point the placement of any single instrument. When audiophiles start talking about such pin point imaging I immediately find that totally artificial. It truly is an illusion, but a false one, IMO.
I think there is plenty of confusion between, imaging, and, realism. Imaging as such, so beloved by many audiophiles, means nothing to me; if it happens to occur because of the type of musical event, say a jazz trio, that's fine. But, the genuine goods occur when it sounds realistic, the clean detail means that it is easy to "point" where something appears to come from, that just happens automatically because the ear/brain is picking up and interpreting the acoustic cues, clues that were recorded by the microphones ...
Frank
I don't know. Why? The Abbeys don't image as well as some other modified VOTT A5s I've heard. I've certainly heard better than mine. The Abbeys are no slouch in the imaging department. They have nothing to apologize for.
Also, do NOT change the text in a quote. It's dishonest and unfair to the person quoted. Moderators hand out infraction points for that sort of thing.
Sorry to hear that John. I frequently can. In fact in fact I often test myself just because I'm curious how well instruments and sounds can be located. Admittedly, it gets harder the more instruments there are. 🙂
Maybe some people are more sensitive to it than others? Maybe that's why I like speakers that can do it. It may be an artifact of the recording, but it can be very real sounding.
Back in the 70s I had a neighbor, a very smart engineer, who claimed that stereo was a complete scam! He simply could not hear the difference between mono and stereo. An extreme case (one would hope) but true.