just seen these:
Wilson Benesch – High end audiophile speakers from the UK – The Future is Carbon
Can we get some opinions on the quality of the engineering and design descisions made based on the spec sheet?
Looks like they're still using 'custom' scan speaks...
Wilson Benesch – High end audiophile speakers from the UK – The Future is Carbon
Can we get some opinions on the quality of the engineering and design descisions made based on the spec sheet?
Looks like they're still using 'custom' scan speaks...
I'll add this bit on... from the spec sheet:
Mid range drive unit directly coupled to amplifier,
tuned to Carbon-Nanotech enclosure.
First Order Bass roll-off.
First Order Tweeter Crossover.
Selected Polypropylene Capacitors and Air Cored Inductors.
Crossover 500 and 5000
Mid range drive unit directly coupled to amplifier,
tuned to Carbon-Nanotech enclosure.
First Order Bass roll-off.
First Order Tweeter Crossover.
Selected Polypropylene Capacitors and Air Cored Inductors.
Crossover 500 and 5000
Mostly trendy marketing psychobabble. Diffraction is generated from the raised front baffle edges. The high overall mass is required to compensate for the lack of force cancellation of the isobarik driver units as it would otherwise have a high vertical force movement. Something my mltl sub exhibits without. Little mention of dampening but rather rely on trendy catch phrases like carbon nano tech and bilit aluminium. Simply using carbon fiber does not equal "nano". Since when is carbon helpful when it comes to bass ports when cardboard or plastic tubes do the exact same thing without the potential of ringing :rollseyes:
Combine that with "provides optimal air volume ratio" another way of saying the box is properly sized. Driver to driver spacing at 5k is much to large but may be intentional as this affects polar lobing, which is then compensated by placing the mid driver above the tweeter.
If they fixed the diffraction, used force cancelation and rid it of unneccessary exhorbanitly expensive materials you would have a speaker in the sub $5k range that would sound better and not break your back.
Combine that with "provides optimal air volume ratio" another way of saying the box is properly sized. Driver to driver spacing at 5k is much to large but may be intentional as this affects polar lobing, which is then compensated by placing the mid driver above the tweeter.
If they fixed the diffraction, used force cancelation and rid it of unneccessary exhorbanitly expensive materials you would have a speaker in the sub $5k range that would sound better and not break your back.
My opinion is this. Speaker is meant for Robocop fans, only Robocop
is better looking. Something is aesthetically very wrong with the
forehead of the speaker. For 25 grand I would expect more.
And opinions on the crossovers' claimed topology?
I'm biting my tongue till we see some more opinions
I'm biting my tongue till we see some more opinions
I suspect you are paying a lot for an unusual design to differentiate them from other products. One could argue its art (beauty in the eye of the beholder) and therefore justify their price on those grounds rather than their sonic qualities.
Contrary to the forum "psychobabble" the Endeavour, in my opinion and experience at least, is a hugely impressive design. I listened to these speakers at Munich last year. Really amazing product.
The comments above, I suspect are based on no experience of the speaker in question. But worse still, clearly these comments have been made without any attempt to understand this product.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The comments above, I suspect are based on no experience of the speaker in question. But worse still, clearly these comments have been made without any attempt to understand this product.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's a speaker. What's there to understand?
Do you want opinions, or fact?
Being overpriced is both opinion and fact.
And what else would you expect on a DIY forum...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.