Why do people need to bash certain brands?
Mikez gave several good reasons in his innitial post for this thread. Too many earnest companies that make great products never fly because mass-fi brands like B&W are so good at convincing the masses that they are buying 'the best'. Most consumers are not savvy enough to consider better less well-known options - instead they are further swindled into dabbling in expensive esoteric cables once the boom and tizz starts to take it's toll.
Where I currently live there are only a couple of hi-fi retailers due to the small market. One of the shops was considering bringing in a new brand - they were considering JM labs, B&W, and Monitor Audio,- all overhyped brands that first and foremost aim to sell LOTS of speakers - rather than accurate musical speakers. I suggested that they look into brands like Castle, Joseph audio, Linn, Audio Physic, Aerial acoustics, Harbeth, Nova Audio, Rega, Dali, Royd, Wilson Benesch, Vandersteen, Totem, ...to name a few, but to no avail - people don't know these brands and they don't sell themselves. If people don't educate themselves and start to discern the mass-fi from the hi-fi, Mikez is right, we won't be able to find any decent sounding stuff in the future.
The brands mentioned above represent a wide range of prices - I've lived with several of them and have had considerable experience with all of these (friends, extended demos etc). I've also listened to many B&W speakers, from the bottom of the line all the way up to the Nautilus 805 and 802. (I actually considered buying a pair until I gave them a good listen) B&W's basic approach is wrong - they are not aiming for a natural, rythmic, musical presentation -- these are qualities that don't immediately impress but take time to appreciate and therefore are not an effective marketing approach (given the sad state of consumer knowledge and sophistication). What sells is impressive etched detail, sibilant treble, and excessive bass and warmth - and that is what B&W delivers - better than the competition -(Polk, Boston Acoustics, Bose, Klipsch at one end - and JM Labs and Monitor Audio at the other).
There are many other speakers that are both less expensive and superior to B&W's - at any point in B&W's extensive product range (a huge product range itself is a tell-tale sign of a market oriented product). I don't know why anyone would even consider Bose, er I mean B&W. (Isn't it cheesy enough that they use a moniker that is a blatant homophone of BMW - even if B&W actually does stand for something. (Bowers and Wilkins ?)
B&W 800 series speakers are good - but a pair of Joseph Audio's - at half the price, would STOMP them. My Castle Durhams at 900$ were a better sounding speaker than the 805 - at a fraction of the price. The Durhams are not as efficient and don't have the power handling abilities, but they are far more musical and involving. - Start talking Aerial Acoustics or Linn and there's no contest. |
BMW was established in 1916 and started making cars after they stopped making aeroplanes during WWII. However the name was well established and prestigious long before that, perhaps not in the USA - but certainly in Britain, and long before 1966. Nevertheless I admit it may just be coincidence and my little jab and may not have any real merit. But the fact that BMW 'America' was established in 1975 has no bearing on matters - as neither is an American company. (it just shows how long it took Americans to realize how bad their own cars were.)
The speaker manufacturers I mentioned are not small fledgling companies - they are well established hi-quality high-end companies who's speakers put most of B&W's to shame - for the money. They probably put a greater proportion of their revenues into r&d than B&W. And because they do not waste resources on designing umpteen speakers to fit avery niche in the market, they can put their resources into designing the best speakers possible. Period. B&W's strategy is to design speakers to 'sell right' - not to sound good. Of course B&W's top speakers are good. Pioneer could make good stuff if they wanted to - and they do - it just costs a fortune and is poor value - and they probably just contract the work out to companies like Linn anyhow (that is what Leouwe does in Germany).
Speaking of Linn, I would say they are the rare company that makes some of the best products available with a strong underlying ethic of sound engineering, simplicity, functionality, beauty, and practicality - AND they have a marketing appeal that is the envy of the industry - largely due to Ivor's personality. But the underlying philosophy of everything they do involves the reproduction of best possible sound. Their products stand up to the test. They have to - you can't get away with being as obnoxious as they are if your goods don't deliver. Just because they are not in the esoteric audio camp - in that they are willing to integrate comfort, convenience and user interface into their designs - doesn't mean they thay are not as focused on sound quality as some of the more dogmatic high-end companies - nor does it mean they are a sell out like Bose or Kakamichi. |
I should qualify some of my statements - I don't think B&W is mainstream mass-fi stuff like Bose or Polk. In terms of quality I think it is far better. But I just don't think they are purists, even in their top-flight range. I tried to like B&W - as mentioned earlier I brought the 805's home when the new series came out a couple of years ago. What an overpriced speaker the 805 is!
My main point here, and if I am correct the point of this thread, is that there are so many other speakers out there that are overlooked because too many people don't look past the name and the marketing - and actually listen to some of the better sounding better valued stuff out there. Many quality companies are struggling because too many people have the herd mentality and are brainwashed by mid-fi boom and tizz sound. Successful companies got that way because their products are proven is bu%@s*it! Just look at the companies that sell 95% of the electronics out there. Big 'reliable' names that produce mass produced crap.
Sadly, some companies that do make, or started out making good stuff, are forced to alter their sound in order to appeal to mainstream tastes or they'll go under.
To be fair once again - B&W is not bad, but I urge you to listen to some of the others, give them a good chance so that you can get used to the different type of sound before you draw conclusions, and eventually you will hear what you have been missing. |
Regarding the last few comments about Linn speakers, I urge you to give them a more careful listen and don't judge too quickly. Also, like any speaker if they are set up carelessly even the best speaker can sound disappointing. If you hear them under the right circumstances and put aside your preconceptions of what a speaker should sound like I think you be singing a different tune. |
Preconceptions:
When someone listens to my Linn system for the first time they are seldom bolled over by what they hear. It took me a long time to get used to the sound of my system and to learn how to make it sound right(through speaker placement - not tweaks). At first I found myself missing that "hi-fi" sound. A tonal richness and sparkle from every recording. At this point I found myself constantly listening to other speakers for comparison - to try and figure out what I was missing. I began to realize it was my own preconceptions based on brief encounters I had had listening to speakers in hifi showrooms. I had memories of sounds so seductive, warm and rich that I built my expectaitions around these fleeting impressions. After more critical listening I soon discovered that this seduction was entirely superficial and was achieved at the expense of the music. Now when I listen to many other speakers I can hear straight through them. JM Labs, B&W, and Monitor Audio are the guiltiest parties with high credentials that I have had considerable experience with.
There are few speakers that sound as good to me as the Keilidhs for anywhere near the price. Where the Linn's show weakness it tends to be through errors of omission - not addition. For reference and comparison, speakers that to me sound better than the Keilidhs are: Joseph Audio's floorstander, Audio Physic Tempo3, Aerial Acoustics model 7, ProAc's response series, and Linn's higher level speakers.
Listening to my Keilidhs friends have noted how clear and accurate the sound is - even non-audiophiles have commented on the midrange quality, but they are seldom blown away by an all-enveloping soundstage, deep bass, or high frequency sparkle. Linn speakers are often refered to as being 'dry' or having a 'shut in' sound. I can see where these observations are coming from when comparing Linn speakers to many others. With certain recordings this can be the case - although the musical message is always conveyed. If the recording lacks depth and fidelity that is how it will sound. If the recording has presence and tonal richness that is how it will sound. I have done numerous comparisons and have always concluded that while having less dazzle the Linn's sound much more capable, accurate - and ulitimately more enjoyable and better able to convey the message of the music.
Reference: Live, un-amplified musical performance.
Most amplified concerts grossly exagerate certain frequencies, - to make matters worse, they then exagerate the levels of ALL frequencies. I often wonder if most sound guys are half deaf. Most concerts are FAR too loud to be clearly audible - the sounds get so hardened by excessive volume levels (relative to the size of the venue) that music often becomes a hard glaze of indistinguishable noise.
Circumstances: I have a pair Keilidhs run in bi-amped active mode, as well Kabers run passively. Proper set-up and room consideration is essential for either of these speakers to sound right. I have heard these speakers sound both astonishingly good and bad. I don't know how to describe the particulars of every installation and why the results are as they are, but as with any speaker, (and perhaps more so with the Linns), speakers set-up is critical. One example of a situation that may cause Keilidhs to sound slightly muffled or even boomy is if they are situated along the short wall of a room and if they lack sufficient lateral breathing room.
There is a local Linn dealer that just can not figure out how to get the Linns to sound right - It's unfortunate because many people end up buying JM Labs instead. |
Blackie, Linn has never claimed that speakers are unimportant - or that they are the least important part of the chain. They just see how pointless it is to begin with a bad signal all the way from the source. "Start as you mean to finish", I think is how Ivor describes it. It's a matter of avoiding the magnification (amplification) of errors, that ultimately will be presented (or blurted out) by the loudspeaker.
With respect to Linn speakers sounding 'murky'. All I can say is I urge you to listen again - and make sure that the system is set up well. Try listening to some natural sounding recordings of chamber music. The Dorian label has some very good uncompressed unadulterated recordings that will reveal the true potentials of Linn's speakers. Then listen to something like Radioheads OK computer and you will be amazed at how different the same speaker can sound. Both recordings are great but are vastly different - and this difference is only appreciable on an accurate system. The more you listen the more you will discover that what you might be calling "murky" or "dark and closed in" (unless the setup is sloppy) is actually the absence of candy-coating in the treble range and the nature of that particular recording. With an open sounding recording I'm sure you would be astonished by the sense of openness and transparency, and with a flat compressed recording you will wonder what the engineers were thinking; but you will always be impressed by the speakers ability to communicate the music. Even with flat sounding recordings such as old jazz classics from the 40's or 50's, (or almost any of REM's recordings) the musical message will be get through as it should. I make these comments with reference to Keilidhs, Kabers, Ninkas, and Katans as these are the ones I have experience with and can vouch for.
Ps: Try listening to Ry Cooders 'Buena Vista Social Club' on a carefully set-up active Ninka or Keilidh system - I'd love to hear your impressions after this ;-) |
Blackie, I can see from my last post how you might think me to be religiously pro-Linn but that's not really the case. I like the integrity of a one brand system both in terms of sound and synergy as well as visual coherance. I don't want boxes of all shapes standing all over the place. I have settled on Linn not because I think that it is the holy grail of hifi, but because I appreciate their solid sensible approach. Their stuff is well designed, simple, elegant, and it meets high standards. Most importantly, (and this is where their loyal following serves them well - particularily in light of all the bad reviews their stubborn approach has garnerered them over the years), they have not caved to homogenized mainstream standards (or lack thereof) of sound reproduction.
But Linn are by no means the only ones whom I would say 'get it'. I'm sure there are many. The few that I have heard I have mentioned in my posts above.
Kalan mentions several speakers above, and at least with respect to the ones I have heard, I agree with him. I must add that the Joseph floorstander, though slightly better in its bass resolution and range, sounds A LOT like the Keilidh. Despite the Joseph's retail being almost twice that of the Keilidh's, I think it is still excellent value and a great speaker. That would make the Keilidh in my opinion, one of the great hifi bargains out there. (since it has been discontinued the Keilidh can be had for roughly 25% of the new price of the Joseph)
As for Keilidh listening coaching classes? You don't need any. Just listen to them for awhile, a few weeks, months, (without too much concentration on the sound because that takes all the enjoyment out of listening to the music) and suddenly you will only be satisfied listening to the likes of Aerial, Audio-Physic, Joseph, Castle, Ruark, Rega,.. or Linn.
The downside is you you may be caught mumbling to yourself, "if ait-taint Scottish, aits Crrap! |
Kalan, the two Joseph RM22si and the RM25si floorstanders sell for 2500 and 3500 respectively. That is roughly 4x the price of a used pair of Keilidhs, which can be got for between 700 - 900$. Yes, I meant 25% of, not off of, the price of the Joseph's. That's the thing - apart from their flagship models, Linn speakers aren't that expensive.
I agree with you about Rega, they were also at the top of my list.
As for listening to a system, I'm not suggesting that you not let yourself be absorbed by the music. I just think it's important to know when to stop listening to gear and start enjoying music.
I've noticed a lot of audiogoners seem to regard music as little more than a tool to evaluate their gear; "such and such track will reveal the brightness of these cables blah blah..." - they seem to have lost sight of the fact that purpose of all of this is the music!
It seems to me to defeat the purpose if after the latest 'upgrade' one ends up sitting in the designated listening chair squinting in order to hear every subtle sonic difference that it made.
I remember back in the days of cassettes how after a session of making mixed tapes, I would often become tired of the music I just spent hours carefully recording.
I must admit, a lot of these points are things that I have to keep in mind for myself - as an audiophile (I think) we are all faced with the affliction of being fetishists to a certain extent. |
My Keilidhs sound better with my TT than my CDP - though I do mostly listen to CD's. I listen to a lot of small scale chamber music, jazz, tango, folk, orchestral, as well as electronica, wall-of-sound rock like Radiohead and Pulp, and occasionally pounding ambient electronica like Leftfield, underworld, faultline and even some metal like tool. They sound as good playing vinyl with fast beats and lots of deep bass as they do playing solo piano or a baroque chamber ensemble. Right now I am listening to Dvorak's Symphonic poems (on CD) with some very loud complex passages. The sense of scale you can get from a full scale orchestra played on big full range speakers is lacking in terms of thundering bass, but they still do well in other respects. They don't try to do anything that a speaker in this range can not realistically achieve.
Ohlala what would you recommend to someone with my tastes that would outperform the Linns for a similar price. If I could afford them (and if I didn't move around so much) I would probably look for a pair of big Pro-ac response 2.5's, Aerial 7's, Joseph's, or Audio Physic Virgos, but with my relatively modest budget don't you think that these beat the competition hands down? (at least when comparing apples to apples) (Please don't mention B&W's because I've been down that road and they just don't cut it for me.) |
The Keilidhs were 1500$ USD. |
Maggies are an astonishing speaker but there is something about electrostats that....okay, perhaps I should practice what I preach and get used to them before I say they aren't my cup of tea. When I heard them I was truly amazed and they were on my list, but I felt there was something missing with electrostats vs. conventional driver speakers - something to do with impact maybe.
|
