Did anybody else notice this about PSB Speakers?

Wes Phillips who has written for Stereophile in the past did a review on the T8. John Atkinson did one on another Tseries but both are years old, going back as far as 2003 on one, 2006 on the other.

Soundstage did one on the T6 more recently. Some offshore mag also did one on the T series towers in 2008 I think. I know I've read all of these, and a couple of them several times.

JA said in his Sync One review, matching with the power train would be key, and in his older one on the T series towers about the same thing.

Each review (and I've read only on the various towers) has applauded the result and the caveats though noteable, could apply to many other speakers too as to which amp, should drive them or could drive them best.

I couldn't help but pencil them in on my own short list as I'm considering making a change in that area myself.

I've not heard any to the best of my knowledge yet, and PSB is pretty busy I guess as I've sent along two emails in the past two weeks without a reply as to if or where I can check them out personally.

Prior to making a PSB buy, I do have to or will have to get to the drug store and order me up some "De-snobery" pills.... great audio gear HAS to cost a lot!! Or it's not great! Right? Isn't that the underlying, hushed implication?

Stereophile for sure has put pretty regularly, items into it's A class which don't have the soaring admission fees. A lot of these lower priced yet higher class sure get snapped up thereafter.... so much for the 'grains of salt doseing' with regard to reviews.

I don't see Mr. Barton's any different than Albert V's. Both men use modest materials to manufacturer great sounding, lower costing loudspeakers. Albert however does offer more upscale models.

Thankfully, I'm in the camp of it's what's up front, rather than the 'break the bank on speakers first' tribe. That said, I'll attempt to drop more than I should on squeakers when the time comes, as my pharmacy is always running out of the "ego no mo" tablets.... and they upset my stomach anyhow.

Mapman & Jaybo

Should squeakers be entirely without character always?

Personally, I see that going either way. With a great front end or even a very good one, as transparent and unbiased as a squeaeker can be should be a pretty good thing, all in all.

I can't help but feel I'm in for some disappointment in comparing them to my current refs.... BUT... with any luck in the next few weeks I'll see.

If however the system needs something to ease things up, or provide a more resolute and stark perspective, having some which deter from 'zero gravity' could well be a very good thing. It's all a mixture anyhow. Right?

AS I've been perusing and considering a change with my own squeaker system, I'm being more than cautious as to which way to go from here.

I've seen some slam dunk bargains here and there, but on ones whose 'perspective' on the event seems on paper at least not to suit some needs & desires.

IMO... acquiring the right speaker is more formidable a proposition than it would appear when you think it all out... driveability, room dimensions, esthetic, presentation, size, price, and color.

I did find a PSB dealer which has the Sync Ones on display about an hour & a half away. they sell Dyn Audio too. No Platinum series though.

Mapman

>> The little Triangles are perhaps still one of the fastest and most transparent and detailed speakers I have heard. They have convinced me to let go of both very well regarded speakers by B&W and Magnepan that I 've had in my system in past years. They are Stereophile class B rated and their only flaw I hear is that they do not do the lowest octave of bass. They definitley offer an alternate sound to the likes of PSB I would say. WHich is better? Who know. They are both very very good, but much different at least in the systems I have heard them in. YMMV. <<

Exactly... as I alluded to in my post... another perspective on the sound.

I feel my largest issue personally, is my dred of going to monitors instead of floor stander (near full range) speakers. I've been pointed towards some reportedly great ones from Joseph Audio, and JM Reynaud. After speaking with Daedalus too, his RMa's seem justifiable as well, primarily because I can't swing the Ulyssyes on the budget.

JMR has my attention though. If the Grand Vennas weren't so tall, I'd give them a try even though I'd be losing some bass I'm pretty sure..

Mapman

Makes sense! Pretty much just what I'd do too.

Magnumpi205

I noticed that too.... I doubt seriously they'll adjust down to 40-43 inches though and those are about my max height tolerances. 45 in. tops! GV's are just too tall!

...but thanks.

Kal,

I’m willing to admit easily, I’ve not heard near the number of different speakers yourself or many heere likely have but noticing differences in the way the sound itself is conveyed isn’t too hard to do.

I was hasty in selecting the word ‘character’ without further defining it… though I feel it is quite different from the term, ‘colored or coloration’. IMHO character points to how the overall presentation is depicted, and colored/coloration indicates tones or notes of the instruments are changed from what they should have or could have been, during the original recital. As when a B flat becomes a B, or a B is then a B sharp.

Consequently, I’ve always felt coloration is not something one would want in a fine loudspeaker. Character however, might be. In as much as panels have one sort of personality or nature, and cone units have quite another disposition, though neither may be colored. All however then possess their own character.

Neutrality in my view should mean none of the bandwidth is promoted over any other portion of it by either addition or subtraction.

Transparency to me, says the sound is unadulterated or unchanged from it’s natural origins.

Certainly both terms being evidenced amount to the amalgamation of a better reproduction system.

For my uses neutrality of a loudspeaker weighs on more than a few parameters than it’s upstream compliment…. And neutrality becomes about as subjective as is the term transparency. Yet I’ll give more credence to a transparent speaker over a neutral one.

The character or spirit , if you will, of any speaker system then can be further defined by the sum of it’s parts, and of course, it’s voice and preview upon the sonic presentation. One system can be forceful and impacting, while another can be more reclined and well heeled. One more up front and intimate a perspective, and another a distant viewpoint in terms of the sound stage geography. . Even the type of materials used in the drivers & crossovers affect how the leading edges of notes are sometimes presented, by sharpening or rounding them up or off. However all of these systems can be uncolored if the tones being reproduced remain accurate and untainted.

A ribbon, a mylar , cloth, alloy, or even a metal tweeter can reproduce the same tones if properly designed, but somehow I can most often discern which is which, eventually if not immediately. Some tweeters regardless the type just sound better to me, as in the Esotar DynAudio produces.

Of course, if one considers any change whatsoever is accomplished to the original tones themselves by the speaker system, as colorations, your point is as valid in that context.

I pray I’ve made my use of the word ‘character’ transparent, and hope it wasn’t used inappropriately.

I’ll take your word on the business of ‘we aren’t there yet’ too. For my money, if and when that day comes, I’d bet it will be quite the thing. Until then I feel outside the requirements for power speakers demand, their voice or character is what equates to a better fit for one system over another if there is to be any interjection of ‘life’ into the presentation, and why I attribute character as a viable component for picking one loudspeaker system over another as your primary units.

To me, the soundstage proximity to the LP is as important a thing as is the articulation. Currently, I’m about spitting distance from the stage and would prefer a second row or third row seat, yet retain the impact and thrust of the music. This factor too contributes to a perception of a speakers personality.

Kal

Sorry... we hear differently, various sounds, and we say things differently too. 'Til something better comes along it'll have to do.

Paulsax

Good point.

If gear was priced according to time & materials rather than to performance the prices would plunge a goodly amount on many high end components…. with the possible exception of loudspeakers using handmade hard wood cabinets…. And very slow builders.

Tell me there's 4K worth of materials in an 8K cable... or production costs equate to 40 to 50% of the selling price.

Another member pointed out to me about the items in a mod someone was/is selling which amounted to a couple hundred or less... the mod costs >$1K. $700 - $900 labor?

Folks like Paul Barton and a few others haven't quite lost touch with reality yet... or have another perspective on doing business by lowering production costs perhaps.

I also get that time and energy required for R&D, which equates to the very first unit (s) actual cost being quite fantastic, especially if an entirely different direction was taken instead of massaging previous designs about.

Given the diminishing returns of performance vs. price as you step up the audio/video ladder, it's always seemed to me the bulk of the buying public and perhaps just above that should be the targeted audience. many do just that. Too many other's contend to appeal to upper air demographics only.... like Wilson, Magico, etc. I get the impression these ‘artisans’ are simply out of touch. It follows though if you make it you name the price for it too.

At any length, congrats to those entities which continue to provide overachieving goods to the public that are stable, lasting, and affordable more often than not.