HiFi vs MidFi

Sonus faber on a good amp, WEll my Seas single W18E001 + Millennium will perform equal to this mega priced Sonus faber.

Not true. I have listened to many of your videos, including with the Thors. I have not heard a single video of yours with sound anywhere near the ballpark here. You are standing in the parking lot outside the stadium. I have heard your Wideband drivers too.....not better than even the Seas. There is a level of refinement in the Sonus Faber video that your system is miles away from......Sorry but yours is in the !

Are you saying
Scan speak is superior to Seas..

I am saying that the Sonus Faber sounds better than anything you have shown. Nothing to do with the name, nothing to do with the manufacturer of the drivers. It is about how it sounds. It sounds coherent, yours doesn't, at least to me. Period. I could care less who made the drivers or designed the speaker. It is miles ahead of what I hear from yours. IMO. You like shouty, splashy sound. You think that is high fidelity. I don't agree. It is that simple. 

Oh yeah, i see what you are saying
Sonus Faber has a big name attached **they have to must sound better* than my Frankensteins..

Well, no you didn't see what I was saying, because what I actually said was this.

 Nothing to do with the name, nothing to do with the manufacturer of the drivers. It is about how it sounds. It sounds coherent, yours doesn't, at least to me. Period. I could care less who made the drivers or designed the speaker.

Judging of sound quality is on an absolute scale and has nothing to do with price. On the absolute scale, yours don't cut it, IMO. 

Trust me the Guarneri's ain;t going to outshoot a Seas W18EX001 /Millennium.

Well, I actually listened to the videos of both and I couldn't disagree with you more. The SF win that shootout in a landslide. Sorry.

A guy in a  Armani suit who has no sensibility to know what is high fidelity.

If you are referring to me, I don't own an Armani suit. I am just an average working person that happens to think your Frankenstein is not even mediocre sounding. You enjoy it, that is all that matters.

You are the one with no clue about high fidelity. Video after video that you have posted prove that beyond any doubt.

You no doubt have not yet heard a 1st class WBer

You are wrong yet again. At least you are consistently wrong.

My WBer will outshoot the Guarneri.

Nope, not a chance. Already said that.

You may need better computer speakers.

I am listening through my Sennheiser HD-58x headphones, which are by far better than your WBer.

 

Sorry not at all impressed with any of the Sonus Faber models.

At least the SF are coherent. 
Frankenstein is an incoherent, shouty mess. 

have you ever in your life heard a Seas W18EX/Millennium?

Yes. I have even owned some.

If mine lose i will tell they they need to get their hearing cked.

Seems pretty objective and scientific. 😜🥴

You mean like Stereophile speaker reviews past 50 years.

Actually, Stereophile performs a series of measurements on every speaker that gets reviewed. The text of the review can be taken with a grain of salt. The measurements tell a lot. The measurements are objective and scientific both. I would love to see Frankenstein measured to see how it performs. You know, frequency response, cabinet resonance, spectral decay, off axis response, impulse response. To paraphrase a famous line, you wouldn't be able to handle the truth.😢

Frankenstein can not be measured at Mr Carlson's lab.

Who is Mr. Carlson?

 

He;';ll take 1 look at it and say
**what is THIS? some kind of joke**\

At least you finally got something right.

This ain't 1970 , this is 2121, soon 2022.

So why are you posting a video of a speaker made in 1929 as an example? I am not impressed with that driver. If you can hear AT ALL, you will note how badly the tonal balance changes once you are more than about 10 degrees off axis. It becomes immediately eliminated as a possibility for me.

You double talk better than ANY politician. You hate open baffle, yet promote a video of a speaker playing while not mounted to any baffle.

Frankensteins blood is flowing, he has BAD breath

.I fixed it for you.   

Tells somethings but only hints at how the speaker ** might perform*.

No, measurements tell you how speakers objectively perform in comparison with other speakers. They are invaluable for culling what is out there for what one may want to audition. You just need to understand what the measurement tells you. Listening will be the ultimate decider every time, but just ignoring available measurements is plain old dumb. 

Have you ever in your life heard superior midrange?

I thought you hated paper cones. That is what that is, in case you didn't notice. More double talk.

Audiophiles can’t read graphs and such.

Speak for yourself. I would bet that most can. You can continue to flail away in the dark. You had Bache, who has a lot of experience with designing speakers that utilize wide band drivers. He knows what he is doing and you don’t. Yet you continuously dismiss him out of hand. Only a fool would do that.

The 1929 Colotura has paper, but it is only performing midrange.

I am now convinced that you can’t hear. It produces as much bass as your wideband. That is not saying much, but it would produce more if mounted in a properly implemented cabinet. It is definitely producing bass and that makes it a midwoofer. And it is made of paper. That video is almost as poorly done as one of yours. Again, if tone changes that much when just slightly off axis, it is a no-go.....not good unless you want to sit with your head in a vice. It then might graduate to not much more than ok.

My WBers have zero distortion = zero fatigue.

Based on your videos, this is nowhere close to true. To quote you, "I know what I hear." And it is not good.

These musical wonders don’t need an apologist.
They sing for themselves no defense necessary.

Then why are you continuously defending and apologizing for them?

@danager    +1000

I apologize for getting involved in it. It is hard to resist though.

whizzers allow for a  wider soundstage.
Rolloff? For sure, no big deal.

It is the horrible decay and overhang that they have that is the problem. They create issues that you clearly can't hear, or you don't understand what you are hearing. 

First you daid this:

My WBers have zero distortion = zero fatigue.
This is a measurable fact

Then you said this in reply to another member:

All speakers distort, they are the weakest link in the chain.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yep 100% agree, Read my post logged just above, In that post i explain all in clear unequivocal language.

I know you don't understand, but those two statements are in conflict with each other. 

Its a known fact super tweeters/horn tweets have sibilance.

You are remarkable in the sheer number of "facts" you can get wrong.

Classical music does not need the 15khz=50khz super tweet range.

You do realize that sibilance is well below this range, right? Then again, no you don't realize it.

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Design_criteria.htm
It is clear you don't understand what he is saying.

Do speakers bring down a perfectly high fidelity amplification /source, down to **midfi*??

From what I have heard on your videos, Frankenstein needs to take a big step up to make it to mid-fi. So in that sense, I agree with you. Your speakers drag your system down.

These findings support Bache Audio's spaeker systems. Although Bache prefers super tweeters, Which I don't.
Risk of bringing in sibilance.

Nope, wrong again. When implemented properly, they are no different than any other tweeter. They will be less of a problem than the whizzer cones that you love.

I get it, you don't have a lot of money. You want to believe you have found the Holy Grail and beaten everyone for very cheap. Sorry, but it just isn't true. If you like your system, great. Your videos are not convincing anyone that you have good sound. Quite the opposite, in fact. If what you have shown on video is the best possible, the bar is much, much lower than I thought. 

You are taking my ideas out of context, due to your stubborn refusal to accept the inherent limitations of xover style speakers

Never once, anywhere, did I say this. You are imagining it because I don’t hear what you do in your speakers. Tough.

Do xover types have critical issues in the 2khz-3khz band width?
Its either
Yes
or
No

In a properly designed speaker, no. Troels actually told you that in the article you linked. It would have told you that if you read and understood it. You didn’t.

Sophie Milman, Diana Krall sounds quite accurate viia the Sony cam.
I hear true fidelity in my uploads of both.
Which is why I plant the mic right up to both Wbers, so you get a real impression of the quality of the speaker.

Placing the mic right up to the driver makes it sound it’s worst. All that lovely noise from that awful whizzer cone. IOW, they sounded like crap on your videos too. The only time they are close to acceptable is when you are across the room in the video. They make it all of the way up to mid fi at that point.

Or is it perhaps , some of what I am saying might be close to the truth about what makes fidelity high and what makes speakers non-fidelity??

You have had plenty of videos showing exactly what bad sounds like. We get the idea.

Where’s all the big time audiophiles with extensive knowledge about these things,, NOT chiming in??

They are laughing at you and your measure once, cut five times speaker. Damn, it's still too short.

WEll its late 2121.

OMG!

Ohhh the hate for WBers, Its clear to me now,. As much as you guys hate WBers is the exact same hate I have for A-Z xover types.

I don't hate wideband drivers. I have never said that. I have never heard one that compelled me to purchase it. I.E.- I don't find them to be better than what I have on hand. If I found one that I liked enough, I would pay the amount respective to its performance. Why would anyone hate a speaker? Pretty bizarre thought process. 

Why are you posting this on someone else's thread? It is off topic and you have enough of your own threads showing how bad this set up sounds. Leave this on one of your own threads.