Meadowlar Osprey...How does it sound???

Sedona: If high volume freedom from congestion or compression is your priority, why do you recommend first-order speakers at all? (Asked as a Thiel owner, BTW...)

Actually Bombaywalla, it's all relative. My Thiels (2.2's) don't offer quite the high-volume ease I would like in my current room, but it wasn't an issue in my previous smaller room. I know I could remedy this by moving to a different Thiel model. But I also know that no first-order speaker I've heard is going to be capable of the unfettered high-level dynamics of a Wilson, fr'instance (driver complement and cabinet size being equal). That's pretty much the nature of the beast, but to me some other sonic qualities that first-order designs can excel in (such as coherence) are more important for the kind of listening I'm realistically comfortable doing in my house.

I think I was misundertaken...Sedona, you didn't have to 'defend' yourself; I wasn't trying to attack you. Maybe *I* didn't understand *you* correctly, but it sounded to me like you had something specific in mind, still first-order. I thought you might have a reason for continuing to recommend first-order designs, maybe even something the Meadowlark did well. I did not glean that you didn't prefer first-order designs at all. I've got no problem with that - in fact it makes sense given the sonic priorities I asked you about.

I myself have never been able to see a positive way to determine whether or not the qualities I like about the Thiel sound are really directly traceable to first-order, time-and-phase-aligned design, at least in part. I believe Thiel contends they have made some of their designs in non-time-aligned versions for test purposes, and that the difference is crucial, but then they would say that. It's a very good marketing story regardless, and as you know more than one manufacturer has successfully used it, and it may indeed be the truth to some degree, even to a large degree. But the fact will always remain that there are many good-sounding speakers, of both box and planar varieties, that manage their accomplishments while ignoring this principle entirely, so there are no absolute franchises on correct speaker design. As ever, it's a matter of wisely juggling trade-offs.

Unsound: As you say, I was talking about the dynamic challenges inherent in first-order design generally, but was not trying to put my 2.2's up against speakers costing 5 times as much. As for Wilsons, I am sure that a large part of their overall brand superiority in the area of high-level dynamics has as much to do with their uniquely rigid and non-resonant cabinet construction as anything else (as does their higher than average pricing).