Best new loudspeaker


I have heard many loudspeakers ,I own Magnapan , and
a Aerial 10-t . This new loudspeaker I heard at great lengths and many agree is from a new company called
NSR -Sonic Research the D-3 Sonata was absolutely killer
and they were saying the wiring and crossover are not even final as of the Jan show . parts quality is excellent in the Silver finish I saw,for a speaker under $5k to create such a soundstage presence with bass that had articulation and impact is beyond me how they do it ,I am told it is a
sealed focal lens .They will be selling by March ,I for sure will be saving my bucks, this is one loudspeaker to watch ,I am already selling my 10-ts.
audiophile1958
the speaker might be too revealing.

Can a speaker or any other piece of equipment be 'too revealing'?? This is not something I've ever heard of before. Is it possible that you prefer equipment that is chosen with a preference for a lack of detail (perhaps to cover up deficiencies in recordings or other equipment)?

I've also noticed that you've not responded to any of my prior posts in this thread. Did I hit a nerve? If so that was not my intention; the point of my other posts was not to make you wrong, but to get an actual answer.
hi ralph:

there is no best anything. however, at a point in time, one can say that given say 5 speakers, one of them is least inaccurate timbrally. that doesn't make it the best, but does establish performance in that regard.

timbre is one of several components of music. it is most important to me.

regarding "revealing" speakers, if a spekaer reveals both musical and non musical information in a manner whcih is not realistic, then it is too revealing.

i will provide an example in the visual realm. i was watching a commercial in which a part of brick building appeared on my lcd screen. i observed that the level of resolution exceeded what i would experience if i were viewing the building from a distance of 20 feet.

sometimes one listens to a stereo sytem which cone might say is overly articulated. when in attendance at a concert, i would never use the word "detail" as part of my description of the music i heard. if the same term is used when describing the music heard through a pair of speakers, it is possible that one is listening to music "under a microscope".

back to the topic. martin logan will be introducing its clx, a full range electrostatic speaker at the denver cedia show, later in the ear. priced between $8000 and $9000, it has the potential for being a fine product. i received information today from a representative of the company. it is too bad it is not in production yet, as i would order a pair with out an audition.
timbre is one of several components of music. it is most important to me

MrT,

timbre is old french for a "drum" or close to "timbanon" in greek...

Do you seriously consider the Quad 57 or a stack of them or any electrostatic/planar/ribbon the last word on reproducing tympani or a full drum set?

Please confirm that, in your opinion, the timbre of a drum set is also "least inaccurate timbrally" when played back with any electrostatic/planar/ribbon - better than any of 1000 audiophile quality cone speakers that you have auditioned?

....just curious how far you are willing to go in your extreme viewpoint on "timbre"? However, I fear I am already on the ignore list - just like Ralph ;-)
yes i will assert that any electrostatic, within its frequency response bandwidth, will create the sound of an instrument, in a manner more realistic than any cone design.

we both realize that such an assertion requires evidence.
as i have stated in the past, an experiment would be needed to compare a live performance to a recording feeding a pair of speakers, or one could use a microphone feed without making a recording.

since this experiement has not occurred you and i are engaging in probabilistic statements.

such a test is not definitive, because it is possible that two listeners may differ in the outcome of such a comparison. do you have any ideas ?
if a spekaer reveals both musical and non musical information in a manner whcih is not realistic, then it is too revealing.
(sic)

Seems what you are describing here is something other than 'too revealing'; if it were me, I might describe that as a coloration.

It seems that there is a concession here that you have made in that you acknowledge that there is no best- only best for you. Yet in the post where you responded to me above, you said:
but does establish performance in that regard.

So I have a question. **IF** we establish performance 'in that regard' are you saying that that established performance is then a known entity that can be used as a yard stick? If yes, then can a series of 'established performance' qualities then add up to something?

Finally, why would you buy a Martin-Logan sound un-heard when you know that your CJ won't be able to drive it?? That would mean that you would be on the hunt for an amplifier (probably transistor, as ML is traditionally a very difficult load for all tube amps). Pardon my saying so, but it seems out of character for you. Am I missing something or did you not know about that quality of ML speakers?