Stereophile review of Escalante Fremont


Has anyone read Stereophile review (Feb '08) of Escalante Design Fremont spkrs ?
Reviewed by Larry Greenhill & measured by Jon Atkinson .

How come they make a review of the spkrs without proper setup :
- LG didn't attached the stand spikes because of his new wood floor & put some bad comments (nasal / coloured tonal).
- JA measured the spkrs with above condition .
- No information if the spkrs burned-in

In my experience , result could be very sensitive for full range spkrs setup ( freq. resp : 18 hz - 50 khz ) .

How can such a great magazine editor allow to publish review with above condition ?

Really different with Positive-Feedback (by Greg Weaver) & Stereo Times (by Dave Thomas & Greg Petan) reviews .
This three reviewers has bought Fremont after made the review .

Seems our international respectable Stereophile magazine has a lot of degradation in their quality .
Is there politics inside this magazine ?
What a waste review ... i think ...
riwin_h
I am the friend Cincy_Bob referred to.

I have been running a pair of Escalante Fremonts for a couple of weeks now, which I bought used from someone who is local. The measurements in my room, derived from warble tones, are indeed poor and track with what Atkinson measured in Stereophile. There is a suckout of roughly 6 db. at the midrange/tweeter crossover point. The bass is peaky, but I have a bad room for bass and for aesthetic reasons, am quite limited as to what I can do to improve it. Incidentally, I do not question Stereophile's integrity and make decisions about equipment on the basis of what I hear, what I hear from friends whose judgment I trust, and a variety of other information -- I bought mine after reading the Stereophile review.

The long and the short of it is that the speakers sound pretty damn good to me, and there are prominent reviewers (and others like renowned mastering engineer Steve Hoffman) who own them and sing their praises. There have only been a couple of familiar recordings thus far in which I can hear response aberrations, but it is less offputting than other things I hear in speakers that really bug me (slow bass, dynamic reticence, lack of resolution, overall lack of naturalness). While I see what is said about the midrange and measured for myself the suckout at the crossover point, I find the midrange to be clear, open and timbre-correct. Here is what Hoffman said about the mids (and the rest of his comments), which largely tracks with what I hear:

http://www.escalantedesign.com/media/pdfs/Steve_Hoffman_Release.pdf

They are very efficient, very dynamic, have quick bass and bass slam, and image like a bitch due to the ring revelator tweeter. I have heard a lot of different speakers and own or have owned some pretty good ones (Salons for three years, still own Ultimate Monitors, Dynaudios for two years, Dunlavys for five years, V.A. Mahlers for five years) run with what most people would consider very good electronics -- none is better than the Escalantes, at least subjectively (and that's what counts). I will likely sell them for a much more expensive speaker in the near future, but I have been asking myself whether I really need to do this. I really like the way these things sound, and at least used, think they are high value.

Measurements are very useful and they are important, but they do not tell the entire story. In addition, most people rely too much on reviews due to their ignorance of high-end gear, lack of contacts in the industry, lack of access to high-end dealers, etc. I think that reviewers generally have integrity (except for the Absolute Sound -- that's a topic for another day), but readers need to understand that their listening biases, listening rooms, the equipment they review gear with, and many other factors shape their perception of what they hear. Michael Fremer, for example, is a lovely guy and has contributed a lot to this sport, but he listens to a lot of rock and roll on huge Wilsons in a 15' x 18' basement with monstrous solid-state amplification -- I'm going to make my own judgments based upon what I know and hear and like (zero-feedback triode amplification, battery-powered preamplification, and symphonic music from vinyl).
Would agree with Dgarretson. Not really high on the price/performance list. You can get a pair of Harbeth 40.1s for similar $ and take a giant leap in performance. You can get the Gershman Sonograms for about 40% of the cost of the Fremonts and get better sound.Great cabinetry though.
Here is what Hoffman said about the mids (and the rest of his comments), which largely tracks with what I hear:

OMG, now I understand why some of his masterings sound so terribly overripe in the bass... I complained about it a few months ago to someone working at one of the online record retailers.
JKalman: The overripe bass would be your WattPuppies (unless, of course, you've EQ'd that 7 db. hump out, which of course makes your sound perfect).