Quad 57 stacked v Wilson watt puppy 6/7

Mrtennis

"the scintilla has merely an iota of the quad 57's timbral accuracy. look at the driver material and "speed' of the drivers."

Says you?....I'd take the Scintilla any day (by a long shot).

Says me,

Dave

My friend had the same system as "Donaudio".Stacked Quads,with ribbon tweets,and triamped,with three Bedini 25 wpc amps.Superb set-up,but took up lots of space.Completely different presentation than Wilsons.Nobody is going to tell you which to buy,with any degree of accuracy,between these different approaches.
Sorry,but you've got to think this one out.
Best.

it's all subjective, but no cone speaker is preferable to stacked quad 57s. you can have your scintilla, duetta signature, martin logan, or any other speaker. the 57 is less inaccurate within its range than any other speaker, period.

Mrtennis

I don't care which speaker is less "inaccurate"...that was not what my mention of the Apogee Scintilla was even about.

I would explain the reasons for my mention of the Scintilla to the poster, if he were interested...and asked. He has not, so I won't.

On the other hand. I've read many of your posts in other threads regarding sound reproduction, and system component selection. My conclusion was, and still is... that you know nothing about "timbral accuracy", or little else audio related?.

You have "almost" no credibility as a useful source of information regarding speaker systems, system components, or acoustics....at least, not with me.

Dave

mrtennis,
just a quick, relatively unimportant comment, but trying to qualify the above statement with "it's all subjective" does not change the objectivistic tone and (at least implied) content of the claims that follow. this has to do with what the word "preferable" means. if it "all" really is subjective, then it simply is not possible that "no cone speaker is preferable," except to some individual(s) based on their own subjective preferences (the word prefer implies subjectivity.) do you mean something like "in my opinion no cone speakers are preferable...." or perhaps more simply (and directly), "I prefer the stacked quad 57s to cone speakers"? this would be consistent with the statement that "it's all subjective." It is a matter of semantics and sneaking in objectivistic statements under cover of a subjectivistic one. while language is ambiguous enough that your post can technically be read to mean that these statements are subjective and merely reflect your own preferences, the actual wording belies a strong belief that you think your preference is grounded in an actual fact that exist beyond that preference (in the external world), namely, that the quads are objectively more accurate than any cone speaker. in turn this implies that the "preferable-ness" of the quads really isn't subjective at all but an objective reality, which contradicts the normal uses of the word "preferable" (i.e., when referring to an objective fact, this word in redundant and thus unnecessary).

in other words, one can't have it both ways, either one believes that the 57 is objectively more accurate, "period," or one believes that the 57s are only one's own perference, however strong that preference may be, i.e., that the strength of that personal preference cannot convert it to or even bring it into proximity with "objective truth" (assuming such a thing can itself be objectively real or true without becoming little more than a tautology).

that said, and more importantly, though, i am jealous as i feel sure that if i ever heard the stacked quads my brain would melt in musical ecstacy! :)