HiFi vs MidFi

invalid398 posts10-28-2021 10:31amMy WBers have zero distortion = zero fatigue.
This is a measurable fact


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. 
**Zero* = as best as ya gonna get. 
Almost un-measurable, not significant degree of coloration. 
Indeed, 
THE weakest link. As I clearly explain above. 
Jadis new KT170 intergrated via B&W will sound JUST like that, B&W sound. 
= highly colored *mid -fi* = no-fi = distortion/fatigue.

I'm picking on B&W because they are the easiest target of all *hifi*  speakers (hifi= high priced) 
But equally true
Jadis KT170 + Sonus  Faber = Sonus faber. 
Jadis KT170 + Zu = Zu
and so forth.
Math made simple, not rocket science. 

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.

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. 

I know you don't understand, but those two statements are in conflict with each other.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Obvioulsy if I stated
*My WBer has no such weakness**
Would undermine everything I am saying in support of WBers as not only the **Ideal* speaker, but really honestly, truthfull (no snakeoil) WBers is the speaker by choice, the ultimate listening experience.

Zero, near zero, a  miniscule factor, all mean same thing.
xover low sens all have coloration, distortion, fatigue which is noticable. My 2 tech geeks love their vintage stacks.

They hear no such coloration. They  do not get fatigued by their Acoustic Research AR3's, 1973, Philips 2 ways, 10 inch woofer, Radio Shak Nova 7's. 
They love their Vintage stacks.
There ya go, they can live with this paper sound.
Soory I can't
I've since moved on to magnesium in the Seas and some  sort of wooden cone in the DavidLouis.
The magnesium cones are extremely well behaved and have no resonances below 1800hz. 
The wood cone has excellent voice characterists. 
IOW neutral, which is what makes high fi, fatigue free listening.
Follow?
Look, I ain;t backing down. You are taking my ideas out of context, due to your  stubborn refusal to accept  the inherent limitations of xover style speakers, low db sens being the most  obvious  curse of this design. 

If Troels was on this discussion, he'd at least agree with some of my ideas.
Whereas you simply  enjoy twisting and distorting what I am GETTING at.

Just answer the Q.
Do xover types have critical issues in the 2khz-3khz band width?
Its either
Yes
or 
No
Not holding my breath for your answer thats for sure