If It Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It

In case anyone out there would assert that better parts and build quality  = better sound, this case obviously does not support that argument.  
 

I recall some GR videos explaining why some parts are better than others.  I’ll buy that.  But parts are useless unless there is a good design in place.  If there is a good design in place to start,  probably best to leave be unless one has very high confidence in the alternative. 

BTW two different craftsmen with two different goals in mind might each come up with a good design that achieves their goal.   It’s a good design if the goals are achieved, plain and simple.  No guarantee that those goals match those of the buyer.  Could this be why there are  so many different products out there?

Why can’t these things ever be simple? 🤷
 

It would be my contention that ignoring the usefulness of GR or ASR would be folly. No one has all the answers especially when it comes to such a subjective subject. My fault with Danny is his unnecessary attacks on some very beloved speakers seemingly just for a sale. Information properly vetted and used is a good tool to have.

All I can say is, I have personally helped upgrade 6 different pairs of speakers using GR Research's upgrade kits (I am a DIY'r and love to do this sort of thing).

Everyone of the upgrades made an appreciable improvement. And despite the cost of them, were a great investment. 

Think about it this way; if someone spends $1000.00 on a pair of speakers, then another few hundred on an upgrade kit, the end results are much better than if the person spent $1300.00 on a pair of speakers in the first place. Those $1300 pair of speakers were still designed to meet a certain price point, and will still have crappy parts in them, so they will still be compromised.

Back in the late 90's and early 00's, a friend and I used to have a cottage business upgrading speakers for people, mostly for fun, but we did pick up a few spare dollars.

Although the advanced measuring methods available now, did not exist, we still were able to get noticeable improvements just by swapping parts with better parts, adding bracing to the cabinets, adding damping to the inside walls of the enclosures.  

About 1 year ago, GR “upgraded” my beloved Wilson Watt Puppy 8 speakers which I power with a pair of McIntosh MC275s in mono mode.  These speakers are + - 3db across the frequency range, 22 hz to 22.5 kHz, 92 db sensitivity from the factory.  We absolutely love the way they sound directly from Wilson.  The GR solution was to make the tweeter play lower (longevity ?), take the low end out of the midrange speaker, and attach separate subwoofer plate amps to each woofer.  GR claimed that it would sound 10 times better and it seems that he did not even hear it in that configuration.  He also made derogatory comments about Wilson Engineering capabilities.   I thought the whole thing was unfair to a legendary speaker, legendary company, legendary founder, and to the legendary reviewers who highly rated this speaker.   For me, GR basically made a new set of 4 speakers.  Transforming 2 full range tower speakers into 2 book self speakers or monitors and 2 subwoofers powered by additional amps.   I think if he would just have said this and articulated why this was a more flexible configuration, it would have been more interesting. 

A lot of Hurt Feelings here…