Audio Note speakers

[Mart68]

I continue on the team to pick up a few different (classics?) two-way speakers with a relatively large bass driver and tweeter without a waveguide. I'm including some pictures because pictures are always fun.

The Dynaco A25XL you mention seems to be a classic. So much so that it has its own thread here on ASR:
View attachment 366094

1969-74 Dynaco A-25 speakers compared to modern designs?

I was just given a pair of early seventies Dynaco A-25 speakers, and am wondering if folks have experience with them? How would they stack up vs newer designs in the past 50 years-- will they hold up? Thanks

audiosciencereview.com

Speakers with variations on the team 8 inch bass and 1 inch tweeter. Mostly British stuff so DSJR (who also sold speakers) and you others from the British Isles are welcome to add information, or correct me if I'm wrong.

JPW P1. Vifa drives, both bass and tweeter. Here are a couple that are now with my parents.
(sorry I'm a bad photographer, poor sharpness in the picture).
JPW P1:
View attachment 366095

Pretty cool speakers, those JPW P1s, I must say. The bird that couldn't fly because there's actually a 3/4 inch tweeter in them (VIFA D19TD-05-08) +
8 inch bass driver (VIFA M21WG-09-08).It shouldn't work but is fun speakers nonetheless. Light thin walls, resonances, little bass in the lower registers and probably wacko off axes on probably on axes relatively bad as well (maybe I'll measure that some day) but despite that a couple of fun speakers. The stands they stand on are made for Heybrook HB1 speakers. Sharp spikes on the stands that can cut into the speakers, what the hell were the designers of them thinking with those destroyers for spikes?

Heybrook HB1, same bass as in JPW P1 if I remember correctly, that is VIFA M21WG-09-08.

Heybrook HB1:

View attachment 366097


Another classic combination 8 inch bass 1 inch tweeter is the variant of bass driver B200 and tweeter t27 that KEF made in different models. The t27 tweeter is also available Rogers LS3/5A (don't buy a new variant of them, unnecessarily expensive for rather mediocre or poor performance).
Here KEF Cadenza without speaker grills. The B200 + t27 and a passive radiator. I had a pair of Cadenzas a couple of years ago. I thought they were ok.
KEF Cadenza:
View attachment 366098

QRS 500, as I mentioned earlier in the thread. Sweden's "folk speaker" with Vifa 8 inch bass and Vifa 1 inch tweeter.
QRS 500:
View attachment 366099
Speaking of DIY, I know a person who just now started a project to mount a Somasonus WG with SB26ADC-C000-4 tweeter in a pair of QRS500. Well, maybe it can be good. The speaker boxes themselves are ok. I know nothing about the quality of the bass driver. Maybe it can be reasonably good speakers, with the right type of crossover, that is. I'll see if he gets them together and shows them at a vintage DIY fair I usually go to.
(he has 3d printer and the SB tweeters plus a couple of QRS500 he doesn't use now so why not try it, was his reasoning)
View attachment 366104

Waveguides | somasonus

www.somasonus.net

There are probably lots of similar variants of 8 inch bass and 1 inch tweeter speakers in other countries. It seems to have been a popular concept in the 1970s up until a bit into the 1990s.

Edit:
For those who are thinking of buying one of the speakers mentioned above with Vifa bass, it is not a matter of if but when the edges rot away. If it hasn't been done recently, it should be redone (as I did with my parents' JPW P1):

Heybrook HB1 speaker - Repairkit foam surrounds for woofer

2 x 8

www.repairyourspeakers.com

Did you know that the enclosures for the JPW loudspeakers of that era were built by the prisoners at HMP Dartmoor?

HM Prison Dartmoor - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[renkitch]

Another classic combination 8 inch bass 1 inch tweeter is the variant of bass driver B200 and tweeter t27 that KEF made in different models. The t27 tweeter is also available Rogers LS3/5A (don't buy a new variant of them, unnecessarily expensive for rather mediocre or poor performance).
Here KEF Cadenza without speaker grills. The B200 + t27 and a passive radiator. I had a pair of Cadenzas a couple of years ago. I thought they were ok.
KEF Cadenza:
View attachment 366098

I had some KEF Cadenzas in the mid/late 80's, Daniel. I thought they were amazing (in comparison to what I had before). The only problem is that they looked really 'scruffy' without the grill. They should make these again, but tidy up the front - probably increase the enclosure height too - they were just a bit too short for floor standing.

 

[Ken1951]

On another forum someone was posting about their new AN speakers and that they started to "settle in" after about 300 hours!

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

On another forum someone was posting about their new AN speakers and that they started to "settle in" after about 300 hours!

How sad.. His hearing started to settle in and he is converted to the new belief. His distrust of real quality is being reinforced, "doesn't sound right".

 

[CapMan]

On another forum someone was posting about their new AN speakers and that they started to "settle in" after about 300 hours!

Let’s hope they stay in that perfect sweet spot for many years now they’ve settled - uncanny how they know how to improve just enough.

 

[Richard Austen]

Following a long tradition of subjectivists, You surely do Your best in trying to create a veil over the validity of DBT.

In the subjectivist vs. objectivist disagreement, the value of DBT is very simple and clear: The subjectivist camp claims over and over again having capability to detect sound quality related differences that the objectivist camp denies are detecteble by human ears / exist at all.

When a person claims that he can do something, the burden of proof lies on him. The subjectivists claiming such capability have failed to prove it in controlled conditions. The results are quite clear. DBTs have proven that the objecvtist camp has it right.

The argument about DBT not being a able to prove that nowhere in this universe exists a person who does not have the said capability is simply irrelevant. It is like saying that everyone should believe in Flying Spaghetti Monster, because it is impossible to prove that Flying Spaghetti Monster does not exist. The subjectivist camp finds this impossible to accept, because their point of view is based on belief in supernatural phenomenons.

As an atheist - there is a difference a claim (and ramifactions for) believing in a God and forcing others to their deaths if they don't. The Onus of proof - you are correct - that a person making a claim that his $3000 cable sounds better than 3 cent lampcord is on the guy with the $3,000 cable. The issue is with the validity of the DBT in terms of Validity and Reliability - but it's STILL on that guy to prove it - So we're not really in disagreement on that - I just take issue with parts of the test and how they're constructed - it is still better than just purely sighted listening and "taking their (manufacturers/dealers/somebody on a forum) word for it."

 

[Richard Austen]

Okay, so speakers are a totally unrelated business!

My apologies, but your repeated and astonishingly lengthy assertions that Audio Note gear is technically excellent lend no credibility to your judgments regarding the quality of recordings.

Now we hear from you that Audio Note and similar companies have excellent engineers and expensive measurement equipment but choose to sell products that measure poorly because they "sound" better. The implication is that these companies perhaps have some trade-secreted knowledge of how measurements and sound quality correlate.

But this is nonsense. They don't have any secret knowledge, and Audio Note and PS Audio do not hire serious engineers. These are companies full of tinkerers and dilettantes.

And it's tinkerers and dilettantes who buy the narrative. It's why the people who buy this expensive stuff tend to be businesspeople, lawyers, social scientists, journalists, musicians, artists, etc. I've rarely met a real engineer or anyone with a background in the hard sciences who blew money on any of this crap.

I used to enjoy these narratives, too, but got educated several years ago.

Where did I ever say Audio Note was technically excellent? For people who claim to be objectivists - I have stated many times now that AN measures badly - very badly - I have said that John Atkinson of Stereophile called their DAC Broken and that UHF said it was the worst measuring DAC they had come across. Yes I mentioned in both cases the reviewers loved the sound of if it calling it the best digital they have ever heard and at UHF better than their reference - but that doesn't make it "technically good."

The secret knowlege is that they adjust the sound based on the listening and not solely relying on the measured performance. I mean that's not exactly a secret - it's making a judgement that "I think this sounds a lit more like music" and if it has worse measurements as a result so be it. AN is hardly alone in audio doing that. Then people can go and listen and determine if that sound aligns with their notion of accuracy.

You're making idiotic subjective statements about who buys AN - like you know every single person on the planet and if one of them is a writer or musician then he is a clueless moron - an engineer does not inately HEAR any better than a journalist or a businessman or a musician. An engineer is not inately a better judge at listening and determining which system is better at reproducing an oboe or cello. Where did you come up with that?

 

[Pearljam5000]

 

[Dialectic]

Where did I ever say Audio Note was technically excellent? For people who claim to be objectivists - I have stated many times now that AN measures badly - very badly - I have said that John Atkinson of Stereophile called their DAC Broken and that UHF said it was the worst measuring DAC they had come across. Yes I mentioned in both cases the reviewers loved the sound of if it calling it the best digital they have ever heard and at UHF better than their reference - but that doesn't make it "technically good."

The secret knowlege is that they adjust the sound based on the listening and not solely relying on the measured performance. I mean that's not exactly a secret - it's making a judgement that "I think this sounds a lit more like music" and if it has worse measurements as a result so be it. AN is hardly alone in audio doing that. Then people can go and listen and determine if that sound aligns with their notion of accuracy.

You're making idiotic subjective statements about who buys AN - like you know every single person on the planet and if one of them is a writer or musician then he is a clueless moron - an engineer does not inately HEAR any better than a journalist or a businessman or a musician. An engineer is not inately a better judge at listening and determining which system is better at reproducing an oboe or cello. Where did you come up with that?

Audio Note has no secret knowledge about listening, engineering, or anything else. Peter Qvortrup is an eccentric who has managed to make a modest amount of money by fleecing people with no technical knowledge.

With respect to your ad hominem attacks against me, I will avail myself of the 'ignore' button. For all the words you've written here and elsewhere, none of them have contributed to our understanding of anything except for blind commodity fetishism.

I want to read something good now, so I'm turning off my phone and pulling out my copy of Ulysses. To improve the quality of your audio forum posts, you should perhaps read Floyd Toole's excellent book or Geoff Martin's textbook draft on tonmeister.ca.

 

[Sal1950]

The secret knowlege is that they adjust the sound based on the listening and not solely relying on the measured performance. I mean that's not exactly a secret - it's making a judgement that "I think this sounds a lit more like music" and if it has worse measurements as a result so be it. AN is hardly alone in audio doing that. Then people can go and listen and determine if that sound aligns with their notion of accuracy.

Who are they to adjust the sound of a correctly measuring DAC to their personal preference?
Maybe they should ask the performers to change the way they play to their preference?
Or maybe even talk to God, he may be able to help them out.

 

[Mnyb]

I continue on the team to pick up a few different (classics?) two-way speakers with a relatively large bass driver and tweeter without a waveguide. I'm including some pictures because pictures are always fun.

The Dynaco A25XL you mention seems to be a classic. So much so that it has its own thread here on ASR:
View attachment 366094

1969-74 Dynaco A-25 speakers compared to modern designs?

I was just given a pair of early seventies Dynaco A-25 speakers, and am wondering if folks have experience with them? How would they stack up vs newer designs in the past 50 years-- will they hold up? Thanks

audiosciencereview.com

Speakers with variations on the team 8 inch bass and 1 inch tweeter. Mostly British stuff so DSJR (who also sold speakers) and you others from the British Isles are welcome to add information, or correct me if I'm wrong.

JPW P1. Vifa drives, both bass and tweeter. Here are a couple that are now with my parents.
(sorry I'm a bad photographer, poor sharpness in the picture).
JPW P1:
View attachment 366095

Pretty cool speakers, those JPW P1s, I must say. The bird that couldn't fly because there's actually a 3/4 inch tweeter in them (VIFA D19TD-05-08) +
8 inch bass driver (VIFA M21WG-09-08).It shouldn't work but is fun speakers nonetheless. Light thin walls, resonances, little bass in the lower registers and probably wacko off axes on probably on axes relatively bad as well (maybe I'll measure that some day) but despite that a couple of fun speakers. The stands they stand on are made for Heybrook HB1 speakers. Sharp spikes on the stands that can cut into the speakers, what the hell were the designers of them thinking with those destroyers for spikes?

Heybrook HB1, same bass as in JPW P1 if I remember correctly, that is VIFA M21WG-09-08.

Heybrook HB1:

View attachment 366097


Another classic combination 8 inch bass 1 inch tweeter is the variant of bass driver B200 and tweeter t27 that KEF made in different models. The t27 tweeter is also available Rogers LS3/5A (don't buy a new variant of them, unnecessarily expensive for rather mediocre or poor performance).
Here KEF Cadenza without speaker grills. The B200 + t27 and a passive radiator. I had a pair of Cadenzas a couple of years ago. I thought they were ok.
KEF Cadenza:
View attachment 366098

QRS 500, as I mentioned earlier in the thread. Sweden's "folk speaker" with Vifa 8 inch bass and Vifa 1 inch tweeter.
QRS 500:
View attachment 366099
Speaking of DIY, I know a person who just now started a project to mount a Somasonus WG with SB26ADC-C000-4 tweeter in a pair of QRS500. Well, maybe it can be good. The speaker boxes themselves are ok. I know nothing about the quality of the bass driver. Maybe it can be reasonably good speakers, with the right type of crossover, that is. I'll see if he gets them together and shows them at a vintage DIY fair I usually go to.
(he has 3d printer and the SB tweeters plus a couple of QRS500 he doesn't use now so why not try it, was his reasoning)
View attachment 366104

Waveguides | somasonus

www.somasonus.net

There are probably lots of similar variants of 8 inch bass and 1 inch tweeter speakers in other countries. It seems to have been a popular concept in the 1970s up until a bit into the 1990s.

Edit:
For those who are thinking of buying one of the speakers mentioned above with Vifa bass, it is not a matter of if but when the edges rot away. If it hasn't been done recently, it should be redone (as I did with my parents' JPW P1):

Heybrook HB1 speaker - Repairkit foam surrounds for woofer

2 x 8

www.repairyourspeakers.com

Heard almost all of these at one time in life considered the heybrook before I got a pair of small Opus 3 concrete speakers . I saved up to bying the Snell EIII later .

Never heard the Dynaco . A friends older Brother had the KEF’s the rest could be found in store in my home town Örebro at ”Hifi Huset” at some point .

It was a long time ago I can’t even call up a fake memory on how any of it sounded to me at the time

 

[Mnyb]

Audio Note has no secret knowledge about listening, engineering, or anything else. Peter Qvortrup is an eccentric who has managed to make a modest amount of money by fleecing people with no technical knowledge.

With respect to your ad hominem attacks against me, I will avail myself of the 'ignore' button. For all the words you've written here and elsewhere, none of them have contributed to our understanding of anything except for blind commodity fetishism.

I want to read something good now, so I'm turning off my phone and pulling out my copy of Ulysses. To improve the quality of your audio forum posts, you should perhaps read Floyd Toole's excellent book or Geoff Martin's textbook draft on tonmeister.ca.

I think I follow your example with the ignore button , but I’m reading a Neil Gainman short story collection at the moment .

 

[Mnyb]

Some arguments are so daft that one does not know where to start .

Even the most science based speaker manufacturers adjust things by ear as choices had to be made .
Even if most of the speakers performance can be predicted using science ( read Toole et al ) . There are inherent compromises in building any speakers.

AN is absolutely not unique in doing this , the unique thing is thier disconnect with reality as the probably most exentric brand out there .

It’s a false narrative to claim that AN and similar “Listen to the music” and others are blinded by graphs and make “cold clinical scientific well measured products “ .
And it’s even more wrong to hint that this could lead forward and has any merit. It’s broken the high end hifi since the 80’s .

Read about the circle of confusion regarding speakers. A good speaker manufacturer has to have other anchor points to reality than just listen to recordings that are in themselves balanced and tuned by listening to another set of flawed speakers ( around we go ) .

 

[DanielT]

Did you know that the enclosures for the JPW loudspeakers of that era were built by the prisoners at HMP Dartmoor?

HM Prison Dartmoor - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Interesting. Well, why not. It is good that the prisoners are doing something in the prison. Reintegration into society and all that.

I had some KEF Cadenzas in the mid/late 80's, Daniel. I thought they were amazing (in comparison to what I had before). The only problem is that they looked really 'scruffy' without the grill. They should make these again, but tidy up the front - probably increase the enclosure height too - they were just a bit too short for floor standing.

Yep I agree, grill and speaker stand for Kef Cadenza was needed.Grill to make them look nicer anyway.

If this measurement on the Cadenza is to be believed, the FR on axes on them looks really good:

KEF Cadenza Specifications

Heard almost all of these at one time in life considered the heybrook before I got a pair of small Opus 3 concrete speakers . I saved up to bying the Snell EIII later .

Never heard the Dynaco . A friends older Brother had the KEF’s the rest could be found in store in my home town Örebro at ”Hifi Huset” at some point .

It was a long time ago I can’t even call up a fake memory on how any of it sounded to me at the time

Opus 3, that is Rauna. I had a pair of Rauna Njord about ten years ago. They sounded, if I remember correctly, good.

Speaking of Rauna, have you seen this thread:

Rauna Freja Vintage 2-Way Loudspeaker Measurements

Today I present measurements on a pair of Rauna Freja, aka affectionately as 'Swedish Tombstones';). They are a small 2-way in a concrete cabinet. I believe that Bo Hansson was involved with the design. I would appreciate any information members have regarding this nice little speaker. These...

audiosciencereview.com

_____

All my answers above were of course OT relative to Audio Note speakers, sorry for that but I couldn't help it.

 

[Richard Austen]

No speaker is truly neutral. I know this will be hugely controversial here, but the LS3/5a renders voices quite naturally

Perfect reprroduced sound would come from a single point in space - the speaker would need to be able to play to 120dB with 0.0 THD and IMD at the person's ear in room - and if you move your head one foot the back or forward left or right the frequency response at your ear would need ot be IDENTICALLY flat 20hz to 20khz with no deviation at all at any frequency (+/- 0.0dB at all frequencies at the ear) - perfect polar response is a given and the room would have to offer no gain or dips whatsoever at any frequency. Perfect phase response goes without saying.

All speakers that deviate from that are "inaccurate" loudspeaker/room response - so now you are choosing which "innacurate" speaker you "like the most" - that's why even amongst the so called "accurate loudspeakers" and "accurate amplifiers" people make choices as to which ones sound better to them. It's the same rigid holier than though attitude that LP and Tube and SET guys have that their choice is the best choice. Someone always trying to control the choices of others - the same people trying to control a woman's choice over their body - and no one ever convinces anyone. I mean I have auditioned Genelec and Gethain Bryston, Krell, d'Agostino, Benchmark,ATC , PSI, PSB, Paradigm, PMC, Soundlab, Revel and a whole host of what objectivists deem as the "bestest of the bestest" gear.

Even within the group of gear that objectivists think is "accurate" do you find a real consensus on what the best speaker is - I did that on another forum asking for the most accurate speakers - the answers I got were sub/satellite, transmission lines, narrow baffles with a BE tweeter, electrostatics, Onidirectional with DSP, single drivers, two way - three way- 4 ways, horns etc. These designs are not even remotely the same and don't measure the same.

Everyone who comes to SET/Horn and Non oversampling CD players came to it FROM the likes of a Floyd E Toole/NRC speaker and great measuring amp (since all decently working SS amps measure better than a SET) etc. They are making this choice because when they listen to music it makes them "happier" - less accurate - more distorton - okay - but more happier - now where is that "Happier-O-Meter"

 

[Mnyb]

Interesting. Well, why not. It is good that the prisoners are doing something in the prison. Reintegration into society and all that.


Yep I agree, grill and speaker stand for Kef Cadenza was needed.Grill to make them look nicer anyway.

If this measurement on the Cadenza is to be believed, the FR on axes on them looks really good:
View attachment 366292

KEF Cadenza Specifications

Opus 3, that is Rauna. I had a pair of Rauna Njord about ten years ago. They sounded, if I remember correctly, good.

Speaking of Rauna, have you seen this thread:

Rauna Freja Vintage 2-Way Loudspeaker Measurements

Today I present measurements on a pair of Rauna Freja, aka affectionately as 'Swedish Tombstones';). They are a small 2-way in a concrete cabinet. I believe that Bo Hansson was involved with the design. I would appreciate any information members have regarding this nice little speaker. These...

audiosciencereview.com

_____

All my answers above were of course OT relative to Audio Note speakers, sorry for that but I couldn't help it.

The Opus 3 Chorus and Chaconne where better speakers than the “periscope like” original Rauna.

But the merged the companies at some point it’s even more complex and off topic .

If international readers thinks Opus 3 is an audiophile record labels it’s absolutely correct it’s another story involving the same people. There are/was in fact two Opus 3 record labels as the founders parted ways and decided to both own the rigth to the company name .

One of the guys Bo Hansson also decided to start manufacturing hifi products speakers and record players .

A memorable moment for me as a kid was when someone brought Opus 3 Master tapes and a real to real tape deck to the local hifi store .

Again sorry for OT a leave this tread for a while now ....

 

[Richard Austen]

Holy Cow!
I really didn't know anything about AN speakers, I just caught this thread and decided to look
at Atkinsons Stereophile measurements of the AN-E Lexus Signature and that's all I need to know.
Although he struggles hard not to really tear them up, you don't have to read between the lines to
see that JA was not very happy with them. One of the worst objective reviews I've ever read by him.


Yes but they can do little else very well.

Actually if you want a real chuckle check this AN 4.1x CD player out from Stereophile https://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-note-cd-41x-cd-player-measurements

"I also can't say whether the Audio Note CD-4.1x is the best CD player. I can say it's one of my two favorites—and it's priced lower than the other one." Art Dudley

"The CD-4.1x is a paradox: does it sound good because of how it measures or despite it?" John Atkinson -

They gave it Class A which is the highest they award to CD medium. That is the question - no one including AN says it measures good - we can all see that it does not but John and Art both say it sounds good - The question is how. To a consumer - the result is what matters and not the how the sausage is made.

 

[Richard Austen]

Speaking of coloring the sound, if you want to do that. Isn't it easier to have transparent electronics paired with gadgets to be able to manipulate the FR and possibly add audible distortion? Then you can have both the uncolored signal and when you feel like what you put on with as much color as you want.

Loudspeaker you said. There, I think you should definitely listen and compare as many different ones as you have the time, desire and opportunity to do. Especially then with different solutions such as, electrostats, open baffles, dipoles, omnis, extremely narrow dispersion, coax, active ones, two channel multiple channels and so on. The list could be longer. In any case, listen to see what you like.

A subjective evaluation of speakers you can do is to have, for example, two pairs at home. Never mind analyzing and making an "objective" evaluation. Play with both pairs for six months. The ones you play with the most are the ones you like best. In this way, you let the subconscious rule completely. I have actually done that sometimes despite that I lean towards the objectivist approach regarding HiFi. But speakers are a different beast than a DAC on the other hand.

Hi Daniel - yes the key is to listen to as many different approaches as you can - as a reviewer myself I come across a lot of time on a lot of gear - espeically in the audio mecca here in Hong Kong where all the major brands are located both pro and home audio speakers.

I owned the KEF LS-50 for 4 years and was able to try them out against a number of speakers but in the end - I prefered my much less pricey (then) Audio Note AX Two which was designed by Andy Whittle of Rogers for Audio Note. Andy works at both compaies as the lead designer at Rogers and in a different role at AN. The KEF was good which is why it stayed for as long as it did alongside the AX Two - but when the time came to keep one I wanted the one that made acoustic instruments and voices sound quite a bit more natural - that was the AX Two - even though it is butt ugly compared to those KEF speakers.

In the end I always look at the gear people get hugely passionate about - like Magnepan - they measure pretty bad - I am not a fan of the sound of them - but hey - people love em to death - and if it makes them happier then go for it.

 

[DanielT]

I totally get why people would look at that video where he says "why would anyone pay $1600 for the PS Audio over the $80 Chinese DAC" - measurements are measurements. Look Audio Note uses the absolute best top-of-the-line Audio Precision that is available (the same one Amir is using) - PS Audio - look through their factory tours - they have all this measuring and test equipment too.

To take something concrete. You mention PS Audio so let's take an example:

Amir:
This is a review and detailed measurements of the PS Audio PowerPlant 12 (P12) AC regenerator. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $5,499.

PS Audio PowerPlant 12 Review (AC Regenerator)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the PS Audio PowerPlant 12 (P12) AC regenerator. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $5,499. PS Audio nails the industrial design of the unit. I really like the casework as well as the look of the various graphical meters as you see above...

audiosciencereview.com

So for $5,499 a gadget is added to the audio chain that adds no audible differences to the sound according to Amir's measurements. Even so, would you say that a PS Audio PowerPlant adds something audible that is NOT measurable? If so, what is it? And if so, how did the engineers at PS Audio "listen" when they created their PS Audio PowerPlant?

Or can you highlight other specific products that, according to measurements, have inaudible distortion and noise and flat FR where you can point out that they nevertheless have a sound signature? Can you prove it really is so? How do you prove it? Without proof, it can only be imagination on your part that this is the case. If you want to convince a skeptic like me, the proof is on your side that this is the case, but then you have to bring up something concrete, a specific DAC for example where measurements exist. Otherwise, it will just be sweeping generalizations on your part.

 

[Richard Austen]

Some arguments are so daft that one does not know where to start .

Even the most science based speaker manufacturers adjust things by ear as choices had to be made .
Even if most of the speakers performance can be predicted using science ( read Toole et al ) . There are inherent compromises in building any speakers.

AN is absolutely not unique in doing this , the unique thing is thier disconnect with reality as the probably most exentric brand out there .

It’s a false narrative to claim that AN and similar “Listen to the music” and others are blinded by graphs and make “cold clinical scientific well measured products “ .
And it’s even more wrong to hint that this could lead forward and has any merit. It’s broken the high end hifi since the 80’s .

Read about the circle of confusion regarding speakers. A good speaker manufacturer has to have other anchor points to reality than just listen to recordings that are in themselves balanced and tuned by listening to another set of flawed speakers ( around we go ) .

Well that's true - but then we are all outsiders looking in at a companiy's process and making a bunch of assumptions - which is not very objective.

Peter Qvortrup began as a dealer importer and he heard "everything" that was available - he rails about reviewers today who have not heard a list of the great speakers and equipment that went before. Peter's objective was his "comparison contrast" methodolgy which is the idea that one can't know how every recording is made but that we do know that every recording is different from every other recording. Therefore a system that shows you the most differences in the recordings is more accurate than one that makes recordings sound the same (homogenous). He co-wrot the article with Classical Composer and audio reviewer Leonard Norwitz.

His AN speakers are not "the best" speakers he has heard (or that I have heard) and he as said this many times - but the speakers he considers the best are not saleable practically to the general market - it's a business - you gotta make money to stay in business. These things have to sit in a regular room for the 98% of the market that isn't going to cover all their walls in usually hideous expensive acoustic foam panels. That's why I mentioned earlier that speakers are their tertiary business because they mainly sell amplifiers and given their high price points they are selling to people who have money and have large rooms and buy the best Horn speakers and match up their pricey AN amps. The speakers are for paeons who live in normal sized houses and have medium sized lving rooms.

This is getting into the weeds - but in this interview Peter talks about his start and his view on audio.