What is the best speaker you have ever owned ?????

[Steve Williams]

what I mean is that these lower octaves are felt, nothing more. The Acoustats never gave me the feeling of moving sufficient air that there was "bass slam" (aka visceral impact) without the use of subs

we all know and experience that bass slam against our chests

 

[MrAcoustat]

Deleted thread

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

No Frantz i am simply responding to audiophiles that are giving their opinion on 20 years old Acoustats wich have NOTHING to do with the highly modified Acoustats that i am talking about and when a 12k pair a speakers CAN compete with speakers that sell for 200k there as to be something very special before you pass judgement you must be able to audition BOTH and i did many times that's all i had to say i will no longer post on this thread thank you.

I certainly believe that many speakers costing much less can compete admirably with some other more expensive ones, but please......this is an exaggeration beyond belief and more prone to to be filed in the wishful thinking section of one's mind. Get real....

 

[Steve Williams]

No Frantz i am simply responding to audiophiles that are giving their opinion on 20 years old Acoustats wich have NOTHING to do with the highly modified Acoustats that i am talking about and when a 12k pair a speakers CAN compete with speakers that sell for 200k there as to be something very special before you pass judgement you must be able to audition BOTH and i did many times that's all i had to say i will no longer post on this thread thank you.

So
Please tell how your modified panels create that bass slam

 

[microstrip]

what I mean is that these lower octaves are felt, nothing more. The Acoustats never gave me the feeling of moving sufficient air that there was "bass slam" (aka visceral impact) without the use of subs

we all know and experience that bass slam against our chests

Yes, but do we experience it in live, non amplified acoustical music, unless we are listening to Handel Music for the Royal Fireworks?

I have no experience at all with Acoustats, how does their bass performance compare to the Magneplanar Tympany, a planar with great bass performance I know very well?

 

[Steve Williams]

In fairness I owned the three models of Acoustats in the 80's and perhaps the modded ones have more bass slam.

As to the magnitude of slam Francisco I only look for realistic levels not something sounding like a boom box.

 

[MylesBAstor]

In fairness I owned the three models of Acoustats in the 80's and perhaps the modded ones have more bass slam.

As to the magnitude of slam Francisco I only look for realistic levels not something sounding like a boom box.

This is the same argument we heard ages ago from CLSs owners who claimed their speakers went down to 32 Hz.....

But perhaps the big question is still measuring FR and eliminating and doubling effects. Then the next question is what sources are being used to show the speakers go down that low?

 

[Shaffer]

No Frantz i am simply responding to audiophiles that are giving their opinion on 20 years old Acoustats wich have NOTHING to do with the highly modified Acoustats that i am talking about and when a 12k pair a speakers CAN compete with speakers that sell for 200k there as to be something very special before you pass judgement you must be able to audition BOTH and i did many times that's all i had to say i will no longer post on this thread thank you.

Please forgive the reductionist approach, the something very special seemed to involve a pair of JL subwoofers. So, what are we talking about, exactly?

 

[Steve Williams]

Please forgive the reductionist approach, the something very special seemed to involve a pair of JL subwoofers. So, what are we talking about, exactly?

That was my point exactly.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

In fairness I owned the three models of Acoustats in the 80's and perhaps the modded ones have more bass slam.

As to the magnitude of slam Francisco I only look for realistic levels not something sounding like a boom box.

 

[Steve Williams]

Originally Posted by MrAcoustat
My best friend Jocelyn is also the guy that rebuilt my Acoustat 1+1s all steel frame as built a pair of non existing Acoustat Spectra 8800s all metal frame coverehd with mahogany wood total size 41x102x12 inches width - height - deep - they weigh 800 pounds each huge panel with a soundstage to die for here is a picture of me with the speaker.

I am also most interested in imaging,height of singers , where their mouths are on a 102" panel. IOW is the image realistic in size or Paul Bunyan like due to panel height of 10 feet

 

[NorthStar]

Andre, you started this thread with the question "What is the best speaker you ever owned?"
Many have responded, stated their preference and gotten off their soapbox. You also answered your question, but you appear to be on a "mission."

...

...And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that Gary. ...If Andre loves to talk about his speakers, his love for the music he loves, and all that jazz; that is his total right!
And there is absolutely nothing that others can say to diminish his own passion in his own words.
That's what audio forums are also part of, among the multitude of other audio subjects. ...But not just audio; EVERYTHING else too, that is the very BEST!

OK Mr Acoustat

By now we know you love Acoustat and for You they're the best speakers you have owned ...
Don't you think you've driven the point home by now? if not , please be assured that we get it.

Frantz, I let you be your own judge on positive active audio forum's communication skills. ...You are fully free to bring "new" equations to our passions.
- Reinventing ourselves is a day-to-day elaboration and labor of love.

...With my deepest respect.

 

[treitz3]

IOW is the image realistic in size or Paul Bunyan like due to panel height of 10 feet?

Hello, MrAcoustat. The quote above is the one reason I personally do not prefer panels. Let's say a guitarist is playing. On a panel, he or she is in an perceived space within the sound stage of approximately 3-4 feet wide. This, to me, is not realistic. A guitarist [on a playback system] should be able to be discerned on the sound stage as to where they are strumming/plucking versus where they are changing notes/sliding. On a pinpoint type system, one can discern this. On a panel type playback system, the two seemingly merge together in one 3' to 4' region IME. In other words, there is no pinpoint imaging to be had.

Now, I will admit......all of this is recording dependent but let's take for example the performance Al Di Meola, John McLaughlin and Paco DeLucia - Friday Night in San Francisco.

The guitarists [IMO] should not blend together or overlap on the sound stage. One should clearly be able to picture within the perceived illusion where each person is sitting within the sound stage. Not only that, they should be able to discern where each player is strumming/plucking versus where they are changing notes/sliding and this goes with all three performers. All of this information should be present within the sound stage with a certain amount of precision. As Steve states, the image would preferably be in a realistic size and not one that would resemble a "Paul Bunyan" type playback.

If you have this album, would you care to take the time to offer your observations on what you perceive on the sound stage?

Tom

 

[microstrip]

Hello, MrAcoustat. The quote above is the one reason I personally do not prefer panels. Let's say a guitarist is playing. On a panel, he or she is in an perceived space within the sound stage of approximately 3-4 feet wide. This, to me, is not realistic. A guitarist [on a playback system] should be able to be discerned on the sound stage as to where they are strumming/plucking versus where they are changing notes/sliding. On a pinpoint type system, one can discern this. On a panel type playback system, the two seemingly merge together in one 3' to 4' region IME. In other words, there is no pinpoint imaging to be had.

Now, I will admit......all of this is recording dependent but let's take for example the performance Al Di Meola, John McLaughlin and Paco DeLucia - Friday Night in San Francisco.

The guitarists [IMO] should not blend together or overlap on the sound stage. One should clearly be able to picture within the perceived illusion where each person is sitting within the sound stage. Not only that, they should be able to discern where each player is strumming/plucking versus where they are changing notes/sliding and this goes with all three performers. All of this information should be present within the sound stage with a certain amount of precision. As Steve states, the image would preferably be in a realistic size and not one that would resemble a "Paul Bunyan" type playback.

If you have this album, would you care to take the time to offer your observations on what you perceive on the sound stage?

Tom

Tom,
We should remember that not all panels are equal. The Quad ESL 63 has pinpointing image , and Sound Labs only have guitars that are 4 feet wide if you place them inadequately in the room. Perhaps because of the clear perception of detail and separation of decays between instruments some of the best imaging I have perceived in terms of separation was with planar speakers - Martin Logan panels allowed me to identify and logically separate individuals in choirs better than any other speaker. I hope Myles is reading this. BTW, IMHO once everything else is correct, the size of instruments becomes correct.

 

[FrantzM]

Tom,
We should remember that not all panels are equal. The Quad ESL 63 has pinpointing image , and Sound Labs only have guitars that are 4 feet wide if you place them inadequately in the room. Perhaps because of the clear perception of detail and separation of decays between instruments some of the best imaging I have perceived in terms of separation was with planar speakers - Martin Logan panels allowed me to identify and logically separate individuals in choirs better than any other speaker. I hope Myles is reading this. BTW, IMHO once everything else is correct, the size of instruments becomes correct.

I am with Micro on that. Some panels and Line Sources can provide incredible imaging. micro examples are spot on and I would add the Pipe Dreams and Scaena (brief but impressive audition ) as Line sources with incredible imaging amon many others. Often, not always the 10 feet-wide mouth phenomenon is a matter of speaker placement nad of course of rooms acoustics

 

[treitz3]

Fair enough. There are some panels that have the ability to have pinpoint imaging as well as other extremely good attributes. I will not dispute that as I have heard it myself [think Quads on tubes....hubba, hubba...]. With that said, I was wondering how Mr.Acustat observed his speakers with specific regards to this particular album if he has it on hand.

Tom

 

[NorthStar]

I believe that Andre has left the building, and for good reasons. ...This thread don't have anymore any beginning now, even less an end, and no middle either.

I feel sad. ...And it didn't have to come to this, but it did. ...That was Andre's thread, and some of you did not respect that; there's nothing else to say.

 

[FrantzM]

I believe that Andre has left the building, and for good reasons. ...This thread don't have anymore any beginning now, even less an end, and no middle either.

I feel sad. ...And it didn't have to come to this, but it did. ...That was Andre's thread, and some of you did not respect that; there's nothing else to say.

????

 

[RBFC]

Like most other discussions here, opinions vary depending upon one's experiences and heresay from trusted friends. Opinions are open to debate. The Acoustats may well fulfill all of the OP's criteria, however there are indisputable limitations that are objectively demonstrable. I believe the "issues" developed when the discussion diverged from "I like this" to making statements about measured performance and price that aren't backed up with evidence.

Andre is happy, and I certainly hope that all our members derive such pleasure from their own systems.

Lee

 

[rbbert]

I believe that Andre has left the building, and for good reasons. ...This thread don't have anymore any beginning now, even less an end, and no middle either.

I feel sad. ...And it didn't have to come to this, but it did. ...That was Andre's thread, and some of you did not respect that; there's nothing else to say.

But the thread is titled "...the best speaker you have ever owned", not "my speakers are better than anyone else's because their opinions and evidence are wrong"