Planars are just so much better than boxes. Did I read someone was complaining about an $80k price tag?
Sense as always , as they say here .. Guru !what I said was "missing weight of images for $80k"........as the ante increases so does expectations. I also said "but i'd need to spend more time to get a better handle".
hey, it sounds 'like a planar'. that's my perception of how they sound based on my limited exposure. my experience is that 'musical magic for the dollar' a planar is hard to beat. but there are certainly 'but's'.
I wouldn't worry too much about the list Tang, Sonus Faber was left conspicuously off it.Alsyvox planars...prepare to sell your Magico's, YG's, Wilson's, Cessaro's. Maggie's, and all others!!
Maybe Cessaro should not be on the heading of this thread. It is already a non contender crappy sounding horn by most .
Mike-I hope it was obvious I am conducting I campaign in favor of planars. That is as oppsed to stating any absolute doctrine. The costf of making an inert box can represent a very steep curve. In respect to the claim planars make "seven" foot voices, I find a line source does an excellent job of constructing images and soundstage. BTW it has been argued that cone speakers cannot recreate height. Nothing is perfect.
For me three... if mine did this I’d not accept it... but I’ve still got them. Over the years I’ve heard such large variability in setups between Maggie systems. A good friend who has had virtually every iteration since well forever often likens them to scalpels the way they cut through to what’s happening in your system and reveal the smallest of changes in setup.For me too.
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
|Julian (The Fixer)|
Website Build | Marketing Managersing