Just create a 2-choice poll and you’ll see the popular opinion.
There's no need for that, IMHO, people will just vote by what they think it's best based on their own preference (or just on-axis response...). Not sure it would be helpful.Just create a 2-choice poll and you’ll see the popular opinion.
Whats more weird is that some people get offended because someone brings up a good point on parts cost and build techniques. Revel doesnt use 20 dollars tweeter, it doesn’t use unbraced cabinets , it doesn’t use 15 mm thick cab. I think buchardt should have avoided all these short cuts in the beginning. That clear didn’t give me any good impression .There's no need for that, IMHO, people will just vote by what they think it's best based on their own preference (or just on-axis response...). Not sure it would be helpful.
Both are measuring good enough, objectively speaking. What he does need now is experiencing both at home, in his real environment, and return the one he doesn't like.
AFAIC, it's funny to read how the (1st Gen) R3 is praised here, comparing to my experience and how unremarkable they sound to me. And I know countless people that share the same thoughts (by the way, Amir himself wasn't a fan either, just saying). Sure, this does have some very strong points: distorsion, vertical directivity etc, and I found it to be great in nearfield conditions.
Another thing that's weird is judging Buchardt by the cost if drivers, like if designing speakers was just assembling parts with no care for research... Guess what: Revel also uses similarly-priced SB Acoustics drivers and I've heard no one complaining here.
I would be glad to give the new Meta a try, tho. But I would pick S400MkII anyday over the 1st Gen R3. My two cents.
I'm not sure who is "offended" on that matter...Whats more weird is that some people get offended because someone brings up a good point on parts cost and build techniques.
May I raise more concerns? KEF relies on some other plastic to dampen the enclosure panels. Is this solution durable, I mean over the decades? Same regarding the high frequency damper in the coax itself. The coil is isolated against the cone by an interface piece, the elastic properties of which are presumably quite critical.Thanks for your point of view. As far as I'm concerned, driver decentralization is a simple sign of non-quality.
Is this an answer to my question where the beef is with the Buchardt, the research as you put it? As said, Buchardt follows a line that was layed out in DIY forums about 10y back. One could say that Buchardt represents the collective wisdom of amateurs. Quite personal, unquestionable preferrences, as usual in DIY, the tweeter choice I think, add some funk to it. The silghtly slanted baffle is cost effective (once the tools are set up), and so the Buchardts have an undeniable cool factor.Another thing that's weird is judging Buchardt by the cost if drivers, like if designing speakers was just assembling parts with no care for research..
Bass is shelved down as to cope with expected room gain in smaller environments, especially with the couch set against a wall. It is not so that most people are seated at a mixing console in the middle of a treated room, or have, as always depicted in the advertizing, an endless living room of 123+ square meters.AFAIC, it's funny to read how the (1st Gen) R3 is praised here, comparing to my experience and how unremarkable they sound to me.
AFAIC, it's funny to read how the (1st Gen) R3 is praised here, comparing to my experience and how unremarkable they sound to me. And I know countless people that share the same thoughts (by the way, Amir himself wasn't a fan either, just saying).
Amir initially didn't like the 1st gen R3 much due to a room mode and when later correcting it as he did for most loudspeakers after he enjoyed its sound.AFAIC, it's funny to read how the (1st Gen) R3 is praised here, comparing to my experience and how unremarkable they sound to me. And I know countless people that share the same thoughts (by the way, Amir himself wasn't a fan either, just saying)
Looks like at least someone still is...as we are also not discussing the S400 MKI?
In the exact same price range, I ended up with Dyn Evoke 20 as my last passive bookshelves (I use only actives since fall 2020). 25M2 (untreated) living room, listening position at 3 meters, or 20M2 dedicated room for movies and music listening (yet to be treated), with LP at 2.5M.May I ask which speakers are remarkable for you and what listening environment do you have?
Again, not sure that whatever "opinion" will help you in any way. You have the objective data, you may give them a listen, by now. IMHO, speakers are not amps or DAC, that may be bought blind based only on measured performance. These are way more dependent of subjective preferences, and room interactions...I really appreciate "different" opinions about KEF, and that was actually what I was looking for.
Opinions derived from personal experience I mean, like yours.Again, not sure that whatever "opinion" will help you in any way. You have the objective data, you may give them a listen, by now. IMHO, speakers are not amps or DAC, that may be bought blind based only on measured performance. These are way more dependent of subjective preferences, and room interactions...
A general advice. Regardless of 'meta' or 'mark2' some folks actually prefer speakers that lend some drama to the 'music'. Times and again, when briefly listening to recommendations on Tidal I feel that most of contemporary productions need that extra spicing. Think of the unevitable colorations added by a smartphone speaker (stereo of course), today's consumers' primary source of cultural identity.May I ask which speakers are remarkable for you and what listening environment do you have?
I really appreciate "different" opinions about KEF, and that was actually what I was looking for.
for decades long I doubt any could guarantee longer life expectancy, and in 10 years so much could go wrong or just one gets the GAS and wanted to upgrade, trust me, when GAS kicks in you would want "look, honey, it's broken !!"May I raise more concerns? KEF relies on some other plastic to dampen the enclosure panels. Is this solution durable, I mean over the decades? Same regarding the high frequency damper in the coax itself. The coil is isolated against the cone by an interface piece, the elastic properties of which are presumably quite critical.
The paint job isn't as good as I initially thought. It has a clearly visible waviness to it. Especially in the black color scheme some light reflections appear slightly distorted. If you think of a glider plane, and it was the wings, that would be another no-no. It spoils laminar flow!
All in all the China made (?) Buchardt may easily compete with the definitely China made KEF. And due to its less elaborated, more basic construction it may be more durable. Not the least the Buchardt may have higher resell value if the brand takes of.
Is this an answer to my question where the beef is with the Buchardt, the research as you put it? As said, Buchardt follows a line that was layed out in DIY forums about 10y back. One could say that Buchardt represents the collective wisdom of amateurs. Quite personal, unquestionable preferrences, as usual in DIY, the tweeter choice I think, add some funk to it. The silghtly slanted baffle is cost effective (once the tools are set up), and so the Buchardts have an undeniable cool factor.
The KEF is just grey dusty scientific engineering, which most people don't grasp anyway, and so don't care naturally.
Bass is shelved down as to cope with expected room gain in smaller environments, especially with the couch set against a wall. It is not so that most people are seated at a mixing console in the middle of a treated room, or have, as always depicted in the advertizing, an endless living room of 123+ square meters.
I leave it as that. I'm afraifd I'm preocupied too much against one of the contenders.
To me this seems to clearly be a case where you should get the speaker that looks better in your living room.
somehow I always think, objective performance have a line of "good enough", when both performed to certain point of performance, other values such as look or brand or price and even other gimmick can be valued more on the decision, afterall we are not buying working tool where objective performance weights more, it's for entertainment/enjoyment, so once achieving "good enough" then IMO it's at the point of diminishing return, and other things like look and brand would provide more enjoyment to the user than shear bit better performanceSure, referring to my post #30 I listened to some renditions of the old song "I see you". Don't know who owns it, but The Byrds' take, in my book, earns quite high credit for doing it right. The contemporary name-sakes nearly made me vomit. I won't exemplify an this.
Buy a Burchardt for the many reasons layed out here!
Sorry for my quite personal take on this. The "good enough" is something we can clearly agree on.somehow I always think, objective performance have a line of "good enough", ...
Which actives did you try and would recommend? Not a lot of talk about actives on here..I use only actives since fall 2020
Ton of threads (and reviews) about actives here such as Neumann, Genelec and some others. Where Neumann and Genelec measure really really well and would certainly be worth a look.Which actives did you try and would recommend? Not a lot of talk about actives on here..
The drivers in my Revel M16's are very inexpensive 'looking'. You would not be impressed. A button tweeter and stamped steel basket woofer. I bet Harman makes that button tweeter for $2-5.Whats more weird is that some people get offended because someone brings up a good point on parts cost and build techniques. Revel doesnt use 20 dollars tweeter, it doesn’t use unbraced cabinets , it doesn’t use 15 mm thick cab. I think buchardt should have avoided all these short cuts in the beginning. That clear didn’t give me any good impression .