- Joined
- Jan 15, 2020
- Messages
- 6,904
- Likes
- 16,937
No worries, I didn't mean with that phrase the LRS, just the concept of high fidelity.I don't think much art went into the design of the LRS -- it's engineering, pure and simple, with just a touch of dark art.
I fully agree there, our classic spinorama and Harman score interpretation aren't optimal for such implementions, although it should be also said that the listening test of Amir confirmed some of the flaws shown in the measurements.This is not something you can get just from measuring some dynamic speakers or from a textbook -- the relationship between measurement and sound is a lot fuzzier than some believe, particularly when you step beyond the well-known world of dynamic speakers.
On the first part "sense of space" I kind agree which is obviously a result of their very high directivity, although many peope don't like this kind of extreme projection to the listener of high directivity loudspeakers.But, you know, ask someone what planars sound like and they'll say "amazing sense of space and detail without a boxy sound." Also, "the bass sucks" or something like that. And "amazingly natural." And that's basically what they *do* sound like.
The second "without a boxy sound" I have more doubts as I think its part due to the optic prejudice and also comparison to poor loudspeakers with significant box colorations.
In the EU country I live most planars are rather in the price region above 5k€ per pair, so I can't really confirm a better bfb ratio. I know that in USA Magnepans have quite impressive low prices though.They do some things worse than dynamics and some things better, and, in general, they have better bang for the buck because they're cheaper to make.