Show me one single, published, blind listening test of a Maggie, done by Maggie, or, better, by an independent body.
Until then, they can join the list of audio companies who verbally claim to do blind testing, but it’s just marketing trickery to fool those who want to be fooled. They wouldn’t be the first or last to disrespect their customers this way.
Just thought I’d point to the difference between actual facts and marketing facts.
But speed of the drivers is defined by the frequency response.
You need to do more research before formulating opinions.
I've done far more research than you have
Clearly, yet you think driver "fastness" is what gives music "detail" and "transparency".
Correct. Looking at the heavily dropping FR above 10 kHz of the LRS and the flat FR of traditional domes of many speakers measured here it's clear that the LRS tweeter ribbon is not faster than those domes but slower.
So to summarize, the hypothesis here is that ribbon transducers have advantages due to less nonlinearities in output and lower overall distortion. To test this hypothesis we can look at frequency response and harmonic distortion levels of speakers utilizing ribbons. Do these advantages hold true in the reviews that you've seen? I have generally seen ribbons, and especially AMTs (which are promoted in the articles), have less consistent frequency response and higher distortion levels than well designed traditional dome tweeters. Even more so when pushed to higher SPL. Are there examples you can provide that show enhanced final measured linearity and lower distortion at comparable SPL to top dome tweeters? As an owner of RAAL ribbon towers, I'm genuinely curious.
. But I believe there is a difference in definition between planar magnetic tweeter and a true ribbon tweeter. They are not the same animal. The LRS in this thread is a planar magnetic so the articles linked deal with this kind of technology..
@David Harper in @Blumlein 88 is right there, then please reconsider if your research was flawed and the conclusion drawn too fast because of misunderstanding from start on.
Have research included what it means stack transducers upon each other and situate two such rows side by side to take care each their unique summing passband, yes a infinite stacked row can have some theoretical perfect behavour but never for a finite stacked row, so the finite stack length and the side by side design will add acoustic distortions that wasnt there had transducer been a single point source, then comes when a open dipole is a long stack it creates non symetric variations for cancelations. Look if stacking acoustic transducer upon each other was a perfect model we never had other than say two or three sizes of transducers listed in manufactures catalog because the rest of system designing was simply how many we would use stacked, but that is not how real world works because stacking is not flawless so catalog include tons of sizes to pick among, will mean whatever acoustic distortions talked about above or their sum have chance be responsible what you call detail so in research please check out if a single planar is still detailed enough to outperform a single whatever normal transducer.
No!
