Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Stereophile readers comments on LS3/6

Expand Messages
  • regtas43
    I happened to have a look at these. There seems for some reason to be a lot of free floating animosity there. People calling the speakers ugly and so on. I
    Message 1 of 4 , May 28, 2014
      I happened to have a look at these. There seems for some reason to be a lot of free floating animosity there. People calling the speakers "ugly" and so on.  I wonder where this comes from. I also wonder why if people think that the price is high, they do not think the price of other High End speakers is some sort of peculiar joke. What are the two way speakers for multiple tens of thousands of dollars supposed to offer that the LS3/6s do not? All quite peculiar...
      REG
    • musica_pt
      Aestethic taste is rather personal and I can understand why people dislike it s conservative design. They re certainly not modern looking and many people
      Message 2 of 4 , May 29, 2014
        Aestethic taste is rather personal and I can understand why people dislike it's conservative design.
        They're certainly not modern looking and many people associate age with lower performance; most high end has an avant-gardish and/or high-techish and/or luxurious aspect that impresses people.

        I myself would describe them as rather broad-shouldered and boxy in volume proportions but I do find them good-looking once  the grill is removed.

        We, as consumers, are very ignorant about how things work and therefore not very well "equipped" to evaluate performance and, because humans are very sensitive to aestethics, looks have a preponderant influence our decisions.

        Paper or plastic when used in a loudspeaker cone looks far less impressive than aluminium, ceramic or kevlar...

        Cheers,
        Ricardo
      • Tom Mallin
        Today s high-end audio market is very much about eye candy. Just look at at the very artful pictures which accompany many on-line reviews, as well as the
        Message 3 of 4 , May 29, 2014
          Today's high-end audio market is very much about "eye candy."  Just look at at the very artful pictures which accompany many on-line reviews, as well as the high-tech industrial design which goes into the appearance of many high-end brands of speakers.  Many would rather have a high-tech-looking design, or something which fits into some notion of techno-aesthetic decor than something which sounds like real music.  Many also think that just because a speaker looks high-tech and has an unusual shape, it must also sound much better than a plain old-fashioned rectangular wooden box.

          It seems as if some of the commenters have not listened to the Stirling LS3/6s.

          Actually, in terms of form, the box has a rather slim look since it is so much taller than it is wide or deep.  It is 25" tall and only 12" wide and deep.  This is only a small difference from the vintage Acoustic Research speakers I have (the AR-3a, for example, is about 25" x 14" wide x 11.5" deep), but because of the slightly different ratios and thinner walls, the LS3/6 cabinet looks considerably more slender and sleek.  Put these boxes on something like the Something Solid XF Mk II stands I have, and I actually think they look quite nice.  

          To my eyes, with or without the grill, my Stirlings' rosewood finish is also night-and-day better than the nylon-sock-covered Vandersteen to which it was compared in one comment.  But I realize this is a personal issue.
           


          On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:22 AM, ricardo_franca@... [regsaudioforum] <regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
           

          Aestethic taste is rather personal and I can understand why people dislike it's conservative design.
          They're certainly not modern looking and many people associate age with lower performance; most high end has an avant-gardish and/or high-techish and/or luxurious aspect that impresses people.

          I myself would describe them as rather broad-shouldered and boxy in volume proportions but I do find them good-looking once  the grill is removed.

          We, as consumers, are very ignorant about how things work and therefore not very well "equipped" to evaluate performance and, because humans are very sensitive to aestethics, looks have a preponderant influence our decisions.

          Paper or plastic when used in a loudspeaker cone looks far less impressive than aluminium, ceramic or kevlar...

          Cheers,
          Ricardo


        • regtas43
          It is strange how the whole field is dominated by myths and misconceptions. Narrow fronts are bad not good,. Kevlar is one of the worst of all driver
          Message 4 of 4 , May 29, 2014
            It is strange how the whole field is dominated by myths and misconceptions. Narrow fronts are bad not good,. Kevlar is one of the worst of all driver materials. And so on.
            What is really surprising is that even if people are unwilling to listen for themselves, the visual evidence is often in front of them. Look at the plot of the bass/mid driver of the LS3/6 alone(shown in the Sphile review). Its out of band behavior is all but perfect. There is a tiny glitch an octave or so out of band but tiny is the word and otherwise a perfectly smooth roll-off.
            And of course if you compare the waterfall with something like the Wilson MAXX 3, well, one is tempted to draw a curtain over the Wilson out of pity...unless one thinks of how it has been reviewed and sold.
            Odd stuff.
            REG
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.