i have read so many reviews of so many speakers - the words used are familiar and i suspect that reviewers listen to the speakers for a half-minute, then head home and wait for the cash to arrive before the rot-writing starts (eg., she was beauty incarnate with sensual lines and curves that were a wonder to behold, causing greenish tinge on my spouse!)
i have noticed one aspect that is rarely variable - small (bookshelf) speakers are noted to have "unbelievable bass/bass extension- was looking for the subwoofer" kind of sound,
but large floor-standers (even the rockport antares) are described as being "light" in the bass department - this must have angered andy payor enough for him to design and produce the crackpot arrakis which has enough bass to crack walls and blow away small bookshelves!
is it because the listener looks for big (bass) sound with a large speaker - and not so big sound with a small speaker and is surprised both ways?
i have noticed one aspect that is rarely variable - small (bookshelf) speakers are noted to have "unbelievable bass/bass extension- was looking for the subwoofer" kind of sound,
but large floor-standers (even the rockport antares) are described as being "light" in the bass department - this must have angered andy payor enough for him to design and produce the crackpot arrakis which has enough bass to crack walls and blow away small bookshelves!
is it because the listener looks for big (bass) sound with a large speaker - and not so big sound with a small speaker and is surprised both ways?
Last edited: