PDA

View Full Version : John Atkinson: "The best speakers I've ever used in my room were the Revel Salon2's"



PacMan
March 7, 2015, 05:17 PM
The Revel Ultima Salon2's offers superb measured performance (confer: Revel Ultima Salon2 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com (http://www.stereophile.com/content/revel-ultima-salon2-loudspeaker-measurements) )

In this video, John Atkinson (1) explains loudspeaker measurements:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j77VKw9Kx6U

At 50:03 a person from the audience asks "What is your own personal reference speakers?".
John Atkinson replies:
"The best speakers I've ever used in my room were the Revel Salon2's.
They really produced the most neutral sound, the best combination of bass definition and best bass control and the best imaging.".

(1) John Atkinson is the editor-in-chief of Stereophile. He has measured more than 750 loudspeakers.

Myles B. Astor
March 7, 2015, 05:24 PM
The Revel Ultima Salon2's offers superb measured performance (confer: Revel Ultima Salon2 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com (http://www.stereophile.com/content/revel-ultima-salon2-loudspeaker-measurements) )

In this video, John Atkinson (1) explains loudspeaker measurements:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j77VKw9Kx6U

At 50:03 a person from the audience asks "What is your own personal reference speakers?".
John Atkinson replies:
"The best speakers I've ever used in my room were the Revel Salon2's.
They really produced the most neutral sound, the best combination of bass definition and best bass control and the best imaging.".

(1) John Atkinson is the editor-in-chief of Stereophile. He has measured more than 750 loudspeakers.

Those comments are totally out of context. That review was from six and youtube from at least four years ago. Go and reread what John said more recently in the Alexia or Magico reviews.

Odyssey
March 7, 2015, 05:53 PM
Revel Ultima Salon2's: Speakers that have stood the test of time!

These speakers were first reviewed by Atkinson for Stereophile back in 2008 and by Harley for TAS back in 2008 with much effusive praise.

A Stereophile recommended Class A component between this date and that. A real winner.

How many other speakers have been so widely reviewed from the last 7 years and still are going this strong? Very few I think.

If anyone here knows the answer, how many have been sold in that time? You could probably stack a lot of other brands up against it and the number would not be as high combined as the Salon2's have sold in that time.

A truly great speaker. Come one come all.

MDP
March 7, 2015, 06:16 PM
Those comments are totally out of context. That review was from six and youtube from at least four years ago. Go and reread what John said more recently in the Alexia or Magico reviews.

I did read those reviews Myles, but like you told me earlier, did he try all of them back to back, or did he rely on memory.

I know you love your S5's, and I'm glad you do. But I would take the Salons first, every time.

Myles B. Astor
March 7, 2015, 06:36 PM
I was also referring to measurements Mark. You don't need side by side comparison for that.

But no, I didn't just mention Magico and in fact if you reread Stereophile, the speaker that John loved and wanted to settle down with was the Alexias. Neither John nor Mikey liked the Magicos enough to put their money where their mouth was. So in reality, my post has absolutely nothing to do with what I own. It has to do with taking a reviewer's six year old review totally out of context. (think about how you might have felt about a product, not even Revel, putting the same six year old statement in an ad!) In the end, you can't hold a reviewer to something they said six years ago. Things change. As a matter of fact, there are several speakers that I could live with quite happily, not to mention my previous Martin-Logans.

BTW, you can go back and see what Soundstage said about the same two speakers also. SS rated the Salons as the best they ever heard until some other speakers came along eg. Magico, KEF and a few others.

MDP
March 7, 2015, 06:48 PM
I think the Salons have withstood the test of time better than most. That they're still relevant after 8 yrs. is pretty amazing in my book. A lot of companies would have had 3 new models in that time.

PacMan
March 7, 2015, 07:05 PM
That review was from six and youtube from at least four years ago.
The period from October 11th 2011 to March 8th 2015 is "at least four years long" ?
Please explain.

Alpinist
March 7, 2015, 07:10 PM
I think the Salons have withstood the test of time better than most. That they're still relevant after 8 yrs. is pretty amazing in my book. A lot of companies would have had 3 new models in that time.

In my opinion, the two speakers that have withstood the test of time best over the last 8 - 10 years are the Revel Salon 2's and the Sonus Faber Stradivari. After 8 - 10 years, these are still the speakers of choice, even for new purchase, by a number of members of Audio Shark. And we're a pretty tough crowd. ;) The best way to future proof a speaker is to build it right the first time and build it to last.

Ken

PacMan
March 7, 2015, 07:13 PM
...I would take the Salons first, every time.
Me too !
To me, Magico S5 is very overpriced and lacks clarity.

rbbert
March 7, 2015, 07:18 PM
It's all opinion and obviously quite changeable. Fremer decided on Wilsons, although a model that lists for nearly 10x the price of the Salon 2's. And as Myles noted, JA has written and said he would take the Alexias as a desert island speaker; again, they are more than twice the price of the Salon 2's. It wasn't so long ago that Myles was pooh-poohing Magico lovers, saying he was a commited electrostatic owner. None of that means the Salon 2's aren't excellent speakers, but there are plenty of other excellent speakers as well and at many price points. You'll find plenty of audiophiles who will tell you that compared to the Magnepan 20.7 the Salons are an overpriced rip-off (just for example).

PacMan
March 7, 2015, 07:19 PM
The best way to future proof a speaker is to build it right the first time and build it to last.

Ken
It clearly is.
And in that regard, it seems strange by Magico now coming with a USD 44 000 (!) Mk2 upgrade (+ shipping) for its Magico Q7 (costing USD 165 000!! or was it USD 185 000 ?).
The Magico Q7 press release came as late as December 26th of 2011 ! (http://imacustica.pt/fotos/noticias/magico_q7_press_release_17830437665460b28c595a2.pd f )

Myles B. Astor
March 7, 2015, 07:24 PM
The period from October 11th 2011 to March 8th 2015 is "at least four years long" ?
Please explain.

Aren't we being rather picky? OK 3 1/2 years but that still doesn't change the fact that Atkinson has written more recently that the Alexias are his desert island speaker. And as I said before, everyone here would rail against an ad that quoted a six year old ad as being deceptive.

mep
March 7, 2015, 07:24 PM
Hmm. I think I smell blood in the shark pool and the sharks seem to be circling. To put things in context, some people are still swooning over speakers that were designed and built in the 1940s and 1950s. Can you say Quad ESL 57 or anything Western Electric?? If you have the original dust that came with them, they are worth even more.

PacMan
March 7, 2015, 07:26 PM
... take the Alexias as a desert island speaker; again, they are more than twice the price of the Salon 2's. It wasn't so long ago that Myles was pooh-poohing Magico lovers, saying he was a commited electrostatic owner.
Good point.
I really just do not understand why Myles got so upset with John Atkinson's appreciations of Revel Ultima Salon2's:
* The date of the RMAF meeting which Atkinson held this speech on is very clear from the video (but Myles managed the "masterpiece" not to notice that).
* I wrote John Atkinson's words regarding the Salon2's exactly as John Atkinson said them.

Myles previously "pooh-poohing Magico lovers" and him thereafter buying Magico speakers thereafter, just strengthens his bad forum-behaviour.

Myles B. Astor
March 7, 2015, 07:27 PM
Me too !
To me, Magico S5 is very overpriced and lacks clarity.

Well you obviously never heard them properly set up. Neither had I until they came into my listening room. If you think they lack clarity, then there was something else really wrong. Seriously amiss.

As far as being overpriced, where are your facts? Have you ever gone to the factory and actually had Alon justify the speaker's price based on what goes into the speaker? Have you actually seen what goes into the design, manufacturing, building, and Q/C for every speaker sold? I have and the markup on the S5 is a factor of 4X; in fact, that's probably among the lowest markups of speakers on the market.

But this all just obfuscating the original point that has nothing to do with Magico or any other speaker. It was about taking a quote out of context. It would be like writing a scientific paper in 2015 and ignoring any previous published experiments north of 2008 that didn't fit into your result. If you can't see that, then there's no further reason to discuss things.

mep
March 7, 2015, 07:30 PM
Good point.
I really just do not understand why Myles got so upset with John Atkinson's appreciations of Revel Ultima Salon2's:
* The date of the RMAF meeting which Atkinson held this speach on is very clear from the video (but Myles managed the "masterpiece" not to notice that).
* I wrote John Atkinson's words regarding the Salon2's exactly as John Atkinson said them.

Myles previously "pooh-poohing Magico lovers" and him thereafter buying Magico speakers thereafter, just strengthens his bad forum-behaviour.

I think you are trying to put words in Myles' mouth. He is not upset with "John Atkinson's appreciation of Revel Ultima Salon2" speakers. This is no different than when Adcom continued to quote AHC on his comment about their amp many years after it was initially brought to the marketplace. The point is that time marches on and what you thought was your dream component 3 or 4 years ago may no longer be your dream component.

the professor
March 7, 2015, 07:34 PM
At one point - he also probably said that JBL L100s were the best. And so on .......

Obviously, any product that still sells in good numbers, after 5 to 10 years in production is a good product at a good price point. But I don't think that because a designer/company has improvements, they should necessarily wait for 5 years to bring them to the public. And they shouldn't be criticized if they do. I like the fact I can upgrade a product to the latest version.

PacMan
March 7, 2015, 07:35 PM
I think you are trying to put words in Myles' mouth. He is not upset with "John Atkinson's appreciation of Revel Ultima Salon2" speakers. This is no different than when Adcom continued to quote AHC on his comment about their amp many years after it was initially brought to the marketplace. The point is that time marches on and what you thought was your dream component 3 or 4 years ago may no longer be your dream component.
I just refered to this RMAF-meeting in October 2011: Nothing more, nothing less.
I assume that the members of this forum has eyes: Then they see the date of the meeting being held was October 16, 2011.
If you have not noticed that date: Please see the first two seconds of the video.

Myles B. Astor
March 7, 2015, 07:35 PM
Good point.
I really just do not understand why Myles got so upset with John Atkinson's appreciations of Revel Ultima Salon2's:
* The date of the RMAF meeting which Atkinson held this speech on is very clear from the video (but Myles managed the "masterpiece" not to notice that).
* I wrote John Atkinson's words regarding the Salon2's exactly as John Atkinson said them.

Myles previously "pooh-poohing Magico lovers" and him thereafter buying Magico speakers thereafter, just strengthens his bad forum-behaviour.

As Mark intimated, I didn't. It was all about taking a review out of context.

You like your Salons? Great. I have no problem with that. Nor do I with those with Raidhos, NOLAs, Wilsons, Rockports, etc. All have their strengths and weaknesses. You pay your money, you get what you want. That's why there's probably more brands of speakers out there than any other component.

As far as bad forum behavior goes, who made you the moderator?

Myles B. Astor
March 7, 2015, 07:52 PM
It's all opinion and obviously quite changeable. Fremer decided on Wilsons, although a model that lists for nearly 10x the price of the Salon 2's. And as Myles noted, JA has written and said he would take the Alexias as a desert island speaker; again, they are more than twice the price of the Salon 2's. It wasn't so long ago that Myles was pooh-poohing Magico lovers, saying he was a commited electrostatic owner. None of that means the Salon 2's aren't excellent speakers, but there are plenty of other excellent speakers as well and at many price points. You'll find plenty of audiophiles who will tell you that compared to the Magnepan 20.7 the Salons are an overpriced rip-off (just for example).

Actually to be factually correct, I wrote in my review that I didn't see myself owning dynamic speakers. Not Magico. And I think that's fair enough statement from electrostatic lovers. That said, I have had numerous dynamic speakers in my listening room and reviewed and liked some of them too (as well as Magnepans too).

But again my comment had nothing to do with Salons but the context the quote was used. And no one has addressed that other than picking on my being off by 6 months out of four years. Can we say Benghazi?

mep
March 7, 2015, 07:55 PM
I just refered to this RMAF-meeting in October 2011: Nothing more, nothing less.
I assume that the members of this forum has eyes: Then they see the date of the meeting being held was October 16, 2011.
If you have not noticed that date: Please see the first two seconds of the video.

I'm not talking about the date of the video, but I thought you understood that by now. But then, members don't "has" eyes, they have eyes. I'm talking about the tone of your comments and the point Myles was trying to make. The point Myles was trying to make is that years have passed by since JA made those comments and in the meanwhile, he has listened to and measured a bunch of new speakers and the Salon2 is no longer the speaker he would pack up for the famed desert island.

mep
March 7, 2015, 07:58 PM
deleted.

rbbert
March 7, 2015, 08:15 PM
Actually to be factually correct, I wrote in my review that I didn't see myself owning dynamic speakers. Not Magico. And I think that's fair enough statement from electrostatic lovers. That said, I have had numerous dynamic speakers in my listening room and reviewed and liked some of them too (as well as Magnepans too).

But again my comment had nothing to do with Salons but the context the quote was used. And no one has addressed that other than picking on my being off by 6 months out of four years. Can we say Benghazi?

I'm pretty sure you posted that in a topic thread on Magico (likely in other places as well). And my point was that opinions are many, varied and changeable; you were just a handy example.

puroagave
March 7, 2015, 08:17 PM
cost analogies are problematic to say the least, at 14 grand Maggie 20.7s are a rip-off compared to Acoustat 2+2s that can be had for under a thou...that kinda thing. regardless, the Salons are superlative speakers (even the Mk Is) if it weren't for the kitschy '90s styling I'd probably have a set of Mk Is right now.

jaxwired
March 7, 2015, 08:26 PM
In my opinion, the two speakers that have withstood the test of time best over the last 8 - 10 years are the Revel Salon 2's and the Sonus Faber Stradivari. After 8 - 10 years, these are still the speakers of choice, even for new purchase, by a number of members of Audio Shark. And we're a pretty tough crowd. ;) The best way to future proof a speaker is to build it right the first time and build it to last.

Ken

Dynaudio C4 and C1 also have stood the test of time and were reviewer favs.

rbbert
March 7, 2015, 09:04 PM
cost analogies are problematic to say the least, at 14 grand Maggie 20.7s are a rip-off compared to Acoustat 2+2s that can be had for under a thou...that kinda thing. regardless, the Salons are superlative speakers (even the Mk Is) if it weren't for the kitschy '90s styling I'd probably have a set of Mk Is right now.
I don't know about that. I lived with 2+2's and modified ServoCharge amps for over 10 years; there's not much the 20.7's don't do much better, ​IMO.

MDP
March 7, 2015, 10:32 PM
It's all personal preference. No speaker is perfect, they're all compromises. We just pick the one we want, and factor in a lot of other things. It always boils down to synergy of equipment, room, and listening habits and preferences.

Mike
March 8, 2015, 12:22 AM
IMHO, the Salon 2's are an unbeatable value today IF paired with the right electronics. I loved mine when I owned them and their world class tweeter made for hours of fatigue free listening. Like anything, synergy is key. Considering Salon 2's can be had on the used market for $12k ish, that's a tough speaker to beat for the $$$. They aren't perfect (no speaker is), but with the right "soulful" electronics, they can be made to sound magnificent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BlueFox
March 8, 2015, 12:30 AM
It's all personal preference. No speaker is perfect, they're all compromises. We just pick the one we want, and factor in a lot of other things. It always boils down to synergy of equipment, room, and listening habits and preferences.

Very true, and for me, luck plays a big role. I do a lot of research before buying something, but at the end of the day, every purchase is a blind purchase. So far, everything I kept has exceeded my expectations. I have to admit I wish I could roll gear through here for comparison, but that is just a dream.

KeithR
March 8, 2015, 01:28 AM
JA also was gaga over Halcro back in the day. Now he thinks Pass is his fav. Cant think of two more different amps. Just sayin'...things change.

BruceLet
March 8, 2015, 01:56 AM
PacMan….Thanks for the original post.

audioarcher
March 8, 2015, 01:56 AM
Does not really matter what JA or anyone else thinks in the end. It's what works best for your own room and preferences.

Bodhi
March 8, 2015, 02:07 AM
Does not really matter what JA or anyone else thinks in the end. It's what works best for your own room and preferences.+ 1. What I enjoy is reading about other members success achieving their audio goals & ultimately achieving great sound/synergy. There is only one "best" speaker....the speaker that is best for your own tastes in the context of your system, room & budget. Also there is no such thing as the "holy grail" as they keep making a better grail! Just enjoy the music! :)

Dpod4
March 8, 2015, 01:37 PM
FIRST WORLD problem for sure.

mauidan
March 8, 2015, 03:56 PM
It's all personal preference. No speaker is perfect, they're all compromises. We just pick the one we want, and factor in a lot of other things. It always boils down to synergy of equipment, room, and listening habits and preferences.

I agree.

I've never heard the any of the Magico S and Q series or any of the Raidhos.

When I was shopping for speakers four years ago, I did listen to Revel Salon 2s, PMC EB1s and WA Sophia 3s all powered by big ARC monos.

The Revel Salon 2s and PMC EB1s were very good, but when I heard the Neal Smith Quintet Live at Smalls on the S3s, I was sold.

Mike
March 8, 2015, 07:06 PM
Well boys, it seems time has not changed his opinion.

I just asked John his top three speakers under $20,000 and he said:

1. Revel Ultima Salon2
2. Triangle Signature Delta
3. Sony SS-AR2ES

Bodhi
March 8, 2015, 07:34 PM
I'd be pretty confident if JA brought in a pair of TSW Apogee Diva Ultimates, he might very well proffer a different view. Though as always a lot depends on how good or bad the speakers couple with the room. The Divas need a lot of room and power to breath & being dipole, need an even front wall and symetrical room. At the end of the day JA is just giving a subjective opinion based on the speakers he has had in his room, so as always YMMV.

Bruce
March 8, 2015, 07:37 PM
Well boys, it seems time has not changed his opinion.

I just asked John his top three speakers under $20,000 and he said:

1. Revel Ultima Salon2
2. Triangle Signature Delta
3. Sony SS-AR2ES


Well not often I agree with JA "completely"-ha!


But in my listening impressions of the speakers he mentioned --and compared to the brands outlines by posters-- and especially my extended time with Magicos

The Revels are a superior Transducer to them-- with second place to the Sony's--kudos to them for having a go in the veritable "Shark Tank "of Hi End Speakers

My personal opinion only

Bruce

hiro100
March 8, 2015, 07:52 PM
Well boys, it seems time has not changed his opinion.

I just asked John his top three speakers under $20,000 and he said:

1. Revel Ultima Salon2
2. Triangle Signature Delta
3. Sony SS-AR2ES

Hi Mike

Very cool you were able to ask him what he thought about and some interesting choices there with Triangle and Sony SS-AR2ES. I'm curious as I may have missed the question on this thread but is it the best speaker he's had in his room or the best speaker under 20,000 he had in his room? Would be curious to see what his choices were if that dollar threshold were removed.

mep
March 8, 2015, 08:11 PM
Hi Mike

Very cool you were able to ask him what he thought about and some interesting choices there with Triangle and Sony SS-AR2ES. I'm curious as I may have missed the question on this thread but is it the best speaker he's had in his room or the best speaker under 20,000 he had in his room? Would be curious to see what his choices were if that dollar threshold were removed.

I thought JA has spoken on what speaker he would cart off to the famed desert island. It sounds like Mike asked him a very pointed question with regards to cost.

rbbert
March 8, 2015, 08:18 PM
I thought JA has spoken on what speaker he would cart off to the famed desert island. It sounds like Mike asked him a very pointed question with regards to cost.
And I thought the Salon 2's were more than $20k/pr??

Alpinist
March 8, 2015, 08:31 PM
And I thought the Salon 2's were more than $20k/pr??

Revised to under $22,000 per pair. ;)

Ken

jaxwired
March 8, 2015, 08:35 PM
It's lucky he hasn't reviewed PMC Fact 12s because then he'd have to make the tough call which speaker to knock off his top three. :D

MDP
March 8, 2015, 08:39 PM
I rest my case :P

MDP
March 8, 2015, 08:46 PM
I thought JA has spoken on what speaker he would cart off to the famed desert island. It sounds like Mike asked him a very pointed question with regards to cost.

Wow Mark, how you love to rain on a parade :D

It's pretty obvious you're not a fan of the Salons.

MDP
March 8, 2015, 08:53 PM
Hi Mike

Very cool you were able to ask him what he thought about and some interesting choices there with Triangle and Sony SS-AR2ES. I'm curious as I may have missed the question on this thread but is it the best speaker he's had in his room or the best speaker under 20,000 he had in his room? Would be curious to see what his choices were if that dollar threshold were removed.

I'd love to see him compare the Salons to the Alexias head to head, and I would be ok whatever his opinion was. I trust JA more than any other reviewer out there.

hiro100
March 8, 2015, 09:20 PM
I'd love to see him compare the Salons to the Alexias head to head, and I would be ok whatever his opinion was. I trust JA more than any other reviewer out there.

I agree. I like JA reviews even though I don't always agree with him. For the record, I have heard and think the Salons are great speakers. I think it would be really interesting to see what JA top three are if cost was no object and how they compared to each other. Although, I suppose he hasn't had them in his room at the same time next to each other.

mauidan
March 8, 2015, 09:23 PM
I'd love to see someone compare the Salons to the Rockport Atrias.

Mike
March 8, 2015, 09:42 PM
Man, these are all seriously great speakers. Revel, Rockport, Raidho, Magico, PMC, Wilson. Wow. They are all well known for a reason.

I'll throw DynAudio, Harbeth and Focal into the mix as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MDP
March 8, 2015, 09:47 PM
I agree. I like JA reviews even though I don't always agree with him. For the record, I have heard and think the Salons are great speakers. I think it would be really interesting to see what JA top three are if cost was no object and how they compared to each other. Although, I suppose he hasn't had them in his room at the same time next to each other.

I agree, I would love to see that.

As Myles pointed out to me in another thread, you can't be sure unless you can compare all of them at the same time.

Audio memory is very fickle.

rbbert
March 8, 2015, 10:32 PM
Those are all good speakers, and there are others as well. Why does one need to be the "best"? More, since none are perfect, how would it even be possible?

MDP
March 8, 2015, 10:38 PM
Those are all good speakers, and there are others as well. Why does one need to be the "best"? More, since none are perfect, how would it even be possible?

Rob, as I have said many times, there is no best.

Synergy between your electronics, speakers,room, and listening preferences are what matters.

It's all personal preferences. I have listened to your speakers at Robert Lee's shop and just loved them.

Mike
March 8, 2015, 10:41 PM
There is definitely no best ice cream either. Pick the flavor that suits you best and go. Everyone needs to consider their room, cabling, music style and most importantly, amplification.

Alpinist
March 8, 2015, 11:25 PM
So true, Mike. I have the D3's and Salon 2's side-by-side in my listening room right now. At low to medium volumes the D3's are best in class due to their low mechanical damping and ribbon tweeter. The subtlety and nuance of jazz vocals and piano are unparalleled. But at medium to high volumes the Salon 2's take flight. Crank up some Santana Soul Sacrifice and the Salon 2's are energized, they will play as loud as you want and never lose their composure or neutrality. They remain a clear window to the music. As you said, many different flavors out there, all special in their own way.

Best,
Ken

Dpod4
March 9, 2015, 02:19 AM
I think the beauty of the Salons and Revel overall for that matter is the R$D and scale of the parent company. Ability to procure and demand the best engineers, parts and company commitment to show off the flagship audio creations. I believe Revel is owned by same company that owns NAD etc - Harman? Lots of know how, history and dough.

Same concept as other big firms when they commit to excellence and don't build a spec to a high volume best buy customer. I demoed a pair of Marantz Reference MA9s1 mono amps this weekend. They blew me away driving my Magicos. Nothing has come close to my Constellation Centuar with my S5s. From $45k VAC statements amps to Hegel H30 to CJ Pr350, etc. But the Marantz are just as good in most aspects and better in some regards (bass, warmth/tone midrange down).

I think when smaller houses build the no-holds-barred it ends up costing a lot more. I bet the Salon 2 if built by a smaller audio brand, would retail for $35-40k to pay down R&D, tooling/machines, cap ex etc.

Mike
March 9, 2015, 08:01 AM
I'd love to see him compare the Salons to the Alexias head to head, and I would be ok whatever his opinion was. I trust JA more than any other reviewer out there.

I asked John last night, he said: "I think the Alexias but they cost more than twice as much as the Revels..."

MDP
March 9, 2015, 08:48 AM
Thanks Mike.

I think a magazine like Stereophile should do that some day. Take an award winning speaker from 5-10 yrs back and then have it go head to head with their new favorite !!

That would be fun to read !!

audio.bill
March 9, 2015, 09:46 AM
I think the beauty of the Salons and Revel overall for that matter is the R$D and scale of the parent company. Ability to procure and demand the best engineers, parts and company commitment to show off the flagship audio creations. I believe Revel is owned by same company that owns NAD etc - Harman? Lots of know how, history and dough.

Just a point of correction, NAD is not affiliated with Harman. Harmon International currently owns Revel, Mark Levinson (the brand), AKG, JBL, and some other brands. NAD is a part of The Lenbrook Group which also manufactures PSB speakers. Of course your point about Revel's available resources still applies.

Dpod4
March 9, 2015, 10:52 AM
Just a point of correction, NAD is not affiliated with Harman. Harmon International currently owns Revel, Mark Levinson (the brand), AKG, JBL, and some other brands. NAD is a part of The Lenbrook Group which also manufactures PSB speakers. Of course your point about Revel's available resources still applies.

Sorry bad data on my part.

PacMan
March 9, 2015, 12:07 PM
I think a magazine like Stereophile should do that some day. Take an award winning speaker from 5-10 yrs back and then have it go head to head with their new favorite !!

That is a good idea, Mark.
Of course, it would surprise me if Stereophile would dare to do such a test blind.
Audio-brands which would benefit from magazines having ABX as a standard procedure in their testing are the really great brands.
Many (all?) hi-fi magazines tend to give their readers the impression that gear being a few years old can not compare to brand new gear.
I appreciate that John Atkinson has measured a lot of gear (the measurements in itself).
The measurements have for instance shown that darTZeel CTH-8550's measured performance is disappointing (Atkinson's own word) although its price is a hefty $ 20 300. On the contrary, Cambridge Audio has made gear which measurements are really great although the products' prices are low. I think Cambridge Audio is among the brands who would benefit from ABX-testing.

That audio products (like Revel Ultima Salon2's) offers superb measured performance matters millions of times more than any subjectivist review in my opinion.
As a consequence, Atkinson's measurements (in themselves) of Revel Ultima Salon2 matters more to an objectivist like me than any subjectivistic opinion.
I consider "reviews" in 6moons and other extremely subjectivistic magazines worthless (and most (nearly all?) magazines are of the 6moons-type).

Just my opinions.
Have a nice day, everybody.

Face
March 9, 2015, 12:18 PM
That is a good idea, Mark.
Of course, it would surprise me if Stereophile would dare to do such a test blind.
Although I would love to see such a comparison, they would lose a few advertisers, for sure.

PacMan
March 9, 2015, 12:29 PM
Although I would love to see such a comparison, they would lose a few advertisers, for sure.
They would, and probably most readers would prefer magazines reviewing gear in the "standard way".
The only hi-fi magazine to my knowledge which has great credibility is Peter Aczel's The Audio Critic, and that magazine is not exactly full of advertisements.

KeithR
March 9, 2015, 12:34 PM
I appreciate JA's measurements and the time he spends on reporting them. I've really tried to associate measurements with what I hear over the past few years. For instance, I much prefer no-feedback amps and now understand why (even when I had BAT years ago and no idea about that relationship).

That said its interesting to see how JA has changed his interpretation of measurements over the years. re: amps, he nailed Dart 8550 for the things in the D'agostinos that he overlooked (and in fact, the 458s he seemed to come around on).

And honestly, the XA-60.5s which he loves so much don't measure that well from what I see- go figure.

rbbert
March 9, 2015, 02:25 PM
They would, and probably most readers would prefer magazines reviewing gear in the "standard way".
The only hi-fi magazine to my knowledge which has great credibility is Peter Aczel's The Audio Critic, and that magazine is not exactly full of advertisements.
Actually, Peter Aczel has no credibility. He does have the distinction AFAIK of being the only reviewer to review his own product (while not revealing that he was the designer and manufacturer).

PacMan
March 9, 2015, 02:35 PM
Actually, Peter Aczel has no credibility. He does have the distinction AFAIK of being the only reviewer to review his own product (while not revealing that he was the designer and manufacturer).
Rob, can you tell me the name of that product, when he reviewed it (and preferably the review itself) and the documentation that it was "his own product" at that time?

rbbert
March 9, 2015, 02:59 PM
It's a well known scandal, the speakers were Fourier (or something close). It is the reason The Audio Critic disappeared for 10+ years and never regained its reputation or readership. Sorry I don't have specific links, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were even something in Wikipedia.

still-one
March 9, 2015, 03:12 PM
Thanks Mike.

I think a magazine like Stereophile should do that some day. Take an award winning speaker from 5-10 yrs back and then have it go head to head with their new favorite !!

That would be fun to read !!

Why would it be interesting? Maybe for those who believe that audio is the only technology that stands still.

Older gear sounds great and there are many fine systems comprised of such gear. That said the best systems will be comprised by manufacturers using the latest technologies and manufacturing techniques.

rbbert
March 9, 2015, 03:55 PM
Rob, can you tell me the name of that product, when he reviewed it (and preferably the review itself) and the documentation that it was "his own product" at that time?
Found a good one; practically "from the horse's mouth"
terrisgolf (http://www.hometheaterforum.com/user/370075-terrisgolf/)

Auditioning

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/uploads/profile/photo-370075.jpg?_r=0 (http://www.hometheaterforum.com/user/370075-terrisgolf/)

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/public/style_extra/team_icons/reputation_1.png
1 posts
Join Date: Sep 09 2010






Posted September 09 2010 - 08:10 AM
Yes, Fourier Loudspeakers began in Yonkers, New York and was funded by Peter Aczel of the Audio Critic. The Fourier 1 was a splendid speaker that retailed for approximately $1,100.00 each. Cabinets were all hand made, as were the crossovers. Tweeters were usually supplied by JVC. They did not suck power and were quite efficient under normal circumstances. The company with respect to sales and marketing efforts were run by myself, Christopher S. Terris. The company was designed to be a small volume, high profit facility that could respond to the technical advances of loudspeaker development more quickly than the higher volume loudspeaker facility, thus giving the consumer the best possible sound and value per dollar. Sadly, the company just was not competitive during its time and stereo retailers did not receive it warmly. Peter Aczel was also caught in the middle of a serious problem that came to the surface. He was giving the speaker rave reviews in the Audio Critic, but he also was a major shareholder in the company. When word got around it pretty much doomed any possibility of a successful distribution structure within the audio community of retailers. Thus, few were ever sold. In my opinion, although not at the level of an Ohm Acoustics model F, the Fourier 1 was a superb loudspeaker and well worth taking a good look at in the used market.

MDP
March 9, 2015, 04:00 PM
Why would it be interesting? Maybe for those who believe that audio is the only technology that stands still.

Older gear sounds great and there are many fine systems comprised of such gear. That said the best systems will be comprised by manufacturers using the latest technologies and manufacturing techniques.

Jim, I have to disagree. What gigantic revelations in loudspeaker technology have occurred since the Salon 2 has come out ?

mep
March 9, 2015, 04:05 PM
Why would it be interesting? Maybe for those who believe that audio is the only technology that stands still.

Older gear sounds great and there are many fine systems comprised of such gear. That said the best systems will be comprised by manufacturers using the latest technologies and manufacturing techniques.

I guess that wouldn't apply to D'Agostino gear currently being manufactured. Through-hole technology circuit boards are hardly the latest in circuit board technology. Take a look at these pictures of Dan's current facility and you will quickly see this place isn't using the latest manufacturing techniques either. Anyone familiar with the concepts of LEAN and 6S will understand when they see the pictures:

A Factory Tour In The Enchanting Foothills Of Arizona - D'Agostino Master Audio Systems (http://positive-feedback.com/Issue78/dagostino_tour.htm)

PacMan
March 9, 2015, 04:10 PM
Why would it be interesting?
Because it is an approach very much more likely to be closer to the truth than the usual torrent of words presented by hi-fi-magazine authors.
And if for example a speaker X is much better than a speaker Y according to a hi-fi reviewer Z, then Z should obviously be able come to this conclusion in a blind test, too.

PacMan
March 9, 2015, 04:14 PM
Found a good one; practically "from the horse's mouth"
terrisgolf (http://www.hometheaterforum.com/user/370075-terrisgolf/)




Auditioning
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/uploads/profile/photo-370075.jpg?_r=0 (http://www.hometheaterforum.com/user/370075-terrisgolf/)

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/public/style_extra/team_icons/reputation_1.png
1 posts
Join Date: Sep 09 2010



Posted September 09 2010 - 08:10 AM
Yes, Fourier Loudspeakers began in Yonkers, New York and was funded by Peter Aczel of the Audio Critic. The Fourier 1 was a splendid speaker that retailed for approximately $1,100.00 each. Cabinets were all hand made, as were the crossovers. Tweeters were usually supplied by JVC. They did not suck power and were quite efficient under normal circumstances. The company with respect to sales and marketing efforts were run by myself, Christopher S. Terris. The company was designed to be a small volume, high profit facility that could respond to the technical advances of loudspeaker development more quickly than the higher volume loudspeaker facility, thus giving the consumer the best possible sound and value per dollar. Sadly, the company just was not competitive during its time and stereo retailers did not receive it warmly. Peter Aczel was also caught in the middle of a serious problem that came to the surface. He was giving the speaker rave reviews in the Audio Critic, but he also was a major shareholder in the company. When word got around it pretty much doomed any possibility of a successful distribution structure within the audio community of retailers. Thus, few were ever sold. In my opinion, although not at the level of an Ohm Acoustics model F, the Fourier 1 was a superb loudspeaker and well worth taking a good look at in the used market.


If you can document your claim regarding Peter Aczel, then this information will be highly appreciated (and it will obviously imply a substantial drop in Aczel's credibility).
That being said, I think everybody must be careful in spreading bad rumours.
I therefore encourage you to present bullet-proof evidence of your claim.

mep
March 9, 2015, 04:21 PM
If you can document your claim regarding Peter Aczel, then this information will be highly appreciated (and it will obviously imply a substantial drop in Aczel's credibility).
That being said, I think everybody must be careful in spreading bad rumours.
I therefore encourage you to present bullet-proof evidence of your claim.


Are you saying you don't believe what Rob posted? What are you looking for? You want a summary court judgement?

How about this link? Is this enough proof for you? Fourier 6 loudspeaker Page 2 | Stereophile.com (http://www.stereophile.com/content/fourier-6-loudspeaker-page-2)

rbbert
March 9, 2015, 04:26 PM
Are you saying you don't believe what Rob posted? What are you looking for? You want a summary court judgement?

Did you actually read what I posted?? It's from one of Aczel's partners in the company! If you want more information, do your own research, but be aware that what I posted is certainly true (unlike you, apparently, I was a subscriber to The Audio Critic from its inception in the '70's and followed this story in real time) and any assertions you make to the contrary are "bad rumors".

madfloyd
March 9, 2015, 04:50 PM
I asked John last night, he said: "I think the Alexias but they cost more than twice as much as the Revels..."

He's already forgotten about the Giyas?

PacMan
March 9, 2015, 04:54 PM
mep & Rob: Please calm down. I just want the facts on the table. We probably agree in that people are innocent until proven guilty.
Thanks for the Stereophile link, mep.
I am hoping that you can show the review where Aczel is reviewing his own speakers (because I think it would be of great interest to several of us not aware of this if your claim is correct).

mep
March 9, 2015, 05:05 PM
mep & Rob: Please calm down. I just want the facts on the table. We probably agree in that people are innocent until proven guilty.
Thanks for the Stereophile link, mep.
I am hoping that you can show the review where Aczel is reviewing his own speakers.

Did you not read the Stereophile article?? Do you really think this didn't happen??

Please read these words from the Stereophile article I gave you the link to and tell me whether you don't understand them or you just don't believe Stereophile either:

While he was editing and publishing The Audio Critic, Peter Aczel became so disenchanted with the available audiophile loudspeakers that he decided to show the industry how to produce a moderately sized and priced system. The result was the Fourier 1, which aroused extensive critical discussion as to both its sonic merits and the ethics of promoting one's own speaker in one's own magazine. (Aczel favorably reviewed the Fourier 1 in one of the final issues of The Audio Critic before revealing that he was, in fact, one of the owners of Fourier.)

Do you really believe in "The Ten Biggest Lies in Audio" or is that a joke too? If you like Peter Aczel, you would love Julian Hirsch as well.

rbbert
March 9, 2015, 05:06 PM
mep & Rob: Please calm down. I just want the facts on the table. We probably agree in that people are innocent until proven guilty.
Thanks for the Stereophile link, mep.
I am hoping that you can show the review where Aczel is reviewing his own speakers.

I doubt it is on-line (it's copyrighted and I don't think Aczel wants to make it too freely available). But the burden is on you, as I said; you are the one doubting it and only you can find the information that will comvince you.

It's possible that Myles may have some more detailed info; IIRC he was getting into the business in a bigger way about that time.

Mike
March 9, 2015, 05:08 PM
He's already forgotten about the Giyas?

The question I asked him was "John, if you had to pick between the Salon 2's and Alexia's, which would you pick?" That was what people were wondering before.

PacMan
March 9, 2015, 05:19 PM
(Aczel favorably reviewed the Fourier 1 in one of the final issues of The Audio Critic before revealing that he was, in fact, one of the owners of Fourier.)

I read that sentence by John Atkinson in the link.
I do not see that it should be a problem that I want to see and read Aczel's claimed review.



Do you really believe in "The Ten Biggest Lies in Audio" or is that a joke too?
Maybe that link is your reason for being so upset.

PacMan
March 9, 2015, 05:21 PM
But the burden is on you, as I said; you are the one doubting it and only you can find the information that will comvince you.

You came with a claim, so it is obviously your burden to present the evidence (confer "innocent until proven guilty").

mep
March 9, 2015, 05:33 PM
You came with a claim, so it is obviously your burden to present the evidence (confer "innocent until proven guilty").

You have already been given enough evidence to show this really happened. It's pointless for anyone to waste any more time on this subject with you. This is the last time I will ever respond to anything you post on this forum or any other forum in the universe.

PacMan
March 9, 2015, 05:43 PM
You have already been given enough evidence to show this really happened.
I like bullet-proof evidence. You obviously do not want to show that review.
And other questions related should be raised as well if the review is you claim. For instance this: Was Aczel's interest in Fourier clear from before?
(this still does not imply that Aczel did not do anything unethical if what you claim is correct).

It's pointless for anyone to waste any more time on this subject with you. This is the last time I will ever respond to anything you post on this forum or any other forum in the universe.
I prefer communicating with people who can prove their categorical claims and who are factual. No further communication with you will therefore be no loss for me.

rbbert
March 9, 2015, 05:47 PM
You came with a claim, so it is obviously your burden to present the evidence (confer "innocent until proven guilty").
No, you came with several claims; first, that John Atkinson says (not said, says) that Revel Salon 2 were the best speakers he has ever used in his room. Next, that only The Audio Critic is a review magazine you would believe (despite the fact that they barely even exist anymore, and don't you wonder where Issues #1-15 went??). Last, that you don't believe that Peter Aczel reviewed a speaker made by a company of which he was a principle (not against the law, just unethical, so there is no "guilty" or "innocent" involved). Now the second of these is an opinion so there is no right or wrong possible. The other two are just plain wrong, and you are (and will be) totally incapable of showing them to be true.

BTW, you should add at least your name to your signature.

Mike
March 9, 2015, 05:48 PM
Stradivari's are for lovers. :)

Boy, did this thread go sideways fast. Pacman, I think its time to drop it and get back to the thread.

MDP
March 9, 2015, 05:49 PM
Okay, lets all settle down. This thread is getting out of hand.

Mike
March 9, 2015, 05:51 PM
I'm closing this thread.