|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
09-15-2005
|
tadalafil generico quando generico cialis costo hk.onkyo.com Bruce Edgar, the founder and designer of California-based EdgarHorn Loudspeakers, recently announced that he discovered a new relationship between his business plan and rules of physics. According to Bruce: “The physics of sound reproduction through the horn-loaded loudspeakers is very intricately correlate what my woodmaker’s moods and my bookkeeper’s advisement”.
Being a knowledgeable Horn-thinker but having lethargic woodworkers and frugal business plan, Mr. Edgar over the year spread the rumors that lightly built; curved upper-bass horns are a pinnacle of horns design. “We really have no complains from our customers”, - Mr. Edgar said, - “ This Patrice Barber has light and curved voice anyhow and it was a perfect much for our horns. Since the EdgarHorn customers never heard properly designed straight upper-bass horns with small throat we have opportunities to sell them virtually anything that “looks like horn” and the customers, after knowing the only ported enclosures with rubberized driver, have no other options then to love our curved horn with that have oversized throat”
However, in recent time Mr. Edgar decided that his loudspeakers, no mater how compromised they are still over-perform the majority of the more expansive “boxed” speakers. So, in his desire to increase the price twice he PERMITTED THE LAWS OF PHYSICS in his upper-bass horn and now his Titan loudspeaker will have a straight horn, but only for $20,000 instead of $10,000.
“Our plans look much further into the unlimited taste development of our ignorant and mostly deaf customers. We stratified our customer’s interests, their financial capacities and the business development of our company. – Mr. Edgar said. Then he continued: “After paying $20,000 for a straight upper-bass horn I will publicly acknowledge that the LF loading and throat equalization in horns do mater. Whoever understands would have a chance to pay $30,000 for upper-bass horns having a smaller throat. For $40,000 I will acknowledge the importance of time alignment in horn installations, for $50,000 I will acknowledge the benefit of mass loading for upper-bass horns. For $60,000 I will acknowledge that rectangular horns do not work properly and for $70,000 I would acknowledge that the properly built horns might in fact can perform perfectly fine in nearfield.”
So, the "intricate correlation" between the truth 'bout horns and the laws of physics has shaded some light…
|
|
|
|
Posted by guy sergeant on
09-16-2005
|
Of all the manufacturers you could be poking fun at you've chosen two who actually care about what they make and sell. Whenever I encounter Bruce Edgar he always strikes me as a courteous and serious guy trying to offer value for money, high performance speakers. He does also seem to enjoy music (as does Kondo)
I imagine he's well aware of the compromises he has to make to supply speaker systems that can actually be sold via retailers. He's also trying to make a living and therefore has to keep some of what he makes reasonably affordable. Of course it's priced accordingly.
If you're going to poke fun at pretentious high end manufacturers/distributors at least pick first on those guys who really deserve it. They're easy to spot. Just look at what wealthy people with no taste tend to buy. Generally people who'd buy Edgar and Kondo items aren't buying them for the kudos of ownership as neither looks that prestigious or expensive. They are bought for how they sound rather than how they look.
best regards,
Guy
|
|
|
|
Posted by Kerry Brown on
09-16-2005
|
Romy,
Funny stuff... especially the the AN piece. Equally surprised octopodes ? Brilliant !
As for the Bruce Edgar post ? Not as funny. And it's off base.
The Titan II system has a straight axis upper bass horn instead of a folded upper bass horn like the first version of that system ? So what ?
When Bruce realized a straight axis horn was a better choice he went with it. Like a good scientist.
As far as the price ? A $20,000 Titan II system is still a better deal than super systems by Wilson, Avantgarde, Dynaudio, Revel, etc., etc..
Besides which, if you are willing to invest some time and energy, Bruce will sell you unfinished horns for a small fraction of normal retail.
My speakers are basically a ' Titan II ' system and believe me they did not cost anywhere near 20 grand.
Lightly built horns ? So what ? Fill the voids with sand like I did. No big deal. The construction and materials are plenty sturdy enough to hold a couple hundred pounds of sand.
Throat size ? The throat size of those 80 Hz horns is correct. Regardless of convention. With JBL 150-4C's the bass is incredibly good.
Time alignment ? It's not nearly as critical as many claim.
Mass loading ? Again... just use sand. Bruce does acknowledge the benefits.
Rectangular vs round ? I doubt that a round version of Edgar's 80 Hz horn would sound much different. Maybe... there's no way to know though without actually making one. And I don't think Bruce has ever done that. He has compared rectangular midrange horns to round ones though and he says the differences are minor. I believe that. My rectangular tractrix midrange horns sound very good... and so do my round tractrix horns.
As for nearfield listening ? Bruce does like some distance, but he knows that near field listening does work well with horns.
I think you are far too hard on Bruce Edgar. He actually does care about performance. And about value. He's a good man.
And as far as performance ? I have heard many many high end speakers, and just as many horn systems, old and new, and nothing I have heard even comes close to Edgar's stuff.
The combination of Bruce Edgar's horn subwoofers, 80 Hz horns and tractrix horns is just plain amazing ( especially with a DEQX digital crossover/preamp ) !
As for Edgar's business plan ? If he can sell $20,000, or $10,000, or $100,000 systems to folks with more money than sense ? More power to him.
Bruce would like to ride the gravy train - just like you and me.
But he is not trying to fool anybody. Unlike most of the BS artists in audio ( eg., invasive free electrons etc. ).
Kerry Brown
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
09-16-2005
|
 guy sergeant wrote: | | Of all the manufacturers you could be poking fun at you've chosen two who actually care about what they make and sell. |
|
I do not think any manufacturers “do not care about what they make and sell”. They all do, or at least they all want to. Everyone want, certainly within a scope of their aperture, knowledge, exposure and ….conformity.
| guy sergeant wrote: | | Whenever I encounter Bruce Edgar he always strikes me as a courteous and serious guy trying to offer value for money, high performance speakers. He does also seem to enjoy music (as does Kondo) |
|
So, what? I have no problems Bruce and enjoy him. What is has to do with the subject of the news?
| guy sergeant wrote: | | I imagine he's well aware of the compromises he has to make to supply speaker systems that can actually be sold via retailers. He's also trying to make a living and therefore has to keep some of what he makes reasonably affordable. Of course it's priced accordingly. |
|
Here is where you are wrong and this is why I wrote what I have written. Bruce does familiar with own publicity among the ignorant horn people and unfortunately he uses it as a cheap and irresponsible commodity. I was very surprised what I have sent him a few customers who where very open and very receptive and then…. he loaded them with objectively erroneous generic axioms juts because it was covenant for him to BS then at that given moment. It regrettably happened many times with Bruce, for instance, he was preaching for years to his customers that there were no fundamental or even theoretical shortcomings of his bent upper bass horn vs. a straight horn. So, his Morons-customers were buying and parsing the Edgar upper bass horn. Two-three years ago to told him at CES that his curved upperbass horn do not sound well and was a weakest point of his Titans. We even were talking with him how simple would be to make the very same horn to be straight, even preserving all the rest compromised of that design. Now, two years since then, the Edgar’s upperbass straight horn became a reality and you hear from his customers and from Bruce that it performs much better. No Kidding? So, how about the “no fundamental or even theoretical limitation of angled upper-bass horn”?
Guy, I regrettably heard VERY many examples like above about Bruce. I do not care about the fact that Bruce jacked the price twice, good for him, he have to do it more. The problem with Bruce that he is very much not a Moron and he does know those real “theoretical limitations answers”. So, why is it necessary to BS the gullible and ignorant people? Execly THAT was something that I portrayed in my “news”. If you did not get it then you did not get it, no biggy… Now… I am sound like a real boring snob… someone should write a news about me….
| guy sergeant wrote: | | Generally people who'd buy Edgar and Kondo items aren't buying them for the kudos of ownership as neither looks that prestigious or expensive. They are bought for how they sound rather than how they look. |
|
…and you, Guy, is wrong here. I do not know well the Kondo’s US customers but knowing the US’s distributor I can made quite confidently an assumption that they should be Morons as no one (I might have interest) would accept the Kondo’s US importer seriously. The playback installations with Kondo never were interesting, I would not say horrible, but they were juts too much Japanese and… to much ignorant (referent o the enter installation not to the Kondo’s gear specifically). Also, whomever I have seen with Kondo WERE the reach and “do not case about sonic result” people.
However, in case of Edgar’s customer is very different story: I know quite few of them and I almost learned their “idiosyncrasies”. When I am saying that the domination majority of Edgar’s customers are bottom-eating audio-white-trash I am not juts pay tribune to my addiction to the adjectives: very many of them ARE very-very primitive (audio-wise) people. This is one of the biggest problems with the Bruce operation that Bruce started as low-price company and he picked all low-laying audio fruit: all those DIYer and those “The big sound” bashers did embrace the Edgar’s horn. They did it NOT because sound or the specific aspect of the Bruce’s horns but BECAUSE it was cheap and not glossy. There was, and still there is NO other reason for Edgar’s customers to be his customers. Why, because very few of then, even using the Edgar’s horns, have interesting sound and practically none of them knows how to use the Edgar’s horns. You want more “evidences”? Stop by at the “Midwest White Wrash Convention” that the DIY/Horn enthusiasts make annually in US and hear/see/speak with the real Results.
At least it is what I feel….
Rgs,
The caT
PS: If you do not mind I will move the Bruce’s posts into his one “News” thread.
|
|
|
|
Posted by guy sergeant on
09-16-2005
|
antidepressants and alcohol death side effects of drinking alcohol and taking antidepressants
You see, despite changing his stance on certain issues (I obviously do not keep abreast of such matters, I just base what I say on what I see and hear when I meet him) he still offers music lovers a chance (even if they don't know fully how to get the best from them) to reproduce music at home in an enjoyable way without it costing the earth. That surely is to be commended.
Guy
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
09-16-2005
|
| Kerry Brown wrote: | | When Bruce realized a straight axis horn was a better choice he went with it. Like a good scientist. |
|
Ah, did Bruce realize it of he decided to make his customers to Bruce realize it?
| Kerry Brown wrote: | | The throat size of those 80 Hz horns is correct. Regardless of convention. With JBL 150-4C's the bass is incredibly good. |
|
Incredibly good? As incredibly good as they COULD BE if the throat were twice or trice smaller? If so then will be you using the same 15” JBL-150 or juts plane better drivers?
| Kerry Brown wrote: | | Time alignment ? It's not nearly as critical as many claim. |
|
Here we go! Wait unit the Titans III will be coming. Then Bruce will “allow” the Time alignment to be important for the horns.
| Kerry Brown wrote: | | Rectangular vs round ? I doubt that a round version of Edgar's 80 Hz horn would sound much different…… My rectangular tractrix midrange horns sound very good... and so do my round tractrix horns. |
|
It is only if you sit at the dead listing spot but try to walk around the room. Still, eve at the “dead spot” the rectangular horns screw the general imaging. Anyhow, in your case, Kerry, with all your “time alignment nor nearly as critical” and the digital “dreck” the you use you have no interesting imaging anyway… :-)
| Kerry Brown wrote: | | As for nearfield listening ? Bruce does like some distance, but he knows that near field listening does work well with horns. |
|
It is not what he was trying to convince some customers of his. According to the Bruce “the horn must not be used in nearfield”.
| Kerry Brown wrote: | | I think you are far too hard on Bruce Edgar. He actually does care about performance. And about value. He's a good man. |
|
No questions, but the fact that he is a good man prevent to be “hard on Bruce Edgar”. I am not hard on hard on Bruce Edgar but on some of his very specific actions that I outlined in my “News”
| Kerry Brown wrote: | | The combination of Bruce Edgar's horn subwoofers, 80 Hz horns and tractrix horns is just plain amazing ( especially with a DEQX digital crossover/preamp ) ! |
|
Here we go again!
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
09-16-2005
|
viagra prodej brno viagra prodej brno | guy sergeant wrote: | Ok, so imagine I'm someone living in the US with a keen interest in playing my collection of CD's and LPs. I need some speakers priced between 5000 and 10000 dollars to go with my 25 watt tube amp. I won't buy Edgars because Bruce once said that bent horns were ok but now apparently they aren't. What should I buy instead?
You see, despite changing his stance on certain issues (I obviously do not keep abreast of such matters, I just base what I say on what I see and hear when I meet him) he still offers music lovers a chance (even if they don't know fully how to get the best from them) to reproduce music at home in an enjoyable way without it costing the earth. That surely is to be commended. |
|
What all that said has to do with buying? I was mocking the relationship between a person who have conceptual and practical knowledge about horns and his hippocratic marketing behavior. I do not call anyone to buy or do not buy his or any other products, this is what you, the audio professionals, exist for. Trey to get it that if you are hypothetical buyer “who is looking for speakers priced between 5000 and 10000 dollars” then you should not talk to me as I do not address these issues… Sorry Guy, I juts do not care or acknowledge this entire subject of the “opinion shaping”. Unfortunately you, the industry folks, are accustomed ONLY to that type of communication protocol….
Rgs,
Romy the Cat
|
|
|
|
Posted by Kerry Brown on
09-16-2005
|
Romy,
Even using " digital dreck " ( and not knowing what " interesting imaging " might be ) my horns image very very well. Only in the sweet spot, but that's fine with me.
For instance, on good recordings I am easily able to hear/see if/when ( and how much ) a singer turns his/her head to the side away from the mic ( listen to Dan Hick's vocals on the first recording by The Hot Club of San Francisco ).
The DEQX digital crossover is quite good. Steep slopes greatly increase clarity, especially at high playback levels. For example, when I play back ' One Second ' by Yello, even at very high levels, I can easily hear lots of detail I had completely missed on track 10 ( ' Dr. Van Steiner ' ) with other crossovers ( including the DEQX programmed w/ gentler slopes ).
( No comments please on my taste in 'music', or lack of same. )
As for Edgar's Machievellian marketing conspiracy ? What better way than planned obsolescence to sell multiple systems to the same customer ( as if ) ?
Customer influence ? Admittedly Bruce was not impressed with his own design initially; the excellent performance of the 80 Hz Edgarhorns was pointed out by a customer who commented that they were " the best thing Edgar had ever done ". Bruce listened to the feedback, gave the horns another chance and liked what he heard. What's wrong with that ?
Throat size ? One of Edgar's notions is one reason vintage horns often/usually sound bad is because the throats are too small. Could be. Who knows ?
I do know that I have never heard better bass from horns.
You might want to try a pair of those 80 Hz horns Romy. If you can set aside your auto-orthodox views for a little while, you might find out you like them. Really. And the 150-4C is an excellent driver. Bruce recommmends it, and if there is a better horn type woofer I have not heard it.
KB
|
|
|
|
Posted by guy sergeant on
09-16-2005
|
buy naltrexone buy naltrexone online usa open
I think that Bruce Edgar's efforts fulfill the role (as far as speakers are concerned) quite well. Reading your comments about him might put some people off which would be a shame because there's very little out there that they can buy (or make themselves) that does the job as well.
I can see where you're coming from. I fully understand your reluctance to endorse anything in particular and your worries about the conflict between 'good sound' and commercial interests. I just think that the site would seem less elitist to newcomers if they could see a way (or ways) to get from where they are to where they perhaps would like to be.
best regards,
Guy
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
09-16-2005
|
| Kerry Brown wrote: | Re: Here we go again! and again and again....
|
|
Kerry, you remind me the Israel Blume, the designer of Coincident Loudspeakers. He kind of nice guy who make small accurate little speakers that work OK in the barbarian rooms of the hi-fi shows. I generally appreciate him, at least he usually has a nice since of humor, without holding himself as ac pompous jerk (the typical illness of the CES crowd) . Still, since Israel deeply in love with the Manley Labs business I do not go into his rooms very frequently (I juts can’t stand that doggy, trying-high-precision-attitude of Eve-Anna Manley) and if I do go there then I stay very little time in there, desperately looking at the door as an escape. It has not a lot to do with sound but rather with the fact that those Manley’s hoodlums are not really my type of crowd. So, the last CES I spent a few second in Blume’s room and run always scared by the Eve-Anna’s high acoustic pressure “cool-chick-wonna to be”… Next days, Israel, caught me somewhere in Alexis Park and told me that that he can demonstrate something extraordinary. I agreed and we when in his room. In there he played to me some kind of recording saying: “Romy, now you will hear something very spacial”. I did hear it and then asked what should I hear. He told me that while the singer was singing she (or he, I do not remember) was moving toward the middle of the stage and he was very inspired that his playback was able to portray it. Well, since he was very moved by it I said thanks left his room. How could I explain to Israel that his entire demonstration was IRRELEVANT as the real imaging is much more complex issue then juts geometrical extension of a sound source within a soundstage?
Rgs,
Romy the Cat
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
09-16-2005
|
| guy sergeant wrote: | | Surely one of the objectives of this site is to allow people to be guided towards good sound by discussing the issues involved in getting there. Whether that entails discussing the merits of different recordings or performances or whether it entails discussing the means of getting the best from those recordings I would have thought that it has to involve presenting opinions about different components…. I just think that the site would seem less elitist to newcomers if they could see a way (or ways) to get from where they are to where they perhaps would like to be. |
|
Nope, there are no objectives in this site; no objectives at all. This forum is juts a public dairy, a blog on the specific subject. Nothing further.
| guy sergeant wrote: | | You have authored articles on SME tonearms, varieties of vacuum tube, getting the best results from particular drivers etc I don't see that expressing those opinions is so far removed from expressing opinions on Edgars speakers or any other components. |
|
And why do you think I would not write the identically “venomous but objective” news releases about the SME or about the Vitavoxes? You really do not know me well if you question my liberalism.
| guy sergeant wrote: | | A careful choice of well conceived (possibly home built but not necessarily so) components should get the keen listener closer to the 'Good |
|
I extremely violently OPPOSE to this sentiment. If YOU wish that people coming to this site should learn something then it would be my main wish that they “get” that the notion you proposed in your statement above is fundamentally false.
| guy sergeant wrote: | | I think that Bruce Edgar's efforts fulfill the role (as far as speakers are concerned) quite well. Reading your comments about him might put some people off which would be a shame because there's very little out there that they can buy (or make themselves) that does the job as well. |
|
Well, I presume that the readers of this site have some evolved understanding of subject and I sincerely hope by “reading someone comments”, including my own, then would not reverse own judgment or actions. If they do… then who care what the do in that case….
Rgs,
The Cat
|
|
|
|
Posted by guy sergeant on
09-17-2005
|
You might write a venous attack on Vitavox but it would be about 12 years too late! You could try to make fun of SME but what would be the point? They are another company who, like them or not, make honest products for ordinary people who want to play music at home. I'm still trying to get to the root of this apparent rage. You seem to have tarred all manufacturers with the same brush almost suggesting that they're all incompetent shysters. Certainly there are many who are but there are some decent products out there although it seems that in your view those products are the result of happy accidents as their manufacturers won't have had a sufficiently evolved method of judging their progress to created those items deliberately.
Why is the statement that suggests people might be able to learn something from this site's contents so offensive? I'm not 'wishing' for it. I couldn't care less. My motivation for reading it's contents is perhaps to learn things from people who know more about some of these subjects than I do. Why is that so unreasonable? If from reading what you write about the Melquaides amplifiers I decide to investigate the possibilities of the 6C33, why is that a bad thing? I might even learn something that is of use to you or others who read what's posted here. Isn't that how the sum of human knowledge grows? Are you against that?
best regards,
Guy
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
09-17-2005
|
| guy sergeant wrote: | | …there are some decent products out there although it seems that in your view those products are the result of happy accidents … |
|
Hm, this is a good way to look at the reality of the things….
| guy sergeant wrote: | | Why is the statement that suggests people might be able to learn something from this site's contents so offensive? |
|
I did say it “offensive”. I said that it isn’t a motivation of my actions and aren’t the objectives of my behavior. Educational value of my (for instance posts) is a subject of perception not the intentions.
| guy sergeant wrote: | | If from reading what you write about the Melquaides amplifiers I decide to investigate the possibilities of the 6C33, why is that a bad thing? |
|
Because the Melquaides Sound has nothing to do with 6C33 and mostly derives from the driver stage. Still, there are so many deadly problems of that miserable Romy’s character…. Do you think we should nail down each of them right here, at the Edgarhorn thread?
Rgs,
The Cat
|
|
|
|
Posted by guy sergeant on
09-18-2005
|
mixing ibuprofen and weed mixing viagra and weed
rgds,
Guy
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
09-18-2005
|
| guy sergeant wrote: | | Nah, this thread is not worthy of such a discussion! |
|
The cult of personality? Why now? I have no problems with it, even more… I like it. Being projected to that silly feline’s cult of personality people with “no cults issues” might learn something useful about themselves, no mater how violently The Cat refuses “to “each”. For instance at this site I spoke during the last few days about quite complex and quite evolved subject: the DPoLS. However, despise of the nobility of the DPoLS subject, the people “without the cults issues” were not able to find anything else to do on this site instead of complaining about the “Audio News”. (I was very surprised with the reaction!) It is funny but I received quite a few emails, including form people who use and enjoy Edgar horns who were very much with me on the subject and they did not find it effective. Ironically none of them is plugged into the industry. Do you feel that I intended to say? Guy, I think you have to take me easier and do not correlate any single world of mine with accounts of somebody’s receivable. Particularly if the “somebody” is perfectly endorse my views. Anyhow, the thread is very much worthy. It does inform quite a lot about the horns. Probably you do not care about the horns and care more about someone abstractive to preserving thier status quo? Well, here is where we apparently see Audio differently.
Rgs,
The Cat
|
|
|
|
Posted by amperidian on
11-17-2006
|
| guy sergeant wrote: | | You might write a venous attack on Vitavox but it would be about 12 years too late! |
|
Why not write about the Vitamix instead then? It may attract an
Emm Labs Harmonizer so that it can produce music and chop vegetables at
same time ... or chop them both together.
|
|
|
|
Posted by amperidian on
11-17-2006
|
Back to the subject of this thread!
I heard some rendition of Dr Edgar's gigantic monsters at the Montreal
show this year (2006) running with Modwright electronics, some 16 wpc
tube amplification (possibly SET). There was in that room also a
gigantic table which reminded me of the famous "Turk" (chess playing
machine developed in the 1800's) without the player ... this turned out
to be the subwoofer of the system.
I walked in the room, hurt my ears for 15 seconds and then out of the
room to talk to the Dr and see why he would bring such diabolical
system here. He told me that it was simply becasue he could not
defeat the laws of physics. "Thank you Dr, you got another audio
dufus convinced here of your illumination" I said and left for good.
Despite my limited amount of exposure in audio and even less with live
unamplified music, I found the sound in that room to be below what I
expected. Hearing a lot about horns, I thought that audio nirvana
was about to pay me a visit when I entered the room. Instead,
both my wife and I were immediately greeted with a severely metallic
treated treble, which although very open sounding, made me look for 2
pairs of earplugs ... but to my surprise I was told that the audio
morons in the room had already tossed them all out the window because
their ears were already filled with wax and they didn't need them. The
only positive impression I got was that there was a general lack of
congestion in the midrange, however the music selection was some small
trio jazz ensemble and not an accurate reflection of a true
orchestra. Also, the volume was too high, which probably resulted
from poor sound correlation and room anomalies. NO INTEGRITY.
ZERO. I forgot about the bass ... it was like a never ending and
loose sounding earthquake.
Going back home, I was wandering what Dr Edgar meant about the laws of
physics. He further explained to me at the show that you cannot
get accurate bass from a small driver and that was why he had created
this enormous contrapture with a driver that measured either 15" or 18".
OK, so he may have been experimenting to see if the small room that
they had at FSI could generate an earthquake of magnitude 6 or 7 on
Richter scale, acting like a resonant bass chamber with mouth at door
of room. Maybe his system may have more favorable results in
larger room, but I cannot understand these manufacturers bringing their
products to the show and cramming them in a small space with listening
position in VERY near field (due to room size) and then looking around
proudly and hyping their own products despite the horrible
sonic excrementation being produced next to them. This industry sucks.
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
05-01-2013
|
|
fiogf49gjkf0d
Bruce Edgar have officially retired and ended up his long career
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/hug/messages/16/165931.html
Say whatever you want but Bruce is distinctive maker and I do like him a lot, even I disagree with some of his products. Unfortunately the majority of his clients were ether bottom eaters or just simplistic audio-idiots, Bruce well know sit. Whatever it was Bruce was the one who very much advanced horn thinking around the world and in contrary to many retarded audio builders he actually the person who could hear and the most important who can understand what he hears/listen.
The Cat
|
|