Looking at the pictures of CES I came across a new Seoul-based company Silbatone Acoustics that show off a new speaker “APORIA” in Vegas. It is a back-loaded Manger.

What I read the company philosophy I was not pleased.

http://silbatoneacoustics.com/index.htm

I am not a huge fun of all those people who suck in the “unsurpassed sound of 1920s-1940s theater”.  I call them “Warehouse Audio” – they collect all that vintages garbage and staff themselves with mostly bogus legends but with each eBay bay and with each fraction of subordination to the 1830s WE, RCA or Telefunken cult the actual sound that they accomplish is more and more further from what I might call “interesting sound” . All those vintage suffers demonstrate the same cookie-cutter sonic surrogate-result in their rooms and what is the most important the surrogate of thinking about audio that I found incredibly boring. So, when I read the Silbatone’s introduction and looked at this picture I felt that it shell be a waste of time.

When I start read about the APORIA speaker that Silbatone Acoustics promotes as today’s version of their sound I was almost certain what they would say. This trans never was late and the playbook is well known: the custom commercial driver that later turn out to be not custom, to insistence that the speaker sets “the new standard in full range horn reproduction for today’s listener” and the desire to present shortcoming as the virtues (“excessive sensitivity can give rise to problems, including noise issues and limited usable volume control range”, Realsy?)

Still, despite my disagreement with the Silbatone people (come on, anyhow who state that a so-called single-driver speaker might be “new benchmark in musical experience in the home” is an unequivocal idiot in my view) I realized that I never heard a horn-loaded Manger and it might be fan to hear how it does.

I know CES show is not the best please to hear anything but if somebody heard Silbatones then let me know if they sound different from the army of Lowther, Fostex, Supravox, Jordans, LES, AER, PHY-HP, Feastrex and the rest  similar so-called full-range drivers.

As the writer of the above-referenced propaganda, I am pleased to once again tweak the whiskers of the cat.

First off, this is promotional material so what the heck do you expect? Every brochure offers a new benchmark in performance or it is not doing the job.

Your post is about the words and mental pictures --"fetishes" if you will-- that Silbatone uses to persuade, but your critique of this sort of thinking is based on an equally stupid generalized picture of "vintage system."

Have you heard a WE full range horn? A Mirrophonic system with 594A drivers and two 18" electrodynamic woofers per side? This stuff ain't Altec--and I say that as a long time lover of Altec speakers.  These big WECO systems provide a very dramatic and sophisticated listening experience that is very different from high end gear or the general run of pro sound speakers.

I always argue for the priority of actual listening experience over language games or general philosophy, even though I do them all myself.  Thinking and talking about audio are  far removed from direct experience but this is what humans do to process the world. A category term like “horn” or “vintage audio” is a complicated thought module that has less utility the more general it gets and these descriptors get loaded with all manner of ideological associations, leaving us even further from the raw taste of sound coming out of a particular speaker in a specific place and time.

That said, enough philosophy! I'll try to relate my experience of this Manger back horn from my perspective.

Personally, I feel that the quality of the APORIA horn has little technically to do with the ancient Western Electric designs that inspired it, except in a very general way. Sonically, the Aporia shares the smooth, fluid character of a WE horn driven by antique WE triode amps but the real key is the Manger drive unit which is a much more modern innovation (1970s, I believe).

The Manger is very different from Lowthers and other paper fullranges. It is very balanced and not peaky at all. Lowthers are lots of fun to experiment with but it seems the Manger is less idiosyncratic sonically, although it is a unique piece of design work, and ultimately a more successful approach.

I ignored the Manger all these years because I was scared off by the low sensitivity when my own systems were mostly built around low powered amplifiers. The APORIA will run on a 300B very comfortably.

I just spent a week listening to the APORIA at CES. Many visitors knew the Manger driver and for them our big success was to do something special with the driver. For me, a non-Mangerphile, I was impressed with the platform. Very smooth and balanced, controlled without being overdamped, and clear without being bright and harsh. Vaguely reminiscent of the old Quad ESL in some intangible way, but more focused and dynamic.

Without the diffusor we put on the front of the driver, the Manger was a bit "in your face" and stood out too much from the back loaded LF. Bass was quite good but I would want to hear the speaker in a better room and a quieter environment to judge the subtleties of sub 50hz performance.

The driver is custom in the sense that Silbatone customizes it for the application, just as a "custom car" is aftermarket modified.  This is an American usage that might be lost on non-native speakers so I changed the wording to "customized."

Basically, what Silbatone does is add fixtures to the back of the driver to optimize for back horn loading. On the Manger, the LF backwave comes out of a different place than the HF backwave. There are also characteristics of the backwave that require attention, because it is not as well-behaved as the front wave. In a back horn, you must contend with aspects of the driver that do not matter in a normal front-firing

The main problem with the APORIA is that it is too freaking expensive to build the way Silbatone does things and that translates into a "crazy rich man" retail price. I suspect that the driver is a good candidate for Lowther style DIY work, but here we go again with the box problems. Few manufacturers and fewer hobbyists have access to the materials research and manufacturing capabilities of Silbatone Acoustics. It is a division of a big corporation with serious high-tech resources and their goal is to build real cost-no-object equipment.

As a man of the people, I recognize that low production, high-$ luxury gear like this matters little to most of us, but we can always rip off the good ideas for our own purposes and means. On that level, the back horn Manger deserves more hobbyist attention.

Joe,

The “decoration” you described came from the fact that you wrote your message on MS Word that adds ugly formatting when you paste it into native HTML editors. I also write in Word and I uselessly before I unload my posts I paste my Word’s text into any plain text field and then copy it from there. It kills the nasty MS World formatting. I have back-end scheduled procedure that cleans up the MS World formatting, so you text is fine now.

Regarding the subject. I am not familiar with properly performing Mirrophonic installation. I heard different versions of WE sound but I have a lot of problem with them. The problems I have is not necessarily with the equipment (and I have to confess that do have disagreement with many WE ideas) but rather with people around the WE cult.  I stand for “authored” sound that is tailored to satisfy creative objective of system builder/listener. The WE cult do not stand for sense of own objectivity but they rather are subordinated to external, mostly extremely poor quality and low demands dogmas.  There is no questions that some idea that WE, RCA, Klangfilm, Bell, Telefunken  use before WWII were very much worth to capitalized upon but the “WE Cult” does not recognize good from bad. They are completely saturated with “vintage syndrome” and it is absolutely imposable to talk with them about the actual Sound.

Regarding the Silbatone. I appreciate that you wrote that marketing blab and that you admit a certain element of none-seriousness in it. Yes, the rule of the engagement dictates that hoodlums when they go to the commercial audio sites shell be exposed to a certain amount of verbs and adjectives in order do not be turned off.  I probably shell be less critical about it and do not bite an easy prey….

I do admit that I do not know Manger drivers. I heard them in 2-ways a few times, it was from “nothing special” to “compressed like hell” but I never paid more attention to them. Perhaps your Silbatone people did found a new way to use the Manger and it is possible that in this Silbatone horn the Manger doe not sound like Manger. Still, Joe, it will be no matter what a single drive in the ugly duplex application. I do not make any sonic claims about Silbatone but how much complexity might be expected from a single driver? We have an army of people who practice diminishing own requirements in order to meet a capacity of the next Foxtex, Lowther or Feastrex . They might be good MF drivers if used properly but why to push them to do what they did not mean to do.  Did you ever try to play with flute the party of contrabassoon? Why not?

The point is that in my view (and this is very prejudicial) no matter how good the Silbatone people cooks the Manger driver they still are the salves of the single driver topology that they chose to employ. I have to note that the topology that has no other advantages then low cost and low efforts to implement.

Here is what we hit an interesting point. If you read my site then I know that I am a proponent of the vision of “cost per topology”.  In my critics of $160K Lamm ML3 amps I expressed my view that a SET amp is reasonable to be as expensive as let say $10K for nowadays prices.  If it cost more than it become topologically devaluated as DSET topology for higher price is able to deliver much better result. The same is with Feastrex for instance – the might be wonderful MF drivers that are very good to listen  Piazzola quarters at 80dB  in the speakers that one built for 30 minutes and that juts dropped in the room for X-max party. How mach this speaker shell cost? Ok, $5K. OK, 10K. OK, 15K if it is a X-max party in Haliburton. But to have a price tag of $50K per driver I think it is an evidence that  the people who make them do not understand the limitation of the single driver topology. Now, now much the single-driver driven Silbatone cost?

Joe Roberts wrote:

The Manger is very different from Lowthers and other paper fullranges. It is very balanced and not peaky at all. Lowthers are lots of fun to experiment with but it seems the Manger is less idiosyncratic sonically, although it is a unique piece of design work, and ultimately a more successful approach.

Joe,

A few comments I need to make.

First, about the WE.  I think it is a bit cheap, to bring to the table with me the arguments of the level that the “editor of the biggest and most influential magazine in the world, Stereo Sound, who can get anything…. but he goes with the antique WECO heavy metal.” You know yourself that it is chip and contra-productive but you do it, I wonder why. You are famine with the Japanese scene and the stupid prestige kitsch they have with WE. So, what?  I was in there and I have seen the attitude of the people toward to those thighs – I did not feel that it was a healthy breeding ground for interesting sound cooking, not to mention that I generally have a tendency do not like the sound Japanese get.

http://www.romythecat.com/GetPost.aspx?PostID=1959

I hardly feel you would be to convey to me anything new about WE. The engineers at the WE time did not do the right things BUT they did not learn yet to do the wrong things. This is the only advantage that I see in some of the vintage gear.  Still, I feel that the demands of the commercial sound reproduction in 30 were way beyond the demands of home listening of our days and therefore whatever the best companies on the 70-year past did I more recognize as tools then the solution. I would prose to put the WE subject aside in context of this thread. Let keep the year on the ball and stay with Silbatone.

Second, about the prices. Yes, you are right – it is all relative and the $90K for a single driver speaker is not too much different than $15K for an interconnect with a foam isolation socked in urine of an adolescent pregnant camel. Oh, did I mention that the camel was impregnated by the ““editor of the biggest and most influential magazine in the world” and he impregnate anything he world but he have chosen the camel? Anyhow, returning back to sincerity. I think you and I use prices differently. You use price as a sale tool. I use price as scale to get a justification for topological complexity. With all your rational that Silbatone has a reasonable price within the ocean of price tag stupidity of high-end audio (and you might be correct) the Silbatone still remains a full-range-single-driver speaker.

Third, the Silbatone.  It might be good full-range-single-driver, it might beat the Lowther (is it really difficult?) but it still spinning somewhere in the single-driver universe with all sad consciences. I am sure that we all found that Handicap Olympics champions are very inspiring but we do not define the capacity of human athletics by the results of the Handicap Olympics champions. Silbatone is just another attempt to make a single driver to reproduce the whole frequency range. It might be good attempt but I personally consider the entire philosophy of minimum drivers is faulty one. Pay attention that no one ever comes up with justification that a single-driver has any advantages. The justifications people are trying to bring are incredibly bogus (like he single point source and etc…) and do not stand ground under more any rational and critical examination. There is the only positive moment of the single-driver is, as I said above – it might be simple, inexpensive and not demanding. So, therefore I think that any single-driver speaker that jumps outside of the scale of being “low-priced audio” I think define own class and disqualifiers itself.

Still, and It shell be stressed that I never heard the Silbatones and I never heard the horn loaded Manger, allegedly modified. I however, heard a great number of single-driver speakers. Do you think that Silbatone is not a single-driver speaker?

Joe, I think I would battle it.

I would not be so certain. Mostly the SUV sized bass horns are notoriously bad sounding despite of the assurances of the system owners overwhelmed with so common in audio endowment effect. Not to mention that the Stage Accompany tweeter is disgustingly compressed. The point is that words describing brands of abstract implementations where consciousness not involved do not define sound. One of my disagreements with the direction your former magazine went was exactly this disassociation between hype of the “engineering of audio solutions” and “consciousness engineering of Sound”.  You feel that naming of topology or a brand automatically implies the “promise of a tiny slice of heaven”? It is not my vision.   Let see how it all related to Silbatone.

 I do not know what Silbatone’s challenge was and what motivated them to do what they did. I do not know what among is writhen at the Silbatone’ site is written as the expressionism of true Silbatone ideas and what was composed juts to fulfill the primitive expectations of “lured to audio public”. In any case let start and stop from a fact that Silbatone is a single-driver speaker. I do not know: it might be a good single-driver speaker and 34335 Lowther’s devotee would experience multiple orgasms when they exposed to Silbatone sound. Can in such case the phrase: “We get Lowther’s listeners off harder” be used by the Silbatone people as a company slogan? Anyhow, Joe, I do not think that you shell spend too much efforts to convince me and others that there is a lot of bad audio out there. I do not think that this fact you would like to use as your justification of the Silbatone’s advances.

Joe Roberts wrote:

…. it doesn't matter if it is a single driver speaker. It is just a speaker. What you are listening to then and there.

Yes, it is a rational view but are you sure that you are willing to use this literature at the site that concentrates at the “advanced audio and evolved music reproduction techniques”?  If you wiling people to judge your Silbatone not as a reportedly good single driver speaker but just as just a speaker then how would you explain that Silbatone simplifies sound? How do I know if I never heard the Silbatone? Well, any single-driver speaker does, the point-source by nature simplifies sound. You can’t go away with it - it is the topology. I can go to the endless hypothesis why it takes place but is it really necessary. Pay attention that  your Silbatone people with all their experience do talk a lot about complex archeology of speaker history, drool saliva about the playback for “Fantasia”, roll eyes from a loudspeaker system that were designed to  be transparent  to “transmit  the hypnotizing voice of Fuehrer”  but false to recognize the fact that single-driver loudspeaker unload complexity from  sound back-proportional with depth of bandwidth. BTW, this heavy dedication on semi-superfluous  goals was something that I found was a shortage out your formal publication – it was the process for sake of process, but again - I am not a huge fun of DIY movement generally.

Joe Roberts wrote:

But in discussions about the Korean market, I hear that many people do count the drivers when judging price. How can a single driver cost as much as a 3 way? This cost per typology thinking has a lot of traps in it and it is one of the things that Silbatone is trying to battle. It has uses as a metric but it is very easy to misapply or go too far with the quantative logic of value ratios.

I think you are fighting virtual enemies and you do it just because you feel comfortable in this unnecessary battle. I do not “do count the drivers” and my “cost per typology” thinking does not mean what you describe. The irony that you know it very well and you know what I meant.

Joe Roberts wrote:

So, imagine an alternative logic where the goal is to have a listener say "I don't like single drivers but the Aporia is different" or "I think SE 300B amps are junk but the Silbatone is better than my $75k Audio Research 75 watt whatever whatever" or " I never thought an 8W would play my Wilson WATT." They are out there trying to evangelize for the cause and showing off a little bit, winning people over to low power approaches, deconstructing mainstream audio marketing nonsense, and injecting their own extremist vision into the dialogue. This is why they are so concerned with having horn speakers that are friendly to big amps, and why we are presenting moderate or adequate sensitivity as a virtue. They are trying to spread the horn message to non-triode freaks, to encourage a listen.

So, you propose do not approach Silbatone as horn loudspeakers, despite to the fact that it uses horn loading. I might admit that it might be a ration way to go. It has no sensitively, no cone compliance, uses a limited dynamic range driver with dipole radiation. Would it be a good replacement for paper cone drivers? Why not if the Silbatone guys did good job.  But are we massaging technologies just for sake of massaging? Saying it I do not deny that Silbatone folk might in fact get a very good sound out of their Manger but here is an interesting twist: would the Silbatone speaker better if the Silbatone folks using all this best intention use an complimentary tweeter and a complains LF section for their loudspeaker. The honest answer to this question contains all foundation of my disagreement with what Silbatone does. Sure, with two more drivers the Silbatone would be another speaker but the “Silbatone as is” is not $5K easy-drop monitors but a near $100K loudspeaker that in my frugal view represent a serious “investment per objective”.  Here is where my “cost per typology” kicks in.

Joe Roberts wrote:

On the eternal WE question, all I can say is that 98% of people who like or don't like Western Electric sound actually never heard a proper Western system and quite possibly heard no actual WE gear at all. If you take a 555 driver and stick it on an Altec horn with a threaded adaptor, as I have done, this is NOT a Western Electric system, especially if you only have one channel with that flea market find. It is a WE part. These parts were installed carefully designed theater systems with purpose designed xovers and huge elaborate baffles. The parts can be good for Altec type experiments but then the systems engineering contribution of ERPI gear is not in play. Western Electric delivers the coup de grace when you fire up some music and ask "Why the HELL does this sound so good?" There is no logical reason for it. It is old. It looks like Thomas Edison's lab. It is not even a compression driver but a "Loud Speaking Telephone." I still don't know the answer to why it works so good. It is mysterious stuff. That's the point. The listening experience. "Experts" stand before a WE system and laugh at the old junk, then when the music comes on their jaw hits their shoe. I did it to hi-end nuts in the 80s with 124 amps and 755A in slant front wall cabinets. HaHa ha...Patsy Cline record...BANG! WTF!? The WE theater gear is on a different order of magnitude. The designer of a very famous British loudspeaker recently visited the Silbatone collection, laughed at first, and then almost died when he heard Mirrophonic. Now he is super interested in field coil speakers. Again, I am cured of the mania but I must recognize that Western Electric speakers are among the best. There is nothing like a TA4181 field coil woofer. I guess you had to be there to appreciate what I am saying. I love 416s but they are toys compared to 4181s. So what does it mean that this Japanese editor uses Western? MY reading is that he puts the listening experience first then goes where his ears told him to go. I don't think he is following a cult trend...if anything he is spearheading it. His "Editors Choice" is something you can't even buy, that comes from an ancient civilization. I am willing to grant the guy respect that he chose what he likes and I appreciate that there is a license in that to pursue your own taste. He can have anything...why would he slum out with inferior antique junk just to make some obscure cultural point?

Joe, I would leave the whole Western Electric saga without attention as it is the Silbatone thread. If you look at my site then you know that I “try” to keep it threads-centric. I just would say that I disagree with you and I would have a lot of say to argue this point. If you wish we can do it in an appropriate thread.

Joe Roberts wrote:

… don't criticize the speaker for not being something else with more drivers or a ribbon instead of a diaphragn or whatever. What is there for your ears? This is hard for people like us to do. We say "Aha, single Manger in a backhorn....hmmm..." then flip through the index cards in our brain. Isolate frequency ranges for detailed critique. Mentally compare Manger and Lowther, even though Lowther is not there and has nothing to do with the occasion.

Yes, your point is well taken. What can I say – I never heard them. I do not feel myself guilty. If I did then I would sound much more confident. I based my comments on my experience with another single-driver speaker. I also base my comments on my experience (here is where read my lips) with any other case where I was proposed that the new solution “does not sound like single-driver speaker”. As many times I heard the “solution” it was always the case – the single-driver speaker problem was resolved… until the dynamic range jumped over 80dB. As soon it happened Mozart begin to sound like Johan Strauss’ polkas, the Allegro con brio from Beethoven Second Symphony begin to sound like Offenbach's can-can and the Shostakovich 8th quartet sounds like Piazzolla’s “Escualo”. But what do I know I am still a virgin as I never cried listening the Mirrophonic….

Joe Roberts wrote:

For all the limitations, single-drivers can get me to this place or at least they have at certain points of my journey. This only works if you listen to them on their own merits rather than mentally comparing the Edgarhorn 4 way system or the TAD 4004 with a transmission line bass.

You forgot to mention that the Edgarhrns are 9 times less expensive….

Joe Roberts wrote:

I am not sure this is a fair question because the scale of a big horn is so impressive that nothing really compares on sheer impact. It cannot be ignored. it is a different game. The good single driver experience is a more subtle and intimate affair, not for the circus.

Saying it you knowledge the handicap nature of “good single driver experience”, do you. If you are able to cry while your Mirrophonic system plays a suffocate girl with a balalaika at the right and school-stolen mid-dram on the left then be my guest. I hardly feel that the “single driver experience” is good for anything else at least above 85dB. Sure if you play in a closer then it is another story… Sorry, can’t help to mock you a little.

Joe Roberts wrote:

Maybe the Aporia experiment will get people to give the single-driver topology a first listen or, in some cases, a second chance. The Manger driver does bring a new flavor to the art and beats the famous paper cones in some respects. The five-figure manufacturing cost of a pair Aporia horns is a serious effort to provde the best foundation for the driver to do its thing. And it is wild looking enough to get people to pay attention.  An interesting and educational product, I think.

Agree, educational, No argument there.

First thing first. I was running under impression that the cost of Silbatone Aporia under $100K. I was looking where I might get this impression from. I am sure it was a comment at some CES blog but I was looking and was not able to found it. Most likely I confused the Silbatone price with the price of the new speaker from that miserable Magico Company. Anyhow, if you say that it is $30k then it is very different ball game. The $30k retail is around low teens in wholesale and a few thousands to makes them. I found it justifiable and marginally to be in a right cost per topology ratio. I know, I know, you will be jumping over it claiming that for the sound they produce they sell coast 1.000,000 and the $30k is grossly underpriced but it is the cost how you value your own reported micro-orgasm not the cost of the loudspeaker. Let agree that the price of $30k is reasonable and move away from this. BTW, it is also not necessary to convince me that the cost of Aporia prodaction is super-high as the curves of the Silbatone horns are licensed from the layout of the corridors in the Egyptian pyramids and the paint that Silbatones are fished with is made from dyeing agent of octopus that lives only at south shore Jeju in Yellow see.

I also a bit turned off that you took the word Lowther literally and feel that I try to assume that Silbatone is the same as the Lowther. I thought it was clear that Lowther is a symbolic name for a single-driver idea and in this respect Silbatone is not different from Lowther. I did not make any accusation prosing that Silbatone might inherent all nastiness of the Lowther drivers.  The Feastrex reportedly do not have any of Lowther problems but it is still has all limitation of own class – the single-driver class. How different the Silbatone would be? I do not the answer but still let acknowledge that it is still a single-driver class loudspeakers.   You might argue it if you wish but I do not use the single-driver phrase as a insult but rather the term that sets expectations.

I do not think that there is a reason to continue to beat the dead horse. You had your desire to announce your view on the Silbatone subject. I had my desire to pay attention to the new horn-loaded Manger idea. I think if any of us had an interest to develop this desiccation further then the next step would be you and me sit in the same room, listening of the same loudspeakers and compare the notes about the heard. Without it all conversations are just shaking air with boneless tang and exchange of worthless epistolary.  I would reserve my further judgment about Silbatone, still having my expectation not too high. If you with to convince me that I am wrong then let me know when Silbatone installation become available somewhere near USA’s New England – I would not mine to drive short distance to listen them and then we would have a common ground for conversation about back horn-loaded Manger.

Joe Roberts wrote:

If by "reduction of complexity" you mean to say that single drivers play small to medium scale music better than they play dense large scale, yes they are like this and so are all other speakers.

I very much disagree with it.

Joe,

I personally very much disagree with my own comment that for two people objectively assess a speaker would be possible ONLY with two parties are sitting in the same room and listening to the same installation. I did propose it as a “remedy” in context of our conversation about Silbatones but I made this conclusion just as I understood that this exchange goes to nowhere. In reality there are very much objective and free from corruption of personal perception methodologies of audio assessments. I did not see you nether used them in past (I am familiar with your views only by your articles) not express any interest to evolve on the subjects of audio evaluations. So, therefore I think the only plausible solution would be to sit in the same room and to point fingers to the specifics as many people have no idea what they listen while they are listening.

Deriving from what I said in the paragraph above I refuse to support the notion that the idea of “good mental pornography might be different” between the people. Yes, the idea of mental pornography is different but the idea of fidelity of music interpretation is very much uniformed. Any more or less worthy musician or music listener around the world have very little ambiguity about the “rightness” of musical ideas presentations. The transparency (or at the higher level - expressivity) by acoustic systems the attack of a performing event upon the musical ideas is one of the criteria of my evaluations and I care less how much a speakers better or worth then Lowthers.  Anyhow, it is much further subject then how good Silbatone’s bass and how much plastic coloration it has. If you would like to read more about my views on the subject then read about the narration about my Macondo:

http://www.romythecat.com/MacondoAcousticSystem.aspx

At this point let settle that Silbatone is some kind of single-driver loudspeaker that used a new type of driver and make the common claims that it is not just a “single-driver loudspeaker”. If I have a change I would certainly listen it or even better I would wait for the Silbatone Aporia MKII that would cost twice more and would have a channel above and a channel below.

One more thing that I would like to pass to you as to the person who runs marketing for Silbatone.  If you would like the people with no-nonsense perception pay attention to your (I mean Silbatone) statements then try to be specific and definite. If you feel that Manger is the key element of your speaker and if you feel that the alleged customization that Silbatone did on Manger is a critical element of the Silbatone design then have ball to talk about it. I do not propose you to divulge what exactly was done with Manger but I do insist that as soon a person refers to the fact that the Manger was “customized” then the person shell enumerate what specific sonic attributes of the default Manger were improved and what specific sonic shortcomings of default Manger were eliminated. This way a person who is familiar with Manger will have own judgment if the “claims of customizing”, also with other things are serious.  That what I call “no BS marketing” and it is very far from telling the stories about people coming suicides after listening Deep Purple on a playback with the Silbatone’s on the right channel and WE’s electromagnet on the left channel.

-  I did whatever I could, I whispered to him the most seducing, but he refused it.
-  Whatever you whispered to him I know, - replied Voland, – but it was not the most seducing.
However, I would say to you, - smiling he referred to Master, - that your novel still will bring surprises to you.
Michael Bulgakov “Master and Margarita” (link)

Joe,

I appreciate the invitation. I frankly have no specific interest about Korea, despite that reputation about the Korea hookers is stronger than the reputation of Western Electric. I hope your Korean friends do not feel offended – I just did not develop any itching curiosity about Korea. I do have the “itching curiosity” about South America where I am planning to go but that is a different side of the map…

I am sure that Korea is some kind of Asian oasis of audio and has more hi-fi shops per capita then Amsterdam has diamond cutters but frankly speaking a critical mass of EMT927 tables within a sq. foot of country surface does not ignite a chains reaction in me that would make me to jump like a wounded in ass antipope to “see” it. I admit that in 90s I was different and I did travel in search for those “sharp audio sensations”. The problem with me at that time was that I did not know what I was looking for. I think I know now and I know that what I am looking does not arrive just after 20 hours of flying somewhere, sponsored by the 600 scientists and a few wily marketing chess moves. I found it kind of disconcerting that you guys extend invitations to me forgetting to promise/imply a noble amplitude of own sonic accomplishment but instead do not forget to promise that I will “see more audio gear in one day than I have seen in my life”. Did I impress you as a junky form the AudioHeritage.com web site who gets off from the pictures of the Akihabara debris? 

I do like your assurance that I might hear “stuff I never encountered before” but I do not like the word “stuff”" in there. Might be I read too much in what you say but, Joe, you never talk about Sound and only talk about the toys to severe external sonic amusement. So, I read in your words no more then you put in them. Also knowing that your entire interest about the this subject is purely conceptually-commercial I have to take under the consideration the coloration of your judgment, not as much about the Silbatone but more about my expectation that I have to leverage. I truly do not know that referents points the you use and you give no pointers of reference.

I still would consider visiting your Silbatone folks if I found myself in your part of the world if they still have interest in me then (the last one was very loaded comment). If I do so then I would certainly NOT take them upon the accommodations and entertainment (come on, I do not play those stupid games, invite Srajan the Ebayen  (link) for that whoreshit).

I think that listening that “promised land” WE system and perhaps for an appetizer the back-loaded Manger would be an educational and I hope for both of us. I am sure you and your Silbatone folks would also find edifying my explanations what in the sound of their speakers and the sound of Mirrophonic is not how it might/shell be. Still, all of it is a globe-away and in the place where I was not intended to go. Even with all my desire to treat my ego by “helping” you guys with Sound I think that to sacrifice 20+20 hours in plain would be too much suffering. 

Once again, I do appreciate the invitation and  if I were in your neighborhood then I will try to abuse your hospitality.

Joe, I do appreciate that that invitation is open-ended and I might take advantage of it sometimes. Frankly I do not feel any specific temptations that I need to “drop everything” and to run to another side of the globe to audition the Silbatone. The Silbatone folks might feel an urge to show off their speaker to many people and might understand it, women do the same when they buy a new dress and what to show them off, but the existence of a new opportunity is not a motivation for employment of the opportunity. The fact that the new Manger loading is available is a good fact, so what? The new ways of sound reproductions and new drivers invented each year, even I invented two. Does it make us, the users, have a need to families ourselves with everything? I do not think so, sure if the opportunity will come then why not – the more divert experience the merrier, but the fact that somebody load a new horn is not something the made me to lose sleep.

Also you and your Korean friends are wrong if your feel that criticize Silbatone. I do not. I mildly mocked the WE fetish at the Silbaton’s site and I do criticize the single-driver topology in general. If it sound as my direct “criticizing” of Silbatone then I think it is the problem of perception not expression as I had no intention to “condemn” anything about Aporia specifically. I just never thought about it deeper then the fact that it is a single-driver speaker.

The Mirrophonic aspect of the Korean’s projects sounds more interesting. I did heard and analyzed the WE speakers elements a few time, never was pleased with them but I never heard the complete original Mirrophonic installation set up by the WE’s snobs. (In thins connotation the word snob did not mean to offend).  I never heard it and my initials reaction was that it might be interesting, particularly after reading your flowery literatures about “Mirrophonic shock”. Then, before I initially replied to your invitation I decided to perform a minor really check.

Pay attention: you stress the Mirrophonic hype but you do not acknowledge the contra-arguments, stressing the people ignorance with the pure WE’s results. Did you ever think how good the very same WE, RCA, Klangfilm, Telefunken gear might be if those people who made  the gear did not targeted to low standard movie reinforcement system but used all their taste and all their materials to fulfill the high-demands of contemporary home sound reproduction? Do I need to name you many compromises of the movie reinforcement objectives and the design shortcomings of those systems? Or perhaps you drop the mask of ignorance from your face and admit that you do understand and know all of it yourself, perhaps many years before I even discover it? Joe, I did read some of your Altec articles that indicate that you do have a lucid sight on those subjects, so use it.

There is something more in the subject of your promised “WE’s brain ejaculation”.   After reading your invitation I called to a friend of mine who had a lot of exposure to a LOT of vintage gear. When I say a lot I really mean it and in his case I might also presume that whatever he own or owned you probably never have seen.  We have differences in views with him and I found many of his audio outlooks conditional but he is not a fool and generally has an atypical for audio level of sincerity. The reason why I called him because I was trying to validate with his experiences your “Western Electric mania” and to leverage my expectations before I “drop everything and run to listen the Mirrophonic” . Hi did hear a number of absolutely esthetic and very seriously installed WE systems, I mean the complete systems, up to the very fine details, assembled and supported by absolutely obsessed fanatics. They were not just the complete WE systems but the very biggest and the most expensive of among the WE did. If you know the WE world (and you were one of the people who propelled it) then you might already know where he heard them). What makes him particularly in this perspective interesting that he also heard the one-before-the-current reiteration of my own playback and knows where I am coming from. We also together with him heard one of those “perception changing” playback system as few years back, so, we have some common references and we can fill the same words with the same meanings. So, I called him and asked abot his opinion if it truly would be “orgasmatick” for me to fly to Korea and to lose my virginity about the presumably properly set up WE Mirrophonic gear. He knows what I was exposed to, he generally has an idea what I have in my own room and he well knows the possible results from the Mirrophonic installation. So, he suggested that it will be NOT overly exiting for me and NOT eye-opening. He did mention that WE have a number of positive moments but it will be for me as far from a “revelation” as… I predict. So, I do not mind to drive 2 hours, hear the results and to talk about the Sound but I do not know if I even consider to invest 20 hours to fly in one way. Not to mention that no one promised an interesting talks about Sound in Korea…. So if it happens then it happens but I see no reason to instigate anything at this point.

Joe Roberts wrote:

South America is a valid destination. If you do it right it can be almost audio-free.

I would propose this quote of yours as the best thing that you ever have written. I really mean.

Joe Roberts wrote:

Certainly, this sincere invitation was offered in part because they found you an interesting Cat, but I think that the offer was also inspired by the fact that you are writing pages of critique on items that you have not, in fact, ever heard.

Joe Roberts wrote:

I don't NEED the best anymore. I just NEED some music. Anybody wants to chat, PM me or via my "commercial" email jr@silbatoneacoustics.com.

drdna wrote:

It might also be instructive to have Joe visit Boston and listen to Romy's system, but I bet he would not go either.

Probably, it would be instructive but I really do not want it to be as some kind of competition between the installations or a competition  ofthe methods to prove/illustrate compare each other reference points. I generally have tendency to do invite and do not play my playback for audio visitors if the specific of listening objectives are defined. I do not recognize any specific audio interests in Joe comments and I see no musical objective in his expressions. I am very far in understanding of audio as the “Rolling Stones playing live at Yankee Stadium on Western Electric triode”, so to me is more important what was in the eyes of beholder in order to interpret his/her definition of Truth.

Anyhow, I do not know what drive Joe in his Silbatone verbal creativity.  Was it the Silbatone actual performance or was it the scrupulous calculation of Google return order and the desire do live the Silbatone criticism of skepticism without answers,. The second reason is not necessary a bad one but I does not require the “actual listening” to found a common ground for judgment.

So, anyhow, I guess I am obligated not to extend my invitation to the virtual and silent Joe’s Korean folks. I kind of do it but I would like to warn that I by default am not in love with people just because then know what the different between grid and plate, know by heart the biography of Guglielmo Marconi  or memorized all VTF for all  versions of SPU cartridges. If you guys feel that you might impress me with something more than feel free to abuse my hospitality what you found yours in Boston. I am sure that if you found you as the “interesting listeners” then I will be able to demonstrate something that you might find worth to experience.

Joe Roberts wrote:

I thought I was quite clear about my evaluation program: Put it on. Play some music. Does it present a compelling emotional experience of musical enjoyment for me? If yes...GOOD! If no, maybe somebody else will like it. This for me is the CORE musical evaluation. All this other hogwash about bandwidth and whatnot is physics, not music. Sound, not music. Missing the main point of musical reproduction, musical enjoyment.

This is absolutely not my view, in fact the I very much in opposition with this view.

Joe Roberts wrote:

True that I have not yet figured out how to write this evaluation program in an outline form. Actually, I gave up trying because one sentence is enough. If you try to catch the butterfly, you kill it.

..and it come from a person who is in academics? Hm….

Joe Roberts wrote:

My main point is that if you have not heard "X," your long distance review of "X" is highly suspect. "You" here is not pointing to our feline host...doesn't matter who it is.

Well, Joe, I do not think you have seen me to “write a review”. I usually very specific in my critiques but I also have good memory. According to my memory I do not criticized Silbatone speaker but rather expressed my disrespect to a full-driver speakers.

Joe Roberts wrote:

So what I found most interesting about the Silbatone speaker is that it sounds VERY DIFFERENT from any other speaker I have heard. It explodes the notion of "single-driver" speaker as sounding this way or that. It was a NEW experience.

It is possibly, but at the same time I can copy and paste a number of the absolutely identical comments from other single-driver speakers’ manufacturers of marketing people who come up with absolutely indistinguishable assurances. Furthermore, some of them (among trios who it not deaf or Moron) while maintaining the public single-driver evangelist position in private conversation asked me to shut up saying: “Come on Romy, what else did you expected from a single-driver speaker?” So, I do not say anything bad about the Silbatone, I did not heard them, but I would point out that the only two questions that I proposed above you to ask yours about the Silbatone you left with answers.

Joe Roberts wrote:

This surprise experience is one of the great thrills audio can provide. This was the thing that once drove me to write.

Joe, I need to make here a remark that you will not like. If you would like to be treated by me with any grain of seriousness then you need to demand from yourself a higher level of honesty about yourself. You were driven to write not because the reported “orgasmtick experiences with Silbatone of yours” and you know it very well. Come on, let stop it. I am a feline, not a 12 years one human.

Joe Roberts wrote:

I looked around the site and I think there is some useful perspective here, but no final answers, nor should there be. Romy, good job for getting people to think...now, let them think and experiment. The goal of any teacher should be to have students who move far beyond them and leave the teacher in the dust.

Well, I have a very clear picture of what you looked around my site but it is not important. What is important is that I have absolutely deferent objectives to “write” then you have or then most of your colleges have. I do not writhe foe somebody but only for myself. I think if you think deeper to it then you will see where I am coming from…

Joe Roberts wrote:

Otherwise, I am more happy retired where the chances of interesting non-audio conversation are much higher.

It is all deepens of what is the definition of “audio” for a person. I agree that if people understand audio as the plate currents, comparing the recipes for soaking of woofer’s cones and collection of the James Bullough Lansing’s wife pictures then the conversations about audio might be too boring. Fortunately audio might be by  different brew…

Joe Roberts wrote:

Also, I'll be checking my Google stats religiously, but I think 6moons has goodsoundclub beat for linkage.

I am sure it is. If you post your comments at goodvibes.com, claiming that Silbatone would make a perfect elephant dildo, then your Korean friends would have even more traffic. Isn’t it what it was all about?

Joe Roberts wrote:

The notion of meeting up for a penis swinging competition is a dreadful thought. My tool is happy where it is, safe and warm in my shorts.

I kind of missed it in my initial reply but I think it is important. There was no conversation about any “completion” I thought it was clear in my posts. However, there is a benefit in penis evaluation. Not particularly in order to found out whose is bigger but in order to learn if a person whop love to talk about virility ever has a penis. What do I mean is that it is very important in case you do not know people are to understand what the person would like to hear in a playback. I am not talking what he is getting with his but what he would like to get. What you hear somebody custom inhalation you might get an idea what was the objectives and what a person was trying to accomplish sound-wise. THAT set certain reference points about person envelopment into understanding of Sound. They is why I always try to pay attention to what and how the people play their playbacks. If listing somebody else playback you recognize only as “penis swinging” then it only an indication of the primitivism of the people you, Joe, are accustomed to deal in audio. Knowing what you wrote I would not be too surprised, also if it so then what expectations one might have about your Silbatone speakers?

Pay attention I did not express a big enthusiasm of inviting you as I do not invite the people just because they do audio of know how to spell “Tetrode”.  The amount of your posts at diyAudio or in “Sound Practice” has also very little to do with me being “inspired” as I belie that the “Sound Practice” direction was a dead end of truly audio enthusiasms and created mode soldering idiots then qualified listeners.

Anyhow, a few more words about your alleged penis. It is kind of hypostatic to you to insist that your “tool is happy and safe in your shorts”. What you do with Silbatone is no less then taking your very penis very publicly and swinging it like lasso with a primitive desire to catch another Sound Practice’s legacy sufferer.   It is not about Silbatone of the sound that they can or can’t produce but about you cashing your publicity in exchange for people attention to Silbatone. Ironically, and it is a surprised to me that you do not get it yet, I o not question as much the Silbatone sound (I personally just have no interest in it) but I rather I question the lever of seriousness of your audio interests, and some of the things that you expressed in this thread have give me this reasoning. 

So, at least before you consider showing up you really need to think what you might impress me with. Otherwise I would prefer instead of playing music for another boring and immune for senses audio visitor to spend quality time on my couch watching my beloved “The Golden Girls”

Joe Roberts wrote:

If you can't relate to individual personal enjoyment as an ultimate goal of audio, sorry Bud, I can't help ya.

Well, when you stick your finder, nose or whatever into a vise and someone will close the vise, coursing you pain and then someone will turn the vise’s se to the opposite direction opening the vise then you will experience the “personal enjoyment”. Sorry, my level of appreciation of the reselects that Audio is able to deliver is at a different level. I think it is different flor you as well but the “personal enjoyment” is the only one goal that you are tuned to sell.

Joe Roberts wrote:

I doubt you like what I like or listen to what I listen to. I'm a blues harmonica player.

I could guess something like this with very high certainty.

Joe Roberts wrote:

Since my motto is " Who cares what I like, make your own evaluations," I can understand how that can upset dogmatic spewers of topological laws and sharply-chiseled evaluation programs.

Ironically I seldom match the topological limitation with auditable result but rather I match the topological potencies with personal demands of listeners.  I have absolutely stunning absolutely accurate prediction.

Joe Roberts wrote:

In accordance with my deeply felt philosophy that one should do with audio whatever makes one happy, I certainly recognize and defend your right to think and do what you please. If you think inflexibility is cool, fine by me.

Yes, I would stick with my position of single-driver speaker as a tool that is able to satisfy very limited demant of audio reproduction. I appreciate that you allow me to maintain this opinion.

Joe Roberts wrote:

I was sort of dogmatic myself 25 years ago, before I became a public audio figure, but I grew out of it. Now I think anything that destroys dogma is far more valuable to the human race.

Valid view. Unfortunately what I express is not dogma but my position that based upon experience, exposure and actually my interest to the subject.

Joe Roberts wrote:

Puhleeze, don't act like I'm ready to run to Boston to hear your system and you are still thinking about whether I should be permitted, because as I implied above, I wouldn't travel to the next trailer park over to hear 99% of audio systems. I already heard 99% percent of audio systems, if you know what I mean. Sometimes it feels like I heard 110% of all audio systems.

OK, Joe, I have something to replay but where we go with it?  All of it has no relevancy nether to your Korean speaker nit to your virginity about the single-speaker drivers. About your blues-searching 110% of all audio systems… Do you remember the Saint-Exupéry's “Le Petit Prince” who was bitching about the grade with 1000000 roses?

Joe Roberts wrote:

I only wish you liked Sound Practices and sent me 20 bucks in 1998 so I could have stayed in business 15 minutes longer.

Do not get me wrong. I have bought a few years back from you the PDF file with all “Sound Practices” and it was OK read. Still, in the large scale it was as “important” as many other product-centric audio publications. You just had a different product and an ordinary audio Moron running dead Dynoaudio with 500W Krell read your “Sound Practices” and ended up with Altec and 2A3. However, Sound that person get is not a action of “tools” but a reflection of the listener's consciousness and from this perspective  the “Sound Practices” was no event in the processes of de-moranization of mostly idiotic audio public. So, as far as I concern the “Sound Practices” was a manual for "kinky soldering", nothing else.  I do admit you did have a very few interesting articles but you went nowhere with them, as you should…

Joe Roberts wrote:

Just to show there are no hard feelings, …

Ok, now I feel officially insulted!