Re: Sound & Vision mag reviews M60's
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,596 Likes: 1
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,596 Likes: 1 |
I am not renewing my subs to any stereo OR a/v mags.
They're fun to look at (like the Xmas Nieman-Marcus catalog), but I'm never gonna own any of that stuff. I'm not in the market for anything for quite some time now.
And, as I said in Dwight, NO review is valid if the subject of that review gets to, in the same effen issue, profusely thank the mag and it's reviewer for all of their brilliant insights, their amazing sensitivity and, more importantly, their correctness!
No critical review publication in ALL of academia would/could exist under that "model." And it's not true in all newsstand mags either. In art mags, you will see reviews that are quite harsh, and on the flip page is an ad for the gallery showing that work.
So the sound mags are all just big circle jerks. Everyone's got their fingers in everyone else's ears.
You can read a review about almost anything and, with an accompanying reproduction, or quoted text, come to some sort of first impression. You can't do that with sound. Ever.
So, while it may be worth discussing any speficic review brought here, there can never be an ultimate, empirical outcome.
Always call the place you live a house. When you're old, everyone else will call it a home.
|
|
|
Re: Sound & Vision mag reviews M60's
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,116
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,116 |
Neither the M60 or Salon 2 have rolled off highs. Then the reviewer has a personal preference for rolled of highs, since he apparently had to toe out the M60's to tame them. I'm sure having the tweeters 12 inches above your ears like the Revels helps tame the highs and make it more forgiving / less affected by speaker toe in/out angle. The optimized and uniform power response of the Revel Salon 2 is what makes it such a great speaker and not picky to room placement. But comparing the Salon 2 to much less costing designs is not a good idea. Revel has some of the brightest minds, technology and most importantly a ridiculous amount of resources to work with. They can spend so much more on R&D and it all trickles down under the different Harman brands, its just not fair. Revel is not typical of most loudspeaker companies and the price tag that comes along with this speaker reflects it. Apples and oranges comparison IMO.
I’m armed and I’m drinking. You don’t want to listen to advice from me, amigo.
-Max Payne
|
|
|
Re: Sound & Vision mag reviews M60's
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 533
aficionado
|
aficionado
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 533 |
That's true of a lot of high end speakers. The Salon 2 is not one of those.
I agree Revel is one of a few brands which supports its design with a serious scientific approach. I have auditioned the Studio 2 model powered by Mark levinson amps and a Mark Levinson No512 CD/SACD player. I was greatly impressed. Was it really worth all that money - may be if you are plenty rich ?
jc
|
|
|
Re: Sound & Vision mag reviews M60's
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 141
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 141 |
Neither the M60 or Salon 2 have rolled off highs. Then the reviewer has a personal preference for rolled of highs, since he apparently had to toe out the M60's to tame them. I'm sure having the tweeters 12 inches above your ears like the Revels helps tame the highs and make it more forgiving / less affected by speaker toe in/out angle. The optimized and uniform power response of the Revel Salon 2 is what makes it such a great speaker and not picky to room placement. But comparing the Salon 2 to much less costing designs is not a good idea. Revel has some of the brightest minds, technology and most importantly a ridiculous amount of resources to work with. They can spend so much more on R&D and it all trickles down under the different Harman brands, its just not fair. Revel is not typical of most loudspeaker companies and the price tag that comes along with this speaker reflects it. Apples and oranges comparison IMO. True so we can agree that in the case with a Revel speaker, you get what you pay for, a superior speaker. Some here seem to think Axiom/Revel are on the same level in performance regardless of price which I think is just ridiculous.
|
|
|
Re: Sound & Vision mag reviews M60's
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,596 Likes: 1
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,596 Likes: 1 |
In the mid-90's, I really wanted an M3 (BMW, not Axiom). It was a time when I actually could have afforded to do it without strain ('cept maybe for the 5g's to insure it in El Paso!)
I bought an Acura GSR. Differences aside, was the BMW really worth the cost of two Acuras. NO! I'd never own both cars, so I would never be keenly and constantly aware of the differences. And I lost way fewer thousands of dollars in depreciation.
Besides, I coudn't afford the Beamer AND almost 6k for car stereo now, could I? Nothin' like a 400w Mac in a car and a 300w/ 12" cannon.
If everyone had unlimited resources, we'd subscribe to TAS and actually buy that stuff, 'cause we're nuts.
The word here is value, overwhelmingly. And we all got great ones.
Money-no-object folk don't hang here.
Always call the place you live a house. When you're old, everyone else will call it a home.
|
|
|
Re: Sound & Vision mag reviews M60's
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 141
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 141 |
In the mid-90's, I really wanted an M3 (BMW, not Axiom). It was a time when I actually could have afforded to do it without strain ('cept maybe for the 5g's to insure it in El Paso!)
I bought an Acura GSR. Differences aside, was the BMW really worth the cost of two Acuras. NO! I'd never own both cars, so I would never be keenly and constantly aware of the differences. And I lost way fewer thousands of dollars in depreciation.
Besides, I coudn't afford the Beamer AND almost 6k for car stereo now, could I? Nothin' like a 400w Mac in a car and a 300w/ 12" cannon.
If everyone had unlimited resources, we'd subscribe to TAS and actually buy that stuff, 'cause we're nuts.
The word here is value, overwhelmingly. And we all got great ones.
Money-no-object folk don't hang here. True dat, hence why I bought a Genesis Coupe instead of a Porsche 9/11
|
|
|
Re: Sound & Vision mag reviews M60's
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,443
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,443 |
I think we should review Lindsey Lohan's dress.
Whoops - wrong thread.
Last edited by Argon; 02/11/11 05:53 PM.
"A fanatic is someone who can't change his mind and won't change the subject" Churchill
|
|
|
Re: Sound & Vision mag reviews M60's
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,596 Likes: 1
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,596 Likes: 1 |
If we were to, in any way at all, it would be entirely valid. Why? Because our comments would not be followed by the praises of her publicist.
Crap, can you imagine being her publicist? Combat pay.
And you don't go before a judge in white tight-knit midi. Boy, did I learn that the hard way in my teens!
Always call the place you live a house. When you're old, everyone else will call it a home.
|
|
|
Re: Sound & Vision mag reviews M60's
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 89
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 89 |
Does Axiom advertise in Sound & Vision magazine?
|
|
|
Re: Sound & Vision mag reviews M60's
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,443
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,443 |
She had on a tight off-white tie dress that sold out yesterday at $575 a pop. I don't think the '60s sold out after the ringing endorsement they received at S&M - er, I mean S&V
"A fanatic is someone who can't change his mind and won't change the subject" Churchill
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,943
Posts442,465
Members15,617
|
Most Online2,082 Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
1 members (rrlev),
740
guests, and
4
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|