And I dont know why you cant see it, it may not say it in words but it is implied in the context of the post.
Ok so let me go through it for you, the guy posts, I have a funny feeling that these British loudspeakers may not be of the BBC LS3/5A school
so the guy has just set a comparison between a bookshelf nearfield monitor that is designed to work in the back of a van and a large stand mounted/ floorstanding speaker, it is obvious that the 2 speakers are aimed at different markets and potential customers, there is no need to bring the 2 speakers together in that post, the way the post is implied is that somehow the TDB-12 is going to be inferior in performance to the LS3/5A which is like saying a Harbeth 40.2 is also inferior to the LS3/5A (ive used the Harbeth as it is of similar size and driver compliment to the TDB-12). I do actually make an LS3/5A type speaker, its called the BC-30, that side and back to the point, why select the TDB-12 to be in the BBC LS3/5A school, is there something you dont like about them? do you think they are not worthy? is it the look of them? maybe you dont like the level pads on there? just exactly what is it that gives you that funny feeling? when you look at a 40.2 do you get the same funny feeling, or maybe looking at a vintage Wharfedale E70 does that also give you the funny feeling? how about a big pair of Tannoy HPD's with a 15" driver and a horn loaded tweeter to compare with the LS3/5A will that give you the funny feeling too? or maybe a pair of LEAK 3090s, surely a nice pair of Wharfedale Dovedales with a 12" bass a 5" mid and a 1" mylar dome tweeter (ive selected those few models because they were all designed around the same period as the LS3/5A) and all sound completely different to them but yet still retain the British sound, so tell me what does give you that funny feeling and the need to make the comparison..?
Wow.
Ok. So YOU are saying that because your speakers aren't based on the BBC monitor design, then they are inferior? It must the case, because no one else here has said it. No one else has implied it.
I was the one who started that thread, and I took a little license in what I said, because it was obviously based on a false premise. That being, that there is a conclusive British sound to audio. Anyone with any knowledge of audio with know that it is not the case. If we look at speakers, for example, while there are BBC monitor types, there are also Quads, Tannoys, etc. Which are all, obviously, vastly different.
When I stated British Audio, I was referring to what some would call Flat Earth audio. So smaller, mid range focused, speakers that often lean towards vocals and speed. Stuff that had been based on BBC designs, and made by companies like Spendor, Harbeths, Stirling, etc. These are often matched with Naim, Rega or Exposure amps, and often fed from Linn or Rega sources. This is a school of audio that had become very popular, is often called British (or English) Audio, that I, and many of my friends enjoy, hence my decision to start this discussion.
What Mr Hardy did, in his often joking manner, is to point out my false premise by showing a British speaker that was very different from what I had been discussing. Not that it was worse, or better for that matter. Just that it could be considered part of British Audio, AND it was not what we were discussing. Your speaker was just a very clear reminder that not every British speaker is what we were discussing.
Let's look at this from a different perspective. What if my question was "What makes British Cars Drive Like British Cars". So the discussion turns to big, Luxurious, fast GTs, full of burled walnut and Connolly Leather. Aston Martin, Jaguar, Bentley, etc. The conversation goes merrily along, and then Mr Hardy, because he would do so, posts a picture of a Lotus Elise. Should I expect the ghost of Colin Chapman to haunt the site? Of course not. Because there was nothing negative in the comparison. It just so happens that a Lotus is also a British car, which happens to be very different.
The only inference I could make that your speakers are not worthy of inclusion in this group, is, strangely, from you. Based on the picture, I would guess that yours is a studio monitor, looking somewhat similar to a JBL perhaps. And that's all I would have thought of it. That's all I did think if it.
I can't imagine what would have happened if someone had posted that they heard them , and did not like them.
There is one thing this discussion has made very clear to me, however. That is, that I will never purchase a Kralk Audio product.
All the best to you.
