Messaggio
da leonida » sabato 8 giugno 2019, 15:30
il testo integrale
When two loudspeakers sound
different, at least one of them is wrong.
Maybe both.
Unpleasantly Distorted Reproduction
Which is better : the Rectilinear III, at $299,
or a comparably priced but totally different -sounding
speaker by another reputable manufacturer?
The ready answer to that question by a nice,
clean -living salesman or boy-scout hi-fi expert is:
"It's a matter of taste. Whichever you prefer
for your own listening. They're both good."
We want you to know how irresponsible
and misleading such bland advice is.
Think about it:
A loudspeaker is a reproducer. The
most important part of that word is the
prefix re, meaning again. A loudspeaker
produces again something that has
already been produced once.
Not something new and different.
Therefore, what it correctly
reproduces should be identical to the
original production. And identicalness isn't a matter of taste. m 'i the
For example, it isn't a matter of taste whether
the body shop has correctly reproduced the original
color of your car on that repainted fender. Nor is it a
matter of taste whether your mirror correctly reproduces
your visual image. Is the reproduction identical
to the original or isn't it?
Okay. We know. The ear is less precise than the
eye. And in the case of loudspeakers, it's usually impossible
to compare the reproduction and the live
original side by side. Furthermore, the speaker is only
a single link in a whole chain of reproducers. But these
Seductively Distorted Reproduction
problems only complicate the matter without changing
the basic principle. The reproduction is either
right or wrong. Two di ff erent-sounding reproductions
can't both be identical to the original.
The common fallacy is to call the reproduction
wrong only when it's obviously unpleasant (fuzzy or
shrieky highs, hollow midrange, etc.) . But what
about a pleasingly plump bass, lots of sheen on the
high end, and that punchy or zippy overall quality
known as "presence"? Equally wrong. And, because
of the seductive "hi-fi" appeal, much more treacherous.
To glamorize the original that way amounts
to having a built-in and permanently set tone control
in your speaker. For some program material it can be
disastrously unsuitable. Like the funhouse mirror
that makes everybody look tall and thin, it's great for
short and fat inputs only.
At Rectilinear, we design speakers to approach
facsimile reproduction of the input as closely as is
technologically possible. We restrict the "taste" factor
to twiddling the tone controls
of our amplifier in the
privacy of our home. Not
in our laboratory.
The Rectilinear III
is our best effort to
date in this direction.
And our inspiration
for it was a totally
different andrather
impractical design :
the full -range
electrostatic speaker.
Any serious audio
engineer will tell you
Undistorted Reproduction that electrostatics
are inherently superior
to conventional speakers in producing an output that's
identical to the input. This superiority is due to scientifically
verifiable characteristics, such as flatness of
frequency response and low time delay distortion.
The trouble is that electrostatics create tremendous
problems with amplifiers, have difficulty
playing really loud without distortion and are also
somewhat deficient in bass. But-they're accurate,
undistorted "mirrors" of sound.
The Rectilinear III is the first successful
attempt to give you this electrostatic type of sound in
a conventional speaker without any of the above
problems.
It allows you to hear what composers,
musicians and record producers have created
for you and not what some speaker
manufacturer thinks will please you.
So, next time you're in a store
and you hear another $299 speaker
that sounds different from
ours ou'll have an id Rectilinear I11
r y ea floor -standing
which of the two is wrong. speaker
And which is (6 drivers, e ropó)
the one to buy. RECTILINEAR Rectilinear Research Corp., 107 Bruckner Blvd., Bronx, N.Y. 10464
Canada: H. Roy Gray Limited, Ontario
Check Na 27 on R