Politics prohibit me from sending this letter but I feel compelled to publish it somewhere, so I thought PPOT was a good venue.
-------------------
Editor:
I am writing in response to your article “The 12 Most Significant Loudspeakers of All Time” (TAS 205).
To sum up the history of loudspeakers in 12 designs is a flawed exercise at best, although I do understand your intent. Readers love “Best of” lists judging from the profusion of them found everywhere in the media. Best Song of the Decade. Best Movie of the Year. Best Restaurant. Ad nauseum. You, of course, want subscribers, so you have to give them what they want.
As any thinking person realizes, “Best Of” lists are inevitably biased because they are typically subjective lists rather than quantitative. “Best Selling Song of the Decade” might be quite different than the “Best Song” depending upon what means was used to compile each list.
And this brings me to the point. Your list:
The 12 Most Significant Loudspeakers of All Time
1 QUAD ESL (aka 57)
2 Acoustic Research AR-3a
3 Rogers LS3/5a
4 Wilson Audio Tiny Tot (WATT)
5 Magico Mini II
6 Dahlquist DQ-10
7 Magneplanar 1-U/1-D
8 Infinity IRS V
9 KLH Model Nine
10 Advent
11 MBL 101E
12 Klipshorn
Yes, you identified it as a subjective compilation of picks supplied independently by your writers and chosen from those submissions by the “senior editorial staff.” You covered your butt. But I still must respectfully ask you to step away from the Kool-Aid.
Each loudspeaker in the list is a legend except one. Each loudspeaker in the list is no longer commercially available except one. #5 stands out like the proverbial sore thumb. Is there some agenda here? Is there – just maybe – a bias toward an active advertiser hidden in the middle of these august products which taught us so much about the playback of music?
But rather than dwell on the obvious, I would like to highlight some of the glaring omissions. In no particular order:
QUAD ESL-63, Harbeth Monitor Mk 1, Martin Logan CLS, several Acoustat designs, SoundLab, Bose 901, Dynaco 25, JBL K2, Celestion SL6000, Gale 401, B&W Nautilus, B&O Beolab 5, Yamaha NS1000, Goldmund Epilogue, Focal Grande Utopia, Wilson X-1 . . . and on & on . . .
The 63 undeniably taught us midrange purity despite its other flaws. The CLS, Acoustat & SoundLab models were lessons in transparency. And even the much-maligned Bose 901s were a study in openness, when other speakers were just boxes. They opened that door to a wider audience than any other product and gave us a customer base to upsell. The NS1000 is still used in many mixing studios as reference monitor. And the Grande Utopia and its archrival the Wilson X-1 were a healthy education in bass and the micro dynamics of the midbass amongst other innovations and attributes. I think you get my point . . . very subjective, of course . . .
So, your list is biased. You know that, I know that and your readers know that. That is the nature of a subjective list. However, that still does not excuse your inclusion of a product that has not stood the test of time to prove its value as “significant.” And in including it, you excluded other fine designs that are certainly more deserving, in my humble opinion.
Respectfully
Disclaimer: My bias – due to my employment as a representative of loudspeakers - makes this letter an exercise in futility since my opinion must be consider as seriously flawed. This, despite the fact that I have spent 30 years in the high end portion of the CE industry and I have personally heard at least ten of the loudspeakers on your list.
---------------------
There, I feel better now . . .
The article that I am whining about can be found
here
Ian