Some Interesting Comments about Edgar Villchur

[Steve F]

I subscribe to Stereophile and have for decades. Although the $25,000 speaker and $30,000 amp reviews are indeed irrelevant, they do, in fact, review 'normal-priced' equipment every month. As a matter of fact, normal-priced reviews outnumber the esoteric stuff. In this issue, they review a $500 pair of JBL floorstanders. Can't get more down-to-earth than that.

The thing I like about the magazine is that their instrumented printed measurements and graphs of speakers under review are quite good. They show a FR in a 30˚ window of on-tweeter axis (a very useful, relevant measurement), they show port contribution, they show room response, step response, all kinds of very solid info. Editorial like Dudley's is inane, but like any magazine or paper or on-line pub, you, as the reader, are free to simply pick and choose what you want to read and what you find interesting. Dudley gets so much wrong about acoustic suspension that it's not even worth my time to list it all and rebut it.

But the instrumented tests of normal-priced loudspeakers are great and it's the only audio mag I subscribe to.

[Aadams]

1 hour ago, AR55 said:

My AR-9Lsi’s?  Of course there are.  I have auditioned a few of them,

9LSI is a high standard.  How could you tell the other speakers were better?  Were they in the same room or perhaps even side by side?  This is merely a question of curiosity and not a challenge.

Adams

[AR55]

The 9Lsi's retailed for $1,950 a pair in 1986, which is less than $7500 in today's money.  I have never auditioned a pair of speakers that retail for less than $10k that I felt were better than my 9Lsi's. 

The Martin Logan Renaissance ESL 15A and the Revel Ultima Salon 2 retail for $20k to $25K.  When I listened to them, I felt that they both had a comparable bass response to my 9Lsi's and more detailed, particularly in the midrange.  Did I compare them side-by-side with my 9Lsi's?  No, I didn't.  If I had, I may not have reached the same conclusion.  

 

[genek]

I haven't subscribed to anything since Audio went out of business in 2000.  My newest piece of audio gear dates from the 1990s, so I don't feel as if I've missed anything.

[Stimpy]

At least the AR3a's show up on a list, of the best, for some. 

The Absolute Sound: 

The 12 Most Significant Loudspeakers of All Time

[Steve F]

This is a much better article, far more relevant, IIDSSM.

 

https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/most-influential-speakers

 

[ar_pro]

57 minutes ago, Steve F said:

This is a much better article, far more relevant, IIDSSM.

 

https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/most-influential-speakers

 

Thanks for posting the link, I hadn't seen this article before.

Art Dudley's current setup can't be ideal for those big Altec systems, which tend to want a lot of air around them; positioned as they are, it might be difficult to avoid some room-induced boominess.

Speaking of which, Dudley actually reviewed a Klipschorn in the August issue:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/klipsch-klipschorn-ak6-loudspeaker

[DavidR]

3 hours ago, Steve F said:

This is a much better article, far more relevant, IIDSSM.

 

https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/most-influential-speakers

 

So would you be the same Steve F as the author of the article?

[DavidR]

Aren't many Wilson and Legacy speakers acoustic suspension. IIRC, the Wilson Alexandria XLF can be set up for either ported or acoustic suspension.

I once took my AR90s down to a high-end store in town, Natural Sound, to audition a Bryston amp. They blew away the Theil and B&W they had in the room.

[Stimpy]

1 hour ago, DavidR said:

I once took my AR90s down to a high-end store in town, Natural Sound, to audition a Bryston amp. They blew away the Theil and B&W they had in the room.

Any reaction from staff or store customers?

[DavidR]

On 10/17/2019 at 8:00 PM, Stimpy said:

Any reaction from staff or store customers?

I will say the treble of the B&W (forget which model) was very nice. Clear, crisp and natural. I owned the bass dept. and thought the mids presented much better with the LMR/UMR.

They looked similar to these:

The staff that knew of AR was not surprised. They all liked them.

I did not buy the Bryston. You pay a LOT for that 20 yr warranty.

[rl1856]

AD's opinions did not surprise me.  He is opinionated, and has a specific preference when it comes to equipment.  He just doesn't like anything that challenges his paradigm.  

What was troubling were the factual errors included in his prose.  

He stated that as efficiency goes down, distortion goes up and uses this "fact" to denigrate AS designs.  Yet he does not address the crucial fact that AR (and most AS) designs have been universally praised for their low distortion deep bass.  Distortion being notably lower than what is delivered by reflex designs, and bass which is deeper and cleaner than what a Khorn can deliver at equivalent frequencies.  AD states that AR speakers were introduced at the dawn of high power transistor amps...forgetting that the AR 1 was introduced in 1954, about 10yrs before SS amps were market viable.   He advances the notion that the science behind AS designs does not work.   He then uses the fact that there are few true AS designs in the current marketplace as proof that the concept is flawed.  Ken Kantor posted in this forum (in 2008 ?) that it was more expensive to produce a good AS speaker compared to a ported design, and that technology had advanced enough that ported designs could deliver similar performance from a smaller box.      I posted about the inaccuracies to another forum that is frequented by SP authors.  The editor's response was that AD has opinions and can say what he wants.

[DavidR]

I've discovered that anyone can write a review and just about anyone can find a magazine to publish it.

[RoyC]

6 hours ago, DavidR said:

I've discovered that anyone can write a review and just about anyone can find a magazine to publish it.

Agreed, David...

Villchur's reputation and credentials are established. In the end the truly questionable credentials are usually that of the authors.

Roy

[DavidR]

33 minutes ago, RoyC said:

Agreed, David...

Villchur's reputation and credentials are established. In the end, the truly questionable credentials are usually that of the authors.

Roy

Yup. A couple of guys on the Emotiva website that write reviews that get published. Neither has an electronics or audio background. Just audio enthusiasts. One did a review on the reissue of the JBL 100. He thought they were quite good. I wrote back about ported speakers that have FAT bass - east coast sound vs west cost..... yadda yadda yadda. He didn't agree. One of his friends who lives near him who listened to them PM'd me and said I was correct. Same guy also liked Tekton Pendragons. but like everyone else ended up selling them.

[ar_pro]

The article in question has been posted at the Stereophile website:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-203

[Aadams]

1 hour ago, ar_pro said:

The article in question has been posted at the Stereophile website:

To understand another man’s point of view it is often helpful to know how he gets paid.  This is one of those times.

[der]

On 10/23/2019 at 4:01 PM, Aadams said:

To understand another man’s point of view it is often helpful to know how he gets paid.  This is one of those times.

 

Agree. Or, to understand a man's point of view it's often helpful to know how he spent his money. I have a neighbor two doors down that has a pair of Bose 901 speakers that he raves about. I told him I own a pair of AR3a. He said he'd never heard of AR and that he was well versed in HIFI. Personally, I think the 901's are horrible and always have. But, I wouldn't dream of telling him that. You never know, he might burn my house down!

[genek]

I have heard 901s that I actually thought sounded ok. The problem with them is that they are so utterly dependent on room surface reflections that unless you configure them exactly the way Bose specifies, in a room that exactly matches the space depicted in the Bose 901 manual, you'll never get that sound.

[DavidR]

1 hour ago, genek said:

I have heard 901s that I actually thought sounded ok. The problem with them is that they are so utterly dependent on room surface reflections that unless you configure them exactly the way Bose specifies, in a room that exactly matches the space depicted in the Bose 901 manual, you'll never get that sound.

I've owned a pair since college. Yes, proper placement is key BUT if you can't properly place them turn them around. In my current home the family room is somewhat narrow and with all the furniture there is no way they can be placed as Bose suggests. Also, amp and pre-amp play a big role in SQ - have an amp with high damping factor. The biggest improvement was recapping the EQ with quality parts. The parts from the day couldn't pass the HF sound. They still don't have the detail my ARs have but there is something about listening to a full range driver that is worth having them. Lastly, don't even bother with the ported series.

[der]

I have heard three different pairs over the years in three different environments. To say I didn't care for any of them would be an understatement.  On the other hand, if the owners were happy who am I to say?  It was their money.

[ar_pro]

On 10/23/2019 at 4:01 PM, Aadams said:

To understand another man’s point of view it is often helpful to know how he gets paid.  This is one of those times.

 

Absolute Sound and Stereophile are pretty much "it" for printed-page audio magazines. AS pulls no punches when it comes to their High End coverage; they're comfortable with the cost of the equipment that they review, and more affordable gear usually takes a back seat to their coverage of the Bugattis, Ferraris and Porsches of the hi-fi world.

Stereophile is tougher to pin down; their readership skews older and reasonably affluent, hence the coverage of stratospherically-priced equipment. But some effort has been made to review gear in a price range more in line with what used to be considered "normal", although it's usually handed off to junior writers who take it semi-seriously, or writers who make a botch of the review through an idiosyncratic writing style. Herb Reichert comes to mind - good luck making any useful decision based on his reviews.

Ironically, Art Dudley's column not infrequently deals with vintage equipment such as the aforementioned Altec Valencias, Thorens and Garrard rim-drive turntables, and on one occasion the Large Advent. To read Dudley's passive-aggressive dismissal of Villchur and his accomplishments in Stereophile's pages is surprising and a little distressing. The magazine recently changed editors - maybe this explains how this got into print.

[genek]

57 minutes ago, ar_pro said:

Absolute Sound and Stereophile are pretty much "it" for printed-page audio magazines.

Hi-Fi News and Record Reviews  -  UK, very pricey

Stereo Magazine - German, not quite as pricey

[ar_pro]

50 minutes ago, genek said:

Hi-Fi News and Record Reviews  -  UK, very pricey

Stereo Magazine - German, not quite as pricey

Very true. I was thinking American magazines, but didn't write it. To a lesser extent, there's also Sound & Vision (Stereo Review's current iteration), and Hi-Fi + magazine, the former being slightly more inclined toward the home theater A/V crowd. 

In the UK, Hi-Fi News is especially good when it comes to covering a wide range of equipment, including vintage gear, and they have a staff of competent and interesting writers, among them Ken Kessler, who has a healthy respect for Edgar Villchur and his impact on high fidelity reproduction in the home.

 

[rl1856]

I have read AD's content since the days of Listener Magazine.   He has a specific preference window for audio equipment and reproduction:  Class A SET driving horn loaded, or very efficient reflex loaded speakers.   He also seems to be of independent spirit- he deliberately arrives at his conclusions.  Over the years he has gained a reputation for being "vintage" friendly.  I think many people have suggested he review this or that component, or investigate this or that technology.   When he feels pushed in one direction, he often pushes back.    A few years ago he wrote about his (limited) experience with a Marantz 8B.  The unit was freshened by a few new caps, but was largely stock, meaning 55+yrs old.   His comments were very much a case of damning with faint praise.   Other times he brings up vintage alternatives that are outside his narrow window, and again his disdain is palpable.  He often mentions issues/questions brought up by listeners, but are contrary to his opinions- again mostly damning with faint praise.   Consider that Acoustic Suspension speakers represent a 180' shift from his beloved Altecs or Devore high efficiency speakers and require something completely different than a SET amp to drive them.  In that light, his comments are almost predictable.   AD is a senior editor of a high profile publication (within a niche hobby) thus it is regrettable that he sometimes reacts in this way.  One would think he would either refrain from commenting, or have someone more open minded address the issues.   It think it is unreasonable to expect a full suite of Pollyanna reviews, but is an open minded reviewer too much to ask for ?