Hi, Chico -- I can only guess why the Canon review is being highlighted this week. First, it is a low-cost design that advertises a unique capability in the area of soundstaging. Any low cost design that makes high-end claims deserves to be reviewed, and the review deserves to be occasionally spotlighted. Second, the Canon name is highly visible among computer people, and the speaker could attract attention on that basis alone. Why not tell folks how it performs and, again, re-publish the review? The review was thorough, and JA found both strengths and weaknesses. Task accomplished. If I were a visitor to this site, knew about the Canon name, and wasn't too familier with the world of high-end reviews, I would be quite interested in reading this piece. So, to me it's less a question of "why?" than it is of "why not?". To make a big deal out of it seems crabby to me. Cheers, Clifton.

I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF IT HAS A TELEPHOTO LENS, AND IS IT 35MM OR DIGITAL? JUST THE FACTS!

Quote:
Why waste space on your site by posting this review? Not even a picture of what they looked like. Why not a past review of something someone might actually be using? This is just wrong.

As I work my way through the magazine's past, there are reviews like this, of products that are I feel intriguing enough to be worth posting in our free on-line archives. This Canon speaker had a superb pedigree, and the company's Negishi-san played a major role in bringing hi-rez digital recordings to the public.

Sorry my posting this review upset you so much. I guess I owe you a refund of what you paid to read it :-)

Seriously, almost every full review going back to the beginning of 1997 is now available in Stereophile's Web archives, and I follow readers' suggestions and my own desires when choosing what to post from before then. If there are specific reviews in which you are interested in seeing on-line, let me know what they are.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

PS: The magazine's physical photo archive was unfortunately and inadvertently disposed of when we moved offices in 1998, so for reviews as old as this one, we can only include a photograph if we can find one on the Web.

Some Hafler original reviews, got any DH500 reviews, XL-600 or P505, or P500. Hafler pre amps? DH110?

John,
I wasn't that upset, I guess my humor did not show through. But, I was a little surprised by this review since I am not aware of Canon ever being a respected speaker manufacturer. Ofcourse you are free to post any past reviews you want. I bow to your greater experience in such matters. As far as a rebate goes I hope you pay off sooner than Canon does for their camera products (Thats a joke). I wonder when we can look foward to a review of say a Bell electronics amp, or a Clairion console. (Also a joke, I think), I apologise if I seemed to gruff. Just struck me as silly.

Hello, came across this thread and just thought I'd add that I still own a pair of these speakers and I'm still using them - as rear surrounds; a job they do very well. Better I think than some of the much newer Mission Bi-polar designs I have heard and they're so much better looking...

I think it's great to see some old reviews on the site as sometimes progress isn't what it seems - especially with loudspeakers where newer technology often doesn't really improve on the sound

take a look here for canon wide speakers.

http://www.freewebstore.org/DBALOGIC/Canon_S70_Wide_Space_Speakers/p961071_4281458.aspx

I was searching the web looking for info about Canon speakers and came across this old forum about Canons. I have had the same pair of Canon TLS speakers for probably 30 or more years now.  They are just as good today as they were when I first bought them. Every one seems to think they are from the camera maker.  I don't think so.  All I can say they are the greatest speakers going for the price and quality. I love the sound. I wish I could get more canon speakers and  I would use them in my Home Theater in place of Atlantic Technology 7.1 surround speakers. 

They are indeed from the "camera manufacturer".  Like, Sony, LG (Korea), etc..  Japanese companies are more in the mold of GE or Sylvania (back when Sylvania was a powerhouse manufacturer), they aren't specialty makers like many American or European brands.  They are big gigantic companies who make everything.

The great thing about that kind of scale is they can take on huge R&D adventures on a whim that specialty makers just couldn't do.

Hi, i worked for the Die-cast company based in Windsor Berkshire  England (no longer trading) that made the cone and the bottom plate for the dome on top, all those years ago, i thought the sound produced was excellent, shame i couldn't afford to buy them at the time.