Stand Loudspeaker Reviews

Coincident Speaker Technology Troubador loudspeaker Manufacturer's Comment

Manufacturer's Comment

Editor: It is with more than a little embarrassment that I must advise you that you were sent a pair of Troubadors that were not intended for the North American market but were specifically manufactured for a customer in Europe. This version of the Troubador uses a second-order crossover with the tweeter being phase-inverted. The regular version that is sold in North America and the Far East utilizes a first-order slope with both drivers connected in-phase. This crossover not only eliminates the low-treble suckout, but time-aligns the drivers as well.

The measurements of our standard Troubador are exactly as JA measured with regards to the low frequencies, but are totally different everywhere else. Sonically, the hollowing-out of vowel sounds and the thickening of textures that Wes observed are completely absent, and indeed represent some of the strengths of the speaker. Indeed, Troubador owners marvel at how detailed and coherent the Troubadors are. Our customers have traded in WATTs, CLSes, Apogees, ProAcs, and other very exotic speakers costing many times the price of the Troubadors, and I have yet to receive any comments that are seriously negative. Quite the opposite: many of our customers call me regularly to wax ecstatic about their speakers.

The comments made by both WP and JA are mainly valid for the version of Troubador that was auditioned by Stereophile. That version is markedly different from and sonically far inferior to our current and regularly distributed one.

Please allow me to send you the regular version of the Troubador and I am certain that both the measurements and the listening will confirm that the Troubador not only represents the best value in high-end speakers, but in many ways the finest sonics, regardless of price.

Since the published review of the Troubador in Stereophile is so negative, it is of critical importance that a new review appear of the standard model.—Israel Blume, Coincident Speaker Technology

My policy is to assume that samples submitted for review are representative of a manufacturer's production. Merely sounding poor is in itself no indication that a sample must have been faulty. And in this case, both samples of the pair measured identically, indicating that that was indeed how they were meant to sound and measure. In the case of the Troubadors, we will publish a follow-up on the replacement pair of speakers in our February '96 issue.—John Atkinson

COMMENTS
eugovector's picture
Submitted by eugovector on November 26, 2012 - 5:20pm

What's going on here?

mrplankton2u's picture
Submitted by mrplankton2u on November 27, 2012 - 5:14pm

It's the token bad review that Stereophile feels it has to throw out to remind readers that on exceedingly rare occasions, it actually does take a break from the non stop advertising/promotional campaigns which help keep the lights on and pay for airfares for "journalists" to travel from show to show in which they endlessly kibitz with other "industry" figures in dining rooms and bars across the United States....lol!

[Possibly actionable defamation deleted by JA]

Now if only we could get these "journalists" to stop giving "very highly recommended" review summaries for products like a $6000 tube amp whose volume control gets too hot to touch... (eyeroll)

[More defamatory content deleted. If you continue to post defamatory and personal comments, we will have no option but to ban you from this site, mrplankton2u.-JA]

mrplankton2u's picture
Submitted by mrplankton2u on November 27, 2012 - 9:51pm

I don't think you have a clue what the term "defamatory" actually means so I've cited a definition below:

 

"Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation a negative or inferior image. This can be also any disparaging statement made by one person about another, which is communicated or published, whether true or false, depending on legal state. In Common Law it is usually a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (theclaimant).[1]"

 

Note, Mr. Atkinson, that under "common law", the requirement for defamation is that published claims are false. [Edited by John Atkinson]

GeorgeHolland's picture
Submitted by GeorgeHolland on November 28, 2012 - 6:40am

It is pretty obvious that Mr Blume is clueless when it comes to speaker design. Even the "novices" on real audio forums know about the importance of acoustic phase.

junker's picture
Submitted by junker on November 27, 2012 - 9:39am

Thanks for the honest review.

JohnnyR's picture
Submitted by JohnnyR on November 27, 2012 - 8:29pm

Well maybe more of a "Don't tell us the truth or you will be banned"attitude. When logic fails, just delete posts and call it "defaming". Lame.

tmsorosk's picture
Submitted by tmsorosk on November 28, 2012 - 5:24am

You mean the truth as you see it JohnnyR ?

After reading many of your posts I would say there anything but true.

I'm usually agaist banning anyone, but I'll make an exception in your case. You contribute nothing to this great site and depict yourself as an unhappy and uneducated troll.   BEAT  IT.

JohnnyR's picture
Submitted by JohnnyR on November 29, 2012 - 6:09am

......that MrPlankton2U spelled out what was going on and JA deleted it because? I'm glad you have no say so as to who should be banned. By the way it's "they're" NOT "there". Please be more civil in the future and perhaps you won't be making errors.

 Mr Blume obviously didn't bother to measure his finished speaker. I'm betting he used his "golden ears" to judge them. Ahhhhh the folly of relying upon "what he heard".

X