Re: Harbeth versus a more intense (high-Q) sound ...
Before I comment I should just clarify one point .... when we say 'high-Q' or 'low-Q' this is a technical term relating to an electrical or mechanical systems behaviour at and around resonance frequencies. It should not be casually assumed that the subjective acoustic Sound Quality is necessarily bad with a high-Q speaker and necessarily good with a low-Q speaker. What we've been talking about is the intensity, the 'shrillness', the incisiveness of high-Q speakers. If you were tasked with designing a PA system for, say, the evacuation of an underground railway station, high-Q speaker with their punchy, attention-grabbing sound would be absolutely ideal and our trusty BBC-monitor low-Q sound so soft and relaxed that lives could be at risk. So, the speaker and the application have to be matched.
Originally Posted by David Schalkwyk
More general comment following your interesting notes on wine ..... (I didn't realise alcohol levels had increased, but then I am the sad, marginalised individual who likes Piesporter which you can rarely if ever find in restaurants or bars these days it is so far out of vogue...)
Two of the quirks of evolution that have brought us to the top of the food chain are curiosity and boredom. Curiosity about the environment (and people) around us and the boredom from repetition: we do like the buzz of things and people a-new. However, we are now being tantalised by a constant stream of tasty new goods, foods, clothes, music and sexy exciting people with one consequence: our nervous systems have withered through over-stimulation. Generation after generation we need more of a high just to get the juices going and we're hooked on this process. Just to think how one hundred years ago the Victorians could get a real high from a musical soiree around the piano with a few conservatively dressed friends!
Alan A. Shaw
Harbeth Audio UK