It's not about how much it's about how.

We underutilise our senses and as a result when we do experience nuance - we remember it.

A loudspeaker cabinet has at least as much to do with the sound as speaker drivers. If this does not initially make sense let's consider the phono cartridge. Cartridge mavens understand well the importance of chassis material. From Koetsu stone bodies to the plethora of Denon 103 chassis options the descriptions and discussions concerning the sonic attributes from these chassis are endless. The cost of a D103 can more than quadruple depending on what material the aftermarket chassis is made of. Koetsu lovers compare sonic attributes and differences in stone materials from onyx, jade, coral stone, blue lace etc... each having their own distinguishable sound.

This is concerning the resonance characteristics of a very small transducer's chassis. The difference in the physical amplitude between a phono cartridge and a loudspeaker is quite enormous. I propose that a loudspeaker's chassis material would then be even more critical than a cartridge's. The difference in amplitude will make a loudspeaker cabinet's resonant nature more easily discerned. When we consider that the majority of high end loudspeakers use MDF as the primary material, under glossy veneers,  then we can understand perhaps one of the short comings the industry has accepted in the pursuit of profit over fidelity. MDF sounds like mud if you sit down and do a comparison of it with with almost anything else - even cardboard sounds better.

There is an argument that dampening all resonance is the best approach however this is fantastic thinking. In reality some percentage of unwanted vibration always remains and the most heavily damped materials are most often grossly uneven across the audio spectrum. They give back what they cannot damp in the most unfortunate of ways. Rigidity, transmission and dampening are what I look for in speaker building material. Most importantly dampening must occur in proportion to what is natural to the ear. This is much like amplifier distortion: it is not the lowest amount of distortion which is most desirable but the harmonic nature of what there inevitably is. This concept can be applied in the same way to unwanted resonance in loudspeakers.

Add to the cabinet the additional complexities of a crossover and a horn and we have a matrix which is more influential than speaker drivers by themselves. These interactions are the most complex and difficult to model of anything in the audio chain and thus it has become the most mysterious, misunderstood, and exploited aspect of the audio market. This and the small detail that more than 95% of an audio amplifier's energy is lost within the loudspeaker indicates that it is here the main challenge resides. The endless decisions, experimentations, measurements and litmus listenings - all with the poor roadmap if limited modelling ability - results in the high cost of time, money, thought and effort. Due to the dismaying complexity it is easy to get disoriented and thus extensive and regular experience with live music, along with speaker design experience, are not only helpful but perhaps essential.

Hemingway said about writing that the most essential thing a writer can have is a: "Built in, Bulletproof, Bullshit detector." (I propose P. W. Klipsch would agree - wherever he may be.)

Knowing what to throw away and being willing to throw it away, despite the cost, time and effort, does not come easy or cheap.

With the Hadron we have reached a point in performance where 48 hours of thermal stabilisation is not just readily apparent it is transformational in the speakers performance.

The three dimensionality of the presentation that develops on day two causes customers to routinely contact us concerning the metamorphosis in performance.

Is it the string or the wood which manifests the sound of a Gesú or Stradivarius?