Originally Posted by ellisda1
Thanks for the comments! I placed my order for 2 A5.4s...
For me, user reviews are useful but carry less weight than side-by-side comparisons or "shootouts" where multiple listeners can comment about what they do and don't hear. It's inconvenient to "audition" the Chanes (but not impossible), and more difficult to audition them against multiple speakers. The 2013 HTS comparison got my attention, and your comments in the Chane User forums comparing aspects of the 5.4s against the Martin Logan Motion 60XTs were instrumental in my final decision.
Just as an aside : I really appreciate the time and effort you (and Jon Lane) make to give careful, insightful, and expert feedback on the wide variety of questions you get on this forum. I'm not an expert,and I appreciate the effort it takes for an expert to be patient and considerate with the education of a novice. Kudos and thanks!
Well, Chane has been and continues to be an underdog. Even among internet direct brands.
Most of the time, our products are not let in the door to comparisons like you mentioned. And I agree that is a shame. But Chane speakers have been directly compared to vastly more expensive loudspeakers (like Revel) with surprising results, on more than one occasion.
As a concrete example; about ten years ago, on axis linearity for the amplitude/frequency response was a hugely touted aspect of performance here on AVS and over on Audioholics. It was perceived and stated by many to essentially govern how a loudspeaker would sound to a user. Some companies (ID and B&M) published this data. Chane didn't, at first, because Jon knew that this single data point (of the many tens of dozens used to craft a loudspeaker) was far more insular, microscopic, and nearsighted than, say, sound power response or a full Spinorama done at Harman labs. And, rather than throw pearls to many people who were never going to buy his products anyway (they said as much), and who really lacked the experience/knowledge or apparent desire to properly contextualize this kind of data, the decision was made back then to not publish Chane's internal, copious measurements of each model. This resulted in Chane getting absolutely lambasted for making shoddy product. For being charlatans. For being snake oil salesmen. Taken out to the woodshed, as it were. Accused of not being a real company. Over and over. And always by people who had never heard or measured a Chane product in their life. Ironic because Chane has designed and engineered every aspect of every speaker they have released, like several other reputable ID brands. Every component value of every crossover, every CAD drawing of every cabinet. Every spec of every driver. Designed and customized by Chane and NOT outsourced to outside companies like Bennic (who does full design for loudspeakers and crossovers on top of production of designs others submit to them). No third party designers were engaged to design on Chane's behalf. Ever.
Fast forward to about three years ago, and Jon released batteries of measurements (comprehensive though they were, they were only a small snapshot of all the data he collects on every design; including those that don't make it to production). Jon did this quietly in his forum for most past models and all current models via the retail website. And, magically, the same people who used to claim that Chane speakers were garbage (all of whom were very active forum members with high post counts) became silent on that front. Because, ironically, every loudspeaker Jon has made actually measures VERY respectably. His designs are nearly nothing if not consistent.
But, fast forward a few years to, well, NOW.... and there are several VERY popular loudspeakers that are touted highly here on this forum that couldn't be construed as anything but colored by the same yardstick that was used to chastise Chane, ironically. And they sell well, sound decent (some of them), and "win" comparisons against much better designed and executed product. So, for the nearly half decade that Chane was a bullet sponge for detractors, no apologies have been distributed, no mea culpas sung, and no explanation tendered for the narrative change that now (correctly) greatly relaxes the std for on axis frequency response linearity in favor of sound power/off axis averages and other things like time and phase behavior.
So, Chane isn't exactly in a rush to have their designs evaluated in that same manner. Maybe to a reputable publication that does comprehensive measurements like Stereophile? But, I don't think it's difficult to see why Jon doesn't get the traction that others might. He doesn't send out free product as others have done. All his reviews are organic and very real, limited in number though they are.
I'm very confident that you'll greatly enjoy your A5.4's.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk