The Audio Critic, perhaps the most objectivist audio magazine ever published, has posted a review of the Linkwitz Lab Pluto-2 floorstanding speakers ($2,995/pair with built-in power amps). The design of these speakers is unique (photo), to say the least, making use of PVC pipe instead of conventional cabinets.
Reviewer Peter Aczel is a longtime fan of Linkwitz designs, and his views on this model are quite complimentary. He liked its performance-to-cost ratio, although he points out that it:
… is capable of reference-quality sound as long as you watch your SPLs, especially at high and low frequencies.
He also mentions that:
Overall, the choice of drivers, the physical implementation of baffling them, the design of the integrated electronics, the whole Gestalt of the Pluto-2 are unique and unprecedented. Siegfried Linkwitz is a seminal thinker on the subject of loudspeaker design. That’s why I tend to pay a lot more attention to him than to designers of expensive monkey coffins.
Monkey coffins? Welcome to Peter’s world. His views are as entertaining as they are polarizing. Read the entire review, then check out back issues for more fun. Enjoy!
The Audio Critic’s reviews are the only ones worth reading anymore. Nice job, Peter.
I am a bit bothered by Aczels reviews of the plutos and Orions. All these years he had been rigerous about measuring and being objective but for Linkwitz he is prepared to take his measurements as objective and in general he is much less critical. It may be that these are great speakers but he doesn’t compare them with any others directly. I was thinking of buying Plutos myself at one stage but could not bring myself to fork out cash for a speaker I have never heard and comes with no kind of service or guarantee other then the users forum.
I also was surprised that Peter was willing to rely on the Linkwitz measurements and not do his own. Weird.
Many current readers would be shocked to read the early issues of Audio Critic. The early Audio Critic was a very subjective magazine – a reader’s digest version of TAS. I suppose it could swing back to this approach at any time. Some felt Peter Aczel lost his credibility when he reveiwed a speaker where it was alleged he had some type of conflict of interest. After that, the magazine changed to a more Julian Hirsch approach.
Perhaps this reveiw reflects awe of and deference to a very highly regarded speaker designer.