2010 Great Northwest GTG

[Tomorrow]

Hope all is well Rick, kiss your wife for me and be safe

scott

We're surely going to meet her before they leave. Marie, after all, is the one with the personality in the family. Plus, she's a real champ. She was not too long out of surgery when she told Rick to go enjoy himself at the GTG. Now that's a good woman!

 

[bandphan]

We're surely going to meet her before they leave. Marie, after all, is the one with the personality in the family. Plus, she's a real champ. She was not too long out of surgery when she told Rick to go enjoy himself at the GTG. Now that's a good woman!

Great looking GTG

 

[STRONGBADF1]

There’s nothing like being 3,000 miles from home, staying at a beautiful hotel recommended by tomorrow.
Then my wife mentions she has stomach pain. Many hours in the ER, and an emergency surgery later, here we are.
We can’t say enough about the friendly and very competent docs and nurses in the hospital here.
Thanks to RJ, Joe, and their lovely wives, for their support and the great flowers!

We're surely going to meet her before they leave. Marie, after all, is the one with the personality in the family. Plus, she's a real champ. She was not too long out of surgery when she told Rick to go enjoy himself at the GTG. Now that's a good woman!

WTH?!

I bet it was the potato salad!

Seriously... Rick, I hope Marie is OK. Make sure you tell her that Brenda and I are thinking of her and hoping for a speedy recovery!

 

[sawzalot]

WTH?!

I bet it was the potato salad!

Seriously... Rick, I hope Marie is OK. Make sure you tell her that Brenda and I are thinking of her and hoping for a speedy recovery!

Ditto on that, I too hope all is well, I knew the salad on the west coast was different but now this

Take care Mr and Mrs Rickster feel better
Best Regards ,sawz and Wifey

 

[Rickster71]

WTH?!

I bet it was the potato salad!

Seriously... Rick, I hope Marie is OK. Make sure you tell her that Brenda and I are thinking of her and hoping for a speedy recovery!

Ditto on that, I too hope all is well, I knew the salad on the west coast was different but now this

Take care Mr and Mrs Rickster feel better
Best Regards ,sawz and Wifey

Thanks very much guys!
It's not only a GTG, and vacation, it's an adventure.

Since her surgery she's doing much better; and I will tell her you've sent well wishes. Thanks all.
RJ and Joe, I didn't mean to derail the NW GTG thread.
If you see the need, please move my health care posts to the Steam Vent.

 

[Tomorrow]

Thanks very much guys!
It's not only a GTG, and vacation, it's an adventure.

Since her surgery she's doing much better; and I will tell her you've sent well wishes. Thanks all.
RJ and Joe, I didn't mean to derail the NW GTG thread.
If you see the need, please move my health care posts to the Steam Vent.

Not a chance. Now we'll get more google hits on "emergency surgery"!

 

[Tomorrow]

THE AUDITION - PART 1

The auditioning reports from our Great Northwest GTG will be broken into a couple of space limited, bite-sized posts. We will start with the introduction of the format used, its purposeful design, and the acoustic elements identified.

The auditioning was held in the home theater room of AverageJoe. This room has reasonably good acoustics with minor reflections, probably off the front (shrouded video screen) as measured by Dennis Murhpy's PRAXIS measuring system software and hardware. Questions regarding this technology should be directed to him. There were 7 auditioners, with two missing due to last minute emergencies. The 7 also included me, and two industry designers (Dennis Murphy, who designs crossovers for Salk Sound and Ken Humphreys, speaker designer for Aperion Audio). At least one of these didn't feel he identified his own speaker, and both seemed to be quite honest and consistent in their reports. I had no knowledge of the speaker play order and was considered a neutral auditioner.

Two speakers did not arrive on time...the Nate's Audio T5's arrived unfortunately on Monday. We'll be doing a little separate post later on those. No word has come from the start-up company Lauren and their monitors. We had hoped to unveil the Ascend Acoustics new Sierra-1 NrT, but parts haven't arrived at the factory in time for us to test the units. We auditioned the standard Sierra-1 model, instead. We did, however, proudly unveil for the first time anywhere the spankin' new Aperion Verus Grand Bookshelf speakers. But more on speakers, later.

AverageJoe will be publishing relevant drive equipment and/or technical data, also separate from this post. But let me say that the FR measurements we conducted the night before the GTG revealed there to be no effect by the blackout screen on the speakers. (Actually there was a very minimal measurable effect, but well below an auditory level.)

The summary reports that you will be seeing include a composite picture of the opinion of the 7 auditioners regarding each speaker pair auditioned. Random, singular and unshared comments have been left out of the summary. Two, nearly identical audition sessions were held for all speaker pairs, the first a blinded session. The second was with all speakers revealed, prices stated, and in random order with regards to the first session. With this approach, sighted biases could be suggested and inconsistencies can be enlightening. A third session was held, not reported on, that used Dennis' switching preamp. At auditioner request, and using auditioner suppied music, we level matched and A/B compared, 4 speakers at a time. These were single units from the manufacturers. The A/B'ing did not include stereo pairs. This mono presentation was a great way to further experience speaker performance. But again, reports had already been collected, and this session was for attendee use only.

Attendees are more than welcome and in fact have been encouraged to post their experiences at the GTG and about the speakers they heard. Individual reports may be found not only on this thread on Audioholics, but in a few other forums as well. Search for the speakers we list here, earlier (and again in my next post).

Our philosophy on this GTG was to provide online forum reports of audio hobbyist opinions of some hard-to-audition, quality stand-mount speakers from internet direct manufacturers. We wanted the auditioners to evaluate these speakers and then describe them, much as they would after going to a dealer...but this would be a more controlled environment with regards to room acoustics, drive gear, etc. As mentioned earlier, msrp pricing was limited to $2,000 for the basic models. (A couple came with custom, i.e. slightly more expensive custom veneer options.) All auditioners were relatively experienced audio hobbyists...but I think all of us still learned a lot about ourselves and our auditory acuities, as well as about the speakers themselves.

Below is one of the audition report forms that details the elements that we focused on, using reasonably appropriate music cuts to determine quality. One of these (with appropriate heading for each presentation, e.g. "Session 2 - Speaker A") was used for each speaker, twice...first session blinded, second session revealed. So each auditioner filled out 12 forms. These were all signed, by the way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


2010 GNW GTG Audition Report – Session 2 - Speaker A:


For Speaker A, please comment upon the following:



Resolution – speakers’ general ability to resolve distinct, detailed, and natural sounds.

(Spanish Harlem)



Bass – woofer accuracy and natural presentation.

(Bass Test)



Midrange purity – clear and believable midrange sounds including vocals.

(Grandma’s Hands)



Transparency – clear, distinct, airy, and delicate open window to the music.

(Played Twice)



Transients – quick, dynamic shifts in musical presentation.

(The Royal March)



Visceral impact – speakers’ ability to involve listener with energy, intimacy, and emotion.

(Sweet Georgia Brown)



Soundstage – depth and width of presentation.

(If I Could Sing Your Blues)



Dynamics – ability to handle brute force musical attacks.

(Drum Solo)



Other comments – including areas that you found particularly pleasing or otherwise about the speakers.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Auditioners were encouraged to use their subjective experience of the speaker play and explain it in plain language as opposed to some made up scoring/comparative numbering rate or rank. While we looked for bias from the auditioners as represented by notable differences in their blinded vs. sighted auditions, only minor differences were noted. These I attribute to the highly competitive nature of the various designs/models. It's difficult to differentiate one fine speaker from another. I think we all found out how we, even the very most experienced of us, have difficulty diagnosing speaker quality to ourselves, much less others. If the other attendees comment, you'll probably see unanymous agreement on that issue.

We looked to compare and contrast speaker presentation among the 6 pairs. We all agree that loudspeaker preference is a highly subjective matter and came at it from that angle. No matter what you may think, a truly accurate, all-variable controlled scientific testing for auditory factors in speaker preference or superiority does not exist and certainly isn't possible within usual 'shoot out' conditions. Harman and a couple of others may have come close, but there are arguable flaws in all such "objective" preference testing systems. Hopefully, our approach will provide the readers with some interesting insights regarding the tested speaker pairs, and a little guidance toward what may be their own preference/speaker matching.

My following post will include the auditioners' reports on the speaker pairs in summary form (we will protect the innocent...) But a hint...these were all VERY competitive, quality loudspeakers that anyone would be proud to own.

 

[bandphan]

I love that Chesky Test disc

 

[AverageJoe]

THE AUDITIONPt. II

Room and Setup

The audition room was our 16 x 22 theater room with just under 3000 cu. ft. of space. Ceilings are 9' high, but with the raised stage and riser it really averages out to 8 1/2. The front portion of the room has floor to ceiling absorption behind the dark speaker cloth wall coverings (see the previous photos), but the rest of the walls and ceiling are just sheet rock. There were some reflections noted during the response tests that Dennis did on Friday night, but overall, the frequency response measurements taken at 1m were fairly flat. As an example:

Don't ask me which speaker this is. We don't intend to publish the rest of the graphs. The response sweeps were not taken to demonstrate a superiority or failing in any of the speakers themselves, and our casual setup was not appropriate for that kind of comparison, anyway. Primarily, we wanted to make sure our blind cloth made no audible difference in the audition, and to verify the room was at least marginally adequate for the task (to justify to my wife any additional acoustic treatments I might need). We didn't even measure all the speakers - but it was nice to learn something about my room.

Electronics consisted of an Oppo BDP-83 (sorry, couldn't afford the Special Edition model ), The Vision DAC/Preamp and Insight+ Double 170 power amplifier from Audio by VanAlstine, SonicWave interconnects by Impact Acoustics, and Velocity 12awg speaker wire from the Audioholics Store with bananas from Aperion.

During the blinded session, each pair of speakers were moved to the same 18" speaker stands which stayed stationary during the entire session. Placement was fairly wide on the stage, about 9' apart. The tow-in was the same for all models, and no attempt was made to compensate for the various tweeter heights (with the stage and stands, tweeter height above the main floor was from 36" to 47", and ear height of the listeners ranged from about 38" in the first row to 64" in the back bar stools). 1st row was about 9' from the speakers and 2nd row about 4' behind that.

After the speakers were placed on the stands, we level-matched by playing pink-noise and adjusting the preamp volume to match levels read from a RadioShack Sound Level Meter (Slow/"C" Weighting) at the back half of the room. After the listening was completed, the speakers were removed from the stands, and the next pair was placed. The blind cloth was not removed until the entire session was over. There was not enough room on the stage for all 12 speakers, so after 3 pairs were completed, we ran everyone out for a break and cycled the other 3 sets from the adjacent equipment room.

After lunch, the entire process was repeated with the cloth removed, but in a different order than before. The last session involved A/B comparisons with listener-provided music. Very impressive switching equipment from Dennis, but a very casual, sighted session so probably no need to elaborate on the setup.
On to the results. Take it away, Tomorrow!

 

[KEW]

On to the results. Take it away, Tomorrow!

Just get to it whenever you can...



No rush...



Don't mind us...



Any time now...



We'll just wait...



Dum-dee-dum-dee-dum ...



Yep! I'll just clip my finger nails while I'm waiting...



Wow! I didn't realize those squirrels were so active out the window...



Take your time, I'm gonna get a sandwich...



Hmm, I need to clean the cobwebs off of the ceiling...



Whenever you're ready...






Good God, man, have ye no compassion!!!

You're killing us!!!

 

[Tomorrow]

I needed that good laugh!! Thanks, Kew!

As soon as I get the Pepsi off my monitor and keyboard, I'll get right on the summary. Promise. Yes I do. Right away.

 

[Tomorrow]

Man, I'm still slogging through these reports...72 of 'em with 9 elements each to summarize. (I can't believe some people have worse handwriting than I do.) Giving an adequate summary to all elements with as fair a statement as possible of listener perceived speaker presentation takes a bit of time. But I'm getting there...... Kew, come help.

Stay tuned.

 

[STRONGBADF1]

just bored waiting...

 

[KEW]

Kew, come help.

No thanks, it's much easier to complain about your slackness than to actually do something, myself!

But if you want, you can scan and email the reports to me and I'll think about helping (at least for the few seconds until I get engrossed in them)!

 

[Tomorrow]

THE AUDITION - Part lll

The auditioning ran very smoothly. We developed a comfortable amplitude setting and established a good pace going with the musical cuts, with just enough time for everyone to scroll a few thoughts about the various audio elements (after each cut). I have mentioned in other places that speaker preference is quite subjective. Our individual auditioner reports demonstrate that phenomenon with virtually every speaker pair. Each pair had reports ranging from "don't like so much" to "I have to have this one". There were also sometimes surprising differences between sighted and blinded auditions by most individuals. (But that will be the subject of another, I think potentially interesting and evocative post.) Comparing and describing the performance of quality speakers is a surprisingly complex and difficult task. Continuous, rapt attention to details of performance was a challenge at the least. Consistent, accurate (for each individual) descriptions, and still taking in the totality of each speaker pair's presentation gave the audition team much to ponder. I hope they chime in regarding the difficulties involved in the task. (I will undoubtedly post my personal impressions later.)

This post will be a summary of the audition team's reports on individual speaker pair presentations of the acoustic elements (previously listed). The comments included were shared by multiple listeners from both the blinded and sighted sessions. Hopefully, this will provide a baseline description of elements that the speakers do or do not do well...according to most listeners. A single or odd comment that diverges substantially from shared descriptions has been left off the summary. Also, these were all quality speakers. Some of the comments reflect comparisons to others of great quality. When an auditioner might write something like "bit sibilant", it was usually in comparison to other high quality speakers heard during the session. So the reader should carefully consider that aspect. "Bit sibilant" in this case is very relative. Thus, I would again caution the reader that he or she may have an entirely different subjective take on their auditions of the speakers. But herein is our experience, with speakers listed in no particular order.

The summary that follows is the result of hours of preparation, generous amounts of sponsor support, lots of investment of resources by the organizers, much interest and many hours of participation by hobbyists, many more hours of study, summarizing and critiquing of written synopses, and last but not least...lots of fun. Joe and I want to thank everyone for their help in making this a great event. So enjoy the report. If you have questions, fire away. If you have complaints, call your moms.

SALK ELLIS 1801



These speakers were extremely well received, with glowing reports across the board. The exlamations regarding the luxuriant, elegant appearance of the units were almost universal. All described performance elements seemed to blend into one of musical immersion and appreciation. More than a few wanted to own this speaker during the blinded session.
Resolution - Generally described as very good to great with detail and balance praises throughout, though two auditioners noted nasal sounds in vocals. "Big", "Bold", "Distinct", "Great separation" were common descriptors.
Bass - Very good presentation of bass. "Fine overall bass", "Clean", "Super", "Good extension".
Midrange - Again, good to very good mids reported. "Easy", "Natural", "Sounds Live", with two reports of slight distortion.
Transparency - Excellent performance here as stated by the listeners. "Resolving", "Airy", "Great at times", "Great sense of clarity".
Transients - Interesting variation of reports from good to outstanding. "Wow!", "Fast attack, but not resolved", "Very good".
Visceral Impact - Here is a strong suit of the Salks. "Great", "I'm involved!", "Wow, even drum ghost notes noted", "Had one wanting more", "Okay".
Soundstage - This was an element difficult to measure given everyone's different off-axis seating. Nevertheless, the Salks entertained descriptors from "Can't judge", to "Average", to "Filled the entire room", "Pinpoint placing and great depth".
Dynamics - Again, very good to excellent reports. "Very good", "Fine", "Easy as pie", "Very lifelike".
Other Comments - "Favorite", "Got to have", "Great and organic", "Balanced", "Great speaker".

SELAH VERITA



This pair from Selah Audio is easily the largest of the demo units. While only a bit of bass reduction would result, these are available in smaller, sealed units, as well. The Veritas are interesting and, to me, are complex speakers that might take getting used to. Their drivers, at least in my opinion, are among the best. I heartily endorse the RAAL tweeter. But responses to their presentation were quite varied and a little conflicted. This result may have been because the Veritas were the first speaker auditioned and listeners were not familiar with the musical cuts. This was discussed by the audition team. I gave slightly more weight to the unveiled reports as a result.
Resolution - This pair had an interesting cross-section of comments regarding resolution, generally good comments, but with some hints of a troubled high end. "Slightly bright and missing something", "Natural but slightly clouded top end", "Solid, good vocals", "Sibilant", "Nice", "Very nice".
Bass - Generally a good bass presentation in the reports, but variable. "Very good", "Nice extension", "Clean bass", "One note", "Lacking a little weight", "Nice, natural, liked it", "Smooth and natural".
Midrange - There was again quite a variation on opinions of the Veritas. "Good detail", "Nice", "Solid but not special", "Clear but thin".
Transparency - The Selahs did well with this important element. "Loved it...3D", "Very nice", "Not bad, maybe a bit sharp", "Clear and distinct".
Transients - Another very good reported element. "Nice job", "Smooth, snappy", "Very nice", "Good presentation".
Visceral Impact - The variability of bass experience may also afflict this element a bit. "Okay, speakerish", "Lacks bass", "Lively", "Good slam", "Doesn't pull me in", "Good".
Soundstage - In my opinion, and from the reports, soundstage seems to be the Verita's strength, even in the challenging seating positions...but there were a couple of dissentors. "Nice", "Deep and wide", "Diffuse", "Average", "Most impressive".
Dynamics - And this might have been perceived by most as not the Verita's strong suit, but still received some very good comments. "Okay but a bit bright", "Hurt by bass loss", "Okay, lacks bass, "Good job", "Better than most with cymbals".
Other Comments - "Solid, good separation, bit bright", "Another good speaker, maybe too bright in the mids".

TYLER TAYLO



These lovely Taylos represented another pair with stunning good looks. The burled maple veneer was impeccable. The audition team seemed to think that this pair also matched its beauty with its attitude via some across-the-board praise. Finding reviews of Tyler Acoustic speakers is difficult. Hopefully we can add to the library as they are worthy competitors.
Resolution - Resolution comments ranged more than any other elements, but were still excellent. "Full-bodied, but bit forward", "Bit hot", "Detailed and lifelike", "Piano artificial sounding", "Very good".
Bass - I guess you have to love the Seas driver and cabinet integration. "Perfect", "Natural", "Nicely extended".
Midrange - I'll let the comments do the talking. ""Man, these are GOOD", "Superb and balanced", "Natural if just a bit forward", "Excellent".
Transparency - This element may suffer from the same issue that limited consensus on Resolution. "Neutral, but not airy", "Not as clean", "Very good".
Transients - And the Taylos are back to consensual comments from the team. "Not bad", "Clean", "Live sounding", "Nice".
Visceral Impact - Overall, this was a very strong performer for impact with perhaps the best reports. "Got me involved", "Great", "Very good".
Soundstage - For some reason, the Taylo pair was another that overcame the multiple off-axis listener perspectives. "Excellent!", "Live", "Nothing overdone", "Very good".
Dynamics - This pair is showing itself to be a top quality loudspeaker. Dynamics were also seen by the team as near fabulous. "Very good", "Snappy", "Good...maybe a touch hot", "Superb".
Other Comments - "I like these", "Natural sounding, perhaps a little muddy", "I'd be surprised if these weren't tower speakers", "Excellent".

(Snip)

 

[Tomorrow]

THE AUDITION - Part III, continued

APERION VERUS GRAND



This was a brand new speaker for us AND for Aperion. This pair was from their first production run and just might end up being a huge hit for the company. They were easily the smallest of the speakers present but they packed a wallop. While not the best of the best according to the auditioners, it was by far the least expensive and judged an excellent value. Because these were just available within days of the GTG, they were personally brought by Aperion designer, Ken Humphries. Also, because he left shortly after the event (in pouring rain) we were unable to snap any decent photographs. Hopefully one or more pictures will be available in a few days. Meanwhile I included a photo from their sales brochure.
Resolution - Being so tiny, these speakers still surprised many of us with their big sound. "Smooth, but a bit congested", "Bit sibilant, but clear", "Good, not great", "Detailed", "Very good".
Bass - Big things from a little source. "Emphatic bass", "Natural sounding", "Good weight", "Clean", "Very good".
Midrange - The mids seemed to be heard with equivalence by all. "Natural", "Okay", "Good", "Bit flat".
Transparency - A little more mixed bag, here. "Little smeared", "Very good", "Reserved", "Lifelike".
Transients - Here the Aperions spiced a little variation amongst the listeners. "Decent, but needs more air", "Smooth, but didn't excel", "Lifelike", "Good".
Visceral Impact - Impact from the little guys was still hanging in there, but barely. "Reserved a bit", "Slightly aggressive", "Nothing outstanding", "Highs bothersome", "Smooth".
Soundstage - Soundstage was decent but not special according to the group. "Nice", "Very good", "Average".
Dynamics - Again, not the best, not the worst dynamics. "Average", "Fine", "Nice and tight".
Other Comments - "Left me smiling", "A bit dull", "Detailed but non-fatiguing", "Solid performer, but bright", "I'd buy", "An amazing value".

ASCEND SIERRA-1



The Sierra-1's have been receiving kudos from the audio community for a long time. We were very pleased to have this pair sponsored by Ascend and to allow us to compare and contrast them with other quality stand-mount speakers. We had hoped to hear their new flagship Sierra-1 Nrt units. But they are still pending production, probably until October.
Resolution - According to our auditoners, this pair's weak link may have been its ability to resolve the finest details. But it was still competitive. "Bit sibilant", "Nice and detailed", "Very good but could be better", "Bold vocals", "Bright", "Clean but a bit thin".
Bass - The pair did better with the bass production. "Clean", "Super", "Lacks ultra-deep but is strong", "Rich".
Midrange - Mids appear to be another element of strength for the Sierras. "Neutral", "Nice", "I like, but they could be a bit warmer for me".
Transparency - And the beat keeps on as we understand what all the fuss is about over these speakers. Obviously the folks at Ascend are doing something right. "Clear", "Distinct", "Naturally clear", "Smooth", "Fine", "Good".
Transients - Transients played into this speaker's hands. "Handled shifts nicely", "I want this speaker", "Good", "Very good".
Visceral Impact - Pretty good impact on the audience. "Nice, present", "Very good", "Good but a little intense".
Soundstage - From this problematic element, the Sierras received a nice approval. ""Okay", "Very good", "Great".
Dynamics - These speakers kept up with the more dynamic and lightning fast units. "Very good", "Great", "I'm there", "Superb".
Other Comments - "Bit intense, but overall excellent", "Stood out for fullness of bass", "I'd buy".

USHER X-718




These Ushers aren't Internet Direct marketed speakers, but they can be difficult to find for auditioning. As I undertand the pecking order, these models are just a step below the well-regarded Usher Tiny Dancers. This pair still seems to fit perfectly with the others for our comparison purposes. The demo pair sent for our evaluation had one minor flaw...they were white (with walnut side panels). It was announced after the blinded audition session that a couple of listeners could see the white speakers through the blackout cloth, and perhaps one knew what they were. None of us feels it was a difficult problem or detracted from our results. There were the most distinctive appearing of the group.
Resolution - This pair wasn't the best competitor to most reviewers, but it had a decent presentation. "Sibilant but distinct", "Good, but unnatural", "Really good".
Bass - There were not embarrassed in the bass end. "Good", "Bit boomy", "Very good".
Midrange - Nothing special nor especially detracting was noticed in the mids. "Okay", "Good".
Transparency - Again, nothing special, nor particularly bothersome for the audience. "Fine", "Needs some airiness", "Very good".
Transients - Repeat. See above. "Fine", "Okay".
Visceral Impact - There was one word for almost all comments regarding impact. "Good".
Soundstage - More of the same. "Good", "Good, but a bit flat".
Dynamics - The X-718's preformed quite well in the dynamics arena. "Good", "Quick, but could present lows better", "Okay".
Other Comments - "I like this speaker", "It's good, but not special", "Could improve upper bass", "Subdued bass".


Lastly, I tried to post a comparative summary of the speaker specifications (and drive gear information) for your quick reference. But I couldn't figure out how to convert a wide Excel worksheet into Audioholics' format. Maybe Joe can do that. You should check the vendors' websites for explicit information.

PS: Many thanks to semi-professional-wait-out-the-storms-photographer AverageJoe for the great pictures! And here is how it looked from the speakers' perspective!

 

[GirgleMirt]

Very nice, looks like you guys did a very good job! From the one speaker I've heard of the bunch, Sierras, seems pretty spot on. Any reason why the price of each was not mentioned? Too bad about the NrT Sierra, would have been great to read a comparison vs the other speakers...

 

[Tomorrow]

Very nice, looks like you guys did a very good job! From the one speaker I've heard of the bunch, Sierras, seems pretty spot on. Any reason why the price of each was not mentioned? Too bad about the NrT Sierra, would have been great to read a comparison vs the other speakers...

I think the pricing was mentioned earlier...not sure. It was in the spec spread sheet I was trying to post. But voila...thanks to my technical guru, AverageJoe, here it is...click to expand.

 

[farming dad]

Great Job on the synopsis Tomorrow! I have to admit, I would have been quite intimidated just trying to interpret my own hand scribbling, so I applaud your effort. Thanks to you, Joe, the wives, and everyone in attendance for a great time and experience. While every speaker we listened to was unique, each was also an excellent product that was worth hearing. Again; Great job!-Aaron

 

[AverageJoe]

I took a few pictures of the speakers inside the house before boxing them up, since some finishes look a bit different with inside lighting rather than bright sunlight.

About the missing Aperion - As was mentioned earlier, l didn't have the foresight to get a couple good shots of the Verus Grand Bookshelves before they left us. No excuse - Since Aperion is only a couple hours drive from us, we were fortunate to host their first appearance in public before they are introduced next month. And I blew my chance to record our sneek peek. Sorry.