Same! Agreed! And since you haven't read the review yet here's a quote... "...in positioning terms, the 770 is very benign in all counts. It seems little affected by boundaries and the front port never becomes audible at any stage." So while that comment doesn't - granted - cover room treatments it does acknowledge the practical, necessary accommodations and compromises of placing speakers in sub-optimal rooms - in other words reality for most of us? Oh dear! You're right!! How are we even taking anything this guy says seriously? I own Linton 85th's - which I love - and while I have some mild misgivings about these Missions lower sensitivity I'm still very much looking forward to hearing these! Linton's are rated 90dB while real world measurements indicate something closer to 88dB and change, while he says of these Mission's "...the 88dB/w sensitivity feels on the optimistic side."
This is a good review. Apologies, if already shared. My best mates brother had these decades ago and yes they were impressive back then Mission 770 review
The front of that 700 looks really ugly to me, a big old port next to the tweeter, it just looks out of whack. But what do I know, that Peter Comeau has a new speaker coming out weekly right now. I'll be interested to see how all these speakers arrange themselves price wise.
Have to agree!! A deeply inharmonious visual composition... yuck. The 770's however (love or hate them) at least conform to something resembling design logic.
I was watching an unbelievably terrible movie with Hugh Grant and his girlfriend had a pair of Missions in her apartment. She was cute, movie was awful.
It's in honour of the original 700: Original 700: New 700: Love it but I'm not offended when drivers aren't nicely aligned in a straight line. It makes it look even more vintage! Of course, if you have a typical English living room, these speakers will stick out like a sore thumb.
The Original 700 looks good. On the new one, the port is bigger than the tweeter, it's out of proportion. Is that Living Room a still from Downton Abbey?!
I was going to say the same thing! They're actually quite different looking objects... black mid woofers, discrete white on white port sized more favourably in proportion to the other two "circles" in the composition... also is the woofer bigger on the original? That would would mean a wider baffle which might be why the cabinet looks more proportionally correct? Also... the original didn't have that massive logo emblazoned on the baffle either? The new one is truly hideous by comparison!! It's worse than an "eye of the beholder" thing... it's just plain wrong
The reason why you guys think the Mission 770 and 700 are "hideous" is precisely the reason why I love them! So I'm afraid it is in the eye of the beholder, just like that very English living room is. About the logo, it's weird that the old ones in that picture above don't have the standard logo. The ones in the photo below look quite different and more like the new ones. Yes, the port is bigger on the new ones but that's not a valid reason to call them hideous. The port of the new 770 is bigger too.
Those small mission logo plates were much more common than the screen printed oversized branding. It’s all about proportions and I think these new lines miss the mark in comparison. Of course - the new ones probably sound much better…
Hmm, not in my experience, unless, of course, all the photos on the internet have been photoshopped. There's nothing wrong with the proportions. Everything looks balanced or compositionally correct.
BTW, I went to my local hifi shop (of IAG products, he sells Lintons, Dentons, Leak, etc) and he told me he won't be ordering the Missions or the Dovedales . They are too expensive to stock them and people will come to demo them only to order them online somewhere else (so that they have them the next day).
If anything the 700 probably look better than the 770. Anyway from memory I think the originals did in the flesh. Now if they coloured the woofer black like the originals they would look better. The bigger ports are there for acoustic reasons. These speakers will fit better into most modern UK homes than a Linton.
Going by my 'love at first sight' response, I think I agree. For people who prefer the look of the Lintons, this is how the Mission looks with grilles: This is probably also the reason why people remember the logo being smaller.
Whether the Missions are an upgrade from the Lintons - you would need to listen for yourself. If going on price alone you need to remember that the Lintons are made in China and the Missions in the UK so the Lintons will be much better value for money. Its quite possible that if all the speakers were made in the sale place the Lintons would be the most expensive.
I'm concluding that the price difference has little to do with UK v China. They made a Wharfedale Airedale ten years ago in China that retailed for £25K. Also I think both the Missions should outperform the Linton providing you want a more open airy and less warm sound. I would also expect more bass extension especially from the 770. If you want best value for money grab the Linton or Evo 4.4.
How do you kow the Airedale wouldn't have cost a lot more if it was made entirely in the UK? Why are you so sure that the Lintons would cost exactly the same if made in the UK? Just because the Dovedale goes lower and less warm doesn't mean they would cost 6000 Euro when they were made in China.
I didn't say that. But saying they can put any price they like irrespective of where it's made. Could they sell a Wharfedale speaker at £50K, are UK made speakers double the price simply due to higher production costs? Probably no to both. Take Tannoy. Moved production from UK rumored to be far east and Poland and increased prices by 30%. Maybe shipping costs play a bigger part these days due to sky high container rates. In which case UK prices for these models should be lower than elsewhere.