Seems Omega 7A & 7F are these drivers, so Louis already have made this test.
That does not constitute controlled scientific or double blind testing. What test methods were used? Where are the published results? What unbiased panel was used for the testing? Have the test results been peer reviewed and found to be valid? Sorry to say but Louis barely releases any driver specifications and has avoided such testing in the past as being too expensive. Just look at his prices, U.S. based labor, and cabinet quality and you'll quickly realize that not much is left over to be invested into the drivers, let alone extensive research.
Listening tests at the Canadian Research Council (the current gold standard) involve using a variety of listeners (off the street, studio professionals, audiophiles, and musicians); a very large room with black acoustically transparent screen; a mechanical system to move speakers (in 3 seconds) in and out of place so each occupy the identical position; multiple repeated random samplings; never just A/B but normally A/B/C/D testing (4 samples) including an extra (a known standard of similar design/performance). And keep in mind that the CRC is a non-biased, non-profit organization. Even with all that, results often aren't clear cut, thus the reality of research. If say the results indicated a clear cut winner of magnet types, inevitably vested parties would dismiss the findings or add qualifiers to nullify the results.
Srajan's quote of Adler stating, "...equally good sound..." is apparently only based on one man's opinion, not scientific testing. Naturally as a typical equipment reviewer Srajan would see no problem in valuing the opinion a single individual and the comment does not detail exactly what "equally good sound" means. Seems to me that he didn't say "identical sound" so even by his words there is room for personal taste, thus we've come full circle.
