Forum Jump: 
 1489Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #601 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 04:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
QueueCumber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Farmer McGregor's Garden
Posts: 6,239
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 58
In the DBTs at Harman, is it completely random selection of listeners for the tests or are these self-selected folks? Have any of these DBTs been done with smaller selective groups, like audio aficionados or musicians?

I’d love to see DBT tests of similarly measuring speakers that look at the intersection of perceptual reasoning ability and some of the measurements being discussed. Averages that illuminate the preference of the general population are helpful for selling speakers, but how would averages amongst folks that are highly sensitive to spatial perception/cues pan out with similarly measuring speakers that are designed with different materials?
Scotth3886 likes this.
QueueCumber is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #602 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 04:08 PM
Advanced Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 711
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 418 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoZags13 View Post
Personal preference will always matter more than data/science. And it should! The data from hundreds of thousands of cars driven millions of miles shows some brands are simply 'better' at things like reliability. Yet people ignore it to buy cars that are 'unreliable' because they care more about other factors like looks, and that makes the world more interesting. Thank you everyone who gives 'science' the middle finger and goes for style over reliability, practicality, and safety. You make things like the Morgan Aero, Jeep Wrangler, and boutique speakers possible.
If you read this whole thread and/or read some of the peer reviewed studies on this issue you would see that Harman has shown that they can take the "data" and predict listener preference 86% of the time, 99% when bass performance is similar. They've also shown that there generally aren't any special snowflakes in regards to preference, they are similar among different age groups, ethnicities, sex, etc.

Also, your boutique brands aren't really a good argument, take a Jeep Wrangler, for example, there aren't many who are going to prefer a Chevy Cruze to a Wrangler off road, the Jeep is objectively better and could easily be proven better in tests. Just like a Jeep Wrangler isn't going to be preferred to a Corvette to someone looking for a fast car and would get spanked in a straight line or a road course.
aarons915 is online now  
post #603 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 04:08 PM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 472
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 490 Post(s)
Liked: 1720
Quote:
Originally Posted by neutralguy View Post
Could this impact of intermodulation distortion be generalized and incorporated into the predictive model? If an effect such as this is known and lies outside the model, it gives critics support to the argument that the frequency response measurements "don't tell the whole story".
Of course frequency response measurements (linear distortions) don't tell the whole story, but it turns out that in the real world they tell the most important part. If they are not right, nothing else much matters. I wrote the following note on non-linear distortions for another Forum:

Non-linear distortions originate in a non-linear input/output relationship which changes the waveform by adding spectral components to the audio signal. Rather than quantifying the non-linearity itself, we probe the system with simple signals; single or multiple pure tones being the most common. Then we measure what comes out and, knowing what went in, a percentage distortion can be calculated. Problem is that because of simultaneous perceptual masking all of the distortion components are not heard. So, the measured percentage distortion, which includes all components, is wrong. The correlation with objectionable sounds when listening to music is poor. We need evaluations that incorporate some properties of the human hearing system's inherent masking in order to make a serious start.

The existing metrics, like harmonic or intermodulation distortion are useful to design engineers, but the only truly meaningful number is zero.

In order to meaningfully interpret distortion measurements above zero, the metrics must involve elements of psychoacoustics: masking being the dominant one. A few have been tried but I know of none that have been tested sufficiently to achieve widespread acceptance. But it is a topic that I have not closely followed in recent years - I'm now retired. There is a discussion, with references in my book. The good news is that over my nearly 50 years of evaluating loudspeakers it has been extremely rare for non-linear distortion to be an audible factor in sound quality evaluations of conventional "hifi" products. However it does happen. Recently popular small wireless and "smart" loudspeakers face real challenges in that respect.

Measuring non-linear distortion in a normal room makes a difficult situation even worse, because amplitudes of distortion products are affected by reflected sounds which are highly dependent on the venue, the loudspeaker location and the mic location. Background noise is another challenge; such measurements need to be done in a very quiet anechoic chamber or equivalent. Being able to make a measurement does not make it a useful measurement.

My standard example of human tolerance for non-linear distortion is the LP. In the early years LPs were the source of program material for loudspeaker listening tests, so I made it my business to examine the performance of the medium. I published several articles in Canadian audio magazines on the topic, and it got to the point of making a test recording that contained music and test signals. There were easily audible differences between the master tape and what came off the LP - those inherent problems are still with us. The levels of measured non-linear distortions of all conceivable kinds was shocking - whole percentages being common, and, during incipient or real mistracking, off the charts. Masking is a powerful factor in what we hear. Needless to say, digital audio was a great improvement. But for some, obviously, the placebo effect is profound .
Muza, russ_777, DS-21 and 2 others like this.
Floyd Toole is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #604 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 04:24 PM
Senior Member
 
GoZags13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Posts: 294
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
If you read this whole thread and/or read some of the peer reviewed studies on this issue you would see that Harman has shown that they can take the "data" and predict listener preference 86% of the time, 99% when bass performance is similar. They've also shown that there generally aren't any special snowflakes in regards to preference, they are similar among different age groups, ethnicities, sex, etc.

Also, your boutique brands aren't really a good argument, take a Jeep Wrangler, for example, there aren't many who are going to prefer a Chevy Cruze to a Wrangler off road, the Jeep is objectively better and could easily be proven better in tests. Just like a Jeep Wrangler isn't going to be preferred to a Corvette to someone looking for a fast car and would get spanked in a straight line or a road course.
You totally miss the point. Off road is only one way to measure a car, and 99% of the world doesn't care about it. Just like audio. And by all the other metrics, Jeep's are loud, unreliable, and unsafe. Yet people love them who go to the grocery store every day and will never drive off road.

And I don't care how 'peer' reviewed the data is supposed to be, it is not independent. And also the fact that it's 'peer' reviewed is not that strong of a support. Do some research on the quality of peer reviewing for statistical cheating and you'll find there are a lot of intenional data manipulation that makes it to publication. Those two facts make it so that, again, no matter how 'good' their tests might be you can't blindly accept them without doing serious inquiry and analysis of the raw data, which YOU HAVE NOT.

Denon X4300H; Sony XBR75 900E; Definitive Technology RLS-II/DI 5.5LCR/DI 5.5R; NHT SW12
GoZags13 is offline  
post #605 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 04:31 PM
Senior Member
 
GoZags13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Posts: 294
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
As I understand it, the data from Floyd Toole et all is available for inspection by any consumer who wants to educate himself. So it's not like it's hidden away behind smoke and mirrors or whatever. The consumer can decide for himself, to some degree, if the explanations and data make sense.

But if one is educated to understand the data (and I freely admit I'm not technical enough to grasp all of it yet), then there needn't be a divide between "personal preference" and the data. You can note, for instance, that perhaps the data lines up quite well with models you have liked, and so looking for that data in a speaker's measurements will be looking for the type of speaker you prefer.
There are a lot of ways to manipulate data from the beinging, including basic test setup and design. I don't know that this is the case, but you can't rule it out. That is extra important to consider when it is not an objective party testing. And there still can be a gap between the 'data' and preference. Especially when getting into things like speakers that are designed with specific looks/shapes/sizes are considered as well.

Denon X4300H; Sony XBR75 900E; Definitive Technology RLS-II/DI 5.5LCR/DI 5.5R; NHT SW12
GoZags13 is offline  
post #606 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 04:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
QueueCumber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Farmer McGregor's Garden
Posts: 6,239
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoZags13 View Post
You totally miss the point. Off road is only one way to measure a car, and 99% of the world doesn't care about it. Just like audio. And by all the other metrics, Jeep's are loud, unreliable, and unsafe. Yet people love them who go to the grocery store every day and will never drive off road.
This may be true, but I love blowing away 99.999% of the cars I run into at a traffic light with a Trackhawk... Lol
unretarded likes this.
QueueCumber is offline  
post #607 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 04:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
QueueCumber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Farmer McGregor's Garden
Posts: 6,239
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoZags13 View Post
There are a lot of ways to manipulate data from the beinging, including basic test setup and design. I don't know that this is the case, but you can't rule it out. That is extra important to consider when it is not an objective party testing. And there still can be a gap between the 'data' and preference. Especially when getting into things like speakers that are designed with specific looks/shapes/sizes are considered as well.
Person 1: I found Truth!
Person 2: How do you know?
Person 1: I used the Truth to measure it.
Lp85253 likes this.
QueueCumber is offline  
post #608 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 04:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
SnellTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 494 Post(s)
Liked: 325
So $10k Revels smash a $10k pair of Magico's. Could you do the same but vs Magico Q5? I know they're $50k would would be interesting. Revel Ultima are some of the very finest speakers I have ever heard, but it seems the ultimate Über high-end hi-fi magazines LOVE everything Magico.
SnellTHX is online now  
post #609 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 04:52 PM
Advanced Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 711
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 418 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoZags13 View Post
You totally miss the point. Off road is only one way to measure a car, and 99% of the world doesn't care about it. Just like audio. And by all the other metrics, Jeep's are loud, unreliable, and unsafe. Yet people love them who go to the grocery store every day and will never drive off road.
No I'm not missing the point, I get that you're saying some people buy things based on emotional reasons but I'm saying there are some who buy the best vehicle for whatever purpose they choose, such as off road capability. If you want to buy speakers based solely on looks no one is going to stop you but most people buy speakers to sound good with looks as a distant 2nd.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoZags13 View Post
And I don't care how 'peer' reviewed the data is supposed to be, it is not independent. And also the fact that it's 'peer' reviewed is not that strong of a support. Do some research on the quality of peer reviewing for statistical cheating and you'll find there are a lot of intenional data manipulation that makes it to publication. Those two facts make it so that, again, no matter how 'good' their tests might be you can't blindly accept them without doing serious inquiry and analysis of the raw data, which YOU HAVE NOT.
It's not Harman's fault that no one else does similar research into listening preference, I'd like to see others confirm their research as well but at this point no one else has done so. I'm also not sure what data manipulation you think they can do with measurements, do you think they turn the speakers around 180 degrees or something when measuring? Also, even if the measurements were doctored, that won't affect the listening tests.

I agree you can't blindly accept any research but my ears just so happen to agree that the best speakers I've heard measure the most neutral. I don't own any Harman brand speakers at the moment by the way, so I'm certainly no Harman fanboy but I do believe in the science and haven't found any fault with it except a few minor things that are more personal preference.
jamiebosco likes this.
aarons915 is online now  
post #610 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 05:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 6,025
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2926 Post(s)
Liked: 1616
I think revel and jbl need wiki updates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revel_Audio nothing here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JBL ends in 2002?

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5 Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is offline  
post #611 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 06:20 PM
Oppo Beta Group
 
RichB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 10,857
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1707 Post(s)
Liked: 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnellTHX View Post
So $10k Revels smash a $10k pair of Magico's. Could you do the same but vs Magico Q5? I know they're $50k would would be interesting. Revel Ultima are some of the very finest speakers I have ever heard, but it seems the ultimate Über high-end hi-fi magazines LOVE everything Magico.
Revel could place the drivers in a 500 pound granite cabinet and the reviews would blow away the Magico's


- Rich

Oppo UPD-205 | Sonica DAC | BDP-105D | HA-1 | PM-1 | Emotiva XMC-1 | ATI Signature AT6002 x 2 + AT6006 | Revel Salon2s, Voice2, Studio2s | Velodyne HGS-15 | LG 65C7 | Lumagen 2020 | HDFury Vertex x 2
RichB is offline  
post #612 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 07:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
srw1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,900
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 200 Post(s)
Liked: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewolf7002 View Post
Thanks for the suggestion, I've added them to my list! I see they have horn mounted tweeters. My only experience with horns are Klipsch speakers, and after listening to a bunch of different models I always found them to be very shrill and hard on the ears. I had a hard time listening to them for any length of time. The dealer said they typically only sell them to older guys with bad hearing lol. I don't know if that's typical of horns or not.
I had the same concerns. But JBL offers a 30 day money-back trial on their speakers if you buy from them, so I took the leap, and I was glad I did. They don't sound sharp to these old ears (54), nor are they fatiguing in any way, and my wife is in complete agreement. They are revealing, though, so they will play back bad source material as it was recorded. I won't push them anymore in this thread, since it has it's own dedicated thread. It's worth noting that there are at least three satisfied owners who have posted in this one.

Scott
Lonewolf7002 likes this.

srw1000 is offline  
post #613 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 07:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
astrallite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,412
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by neutralguy View Post
Could this impact of intermodulation distortion be generalized and incorporated into the predictive model? If an effect such as this is known and lies outside the model, it gives critics support to the argument that the frequency response measurements "don't tell the whole story".
This IMD should only be audible if there is significant midrange excursion though, so as long as the coaxial speaker is a 3 way, the mid isn't crossed over too low, and you are utilizing a subwoofer, the IMD artifacts should be close to inaudible.

Also coaxial drivers have a huge advantage in the near-field compared to a multi-driver waveguide system because the direct sound is radiating naturally off the driver itself rather than having a good portion of the output reflecting off of a waveguide. Even though in the mid-field, the dispersion characteristics will sound competitive with a concentric driver, if you try listening to Revels in the near-field it's going to sound way too diffuse with poor imaging.

Zeos comented on something similar about how Buchardt S400 with the giant waveguide just sounded too diffuse in the nearfield compared to a concentric like the Kef R3 or even a standard 2-way without a large waveguide like the Buchardt S300. I had a similar experience trying to listen to the Gem2s and the Performa Be M126Bes in the nearfield (around 3 feet) compared to Kef Reference 1. I had serious problems trying to make out any details because so much of the sound was too diffuse.

Last edited by astrallite; 01-11-2019 at 07:23 PM.
astrallite is offline  
post #614 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 10:49 PM
Senior Member
 
Hifisound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Bangalore, India
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 121 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post
IMO there's some weird but apparently long-standing institutional bias going on at Harman against concentric drivers.
They heard you 😀
http://www.jblpro.com/www/products/r...ast/one-series

Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
Recently, a concentric design did not live up to expectations because of intermodulation distortion.
Was it a 3-way ?

Hifisound is offline  
post #615 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 11:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
astrallite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,412
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post
IMO there's some weird but apparently long-standing institutional bias going on at Harman against concentric drivers. I speculate, but maybe this unwarranted bias stems from ALTEC having the niche as the American coaxial speaker company with their (not very good) 604 coax, or because the Urei “monitors” Harman finally killed off genuinely sounded bad?

At all but one of Andrew Jones' stops - KEF, Pioneer/TAD, ELAC - he introduced new and innovative concentric drivers. Two very different ones (IRIS and CST) at Pioneer/TAD. The one exception: Infinity!

It's their one blind spot, and an unfortunate one because it slightly undermines the wonderful and beneficial work they’ve done and shared.


The "air" stuff is also a little disingenuous, because air in the treble depends on the dispersion of the waveguide, which to large extent boils down to the depth of the waveguide. That waveguide can be a midrange cone or a fixed piece. Some concentric drivers, such as the TAD units, have quite shallow midrange cones. Also, as Dr. Toole points out in his excellent book, different listeners have different preferences as to directivity. Dr. Earl Geddes asserts that some of it is based on program preferences: wider dispersion for people who judge speakers based on orchestral or chamber music, narrower for studio work. I do not know of support for that theory in the literature though.

IMD - sure, I guess, in a small coax asked to play too low too loudly. Here is a great article with demo recordings comparing a JBL cinema setup with little KEF LS50s, with and without subwoofers on the LS50s. I've personally tried to listen for it in speakers based on concentrics from KEF, Tannoy, TAD, Elac, and Pioneer. I’ve never really managed to hear it.
IMO the guys on the Revel train here basically are saying if you believe in science you have to just listen to what Toole says. If you listen to Geddes or Andrew Jones somehow you are anti-science.
Scotth3886 likes this.
astrallite is offline  
post #616 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 11:25 PM
Newbie
 
spkr_diy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm curious if the spinorama measurement process has been applied to any speakers designed specifically for on-wall mounting. If so, I wonder how. Perhaps with the speaker mounted to a false wall of substantial size?
spkr_diy is offline  
post #617 of 761 Old 01-11-2019, 11:37 PM
Senior Member
 
Hifisound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Bangalore, India
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 121 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrallite View Post
IMO the guys on the Revel train here basically are saying if you believe in science you have to just listen to what Toole says. If you listen to Geddes or Andrew Jones somehow you are anti-science.
On the contrary, it comes across as almost the same except choice of wider dispersion (Dr Toole) vs narrower dispersion (Dr Geddes). [And as Dr Toole described earlier, coax being a valid choice as long as it satisfies the basic criteria].
Muza, DS-21 and SouthernCA like this.


Last edited by Hifisound; 01-12-2019 at 10:37 AM.
Hifisound is offline  
post #618 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 12:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PrimeTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lower California
Posts: 3,161
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 752 Post(s)
Liked: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
There were easily audible differences between the master tape and what came off the LP - those inherent problems are still with us.
Now that we can get digitized versions of many master tapes -- Hallelujah! -- those messy LPs can be bypassed and relegated to their remaining purpose nowadays: iconized (album art) nostalgia. Ah, nostalgia -- "The pain from an old wound" (from the Greeks, according to Don Draper -- certainly appropriate here).

Quote:
The levels of measured non-linear distortions of all conceivable kinds was shocking - whole percentages being common, and, during incipient or real mistracking, off the charts.
Master tape was not blameless, what with scrape flutter and saturation. Still, way better than vinyl, as it doesn't involve physical transduction, as do loudspeakers, microphones and phono cartridge needles. Needles, I say!

Quote:
Masking is a powerful factor in what we hear.
Which we are constantly reminded of in this brave new world of MP3 encoding/streaming (thanks again, jj).
PrimeTime is offline  
post #619 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 06:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,016
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 651 Post(s)
Liked: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkr_diy View Post
I'm curious if the spinorama measurement process has been applied to any speakers designed specifically for on-wall mounting. If so, I wonder how. Perhaps with the speaker mounted to a false wall of substantial size?

The anechoic chamber is undergoing upgrades to be able to measure in wall speakers like the JBL SCL series. I'm not sure if measurements have been done for any of the on wall speakers.
Rex Anderson is online now  
post #620 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 07:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
SnellTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 494 Post(s)
Liked: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post
Revel could place the drivers in a 500 pound granite cabinet and the reviews would blow away the Magico's


- Rich
Haha, I suppose. Haven't had the pleasure of listening to any of them so I cannot judge. I do wonder what the $600k (or something stupid) Magico Ultimate's sound like...
SnellTHX is online now  
post #621 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 08:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 8,296
Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3954 Post(s)
Liked: 2697
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnellTHX View Post
I do wonder what the $600k (or something stupid) Magico Ultimate's sound like...
I have a friend who has a $60K pair of Magico speakers. For music, they are super awesome. One of the very best 2 channel systems I have ever hear. But, because of their inefficiency, not the ideal speaker for HT.

And in the FWIW department, my first HT speakers (about 1992) were Snell THX speakers.

Mark 12:30 ][ "Hold Up" By Leslie Austin ][ The Oconee Theater

"Worrying does not take away tomorrow's troubles. It takes away today's peace"
audioguy is offline  
post #622 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 08:30 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ggsantafe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Solar Powered in the Land of Enchantment
Posts: 1,100
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 307 Post(s)
Liked: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
I have a friend who has a $60K pair of Magico speakers. For music, they are super awesome. One of the very best 2 channel systems I have ever hear. But, because of their inefficiency, not the ideal speaker for HT.
So your reply mirrored some of my thoughts - mainly how do the spinorama measurements apply to HT settings where there are multiple speakers (in my case 7 base layer & 4 on ceiling) and does speaker directivity matter as much when additional speakers are involved in delivering the soundtrack?

ggsantafe is offline  
post #623 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 09:26 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 14,998
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2643 Post(s)
Liked: 2548
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrimeTime View Post
Now that we can get digitized versions of many master tapes -- Hallelujah! -- those messy LPs can be bypassed and relegated to their remaining purpose nowadays: iconized (album art) nostalgia.

...and often: listening to them for glorious music and wonderful sound, discovering and exploring music never released on CD, etc. Not to mention tons of new music is now released on vinyl



*slinks back in to the circle of confusion*
R Harkness is online now  
post #624 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 09:31 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,811
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1127 Post(s)
Liked: 600
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrallite View Post
IMO the guys on the Revel train here basically are saying if you believe in science you have to just listen to what Toole says. If you listen to Geddes or Andrew Jones somehow you are anti-science.

That smear on all three gentlemen (Dr. Toole, Dr. Geddes, and Mr. Jones) is unwarranted and unwelcome.

Also, leave the petty tribalism at home. Revel makes fine speakers. So do other companies. Unfortunately, despite scientific advances that every competent speaker maker or marketer should understand, there’s still a lot more chaff than wheat.
audioguy, Muza, jamiebosco and 4 others like this.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
DS-21 is offline  
post #625 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 10:01 AM
Advanced Member
 
dftkell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 986
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 79
Kevin,

Thank you very much for the informative thread. I've always been impressed with Harman's methodology and science-based approach to speaker design.

I have a question regarding the double blind listening tests you conduct. Do you also conduct them for your center channel speakers?

If so, did the Concerta C25 score higher in DBLT's than the previous model, the C12? I would assume that the C12's three-way design would be superior to the C25's two-way design,regardless of improvements to drivers, etc.

Thank you,
Dan
dftkell is offline  
post #626 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 10:55 AM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 472
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 490 Post(s)
Liked: 1720
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkr_diy View Post
I'm curious if the spinorama measurement process has been applied to any speakers designed specifically for on-wall mounting. If so, I wonder how. Perhaps with the speaker mounted to a false wall of substantial size?
In my book you will see such measurements in Figures 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.13, 15.11 and 15.12. I may have missed some. These were all measured on a large rotatable wall section in a 4-pi anechoic chamber. The new ones Rex mentions will be from a hemi-anechoic chamber, a much more convenient scheme, and ultimately more accurate.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #627 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 11:06 AM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 472
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 490 Post(s)
Liked: 1720
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post
That smear on all three gentlemen (Dr. Toole, Dr. Geddes, and Mr. Jones) is unwarranted and unwelcome.

Also, leave the petty tribalism at home. Revel makes fine speakers. So do other companies. Unfortunately, despite scientific advances that every competent speaker maker or marketer should understand, there’s still a lot more chaff than wheat.
I know Earl Geddes and Andrew Jones and I doubt that there are any consequential differences among us when it comes to designing or evaluating loudspeakers - neutral sound is the goal. All of us believe in science, wherever it originates, and the meaningful measurements that follow therefrom. There are different, valid, approaches to delivering neutral sound to listeners. Given the large numbers of overrated, and often overpriced, loudspeakers not capable of delivering neutral sound we should not quibble over imagined rivalries among serious-minded engineers.
RichB, Vergiliusm, Muza and 12 others like this.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #628 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 11:47 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 8,296
Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3954 Post(s)
Liked: 2697
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post
That smear on all three gentlemen (Dr. Toole, Dr. Geddes, and Mr. Jones) is unwarranted and unwelcome.

Also, leave the petty tribalism at home. Revel makes fine speakers. So do other companies. Unfortunately, despite scientific advances that every competent speaker maker or marketer should understand, there’s still a lot more chaff than wheat.
I never cease to be amazed at the "name calling" that goes on within this hobby. Objective vs Subjective seems to be a great starting point. I wonder if Canon owners call Nikon owners names. Or if red wine enthusiasts do that to folks who happen to prefer white wine.
BufordTJustice and Lp85253 like this.

Mark 12:30 ][ "Hold Up" By Leslie Austin ][ The Oconee Theater

"Worrying does not take away tomorrow's troubles. It takes away today's peace"
audioguy is offline  
post #629 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 12:10 PM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 472
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 490 Post(s)
Liked: 1720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hifisound View Post
They heard you 😀
http://www.jblpro.com/www/products/r...ast/one-series


Was it a 3-way ?
It was a 2-way. The problem would probably not have existed if it had been a 3-way, but that is the way it was sold.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #630 of 761 Old 01-12-2019, 12:32 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,811
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1127 Post(s)
Liked: 600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
<snip>
There is no theoretical reason why well designed concentric arrangements cannot sound good. It is a choice.

However, putting a tweeter at the bottom of a cone does restrict the high frequency dispersion somewhat, meaning that shallower woofer/mids may have an advantage. One of the Japanese companies marketed a flat/planar concentric design many years ago. It is a choice.

In the end, it has to come down to good design, and I know of no evidence that one configuration, concentric or conventional, has an inherent advantage over the other.
I agree completely. However, that is a markedly different narrative from "Both KEF and TAD speakers suffer from Intermodulation Distortion since the woofer or mid cones are the waveguides. While it is true that their off-axis radiation it symmetrical, the design also limits dispersion at the highest frequencies, which is heard as a lack of "air.'"

Speculation of a long-standing Harman blind spot about concentric drivers is "idle chatter," I agree. But I heard similarly dismissive comments about concentrics due to IM distortion from ex-JBLer Greg Timbers last decade, so...

To be clear, I am NOT making the argument that concentrics are inherently better than a thoughtfully engineered multiway speaker with a waveguide-loaded tweeter that matches the dispersion of the next-driver-down at the crossover region. I'm merely pushing back on comments that they're inherently worse.

I'm also very skeptical of the IMD argument. Not that it's there. Clearly it is. But is it audible and consequential? Mitchco's earlier post includes a link to his article comparing the KEF LS50 and a JBL Pro speaker with a 15" woofer and compression driver tweeter. This review includes binaural recordings of the LS50 full range, LS50+subs, and JBL + subs. Can someone point out how the inarguably much higher IM distortion in the LS50 manifests itself in these recordings?

Lastly, there is one company selling a speaker line based on a concentric with flat midrange today: Technics. Within the limits of what one can discern from Stereophile's measurements - no sign JA's dumb practice of normalizing his off axis charts to the axial response will end, alas - the bookshelf model seems capably engineered if voiced very bright.

Listening window


Normalized horizontal



Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
A Tannoy dual concentric was in my very first blind listening test in 1966 . At the time the design was highly touted, and advertised, and many of us thought it would have an advantage over distributed driver arrangements, but it lost badly (See Figure 18.1 in my book for measurements). It lost not because of the driver locations but because of inadequate engineering.
For those following along at home: Kindle Location 9362 (pg. 448).

And, yuck. The midrange level jump does make me wonder if the Alnico woofer had been partially demagnetized at some point. So glad we've moved beyond Alnico!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
I am sure that if Harman saw an advantage in any driver design or configuration it would be employed. How it sounds is the deciding factor.
Business realities and IP law do get in the way of that to a large extent, of course.

Other companies and individuals have made a certain drivers a large and perhaps dominant part of their business identity, and as a practical matter following them would imply that they were "right" and the previous products were "wrong." Just look at what happened to Thiel when they abandoned some idiosyncratic design concepts. There were other factors involved there, but undeniably one of them is that "Thiel buyers" hated the upgraded design philosophy.

As for IP, to use a speaker example: if multiple-entry horns are a superior technology - I'm not saying they are, just using them as an example! - then other companies are limited more by their willingness to license technology (and the IP holder's willingness to license) or risk litigation on their patent workarounds.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
DS-21 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Tags
cea 2034 , double-blind , listening tests , loudspeaker measurements , spinorama



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off