or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Speakers ~$10K for rock, alternative and some pop. Not Jazz or Classical.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Speakers ~$10K for rock, alternative and some pop. Not Jazz or Classical. - Page 9

post #241 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post

It's not a claim, it's a fact. Check out my living room and imagine your Revel in it. Now imagine an accurate pair of tower under 3K in a dedicated room built for listening. But you're free to believe that spending on the most expensive speaker out there and putting them in your untreated living room is the ultimate setup.

Perhaps a fact in your room.

But every room is different.

They may not sound as great in your room. But they may sound great in most rooms.

Too many variables. A great speaker in a good normal room may sound better than a good speaker in a great room.

A great speaker in a great room may sound better than a great speaker in a good normal room. But even that won't guarantee how much better. 5%, 10%, who know with 100% certainty?

Nothing in this audio hobby is pure black and white carved in stone fact of life.

As Nuance says, bias is there. We all have bias. Even if it's just a little bit.
post #242 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post

So you really can't "fix" a bad speaker? Again, can you give us some examples(make/model) of some "bad" speakers?

And you state you can't fix a bad speaker, but the frequencies BELOW 2-300hz can be fixed?

So to sum it up, what your saying is you can't "fix" a bad speaker, but you can "fix" frequencies below 2-300hz, which must also mean that the frequencies above 2-300hz cannot be fixed? LOL!

And speaking of FLoyd Toole, alot of his "research" completely contrasts the finding of other well known individuals on sound reproduction and the effects of the speaker/room relation with people like Bob Carver, Kevin Voeks, John Dunlavy etc..........he has alot of good and useful info, but I notice you lovetossing his name into your posts like he is Jesus of the AV world, LOL! Books only get you so far man.



Bad is a relative term, but I'd consider something will poor frequency response, bad sound power response, crossover issues, poor decay, excess distortion, cabinet resonance, etc a poorly designed or "bad" speaker.

The response below the Schroeder Frequency is largely dominated by the listening room, and yes, that can be fixed. Now if the speaker performs poorly anechoicly in that region, well, that cannot be fixed. Got it? Once again I say, read Floyd Toole's book, read some of his white papers or simply just read up on loudspeaker design. If you don't know what a bad set of measurements looks like then put in the research time to find out.

Can you find me one person who's had more resources and put more time into loudspeaker design and listening other than Floyd Toole and Sean Olive? I'm not discounting other professionals of the industry, but no one else has the resources they do. Just because someone else has a different design philosophy doesn't mean Toole and Olive's approach is wrong. They've actually completed numerous case studies with actual unbiased listeners and used those results to aid in their design. Who else has a level matching system with speaker shuffler and true double blind listening conditions?

Good speaker:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/k...r-measurements

Bad speaker:
Wilson Audio or most B&W's, for example. Just read the measurement plots, ntrain. Do you know how to do that? If not there are plenty of people on this forum that can educate you on how to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

Perhaps a fact in your room.

But every room is different.

They may not sound as great in your room. But they may sound great in most rooms.

Too many variables. A great speaker in a good normal room may sound better than a good speaker in a great room.

A great speaker in a great room may sound better than a great speaker in a good normal room. But even that won't guarantee how much better. 5%, 10%, who know with 100% certainty?

Nothing in this audio hobby is pure black and white carved in stone fact of life.

As Nuance says, bias is there. We all have bias. Even if it's just a little bit.

Exactly.
post #243 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

A great speaker in a great room may sound better than a great speaker in a good normal room. But even that won't guarantee how much better. 5%, 10%, who know with 100%. As Nuance says, bias is there. We all have bias. Even if it's just a little bit.

You're saying the more expensive speaker would perform better in untreated room than the 3K one? There is no bias in a proper blind test. Whatever comes out of it is what your mind prefers. Just accept it, buy the speakers and begin to start enjoying music.
post #244 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post

You're saying the more expensive speaker would perform better in untreated room than the 3K one? There is no bias in a proper blind test. Whatever comes out of it is what your mind prefers. Just accept it, buy the speakers and begin to start enjoying music.

He never said anything about price; he simply said a "great" speaker vs. a "good" one. In other words, a "great" design will always sound better than a "good" design in most cases. Everyone has personal preference, but it's likely that the majority will prefer the "great" design, because that design is the one that will be more consistent in a variety of listening rooms and setups. Whether you agree with the price or not, Revel's Salon2's are a pretty great design and will sound more similar than not above the Schroeder Frequency in most rooms because of the linear response on and off-axis, the waveguide tweeter design, the boundary compensation and the very good sound power response. A speaker with really good off-axis and sound power response will perform better in a reflective room than a speaker that has poor off-axis/sound power response. The latter's reflections don't play as nicely as the former's due to said design.

Hopefully this all helps aid the OP in his speaker choice, as knowing this information can be very helpful in weeding out speakers. Once the choices are narrowed down, nothing beats actually listening, though.
post #245 of 411
So... Has the OP bought the speakers yet or did he leave the thread already?
post #246 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

Bad is a relative term, but I'd consider something will poor frequency response, bad sound power response, crossover issues, poor decay, excess distortion, cabinet resonance, etc a poorly designed or "bad" speaker.

The response below the Schroeder Frequency is largely dominated by the listening room, and yes, that can be fixed. Now if the speaker performs poorly anechoicly in that region, well, that cannot be fixed. Got it? Once again I say, read Floyd Toole's book, read some of his white papers or simply just read up on loudspeaker design. If you don't know what a bad set of measurements looks like then put in the research time to find out.

So if your saying bad is a relative term, then your saying that it depends on one's perspective in relationship to ones own list/order of importance on features/attributes........so in other words, your basically saying nothing other than to toss out a biased ideal. Which points to what comes across as your "holy grail" auther in Toole.

The 201/2 in your eyes might be a great measuring speaker, but others may not necessarily see it that way. Is it good in comparison to what Stereophile has reviewed in the past? Or to its percieved "dollar value"? Or is it really good compared to speakers that may not pay for advertisement through them? All relative right?
post #247 of 411
And yes it gets quiet all the sudden
post #248 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post

So if your saying bad is a relative term, then your saying that it depends on one's perspective in relationship to ones own list/order of importance on features/attributes........so in other words, your basically saying nothing other than to toss out a biased ideal. Which points to what comes across as your "holy grail" auther in Toole.

The 201/2 in your eyes might be a great measuring speaker, but others may not necessarily see it that way. Is it good in comparison to what Stereophile has reviewed in the past? Or to its percieved "dollar value"? Or is it really good compared to speakers that may not pay for advertisement through them? All relative right?

^ Incorrect on your part. Bad is relative in terms of what someone thinks related to how something sounds; it's not relative when it comes to measurements. It's easy to see what measure's "bad" and what doesn't, and advertising dollars have nothing to do with measurements, especially anechoic, 3rd party ones.

So who disagrees that the Kef 201/2 measures well? Please provide links, ntrain. Here's a true anechoic set of measurements from the NRC:
http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/mea...ers/kef_201-2/

Please provide links, ntrain, and that includes proving what you said when speaking with AJ. We'll be looking forward to it.
post #249 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post


The 201/2 in your eyes might be a great measuring speaker, but others may not necessarily see it that way. Is it good in comparison to what Stereophile has reviewed in the past? Or to its percieved "dollar value"? Or is it really good compared to speakers that may not pay for advertisement through them? All relative right?

What do you mean "might be a great measuring speaker"?

The KEF 201/2 has been objectively measured by both Stereophile and NRC/Soundstage. It is one of the best measured speakers ever anywhere. Period.

You disagree?
post #250 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post

And yes it gets quiet all the sudden

Well, it'spretty quiet in my house right now.

Getting ready to go see "Avengers" on my day off work and kids are in school.

I just think moderation is best no matter what in life. Nothing too high, nothing too low, nothing too black, nothing too white, just somewhere in between.

Okay, we all agree that room acoustics is important. But just because a room is "treated" doesn't guarantee that a $25,000 speaker will sound great to everyone either.

I auditioned the B&W 800D twice - once in an untreated room and once in a treated dealer room (decked out with fancy furnishings and lights). Now to some people, the 800D may sound great to them in any room. But it did not sound great to me in either room.
post #251 of 411
Enjoy the movie. Watch the 3D version. Ironman makes the movie!
post #252 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

^ Incorrect on your part. Bad is relative in terms of what someone thinks related to how something sounds; it's not relative when it comes to measurements. It's easy to see what measure's "bad" and what doesn't, and advertising dollars have nothing to do with measurements, especially anechoic, 3rd party ones.

So who disagrees that the Kef 201/2 measures well? Please provide links, ntrain. Here's a true anechoic set of measurements from the NRC:
http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/mea...ers/kef_201-2/

Please provide links, ntrain, and that includes proving what you said when speaking with AJ. We'll be looking forward to it.

Easy to punch a hole in this, and I'll explain one thing thats never measured. Linear response in terms of power. Its ALWAYS OMITTED.

Notice how the measurements are always taken at 1/2 watts? Why not take the measurements again at 10/20 watts? And again at 100/200 watts?Or how about a 1/10th of a watt as well? Linear power response across the frequency spektrum which IMO is a very important(most important) set of measurements never taken will show more than what is always presented. I have found that the response curve at varying output levels can show inconsistencies in how a speaker performs DYNAMICALLY on and off axis. People seem to forget that program material is dynamic and not linear. Do all the drivers and their filter boards have the same linear response at all power levels? Do they all reach thermal compression, have the same THD and resonation patterns at the same time on the dynamic peaks? Highly unlikely. All the measurements taken are in the "horizontal" plane literally, but the "vertical" plane is just as important and often overlooked. Id love to see mfg's and paid advertisements show some of their measurements at differing power levels, the findings would shed new light on "performance" and how "good" or "bad" a speaker truely is. One reason why I take alot of the measurements with a big grain of salt.

People say that the limited measurements given in these "tests and measurements" will give a good understanding of how a speaker will perform and will mean speakers will sound nearly identical with the same highly limited and listed measurements, not the case at all.
post #253 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post

It's not a claim, it's a fact.

A "fact" you can't provide a shred of scientific evidence for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post

Check out my living room and imagine your Revel in it. Now imagine...

I'll leave the imagination up to you. For those who prefer reality, Dr. Floyd Tooles compilation of research by a sea of pyscho-acousticians is more apt. To each his own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post

But you're free to believe that spending on the most expensive speaker out there and putting them in your untreated living room is the ultimate setup.

I'll leave the "beliefs" up to you. I practice what I preach, in hotel rooms far more sparsely furnished/sized constrained than most American living rooms. I'm not an anonymous poster in cyberspace. No need for imagination and beliefs, you can come see/hear for yourself anytime you please. Capital Audiofest is next on the calendar for the reality show. See you there.

cheers,

AJ
post #254 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by jima4a View Post

Here is the list
.....
Focal Electra 1028 Be
Focal Electra 1038 Be
JBL Synthesis 1400 Array
......

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post

So you really can't "fix" a bad speaker? Again, can you give us some examples(make/model) of some "bad" speakers?

Sure, let's pull an example from Jims list, the Focal 1037be, near identical to the 1038be, since we have measurements for it:


Please tell us how you would "fix" that loudspeaker. Thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post

And speaking of FLoyd Toole, alot of his "research" completely contrasts the finding of other well known individuals on sound reproduction and the effects of the speaker/room relation with people like Bob Carver, Kevin Voeks, John Dunlavy etc..........he has alot of good and useful info, but I notice you lovetossing his name into your posts like he is Jesus of the AV world, LOL! Books only get you so far man.

Great, so please post the links to the AES papers by those fine gentlemen that contradict Tooles compilation of research by dozens of psych-acoustic scientists. No more "because I said so", but actual links to scientific peer reviewed papers. Thanks again, looking forward to reading them.

cheers,

AJ
post #255 of 411
This was once an interesting and productive thread. Why you people continue to provide an audience for those who always derail a conversation is beyond me.
post #256 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post

Easy to punch a hole in this, and I'll explain one thing thats never measured. Linear response in terms of power. Its ALWAYS OMITTED.

Notice how the measurements are always taken at 1/2 watts? Why not take the measurements again at 10/20 watts? And again at 100/200 watts?Or how about a 1/10th of a watt as well? Linear power response across the frequency spektrum which IMO is a very important(most important) set of measurements never taken will show more than what is always presented. I have found that the response curve at varying output levels can show inconsistencies in how a speaker performs DYNAMICALLY on and off axis. People seem to forget that program material is dynamic and not linear. Do all the drivers and their filter boards have the same linear response at all power levels? Do they all reach thermal compression, have the same THD and resonation patterns at the same time on the dynamic peaks? Highly unlikely. All the measurements taken are in the "horizontal" plane literally, but the "vertical" plane is just as important and often overlooked. Id love to see mfg's and paid advertisements show some of their measurements at differing power levels, the findings would shed new light on "performance" and how "good" or "bad" a speaker truely is. One reason why I take alot of the measurements with a big grain of salt.

People say that the limited measurements given in these "tests and measurements" will give a good understanding of how a speaker will perform and will mean speakers will sound nearly identical with the same highly limited and listed measurements, not the case at all.

How exactly that does punch a hole in the fact that the Kef 201/2 is a great measuring speaker? We're not trying to debate the current state of the art of speaker measurement; we're specifically talking about the existing measurements of an existing speaker. Please try to focus and stay on topic.

Also, Soundstage! and Stereophile both measure in the vertical and horizontal plane, though sometimes not for every speaker, so you're wrong about that. We all know that magazines and 3rd parties don't publish enough measurement data about loudspeakers, but again, this isn't a debate about measurement methods; it's about the Kef 201/2 and your claim that some people don't think it measures well. Show us the proof, ntrain - we're waiting.

Regarding your statement below, can you prove that? I'm not saying I think measurements will give you an idea of how a speaker will perform (even though we all know where I stand on that subject); I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here. Prove it. How does Frequency Response (on and off-axis, including horizontal and vertical), spectral decay, sound power, step response, distortion, phase, etc not tell us something about the expected sound quality from a loudspeaker? Also, I don't think anyone is claiming that two speakers that measure identical will sound identical, unless it's the same speaker, of course. If someone did insinuate that then I missed it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post

People say that the limited measurements given in these "tests and measurements" will give a good understanding of how a speaker will perform and will mean speakers will sound nearly identical with the same highly limited and listed measurements, not the case at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nethawk View Post

This was once an interesting and productive thread. Why you people continue to provide an audience for those who always derail a conversation is beyond me.

So long as someone is around to post false, misleading information, there will always be someone else to correct their inaccurate claims. It'll always be like this. You're right, though - this thread used to be good...
post #257 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post

Sure, let's pull an example from Jims list, the Focal 1037be, near identical to the 1038be, since we have measurements for it:


Please tell us how you would "fix" that loudspeaker. Thanks.


Great, so please post the links to the AES papers by those fine gentlemen that contradict Tooles compilation of research by dozens of psych-acoustic scientists. No more "because I said so", but actual links to scientific peer reviewed papers. Thanks again, looking forward to reading them.

cheers,

AJ

The question is: does it need fixing? As per JA's comments:
Quote:
The Focal Electra 1037 Be offers superb measured performance, but I keep returning to that in-room response (fig.6), one of the best I have encountered. Wow!—John Atkinson

In this case do we evaluate the speaker by how it sounds when were are shuffling around the house or do we evaluate how it sounds when sitting in a few centralized locations? JA says its a great measuring speaker, yet your saying the opposite.....so who is right? Check the first post from me on this page.

Was this a single speaker measured alone, or were a pair together measured in their normal locations? Too many unaccounted for variables in reality. SO who is to say it can't be fixed......or what specifically your talking about? The big roll off, off axis above 12khz? Or the panel resonation at 350hz. The panel resonation is an easy fix with some added bracing or "dynamat" added to the interior of a speaker, very easy fix. THe directional tweeter above 12khz? The question is if its actually a problem to the listener and how he uses the speaker. At 12khz though your at the upper limit range of the human hearing.......Id be alot more concerned if it was in the midrange.

Which gets back to my first post on this page...................again.

Any Magnepan speakers measured at Stereophile?
post #258 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

How exactly that does punch a hole in the fact that the Kef 201/2 is a great measuring speaker? We're not trying to debate the current state of the art of speaker measurement; we're specifically talking about the existing measurements of an existing speaker. Please try to focus and stay on topic.

Also, Soundstage! and Stereophile both measure in the vertical and horizontal plane, though sometimes not for every speaker, so you're wrong about that. We all know that magazines and 3rd parties don't publish enough measurement data about loudspeakers, but again, this isn't a debate about measurement methods; it's about the Kef 201/2 and your claim that some people don't think it measures well. Show us the proof, ntrain - we're waiting.

Regarding your statement below, can you prove that? I'm not saying I think measurements will give you an idea of how a speaker will perform (even though we all know where I stand on that subject); I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here. Prove it. How does Frequency Response (on and off-axis, including horizontal and vertical), spectral decay, sound power, step response, distortion, phase, etc not tell us something about the expected sound quality from a loudspeaker? Also, I don't think anyone is claiming that two speakers that measure identical will sound identical, unless it's the same speaker, of course. If someone did insinuate that then I missed it.

Im not talking about the "horizontal/vertical" plane LITERALLY, Im talking about in terms of input power given. What is a speakers frequency response at 1/10th of a watt? 1 watt? 10 watts? 100 watts? etc etc, both on and off axis. Drivers do not operate in a perfect linear fashion. Does one driver compress and distort at the same power level as another? Do they disperse frequencies evenly at all power levels? Or any of the given measurements that are relavent etc etc.....

All these measurements are given at a specific power input, all the time.
post #259 of 411
ntrain,

You didn't answer AJ's questions, and where did he state that speaker was a bad measuring speaker? Just curious. All you did was ask questions of your own, which are another dodging technique. I noticed you quoted John Atkinson, but just recently today said you had an issue with relying on a magazine's measurements, implying them being paid for advertising had an influence. Quite ironic and contradictory, no? Please provide the proof, ntrain - we're all waiting and looking forward to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post

Im not talking about the "horizontal/vertical" plane LITERALLY, Im talking about in terms of input power given. What is a speakers frequency response at 1/10th of a watt? 1 watt? 10 watts? 100 watts? etc etc, both on and off axis. Drivers do not operate in a perfect linear fashion. Does one driver compress and distort at the same power level as another? Do they disperse frequencies evenly at all power levels? Or any of the given measurements that are relavent etc etc.....

All these measurements are given at a specific power input, all the time.

Meaningless to the topic at hand; this is not about measurement techniques. Stop dodging our questions and please provide proof. This is the Audio/Video Science Forum; where is your scientific proof?
post #260 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

ntrain,

You didn't answer AJ's questions. All you did was ask questions of your own, which are another dodging technique. I noticed you quoted John Atkinson, but just recently today said you had an issue with relying on a magazine's measurements, implying them being paid for advertising had an influence. Quite ironic and contradictory, no? Please provide the proof, ntrain - we're all waiting and looking forward to it.



Meaningless to the topic at hand; this is not about measurement techniques. Stop dodging our questions and please provide proof.

LINEAR INPUT POWER RESPONSE is MEANINGLESS(Or to the topic at hand?)? So you listen to musical content that puts 1 watts rms roughly through your speakers all the time at every frequency point? LOL! This is more than just "measurement techniques", its also about what ISN'T measured period.

So you have a set of speakers that technically are rated for 100 watts rms and are "measured" to be flat through the spektrum range at 1watt/2.83v at 1 meter.....and your listening to a track that contanstly puts say a few watts through your speakers, but you hit a quick peak where 50 watts runs through one of your drivers and it compresses and distorts a little bit on a recurring passage in the track that hits specific frequencies........giving you a bit of common "listening fatigue". So then what good is your 1 watt rating if you find your turning your level down a bit because the sound is "harsh" to your ears because of a driver not keeping up with the others in your speaker at higher dynamic peaks?

1 watt of pink noise or sweeps do not tell the whole story of a dynamic speakers qualities or abilities.

If anyone is "dodging" points made and waffling over specific points made by myself, its you.
post #261 of 411
The topic is regarding the Kef 201/2's and your claim that some people don't think they measure well, and also the Focal 1037be and how you'd "fix" it. Answer the questions with scientific proof and stop trying to change the subject by asking other questions. We look forward to your actual responses to our questions, and also to you posting pictures of your fully active Revel speakers that you said you'd provide for us. Thanks.
post #262 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

The topic is regarding the Kef 201/2's and your claim that some people don't think they measure well, and also the Focal 1037be and how you'd "fix" it. Answer the questions with scientific proof and stop trying to change the subject by asking other questions. We look forward to your actual responses to our questions, and also to you posting pictures of your fully active Revel speakers that you said you'd provide for us. Thanks.

Yes, waffling.......again, my response above it towards the 201/2's, the 1037's and ANY speaker measured in Stereophile. In other words the "measurements" are lacking significantly. They are done at one fixed point only.

And again, can't "fix" something if one person claims the measurements are great......while someone is making an obvious claim that "fixing" needs to be made. So answer some of my comments and questions,(you and AJ)before I continue on.
post #263 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

So long as someone is around to post false, misleading information, there will always be someone else to correct their inaccurate claims. It'll always be like this. You're right, though - this thread used to be good...

+1 And I'm glad you do!
post #264 of 411
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

That is a very solid list, jima4a. The Salk's, Revel's and Kef's would be my top three, with Dynaudio and Thiel CS3.7 rounding out the top five. The top three choices will sound more similar than not; I cannot see anyone being unhappy with any of them, but YMMV and to each their own.

I agree on the top three but have not finished looking. Focal and Thiel would likely make top5.
post #265 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nethawk View Post

+1 And I'm glad you do!

Thanks, but it's not worth it anymore. As you can see, certain individuals have provided no proof and likely never will, so they simply discount themselves; I think most people are smart enough o realize that. It's time to put my ignore shades on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jima4a View Post

I agree on the top three but have not finished looking. Focal and Thiel would likely make top5.

Cool - do keep us posted. I really do think you'd be happy with any of those 5, but will you be able to audition any of them?
post #266 of 411
Dudes the OP wanted some recommendations for a pair of 10K speakers. Instead you guys turned this into a scientific orgy fest, wtf!

AJ so what if you're this big shot speaker maker? If I tell you that your speaker or any other's sounds crappy in my room then there's nothing you can do about it regardless of how well it measures because a crappy room will make a crappy sound. And my ears are of course better than yours LOL. How much are your speakers btw? Why so defensive about expensive speakers sounding bad?

Seriously people, you guys got nothing better to do than to derail a thread like this? Is this a matter of life and death? This is your source of income? Or just a bunch of nerds trying to get some existence in life? I really wonder...

Get a dose of humility people!
post #267 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nethawk View Post

This was once an interesting and productive thread. Why you people continue to provide an audience for those who always derail a conversation is beyond me.

+1

I'm done with this thread.
post #268 of 411


Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post

The question is: does it need fixing?

Thanks. Case closed.
post #269 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post

1 watt of pink noise or sweeps do not tell the whole story of a dynamic speakers qualities or abilities.

I hope we can all agree that the lack of comprehensive industry standard measurements are a problem. I also hope we can agree that the measurements provided by Stereophile, Harman, and others are worth more than the opaque techniques used by most vendors to produce their spec sheets. Harman does derive sound power response by taking measurements at 70 positions around a speaker. At least in some cases[PDF] Harman measures linearity at 10, 30, and 100 watts.
post #270 of 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post

Dudes the OP wanted some recommendations for a pair of 10K speakers. Instead you guys turned this into a scientific orgy fest, wtf!

It's unfortunate. It's what happens when ideologues can't put their egos aside in order to simply have fun and share in an enjoyable, highly subjective hobby that includes an incredibly broad spectrum of thought.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Speakers ~$10K for rock, alternative and some pop. Not Jazz or Classical.