Rocket RS-850 vs. Swan 6.2 - Page 12

Craig - to quote that great American Philosopher, Bart Simpson. "You're dammed if you do and you're dammed if you don't." For what it's worth, I always look forward to reading your speaker and sub shootouts. Keep it up.

Ben

If she'd join me on the couch, I'd volunteer for a session or two (or 84).

Probably. (Well, not everyone. At least the children will whine. )

Unlike some of these ultra-serious AVS critters, Craig, let's have some fun. JBL has some fine new offerings that rarely get the attention of the Flavor-Of-The-Month crowd. If you do a shootout with towers this winter, toss in some (~$500 pr/ebay-HarmanAudio) Studio L890's. I'd enjoy seeing some audio-elitists take just a tiny bit of gas. Or...OTOH...you could see me slither off down the hill like a .... La Jolla Mudslide.

I didn't bother looking at the dates, just at how rude you were being. And besides, I have nothing more to say to you; I won't play your game. Take care now.

Which was the predecessor thread to this one that got closed? That might make for good popcorn material.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...read+is+closed

enjoy

You are a Bad Man...

Love and Hugs...

mls

I work at it.

Thanks.

Does anybody sell the original Swan 5.1s anymore? I'm torn between what speakers to get. I had my eye on the AV123 450s for a while but I like the look of the Swans a lot.

ozhometheater and theaudioinsider sell them. I am not sure if the rosewood is still available.

I think it's appropriate to have this link in this thread. I was a little surprise to see 340SE doing so little in the shootout..

http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/showthread.php?t=2965

I knew something wasn't right but didn't want to say anything. This is very interesting observation.

All that effort... Although all of the test speakers are worthy, a few people have heavily recommended speakers based on the result..

well it looks like the sensitivity between the speakers wouldn't have played much of part between the swan d2.1se and the ascends.. But the acculine vs ascend may not have been very fair. I wonder if there are any other ways to perform a level matched blind test that is quickly switchable from one set to another..

Just catching up on the level-matching questions here. There's a lot more to this than is immediately apparent.

As a rule of thumb, whenever a 5.25" monitor with an F3 in the fifties (we rate the 630 at a very conservative 65Hz) needs an estimated sensitivity number, I tend to think mid eighties and not much higher...

As mentioned on other forums (last post of the page, and page 4), there's many other factors beside the switch box which made this test not really realistic.

For example, there's the fabric. I wanted to mention this on another thread, but decided not to, given Craig's inability to have a normal conversation, but since it's been brought up... IMHO, the fabric will have a definite effect. I think that's obvious, but what I wanted to point out was the indirect effect of the fabric. What I mean, first, there will be an effect from the speaker to the listener. That's obvious.

But, it does not stop here. The speakers also radiate sound on the top, bottom and sides. This sound will bounce of walls and also reach the listener. These reflection points will also be affected by the fabric veil, in fact the veil will even have a greater impact because the soundwaves aren't passing directly thru, they're passing diagonally thru the fabric, and so the veil will be less 'transparent': Its effect will increase the more off angle you go.

Here's a visual example of reflections: http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/S-...cs.html?page=1

Now imagine a veil between the listener and the speakers. Each reflection being influenced differently by the veil. I'm sure there's quite an effect on the side/bottom reflections, though looking at the GTG pictures, it doesn't look bottom should have mattered anyhow given the number of couches, large chairs and listeners everywhere The exact effect probably varies from speaker to speaker, depending on their individual characteristics (probably different degree/effect).

Reflections really play an important part of the sound we hear. Actually, room is a critical part of sound. Maybe even more than speakers themselves.

Anyhow, I'll say like basically anyone, and even as craig said himself, the GTG really was just for fun and we can not really make any conclusion with the results.

I'm guessing the results were only posted because people would have asked anyway, and probably even demanded results... But as was said, just moving around in the room changed dramatically the sound, and preferred speakers changed depending on where you were sitting, so right there, I'm not quite sure what sens could be made out of that... But anyhow

So what sounds like was bad in terms of blind controlled test:
1) the switcher
2) room & room acoustics
3) the hiding veil
4) listening positions

Although what Dave said sounds really sound, I'd have to say that even without that, it would be pretty optimistic to place credibility to the results of that GTG. It's really hard to put a mark on 'sound', and it must not have helped that such a 'final' scoring system was used... (ex: these were close, 86 vs 88, but this 200$ speaker was a lot better than this 500 speaker, scoring 85 vs only 75!!!)

Anyhow, there's always next time That's the fun thing with this hobby, you're always learning new things. Even if you think you know a lot, often times something happens which opens your eyes and make you realize how little you know! That's what makes it interesting! The important thing is to enjoy yourself!

Count me in! As long as there's beer...

J.

I'm just surprised it took almost two weeks for people to start criticizing the GTG results. I guess the Affordable Audio article has only been out about a week.

I appreciate the effort that everyone put into it, especially you, Craig. Thanks.

Jim

Grandarf, while I shouldn't dignify that and while I'm probably going to regret doing so anyway, I have one word. I'll risk it on behalf of our teams, on behalf of our customers, and to defend my reputation.

Rubbish.

A hint: You do not want a reply in kind. Trust me.

... my advice - try attending one of these - you will for sure learn a lot (as everyone there did) and it MIGHT make your "observations" a tad more credible...

BTW... this from a fellow who "won nothing"...

Passive ~ Aggressive is almost a "watchable" event with you Sir...

mls

LOL! Well said.

lol Jon. Somewhat a wise answer, as I'm somewhat of an arguer.

I've always said that speakers need to be setup ideally to have a good idea of their potential. With poor placement you do not hear what the speakers are truly capable of.

Environment is also critical. Listening position. Listening room. Again, all critical to gauge speaker performance. When you have so many things which seems questionable, it's unthinkable to say that you can actually conclude anything about it.

I don't see why you feel the need to defend your reputation... No one said TAI products are bad or anything. I'm saying, as craig even said himself, that you really could not conclude anything relating to speaker performance with that GTG. That was not the idea. The idea was to have some fun. Please craig correct me if I'm wrong.

Just take the way the scores were calculated. You had what, 10+ listeners? Each sitting at different positions scoring both the speakers. How many were in the 'sweet spot'? How many were not? How many were in bad spots? Craig said that depending where you sat, one speaker could sound better than the other, and you switch seat, and it was the other speaker which now sounded better!

So how can you honestly come out with a score like "85 vs 81"... You averaged all the bad/good spots in the room?

The room itself did not really represent a real room. No room I know of has a fabric sitting between the speakers and the listeners. No listening room I've seen has so many chairs, couches in the center of the room. No listening room (well besides the ones at show, which normally have very poor acoustics) I know have so many human bodies in the room.

I've once heard the Quads 989 in a sort of 'conference' room and simply could not believe how bad they sounded. They sounded horrible. Not because of the speakers themselves, because of the conditions. If you don't have good conditions, you can't have objective results. I could have said, I give them 34/100, but what would be the point?

Anyhow, you got me really curious now as to what I've said which was so much rubbish and that I do not want to hear. I just read that craig might like to start another thread, maybe we could, or maybe you could pm. I'd really like to hear it.


craig: You said yourself that you couldn't really base yourself on the GTG results no? Should I go search old threads and post you? I think you said yourself this wasn't a speaker test, that it was a GTG to enjoy audio, have fun, etc... Now it seems you're saying otherwise.

I said

you said:

Yours doesn't seem to fit with mine, seems you were replying to my 4 numbers.

1) Switcher (not room) as clearly demonstrated by DaveF, using a switching is a big no-no in audio. Are you arguing this still even after the proof and explanations he provided us? (graphs showing drastic effect of even a 2ohms resistor?)

2) Room and room acoustics. See top of post.

your 3) Level matching. No problem doing, just not with a switcher box. See #1.
my #3) Veil, affects sound, so if you want to compare and judge speakers, probably not best to use!

#4) more than 1 person, listening positions: No issue with more than one. But when, like you said, if varies so much from one listening position to another, you should limit the number of listeners to a reasonable area. No use putting 30 people if there's only room for 8 or whatever good listening positions!


Anyhow, your GTG sounds a lot like many trade shows where exhibitors rent hotel rooms and allow people to listen. For sure it can give an idea, but you can never judge a speaker unambiguously just with these kinds of 'tests'. Surely given marks which so objectively define performance with such finality such as points for performance is going pretty far. Especially given, like I said before, all the factors which could falsify the results.

Which, like I said, switcher, veil, room, listening positions were each one by themselves could be said to be important on their own, but when all added together... The uncertainty factor really goes up exponentially.

So would we ALL agree that the event was alot of fun (and work on Craig's part), but that everyone should definitely LISTEN for themselves and not buy the speakers that scored the highest without serious audition. I have some of the speakers auditioned, and my results that were not blind but based on just listening in my own system differ from the results of the blind tests. Am I biased-who isn't, but they were done in MY room. Also, I have contacted someone who can build a switch that does works at the preamp level and does not have the pitfalls described (real or imagined). They will not be cheap but could be cheaper with a run of more than 5. PM me if you are interested (this is not a profit thing for me but something I have been interested in-if you search my posts you will see I solicited feedback on a switch before Craigs event.)

MLS. I've attended many such events so have a fair idea of what you can conclude, or more especially, what you can't conclude.

As for your questioning of my 'credibility' "it MIGHT make your "observations" a tad more credible... ". I'll simply choose to disregard that comment. If you wish to address my comments, go ahead, but I've already explained to you that attacking a poster is not the way to have a reasonable conversation. Don't you remember me telling you about adhominems?

http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...d-hominem.html

I know that speakers are a very emotive subject for you, but I hope we can keep this conversation reasonable and to a mature level. As I said before, if you or anybody else think anything I said was false, quote it and say why. But please leave the credibility attacks, insults, etc.. out of the conversation. This forum is about learning and discussing about a common interest of ours. Much more pleasant without the drama.

What a lame analogy! Everyone knows that abortion is now a safe, legal example of a woman's right to choose! Try again...!

Edit: And as an aside, why the Hell would you bring that up in a talk about speakers? Weird.....!