My Journey to find the "perfect" speaker... - Page 9

If you were to draw a line at the -12 dB mark of the classic 3 graph it would cover up alot of the delayed energy (which is what is happening in the MA graph) and most of that energy that still would be seen appears to settle down or dissipate by approx 2ms. Still not as clean as the MA but very respectable considering the price of the speaker. All measurements are relevant on this graph time frequency and level.

Bzzzzz. Wrong answer.

The reason is *very* simple. The program automatically lowers the graph to compensate for that big 27kHz FR spike. The bigger the peak, the less the graph shows. The more inaccurate the speaker, the better it looks.

Want to try again?

If you look at the MA graph you see small peaks just above the floor of the graph at 1.5khz and at 3Khz there is energy there the graph is just not set to show below -12dB.

John...take a page from nemo's book.

I will admit, it would be nice if the graphs had the same floor.

Sorry, just got done watching House. Nemo gets the job.

It wouldn't just be "nice" to have the same floor, it's critical if you want to make any comparison at all.

Seriously though, if you're going to tell someone they're wrong, it's best to know for sure you're right first. Otherwise, it provokes, well, sarcasm or smart ass responses.

cschang - it looks like we are going to have to eat crow here. Would you like a breast or a leg?

Alimentall is right. Because of the peak in the treble on the GS10, the floor of the graph is about 5dB higher than the other two speakers I posted graphs for. So we can't see what is going on down there. And as nemo1 pointed out, there are little peaks just barely noticeable at 1.5 and 3KHz that would be more visible if the floor were as low as the other two graphs.

So, Alimentall. I apologize for accusing you of not knowing your stuff. I come to this forum to learn and share my knowledge, and I should know better than to state something with such conviction when I am relatively new at reading CSD plots (I only started paying attention to them within the past three months). As they say, everyone makes mistakes, you just have to learn from them. Lesson learned.

With that said, if you move the floor of the graphs for the NHT and B&W up 5 dB, it still looks like the MA is marginally cleaner.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program . ..

Leg man here....

Nemo's delivery was better.

Just as a side note in my last response I indicated that the lower limit of the MA graph is -12 it is actual -18 but this also puts the NHT graph at -24 for lower limit. This explains how at peak of +17 on the MA graph can fit into the graph and like Alimentall has pointed out, this forces the lower limit of the dB scale to fit in a range of 36 dB. When the the MA speaker was measured the range should have been increased another 6dB on the lower end just for comparisons sake with other speakers measured.

You All Have A great Night

Aww, see now you all ruined it because now I feel guilty for being an ass.......

Only because I provoked you. No harm, no foul.

Hugs -n- kisses,

- Tim

If you imagine the floor of the NHT plot raised by 6dB (or about one-sixth of the way on the vertical scale), imho it is not as clean below 2000Hz and around 10khz as the MA graph.

I second the notion that Stereophile should conform its plots to a single scale. This might make individual plots slightly less useful, but greatly enhance the comparability of plots of different speakers.

Kal?

Well, I have my normal discount that I give to everyone, but don't really try to sell anything here. However, if you actually really want to hear the bookshelf versions, I have a pair that I was mailing around the country for awhile if you wanted to hear a set for a few days or a week.

Interesting... Same with electronics that you might be a dealer for?

For anyone who might care, this is a great site for measurements:

http://www.soundstageav.com/speakermeasurements.html

and here are the NHT C3: http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/mea...classic_three/

and MA GR10: http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...toraudio_gr10/

As in the Stereophile reviews, FR on the NHT looks better. But the NHT shows more THD in the bass region.

I hadn't thought of it, to be honest. Speakers are much more different in tonality and variety and the NHTs are much harder to find than NAD. Trying to find a T175 or what

Nuance, I would love to read you impression of the MA's & the rs850's.
Let us know.

"Consideration" is afforded by many amatuer reviewers, as well , for special treatment. Welcome to stealth advertising.


I'm sorry, but that seems like the regurgitated pablum that passes for fact around here. There is some truth in most bias and generalizations, AND I too see those nuggets in what you are saying because those descriptions function, semi-well , as gross generalizations that add to the net parrots vocabulary.


He was asking about drawing graphs , which is a bit differant than what you are implying, but I'm going to have to say that you'd need to prove what you are saying, because I'd be surprised.
Maybe you could, but I am not willing to accept it based on your word Joel.


Everyone needs to check themselves before jumping off this bridge....blind.


You either DO or you DON'T.....NO really.

Look up Lynn Olson's writings on the subject, maybe you'll believe him.
Don't care! I don't need to prove *anything* to you Jake. And it doesn't surprise me that you *can't* based on your speaker choices.
I would have said I *don't* try (without the "really") except that I did tell people that I had custom ordered matching stands for the NHTs in the NHT thread. So, I stand by my qualified statement as is.

As usual, you can't really deal with the truth of the issues, so you try to diminish me as a source of information. But that says more about you than it does about me.

Well, once again it's Egos 21 - Thread 14.

Brandon...please send me a PM when you decide what to audition and what you end up with. Craig is a good source for information and resources.

This is turning into more of TSOS so prevalent on AVS. I'm checking out.

Mud

That's the kind of thing proponents of ultra-high-end cables say.


Actually, I have and can , at times, but I won't be so arrogant as to say that I'm not fooled sometimes too and hence my stating "There is some truth in most bias and generalizations, AND I too see those nuggets in what you are saying ", the differance is the fact that I am not so arrogant as to put together such a concise (and contrite) generalized paragraph oversimplifying attributes that could be also be the result of crossovers as well.


I always make a point of calling out self-impressed blowhards, nothing personal.

And also people that know what they're doing.
Okay, so you can, but then say I can't?
Uh, yes, well did you read the part where I explained that I can't avoid fooling myself at times?
You're jealous! That's funny! Or is it the meds from the surgery?

I suppose you won't mind if I follow you around attacking your credibility for no other reason but anger or frustration or whatever, since turnabout is fair play?

You've never sought permission before.
But I am not angry or frustrated....but yes a little medicated :l

Jake Small and Alimentall, please take it to PM. It's getting...tiring.

Elitist tones and atitudes are always boring. Who cares.

Does anyone have an opinion on Focal's Electra line, specifically the 1007's? I just read a Stereophile review on them. Seemed well liked. The beryllium tweeter is interesting. Any comments on it?

Take a look at their pro line, the powered Solo6 Be. I haven't heard either speaker, but I think the Solo is a much better value.

http://www.focalprofessional.com/en/...s/solo6Be.html

Master M3, but I just called my local NAD dealer and they finally started stocking the Master series.