Chane vs Emotiva - Page 6 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 134Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #151 of 153 Old 06-14-2019, 07:25 PM
Audio Engineer
 
BufordTJustice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,571
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 609 Post(s)
Liked: 1023
Chane vs Emotiva

Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123 View Post
I take "competently designed" with a grain of salt until I see the rubber meet the road with measurements. I'm not going to throw any ID company under the bus. I do think there are a lot of good ID speaker companies, but I also believe there needs to be more objective measurement data available, otherwise we are left to flowery subjective impressions of loyal owners to base our decisions on, or perhaps flawed in person listening tests under questionable conditions.



It's not hard to find examples of well regarded retail and ID speakers that either measure poorly, or worse than advertised.


Again, I have long been a proponent of gathering as much data as possible. But, to come full circle, all data must answer to testable reality. I owned a pair of them for over six years.

Bottom line; I have heard the A3rx-c in real life (yesterday, for the umpteenth time) and, under no circumstances can it be said of this speaker that it "has no mids". Period. Full stop.

This also is corroborated by the observations of literally every other A3rx-c owner (many of whom also own speakers from Revel, Salk, Ascend, GE, Dynaudio, Totem, PA, Polk LSi, RBH, etc) who has decided to give Jon any feedback at all (which is many many dozens of owners) aside from SB. That's a very large pool of data points. So, acknowledging that SB is telling the truth and is a good faith member of this forum, that means at least a third variable is in play.

But I'm not going to be labeled as curmudgeonly for simply being unwilling to accept a completely uncorroborated opinion, good faith and honest though it is.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said 'faster horses'." -H. Ford | Parasound HALO C2 pre/pro | modded Adcom MOSFET GFA-5500 | Acurus/Mondial A200x3 | Panny BDT-500 | Google Chromecast Audio/Apple TV 4K | Toshiba SD-9200 CD Transport | Vizio 55" LED/LCD | Darbee DVP-5000S | L+R: Chane MTM Prototype | Chane A2.4 center | surround: custom finished Chane A5rx-c | Member: NATIA, LEVA, & AES (full member).
BufordTJustice is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 153 Old 06-14-2019, 07:34 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bear123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: PA
Posts: 6,333
Mentioned: 77 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2595 Post(s)
Liked: 4073
Quote:
Originally Posted by BufordTJustice View Post
Again, I have long been a proponent of gathering as much data as possible. But, to come full circle, all data must answer to testable reality. I owned a pair of them for over six years.

Bottom line; I have heard the A3rx-c in real life (yesterday, for the umpteenth time) and, under no circumstances can it be said of this speaker that it "has no mids". Period. Full stop.

This also is corroborated by the observations of literally every other A3rx-c owner (many of whom also own speakers from Revel, Salk, Ascend, GE, Dynaudio, Totem, PA, Polk LSi, RBH, etc) who has decided to give Jon any feedback at all (which is many many dozens of owners) aside from SB. That's a very large pool of data points. So, acknowledging that SB is telling the truth and is a good faith member of this forum, that means at least a third variable is in play.

But I'm not going to be labeled as curmudgeonly for simply being unwilling to accept a completely uncorroborated opinion, good faith and honest though it is.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry, I think my conversation with you, for me at least, was a bit of a tangent. None of my comments had any relevance to the discussion regarding the A3 speakers. Just general comments. And none were directed towards any particular company, especially any ID company. Just making general statements regarding my opinion that good objective measurement data should be a strong influence on one's purchase decision for speakers.
BufordTJustice likes this.
bear123 is online now  
post #153 of 153 Old 06-14-2019, 07:43 PM
Audio Engineer
 
BufordTJustice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,571
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 609 Post(s)
Liked: 1023
Chane vs Emotiva

Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123 View Post
Sorry, I think my conversation with you, for me at least, was a bit of a tangent. None of my comments had any relevance to the discussion regarding the A3 speakers. Just general comments. And none were directed towards any particular company, especially any ID company. Just making general statements regarding my opinion that good objective measurement data should be a strong influence on one's purchase decision for speakers.


Oh, well in that context I fully and wholeheartedly agree with you.

Finding truly objective, and properly obtained data can be harder than it might seem on paper. Seeing the variability that can be measured by moving the exact same speaker into two different rooms, the room plays an enormously dominant part in what we hear (Toole; which is also why good sound power and listening window response, if not a very good Spinorama, is a good general indicator of preference). However, the indicator of preference was between loudspeakers that did not have good spatial/off axis responses and those that did (Revel speakers ably filling that role in the Harman testing).

My only caveat would be to ask this; how useful is that data when we attempt to draw finer comparisons? I dare say that when both loudspeakers are performing nearly equally well on- and off-axis, the current resolution of acoustical measurement data can be inadequate in terms of comparing two like/similar speakers. I think there is a lot of merit in thinking that the 86% correlation of the original study drops very close, if not into, the region of statistical uncertainty if, say, two Revel speakers were tested against each other to the same group of listeners. Especially if they are in similar price and acoustical size classes. And that's my caveat; that listening must still be what is the final arbiter.

EDIT: Or even when the speakers measure equally poorly. There's just not much daylight separating quality ID offerings within like size and price classes.

I suspect that is why Dr Toole and especially Dr Olive focus so hard on training listeners to be as good as they can be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
bear123 likes this.

"If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said 'faster horses'." -H. Ford | Parasound HALO C2 pre/pro | modded Adcom MOSFET GFA-5500 | Acurus/Mondial A200x3 | Panny BDT-500 | Google Chromecast Audio/Apple TV 4K | Toshiba SD-9200 CD Transport | Vizio 55" LED/LCD | Darbee DVP-5000S | L+R: Chane MTM Prototype | Chane A2.4 center | surround: custom finished Chane A5rx-c | Member: NATIA, LEVA, & AES (full member).

Last edited by BufordTJustice; 06-15-2019 at 09:23 AM.
BufordTJustice is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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