How to Choose a Loudspeaker -- What the Science Shows - Page 36 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 6384Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1051 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 11:21 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 4,887
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 1628
The other point I would like to make is regarding EQ. The logic put forth by Dr. Toole on the potential deleterious effects of EQ above ~500Hz is believable.

So what I'm concluding at this point is those who enjoy improved sound from room EQ systems likely do so for the following two reasons. 1) automatic setting of levels and delays, because many consumers don't have the knowledge or time, or can't be bothered to use rulers and SPL meters to set up their systems, and 2) EQ can improve the sound of lesser speakers found in many home consumer systems.

The caution regarding EQ above ~500Hz would be mostly to those who have really good speakers.

I'll close by saying that it would be really interesting to take a really good speaker, one that measures flat anechoically, after room EQ applies small boosts and cuts, then measure that system with EQ anechoically again. You would directly see the boosts and cuts. It would be an interesting confirmation of the theory.

HT: Samsung PN64H5000 (recommended settings) | NAD T758 V3 | Buchardt S400 (2) | Emotiva E2 (2) | Rythmik Audio F12 (2)
Soulburner is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1052 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 11:28 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Central, PA
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)
Liked: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post

A cautionary note for several people in this discussion: spatial averaging (multiple mic locations) at low frequencies yields smoother curves, but it does not describe what is heard at any one location. You need to make separate measurements at all important seat locations, using 1/6-octave or higher resolution, and compare them to see how much variation there is. This is where multiple subs, properly used, are hugely advantageous (Chapter 8 in my book).
I’ll assume this is directed primarily at me since I’m the one that mentioned using multiple mic locations simultaneously. In the interest of time and trying not to get the thread too far off topic, I perhaps left out too much detail in my prior post. The subs (and other sub systems) are indeed measured separately. I was illustrating a method used when the MLP is an entire auditorium as opposed to a couch or a row of home theater seats. It’s simply much faster to set up multiple mics at the one time then to move one mic all over the venue numerous times. Using software such as SMAART or SpectraFoo allows multiple mics to be used simultaneously and measured separately (this info is for those not familiar with these products - as I’m sure that you are).

Additionally, the potential location for subwoofers in a given venue is quite limited by the physical limitations of the venue, proximity to the nearest paid seat, sight lines, etc. I would love to tear out a row of seats to make space for some optimally placed subs, but it doesn’t sit well with theater owners.
garygreyh is offline  
post #1053 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 12:02 PM
Member
 
buckchester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 165
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
I'll give you an "A". Well done, you have done your homework. I would add that one can do quasi-anechoic - i.e. time windowed - measurements in a room and get useful data above 1-2 kHz. No doubt, truly anechoic measurements are best because they can have high resolution in the frequency domain over the entire frequency range.

A quick look at your measurements indicates to my eye that Audyssey has slightly boosted the bass. To test its success at smoothing the bass one needs to make the broadband bass levels more equal. A bass tone control should get you close. Because of the equal-loudness contours, a small change in level at bass frequencies makes a disproportionate impression on overall spectral balance. Most people like bass, and too much bass is often a "forgivable sin". It is a simple way to impress a customer.

A cautionary note for several people in this discussion: spatial averaging (multiple mic locations) at low frequencies yields smoother curves, but it does not describe what is heard at any one location. You need to make separate measurements at all important seat locations, using 1/6-octave or higher resolution, and compare them to see how much variation there is. This is where multiple subs, properly used, are hugely advantageous (Chapter 8 in my book).

Thank you. I read through one of your AES papers that you provided a link for, which helped me understand the issue more.

I'm not sure I understand all your comments completely. When you say "make the broadband bass levels more equal", I believe you are suggesting I try to fix some of those peaks and valleys that are still in the bass frequency range, however, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by a bass tone control and how this could fix this.

Regarding your recommendation on separate measurements for the bass - I have already done that and so I am attaching a few bass measurements from three different seating locations. Middle seat, left seat, right seat. Before and after Audyssey. I think it looks pretty good. Certainly an improvement after Audyssey. But I'd be interested in your viewpoint. Note too that these measurements are the two subs only. They are playing at the same time for each measurement. Perhaps I should do similar measurements wth the speakers playing (e.g. Left speaker + subs, right speaker + subs)?

Also, is there an effective way for someone to EQ their system only up to the Schroeder frequency? With the version of Audyssey that I have, it EQs the entire range. My only option would be to turn it off completely, or to select the "Bypass L+R" option. But that would leave me with EQ for the LFE channel only. I have a MiniDSP 2x4, but again, this only EQs the subs. My speakers do have their own built-in amplifiers and they have LFE inputs, but I still can't think of a practical way to make this work. I would have to set different crossovers for the speakers and subs through the MiniDSP. When playing music, I could probably get EQ working up to the bass crossover built into the speakers (which I believe is somewhere around 125Hz). But when playing movies, I would only get EQ for the LFE signals. So, I don't think the MiniDSP is going to help me in this regard...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	MS-LFE-Red NoAud-Blue Aud.jpg
Views:	35
Size:	42.7 KB
ID:	2517074   Click image for larger version

Name:	LS-LFE-Red NoAud-Blue Aud.jpg
Views:	29
Size:	44.6 KB
ID:	2517076   Click image for larger version

Name:	RS-LFE-Red NoAud-Blue Aud.jpg
Views:	33
Size:	44.7 KB
ID:	2517078  
buckchester is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1054 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 03:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 4,887
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 1628
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckchester View Post
Also, is there an effective way for someone to EQ their system only up to the Schroeder frequency? With the version of Audyssey that I have, it EQs the entire range.
Check to see if your AVR is supported: https://play.google.com/store/apps/d...AudysseyMultEq

HT: Samsung PN64H5000 (recommended settings) | NAD T758 V3 | Buchardt S400 (2) | Emotiva E2 (2) | Rythmik Audio F12 (2)
Soulburner is online now  
post #1055 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 03:28 PM
Member
 
buckchester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 165
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
Check to see if your AVR is supported: https://play.google.com/store/apps/d...AudysseyMultEq
Thanks, but my receiver is older and not supported. Too bad for me...
buckchester is offline  
post #1056 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 04:08 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 11,799
Mentioned: 65 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1339 Post(s)
Liked: 1577
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckchester View Post
Thank you. I read through one of your AES papers that you provided a link for, which helped me understand the issue more.

I'm not sure I understand all your comments completely. When you say "make the broadband bass levels more equal", I believe you are suggesting I try to fix some of those peaks and valleys that are still in the bass frequency range, however, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by a bass tone control and how this could fix this.
What receiver do you have? Most receivers have tone controls somewhere in their menu system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckchester View Post
Regarding your recommendation on separate measurements for the bass - I have already done that and so I am attaching a few bass measurements from three different seating locations. Middle seat, left seat, right seat. Before and after Audyssey. I think it looks pretty good. Certainly an improvement after Audyssey. But I'd be interested in your viewpoint. Note too that these measurements are the two subs only. They are playing at the same time for each measurement. Perhaps I should do similar measurements wth the speakers playing (e.g. Left speaker + subs, right speaker + subs)?
Yes, you should DEFINITELY measure with the speakers and subs playing together. Try using just the CC. The easiest way to do this is to put your system in PLIIx Movie or Cinema Mode. When send a stereo signal to the receiver set to PLIIx Movie Mode, the receiver will look for all content that is identical in both channels, and will send it to the CC. With stereo test tones, everything is duplicated on both channels, so everything will be sent to the CC. Measure that with the subwoofers playing and examine the response at the crossover point between the subs and speakers. If there is a dip there, the speakers and subs are out of phase with each other. The way to correct it is to manipulate the subwoofer Distance setting. The Distance setting is actually a delay setting, and adding less or more delay will get the speakers and subs in phase with each other. It's an iterative process, so just try adding a foot or 2, and keep adding until you get the response around the crossover to flatten out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckchester View Post
Also, is there an effective way for someone to EQ their system only up to the Schroeder frequency? With the version of Audyssey that I have, it EQs the entire range. My only option would be to turn it off completely, or to select the "Bypass L+R" option. But that would leave me with EQ for the LFE channel only. I have a MiniDSP 2x4, but again, this only EQs the subs. My speakers do have their own built-in amplifiers and they have LFE inputs, but I still can't think of a practical way to make this work. I would have to set different crossovers for the speakers and subs through the MiniDSP. When playing music, I could probably get EQ working up to the bass crossover built into the speakers (which I believe is somewhere around 125Hz). But when playing movies, I would only get EQ for the LFE signals. So, I don't think the MiniDSP is going to help me in this regard...
What version of Audyssey do you have? What speakers do you have?

Craig


Edit: Actually, looking closer at your graphs, you have a broad recession starting at 40 Hz in your red graphs without Audyssey. First, be sure you turn your crossover as high as it will go before you take anymore measurements. You want the full bass range being sent to the subwoofer out. Then, before you run Audyssey again, try taking some measurements in front of and behind your current listening/measuring position, (be sure Audyssey is off before taking these measurements.) If you can correct that broad recession in your pre-Audyssey response by a forward or backward adjustment of your listening position before you run Audyssey, you'll likely get a better result with Audyssey. After you've optimized the pre-Audyssey response, and then re-run Audyssey, then go back and perform the Subwoofer Distance Tweak I described earlier.

Lombardi said it:
"Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

My System

Last edited by craig john; 01-27-2019 at 04:30 PM.
craig john is offline  
post #1057 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 04:29 PM
Member
 
buckchester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 165
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post
What receiver do you have? Most receivers have tone controls somewhere in their menu system.


Yes, you should DEFINITELY measure with the speakers and subs playing together. Try using just the CC. The easiest way to do this is to put your system in PLIIx Movie or Cinema Mode. When send a stereo signal to the receiver set to PLIIx Movie Mode, the receiver will look for all content that is identical in both channels, and will send it to the CC. With stereo test tones, everything is duplicated on both channels, so everything will be sent to the CC. Measure that with the subwoofers playing and examine the response at the crossover point between the subs and speakers. If there is a dip there, the speakers and subs are out of phase with each other. The way to correct it is to manipulate the subwoofer Distance setting. The Distance setting is actually a delay setting, and adding less or more delay will get the speakers and subs in phase with each other. It's an iterative process, so just try adding a foot or 2, and keep adding until you get the response around the crossover to flatten out.


What version of Audyssey do you have? What speakers do you have?


Craig

I have a Marantz SR5005. I don't think I can use the tone controls when Audyssey on on, but I'll verify.

Thanks for these suggestions. I actually do have a dip in the response near the crossover. I will experiment with these suggestions and see if that helps.

Audyssey is MultEQ. Speakers are GoldenEar Triton 2.
buckchester is offline  
post #1058 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 04:31 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 11,799
Mentioned: 65 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1339 Post(s)
Liked: 1577
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckchester View Post
I have a Marantz SR5005. I don't think I can use the tone controls when Audyssey on on, but I'll verify.

Thanks for these suggestions. I actually do have a dip in the response near the crossover. I will experiment with these suggestions and see if that helps.

Audyssey is MultEQ. Speakers are GoldenEar Triton 2.
See my edits above also.

Lombardi said it:
"Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

My System
craig john is offline  
post #1059 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 04:37 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 11,799
Mentioned: 65 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1339 Post(s)
Liked: 1577
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckchester View Post
I have a Marantz SR5005. I don't think I can use the tone controls when Audyssey on on, but I'll verify.

Thanks for these suggestions. I actually do have a dip in the response near the crossover. I will experiment with these suggestions and see if that helps.

Audyssey is MultEQ. Speakers are GoldenEar Triton 2.
According to the manual for that receiver, you can use the tone controls with Audyssey only if Dynamic EQ is off.

How do you have the Triton powered woofers connected to the receiver?

Craig


Edit: We are way off-topic for this thread. If you want to discuss this further, let's go to PM.

Lombardi said it:
"Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

My System
craig john is offline  
post #1060 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 04:40 PM
Member
 
buckchester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 165
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post
According to the manual for that receiver, you can use the tone controls with Audyssey only if Dynamic EQ is off.



How do you have the Triton powered woofers connected to the receiver?



Craig
Yes I did see your further edits. Good suggestions. I will try that too.

I will also experiment by turning off Dynamic EQ and adjusting the bass tone control. I do find I like Dynamic EQ, though. But I will definitely experiment.

I have the Triton2 hooked up with just speaker wire and I have my crossover set to 80Hz. I have tried all sorts of different set up methods with these speakers and I find this produces the best result paired with two PSA V1500 subs.
buckchester is offline  
post #1061 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 07:32 PM
Senior Member
 
SunByrne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pearland, TX
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 159 Post(s)
Liked: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidK442 View Post
35 pages and how many Spinorama measurements so far?
Excellent point. I'm going to post one from a recent speaker review (some of you might recognize it—if you do, please stay quiet for now; I will reveal what speaker it is soon).

I'd be interested to hear what Dr. Toole and others say about this speaker based on the graph:

spinorama graph

And no, this isn't any kind of "gotcha" exercise. I want to learn to better read these on my own, so I want to know what people who do read these regularly have to say.

_____
Study: Schiit Bifrost Multibit > Yamaha A-S500 > Ascend Acoustics Sierra-2/Emotiva S8
Living Room HT: Oppo BDP-83 > Denon X3400H > PSB Image 4T/8C/S50/Rythmik L22
Office: Schiit Modi 3 > NAD C740 > Ascend Acoustics Sierra-1 NrT
Bedroom: Onkyo TX-8050 > PSB Image 1B/SubSonic5

Last edited by SunByrne; 01-27-2019 at 07:35 PM. Reason: Graph not showing up. Just made it a link.
SunByrne is offline  
post #1062 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 10:53 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DavidK442's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 1,682
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 883 Post(s)
Liked: 738
Some top end sizzle and sibilance, but otherwise a balanced sounding speaker??
A 3 way design?

Last edited by DavidK442; 01-27-2019 at 10:56 PM.
DavidK442 is offline  
post #1063 of 5319 Old 01-27-2019, 11:32 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 4,887
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 1628
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunByrne View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidK442 View Post
35 pages and how many Spinorama measurements so far?
Excellent point. I'm going to post one from a recent speaker review (some of you might recognize it—if you do, please stay quiet for now; I will reveal what speaker it is soon).

I'd be interested to hear what Dr. Toole and others say about this speaker based on the graph:

spinorama graph
Aha, I knew that looked familiar.

I wonder if this is enough information though? Does it tell us anything about time alignment of drivers? How about damping and ringing? I'm not sure all factors that influence sound would be displayed here.

HT: Samsung PN64H5000 (recommended settings) | NAD T758 V3 | Buchardt S400 (2) | Emotiva E2 (2) | Rythmik Audio F12 (2)
Soulburner is online now  
post #1064 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 07:35 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunByrne View Post
Excellent point. I'm going to post one from a recent speaker review (some of you might recognize it—if you do, please stay quiet for now; I will reveal what speaker it is soon).

I'd be interested to hear what Dr. Toole and others say about this speaker based on the graph:

spinorama graph

And no, this isn't any kind of "gotcha" exercise. I want to learn to better read these on my own, so I want to know what people who do read these regularly have to say.
I should have bought this speaker when I was rebuilding my system last June. Instead I built a kit, but I'm pretty sure these are quite a bit better than what I built.
Bottlemech2 is offline  
post #1065 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 07:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 610
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 306 Post(s)
Liked: 465
Some sighted testing today. Two well measuring loudspeakers. Not easy by any means :-)




Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A510F met Tapatalk
BufordTJustice likes this.
TimVG is online now  
post #1066 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 08:41 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,602
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1048 Post(s)
Liked: 1243
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
Some sighted testing today. Two well measuring loudspeakers. Not easy by any means :-)




Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A510F met Tapatalk

Very interested to hear your thoughts on that one. I have heard quite a few Genelec speakers, owned some for a while and worked in other control rooms with them. It looks so small next to the Revel....


Be sure to let us know how they compare in output capability, how many watts you are using to drive the M105 etc. Which Genelec model is that? Price/pair?
BufordTJustice likes this.

Last edited by Rex Anderson; 01-28-2019 at 02:27 PM.
Rex Anderson is offline  
post #1067 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 08:57 AM
Senior Member
 
steven59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 357
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 115
This has been a busy thread and not so easy to keep up with. I make a post citing the page I'm on when the correct way would be to name the post number. I copy/pasted a quote of Dr Toole's describing his musical preference leading harman away from 2 channel sound as their chief consultant before reaching KV's post explaining to those of us struggling with the mono comparison tests. I'll leave it alone accepting I don't have the experience to understand it. I'm not sure what 2 different listeners listen for comparing imaging all I can say is what I stated there I preferred the image created by the f52 to the newer f208 and while I would never suggest they imaged better than the Salon's, they did do it differently. I enjoyed all 3 pair of revel's I owned and the salon 2 really are 'all that' if you can afford them as we know good speakers need good power.
avkv and BufordTJustice like this.

Meridian dsp8000se upgrade, Vienna acoustics Beethoven's, Hegel H360, Roon Nucleus, Rega jupiter cd, Revox s26 tuner,
steven59 is offline  
post #1068 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 09:34 AM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 836
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 875 Post(s)
Liked: 3078
Quote:
Originally Posted by garygreyh View Post
I’ll assume this is directed primarily at me since I’m the one that mentioned using multiple mic locations simultaneously. In the interest of time and trying not to get the thread too far off topic, I perhaps left out too much detail in my prior post. The subs (and other sub systems) are indeed measured separately. I was illustrating a method used when the MLP is an entire auditorium as opposed to a couch or a row of home theater seats. It’s simply much faster to set up multiple mics at the one time then to move one mic all over the venue numerous times. Using software such as SMAART or SpectraFoo allows multiple mics to be used simultaneously and measured separately (this info is for those not familiar with these products - as I’m sure that you are).

Additionally, the potential location for subwoofers in a given venue is quite limited by the physical limitations of the venue, proximity to the nearest paid seat, sight lines, etc. I would love to tear out a row of seats to make space for some optimally placed subs, but it doesn’t sit well with theater owners.
No, I wasn't aiming at you in my. remark - go back through the thread and mulit-mic measurements are mentioned a few times. Putting total reliance on such measurements is encouraged by some "Room EQ" schemes.

I sense that you are talking mainly about large venue systems. Small rooms are very different. Audience coverage is critical there. I spend a chapter on cinema sized venues in my book (Chapter 11), and on the special bass problems existing only in small rooms in Chapter 8.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #1069 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 09:48 AM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 836
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 875 Post(s)
Liked: 3078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
The other point I would like to make is regarding EQ. The logic put forth by Dr. Toole on the potential deleterious effects of EQ above ~500Hz is believable.

I'll close by saying that it would be really interesting to take a really good speaker, one that measures flat anechoically, after room EQ applies small boosts and cuts, then measure that system with EQ anechoically again. You would directly see the boosts and cuts. It would be an interesting confirmation of the theory.
Figure 4.13 in my book addresses the basis of your question, albeit starting with a flawed loudspeaker. The subjective ratings are interesting. It is attached.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Figure 4.13 spinorama & room curves bad spkr.jpg
Views:	88
Size:	195.2 KB
ID:	2517452  
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #1070 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 09:54 AM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 610
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 306 Post(s)
Liked: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex Anderson View Post
Very interested to hear your thoughts on that one. I have heard quite a few Genelec speakers, owned some for a while and worked in other control rooms with them. It looks so small next the the Revel....


Be sure to let us know how they compare in output capability, how many watts you are using to drive the M126Be etc. Which Genelec model is that? Price/pair?
Hi Rex

A few comments:

The Revels are the M105 - the power amp is a NAD 2200 which is a very capable amp


The Genelecs are the 8030C an are priced at around €1000/pair.

The primary goal of this test was simply to assess what two well measuring loudspeakers would do in my new living room (I've just moved last week) in terms of normal listening, output capability isn't really the primary concern here, although I imagine both will be similar. 5" woofers with similar cabinet volume/tuning frequency. The Genelec looks a good chunk smaller as it's made out of thin aluminium whereas the Revel has a thick, braced MDF cabinet.

So.. A sighted test it was then. I used a DSP unit to level match and route the left stereo channel to both speakers. A/B testing took less than 0,5s Since I own and enjoy both models, I did my best to be as objective as possible. I also switched them around physically at some point so that location would not give the edge to one or the other. No REW meausrements at this point since I'm still unpacking boxes daily.

In terms of timbre, they sound quite similar. If I had to give it a percentage, I'd say 70%. The differences to my ears were mostly in the treble range. The Genelec sounded a bit softer/laid back, whereas the Revels sounded a tad more forward/brighter/airy by comparison. The biggest variable whether one or the other sounded better, was the program material and even then it's most noticable in a direct A/B comparison. The other and most substantial difference was the spacial aspect. It's been said here before, but Revel speakers have very wide and even dispersion, and even in a mono test there is just a sense of depth to them that is not found in any cone/dome system I've experienced. Based on timbre in the absolute sense, with the program material I worked with today, I'd give the edge to the Genelec -today*-. In terms of spacial presentation the Revels win hands down.
*I say today, because my living room is very lively at this point, being quite empty still. I'll probably repeat this test in the future. Hopefully blind.

Aftermath: The anechoic data, which I hadn't looked at a for while, but did once the test was over, reveals that what I heard correlates with it. My ears still work to some degree it seems. In fact, based on the anechoic data, I made a small correction file for the M105 (-1dB / Q= 1,67 / 2000Hz and HS filter -3dB /12dB octave / 12500Hz) which in terms of timbre, placed it between the Genelec and the M105 without correction, to my ears - although with the added benefit of a more spacious soundfield. The filters can be turned off at any point, the high shelf filter is basically a fancy treble switch.
CruelInventions likes this.
TimVG is online now  
post #1071 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 09:56 AM
Senior Member
 
SunByrne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pearland, TX
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 159 Post(s)
Liked: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidK442 View Post
Some top end sizzle and sibilance, but otherwise a balanced sounding speaker??
Interesting. I have never heard anyone who has actually listened to this speaker (I haven't) call it sibilant. But, yes, "balanced" is a common term in reviews.

Quote:
A 3 way design?
Correct.

_____
Study: Schiit Bifrost Multibit > Yamaha A-S500 > Ascend Acoustics Sierra-2/Emotiva S8
Living Room HT: Oppo BDP-83 > Denon X3400H > PSB Image 4T/8C/S50/Rythmik L22
Office: Schiit Modi 3 > NAD C740 > Ascend Acoustics Sierra-1 NrT
Bedroom: Onkyo TX-8050 > PSB Image 1B/SubSonic5
SunByrne is offline  
post #1072 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 09:59 AM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 836
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 875 Post(s)
Liked: 3078
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckchester View Post
Thank you. I read through one of your AES papers that you provided a link for, which helped me understand the issue more.

I'm not sure I understand all your comments completely. When you say "make the broadband bass levels more equal", I believe you are suggesting I try to fix some of those peaks and valleys that are still in the bass frequency range, however, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by a bass tone control and how this could fix this.

Regarding your recommendation on separate measurements for the bass - I have already done that and so I am attaching a few bass measurements from three different seating locations. Middle seat, left seat, right seat. Before and after Audyssey. I think it looks pretty good. Certainly an improvement after Audyssey. But I'd be interested in your viewpoint. Note too that these measurements are the two subs only. They are playing at the same time for each measurement. Perhaps I should do similar measurements wth the speakers playing (e.g. Left speaker + subs, right speaker + subs)?
.
When I say "broadband" I mean not paying attention to the ripples, but visually smoothing the curve, as if it had been done with very low resolution measurement. A bass tone control simply tilts the bass response with a hinge point around 300-500 Hz. It does not address irregularities in the curve - that is the job of the EQ.

For me your room curves are too smoothed. They do not show individual room resonances, which is what we hear. Increase the resolution of your measurement system to around 1/10-1/12 octave.
avkv likes this.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #1073 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 10:07 AM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 836
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 875 Post(s)
Liked: 3078
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunByrne View Post
I'd be interested to hear what Dr. Toole and others say about this speaker based on the graph:

spinorama graph
.
Other than the upward tilted HF it is quite well balanced, with well controlled directivity. The smoothness of all the curves indicates an absence of resonances and good time domain performance. It should sound good, with tone control adjustments to cater to program and preference variations.

What is it?
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #1074 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 10:22 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
Other than the upward tilted HF it is quite well balanced, with well controlled directivity. The smoothness of all the curves indicates an absence of resonances and good time domain performance. It should sound good, with tone control adjustments to cater to program and preference variations.

What is it?
Philharmonic BMR
Bottlemech2 is offline  
post #1075 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 10:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,772
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3772 Post(s)
Liked: 3380
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

In any event, YES, I believe it's possible for a standards committee and whole bunch of very smart people to believe in, and invest in, research that is not fully vetted, performed by an entity that has a vested interest in the outcome of the research, and does not have high-powered, third party studies that totally support the findings. Harman's research may well be 100% correct, but I will view it through the lens of skepticism until it is verified by unbiased, third party investigators. I also believe there are enough question marks for me to remain skeptical.
You might want to find another example considering this one doesn't support your position. It was the "unbiased" third party investigators that produced biased results that incorrectly withdrew a very helpful drug from the market. Aprotitin has been re-approved in Canada and the EU, but unfortunately not the US. Hard for any drug to recover from that type of assault considering there are alternatives. Like Paul Harvey says, "Now you know the rest of the story". https://academic.oup.com/bja/article/110/5/675/330401
avkv likes this.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #1076 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 10:26 AM
Senior Member
 
SunByrne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pearland, TX
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 159 Post(s)
Liked: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
Other than the upward tilted HF it is quite well balanced, with well controlled directivity. The smoothness of all the curves indicates an absence of resonances and good time domain performance. It should sound good, with tone control adjustments to cater to program and preference variations.
OK, that was basically my reading as well, so I think I'm on the right track to understanding these graphs. Thank you!

Quote:
What is it?
Philharmonic BMR: 3-way speaker with RAAL 64-10 tweeter, Tectonic BMR midrange, 7" ScanSpeak woofer, 4th-order Linkwitz-Riley crosovers. A Dennis Murphy design with help from Paul Kittinger on tuning the port. It's a maxi-bookshelf or a mini-tower, depending on how you classify a speaker that's 20" high and 8" wide.

It has recently been getting a lot of attention here on AVS as Dennis sent a pair out to tour around the country, and the forum members' reviews have been pretty enthusiastic. Audioholics recently did a more formal review with measurements, including the attached spinorama.

When I saw the spinorama my impression was that it looked very strong—maybe a bit bright—but I'm new to reading those, so I wanted some input from someone with more expertise. So, thank you, Dr. Toole.
overg likes this.

_____
Study: Schiit Bifrost Multibit > Yamaha A-S500 > Ascend Acoustics Sierra-2/Emotiva S8
Living Room HT: Oppo BDP-83 > Denon X3400H > PSB Image 4T/8C/S50/Rythmik L22
Office: Schiit Modi 3 > NAD C740 > Ascend Acoustics Sierra-1 NrT
Bedroom: Onkyo TX-8050 > PSB Image 1B/SubSonic5
SunByrne is offline  
post #1077 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 10:36 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Central, PA
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)
Liked: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
No, I wasn't aiming at you in my. remark - go back through the thread and mulit-mic measurements are mentioned a few times. Putting total reliance on such measurements is encouraged by some "Room EQ" schemes.

I sense that you are talking mainly about large venue systems. Small rooms are very different. Audience coverage is critical there. I spend a chapter on cinema sized venues in my book (Chapter 11), and on the special bass problems existing only in small rooms in Chapter 8.
Yes, a few of us got a bit off topic and I was in fact talking about large venue measurements, thus the confusion. I’ve read parts of your book but don’t currently own a copy. I’ll pick it up as soon as I’m done digesting Bob McCarthy’s “Sound Systems: Design and Optimization”. Actually, I’ll likely pick it up before I’m done with his as it’s a lot to digest.

I’m sure I speak for many when I say thanks for your participation here. Much appreciated.
Floyd Toole likes this.
garygreyh is offline  
post #1078 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 10:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
Jsin_N's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 760
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 443 Post(s)
Liked: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
You might want to find another example considering this one doesn't support your position. It was the "unbiased" third party investigators that produced biased results that incorrectly withdrew a very helpful drug from the market. Aprotitin has been re-approved in Canada and the EU, but unfortunately not the US. Hard for any drug to recover from that type of assault considering there are alternatives. Like Paul Harvey says, "Now you know the rest of the story". https://academic.oup.com/bja/article/110/5/675/330401
Straw-man argument anyway used to show off credentials
Jsin_N is offline  
post #1079 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 11:42 AM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 983
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 606 Post(s)
Liked: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunByrne View Post
OK, that was basically my reading as well, so I think I'm on the right track to understanding these graphs. Thank you!



Philharmonic BMR: 3-way speaker with RAAL 64-10 tweeter, Tectonic BMR midrange, 7" ScanSpeak woofer, 4th-order Linkwitz-Riley crosovers. A Dennis Murphy design with help from Paul Kittinger on tuning the port. It's a maxi-bookshelf or a mini-tower, depending on how you classify a speaker that's 20" high and 8" wide.

It has recently been getting a lot of attention here on AVS as Dennis sent a pair out to tour around the country, and the forum members' reviews have been pretty enthusiastic. Audioholics recently did a more formal review with measurements, including the attached spinorama.

When I saw the spinorama my impression was that it looked very strong—maybe a bit bright—but I'm new to reading those, so I wanted some input from someone with more expertise. So, thank you, Dr. Toole.
You can compare to the Revel M16 review by Audioholics here:

https://www.audioholics.com/bookshel...6/measurements


Speakers: M040 | X18 | UB5
Sub: VTF-2 mk5
Amps: HK 3490 | TSR-7810
l0nestar8 is offline  
post #1080 of 5319 Old 01-28-2019, 12:00 PM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 836
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 875 Post(s)
Liked: 3078
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
You can compare to the Revel M16 review by Audioholics here:

https://www.audioholics.com/bookshel...6/measurements

Unfortunately the Audioholics measurements were early in their game and were corrupted at mid and high frequencies by poor microphone mounting - causing the ugly ripples. I think (hope) they fixed that.

EDIT: Figure 12.1(e) in my book shows a proper spinorama.
Q&A and avkv like this.

Last edited by Floyd Toole; 01-28-2019 at 12:06 PM.
Floyd Toole is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

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

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