How to Choose a Loudspeaker -- What the Science Shows - Page 5 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 5011Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 3772 Old 12-30-2018, 06:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 6,703
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3325 Post(s)
Liked: 1877
@avkv I have been reading about ml amps as I am shopping around for a used amp...my question is what amps do you use to get your research data/spin s? every so often I read about ml amps not being neutral. any explanation on how an amp might be worth examination when searching for neutral speaker?

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #122 of 3772 Old 12-30-2018, 07:16 PM
Advanced Member
 
Vergiliusm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Land of Enchantment
Posts: 604
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 223 Post(s)
Liked: 416
Quote:
The irony of humans with bias preaching unbiased science to justify their bias is not lost on anyone
I think you forgot the smile emoji, but I like it. Can I get that on a t-shirt to get some street cred?

"Rock and roll is alive and alright" Sloan
Vergiliusm is offline  
post #123 of 3772 Old 12-30-2018, 07:34 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,125
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2755 Post(s)
Liked: 2662
Quote:
Originally Posted by avkv View Post

Contradicting the oft-repeated claim that choosing a loudspeaker is a very personal choice, research has proven that regardless of age, culture, or listening experience, all people with nominally normal hearing generally agree on which speakers sound better than others. Indeed, there is a universal definition of what sounds good. http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=12794 and https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/conventions/?elib=12847

I'm wondering about the claim "all people...."


I did not purchase those papers so forgive me if all the answers are there but...


Is it really the case you can predict what every single listener will choose as the best speaker in a blind test? I didn't think HK's claims went that far. Has every single person preferred the HK speaker vs a competitor in every test? That would strike me as pretty amazing.


I note in the link to the blind test of the Magico vs the two Revel speakers, that the two Revel speakers were rated differently. There are presumably characteristics about one that some preferred over the other. So it doesn't seem like HK can perfectly predict ALL people will prefer speaker X over Y. Unless I missed something?


Also, in the paper linked to earlier in the thread concerning listener preferences for loudspeaker and headphones, there was the quote:

"There were significant variations in the preferred bass and treble levels due to differences in individual taste and listener training."


That strikes me as problematic for the previous claims that suggested "all people generally agree" which speakers sound better than other. I suppose it could have been worded "People generally agree...." which would remove some confusion. Though it leaves open that..not all people agree, and the results are always going to be therefore suggestive in terms of probabilities, never conclusive. Which always leaves the room open for alternative listener preferences. Which...suggests to me....it will still boil down to an individual deciding what he likes best, research or not.


And this is for me one of the problems as a consumer and especially as an audiophile (though not a woo-woo believing audiophile). I'm super picky about the speakers I like and buy, so I'm left wondering how exactly the HK research will apply to my purchasing decisions.


The HK research, as I understand it, gives a probability that in a blind test a listener - hence possibly myself - is most likely to select the HK product, for instance a Revel speaker, as best sounding. So what do I do with this info? Simply presume I'm in the set of people who would prefer the Revel speaker...and just say "Ok, that settles it, I'll just buy Revel speakers?"


The problem I face is that I've listened to a number of Revel speakers...so why don't they appeal to me? A couple were in a bit more challenging rooms, but a couple were in very good rooms where the sound was very smooth, even...everything the measurements suggest. And yet, while the speakers were attractive, and expensive looking, and while I found them extremely competent, there was no "it" factor at all that made me want to keep listening for long periods, much less purchase them. Where I have experienced that from a number of other speakers that I ended up owning. So how does the research therefore relate to me and help me "choose" a loudspeaker, if one designed by the criteria presented doesn't float my boat? If the HK researchers are saying "Trust us, we know what type of speaker you are likely to prefer" what does that research mean for ME if I don't prefer them? The HK researchers could say "Well, yes there are all sorts of other variables introduced in your sighted store/show evaluations, but in our BLIND TESTING facilities, you would likely have preferred the Revel speakers over the ones you think you preferred."


Well...ok..maybe the odds are in that favor (though, not decisive). But, again, I'm stuck with the fact that upon hearing the speaker in conditions I'm actually going to be using (not in a blind testing facility)....I can't get any enthusiasm for them. Do I just buy them anyway? It would seem very odd to me to buy the speaker that didn't make me want to keep listening to my music vs the one that made me want to stay in the store all day long listening to my music.


So this is the dilemma I've brought up before in the Revel threads. The HK science is supposed to help us choose the right type of loudspeaker via tests done in a scientific facility with other people, but given the effect of speakers on a listener in "real world" conditions, and given perfect predictability eludes even the tests, it STILL seems the consumer, at least picky audiophile types like myself, are still are left to the same old "audition speakers and just go with what you like" approach anyway.

Last edited by R Harkness; 12-30-2018 at 08:02 PM.
R Harkness is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #124 of 3772 Old 12-30-2018, 07:45 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 6,703
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3325 Post(s)
Liked: 1877
revel is aggressive lately...if you have a brick and mortar...revel is moving into them. fine by me, they sound good enough...just funny to hear the change in sales pitch...they should be listened too

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
post #125 of 3772 Old 12-30-2018, 07:57 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,125
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2755 Post(s)
Liked: 2662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
Other companies use it, so I'm not sure what I'm misinterpreting

The thread is titled "how to choose a loudspeaker" and the method of vetting this, proposed by Kevin of HK, is the one developed by HK.



From Kevin's second post in the thread:


"Years of experiments and studies conducted by Harman Research Scientists https://www.routledge.com/Sound-Repr.../9781138921368 and https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/journal/?ID=524 has led to a series of 70 measurements which, after post-processing, provide an excellent indication of a loudspeaker's sound quality."



Hence "That company has developed the method for choosing the right loudspeaker." (Yes, it sprang from earlier insights and research, but the vetting method proposed in this thread is the one that HK has come up with...no?)


Obviously my #3 springs from the fact *almost* not other companies are using the criteria or offering the information HK is (Prof Tool mentions KEF as the only one he's aware of doing so other than HK). So...effectively...at this point the facts will happily suggest HK is just about the only company offering the information that fulfills the criteria they propose as vetting the "way to choose a loudspeaker."


Again....my point had only been about the optics of how this all converges, not on the actual marketing motivations. (Though it doesn't help dispel the "marketing" vibe that a competitor's speaker will generally only be mentioned to describe their defects relative to Revel speakers...even if factual. We don't hear about how competitor models may be better in any parameters).



Anyway, that's all I want to say about that as I truly do not believe Kevin or others motivations are other than to spread hard-won knowledge!

Last edited by R Harkness; 12-30-2018 at 08:05 PM.
R Harkness is offline  
post #126 of 3772 Old 12-30-2018, 08:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,006
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 630 Post(s)
Liked: 560
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
That strikes me as problematic for the previous claims that suggested "all people generally agree" which speakers sound better than other. I suppose it could have been worded "People generally agree...." which would remove some confusion. Though it leaves open that..not all people agree, and the results are always going to be therefore suggestive in terms of probabilities, never conclusive. Which always leaves the room open for alternative listener preferences. Which...suggests to me....it will still boil down to an individual deciding what he likes best, research or not.
With their measurement data they have shown that they can predict with 87% accuracy which speakers will be preferred when bass isn't accounted for and 99.9% when the speakers have similar bass response, so I think that is what is meant by "all people generally agree".


Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
So this is the dilemma I've brought up before in the Revel threads. The HK science is supposed to help us choose the right type of loudspeaker via tests done in a scientific facility with other people, but given the effect of speakers on a listener in "real world" conditions, and given perfect predictability eludes even the tests, it STILL seems the consumer, at least picky audiophile types like myself, are still are left to the same old "audition speakers and just go with what you like" approach anyway.
I take it more as the Harman science helps the Harman brands design the best speaker they can based on that science and their respective price point. Customers' biases may very well still sway them toward other speakers for a myriad of reasons. I think Revel should always be auditioned but no one should assume they've done your homework for you and that you shouldn't even consider other brands.
aarons915 is offline  
post #127 of 3772 Old 12-30-2018, 08:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,366
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1887 Post(s)
Liked: 1084
I find the science interesting but I still wonder about what makes some people choose one speaker over another. I know other speaker companies do testing as well and have anechoic chambers. I wonder if their preference testing has different parameters or something that makes them design a speakers that is not as accurate (on and off axis) as it can for that price point. I often get asked for recommendations and my disclaimer is they should listen to the speakers and see what they prefer. I also tell them they should listen in their own room if possible. I know I have recommended Revel several times but during their listening tests they ended up buying other brands. I know in two instances they used SPL apps and test tones to make sure they were level matched because they were worried that salesman might purposefully play one pair of speakers louder than the other. We know aesthetics plays and important role in preference and I know many like the look of the Revels. So what made some of thee people choose a less accurate speaker? Looks, differences in rooms, hearing loss, etc. I wonder if some of these companies have found what people prefer if they have hearing loss or for short listening periods, etc. I doubt we will ever find out.
PrimeTime and Gooddoc like this.
Ellebob is offline  
post #128 of 3772 Old 12-30-2018, 08:34 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JerryLove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,655
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
If you're going to impugn someones motives, or suggest that because a company developed something it somehow makes it invalid, then back it up with facts and evidence. I don't see any.
Though not as relevant in the case of Toole's work (which goes back to his government days); I do disagree with this statement in principle.

It was appropriate to be critical of tobacco's findings that tobacco didn't cause cancer even before we caught them at it. It's similarly reasonable to question the efficacy of drugs tested by the manufacturer.

To put it another way: there are a ton of cable manufacturers out there that will gladly tell you about their scientific tests that show that their cables sound better.
MordredKLB and fatbulkexpanse like this.
JerryLove is offline  
post #129 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 12:57 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
garygarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 856 Post(s)
Liked: 1188
Quote:
Originally Posted by torii View Post
how does levels of distortion fit into the desired neutral speaker? can a speaker with 5% distortion be a good neutral speaker? would a 1% distortion speaker be better or worse than the 5% speaker. I think I notice if distortion gets to low it starts sounding very dry/sterile...too clean
Harmonic distortion, if the amounts are low enough, and if pleasant, rather than noxious, might seem to lend a little "richness" to the sound, the way some phono cartridges do. It is still distortion, though.

I think meaningful loudspeaker distortion figures are hard to come by, now that Audio Magazine and Heyser are gone. Back in the day, I recall IM distortion levels ranging from about 1.5% at 100 dB one meter away for well designed fully horn loaded speakers, to as high as 10% for a "good" direct radiator, at 100 dB/1 meter. The somewhat less important Harmonic distortion ranged from about 0.33% to as high as 20%, at the same SPL.

Stereophile (November 21, 2004) had an interesting article by Keith Howard on modulation distortion in speakers, which he calls Doppler distortion. The meat of the article is on the third page, where he describes the harshness and other effects of spurious harmonically unrelated sidebands resulting from modulation. He says that after his experiments he sides with Klipsch in believing that modulation distortion can be a serious problem in speakers, especially 2 ways, with wide excursion in the woofer. Paul Klipsch believed that having excursion of 1/16 of an inch or less in a woofer was preferable.

If I understand correctly, these kinds of distortion can vary widely in speakers that are equally "neutral" in frequency response.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/red-shift-doppler-distortion-loudspeakers-page-3#omWdye7G676SYg0g.99
torii likes this.

Last edited by garygarrison; 12-31-2018 at 01:13 AM.
garygarrison is offline  
post #130 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 01:07 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
astrallite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,412
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by garygarrison View Post
Harmonic distortion, if the amounts are low enough, and if pleasant, rather than noxious, might seem to lend a little "richness" to the sound, the way some phono cartridges do. It is still distortion, though.

I think meaningful loudspeaker distortion figures are hard to come by, now that Audio Magazine and Heyser are gone. Back in the day, I recall IM distortion levels ranging from about 1.5% at 100 dB one meter away for well designed fully horn loaded speakers, to as high as 10% for a "good" direct radiator, at 100 dB/1 meter. The somewhat less important Harmonic distortion ranged from about 0.33% to as high as 20%, at the same SPL.

Stereophile (November 21, 2004) had an interesting article by Keith Howard on modulation distortion in speakers, which he calls Doppler distortion. The meat of the article is on the third page, where he describes the harshness and other effects of spurious sidebands. He says that after his experiments he sides with Klipsch in believing that modulation distortion can be a serious problem in speakers, especially 2 ways, with wide excursion in the woofer. Paul Klipsch believed that having excursion of 1/16 of an inch or less in a woofer was preferable.

If I understand correctly, these kinds of distortion can vary widely in speakers that are equally "neutral" in frequency response.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/red-shift-doppler-distortion-loudspeakers-page-3#omWdye7G676SYg0g.99
Wouldn't this distortion be extremely audible in a home theater subwoofer? Seems like that would also imply its better to have a separate mid-bass module (like the Hsu unit) and subwoofer, say have something for the low bass (subsonic-40Hz), and then something for the midbass (40-120Hz) since subs will go through quite a bit of excursion during movies and that doppler distortion would bleed into the upper bass.
astrallite is offline  
post #131 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 01:56 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
garygarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 856 Post(s)
Liked: 1188
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrallite View Post
Wouldn't this distortion be extremely audible in a home theater subwoofer? Seems like that would also imply its better to have a separate mid-bass module (like the Hsu unit) and subwoofer, say have something for the low bass (subsonic-40Hz), and then something for the midbass (40-120Hz) since subs will go through quite a bit of excursion during movies and that doppler distortion would bleed into the upper bass.

Yes, but I wouldn't say extremely audible.... If a flopping, high excursion, subwoofer causes Doppler distortion, if it crosses over, say, at 80 Hz, there is reduced opportunity to produce modulation with higher tones to which the ear is more sensitive. Even so, your idea of a separate mid bass speaker may be a good one. When sub manufacturers, and, especially regular woofer manufacturers, brag about their X-max, it makes me uncomfortable. It's different with a guitar speaker, where distortion is used artistically. There is a recent trend toward horn loaded subwoofers, which can have low excursion with high SPL, and low distortion. They are BIG, sometimes going from floor to ceiling in a corner. More than one person online has dug out their basement or crawl space to insert a DIY horn sub that "speaks" into the first floor listening room.


At least one sub manufacturer has recommended not only having the bass management crossover at 80 Hz, but also the LPF for LFE, even though movie mixers do put sound up to 120 Hz into the LFE. The manufacturer said the reason was that bass clarity would be improved. Since the LPF is not a brick wall, and the bass would gradually fade away above 80 Hz, some of the LFE between 80 and 120 will still get through, and 80 Hz to 120 Hz is only 1/2 an octave.
torii likes this.
garygarrison is offline  
post #132 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 04:03 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 422
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Liked: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
The others were observations and innuendo. The one I quoted was outright incorrect.

If you're going to impugn someones motives, or suggest that because a company developed something it somehow makes it invalid, then back it up with facts and evidence. I don't see any.
Ok, now you're on to something! Motive: This is their BUSINESS. They use it to make money.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I'm a Revel/Harman Luxury dealer and have been for over 5 years. I like and use a lot of their products. Besides being an integrator myself, I also do consulting and design projects for several A/V integration companies. Part of that is suggesting and helping them attain lines/brands to help their business - I have brought 2 dealers into the Harman/Revel/JBL sphere of products. I design projects with it for them all the time and have no problems with the speakers - but I also have other things to compare them to in the real world, which is why this study is a little funny to me.

^ I have NO AX TO GRIND with them other than they deleted reps to save money and now their ordering process is trash, but that has nothing to do with how their speakers sound. I'm still a big fan of practicality and reality....

FACT: Harman Luxury Group - which Revel, JBL Synthesis, etc. is a part of - took a $499 OPPO BDP-83 DVD player, re-skinned it, and called it their own under the Lexicon brand adding $3,000 to the price tag.

https://www.audioholics.com/blu-ray-...icon-outside-1

^ This stuff goes on in the A/V industry. No question. It's unethical and it's shady. While the guys at Revel didn't directly do the above, they're part of the larger business, which carries a pretty big black eye from an integrity stand point, IMO.


FACT: Revel itself has re-skinned other products as well, leaving them virtually untouched other than slight superficial changes that have little to no influence on performance. These products get all of the benefits of the "Revel" marketing (read "We have science on our side, so it's better"), correct? They get higher price tags on them because of the rebadged "Revel", correct? But, they are essentially the same thing.

Here's one just off the top of my head...

In-ceiling LCR

https://revelspeakers.com/productdet...uct/c763l.html MSRP $750/ea
For all intents & purposes, virtually the exact same speaker as
https://www.infinityspeakers.com/in-...g/ERS610_.html MSRP was $499/ea

There is a massive difference in weight with the Infinity speaker being much heavier (neodymium magnets, perhaps?), but the driver sizes are the same (MCD nomenclature vs CMMD). The size of the unit is virtually the same with the minor tweak for the modern magnetic grill. Essentially, they are the same thing. Only one is "Revel" and now 50% more. Does anyone actually believe any amount of time was spent making this speaker a "Revel"?

^ I think it makes good business sense for Harman to not throw away good models like the speaker above. I really do - part of my 19 year career in A/V was as a business development manager for an OEM. However, everything under the Revel name also benefits from their marketing. Part of that marketing approach is "preaching from the mountain". From different angles, it comes across as disingenuous.

- The reply to MMiles (reay interesting) question, which didn't actually answer him, BTW, was a total attempt to debate from a position of authority - which is nonsense. "We study this and wrote books" does not actually answer his question regarding the study and other manufacturers. It attempts to talk down from the mountain. The then terse, snarky "Yes" reply when Mmiles followed up rang out as a defeated answer.

Yes, I discuss my experiences as a dealer and someone who works with a lot of different products and manufactures. I do so only to give a point of reference from which I answer people... BUT I STILL DIRECTLY ANSWER THEM. I don't say "I've been an A/V professional for 19 years so, trust me, I just know". Or, "Google it. I won't bother to post links." Who here would be satisfied with that?
mmiles, PrimeTime, shivaji and 6 others like this.

Last edited by PrestigeAudio; 12-31-2018 at 04:37 AM.
PrestigeAudio is online now  
post #133 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 04:06 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 422
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Liked: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post
Though not as relevant in the case of Toole's work (which goes back to his government days); I do disagree with this statement in principle.

It was appropriate to be critical of tobacco's findings that tobacco didn't cause cancer even before we caught them at it. It's similarly reasonable to question the efficacy of drugs tested by the manufacturer.

To put it another way: there are a ton of cable manufacturers out there that will gladly tell you about their scientific tests that show that their cables sound better.
I agree!

Years ago I remember (in the mid 90s ?) a study came out showing that salt didn't contribute as much to high blood pressure as was thought. The people who paid for the "independent" study: Campbell's Soup.
PrestigeAudio is online now  
post #134 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 04:29 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 422
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Liked: 184
Here's an interesting thing....

Why did they have to list the manufacturers and model numbers with such a small sample size? THAT'S what is what came across as sketchy.

- Why couldn't they have said: Model XYZ measured " ", Model 123 measured " ", & Model ABC measured " "?

And then pointed out that people preferred them in this order while correlating that with their studies?

- Why such a small sample size with 2/3 products being Revel?

- Why Revel "trained" employees? Do people who work in the audio industry - for a specific company - represent the gen pop?

There are so many questions as to why this was done this way and with these specific products. I also have serious questions as to how any of this is relevant at all to real world conditions. Great, your speakers kick butt in a vacuum that only you posses and control - against a single competitor. Now, translate that into people's living rooms.

^ The above is what makes this look like it has a marketing angle. That's fine if it does, BTW. But to do so under the guise of science is what honks people off.

BTW, Revel isn't the only company standing on a soapbox with science and research data. In my meetings with Paradigm they continuously stated that their speakers use mass amounts of NRC data and studies that show customers prefer a certain frequency response performance and, therefor, people always think Paradigm sounds best because that's how they approach speaker design.

^ Problem was, I've never heard a Paradigm speaker I liked and passed on the line, cracking up on the inside the whole time they were going on and on about how NRC research data shows their speakers sound best.
shivaji, gajCA and emcdade like this.
PrestigeAudio is online now  
post #135 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 04:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
djp2k7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 315 Post(s)
Liked: 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
I'm wondering about the claim "all people...."
So this is the dilemma I've brought up before in the Revel threads. The HK science is supposed to help us choose the right type of loudspeaker via tests done in a scientific facility with other people, but given the effect of speakers on a listener in "real world" conditions, and given perfect predictability eludes even the tests, it STILL seems the consumer, at least picky audiophile types like myself, are still are left to the same old "audition speakers and just go with what you like" approach anyway.
For them to claim "all people..." I'd like to see more results of their double blind listening tests with other speakers. Are there any links? All I've seen are the Magico 3, Salon 2, Paradigm model, and the Performa model. And someone mentioned the Salon 2, which was most preferred, does not measure as well as the Performa model. ? Maybe the person who mentioned that wasn't taking all of their measurements into factor, idk.

Brent Butterworth, who is a big measurements guy, preferred the sound of the B&W 803D over his Performa F206 speakers though he knew they didn't measure as well as the Revels. But if I see a dozen or so measurements of other popular speakers with the blind listening results showing the listeners choosing the Revels then I'm sold. Sold on the presumed fact that the vast majority of people prefer flat, but not everyone of course.

Onkyo TX-NR676 / Yamaha CD-S300 / XBOX One X / Sony UBX700
Klipsch R-51M / Martin Logan Dynamo 300 / HiFiMan HE400i Headphones
djp2k7 is offline  
post #136 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 05:27 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,262
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 847 Post(s)
Liked: 262
This is a very important aspect of scientific research that findings are duplicatable by others. And I would like to read papers by other research institutions including NRCC who have been able to verify the correlation between Spinorama and double blind testing.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
SouthernCA is offline  
post #137 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 05:34 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
callas01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,983
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1357 Post(s)
Liked: 903
This feels like an infomercial....I hate infomercials

Last edited by callas01; 12-31-2018 at 05:38 AM.
callas01 is online now  
post #138 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 05:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Shadowed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,243
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 939 Post(s)
Liked: 909
It never ceases to amaze me how
Quote:
all people with nominally normal hearing generally agree on which speakers sound better than others.
Gets turned into these...

Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
I'm wondering about the claim "all people...."
Quote:
Originally Posted by djp2k7 View Post
For them to claim "all people..." I'd like to see more results
Which has a different meaning than the original statement.
Q&A, krabapple, filecat13 and 2 others like this.
Shadowed is offline  
post #139 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 05:59 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 422
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Liked: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowed View Post
It never ceases to amaze me how
Quote:
all people with nominally normal hearing generally agree on which speakers sound better than others.
Gets turned into these...

Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
I'm wondering about the claim "all people...."
Quote:
Originally Posted by djp2k7 View Post
For them to claim "all people..." I'd like to see more results
Which has a different meaning than the original statement.
I don't understand your issue with their take on the statement. How do you think it reads or what do you think that statement implies? Also, are these "normal" Harman employees... errrr.... people being subjected to audiology tests before listening to check all of their hearing to validate them as "normal"? If so, I didnt see where it explained that.

To myself and others, obviously, the statement seems to imply that if you don't like speakers with "xyz" parameters, then your hearing isn't "normal" or "normally normal".

I mean, "ALL" is a pretty simple to understand word and they are the ones who used it. It leaves no wiggle room whatsoever.

In advertising this is referred to as "Emotional Appeals". "All the cool kids are doing it". Or, in this case "Everyone with normal hearing thinks this sounds the best".

Last edited by PrestigeAudio; 12-31-2018 at 07:02 AM.
PrestigeAudio is online now  
post #140 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 06:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Shadowed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,243
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 939 Post(s)
Liked: 909
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrestigeAudio View Post
I don't understand your issue with their take on the statement. How do you think it reads or what do you think that statement implies? Also, are these "normal" Harman emlloyees... errrr.... people being subjected to audiology tests before listening to check all of their hearing to validate them as "normal"? If so, I didnt read that part.

To myself and others, obviously, the statement seems to imply that if you don't like speakers with "xyz" parameters, then your hearing isn't "normal" or "normally normal".

I mean, "ALL" is a pretty simple to understand word and they are the ones who used it. It leaves no wiggle room whatsoever.

In advertising this is referred to as "Emotional Appeals". "All the cool kids are doing it". Or, in this case "Everyone with normal hearing thinks this sounds the best".
For the purpose of not derailing the thread any further, I will just leave it at that.
Q&A and Lonewolf7002 like this.
Shadowed is offline  
post #141 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 07:01 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 18,428
Mentioned: 214 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8587 Post(s)
Liked: 5787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
I didn't say there was and have no idea where you got that from. I stated manufacturers don't publish meaningful data, with torii providing a great example above.

I guess Focal doesn't have the funds for it . Maybe they had to sell the Klippel machine before they got a chance to assemble the speaker.
OK, I go to the Harman Audio site where they sell JBL and Infinity consumer grade products and see no mention of "meaningful data" no matter which set of JBL or Infinity speakers I click on.

Why is that?

Does Harman only provide meaningful data for it's elite or pro lines?

https://www.harmanaudio.com/home-aud...SABEgJoP_D_BwE

I'm not trying to be obtuse, I'm simply approaching this as a consumer.

If I go to Ascend Audio or Philharmonic Audio's site, among other smaller brands, I at least find some meaningful data.

What am I missing?
motrek likes this.

Geoff A. J., California
gajCA is offline  
post #142 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 07:01 AM
Member
 
epetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 68
How to Choose a Loudspeaker -- What the Science Shows

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowed View Post
For the purpose of not derailing the thread any further, I will just leave it at that.


Too late. This thread is so far off original topic from first post already. Seems like for a thread like this to be successful there needs to be two threads. One which is read-only and is the posted results of spinoramas and double blind listening tests. The other can be color commentary, opinions on results, and random trolling. But if not, results posted here over time are going to be impossible to find the signal in the noise. Unless the first post just keeps getting edited to add more results so they're all at the top.

Last edited by epetti; 12-31-2018 at 07:37 AM.
epetti is offline  
post #143 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 07:26 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,658
Mentioned: 181 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3687 Post(s)
Liked: 3283
Well, this could have been an interesting thread, lol.

Maybe it can just be continued in the Revel or JBL owner threads? No sense in continuing this thread since the conflicts of interest that folks have a problem with are not fixable.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #144 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 07:30 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
12B4A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: CR Iowa
Posts: 1,046
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 596 Post(s)
Liked: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by gajCA View Post
OK, I go to the Harman Audio site where they sell JBL and Infinity consumer grade products and see no mention of "meaningful data" no matter which set of JBL or Infinity speakers I click on.

Why is that?
Even within Harman the willingness to base decisions off of ANSI-2034 along with the publication of data acquired from the method has been ignored or met with resistance. It seems that most distributed data has come from the engineering side. Marketing at the Harman level of the org still adheres to disingenuous practices such as cherry picking data, deliberately burying specifications*, or just plain not disclosing anything.

*really a pet peeve of mine when height/width/depth/weight info gets buried too.
PrimeTime likes this.

Life is Lambertian
12B4A is online now  
post #145 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 07:42 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 18,428
Mentioned: 214 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8587 Post(s)
Liked: 5787
Quote:
Originally Posted by epetti View Post
the posted results of spinoramas and double blind listening tests.
Can you link that?

Geoff A. J., California
gajCA is offline  
post #146 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 07:47 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 18,428
Mentioned: 214 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8587 Post(s)
Liked: 5787
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12B4A View Post
Even within Harman the willingness to base decisions off of ANSI-2034 along with the publication of data acquired from the method has been ignored or met with resistance. It seems that most distributed data has come from the engineering side. Marketing at the Harman level of the org still adheres to disingenuous practices such as cherry picking data, deliberately burying specifications*, or just plain not disclosing anything.

*really a pet peeve of mine when height/width/depth/weight info gets buried too.
I'm approaching this as a consumer; I'm not an engineer.

If only Harman "provides meaningful data" why can't I find that data when I visit the Harman site for consumer audio?

Of are we just talking elite speakers here, normal "consumers" need not apply?

"Other" brands are being disparaged for not providing data by Harman loyalists but I can't find the data for Harman products either.

Or maybe I'm just to ignorant to understand the point of this thread.
guachi, JonfromCB and motrek like this.

Geoff A. J., California
gajCA is offline  
post #147 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 07:48 AM
Member
 
epetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by gajCA View Post
Can you link that?


Just quoting from the very first post in this thread: "In this thread, we will publish the results of these measurements. In addition, we will discuss their correlation to double-blind listening tests, http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2008/1...udspeaker.html as well as publishing the results of formal listening tests, when available. We will add measurement results as they become available. The intention of this thread is for it to be reality-based, and to inform and discuss loudspeaker measurements and listening tests."

Kevin started putting some results in the next few replies before it got derailed. I'm just saying if there were any further useful data posts it would be impossible to find them in the midst of all the noise of the rest of this thread. It would have been great to have a single thread that you could refer to that just had results of measurements and listening tests in it.
Q&A, bearr48 and gajCA like this.
epetti is offline  
post #148 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 08:19 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,125
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2755 Post(s)
Liked: 2662
I think the thread can still be useful. As I’ve repeatedly said I’m in the camp that Kevin et al are providing great information with
good intentions.

If more substance is contributed by Kevin - eg more tests or whatever - substantive discussion will follow. It’s when we are in a waiting
pattern twiddling thumbs that discussion tends to wander in any thread.

One thing I’d be curious about is if Kevin could comment on any speakers, where they show defects or not, from links to other measurements - eg Stereophile or the NRC measurements at Soundstage. Or if he will only comment on speakers measured in their
own spinnerama?

Last edited by R Harkness; 12-31-2018 at 09:03 AM.
R Harkness is offline  
post #149 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 08:21 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
12B4A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: CR Iowa
Posts: 1,046
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 596 Post(s)
Liked: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by gajCA View Post
Or maybe I'm just to ignorant to understand the point of this thread.
Ignorance can be eased with information. Choosing to be obtuse cannot.

Life is Lambertian
12B4A is online now  
post #150 of 3772 Old 12-31-2018, 08:30 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mmiles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Delaware
Posts: 3,976
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 815 Post(s)
Liked: 431
The thread was a target for debate when a speaker manufacturer starts a thread on how to select a speaker. Then in post 4 gives a comparison to thier product and others.

IF no brands or models where discussed and the thread focused on the process only and its origination it might have had a different outcome. Those standards are used in many areas not just consumer goods.

Again to be clear I like the JBL and Revel sound. I admire those in leadership positions that I have met at HARMAN.

No axe to grind with the brand. Just a couple questions and here we are.

Happy New Year.
A.T.M. likes this.

Mike Miles
[email protected]
mmiles 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