How to Choose a Loudspeaker -- What the Science Shows - Page 71 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 5011Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2101 of 3773 Old 03-03-2019, 04:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Europe, Croatia
Posts: 1,746
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1012 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
However, starting with a reproducing system free from audible resonances - i.e. neutral -is a significant advantage.

I was wondering, although neutral reproduction of audio content is logically the most reasonable goal, has your research ever covered correlation between polar response of real sound sources vs polar response of speakers?
As you may know, distant and unreachable goal of many audiophiles is for their system to sound like a live performance, ergo that voices and instruments sound just like they are in room with you.
My opinion is that (among other things), main obstacle for hyperrealistic sound coming out from speakers is their inability to emulate polar response from variety of live sources. For example, cymbals most likely have omnidirectional polar pattern across whole range, while human mouth is essentially horn with some diffraction going on at edges of mouth/face.
Naturally, the issue starts with recording process. However, considering all that, could it be possible that there is a different polar pattern, "more suitable" for speaker design which would actually imitate real sound sources with greater accuracy? (assuming of course that recording process with typically a single microphone in "nearfield" of instrument is not highly problematic)
Scotth3886 likes this.

Revel Ultima Salon 2, Revel M106, Revel C208, Yamaha P5000S, Denon X5200, Panasonic 65" VT50, Dual VBSS w Faital 18FH510
Kef LS50, Parasound New Classic, Focusrite 2i4 2nd Gen
donktard is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2102 of 3773 Old 03-03-2019, 04:14 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 11,607
Mentioned: 64 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1172 Post(s)
Liked: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
Craig, Craig, have you not been paying attention? This topic has been covered more than once in these forums - and, need I say, in both of my books. Here is one directly relevant paper:

Olive, S.E. (2003). “Difference in Performance and Preference of Trained versus Untrained Listeners in Loudspeaker Tests: A Case Study”, J. Audio Eng. Soc., 51, pp. 806-825.

This is just one example of a large population sample (ending up with over 300 listeners) from many very different backgrounds showing very persuasive agreement in what they prefer. Olive and colleagues have since expanded these evaluations in the context of headphones using large populations of listeners from different backgrounds and different countries/cultures. Again, the result is monotonously the same. The preferred headphones had measured in-ear frequency responses that closely resemble the sounds in the ears from highly rated loudspeakers in typically reflective listening rooms. Surprise, surprise. Numerous AES papers exist on the topic. Here are a few:

Olive, S.E, and Welti, T. (2009). “The Relationship between Perception and Measurement of Headphone Sound Quality”, Audio Eng. Soc., 133rd Convention, preprint 8744.
Olive, S.E, Welti, T. and McMullin, E. (2013). “Listener Preference for In-Room Loudspeaker and Headphone Target Responses”, 135th Convention, Audio Eng. Soc., Paper 8994.
Olive, S.E., Welti, T. and McMullin, E. (2013b). “Listener Preference for Different Headphone Target Response Curves”, Audio Eng. Soc., 134th Convention, Preprint 8867.
Olive, S.E., Welti, T. and McMullin, E. (2014). “The Influence of Listeners’ Experience, Age and Culture on Headphone Sound Quality Preferences”, 137th Convention, Audio Eng. Soc., Paper 9177.

As has been pointed out, the listener training is to teach listeners how to identify resonances and to describe what they hear in terms that are useful to design engineers who will strive to attenuate any audible problems. Untrained listeners differ from trained listeners in three ways: (1) they make mistakes, leading to greater standard deviations in their judgments and (2) they are inclined to give higher scores, being less critical than experienced listeners, and However, the average sound quality ratings of all groups of listeners end up indicating a preference for the same loudspeakers - those with neutral timbre.

As has been stated numerous times, program material is not consistent and the circle of confusion exists in movies and music, necessitating occasional intervention with tone controls. However, starting with a reproducing system free from audible resonances - i.e. neutral -is a significant advantage.

In any sighted listening evaluation all bets are off.
Is this an accurate analysis?
"From what I recall neutral curve is preferred one however depending on listeners education and training there will be larger deviation from neutral. Amateur listeners will deviate way more then trained and experienced listeners."

Dr. Toole, you said:
"Untrained listeners differ from trained listeners in three ways: (1) they make mistakes, leading to greater standard deviations in their judgments..."
How are "mistakes" defined. What criteria is used to determine that responses that differ from those by trained listeners are "mistakes"?


"...(2) they are inclined to give higher scores, being less critical than experienced listeners,..."
Are higher scores deemed to be "mistakes"?


"...(3) lacking training they have problems describing what they are hearing."
If they were simply given the vocabulary to describe what they hear, would that make their judgements more reliable? Would it change their judgements?



Dr. Toole, you have a vested interest in interpreting the data to show that trained listeners are more reliable than untrained listeners. However, what if there is another interpretation of these data that says that the variability of the untrained listeners is more representative of the general public than the more tightly grouped trained listeners? Is that possible?


To others in this thread who think that I am trying to discredit Dr. Toole's and Olive's science, or that I am disrespecting it or them, that is not the case at all. I do indeed highly respect and value what they've done. I think spinoramas are an extremely valuable way to evaluate speakers and they offer a tremendous amount to the knowledge base. I also agree completely with the premise that neutral speakers are the best choice. I just view some aspects of the science with a more skeptical eye, and I am really trying to understand it better. I apologize if my questions and comments are not phrased more politely, but I don't know how else to question things without it coming across as "challenging the science."



Craig



PS. My wife and I are gonna go watch a movie now.

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

My System
craig john is offline  
post #2103 of 3773 Old 03-03-2019, 05:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 532
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex Anderson View Post
I used those in a few recording control rooms. IMO, early first generation sounded the best. Genelec knockoffs but they do not sound as good as the real deal. Pretty good bang for the buck though. Not sure what folks are doing to replace blown drivers if that happens.
The Genelec 1031 was actually not as well behaved. I was surprised when I found this spinorama as well, but it is what it is. The mackie also featured a passive radiator which would set it apart a bit further. The BIG knockoff was the Behringer. Not as good a loudspeaker than either of its competitors, I have a spin for that one as well.

The spinorama also takes into account the vertical directivity so in any multi way design there is bound to be a dip in the early reflection and sound power DI curve as a result. It it practically impossible to avoid it in the treble region although the best designs have it severely minimized. The mackie for instance is old waveguide tech. Nothing like your current JBL or Genelec. As Dr. Toole points out the 8” two way systems have somewhat narrower dispersion as a result. Really good compact 3 way models are quite rare as far as I can tell. There’s the Gem2, but one can have several active two way monitors with an 8” bass driver for the price of one of them. If ultimate fidelity is what you seek, sure - but I’m more in the €1000/ speaker range, which to me is the point of diminishing returns.
TimVG is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2104 of 3773 Old 03-03-2019, 05:08 PM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 77 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 765 Post(s)
Liked: 2746
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post
Is this an accurate analysis?
"From what I recall neutral curve is preferred one however depending on listeners education and training there will be larger deviation from neutral. Amateur listeners will deviate way more then trained and experienced listeners."
This is from a simplified "tone control" experiment in which a small sample of listeners was used. The circle of confusion was included - a problem with limited program samples. A more elaborate, more definitive test has yet to be mounted. The naive listeners tended to boost the bass and treble, which increases the loudness so another test needs to be done in which overall loudness is compensated for. This is acknowledged in my book. BTW "trained" and "experienced" listeners are different people in the tests.


Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post
Dr. Toole, you said:
"Untrained listeners differ from trained listeners in three ways: (1) they make mistakes, leading to greater standard deviations in their judgments..."
How are "mistakes" defined. What criteria is used to determine that responses that differ from those by trained listeners are "mistakes"?
"mistakes" in this context are simply judgements that do not repeat in subsequent repeated exposures to the same sound. The variations tend to be random. Both trained and experienced listeners are more consistent - smaller standard deviation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post
"...(2) they are inclined to give higher scores, being less critical than experienced listeners,..."
Are higher scores deemed to be "mistakes"?
Not at all. It simply means that the relative ratings are consistent with other listeners, but higher on the rating scale. Winners and losers are the same

Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post
"...(3) lacking training they have problems describing what they are hearing."
If they were simply given the vocabulary to describe what they hear, would that make their judgements more reliable? Would it change their judgements?
You really have to take a break and read some of the material I have been referring to. The "vocabulary" is the estimated frequency at which the coloration is heard, and perhaps an estimate of the Q. You can download the program and become a "trained" listener - unless you think it will destroy your pleasure forever

Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post
Dr. Toole, you have a vested interest in interpreting the data to show that trained listeners are more reliable than untrained listeners. However, what if there is another interpretation of these data that says that the variability of the untrained listeners is more representative of the general public than the more tightly grouped trained listeners? Is that possible?
Now this I really don't understand. I think that my "vested interest" if it truly exists, is the reverse: my first observation 50 years ago was that the unwashed masses ended up liking the same speakers. That was the "breakthrough". A secondary aspect is that they are the same speakers that experienced and/or trained listeners prefer. All that is required is an undamaged hearing apparatus. Trained listeners are simply a labor and time saving device for use in loudspeaker development. The variability in judgments exhibited by "the masses" is essentially random, with a normal distribution, so nothing of value for marketing is there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post
To others in this thread who think that I am trying to discredit Dr. Toole's and Olive's science, or that I am disrespecting it or them, that is not the case at all. I do indeed highly respect and value what they've done. I think spinoramas are an extremely valuable way to evaluate speakers and they offer a tremendous amount to the knowledge base. I also agree completely with the premise that neutral speakers are the best choice. I just view some aspects of the science with a more skeptical eye, and I am really trying to understand it better. I apologize if my questions and comments are not phrased more politely, but I don't know how else to question things without it coming across as "challenging the science."
Any real scientist welcomes critical comment, and I do. However, you seem not to have read the science that exists and yet persist in asking questions that have been answered years ago. Please take a break and do some background reading.
rynberg, sdurani, Muza and 12 others like this.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #2105 of 3773 Old 03-03-2019, 05:21 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 8
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl Maga View Post
I accept your proclamation that you did not intend to assign sinister motivations to them. However, I must then assume you did not mean what you said because accusing one of publicly and vociferously espousing beliefs that they don't sincerely hold infers sinisterism on their part.



Yes, I can think of at least a dozen reasonable explanations for this situation. I come to that viewpoint as a retired Sales Engineer having helped to move $300+ million in products for well known technical manufacturers. In that role we frequently found it necessary to discuss with customers the actual technical merits vs what marketing did, or did not say, about the products. Given that these manufacturers were widely accepted as the cream of the crop, I was always astounded at the extent to which this dynamic was in play.
I will try again. I have zero doubt about Dr Toole's or Kevin Voeck's sincerity. None.

I do have doubt about Harman corporations commitment . I base this on the failure of JBL Synthesis and Revel to make their spinorama measurements readily available.
Obviously I dont know how or why they have decided not to publicise the measurements.
The possible reason you give , that parts of the company believe in one thing and other parts dont, may well explain the current situation .
Whatever the reason for me the current situation doesnt reflect well on Harman .

I was really interested in the JBL L100 Classic which falls in price range and my preferred form . When Harman make the spinorama measurements readily available across their premium brands I will consider buying one of their loudspeakers. ( I am sure they are really worried about not getting my business !! )
MMacka is offline  
post #2106 of 3773 Old 03-03-2019, 05:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
Jsin_N's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 756
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 195
Sometimes there's no getting past cognitive dissonance and bias.
Gooddoc likes this.
Jsin_N is offline  
post #2107 of 3773 Old 03-03-2019, 06:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,265
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
Look back at my post #2049 . A properly designed loudness compensation scheme operates on bass frequencies, not treble.



That said, I can imagine that less experienced or less disciplined listeners are attracted to the sizzle and snap. It will get tiresome when it is added to absolutely everything that is listened to . . . Did anyone test the reviewer's hearing or his/her ability to hear imperfections in loudspeakers?



These subjective reviews are not conducted in circumstances that avoid bias, so whatever is said may not "translate" to opinions of others listening in different situations. Virtually nobody does double-blind listening in support of reviews, so all physical and psychological biases are in place. Opinions are in progress before a note of music is played. Accurate anechoic measurements, on the other hand, do not change - but almost nobody does accurate measurements, and few even try. This is the basis for the popular notion that "we cannot measure what we hear".



Chapter 3 in the 3rd edition of my book dwells on how to conduct meaningful listening tests. It is not simple; it is not fun; but the results are repeatable with time and across populations of listeners - and they correlate with comprehensive anechoic measurements. The industry needs more of these. It can be done.
Agreed.

I was just trying to answer this question in my mind:

"What could be some of the audio related reasons why many consumers pick non accurate speakers?"

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
SouthernCA is offline  
post #2108 of 3773 Old 03-03-2019, 08:03 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,696
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 426 Post(s)
Liked: 404
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganduy View Post

As an aside, I find it hugely ironic that although I can afford to spend up to 100k for a pair of speakers, I must settle forever on a system I bought at half price discount at my local Guitar Center at a fraction of that cost.

Anyone not familiar with the M2 should check out the science behind their design.

Thanks Dr. Toole.
M2s retail for ~$6K apiece from what I see on the web. $12K/pair is undoubtedly a fraction of $100K, but ....still rather rich for my blood.

But maybe you got a *really* good discount. ;>
krabapple is offline  
post #2109 of 3773 Old 03-03-2019, 08:48 PM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 77 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 765 Post(s)
Liked: 2746
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernCA View Post
Agreed.

I was just trying to answer this question in my mind:

"What could be some of the audio related reasons why many consumers pick non accurate speakers?"

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
It is a good question. Another one is "how much of the decision was actually based on the sound reaching the ears of the listener?" The influence of non-auditory factors is always significant and sometimes dominant. It depends on the individual, and marketing departments are very good at generating emotional motivations that sound "technical" but are really imaginary. Humans are complex . . .
R Harkness, avkv, Muza and 1 others like this.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #2110 of 3773 Old 03-03-2019, 11:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,265
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
It is a good question. Another one is "how much of the decision was actually based on the sound reaching the ears of the listener?" The influence of non-auditory factors is always significant and sometimes dominant. It depends on the individual, and marketing departments are very good at generating emotional motivations that sound "technical" but are really imaginary. Humans are complex . . .
Let's first answer the question what are the audio related reasons why so many people choose non accurate speakers . I am still puzzled about that.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
dowop likes this.

Last edited by SouthernCA; 03-03-2019 at 11:39 PM.
SouthernCA is offline  
post #2111 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 03:16 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scotth3886's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: New Albany, OH
Posts: 7,770
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3754 Post(s)
Liked: 2303
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernCA View Post
Let's first answer the question what are the audio related reasons why so many people choose non accurate speakers . I am still puzzled about that.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
The catnip.
avkv likes this.
Scotth3886 is online now  
post #2112 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 05:20 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Europe, Croatia
Posts: 1,746
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1012 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernCA View Post
Let's first answer the question what are the audio related reasons why so many people choose non accurate speakers . I am still puzzled about that.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Is it really that puzzling? Because they sound good. Just because they are not accurate that doesn't mean the sound is bad.
Scotth3886 likes this.

Revel Ultima Salon 2, Revel M106, Revel C208, Yamaha P5000S, Denon X5200, Panasonic 65" VT50, Dual VBSS w Faital 18FH510
Kef LS50, Parasound New Classic, Focusrite 2i4 2nd Gen
donktard is offline  
post #2113 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 05:32 AM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 532
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 391
@Rex Anderson

Been meaning to ask: Any chance a JBL 306P spinorama is available?
300z likes this.
TimVG is online now  
post #2114 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 07:34 AM
Advanced Member
 
BP1Fanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Columbus, Oh
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
However, compromises are inevitable in an 8-inch two-way because of the large directional disparity in the crossover to the tweeter - even with a waveguide. The large woofer is chosen to deliver highish sound levels at lower frequencies, but that decision forces a tradeoff. The solution if one wants more neutral spectral balance and high sound levels is to add a midrange in a 3-way system, or reduce the size of the woofer/mid and accept a sound output limitation. Decisions, decisions . . .
If 3 way is the most neutral sounding speaker, then why does Harman make 2 way speakers with 8" or larger woofers?

Sony XBR65x900e / STR-DN1080 / original PS4 / WOW! Ultra TV / Quantum Access Mini PC Stick w/Windows 10 / 8 x Rockville SPG88 8“ DJ PA Speakers / Dayton Audio SA1000 / Kicker 08S15L74 in a Tapped-Tapered Quarter Wave Tube (negative flare tapped horn).
BP1Fanatic is offline  
post #2115 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 07:44 AM
Advanced Member
 
TimVG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 532
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by BP1Fanatic View Post
If 3 way is the most neutral sounding speaker, then why does Harman make 2 way speakers with 8" or larger woofers?
Market demands/size constraints/price point .. also it depends on the desired directivity indices and the power handling of the tweeter at lower frequencies. To use an 8 inch woofer and cross it over to a tweeter succesfully while maintaining somewhat wide dispersion, the crossover point is usually below 2kHz. Not every tweeter can handle that comfortably at the required power levels. Technically the M2 is also a two-way, albeit a large one. It is a design choice. If you're looking at maintaining as wide dispersion as possible throughout the audible frequency range, using forward cone/dome type loudspeakers, then one needs 3, 4 or even 5 drivers. It's a matter of physics - and money. These designs, if designed well, always come with a cost.
avkv likes this.
TimVG is online now  
post #2116 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 08:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Europe, Croatia
Posts: 1,746
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1012 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
Market demands/size constraints/price point .. also it depends on the desired directivity indices and the power handling of the tweeter at lower frequencies. To use an 8 inch woofer and cross it over to a tweeter succesfully while maintaining somewhat wide dispersion, the crossover point is usually below 2kHz. Not every tweeter can handle that comfortably at the required power levels. Technically the M2 is also a two-way, albeit a large one. It is a design choice. If you're looking at maintaining as wide dispersion as possible throughout the audible frequency range, using forward cone/dome type loudspeakers, then one needs 3, 4 or even 5 drivers. It's a matter of physics - and money. These designs, if designed well, always come with a cost.
I might also add that off axis response might be of little concern if speakers are targeted for nearfield usage. Reflections in first 10-20 ms from direct sound will usually be tamed so they are 20dB below signal level or more and decay times will be crazy fast too.
Scotth3886 likes this.

Revel Ultima Salon 2, Revel M106, Revel C208, Yamaha P5000S, Denon X5200, Panasonic 65" VT50, Dual VBSS w Faital 18FH510
Kef LS50, Parasound New Classic, Focusrite 2i4 2nd Gen
donktard is offline  
post #2117 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 08:17 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,355
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 872 Post(s)
Liked: 1041
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
@Rex Anderson Been meaning to ask: Any chance a JBL 306P spinorama is available?
I asked for it and also an answer as to why spins aren't available for all JBL and Revel speaker models. My guess is there are just too many and it would cost a lot to produce all that data.

I know Kevin is working hard to get as much info to us as he can. He is involved in a lot more than just data acquisition and dissemination....
avkv, SDX-LV and MMacka like this.
Rex Anderson is online now  
post #2118 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 08:41 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 7,937
Mentioned: 143 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3579 Post(s)
Liked: 2770
@Floyd Toole , I am as impressed with the infinite patience you have shown in responding to repetitive questions as I am with your scientific knowledge. You are as much a gentleman as you are a respected scientist. But it may be time to simply stop responding to anyone who appears to be ignoring your responses and continually asking questions that have already been answered multiple times. While no one should be discouraged from sincerely asking serious questions, throwing mud on a wall to see what will stick is not worthy of a scientific discussion. Doing so repeatedly after good explanations have already been repeatedly given is not worthy of any discussion.
rynberg, avkv, krabapple and 11 others like this.
Dave in Green is offline  
post #2119 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 08:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,876
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 352 Post(s)
Liked: 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by donktard View Post
I might also add that off axis response might be of little concern if speakers are targeted for nearfield usage. Reflections in first 10-20 ms from direct sound will usually be tamed so they are 20dB below signal level or more and decay times will be crazy fast too.
Not only nearfield, but might not that also apply to a room that many would consider to be “too dead”?
Randy Bessinger is offline  
post #2120 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 09:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Europe, Croatia
Posts: 1,746
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1012 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bessinger View Post
Not only nearfield, but might not that also apply to a room that many would consider to be “too dead”?
Not necessarily. Although not very accurate, when people say nearfield that is basically envirnoment with an absence of strong early reflections. So you can accomplish that by few means: sitting really close, having boundaries far from speaker/listener and adding acoustic treatment.
However, dead room is much broader term and is usually used to actually describe a disbalanced room, where acoustic treatment acts as a lowpass filter that mostly butchers high frequencies. Real dead room with absence of strong early reflections in typical home is rare.
Scotth3886 likes this.

Revel Ultima Salon 2, Revel M106, Revel C208, Yamaha P5000S, Denon X5200, Panasonic 65" VT50, Dual VBSS w Faital 18FH510
Kef LS50, Parasound New Classic, Focusrite 2i4 2nd Gen
donktard is offline  
post #2121 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 09:21 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scotth3886's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: New Albany, OH
Posts: 7,770
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3754 Post(s)
Liked: 2303
Quote:
Originally Posted by donktard View Post
Not necessarily. Although not very accurate, when people say nearfield that is basically envirnoment with an absence of strong early reflections. So you can accomplish that by few means: sitting really close, having boundaries far from speaker/listener and adding acoustic treatment.
However, dead room is much broader term and is usually used to actually describe a disbalanced room, where acoustic treatment acts as a lowpass filter that mostly butchers high frequencies. Real dead room with absence of strong early reflections in typical home is rare.

Yes
Scotth3886 is online now  
post #2122 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 09:24 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,876
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 352 Post(s)
Liked: 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by donktard View Post
Not necessarily. Although not very accurate, when people say nearfield that is basically envirnoment with an absence of strong early reflections. So you can accomplish that by few means: sitting really close, having boundaries far from speaker/listener and adding acoustic treatment.
However, dead room is much broader term and is usually used to actually describe a disbalanced room, where acoustic treatment acts as a lowpass filter that mostly butchers high frequencies. Real dead room with absence of strong early reflections in typical home is rare.
The only reason I mention is because of an exchange I had with Sean Olive years ago. I was considering a blind (possibly double blind) bookshelf speaker shootout and I mentioned that I thought my room was on the dead side. As I recall, he said that could make the differences less apparent.

Typical is probably the key word with so much emphasis and disagreement on killing first reflections. At least it used to be a subject of disagreement on AVS.

Last edited by Randy Bessinger; 03-04-2019 at 09:42 AM.
Randy Bessinger is offline  
post #2123 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 09:48 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Europe, Croatia
Posts: 1,746
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1012 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bessinger View Post
The only reason I mention is in an exchange with Sean Olive years ago I was considering a blind (possibly double blind) bookshelf speaker shootout. I mentioned that I thought my room was on the dead side. As I recall, he said that could make the differences less apparent.
Sure, as reflected sound gets lower in amplitude, direct sound will essentially mask the differences in off axis response of a speaker. That still doesn't mean you should get a speaker with crappy off axis response.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bessinger View Post
Typical is probably the key word with so much emphasis and disagreement on killing first reflections. At least it used to be a subject of disagreement on AVS.

In home, lots of things with audio is compromise. Early reflections sure can be beneficial. But in poor envirnoment, its just way easier to kill them, deaden the room and add EQ if you need to recover balance on LP, especially for HT.

Revel Ultima Salon 2, Revel M106, Revel C208, Yamaha P5000S, Denon X5200, Panasonic 65" VT50, Dual VBSS w Faital 18FH510
Kef LS50, Parasound New Classic, Focusrite 2i4 2nd Gen

Last edited by donktard; 03-04-2019 at 09:53 AM.
donktard is offline  
post #2124 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 09:54 AM
Member
 
Floyd Toole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: California
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 77 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 765 Post(s)
Liked: 2746
Quote:
Originally Posted by BP1Fanatic View Post
If 3 way is the most neutral sounding speaker, then why does Harman make 2 way speakers with 8" or larger woofers?
I have not done an exhaustive search of current Harman products, but my recollection is that any woofer larger than 8 inches would be coupled to a horn, not a 1-inch tweeter. This is a very different design. The impressive M2 is a 15 inch two way.

An intermediate offering has been a 1-inch tweeter with a custom waveguide (a horn) to achieve a better directivity match at crossover. It does not have the potential of a three way, but the best designs can be very good and price competitive.
avkv and Muza like this.
Floyd Toole is offline  
post #2125 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 11:47 AM
Advanced Member
 
BP1Fanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Columbus, Oh
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Thank you Mr. Toole! I've been reading how 2 way PA speakers need lower crossover points when paired with a compression driver and a large woofer. I know manufactures are using higher crossover points to raise the power handling and protect the compression driver.

Sony XBR65x900e / STR-DN1080 / original PS4 / WOW! Ultra TV / Quantum Access Mini PC Stick w/Windows 10 / 8 x Rockville SPG88 8“ DJ PA Speakers / Dayton Audio SA1000 / Kicker 08S15L74 in a Tapped-Tapered Quarter Wave Tube (negative flare tapped horn).
BP1Fanatic is offline  
post #2126 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 01:16 PM
Member
 
Spinaker01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 88
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotth3886 View Post
I wear it with pride. On, oh Gawd, a Buick.



It helps though as when I'm late and driving like an a$$hole, I figure the highway patrol will figure I'm just have a cardiac arrest or seizure and let me go.

Headphones will be saved for the nursing home as it's just too easy to play way too loud.

I wish there was a way to post a Tidal playlist as I think I've discovered some really cool stuff I'd love to share.
Check out Yello, they have great production. Strangely, though I still prefer electronic, manaufactured computer music MORE through speakers that are flat and sound realistic with acoustic music. Acurate is accurate.
avkv and Floyd Toole like this.

Lumin T1 | Vitus RI-100 | Revel Ultima Studio2 | JL Audio: F110(2) & F112
Spinaker01 is offline  
post #2127 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 01:36 PM
Member
 
SDX-LV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd Toole View Post
I have not done an exhaustive search of current Harman products, but my recollection is that any woofer larger than 8 inches would be coupled to a horn, not a 1-inch tweeter. This is a very different design. The impressive M2 is a 15 inch two way.

An intermediate offering has been a 1-inch tweeter with a custom waveguide (a horn) to achieve a better directivity match at crossover. It does not have the potential of a three way, but the best designs can be very good and price competitive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimVG View Post
Market demands/size constraints/price point .. also it depends on the desired directivity indices and the power handling of the tweeter at lower frequencies. To use an 8 inch woofer and cross it over to a tweeter succesfully while maintaining somewhat wide dispersion, the crossover point is usually below 2kHz. Not every tweeter can handle that comfortably at the required power levels. Technically the M2 is also a two-way, albeit a large one. It is a design choice. If you're looking at maintaining as wide dispersion as possible throughout the audible frequency range, using forward cone/dome type loudspeakers, then one needs 3, 4 or even 5 drivers. It's a matter of physics - and money. These designs, if designed well, always come with a cost.
@TimVG are you referring to the ka=2 rule? http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/spe...iver-diameter/ this article talks about this and may as well be correct.
SDX-LV is offline  
post #2128 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 01:52 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 8
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex Anderson View Post
I asked for it and also an answer as to why spins aren't available for all JBL and Revel speaker models. My guess is there are just too many and it would cost a lot to produce all that data.

I know Kevin is working hard to get as much info to us as he can. He is involved in a lot more than just data acquisition and dissemination....
This is something that confuses me. I assumed that spinoramas would be done for all Revel and JBL Synthesis loudspeakers as a matter of course to confirm that the design stages had indeed produced a speaker with excellent spinorama measurements .
I wonder if @avkv could comment on whether or not this is correct ?

It would be very understandable if measurements for some older or less ambitious designs were not done and so not available . The time to go back and do these would be considerable and hardly a priority .

It seems that either measurements are done and for unstated reasons not released or measurements are not always done and so not readily available.
I find either alternative hard to understand.
MMacka is offline  
post #2129 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 02:44 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scotth3886's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: New Albany, OH
Posts: 7,770
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3754 Post(s)
Liked: 2303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spinaker01 View Post
Check out Yello, they have great production. Strangely, though I still prefer electronic, manaufactured computer music MORE through speakers that are flat and sound realistic with acoustic music. Acurate is accurate.

Been checking them out since their first album in 1987, One Second. Saved a bunch more to Tidal last night.

"though I still prefer electronic, manufactured computer music MORE through speakers that are flat and sound realistic with acoustic music"

I don't know where I said any different. So yes, realistic sound stage and imaging are also lots of fun with 'manufactured' music, provided that it's not EDM. Fun with all the manufactured effects swirling and flying all over the room. Actually, accurate is accurate and also can be fun. If it works for me on large symphonic presentations, well, and also big band, it might just work on everything else.

For those folks not familiar:

https://tidal.com/track/64629993

https://tidal.com/track/65217833

https://tidal.com/track/65217835

https://tidal.com/track/65217837

Last edited by Scotth3886; 03-04-2019 at 02:54 PM.
Scotth3886 is online now  
post #2130 of 3773 Old 03-04-2019, 05:48 PM
Member
 
buckchester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 145
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 43
I am attaching a few gated in-room measurements. I have limited the low frequency to 1khz because the measurements below this point look a little wonky (so I'm not sure I am getting accurate readings below this point). They are gated at 3.4 (right window ms).

The first is for a Goldenear Triton Two. Does this look like a good speaker?

The second is for a Paradigm Studio 20 v.3. Looks a little smoother. However, is it smoother enough that it should produce an audible improvement (at least in this part of the frequency range)?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Gated - GE Triton 2.jpg
Views:	63
Size:	35.1 KB
ID:	2534390   Click image for larger version

Name:	Gated - Paradigm Studio 20 v.3.jpg
Views:	67
Size:	38.1 KB
ID:	2534392  
head_unit likes this.
buckchester 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