Borresen Acoustics Owners Thread... The Next Level - Page 4 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 103Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 119 Old 04-30-2019, 11:07 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
no quarter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 2,288
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1655 Post(s)
Liked: 868
George,I think I actually feel your pain, all the way up here in Canada

3.0-Cary audio cinema 12 , confidence centre, XD 600's,Cary 500.1 monoblock
2 channel-Naim Core/NDS/XPSDR/Chord Hugo TT2/Cary Cinema 12/Anthem MCA 50, excite 12’s,Teac pd-501 DSD player,Nordost QB-8.Superlumina cables,DC 1. Full Naim Fraim.NDS/XD 600.
no quarter is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 119 Old 04-30-2019, 12:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mmiles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Delaware
Posts: 4,322
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 516
This what I have learned over the past 30+ post.

You guys can really type!
shivaji and OctaDyn_Dude like this.

Mike Miles
[email protected]
mmiles is offline  
post #93 of 119 Old 04-30-2019, 01:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DreamWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Dirty South Jersey
Posts: 2,180
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 993 Post(s)
Liked: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by no quarter View Post
George,I think I actually feel your pain, all the way up here in Canada
Yes, so painful to have intelligent people try to educate you. You have an ignore list, so do I, maybe we should both put them to use?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmiles View Post
This what I have learned over the past 30+ post.

You guys can really type!
Used to be around 100 WPM corrected. Slowed up with age, probably around 70-80 WPM now. But, my brain is the bigger bottleneck now, lol, I can't stream of conscious words as quickly as I used to, haha.
Laika likes this.
DreamWarrior is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #94 of 119 Old 04-30-2019, 02:19 PM
Member
 
Laika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 97
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 26
And to think it could have been done so much cheaper.



Reviews



Zachary S. United States

Quite simply put; Using different materials in the Iso-Cup Balls should not make such a difference in the sound that they allow your system to produce. But, it does, clearly and audibly. They are a great way to fine tune your system, and instead of spending hundreds or even thousands changing your components, you can for under $20 play around to your heart's content. Highly Recommended



https://herbiesaudiolab.com/collecti...-cup-ball-only


But this really tweaked my system. WITH THE STATE OF THE ART P14!



http://www.rane.com/pi14.html
Laika is offline  
post #95 of 119 Old 04-30-2019, 02:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
drewTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Newport Beach, CA
Posts: 4,631
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2095 Post(s)
Liked: 2244
KeyboardWarrior needs to chill the hell out...lol.

LG OLED65E8 | Plinius Hiato | Dynaudio Contour 20 | Dynaudio Stand 6 | REL S/510 | PS Audio DirectStream Junior | Furman IT-Reference 15i | Sony PS4 Pro | Synology DS916+ | Apple TV 4K | BDI Mirage | NEEO | Focal Shape 40 | iFi Pro iDSD | iFi Pro iRack | roon
drewTT is offline  
post #96 of 119 Old 04-30-2019, 03:54 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
OctaDyn_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 2,657
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1134 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Listen my head is spinning with trying to clear up my mothers affairs from 800 mi away. Between a couple of these guys they write novels that under these circumstances I find it difficult to keep up with it all.



As far as the warrior I do have a couple of friends with $750K+ systems so I know what good sounds like. In my room I can't keep up with them but think I do pretty well for my tastes and expectations.



Craig my 2 week tests consists of listening to a new cable for about 2 weeks. Then I put the original back (which I'm very used to). If I miss the old cable for 10 or less mins. I reject it. OTOH if I miss it for over a day it's something I want. When I like a new cable my criteria is what happened. If the sound stage collapses - imaging becomes less focused and I lose depth and detail I want the new cable. To me that is a good enough test for me (maybe not others). But that's what I've heard and why I may spend 4 or 5 figures for a cable. I have rejected cables at 5 figures because I only missed the originals for a few min at best.


Warrior dude you are not my accountant or wife so why do you care so much for what I spend if anything? If you're looking out for my finances thanks but no thanks. I think I've done very well without your help. I understand technology. I repaired nuclear medical equip for a couple of years and computers for over 40yrs. There is a big difference between science and technology. Have a good day buddy.


Yes I'm surprised the mods haven't intervened but that usually only happens when there is a complaint. I like a good healthy discussion

Last edited by OctaDyn_Dude; 04-30-2019 at 04:21 PM.
OctaDyn_Dude is offline  
post #97 of 119 Old 04-30-2019, 05:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DreamWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Dirty South Jersey
Posts: 2,180
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 993 Post(s)
Liked: 579
@OctaDyn_Dude , we keep coming back to money. $750k doesn't guarantee the system sounds good. It does verify they probably spent a lot of "unnecessary" money -- they probably spent more on speakers and amps than the studios that produced most of the music they listen to. But, it's their money, just as it's yours.

I just don't believe you can equate dollars spent to fidelity -- it just doesn't work that way. In fact, unfortunately, it often works quite the opposite. Sometimes the most expensive speakers have terrible response because they are designed by art-house folk who really have no business designing speakers. For example, I've seen crossovers having such terrible impedance responses that it'd be hard for many amplifiers to drive them. This requires asinine power just to push through the crossover's poor design. No one ever knows because no one in your circles probably measures anything. But, if your ears are happy, I'm happy.

Fact is, in 2019, it just doesn't take $750k to create an outstanding system, and that's a really good thing for folks like me who would never spend that much on audio in my life! More power to you if you have the funds to do it. But, if I'm being honest, I still think it's a foolish waste of money for the sole purpose of inflating the egos of folks who don't understand (really understand) the science behind audio reproduction. It wouldn't impress me, in fact, I'd probably measure it, and laugh heartily that they wasted their money on something that measures terribly and is the furthest thing from fidelity possible. Or...maybe it'd surprise me, sound incredible, and I'd still walk away feeling like I could have its equal (or better) for much less money.

Anyway, best of luck with your mother's affairs. I really am done here this time. I doubt you want to continue the discussion, but if you do, feel free to PM me. I, too, like a healthy, cordial (or even heated) discussion. It's easier on the internet where I can breathe a bit in between responses and think them through without snapping towards full-on-jerk-off (though, I'm probably still only capable of getting down to half-a-jerk-off level, lol).

End of the story, though, I'm not trying to be your wife or accountant. I am (or was) truly just trying to get you to spend money in what I honestly believe to be more fruitful ways. Ways which can have real benefit and truly take you to another level, IMO. Wouldn't it be incredible if with just an amazing room and lesser priced gear, all hidden so no one knows what it is, where the sound just appears out of thin air, you could kick the crap out of those $750k systems. That's what I'd aim to do! Why keep up with the Joneses when you can obliterate them for less money!

But, hey, if what gets you going is tinkering with cables and constantly swapping stuff around to achieve that "next level" of psycho-acoustic thrill, just say so. But please, please, please, stop believing anything you're doing is modifying the signal to an audible extent -- if it were, I'd really like to know why you think we can't measure it given everything we hear is just waves in the air. Waves which were once picked up by a microphone, one of probably lesser fidelity than a calibrated, reference level, measurement mic. Waves which were then recorded, played back, amplified, and then regenerated by speakers of various fidelity themselves into rooms of even higher varied quality. Why all-of-a-sudden can these waves not be accurately captured and analyzed to see if a cable made a measurable difference?
Laika likes this.
DreamWarrior is offline  
post #98 of 119 Old 04-30-2019, 05:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Spurrier Sucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: On Top
Posts: 1,867
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1089 Post(s)
Liked: 696
This was fun until it wasn’t.
Spurrier Sucks is offline  
post #99 of 119 Old 04-30-2019, 06:53 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mr.SoftDome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,553
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 667 Post(s)
Liked: 537
I feel a dirty need to go buy a big fat power cable...
Mr.SoftDome is offline  
post #100 of 119 Old 04-30-2019, 10:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DreamWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Dirty South Jersey
Posts: 2,180
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 993 Post(s)
Liked: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.SoftDome View Post
I feel a dirty need to go buy a big fat power cable...
Too bad it's not copper .
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	powercable.jpg
Views:	22
Size:	28.3 KB
ID:	2560896  
DreamWarrior is offline  
post #101 of 119 Old 05-01-2019, 01:40 PM
Senior Member
 
Red MC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 375
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 273 Post(s)
Liked: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWarrior View Post
Because it is an either-or proposition. Either you recognize that your ear-brain interface is flawed or you don't. Either you correct that flaw with a DBT so you can remove as many factors as possible or you don't. Either you understand science or you don't. There is no in between here, at least not in 2019 when we pretty darn well understand wires and their impact on musical fidelity.

But, here's the thing -- there are a too many confounding factors that people can't seem to sort out:

1) Can we measure everything we can hear? I believe that's a yes and no. I believe we can measure more than our ears can physically perceive. But, I don't believe measurement gear can tell us exactly what we hear because it doesn't have a brain and it has no idea how our brain has been biased (at least not in 2019...one day maybe neuroscientists can get there and then we'll inject audio directly into our brains). Anyway, as such, IMO, measurements are infinitely more reliable, accurate, and repeatable than our ears! However, unfortunately, for the audiophools, the fact that their brains are part of the equation makes them believe it is superior to the instrumentation that allows things like...oh...hearing aids to exist and be tuned to a person's specific hearing losses. So, no, we can't measure what you perceive, but we darn well can measure the sound waves your physical ear takes in. Plus, we have a pretty good analysis of how the ear works based on many scientific studies. We also have many clues about the ear-brain interface -- without it, we wouldn't have stereo!

2) Is a DBT reliable? IMO, certainly, if performed properly and to an appropriate statistical confidence level. Without them, we wouldn't have medication that saves lives. Unfortunately, their proper use in audio is infrequent, probably because it doesn't pay. Plus, audiophools rush to say they are too stressed to perform them or can't figure out in such a short time what's what. Hilarious, because to hear them talk of the differences they are night and day! But, toss a DBT into the equation and the differences collapse to nothing. WTF? How is this a damnation of DBT and not a realization that your ears are better when they aren't biased by your eyes!

3) Marketing and pseudo-science are real and have a stranglehold on gullible people with more money than scientific prowess. Plus, ego and the need to acquire and show-off expensive stuff helps pollute the brain-ear interface. Meanwhile, we can build copper cables to propagate GIGAHERTZ (yes, that's kHz, mHz, gHz -- 1,000,000 times larger than the highest frequency we can hear) signals. But, surely, some idget in their garage can revolutionize a cable to more transparently carry up to, say, 20kHz signals. And, hey, even "simple" Cat-5e cable can be used for speaker wire -- ever try using speaker wire for Ethernet?


4) If I hear it then that's my truth. Certainly this is hard to deny. But, do you hear it? I mean, does your physical ear pick up something different? You know, the physical ear which we can already emulate more accurately with scientific devices; devices that "hear" over 20kHz, reliably, and can be calibrated. I know my system sounds better after I imbibe, at night, when I'm relaxed. Maybe there is indeed something to this brain-ear interface that we can't measure, but that doesn't mean we dismiss the ear-air interface that we can measure!

So, yes, all these things get jumbled up and people rally around, "see, my cords make my system sound better, nothing you can say or do will convince me otherwise." And those folks have a point, to some extent. Alas, what they concurrently suffer from is a serious misunderstand regarding which interface is being modified. A DBT (or comprehensive set of measurements) would help them confirm that it's not the ear-air interface, rather the ear-brain/ear-eye/eye-brain whatever interface. And, admittedly, we still don't understand as much as I'd like about the latter. But the former is pretty well understood. Making the logical leap from there to "we can measure the effect of cables and understand when they do and don't change anything", for some reason, seems to be hard. I don't get it, I never will.

And one more fly in the ointment -- people like to gravitate to the fact that we never seem to properly reproduce "real" sound. For example, they'll say a recording of an orchestra never sounds like the "real thing", so that must be proof that all our scientific stuff isn't better than our ears. Unfortunately, that's a false conclusion. However, I do look forward to the day that our recordings and playback can be standardized to a level where they finally can sound like "real life". It will probably never happen with the audiophools in charge, though. Kind of ironic, too, considering videophiles go to great lengths to make sure the light waves hitting their eyes are properly calibrated, while many audiophiles go to great lengths to never measure or calibrate a thing and just keep tinkering indefinitely until their ears are happy (up until the next tinker session where their ears become even happier -- or not, and they back out their change without ever realizing why it made them unhappy, insuring they'll repeat the process forever and ever and ever...what a bloody waste of time and money, but to each their own).
You're creating a false dichotomy. Nobody is claiming that the ears & brain are perfect. I recognize their flaws, but subjective listening is still an important tool.

I'm an electrical engineer and have experience measuring speakers and rooms. By looking at a standard set of loudspeaker measurements, I can usually tell whether or not I'm going to like a speaker. So they are useful to me when deciding whether a speaker is worth an audition or not. But among the speakers I like, measurements don't tell me which I'm going to like best. And there are some aspects of performance that are hard to measure but easy to hear: Soundstaging is a good example. Also, the decay of notes. Dynamics to some extent too. Theoretically, the measurement microphone can capture sound waves more accurately than my ears. However, aside from a handful of metrics made using sine sweeps and pink noise, it's hard to extract information from the data that will be useful to me in choosing a loudspeaker. It's even harder with measurements of electronics, where we seem to measure the things that are easy to measure rather than things which differentiate the products.

On the other hand, measurements are invaluable in evaluating and improving room acoustics. And they are mandatory when using parametric equalization or other electronic room correction. I've also found my measurement tools to be very useful when positioning and setting up subwoofers, but I could get 90% there with just a CD of test tones if I had to. Measurements can also speed up the process of loudspeaker positioning.

In short, measurements are better for some tasks, ears are better for others.

Regarding DBTs, the only sub-field of audio where they have helped improve anything is lossy compression. Otherwise, their primary purpose seems to be fueling internet debates. It doesn't make sense to put together and optimize an audio system using a protocol that routinely produces null results for everything besides gross differences in frequency response and high levels of distortion.


If I were to follow a purely objectivist approach where I didn't consider anything I couldn't justify based on DBTs with positive results, I'd look for a relatively inexpensive pair of speakers that play loud enough for my room and don't have any glaring flaws, pair them with the cheapest receiver I could find with a tape loop that I can plug a miniDSP into, feed it with any old S/PDIF source, and connect it with the cheapest wire I can find at Home Depot. I wouldn't bother with room treatment, and the loudspeaker FR doesn't need to be perfect, since I'd use the miniDSP to bring things to my desired house curve.


It would sound decent and offer good value for the money, but it wouldn't sound anywhere near as good as a well-implemented high end system. I'm 100% confident about this because I've done it before, twice.
shivaji and OctaDyn_Dude like this.

HT: Dynaudio C2, Contour S CX, 2x BM14S, Aperion surrounds, Simaudio Titan, Marantz AV8801, Oppo 103, Linn Majik DS, and a Pioneer Kuro
Stereo: Dynaudio Focus 160, Simaudio W-5 LE or Luxman M-600A, Linn Akurate DSM, 2x Rythmik F12G
Other interests: motorcycling, skiing, being active
Red MC is offline  
post #102 of 119 Old 05-01-2019, 02:05 PM
Senior Member
 
Red MC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 375
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 273 Post(s)
Liked: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by OctaDyn_Dude View Post
Red I have the most bizarre room you've probably ever seen. I really have no where to hang absorption or diffusion panels let alone bass traps. My back wall is 4 different depths. My ceiling is vaulted for 16ft (8 to 14ft high) before dropping to a soffit then a standard 8ft ceiling height. Someday maybe but I would want to try them first.

Some rooms need more help than others. I think an acoustic consultant could help identify what could be improved upon and what your options are, whether it's hanging stuff on walls, changing furniture, or built-ins. You've invested so much in your system, effort and money, so it couldn't hurt to explore whether you can get anything more out of the room.


Your room sounds like it might be similar to my living room. My house has a fairly open layout on the first floor. The living room has a vaulted ceiling in the front half of the room, rising from 8' at the front wall up to 16' in the middle of the room where it's open to the second floor landing, and then abruptly drops to a standard 8' ceiling over the rear half of the room. The back of the room has an opening to the dining room, two openings to the kitchen, a hallway, and an entry-way to our door. There's a stairwell on one side and sliding doors on the other. So the layout is complex. That's actually a good thing acoustically. The only acoustic problem I wanted to address was strong slap echo up in the vaulted area of the ceiling. My smaller dedicated room, on the other hand, needed a lot of work.

HT: Dynaudio C2, Contour S CX, 2x BM14S, Aperion surrounds, Simaudio Titan, Marantz AV8801, Oppo 103, Linn Majik DS, and a Pioneer Kuro
Stereo: Dynaudio Focus 160, Simaudio W-5 LE or Luxman M-600A, Linn Akurate DSM, 2x Rythmik F12G
Other interests: motorcycling, skiing, being active
Red MC is offline  
post #103 of 119 Old 05-01-2019, 03:56 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DreamWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Dirty South Jersey
Posts: 2,180
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 993 Post(s)
Liked: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red MC View Post
*snip*
Ugh, didn't I say I was done here? On with it, I guess....

I don't entirely disagree with you, but I also think you've moved the topic to things (speakers and compression) that are readily audible. And while you're correct that DBT was invaluable to optimize compression algorithms, I disagree that they're useless for anything else. In fact, I'd say that since they often produce the null hypothesis (i.e., testers are statistically no better than guessing) while they don't (can't, actually) prove no one can hear a difference (can't prove a negative, period!) they do, with a pretty large statistical confidence, imply it! Even better, all it takes to end this argument is one person, just one, to partake in a DBT and achieve an acceptable confidence level. To the best of my knowledge, that golden-eared person (despite many self-proclaimed golden-ears) doesn't exist...and, as far as I'm concerned, never will as far as cables go (again, supposing there's no already known measurable difference caused by a defective cable in either design or specification -- i.e., it's not exactly fair to use, say, a hair-strand of wire and a beefy wire because we already know, through science, there will be differences there).

It also appears you're attempting to posit that because our ears can detect, for example, sound-stage and measurements "can't", that they must also be more capable of detecting the differences in, say, cables than measurements. If so, then I believe it's you creating the false dichotomy.

The reason measurements "can't detect" sound-stage is because sound-stage is an illusion built in your head. Perception thereof relies entirely on the listener's ear and its anatomy, their brain, even their bone-structure (how far are your ears apart?). Which is to say, perception of sound-stage is unique to an individual. Fortunately, we have averages because we've studied this. If we didn't, we wouldn't have stereo. However, despite that a person who's, for example, half-deaf in one ear will perceive sound-stage significantly differently than, say, me, the same waves (assuming we're sitting at exactly the same spot in the room) hit our ears. The same waves that would hit a pair of mics in a fake-head to simulate HRTF -- and such a device exists! It's nothing magic, it's all just waves! Good, 'ole, measurable, capture-able, waves!

Thus, if we can agree that what we hear (physically hear, not perceive, I've been careful to distinguish) exists entirely in the waves that propagate our rooms, then all we have to debate is how to accurately capture and analyze those waves algorithmically and relate them to what we perceive and prefer. If we can't agree on this, then you'll need to make a very coherent argument why. And if you chose to, please take careful note of my use of the terms hear and perceive, thanks!

Regardless, none of this hooey is required for cables, IMO. We can measure the electrical properties of a cable and, given it's just an extension of the circuit it connects, we can model it (e.g., SPICE) and determine if and to what extent it'll have an impact on the circuit. Surely as an electrical engineer, you know this, right? Or, are you one of those electrical engineers that knows just enough to be dangerous, believing ridiculously overpriced power cables, for example, yield significant (or any) audible improvements?
CruelInventions likes this.
DreamWarrior is offline  
post #104 of 119 Old 05-01-2019, 05:44 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: 1578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red MC View Post
You're creating a false dichotomy. Nobody is claiming that the ears & brain are perfect. I recognize their flaws, but subjective listening is still an important tool.
Subjective listening is certainly important and it should always be the final arbiter of any purchasing decision. However, the contention of the subjectivists in ths thread is that it is the ONLY arbiter of sound quality. I have previously shown in-room measurements of one of these types of systems and it left a lot to be desired in terms of frequency response, yet this was trivialized and ignored by the subjectivists.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red MC View Post
I'm an electrical engineer and have experience measuring speakers and rooms. By looking at a standard set of loudspeaker measurements, I can usually tell whether or not I'm going to like a speaker. So they are useful to me when deciding whether a speaker is worth an audition or not. But among the speakers I like, measurements don't tell me which I'm going to like best. And there are some aspects of performance that are hard to measure but easy to hear: Soundstaging is a good example. Also, the decay of notes. Dynamics to some extent too. Theoretically, the measurement microphone can capture sound waves more accurately than my ears. However, aside from a handful of metrics made using sine sweeps and pink noise, it's hard to extract information from the data that will be useful to me in choosing a loudspeaker. It's even harder with measurements of electronics, where we seem to measure the things that are easy to measure rather than things which differentiate the products.

On the other hand, measurements are invaluable in evaluating and improving room acoustics. And they are mandatory when using parametric equalization or other electronic room correction. I've also found my measurement tools to be very useful when positioning and setting up subwoofers, but I could get 90% there with just a CD of test tones if I had to. Measurements can also speed up the process of loudspeaker positioning.

In short, measurements are better for some tasks, ears are better for others.
What is a "standard set of loudspeaker measurements" to you? Dr Toole will insist that only a full set of some 75 or so on- and off-axis FR tests compiled into a "listening window response", (aka the "spinorama"), is required to inform of the necessary SQ parameters. Short of that, what do YOU require to lead you to believe a speaker is worthy of consideration?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red MC View Post
Regarding DBTs, the only sub-field of audio where they have helped improve anything is lossy compression. Otherwise, their primary purpose seems to be fueling internet debates. It doesn't make sense to put together and optimize an audio system using a protocol that routinely produces null results for everything besides gross differences in frequency response and high levels of distortion.
Again, coming back to Dr. Toole, he used DBT's extensively to determine what speakers most listeners will prefer. I'm not sure I put as much stock in his preference testing as he does, but he claims that "accurate" and neutral speakers are preferred by 97% of listeners. His measurement techniques have been adopted as a "standard" by AES. My point is that DBT's in audio are used for much more than just confirmation of masking effects in lossy compression codecs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red MC View Post
If I were to follow a purely objectivist approach where I didn't consider anything I couldn't justify based on DBTs with positive results, I'd look for a relatively inexpensive pair of speakers that play loud enough for my room and don't have any glaring flaws, pair them with the cheapest receiver I could find with a tape loop that I can plug a miniDSP into, feed it with any old S/PDIF source, and connect it with the cheapest wire I can find at Home Depot. I wouldn't bother with room treatment, and the loudspeaker FR doesn't need to be perfect, since I'd use the miniDSP to bring things to my desired house curve.

It would sound decent and offer good value for the money, but it wouldn't sound anywhere near as good as a well-implemented high end system. I'm 100% confident about this because I've done it before, twice.
That's not how I would do it... not even close. If I wanted to set up such a system with ONLY objective data as my decision making tool, I look for the speakers with the best measurements at the lowest price. This would be difficult because often less expensive speakers don't have robust measurements sets available. However, some do:

  • Ascend Acoustics
  • Philharmonic Audio
  • KEF

I would look for on- and off-axis frequency response measurements, sensitivity, impedance and power handling. Given those parameters, I would select the amplifier specs I need to drive them. I would also select subwoofers, (not a single, at least two, maybe more). I would then look for a receiver or a set of separates that meet those requirements, as well as any requirements for processing, Room Correction, connectivity, etc. I would then gather all the equipment in the room, install it, measure it, tweak the installation for the best response, and then run Room Correction. I would then re-measure and verify that Room Correction was beneficial, and optimize any parameters that were sub-optimal. If the time domain measurements were not to my liking, I would install acoustic treatments to optimize the time domain... and then re-run Room Correction.

All this could be done without ever hearing a single component until the system was finalized. It would probably be more expensive than your system, but I guarantee it would sound better.

And BTW, I didn't recommend a full-on DBT to OctaDyn_Dude. I recommended a simple blind listening test that he could do at home for free, with only the help of a friend. If he's unwilling to do even that for his own edification then he's too far over the edge into the subjectivist domain to be reasoned with. He "believes" and that's all there is to it.

Craig

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

My System
craig john is offline  
post #105 of 119 Old 05-01-2019, 08:36 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,176
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2805 Post(s)
Liked: 2726
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWarrior View Post

The reason measurements "can't detect" sound-stage is because sound-stage is an illusion built in your head. Perception thereof relies entirely on the listener's ear and its anatomy, their brain, even their bone-structure (how far are your ears apart?). Which is to say, perception of sound-stage is unique to an individual.

No more than for pretty much any other characteristic of audio.


Soundstaging/imaging is to a relevant degree predictable. That's why sound recordists and mixers make the choices they do.
JA of Stereophile often points to pink noise tests that predict stable imaging. And speaker dispersion patterns help predict the nature of their soundstaging (e.g. dipole or omni vs front radiator, etc).



So there's nothing particularly different about soundstaging/imaging. (And if that were actually unmeasurable and an illusion that only goes on in people's head, no surround or atmos - type sound matrixes could have been developed with any degree of expectation as to how people would hear differences in space and location in the soundfield).



Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWarrior View Post
Fortunately, we have averages because we've studied this. If we didn't, we wouldn't have stereo. However, despite that a person who's, for example, half-deaf in one ear will perceive sound-stage significantly differently than, say, me, the same waves (assuming we're sitting at exactly the same spot in the room) hit our ears.

Same goes for frequency response if someone has damage to their hearing (e.g. a big notch in, or reduction in, some high frequencies). But we don't say because of this "flat frequency response is simply an illusion built in your head." It's something happening, measurable and predictable from a sound system. You can predict how it will sound to listeners with generally normal hearing. And to the degree you know the character of someone's hearing (e.g. from an audiology test) you can predict to a degree how they will hear it as well.

Last edited by R Harkness; 05-01-2019 at 08:42 PM.
R Harkness is offline  
post #106 of 119 Old 05-06-2019, 10:39 AM
Senior Member
 
Red MC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 375
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 273 Post(s)
Liked: 219
I don't want to hijack this thread further, so I'll respond to some questions via PM.


I do have an on-topic question for George though. I'm curious whether the new Borresen speakers are designed with the same acoustic "house curve" that Michael used with the Raidhos, specifically the crossover dip and mid-bass bump. I thought the crossover dip worked well with the Raidhos. I sensed that it allowed them to run the tweeter a little hotter to bring out the detail without introducing harshness and fatigue. I also wonder if it might help explain the excellent soundstage depth. But I was less a fan of the bass bump. I didn't really notice it the first time I heard Raidhos at a show, where the C1 (or was it the C1.1?) kind of blew me away. But it's something that I heard subsequently at other shows and a dealer audition. I can't afford the Borresens at full list, but if they've tamed the mid-bass I might have to keep an eye on the used market in a couple years.

HT: Dynaudio C2, Contour S CX, 2x BM14S, Aperion surrounds, Simaudio Titan, Marantz AV8801, Oppo 103, Linn Majik DS, and a Pioneer Kuro
Stereo: Dynaudio Focus 160, Simaudio W-5 LE or Luxman M-600A, Linn Akurate DSM, 2x Rythmik F12G
Other interests: motorcycling, skiing, being active
Red MC is offline  
post #107 of 119 Old 05-07-2019, 05:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
OctaDyn_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 2,657
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1134 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red MC View Post
I don't want to hijack this thread further, so I'll respond to some questions via PM.


I do have an on-topic question for George though. I'm curious whether the new Borresen speakers are designed with the same acoustic "house curve" that Michael used with the Raidhos, specifically the crossover dip and mid-bass bump. I thought the crossover dip worked well with the Raidhos. I sensed that it allowed them to run the tweeter a little hotter to bring out the detail without introducing harshness and fatigue. I also wonder if it might help explain the excellent soundstage depth. But I was less a fan of the bass bump. I didn't really notice it the first time I heard Raidhos at a show, where the C1 (or was it the C1.1?) kind of blew me away. But it's something that I heard subsequently at other shows and a dealer audition. I can't afford the Borresens at full list, but if they've tamed the mid-bass I might have to keep an eye on the used market in a couple years.
For starters as good as the Raidho's are they sound muffled when compared directly to the Borresens (Note heard very little of the C series). Raidho's were never really meant to be a speaker that brings a concert into your room. The mid bass hump was put there for a better low level listening experience. That's what I liked because I listened at low levels 90% of the time. I'll agree when you crank them up there is a lot of room boom kind of like some one adding a sub to Dyn C1's and setting the crossover on the sub to 80hz. I would say the reason for the sound stage depth and detail was due to the resonate break up frequencies being about 15K with the Ceramic and around 19K with the diamond coated Ceramic cones but they are heavy. The room boom I refer to as being off axis and hearing much louder lows in different areas of the room. I had that even with the Dyn C1's. I know bass traps would have helped but my listening room is also my living room. I didn't want tube traps in various spots in there and still don't.



Now that my 03's are really starting to break in (I have just over 700hrs now) I've been asked a lot regarding room boom. So I've walked around my room and I don't hear it anywhere like the Dyn's or Raidho's especially when played really loud. To me it sounds the same in the sweet spot as it does in the coroners. Although (now that I'm really listening for it) I do find a very slight null moving from the sweet spot to the corners. Kenz5 who went from Dyn C1 to the Raidho D1.1 and now has the 02's told me the same regarding the room boom. For that reason he is considering the 03's for even deeper lows. Besides deeper lows he is in for a real treat in the mids should he decide to go to the 03's



As far as the added detail/clarity Mike Borresen says it's due to a extremely light cone and his iron free magnet structure. The voice coil has a much more stable impedance as the cone moves in and out. The tweeter is completely re designed and weighs about 30% less than the Raidho tweeter although it looks very similar. Out of the box it does sound a bit hot but so did the Raidho's when new. I do find with more hours on them I find only a few certain older recordings sounding a bit hot where it was less noticeable with he Raidho's. But the better recording sound so much better.
kenz5 likes this.
OctaDyn_Dude is offline  
post #108 of 119 Old 05-09-2019, 07:32 AM
Senior Member
 
Red MC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 375
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 273 Post(s)
Liked: 219
Thanks.


Raidhos have good clarity to my ears anyway. So if the Borresens make Raidhos sound muffled, that's impressive. You're always going to have bass peaks and nulls in the room, but it's nice to hear the bass is more controlled. I can't wait to hear the 01's, even if I can't afford them right now.

HT: Dynaudio C2, Contour S CX, 2x BM14S, Aperion surrounds, Simaudio Titan, Marantz AV8801, Oppo 103, Linn Majik DS, and a Pioneer Kuro
Stereo: Dynaudio Focus 160, Simaudio W-5 LE or Luxman M-600A, Linn Akurate DSM, 2x Rythmik F12G
Other interests: motorcycling, skiing, being active
Red MC is offline  
post #109 of 119 Old 05-09-2019, 04:40 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
OctaDyn_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 2,657
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1134 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red MC View Post
Thanks.


Raidhos have good clarity to my ears anyway. So if the Borresens make Raidhos sound muffled, that's impressive. You're always going to have bass peaks and nulls in the room, but it's nice to hear the bass is more controlled. I can't wait to hear the 01's, even if I can't afford them right now.
Yeah think of it as more clarity and less room boom. I'm amazed by these puppies. They also play a lot louder and have more dynamics which I missed after leaving Dynaudio. The dynamics that is.
OctaDyn_Dude is offline  
post #110 of 119 Old 08-27-2019, 04:38 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
OctaDyn_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 2,657
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1134 Post(s)
Liked: 832
A review of the Borresen 02's and a bit about what makes them so magical sounding
https://6moons.com/audioreview_articles/borresen/
OctaDyn_Dude is offline  
post #111 of 119 Old 08-27-2019, 11:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
drewTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Newport Beach, CA
Posts: 4,631
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2095 Post(s)
Liked: 2244
I might be in Chiraq next year a couple times, does Next Level have these setup to hear?

LG OLED65E8 | Plinius Hiato | Dynaudio Contour 20 | Dynaudio Stand 6 | REL S/510 | PS Audio DirectStream Junior | Furman IT-Reference 15i | Sony PS4 Pro | Synology DS916+ | Apple TV 4K | BDI Mirage | NEEO | Focal Shape 40 | iFi Pro iDSD | iFi Pro iRack | roon
drewTT is offline  
post #112 of 119 Old 08-28-2019, 05:22 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
OctaDyn_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 2,657
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1134 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewTT View Post
I might be in Chiraq next year a couple times, does Next Level have these setup to hear?
Yes he does. Borresen just announced a more affordable Z01 baby Borresen speaker that will be shown at the RMAF. My question that hasn't been answered yet is what is affordable.
yonson likes this.

Last edited by OctaDyn_Dude; 08-28-2019 at 05:35 AM.
OctaDyn_Dude is offline  
post #113 of 119 Old 09-08-2019, 07:47 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
OctaDyn_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 2,657
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1134 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Something new from Borresen - A more affordable monitor - The Z01
I heard the retail price is around 13K plus stands. The stand hasn't been finalized yet so that price isn't known yet.
shivaji, no quarter and yonson like this.
OctaDyn_Dude is offline  
post #114 of 119 Old 09-10-2019, 07:44 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
no quarter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 2,288
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1655 Post(s)
Liked: 868
Quote:
Originally Posted by OctaDyn_Dude View Post
Something new from Borresen - A more affordable monitor - The Z01
I heard the retail price is around 13K plus stands. The stand hasn't been finalized yet so that price isn't known yet.
I think JNelson was there at the show where they were introduced, I wanted to ask him on the Dyn thread of his thoughts, but probably better to do it here. They are right there in the same price range as Confidence 20’s and Kudos 505’s George, so a shootout is in order, once Tyler gets them all in.

3.0-Cary audio cinema 12 , confidence centre, XD 600's,Cary 500.1 monoblock
2 channel-Naim Core/NDS/XPSDR/Chord Hugo TT2/Cary Cinema 12/Anthem MCA 50, excite 12’s,Teac pd-501 DSD player,Nordost QB-8.Superlumina cables,DC 1. Full Naim Fraim.NDS/XD 600.
no quarter is offline  
post #115 of 119 Old 09-10-2019, 08:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jnelson2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,026
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 560 Post(s)
Liked: 546
Borresen Acoustics Owners Thread... The Next Level

Quote:
Originally Posted by no quarter View Post
I think JNelson was there at the show where they were introduced, I wanted to ask him on the Dyn thread of his thoughts, but probably better to do it here. They are right there in the same price range as Confidence 20’s and Kudos 505’s George, so a shootout is in order, once Tyler gets them all in.


Then all we need is the CF 20 then . The Z01 delivery date I got from Fritz was Q1 2020. The one Tyler has now is a prototype so no clue how much things may change. Hope he can get a CF20 before shipping the Z back to Denmark.

Also heard they’re targeting 12k for the speakers. Stand pricing is unknown. So figure 14-15k

Regarding the B01s. I truly believe RMAF put Borreson on the map. The demo of the 01s was truly something special. I have never heard anything with such detail, clarity, speed and depth as I did over the weekend. And all in a room like this,,, unbelievable


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
OctaDyn_Dude and no quarter like this.

Sony XBR-65A1E, XBR-55A1E, Marantz AV8805, AV7704
Naim SN2, Hi-Cap DR, ND5XS2, Naim Unity Core, Emotiva XPA-9, A-5175
Dynaudio Contour 30, Focus 210C, IC17, S4-W80, Emit 10, 2X JTR S1, SVS SB-2000
Panasonic UBD-820, Bluesound Node 2i, Ansuz Mainz C2 Power Distribution,X Power and speaker cables

Last edited by jnelson2000; 09-11-2019 at 05:53 AM.
jnelson2000 is offline  
post #116 of 119 Old 09-10-2019, 09:27 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
no quarter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 2,288
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1655 Post(s)
Liked: 868
Awesome, maybe I will be waiting until early next year then, before I can hear them all together. Not a big deal really, need to save some cash, and I want to get an Mscaler first anyway. Were they using the SN3 in any of those rooms?

3.0-Cary audio cinema 12 , confidence centre, XD 600's,Cary 500.1 monoblock
2 channel-Naim Core/NDS/XPSDR/Chord Hugo TT2/Cary Cinema 12/Anthem MCA 50, excite 12’s,Teac pd-501 DSD player,Nordost QB-8.Superlumina cables,DC 1. Full Naim Fraim.NDS/XD 600.
no quarter is offline  
post #117 of 119 Old 09-11-2019, 05:10 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
OctaDyn_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 2,657
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1134 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Tyler said he wanted to use the SN3 in the room with the Kudos 505's.
OctaDyn_Dude is offline  
post #118 of 119 Old 09-11-2019, 07:13 PM
Advanced Member
 
yonson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 892
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 495 Post(s)
Liked: 346
Interesting, I'm curious to hear how the Z01's sound compared to the D1.1's...
yonson is offline  
post #119 of 119 Old 09-28-2019, 04:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
OctaDyn_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 2,657
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1134 Post(s)
Liked: 832
Borresen 01's at RMAF 2019
shivaji and kenz5 like this.
OctaDyn_Dude is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

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


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off