RAAL tweeters - Page 9 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 599Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #241 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:14 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 325
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
Considering everyone else seems to understand my argument perfectly fine, wouldn't you say you're demonstrating your lack of reading comprehension?
There’s no problem comprehending what you’ve written. The point is that your arguments aren’t giving fair credit to good counter points, because you continue to ignore or downplay any evidence that disagrees with you.

Quote:
What actual evidence contradicts the Harman research? The only evidence that could do this would be a well controlled double blind test, not peoples' opinions on the internet.
I think we all know that arguing on the internet is not going to produce any new double blind studies out of thin air.

So all we do have is appeals to authority, anecdotal evidence, and non-expert theoretical projections. This applies to both sides of the debate.

You still haven’t properly responded to the evidence that speakers exist which measure extremely well in spins, which sound worse than others speakers that measure worse.

I suspect you will probably continue to question the legitimacy or cast other aspersions towards the source of the evidence.

Last edited by echopraxia; 08-25-2019 at 10:41 PM.
echopraxia is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #242 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,442
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by echopraxia View Post
There have been several examples of evidence given by Dave from Ascend, but you also gave one such example yourself:
He asked for evidence, not to regurgitate back his example. By the way, unless we could prove that the Infinity measures better than another speaker and sounds worse in a double blind test, it's not a valid example. Or it could be the .5% that the model doesn't get right.


Quote:
Originally Posted by echopraxia View Post
Aaron is arguing the canonical Dr. Toole extremist position that: if the spins show a speaker should sound better, then we need no further measurements of any kind to conclude that it absolutely will sound better, period, no exceptions ( except for his latest concession about high SPL).
A 99.5% success rate would mean that .5% of the time there are exceptions, so you either didn't comprehend what I said, again, or you're being intellectually dishonest in characterizing my argument.


Quote:
Originally Posted by echopraxia View Post
Aaron has conceded that there may be exceptions to this rule at high SPL, but still holds steadfast to the believe that at lower SPL the spinorama will tell you all you need to know about a speaker’s sound quality. Maybe he’ll concede this point next, and admit that it’s possible for a speaker which measures great to sound bad — at which point we will have fully reached consensus
No I didn't say that, what I said was as long as a speaker is played within it's operating range as far as distortion, X-max, etc, that the Spinorama can predict with 99.5% accuracy which speaker will be preferred. There isn't a speaker I'm aware of where distortion or Xmax become an issue(aside from maybe a Bose cube) so it's largely an irrelevant point.
aarons915 is online now  
post #243 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:17 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 325
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
Oh, I see. I'm not sure a single example proves the theory. Anecdotes are interesting and can serve as inspiration for further research, to be sure. A single example or anecdote doesn't (and shouldn't) prove anything beyond acting as a discussion point or the basis of a hypothesis.

However, to further your hypothesis, here's an interesting apple-to-apples comparison: graphs showing the Salon2 versus the Primus 360 using the same exact measurement technique and chamber calibration.

Salon2:



Primus 360:



It's not immediately obvious to me which speaker is better. However, I'd bet that I'd prefer the Salon2 in actual listening.
I agree that anecdotal evidence is not sufficient, but would remind everyone here to be realistic to the forum of discussion we’re participating in: unless any of you actually plan to fund a fully rigorous controlled double blind study here, it’s not going to happen during the course of this discussion.

That said, what we can say is that this anecdote certainty casts doubt on the completeness of the theory. Something certainly seems to be missing, and more study would help understand what it is that is missing here from the spins in characterizing these two speakers’ relative performance.
gajCA likes this.
echopraxia is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #244 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
xcjago's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Harbor City, CA
Posts: 1,136
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 68
What about the fact that some of the higher end and much more expensive Revel speakers measure worse on the Spinorama than Revel's cheaper models (as shown by Dave)? Does that mean the cheaper ones have better sound quality? It would seem to be, if you believe that all the matters for sound quality is the spinorama. Funny since it comes from the company that did the "what the science shows."

Edit: Someone above me thinking along the same lines.
echopraxia likes this.
xcjago is offline  
post #245 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:21 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 325
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
A 99.5% success rate would mean that .5% of the time there are exceptions, so you either didn't comprehend what I said, again, or you're being intellectually dishonest in characterizing my argument.
Please clarify: Are you saying it’s possible that the RAAL could be within the set of samples where a speaker consistently sounds better than it measures in spins? Or are you saying that this is not possible?
echopraxia is offline  
post #246 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1818 Post(s)
Liked: 1404
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
Also, all of these designers are profiting from the RAAL ribbon, I'm not saying they're being dishonest but when you have a profit motive you are more prone to bias.

Now this is interesting.

We’re now questioning the integrity of independent speaker designers, who mind you, are far from profit driven. Not to mention every single designer here also has a dome tweeter model.

But this discussion is done anyways. I would hope that the designers don’t continue to waste time here.
@mariogonzalezzz hope you’re happy lol.
gajCA likes this.

Leave it at 8 ohms and call it a day :)
Russdawg1 is offline  
post #247 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by echopraxia View Post
That said, what we can say is that this anecdote certainty casts doubt on the completeness of the theory. Something certainly seems to be missing, and more study would help understand what it is that is missing here from the spins in characterizing these two speakers’ relative performance.
I think everyone agrees with this. @aarons915 is just stating what the current science shows, not that all research needs to cease, lol.

I'm too scared to bring this topic up in the mega-thread since it will likely just raise my stress levels, haha. I think we are all asking the same basic questions here.

There's really no need to call into question anyone's motives or anything like that. It's obvious that we are all curious people around here, otherwise we wouldn't be discussing this at all.

Speakers: M040 | X18 | UB5
Sub: VTF-2
Amp: HK-3490
l0nestar8 is offline  
post #248 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:34 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,442
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by xcjago View Post
What about the fact that some of the higher end and much more expensive Revel speakers measure worse on the Spinorama than Revel's cheaper models (as shown by Dave)? Does that mean the cheaper ones have better sound quality? It would seem to be, if you believe that all the matters for sound quality is the spinorama. Funny since it comes from the company that did the "what the science shows."

Edit: Someone above me thinking along the same lines.
Possibly, but remember the 99.5% rating is only when the bass is similar, if you put a Salon 2 against that Infinity it will most likely win because of the bass anyway, even if it's slightly smoother in the mids and highs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by echopraxia View Post
Please clarify: Are you saying it’s possible that the RAAL could be within the set of samples where a speaker consistently sounds better than it measures in spins? Or are you saying that this is not possible?
No, I think if a RAAL based speaker consistently won against speakers that the Harman model says measure better, it would be clear evidence that the model isn't accurate. I was taking issue with you characterizing my argument as their being no exceptions, which is obviously not what I said at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russdawg1 View Post
Now this is interesting.

We’re now questioning the integrity of independent speaker designers, who mind you, are far from profit driven. Not to mention every single designer here also has a dome tweeter model.

But this discussion is done anyways. I would hope that the designers don’t continue to waste time here.
@mariogonzalezzz hope you’re happy lol.
No see the part where I said I'm not accusing them of being dishonest? That's your clue that it wasn't what I was saying, I was saying that if you are making a profit from selling something, you're more likely to biased compared to an independent researcher. Are you saying Ascend isn't in the speaker business to make money by the way?
aarons915 is online now  
post #249 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
xcjago's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Harbor City, CA
Posts: 1,136
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
Possibly, but remember the 99.5% rating is only when the bass is similar, if you put a Salon 2 against that Infinity it will most likely win because of the bass anyway, even if it's slightly smoother in the mids and highs.
Well then, I guess anyone who buys Salons is wasting their money. All they need to do is buy the Primus 360 and add a subwoofer. Then you have the same sound quality, right?
BluesDaddy56 likes this.
xcjago is offline  
post #250 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:53 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,442
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by xcjago View Post
Well then, I guess anyone who buys Salons is wasting their money. All they need to do is buy the Primus 360 and add a subwoofer. Then you have the same sound quality, right?
I don't know, you would have to compare both in a controlled double-blind test to see which you prefer. Don't assume because 1 is ultra expensive, it will automatically win, there are many examples of expensive speakers that have been beat by much cheaper ones in Harman's MLL testing.
aarons915 is online now  
post #251 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 01:59 PM
Member
 
Makav3li's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked: 65
After reading this entire thread it's clear that Aaron came on here to badmouth RAAL ribbon tweeters and imply that companies who use them utilize questionable design practices. He was effectively shut down by Dave, Dennis, and the actual manufacturer using his own "evidence" and clear misunderstanding of the science against him. Instead of owning up to defeat he has shifted his position on what his original intentions were under the pretense that we all now agree with him. I don't agree with you! I have a sneaking suspicion that most technical readers wouldn't agree with you having read your posts and the counter arguments put forth by actual speaker designers. I don't think you'll hear much from this silent majority because you've made it clear it's not worth the time and effort to converse with you. This thread is done, put a fork in it.
Makav3li is offline  
post #252 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 02:02 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 325
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
No, I think if a RAAL based speaker consistently won against speakers that the Harman model says measure better, it would be clear evidence that the model isn't accurate. I was taking issue with you characterizing my argument as their being no exceptions, which is obviously not what I said at all.
Ok, let's make your position explicitly clear; please correct my summary here if there's anything inaccurate about it:

1. You admit that it is possible for some speakers to consistently sound better than the Harman measurement model would predict.

2. You admit that it is possible for some RAAL speakers to be examples of such exceptions admitted to in (1).

3. You acknowledge that the creators of RAAL transducers and RAAL speakers (e.g. Alex at RAAL, Dave at Ascend, etc.) believe that (2) is the case for their products (that there is more to the sound quality people hear from these than what the Harman measurement model predicts).

4. You still believe (3) is incorrect, and that RAAL speakers sound no different than the Harman model alone predicts (except at high SPL).

Are you willing to concede (4) yet? Or, is there anything incorrect in my assessment of (1), (2), or (3)?

If my summary here is correct, then you are claiming that your explanation of how RAAL speakers sound relative to their Harman model of measurements is a more accurate and trustworthy than explanations from the very inventor of the RAAL tweeter, and the designer of one of the most critically acclaimed speakers that use them.

Last edited by echopraxia; 08-25-2019 at 02:29 PM.
echopraxia is offline  
post #253 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 02:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1818 Post(s)
Liked: 1404
RAAL tweeters

Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
No see the part where I said I'm not accusing them of being dishonest? That's your clue that it wasn't what I was saying, I was saying that if you are making a profit from selling something, you're more likely to biased compared to an independent researcher. Are you saying Ascend isn't in the speaker business to make money by the way?

I know that Dennis Murphy retired out of this business because he was delivering quality speakers at/below cost which is not a way to make money.

Dave’s margins are roughly 4x smaller than that of a Revel/Harman speaker.

Just about every ID is when compared to a Retail speaker.

So yes, if he was for profit, he’d probably expand (he has the market to do so) his business and move out of the ID sector.

I’m not familiar enough with Rick to speak about him but I’m sure it’s within these bounds.

Leave it at 8 ohms and call it a day :)
Russdawg1 is offline  
post #254 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 02:15 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by xcjago View Post
BTW, here's some measurements of my Sierra-2 in my room. Pre-EQ it really doesn't look too bad. There's a small dip around 3,000 hz but it's nothing that a little EQ can't fix. Or even if you don't want to EQ, it's not a big deal IMO. After Dirac, the response is as smooth as you can get (with the exception of my subwoofer integration issue, which has since been fixed). Also you'll notice I don't have the high frequency roll off as shown in others measurements.
Xcjago, take off the REW smoothing and show the actual measurements. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig!
Barbecue Tech Tips is offline  
post #255 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 02:19 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 19,705
Mentioned: 231 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9266 Post(s)
Liked: 6373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Makav3li View Post
After reading this entire thread it's clear that Aaron came on here to badmouth RAAL ribbon tweeters and imply that companies who use them utilize questionable design practices. He was effectively shut down by Dave, Dennis, and the actual manufacturer using his own "evidence" and clear misunderstanding of the science against him. Instead of owning up to defeat he has shifted his position on what his original intentions were under the pretense that we all now agree with him. I don't agree with you! I have a sneaking suspicion that most technical readers wouldn't agree with you having read your posts and the counter arguments put forth by actual speaker designers. I don't think you'll hear much from this silent majority because you've made it clear it's not worth the time and effort to converse with you. This thread is done, put a fork in it.
No kidding.

"I don't like speaker X that has this new tweeter that most experienced AVS members who've heard them really enjoy so there must be some kind of conspiracy."

My main speakers measure well on Sountstage, (nobody else on AVS owns them and they were only $1150/pair but no longer available and the replacements don't have a matching center), the ones in my secondary room measured atrociously on S&V but I really like them as well.

I guess I could conclude that independent measurements don't mean a hill of beans but I don't.

Subjective preference is a weird thing.

Geoff A. J., California
gajCA is offline  
post #256 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 02:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 5,204
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 1781
Quote:
Originally Posted by echopraxia View Post
Aaron is arguing the canonical Dr. Toole extremist position that: if the spins show a speaker should sound better, then we need no further measurements of any kind to conclude that it absolutely will sound better, period, no exceptions ( except for his latest concession about high SPL).
That is not exactly Toole's position, and to go there and label it "extremist" is a straw man and dishonest.
Vergiliusm likes this.
Soulburner is offline  
post #257 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 02:41 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 325
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
That is not exactly Toole's position, and to go there and label it "extremist" is a straw man and dishonest.
I am not labeling Dr. Toole's position as extremist; I'm labeling some people's interpretation and (sometimes borderline "weaponized" use) of Dr. Toole's research as extremist.

This is why I continue to add disclaimers, explaining that the possibility that Toole's models are anything less than 100% complete, is not an attack on Toole or his research; it's a reality of virtually all science.

You must admit that zealots exist who take the interpretation of spin measurements to a level of certainty that is unjustified and extreme. Dr. Toole does not do this! I had initially thought this extremism to be Aaron's position here, but his position seems to be changing quite a bit, from post to post (especially after the responses from RAAL's and Ascend's accounts).

It's very possible I incorrectly interpreted Aaron's position, and I'm willing to concede this depending on what Aaron says next. I'm waiting to see what (if anything) he clarifies regarding the summary in my most recent post. Half the effort on this thread is getting Aaron to actually nail down his position to a concrete set of stable claims.
gajCA likes this.

Last edited by echopraxia; 08-25-2019 at 02:50 PM.
echopraxia is offline  
post #258 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 02:55 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 5,204
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 1781
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
Oh, I see. I'm not sure a single example proves the theory. Anecdotes are interesting and can serve as inspiration for further research, to be sure. A single example or anecdote doesn't (and shouldn't) prove anything beyond acting as a discussion point or the basis of a hypothesis.

However, to further your hypothesis, here's an interesting apples-to-apples comparison: graphs showing the Salon2 versus the Primus 360 using the same exact measurement technique and chamber calibration.

Salon2:



Primus 360:



It's not immediately obvious to me which speaker is better (when bass is removed, obviously.) However, I'd bet that I'd prefer the Salon2 in actual listening (even with the bass removed.)
Thanks for this example. It's pretty clear to me that I would most likely prefer the Salon 2, even if I didn't know which speaker was which. The reason is because the upper bass and lower mid-range is much more linear. The Primus dips down from 100 Hz on up through the upper bass and lower mid-range that would lead it to sound a little bit recessed in comparison and I know from experience that I do not prefer that type of sound. That is where all of your vocals, guitars, drums, etc are. There is also a peak in that range which means there will be some coloration.

The dip in the sound power is probably not very audible as it is considerably off-axis and the direct sound is what dominates our perception. Even if it is just barely audible, it certainly is not enough to degrade the superior linearity through the rest of the range.

Last edited by Soulburner; 08-25-2019 at 03:04 PM.
Soulburner is offline  
post #259 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 03:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 733
Fellas, let's not forget that @aarons915 did an N=2 single blind shootout between a Revel M105 and a Kef LS50, in mono. Both subjects preferred the LS50. This result goes against Toole's research too. The M105 has better spins than the LS50 in almost every way. For two people in the same house to both fall in the 0.5% was eyebrow raising to him.

He, in fact, questioned the science, and even brought it up in the mega-thread where there would be a lot of opposition.

In sum, I don't think it's fair to accuse him of zealotry when he's publicly questioned Harman's methodology and the accuracy of their predictive model in the recent past.

The question is if there are any technical explanations beyond being pure statistical anomalies.

If the Salon2 consistently beats the P360 in DBT, with subs, that would necessitate an explanation and a possible adjustment to the predictive model.
gajCA and BufordTJustice like this.

Speakers: M040 | X18 | UB5
Sub: VTF-2
Amp: HK-3490

Last edited by l0nestar8; 08-25-2019 at 03:11 PM.
l0nestar8 is offline  
post #260 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 03:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 5,204
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 1781
Quote:
Originally Posted by echopraxia View Post
I am not labeling Dr. Toole's position as extremist; I'm labeling some people's interpretation and (sometimes borderline "weaponized" use) of Dr. Toole's research as extremist.
Ok, but I didn't read it that way. Maybe an edit is in order?
echopraxia likes this.
Soulburner is offline  
post #261 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 03:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
Thanks for this example. It's pretty clear to me that I would most likely prefer the Salon 2, even if I didn't know which speaker was which. The reason is because the upper bass and lower mid-range is much more linear. The Primus dips down from 100 Hz on up through the upper bass and lower mid-range that would lead it to sound a little bit recessed in comparison and I know from experience that I do not prefer that type of sound. That is where all of your vocals, guitars, drums, etc are.

The dip in the sound power is probably not very audible as it is considerably off-axis and the direct sound is what dominates our perception. Even if it is just barely audible, it certainly is not enough to degrade the superior linearity through the rest of the range.
That whole region (below Schroeder) would be EQ'd by simple room correction, anyway. When I mean "with a sub," I mean with a DSP-calibrated sub. The results of that test, is what I'd be most curious about. That would isolate the driver quality, cabinet quality, and crossover component quality (advantage Revel) from frequency response smoothness and driver directivity matching (advantage Infinity.)
BufordTJustice likes this.

Speakers: M040 | X18 | UB5
Sub: VTF-2
Amp: HK-3490

Last edited by l0nestar8; 08-25-2019 at 03:14 PM.
l0nestar8 is offline  
post #262 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 03:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 5,204
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 1781
Of course EQ changes things - but we're talking about non equalized systems being compared in blind tests.
Soulburner is offline  
post #263 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 03:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
Of course EQ changes things - but we're talking about non equalized systems being compared in blind tests.
Without any EQ whatsoever, the Salon2 would win a landslide due to bass ouput and depth alone. We are trying to move beyond that simple fact since that's obvious to an extreme.

And for the record, I'm suggesting to only EQ below Schroeder, not the full spectrum, as per Toole's research and personal advice for best sound quality.

Speakers: M040 | X18 | UB5
Sub: VTF-2
Amp: HK-3490

Last edited by l0nestar8; 08-25-2019 at 03:31 PM.
l0nestar8 is offline  
post #264 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 03:34 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,442
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by echopraxia View Post
Ok, let's make your position explicitly clear; please correct my summary here if there's anything inaccurate about it:

1. You admit that it is possible for some speakers to consistently sound better than the Harman measurement model would predict.

2. You admit that it is possible for some RAAL speakers to be examples of such exceptions admitted to in (1).

3. You acknowledge that the creators of RAAL transducers and RAAL speakers (e.g. Alex at RAAL, Dave at Ascend, etc.) believe that (2) is the case for their products (that there is more to the sound quality people hear from these than what the Harman measurement model predicts).

4. You still believe (3) is incorrect, and that RAAL speakers sound no different than the Harman model alone predicts (except at high SPL).

Are you willing to concede (4) yet? Or, is there anything incorrect in my assessment of (1), (2), or (3)?

If my summary here is correct, then you are claiming that your explanation of how RAAL speakers sound relative to their Harman model of measurements is a more accurate and trustworthy than explanations from the very inventor of the RAAL tweeter, and the designer of one of the most critically acclaimed speakers that use them.
Your debate "style" is intellectually dishonest, which others have pointed out as well. My position is crystal clear at this point. Nowhere did I say that a speaker could consistently beat what the Harman model predicts, copy pasted from my earlier reply I said No, I think if a RAAL based speaker consistently won against speakers that the Harman model says measure better, it would be clear evidence that the model isn't accurate.

I agree with 3 and 4 except I addressed your claim about SPL when I said No I didn't say that, what I said was as long as a speaker is played within it's operating range as far as distortion, X-max, etc, that the Spinorama can predict with 99.5% accuracy which speaker will be preferred. There isn't a speaker I'm aware of where distortion or Xmax become an issue(aside from maybe a Bose cube) so it's largely an irrelevant point.

These are all previous comments and are crystal clear and is what the current Science says.
aarons915 is online now  
post #265 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 03:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,442
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russdawg1 View Post
I know that Dennis Murphy retired out of this business because he was delivering quality speakers at/below cost which is not a way to make money.

Dave’s margins are roughly 4x smaller than that of a Revel/Harman speaker.

Just about every ID is when compared to a Retail speaker.

So yes, if he was for profit, he’d probably expand (he has the market to do so) his business and move out of the ID sector.
Dennis Murphy is a great guy and a gift to the industry, he was definitely not making much, if any profit but he's also retired and this was more of a hobby to him. Neither of us know Dave's or Revels margins but you also have to take into account that he also doesn't have anywhere near the costs that Harman does. You should know as well as anyone how expensive it is to live in CA, I doubt he can afford to run his business as a charity, nor would I expect him to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gajCA View Post
No kidding.

"I don't like speaker X that has this new tweeter that most experienced AVS members who've heard them really enjoy so there must be some kind of conspiracy."
These are the kind of comments that are puzzling to me, I said I didn't care for the Mini Phil but that I did like the BMR and that was what made me dig into the details a bit more about what I was hearing in relation to the measurements. Both the BMR and the Sierra 2/EX measure well in the Spinorama so I'm really not sure what people are taking offense to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mariogonzalezzz View Post
some people are thorough in answering questions. especially about a subject like this.
its one thing when designers give their input but another when people "attack" someone with an opposing view. no doubt there is aggression, aiming to put someone on the defensive by ganging up. presumably raal speaker owners
You'll only find this sort of behavior when someone says anything that isn't glowing praise of speakers with RAAL tweeters, I said before that they exhibit cult-like behavior and I'm sure an outside observer would agree.
aarons915 is online now  
post #266 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 03:45 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,442
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
Fellas, let's not forget that @aarons915 did an N=2 single blind shootout between a Revel M105 and a Kef LS50, in mono. Both subjects preferred the LS50. This result goes against Toole's research too. The M105 has better spins than the LS50 in almost every way. For two people in the same house to both fall in the 0.5% was eyebrow raising to him.

He, in fact, questioned the science, and even brought it up in the mega-thread where there would be a lot of opposition.

In sum, I don't think it's fair to accuse him of zealotry when he's publicly questioned Harman's methodology and the accuracy of their predictive model in the recent past.

The question is if there are any technical explanations beyond being pure statistical anomalies.

If the Salon2 consistently beats the P360 in DBT, with subs, that would necessitate an explanation and a possible adjustment to the predictive model.
Thanks for mentioning this, I was getting around to bringing this up. I don't even own Harman speakers so it's quite comical to be labeled a Harman absolutist, etc. My own personal experience led me to question the Spinorama but I never thought it was automatically invalid. I theorized that in my case, the Sound power might be more indicative of their quality since I don't listen on-axis, I also neutered the bass in the M105 which might cause them to be preferred if I left it alone.
aarons915 is online now  
post #267 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 03:45 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 325
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
Ok, but I didn't read it that way. Maybe an edit is in order?
Done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Makav3li View Post
After reading this entire thread it's clear that Aaron came on here to badmouth RAAL ribbon tweeters and imply that companies who use them utilize questionable design practices. He was effectively shut down by Dave, Dennis, and the actual manufacturer using his own "evidence" and clear misunderstanding of the science against him. Instead of owning up to defeat he has shifted his position on what his original intentions were under the pretense that we all now agree with him. I don't agree with you! I have a sneaking suspicion that most technical readers wouldn't agree with you having read your posts and the counter arguments put forth by actual speaker designers. I don't think you'll hear much from this silent majority because you've made it clear it's not worth the time and effort to converse with you. This thread is done, put a fork in it.
Yeah, it certainly does look that way, unfortunately. If this is not the case, it's on Aaron to formally concede certain points rather than the half-heatedly shifting his position every which way. Perfect example here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
Your debate "style" is intellectually dishonest, which others have pointed out as well. My position is crystal clear at this point. Nowhere did I say that a speaker could consistently beat what the Harman model predicts, copy pasted from my earlier reply I said No, I think if a RAAL based speaker consistently won against speakers that the Harman model says measure better, it would be clear evidence that the model isn't accurate.

I agree with 3 and 4 except I addressed your claim about SPL when I said No I didn't say that, what I said was as long as a speaker is played within it's operating range as far as distortion, X-max, etc, that the Spinorama can predict with 99.5% accuracy which speaker will be preferred. There isn't a speaker I'm aware of where distortion or Xmax become an issue(aside from maybe a Bose cube) so it's largely an irrelevant point.

These are all previous comments and are crystal clear and is what the current Science says.
You'll notice how he's very vague in how he replies to my comment, where I tried to summarize his position in crystal-clear terms. Honestly, I'm still confused as to which points I summarized that he precisely agrees are accurate and which are not.

I posted 4 points, each of which are either true of false (or somewhere in between). It's still not explicitly clear which he agrees with, or to what extent. To my best interpretation of his most recent response, it sounds like all my points are pretty much completely accurate, except that he actually wants to walk back a concession he made earlier! That's fine for now though, so let's focus on what we do know (to the best of our ability) of his position:

Given all 4 points (minus the point about SPL), there is only one conclusion: He is effectively claiming to have a more trustworthy assessment of the sound of the RAAL tweeter (and how it relates to Harman style measurements), and speakers that use it, than the very inventor of the RAAL tweeter himself, plus many of the speaker designers that use it who also posted here disputing Aaron's aspersions about RAAL tweeters.

Take that for what you will.
duckymomo and BluesDaddy56 like this.

Last edited by echopraxia; 08-25-2019 at 03:49 PM.
echopraxia is offline  
post #268 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 03:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 5,204
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 1781
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
Without any EQ whatsoever, the Salon2 would win a landslide due to bass ouput and depth alone. We are trying to move beyond that simple fact since that's obvious to an extreme.

And for the record, I'm suggesting to only EQ below Schroeder, not the full spectrum, as per Toole's research and personal advice for best sound quality.
It's true that the bass output would lead to a clear winner if not accounted for. However, the best way to compare would be no EQ at all and to just engage a crossover at 80 Hz, connected to subs ideally positioned.

I don't think we should be talking about EQ When comparing speakers.
Soulburner is offline  
post #269 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 04:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
It's true that the bass output would lead to a clear winner if not accounted for. However, the best way to compare would be no EQ at all and to just engage a crossover at 80 Hz, connected to subs ideally positioned.

I don't think we should be talking about EQ When comparing speakers.
Hey, I mean, why not do both?? Lol. The more data, the merrier. That little dip in the upper bass/low mids is very common to compensate for floor/desk bounce. Most active monitors have a switch to add in a broad, low Q, 2-4dB dip there to compensate for that exact thing, as an example. This is done to improve room accuracy, of course.

So yeah, try both methods, and see what happens. I wouldn't automatically assume that the Salon2 would sound better even with an 80Hz bass cut. Regardless, I would still cut way higher than 80Hz since bass differences are audible all the way up to at least 200Hz and possibly a little beyond.

Either way, trying numerous combos to see what shakes out is my wish...Above transition, the Infinity has a measured advantage so my only point is whether that's audible when bass is thoroughly accounted for. That's all. However that's best accomplished is fine with me.

You bring up good points.

Speakers: M040 | X18 | UB5
Sub: VTF-2
Amp: HK-3490

Last edited by l0nestar8; 08-25-2019 at 04:16 PM.
l0nestar8 is offline  
post #270 of 554 Old 08-25-2019, 04:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,442
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by echopraxia View Post

Given all 4 points (minus the point about SPL), there is only one conclusion: He is effectively claiming to have a more trustworthy assessment of the sound of the RAAL tweeter (and how it relates to Harman style measurements), and speakers that use it, than the very inventor of the RAAL tweeter himself, plus many of the speaker designers that use it who also posted here disputing Aaron's aspersions about RAAL tweeters.

Take that for what you will.
I've answered your questions now my turn. First of all you realize the RAAL speakers that we have spins for in this thread measure very well, correct? Do you think they would do badly in Harman's model or something?

Also, you've asked my position, now what is yours? What do you think the Spinorama is missing that doesn't properly capture how these RAAL bookshelf speakers sound?
aarons915 is online now  
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