AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,169 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The new S&V arrived the other day, and in addition to an overall reformatting of the magazine (which I hate, but thats just me), they are no longer including in their reports the lab test results.


While they do have full bench test results on the web site, they are no longer included with the dead-tree version of the review. In the past, the print version always had some of the test data, while a more complete report could be found online.


Personally, I am not happy with this change at all, and plan to let them know. Whether or not you like S&V or question the accuracy of their tests, it was a handy and convenient data point. I resent that I now have to go looking for the test reports.


Brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,351 Posts
I thought the latest edition of S&V was just an overview of lots of gear. Seems like a special edition. My guess is that the next issue they ship will be back to normal with proper equipment tests, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,155 Posts
I think Brian is correct that this is a permanent change and I agree with his feelings that the changes are for the worse. It's a shame. I also wonder whether the test reports will be available a year or 2 down the road when you reference an old article.


Ed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,091 Posts
Brian, I would lament this as well, except that the measurement I saw, at least of speakers, was so inaccurate, oftentimes, that it simply was useless. Not much to miss, to be frank. Of course, about the only time I look at an S&V mag is to leaf through it at the bookstore to see if they've gotten better. Then I sigh, set it down, and look at real magazines :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,169 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
As has been mentioned in other threads, I am eagerly awaiting some sort of definitive explanation for the Xd measurements that they published. But if it is ever offered on their print version, I will be surprised. More likely there will be something on NHT's web site.


That said, I do value their bench test's, particularly amp performance, and bass management functionality. To my knowledge, they were the first and only publication to point out in detail how FUBAR BM is in most hi-rez players.


I find it disappointing that magazines like Stereophile and TAS make little or no mention of BM. TAS ignores it completely, and while Kal mentions it in Stereophile, they don't harp on it (I guess their readers are all full range guys!).


I would have loved to see JA actually publish test results of BM. If he did, that alone would have sold a lot more ICBM's.


Brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,155 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BGLeduc
To my knowledge, they were the first and only publication to point out in detail how FUBAR BM is in most hi-rez players.
This is true. And it's all due to David Ranada. This guy is so on-the-ball and so much more astute/intelligent than the rest . . .


Ed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,760 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BGLeduc
I find it disappointing that magazines like Stereophile and TAS make little or no mention of BM. TAS ignores it completely, and while Kal mentions it in Stereophile, they don't harp on it (I guess their readers are all full range guys!).
I agree with you but most of our readers are full-range, 2 channel guys. So far, at least.


Kal
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,247 Posts
What are your personal thoughts on that approach as opposed to incorporating a subwoofer Kal?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,760 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai
What are your personal thoughts on that approach as opposed to incorporating a subwoofer Kal?
I have been coming around to the idea of preferring a subwoofer but not to extend the frequency response since that is adequate with the big speakers in my main system. However, the big advantage to a subwoofer, in addition to whatever is your L/R or L/C/R, is (1) the freedom to position it optimally for bass without impinging on imaging/soundstage issues and (2) the ability to EQ the subwoofer without compromising the signals going to the main speakers.


Kal
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,091 Posts
"How do you understand towers so well?"


"Well, first, I imagine a sub/sat system, then take away the flexibility and adjustability" :)


If you look at any tower speaker, 50-75% of money is bass. Good or bad, deep or not. When you imagine a $20K speaker as a $8000/pr monitor speaker sitting on two $6000 passive subs, it's simply hard to imagine anything resembling value there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,247 Posts
Makes sense to me Kal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,169 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Quote:
However, the big advantage to a subwoofer, in addition to whatever is your L/R or L/C/R, is (1) the freedom to position it optimally for bass without impinging on imaging/soundstage issues and (2) the ability to EQ the subwoofer without compromising the signals going to the main speakers.
My recent experience setting up a sub/sat system in my 2CH room has completely convinced me of this. I always accepted these perceived benefits on face value, but hearing is believing.


I don't see how I could have gotten the same results (solid imaging AND measurably flat bass response) with a pair of full range towers. It took some fiddling with crossover settings, and the use of parametric EQ on the sub, but the results exceeded my expectations.


Brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,247 Posts
I don't think you can BGLeduc when you consider that it's a good idea to excite the maximal number of modes in a room and that's invariably at some corner position. A full range system that goes deep down in the bass just won't be in a good position a few feet out and a few feet in, give or take to do justice. What's good for the mids and tweets ain't what's good for the lows. Besides, off-loading the low frequencies to a competently powered sub may even improve the performance of the mains seeing as how the amp is relieved of the responsibility of providing power down below.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,351 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai
I don't think you can BGLeduc when you consider that it's a good idea to excite the maximal number of modes in a room and that's invariably at some corner position
... Or not, depending on whether you want a smooth frequency response or just as much unbalanced bass frequency as you can get :)


I think the industry in general is coming around to the importance of room acoustics. Once you do you realize a full-range floorstander is simply not optimal. I hope we start to see many more high-end sub-sat combinations that are specifically designed and voiced as a complete system (not to say there arent some now but typically the 'statement' pieces are all full range floorstanders) These would include parametric EQ as well as tools to maintain complete phase coherency with the sats, etc.


Andy K.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,091 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kromkamp
I hope we start to see many more high-end sub-sat combinations that are specifically designed and voiced as a complete system.... These would include parametric EQ as well as tools to maintain complete phase coherency with the sats, etc.
If only I knew of such a system......... ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,423 Posts
It seems to me that the problem with the sub-sat idea is getting manufactureres away from the concept that more expensive = deeper bass + higher clean output. I'm not sure what kind of clean output you could get at say, 100 hz or so from relatively small sub/sats (maybe someone can help me out here); so I'm thinking that the ideal as far as value in a system capable of high output would maybe be something like the new Triad Gold In-Room monitors recently reviewed in WSR, with two woofers, a mid and a tweet, but only flat down to 50 hz or so; or Aerial LR3, or ACI Protege. In other words, a similar design to a tower, but tuned to a higher freq. In the case of the Triad this seems to also offer the benefit of higher sensitivity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,351 Posts
Yes. When I say sat I dont mean a tiny speaker necessarily. Maybe bookshelf or mini-monitor is a better term. But still designed as a complete system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,091 Posts
The design of these systems have huge advantages for HT systems as well as music systems. Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of these system from which to choose. Triad and NHT, obviously. Aeriel and ACI as you mensioned. I think M&K and who else? In order to do it right, it makes sense to have acoustic suspension midbass drivers that are designed specifically to go with a sub rather than being ported so as to stand alone. I'm surprised Revel hasn't done a dedicated multi-channel sub/sat system rather than the hybrid music(ish)/theater(ish) systems that are so popular.


Speaking of Revel, the schmuck rep from Revel never showed up for our meeting last week, as I suspected. Even when you find good product, it's hard to get good people behind it, so I guess I'll pass, unfortunately, and continue the quest for other cool gear.........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,351 Posts
So your not buying Revel because the Rep didn't make your meeting? :rolleyes: Thats like passing on the Sin City DVD release because Britney Murphy wouldn't personally deliver it to your door. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,091 Posts
Sorry, long history of schmuckery with said rep and that was kind of my last ditch effort with them, I mean, really, too much trouble to make a phone call? And, yeah, it kind of is their specific job to show up and tell me why I should buy their product. Not completely ruling it out, but sheesh........ Besides, CEDIA is here. Nothing like getting around the lazy middleman.


In any case, too bad Soundstage Network is pitifully slow at adding measurements at www.speakermeasurements.com . I find those somewhat revealing and it would be nice to have a single, rather comprehensive measurement facility where you could get a *lot* of product info, not just a few products here and there. They don't do waterfall plots, impulse, etc, while Stereophile doesn't do distortion curves. Can't seem to get everything under one roof. I think we'd get better engineered products if measurements were a) more comprehensive and b) more critical rather than "well, the measurements were a little worrisome, but I guess it sound alright"
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top