My biases tend to run parallel to RH's. That's probably why I don't subscribe. What's the point of hearing your own echo. That said, I 've enjoyed the dynamic capabilities of Watt/Puppies driven by Krells playing big band jazz immensely. Manufacturers have criticized the power reviewers have in this industry for some time now. Now we have reviewers reviewing each other. Hmmn, interesting. I think I like it. |
"Why must it be an anechonic chamber?" Perhaps because it is the least prejudicial reference point? |
Khrys, because an anechoic chamber is the most neutral place for such references. Such a room doesn't skew the measurements. Discounting the obvious but impractical preference of having manufacturers measure their speakers in ones own listeneing room, where would you prefer your potential speakers measurments made: in some one elses room, a bowling alley, a porta-potty, where? |
Aw com'on Larry, were're just having some fun. BTW, your right. |
Khrys, Am I to understand that technology can't be developed despite less than ideal circumstances or that technology can't be improved by better testing procedures? Instead of asking for a guess as to the results of an experiment after being subjected to non-specific paramters, why not offer the answer? While your at it perhaps you can offer why it may be germaine to this discussion? I'll admit it, I'm confused. Are you suggesting that one might extrapolate a serious medical diagnosis by observing confusion between a second year student and a philospher and, that's the best part? If your response depends on some sort of personal attack, you needn't bother. |
Khrys, your question is valid. Though anechoic chambers are not standardized which of course compromises the very point of it all, they at least an attempt to neutralize conflicting interactions that may skew the baseline measurements. I think it's probably safe to say that most anechoic chambers are fairly similar above 200 Hz. As far as being the being the most removed from its intended usage, at least it is fairly consistent and allows the device under test to be tested as a device. Once we know how the device performs, we can adjust for the environment with some tangible knowledge. If surround sound ever fullfills its promise reflected sound may turn from being a troubling benefit to just a troubling bane. I'm not exactly sure why you keep refering to the 1940's. Are you suggesting that computer modeling eliminates the need for anechoic chambers? That may well be true, but, even the models may need some sort of reference and/or calibration. As far as the fewer compensatory devices needed being better. Well, in a perfect environment (anechoic chamber?) that might be the ideal way to go. Truth is, that in order to get recorded music at all requires a significant amount of compensatory devices to begin with. Perhaps error prevention/corection should be considered a natural part of the process. Please remember that when a Steinway recieves it's final tuning it's in the very environment in which it will be heard. Wouldn't it be nice if we had that luxury with our speakers? Not very likely. Heck, your suggestion for Steinway to test their instruments in an anechoic chamber as part of their development, is sound advise to me. |
As though I'm the only relentless one here. Ah, yes and we finally come back to the Wilsons, individually tuned, but, unfortunately with out a proper anechoic baseline. Sorry, I couldn't help myself. You may have to wait until after May, when I indulge myself at the Oyster Bar in NYC during the Holland Herring Festival for those test results. Best Regards. |
Just a thought on playing live music next to a rig. I had a friend walk into my home with his trombone in hand. He commented that the rig was playing loud. I told him my aim was to reproduce the sound of the live performance to scale. He then proceeded to take his horn out and play along. To his astonishment he said he could not effectively play soft enough to properly accompany the sound eminating from my system. |
Ah, that word "sophistry" again. Philospher, Brit for sophomore, just what thought is trying to be conveyed by the use of this word. I never thought I would come to be so aware of the abiguity of this word till this thread. |
Khrys and Duane, now we're getting some place. Your points are well taken. Yes, there doesn't seem to be any current criterion for an "anechonic" chamber. But that doesn't mean we should throw the baby out with the bathwater. A speakers anechonic measurments are not the end to end all, hardly. Anechonic measurments really only offer us a baseline. A damn good one though, perhaps, better than any other means. Certainly one shouldn't use those measurments alone in evaluating a potential speaker. Klipsh, some Linn's and others are designed to work best in other than an anechoic chamber. The Dunlavy's are a very good example of anchoeic vs. real room. As Sean has pointed out in previous threads the top most woofer will reflect very differently than the lower woofer in most typical rooms. Very different than in an anechoic chamber. That doesn't mean that the anechoic measurements are useless. It just suggests that the room may need specific treatment to replicate a proximity to those measurements. At least with the Dunlavy's one has a basis to start establishing what that room treatment might entail. Roy Allison had interesting products to address these very issues. Some Allison speakers actually slanted a down firing woofer onto a built in platform so as to consistantly replicate to some degree what he was aiming for despite room variences. Yes, our ears are the the best devise for establishing sonic value, but those very ears in an anechonic chamber will perform better than in most other situations and allow for a reference point to compare to in real working evnviorments. As for reflected sound some designs such as Thiel are actually desiged to be listened to off axes and are measured as such in an anechoic chamber. The influence of the room may become less and less of an issue in the near future with the emergence of products such as the TacT. As to whether the overall sound correction to the reflected sound corrupts the initial primary sound, well, I just don't know. There may be a technological answer for this question in the future. Then again it may be moot. |
