Similarly "blind ABX tests are valuable, I do them never".
Some thoughts on ASR and the reviews
I’ve briefly taken a look at some online reviews for budget Tekton speakers from ASR and Youtube. Both are based on Klippel quasi-anechoic measurements to achieve "in-room" simulations.
As an amateur speaker designer, and lover of graphs and data I have some thoughts. I mostly hope this helps the entire A’gon community get a little more perspective into how a speaker builder would think about the data.
Of course, I’ve only skimmed the data I’ve seen, I’m no expert, and have no eyes or ears on actual Tekton speakers. Please take this as purely an academic exercise based on limited and incomplete knowledge.
1. Speaker pricing.
One ASR review spends an amazing amount of time and effort analyzing the ~$800 US Tekton M-Lore. That price compares very favorably with a full Seas A26 kit from Madisound, around $1,700. I mean, not sure these inexpensive speakers deserve quite the nit-picking done here.
2. Measuring mid-woofers is hard.
The standard practice for analyzing speakers is called "quasi-anechoic." That is, we pretend to do so in a room free of reflections or boundaries. You do this with very close measurements (within 1/2") of the components, blended together. There are a couple of ways this can be incomplete though.
a - Midwoofers measure much worse this way than in a truly anechoic room. The 7" Scanspeak Revelators are good examples of this. The close mic response is deceptively bad but the 1m in-room measurements smooth out a lot of problems. If you took the close-mic measurements (as seen in the spec sheet) as correct you’d make the wrong crossover.
b - Baffle step - As popularized and researched by the late, great Jeff Bagby, the effects of the baffle on the output need to be included in any whole speaker/room simulation, which of course also means the speaker should have this built in when it is not a near-wall speaker. I don’t know enough about the Klippel simulation, but if this is not included you’ll get a bass-lite expereinced compared to real life. The effects of baffle compensation is to have more bass, but an overall lower sensitivity rating.
For both of those reasons, an actual in-room measurement is critical to assessing actual speaker behavior. We may not all have the same room, but this is a great way to see the actual mid-woofer response as well as the effects of any baffle step compensation.
Looking at the quasi anechoic measurements done by ASR and Erin it _seems_ that these speakers are not compensated, which may be OK if close-wall placement is expected.
In either event, you really want to see the actual in-room response, not just the simulated response before passing judgement. If I had to critique based strictly on the measurements and simulations, I’d 100% wonder if a better design wouldn’t be to trade sensitivity for more bass, and the in-room response would tell me that.
3. Crossover point and dispersion
One of the most important choices a speaker designer has is picking the -3 or -6 dB point for the high and low pass filters. A lot of things have to be balanced and traded off, including cost of crossover parts.
Both of the reviews, above, seem to imply a crossover point that is too high for a smooth transition from the woofer to the tweeters. No speaker can avoid rolling off the treble as you go off-axis, but the best at this do so very evenly. This gives the best off-axis performance and offers up great imaging and wide sweet spots. You’d think this was a budget speaker problem, but it is not. Look at reviews for B&W’s D series speakers, and many Focal models as examples of expensive, well received speakers that don’t excel at this.
Speakers which DO typically excel here include Revel and Magico. This is by no means a story that you should buy Revel because B&W sucks, at all. Buy what you like. I’m just pointing out that this limited dispersion problem is not at all unique to Tekton. And in fact many other Tekton speakers don’t suffer this particular set of challenges.
In the case of the M-Lore, the tweeter has really amazingly good dynamic range. If I was the designer I’d definitely want to ask if I could lower the crossover 1 kHz, which would give up a little power handling but improve the off-axis response. One big reason not to is crossover costs. I may have to add more parts to flatten the tweeter response well enough to extend it's useful range. In other words, a higher crossover point may hide tweeter deficiencies. Again, Tekton is NOT alone if they did this calculus.
I’ve probably made a lot of omissions here, but I hope this helps readers think about speaker performance and costs in a more complete manner. The listening tests always matter more than the measurements, so finding reviewers with trustworthy ears is really more important than taste-makers who let the tools, which may not be properly used, judge the experience.
Showing 16 responses by dwcda
I've spent some time on the ASR site & didn't care for it much. Not that I'm against measuring audio equipment, it was the whole feeling of the forum... lots of seemingly aggressive people shouting their opinion, mocking others who disagree. Mind you, I get the same feelings from those that are diehard cable/tweak believers, who belittle those that disagree with them. I keep reading them write the words "believe your own ears" while they completely ignore the concept that if you're watching something, or you're told something, or you're made aware of something while you're listening/comparing then you're not believing your ears... you're permitting your brain to override your ears & tell you that you're hearing something that you're not. Listen to 2 sources of music after being told that A<B and you'll hear a superior B. Listen to 2 sources blindly and suddenly all differences statistically disappear. So I find the two absolutes, listening & measuring, are both outliers that I will read but often categorize as interesting but not necessarily relevant to me. |
This thread is frickin’ awesome, absolutely delivers. Amir: this equipment measures badly. Here’s my evidence from tests that I performed. Feel free to purchase it at your own risk. ASR Forum: science trumps all. If two pieces of "stuff" measure the same you will not hear a difference under a blind ABX test. Prove us wrong but if you argue with us, we’ll beat you into submission. Audigon: this cables sounds great, if you don’t hear the difference your equipment sucks & cannot resolve the difference, your room needs acoustic treatment, you have a tin ear, you don’t know what you’re listening for. Blind ABX tests are meaningless, I don’t need to test my hearing to know that I heard a difference. I attended a Pink Floyd concert in 1978 and I can still remember how great it was. If I like Pasta Primavera more than Chili con Carne I don’t need a blind ABX test to prove that to myself. WRT blind ABX tests... oh, you’re one of those. Why does Amir keep posting here? No one cares what he has to say... 500+ posts later the argument continues. |
Surely you can understand that the onus to prove a given set of cables improves the SQ rests on the person making that claim. Those that don't believe that cables make a difference have done blind ABX tests to come to that determination. Just in this thread alone there's a link to the test and results from a person who believed that he could 100% tell the difference between his Opus cables and Monster. After a blind test he's rethinking that confidence. But most cable believers, like you just stated, are unwilling to test their hearing by listening blind. |
So many opinions on how Amir & his moderators treat posters who don’t fall in line with the forum. Funny thing, I posted a thread here about my experience of testing some AQ Dragon power cords where I didn’t hear a difference. It was misstated twice by the same poster that previously I had auditioned $80,000 worth of Transparent cables. I assume that was to make me look foolish or like a liar. Even when I corrected the poster about the value of Transparent Super cables he persisted & repeated the lie. Same poster referred to my experience & discussion with the dealer who sent me the Dragon cables as hearsay and doubted that I actually had the Dragons to evaluate. IOW called me a liar again. He then referred to my posts as bullshit. Another referred to my posts as being a part of the Naysayer Church (multiple posts referring to this Church) that wants people to blindly follow science. I was told I was boring, just send the cables back. I was mocked for inviting my neighbors to listen & give their opinion. Then it was agreed by many that the problem was that my speakers were too close to the wall behind them, apparently just inches away (they were 48" from the wall behind them). I was told the problem was that I have a tin ear (ignoring all of the other people who came by to compare cables & heard no difference, including one man who manufactured speaker/XLR/power cables & brought his by). In the end a poster that lived nearby came over with his speaker/XLR/power cables and a power conditioner and we had a listening session. For each change in cable he couldn’t hear a difference. When they were all connected he felt there was a small difference but wasn’t interested in a blind listening test. After the results of that session were described the thread died. This forum isn’t hugely welcoming to people with different opinions either. I haven’t been banned yet so I’ll give you that. |
Not a universal opinion on the PSM156. Imagine if he did listen to the PSM156 and gave this review...
|
@8th-note +100 Good synopsis of what has transpired here. They keep attacking and then criticize the dude for defending himself. And they see his responses as evidence that he's a nasty, arrogant condescending piece of work while ignoring that it's their posts that fit that description. Funniest is when they say the ASR posters attack opposing opinions while doing that here for hundreds of posts. |
Criticizes video posted because it borders on soft porn.... ups the ante by posting another video of the same women behaving the same way. Sure pwned on that one. |
This is a common theme in your posts. People that disagree with you don't simply have a different opinion, they must be punished. Bottom line, you saw a video of a woman playing violin in an orchestra and you decided that it was soft porn because she was attractive. |
I personally wouldn’t denigrate a woman because her "followers" appreciate her beauty, but you do you. I see a lot of detractors of Taylor Swift do the same thing. Same with Beyonce. So in your mind a woman sitting in a chair, fully clothed, bouncing from side to side is soft porn. And to prove it you posted your own link to her soft porn. Crazy thing here... good looking women can produce amazing music. Go figure. Like the video that mapman posted... helluva attractive woman that is a very talented guitar player. Sure, many will follow her simply because she’s beautiful, but only a misogynist would put her videos down as soft porn to make a point. |
You've posted 60x on this thread. Irony is dead. Hypocrisy is waking up |