@markwd Is it me or are you damning with faint praise a bit too much?
It's getting a bit off putting.
All the best,
Nonoise
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 28 responses by nonoise
When someone conflates medical expectation bias with auditory expectation bias, you know they're really reaching. Even half in the bag as I am right now, I know that anyone succumbing to the "placebo effect" via a controlled medical study will/can claim an improvement in their condition but it's just a matter of time before they realize it's bumpkis. Their deteriorating health will prove that out. If you're going to proffer that BS, then one must accept and allow the same curtesy to those who listen for changes over a long period of time or it will just amount to another parlor trick. Those subjects in the Harmon tests were found to need half an hour to adjust between tests as their first exposure to a new room thoroughly threw them for a loop. Subsequent tests kept that as the time frame. After repeated exposure, they got to where they could find some consensus as to what sounded pleasing. The proof is in the long term listening. We always readjust when things settle down and that is always discounted as it throws out the "findings." Nothing like rigging a test based on rules set by those whose intent is to guarantee their results. All the best,
|
Sorry, but that's a big conditional "can" along with "a specific" and to imply that Amir is gonna come to the rescue smacks of a little bit of hero worship. Earlier on, one member spoke of the different filter settings on a Technics unit that all measured the same but sounded different.
I found a similar review of my Technics SL-G700 Network/SACD Player where the reviewer spoke to Technics about the 4 (or so) digital filter settings and they told him that although they all measured the same, they sounded distinctly different and it was up to the listener to pick the one they preferred. Others have measured it and found out it to be the case as well. It should be easy enough to procure a unit, test it, and lay that dog to rest. All I could hear was a slight difference and went with the setting that didn't alter the incoming signal at all based on what reviewers were told by Technics, and yes, I could be fooled into not picking out the one I'm presently using that measures the same as the others as they're slight. That would more in the realm of a parlor trick. There's more than meets the eye, and scope. All the best, |
Looks like the softening up is working, permitting the more trollish and boorish to hash over the extremes and paint everything they don't like with a broad brush. That analogy of oh those some many miles of cabling before it gets to your place has been shot down time and again. All those substations, annexes, transformers and cabling alter the power in ways that would not resemble what it measures as when it finally reaches your home. It's not some invisible, constant never changing force being shuttled to your door. What matters is how it's intended to be when it at last gets to your outlet and measures are taken to ensure it doesn't vary much, especially as much as it did during it's journey carried over aluminum lines. Would you have your PC made out of aluminum? So yes, it is those last three feet that matter since most people don't go around trying to directly connect stuff to the Romex. Granted, they charge more than it's worth but who doesn't nowadays? I have a few PCs from TWL and some from Zu Audio and a few others and there's clearly a difference in sound staging, dynamics, and frequency extension. Until the fetish of measuring everything to death and making a cottage industry out of it, we've always relied on our ears and yes, some fell prey to marketing and peer pressure but stop with this throwing the baby out with the bathwater malarkey. One can always get better performance for not so dear a price as the one you brought up and to keep citing the extremes doesn't bode well for those arguments. Do your thing and leave others to do the same. Before this measurement fetish took hold, members were politely cautioned about price/performance matters and not to fall for the hype. It's always been done that way, but now, it's one big crusade that requires total subjugation, enabling all that dopamine and serotonin to flow again for that big, fat rush. All the best, |
@markwd Thanks for clearing that up as it never made sense to me the way I perceived it. All the best, |
Less trained listeners are much less picky (having lower standards) which goes to affirm the claims of audiophiles that they have extraordinary hearing ability. There, I fixed it. The data points the way but the inference needed some work. I can skew conclusions as good as the next guy. All the best, |
I left out preferences in listening pleasure as well as the rooms gear is listened to, it being so obvious that I felt it need not be mentioned. This reminds me of a review Ron did over on New Record Day about (I think it was) a Dali speaker. His measurements showed a rather large frequency spike around 12 or 15 KHz that didn't manifest itself as shrill, etched or zingy. He spoke with Dali about it and it was designed in. He found that it had lots of air, ambience and detail without the negatives. The speaker had a lively and not fatiguing quality that made listening a pleasure. I find it odd that many who are into measurements cite the Harmon/Toole studies about preferences that were pleasing to the general and uninitiated public, resulting in that V curve which is not all that accurate and faithful to the original that's held up as something to aim for. So which is it? Accuracy or pleasure? The answer is it has to be both. Strict accuracy leaves out the variables we haven't nailed down as of yet, small and elusive they may be and to dismiss it as mysticisms and deepenings smacks too much of hubris for my liking. YMMV. Mine does. All the best, |
I have yet to see anyone here posit that measurements aren't used in constructing gear. In fact, they go to great lengths saying they are. What they take issue is with measurements taken after the product is complete as the sole arbiter that it sounds good or bad. Measurements can show where something is amiss but they also confound when they measure odd or off at certain things but still sound wonderful, just as things that measure great can sound sterile, shrill, flat and two dimensional. Go figure. All the best, |
I knew I saw this somewhere and believe it applies:
In other words, too much kool-aid. We are not at the apex of measuring. Not by a long shot. @kevn Very well said. Nice insight. All the best, |
"defeat Amir and ASR"? You make it sound like Amir is some kind of crusader going to war against the infidels. Take time for some good introspection and weigh the pluses and minuses of what constitutes being in a cult. By the way, that sentence of yours constitutes a big plus in the being in a cult ledger. All the best, |
If that graph was from Harmon Inc/Sean Olive, I still have to call BS on it as there are "trained listeners" in the category of audio reviewers as that's what they're trained to do when reviewing. I can't imagine at least one audio reviewer not passing the test. Now if the category were renamed "trained blind listeners with similar preferences for what sounds nice to them" (hence the Harmon curve), then have at it. All the best, |
The word is not the thing. All the best,
|
Nah, it’s just sophistry being used to baffle. Look at all the angles and attempts deployed, the feints, the parries, the side steps. Getting kinda boring. @kevn Thanks for the cleanup on aisle 7. Your vigilance is commendable and most appreciated. All the best, |
@mahgister Hey magister! I don't hate Amir, I just don't like his style and motives. You're not remotely qualified to assess what I say and mean, and for that matter, never have been. You, if anyone, are not polite. You explode with anger all the time and when confronted with your behavior, you apologize. You've done that many, many times. If anyone should imitate Amir, it is you, but you don't have that ability, as you've shown time over time all these years. The patience he's shown you is more than anyone I know would exhibit. As for infestation of threads, that seems to be your forte. You've done it for years. Practically everything you've said in this thread, you've brought up before to the point of boring the heck out of members. You go off on your tangents demanding that others must respond and when one or two do respond, you claim vindication and insult other members when they complain of your tactic of highjacking a thread. You post multiple times in a row but no one answers and it spoils the thread and intention of those who want to participate. Like others have already said, they (we) just pass over what you write hoping you lose interest (at least I do). If you're of the mind, why don't you go over to ASR and start posting there and let us know how that goes. By the way, if you really think members here are "gangstalking" you, reflect for a moment as to why and you'll discover it is because of you and your manner. All the best, |
