@toronto416 Hows the heat dome? IMHO, what would have made this thread a spectacular success, once it turned into an Amir - ASR bashing contest, would have been if it only got 50 views and 5 posts. Anyone interested in Amir - ASR is welcome to head on over to that site and join the conversation. All the nonsense taking place on this thread only points out, to me anyway, the number of people who have not learned two of the tenants on living a happy life. 1. If something is beyond your control, like Amir - ASR, and it does not directly impact your life, then you ignore it and give it no further thought. 2. Recognise that nothing someone else says or does can create a feeling within you. Only your chosen reaction can do that. Therefore, all these members who are ranting about Amir - ASR and displaying a lot of hostility, are all doing that by themselves and to themselves. Amir - ASR has nothing to do with it. If Agon members would be a trifle bit more Stoic in their thoughts and behaviors, this thread would have dried up and blown away a long time ago. Or, stayed on the topic of speaker design as was first intended? GO OILERS !
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.
@bigtwin +1 and well said. |
@ghasley Thanks, but the credit should really go to Marcus Aurelius 121 AD - 180 AD "If any external thing causes you distress, it is not the thing itself that troubles you, but your own judgement about it. And this you have the power to eliminate now" GO OILERS ! |
@bigtwin +1 |
All of what bigtwin says is true, but what about the younger or newer hobbyists that may be swayed by Amir and ASR? Someone needs to disagree for the record. I am sure many of these Agon members would visit ASR and voice their opinions but it seems they will get banned. I for one applaud Agon for not banning Amir. I think this entire thread does him no credit. Plus I think it is his right. |
Amir would argue with a rock. This entire thread has proven nothing. NOTHING. Except, as we all expected, ASR listens only to measurements and not the equipment being measured. That, and Amir's ego is the size of Mt Everest. Maybe if everyone just ignored him, he'd stay in his cage over at ASR where they can argue that their $200 dongle DAC sounds just as good as a Holo May KTE, pat each other on the back and pretty much be satisfied lying to themselves. After all, if the rest of their system is complete sh!t, it probably would sound about the same, and how could they know any better? Kind of sad, but ignorance is bliss.
|
| Post removed |
Is that why MikeL and the two people with him couldn't tell his MIT Oracle cable from Monster in blind testing? Granted, half a million dollars is not a lot of money to spend on an audio system. How much should he have spent to hear that difference with ears alone??? |
Hey! Not all sh!t smells bad. Here is the scent of my speakers: "The Salon2 demonstrated jaw-dropping dynamics in my listening room. I heard no grain or compression until the amplifier ran out of steam. The Salon2 played synthesizer and bass-drum crescendos so well that I kept cranking up the volume.....The Ultima Salon2 remained in complete control, falling silent after each percussion note. Cymbals sounded startlingly clear, utterly transparent, and sweet....The Salon2s had a spatial precision that I normally associate only with my Quad ESL-989 electrostatic speakers. Nor was the Revel's ability to deliver large, even amounts of sonic power into my listening room done at the expense of the most subtle musical details. the Revel Ultima Salon2 is the best-performing, most natural-sounding full-range loudspeaker I have auditioned in my listening room since I started writing for Stereophile in 1984. ..... The Revel design team has smoothed the Salon1's upper midrange while retaining that award-winning speaker's powerful bass extension, timbral accuracy, and superb dynamics. The result is an open and transparent top end, an utterly neutral and grain-free midrange, and bass that is extended and pitch-perfect. The Ultima Salon2 does all this while sounding completely neutral, with top-to-bottom smoothness, coherence, and remarkable resolution of detail." "Conclusion No loudspeaker is perfect, but Revel’s Ultima Salon2 is the closest I’ve found. Its bass and high-frequency performance are beyond reproach, and its midrange deserves high praise for its neutrality, transparency, and speed. Some might wish for a little more of the midrange richness of, say, the Magico V2, but this would be more about desiring a certain type of sound rather than indicating any deficiency in the Salon2. From top to bottom, The Salon2 is an ultraprecise, remarkably refined, full-range transducer that delivers nothing short of state-of-the-art sound while making fewer compromises than any other speaker I’ve heard." I am quoting sources that are in your camp. Do tell: what is "sh!t" about my speakers? |
| Post removed |
@ricevs - Something I found interesting is that I actually tried a SMSL SU-9 PRO, Topping D90 III and VMW (SMSL) D2se2. They measure very, very similarly in Amir's tests. You'd think they sound exactly alike, right? Not a chance... The SU-9 PRO has a very sharp edge (to the point I got a headache when first listening) and odd oscillation around instruments and some vocals, which made some parts of the soundstage fuzzy. The best measuring DAC, the Topping D90 III, was absolute poo. High frequencies on the D90 III sounded blunted which made everything sound flat and dull. The VWV is actually a decent DAC and I'd personally recommend it as a solid budget choice, but would never know it's the best choice based on Amir's testing alone. Another thing I found interesting is the ASR recommended PCM filter is Linear Fast. If you go on ASR or elsewhere, people will blindly recommend this setting, simply because of Amir's reviews. I found two things through my own testing... First, I was getting a speaker pop from the DAC cutting off highs when leaving the DAC on 0.0 dB, so I had to turn down the volume before turning off the volume setting. Second, Filter Off actually sounds best to me in my system, despite this being the setting that's not recommend. I did order a Laiv for fun, which is arriving this week. Hard to say without seeing schematics, but the PCBs seem to be designed very similarly to MSB's entry-level DAC with shorter R2R ladders. I wouldn't be surprised if that was its 'inspiration' and we eventually get a comparison saying the Laiv sounds very similar to a MSB Discrete (with 1 power supply and stock USB input). |
@amir_asr - Which Monster cable and were the cable gauges similar? Bruce Brisson was Monster's cable designer prior to starting MIT, so that's not surprising. I have Monster's M2.4 cable and the M2 series is a fantastic used bargain and still a solid cable. Cable designers definitely overuse the trick where their budget side is a higher gauge and gets thicker as you spend significantly more. |
Oops. I misspoke. It was the Transparent OPUS cable ($46000), not MIT. Here is the link. "And to cut to the chase, Mike could not identify the Monster from the Opus MM with any accuracy (nor the reverse, which also would have been a positive result if he had been consistently wrong) using our testing methodology. We stopped the test a little less than halfway through, I think we got through 8 A/Bs before we gave up." And there were four total listeners, not three.
|
I love it, since the philistines at ASR overmoderate their site they now come over here spewing their vitriol. Hey, it probably sends more traffic over there. It’s all about the hits and Benjamins. Nothing like spending 100K on a Klippel and listening to our rich recorded heritage on a $200 DAC. These folks have their priorities just right. |
Might be where you come from but ASR has no advertising, sponsorships, or any commercial relationships with any company. My youtube channel likewise has no ads despite having nearly 50K subscribers and fully qualifying for such. So I don’t make a penny whether you go there or not. This forum has advertising so we are all helping defray the cost of running it by our posts here. |
Notice not one word about the sound of Mike's system, just that he couldnt tell the difference in cables. Plus this is just one enthusiast who may have been able to tell the difference if he werent in an adverse situation in which he knew he was being tested. Notice he (that guy) keeps mentioning JA from Stereophile but doesnt mention that JA isnt a fan of double blinds. "Using our testing methodology". HMMMM. For the record I have never been a fan of Transparent cables. If memory serves the big deal has something to do with reducing or eliminating the vibration of the conductor or was this MIT? Anything but transparent with the less expensive cables from my experience. So not what I would pick as a viable representative of higher priced cables. Although I have never had a speaker cable in any of my systems over $ 10K.
|
You have Amir posting one Double blind test that went "his way" and somehow that justifies his point of view. On the other hand, you have maybe a hundred people around the world that are A/Bing cables right this very minute and find they are different.....let alone the thousands and thousands of posts all over the net. But, they are not following Amir’s listening test rules so all their observed and heard findings are null and void.....Basically, they have all fooled themselves in thinking they hear differences......so he is calling them all fools. So, who is the fool here? The one who makes up stuff that cannot be proved and does no listening tests? Or the 200,000 people around the world that do listening tests and hear differences? I hope you all use your ears to decide and not your ego mind. You cannot KNOW what something sounds like without LISTENING. Just like you cannot know what something looks like without looking.....tasting, smelling, touching, etc. This is not a mind game.....this is direct knowledge....to know something with our senses is the highest science....the highest. Praise be to our senses. We can trust what we hear......we can. |
Sounds like you haven't elevated from mid-fi systems. From my show report of Pacific Audio Fest, the Børresen room had the Ansuz D-TC Gold signature which costs $108K.
The whole system sounded poor because as you see, no cable lifters were used. Electrons were looping needlessly and escaping onto the floor, the rack, etc. This muddied all the detail as there were no micro-dynamics to speak of. Soundstage was poor as well due to crosstalk between those cables. |
How 'bout this from a guy who uses measurements as an aid and not a template? He even uses a Doge tube amp for crying out loud and just listen to the sound he gets. The measurements bear out what his instincts tell him and not the other way 'round. The first part deals with his thoughts about his system followed by various music samples. You can skim the music if you like and start at 21:09 for his measurements and a look into his system.
All the best, |
For someone who claims to have 2,000,000 visitors a month to ASR, Amir seems to have a lot of time and energy to devote to repeated postings in this thread on Audiogon. Somehow it does not add up, but he keeps coming back and arguing every point. He is always right, and always has the last word until somebody else tries to. It reminds me of the Eveready Bunny on Duracell batteries that just won't stop. |
For example, AVSforum hits close to 8 million some months and threw the feral ASR minion manager out on the road (banned his hiney into oblivion). Agon hits around 1.5 million some months. no big deal... |
Regarding the Borreson Room at PAF 2023: From Amir’s post above which I take as a mixture of sarcasm, but maybe it's not "The whole system sounded poor because as you see, no cable lifters were used. Electrons were looping needlessly and escaping onto the floor, the rack, etc. This muddied all the detail as there were no micro-dynamics to speak of. Soundstage was poor as well due to crosstalk between those cables." From his link to his review on the sound of 2 different tracks "Boomy and tuby. But large presentation." "Central vocal image nice; bass still sounded wrong." The following don’t specify tracks just provide overall impressions Positive Feedback: "A remarkable sounding room featuring Ansuz, Aavik, Borresen, and Axxess. Crazy good." Part Time Audiophile: "Børresen M6 were playing music in a HUGE way. In comparison to the M3s, the M6s walked up to the rear wall of the exhibit room and kicked it over like it was a backdrop in a movie... to call the Børresen M6s a Friday highlight of the show is a massive understatement." Archimago’s Musings : "No need to beat around the bush with this one. The Børresen M6 speaker with accompanying Aavik gear, all part of Audio Group Denmark, was a joy to listen to for this high-fidelity-loving audiophile Enjoy the Music: "To say it sounded amazing would be an understatement.... the sonics were jaw-dropping, with the music emanating from the darkest, densest, quietest background you can imagine. Speed and impact were world-class, and it offered an unworldly degree of resolution, supporting its exquisite transparency."
|
That should have been a warning to you. You always want to know what track was being listened to so that you can see if there are issues in the music itself. This system costs almost $2,000,000. Folks who have only heard $10K speaker cords in their systems are liable to be impressed just by the cost and scale of the system. Those of us used to listening to such expensive systems can easily put that aside and provide 1000% reliable listening test results. To wit, let's bring in Jason Serinus of stereophile into the ring. "It's rare that I encourage people to take my show reports with a grain of salt, but in this case, a dip in the Great Salt Lake, imperiled as it may be, seems in order. The reason is simple. Because the pair of M6s on display had just arrived from Denmark via the Chicago area—this huge speaker requires up to 500 hours of break-in before it sounds its best—they only had 100–150 hours on them. Having already discovered how some of the hotel's huge rooms tended to overemphasize the lower midrange and upper bass, I have no idea if the over-emphasis and extra resonance I heard in that region reflected the speaker's true character, the speaker's character in the early stages of break-in, room interactions, or a combination of all three. (I expect the latter.) But beyond that, the soundstage was huge, depth was impressive, and low bass lines were as fleshed out as can be." Pretty good match for my assessment and he did it without noticing lack of cable lifters!!! In the comments, he says this: "As Robert says, it's a damn show report. If you only want to read censored news, news that's in accord with your preferences, or reviews that are bought by audio companies, your choices are plentiful."
|
Ah, you made me look: Looks like you didn’t realize that the 8M visitors for AVSForum is for three months, not one. Using the same 3 month period, ASR Forum is doing 6.4M biting at their heels. Never had such aspiration for growth but it is rewarding to see how much audiophiles are tired of nonsense they read about hi-fi and want sources of reliable data and true explanation of how their systems work and can be improved. |
Could we apply the same to someone who doesn't know how to click on the image and see it in full size and proper orientation? And with it learn that this forum software is ignoring the metadata that tells it the orientation of the image? |
""As Robert says, it’s a damn show report. If you only want to read censored news, news that’s in accord with your preferences, or reviews that are bought by audio companies, your choices are plentiful." So are you implying that the 4 other reviewers were bought because they didn’t specifically opine on the bass? The rest of Jason’s comments seem inline with their overall take. "But beyond that, the soundstage was huge, depth was impressive, and low bass lines were as fleshed out as can be." Also, it’s a bit curious that you align yourself with Jason since he attributed his "concern" about the lower midrange upper bass at least in part to speaker break-in "The reason is simple. Because the pair of M6s on display had just arrived from Denmark via the Chicago area—this huge speaker requires up to 500 hours of break-in before it sounds its best—they only had 100–150 hours on them." This is diametrically opposed to your position on speaker break-in . Per your opening statement on ASR thread - Do Audio Speakers Break In 3/6/2020 "Manufacturers either genuinely believe in the speaker break-in myth, repeating what they have falsely concluded like audiophiles. Or are hoping that if you don’t like the speaker at first, you hang on to it longer to lose the motivation or option to return them later. Either way, there is no reason to listen to them unless they provide objective proof that sound changes with break-in. After all, this is no small difference so surely they can measure and provide proof.... Now that I have saved you a ton of money from myth of speaker burn-in, how about donating some of that to me so I can run more of these tests". It would have seemed that you would have discounted his assessment since they don’t follow your science
|
I do. That's why I highlighted the part that said "it is a damn show report." Anyone who takes these seriously doesn't know which end is up. And that applies to my show reports as well. But at least with mine, you learn what music was played and discover new music to enjoy. This is one of the reasons I go to audio shows. And the other is to meet key people in these companies and have in-depth discussions with them. The other take away is that subjectivism leads to you many answers to the same question. They can't all possibly be true. Jason thought there were issues with the fidelity as did I. You quoted three others that said there was nothing wrong. What possible value is there in such "listening?" And why do you keep asking me to "listen" when at first chance, you dismiss my listening tests as not valid? |
I didn’t say that your listening wasn’t valid, I provided others overall assessments . Just because you don’t agree with how they provided their reports doesn’t make their comments invalid. And, yes Jason did state concerns about their fidelity, I noted that; likewise his overall assessment tends to be inline with the others but go ahead and ignore that. Maybe you should reach out to him about his apparent ignorance on speaker break-in eh
|
@facten "Why would you do that?". Challenging the Enlightened, unacceptable! This whole picture of ASR is freaking unbelievable.
|
Amir only wants to answer what he wants to answer. He will defer and ignore anything else and post a bunch of graphs and babble. I perused his site a bit and in one blurb about listening to a Dac on his headphones he marveled at the amazing dynamics! However here he says dynamics don’t exist and ignores the request to answer how that is measured. Nope sorry said dynamics are how loud it can play… musta been blaring his ears out I guess.. Hmm. |
| Post removed |
Naturally. There is one of me and many posting audiophile nonsense.
Nope. I answered you with text. That there is no such thing as fast or slow bass, microdynamics, etc. I said that these are made up terms so naturally there is no measurement that matches them. It is like saying some speaker sounds like a Donkey and asking me for a measurement for that!
Yes and I explained to you that this term is short hand for dynamic range and how deep the bass goes. You disagreed and demanded to know if "Cornwall has better Macro dynamics than a Harbeth ." I post if anyone agrees with you and no one did. So you need to argue with the folks here, not me. I have addressed your question and there is nothing else I can tell you.
|
Sure looked like you were posting the three other reports to do exactly that.
Then you must also agree with this from Jason: "Having already discovered how some of the hotel's huge rooms tended to overemphasize the lower midrange and upper bass, I have no idea if the over-emphasis and extra resonance I heard in that region reflected the speaker's true character, the speaker's character in the early stages of break-in, room interactions, or a combination of all three. (I expect the latter.) " So he heard extra resonances, and overemphasis of lower midrange and upper bass. Right? The three other show reports posted made zero mention of any faults let alone these. What you quoted from me was this: "Boomy and tuby. But large presentation." "Central vocal image nice; bass still sounded wrong."" Jason said similar thing with "upper bass" having problems. He praised the large presentation which I also mentioned as a positive. By the way, it is a given, per fundamental physics and laws of the Universe that the bass in that room is wrong. It has to do due to wave superposition. All rooms have bass modes ("resonances" as Jason may be saying) that must be corrected. This requires parametric equalization. Without it, it is only a matter of what music you play (that hits on room modes), where you are listening, and your hearing acuity to detect this problem. Above applies to any system regardless of cost. You could have a $10M speaker system and it will still produce the wrong bass because that is a property of the room, not the speaker. Those of you who are spending thousands on speaker wire but don't use DSP, have completely missed the boat on what it takes to have a high-fidelity system. For $100 you could measure your room and apply the correction to get good sound. Instead, you are admiring the cost of your system, not its true fidelity. |
This is trivially explained through measurements. See this measurement form my VMV D1se2 Stereo DAC Review:
When you set the filter to "off," the output level jumps up by some 4 dB. This easily results in better perceived detail, air, etc. This is why it is critical to match levels in such listening test comparisons. Failing that, you want to pay attention to measurements as it not only tells you about higher volume, it also shows that "off" starts to cut off the output starting from just 5 kHz. There is a whopping 4.5 dB droop by the time you get to 20 kHz! If you had matched levels, you would have hopefully heard the much attenuated high frequency response. Granted, some confuse this with "less digital" which it is not. |
Automatic EQ systems do that by using a trick that relies on how much headroom your speakers/amp have. You pull the overall level down to the minimum of nulls (within reason). You then use PEQ with negative gain to fix the peaks. Result is flat response (or close to it). Keep in mind that no true null exists in a room due to lossy nature of it. So we are not dealing with an impossible problem. Fortunately you don't need to fix them fully or much. Nulls do not cause ringing in time domain so their sonic impact is much lower than peaks. Fixing 2 to 3 peaks will make a massive difference. |
"
Sure looked like you were posting the three other reports to do exactly that.
Then you must also agree with this from Jason: "Having already discovered how some of the hotel’s huge rooms tended to overemphasize the lower midrange and upper bass, I have no idea if the over-emphasis and extra resonance I heard in that region reflected the speaker’s true character, the speaker’s character in the early stages of break-in, room interactions, or a combination of all three. (I expect the latter.) " So he heard extra resonances, and overemphasis of lower midrange and upper bass. Right? The three other show reports posted made zero mention of any faults let alone these. What you quoted from me was this: "Boomy and tuby. But large presentation." "Central vocal image nice; bass still sounded wrong."" Jason said similar thing with "upper bass" having problems. He praised the large presentation which I also mentioned as a positive."
You seem to have this view that yours is the only word in audio, posting others comments to give balance is something you apparently can’t tolerate. Oh well! Relative to Jason’s comments I didn’t state that he wasn’t in agreement with you, I did question your letting slide his comments about speaker break-in being a possible cause since you so adamantly say it doesn’t exist. But hey, as you noted in one of your posts they are just dammed show reports and shouldn’t be taken seriously, including yours. Given that, maybe you shouldn’t use yours to try to prove a point. Anyway, I’m done. Listening to music via a tube integrated, sounds damm good!
|