advertisement


Harbeth Monitor 30 Speaker measured by Amir of ASR

The truth of the matter is that DAC measurements are pretty straightforward, unlike speaker measurements.

So whilst I find the former useful, if ignore his comments and silly star-ratings, the latter show blatant mistakes which render them useless (i.e. optimal axis, CSD)
 
Besides, as has been noted in the discussion, there are different schools of design amongst the most recognised speaker designers; Toole's word is not law.

Amir's approach to speakers is biased, his knowledge limited and his measuring methodology flawed.
 
Good god, in some ways those two ASR reviews might be the epitome of 'all the gear, no idea.'

It's the developed sense of interpretation-in-context that is utterly lacking.Not for the first time.
If I want to read about speakers, think I'll stick to JA's measurements and experienced views for now.
 
wut? they ask how much, and they don't really know or understand how their products perform already...?

(Though to be fair, in such a rarified atmosphere/ market, its def not just Magico spinning a yarn on what they offer)

tl;dr: that's not quite the positive endorsement of that end of the market you suggest it is, Keith.
 
Yank said:
Floyd Toole is one person...
Click to expand...

Indeed. Half-Floyd, half-Toole.

By the way, have you seen TF's roo?
It' interesting to observe the lack of side-wall symmetry and the ceiling tilting sideways, this from a man who preaches wide dispersion. And the listening spot shoved way back against the wall.

NDZx2HW.jpg
 
From the AS review:

“We show a dip post our peak in low frequency but they don't. The reason is that they are using gated measurements to eliminate echos and that hugely reduces resolution in a few hundred hertz (to one or two data points).”

(‘They’ being Stereophile).

Why on earth would anyone be interested in the sound of his or John Atkinson’s room? I’ve only skimmed the review, but that seems a massive flaw to my eyes similar to Keith’s +/- 15-20db or whatever ‘measurements’ of various speakers which have little value beyond assessing the impact his room and setup has on the sound he hears. To my mind, unless the intent is to assess a speaker in *your* room (which is how I use them and I’d never argue my measurements of my Tannoys, 149s etc were anything other than that), measurements in anything other than an anechoic chamber is of very limited use. John Atkinson, who’s measurements I respect a lot, obviously uses gating to try and take his room out of what is intended as a more general and useful measurement.

Still interesting and to be encouraged, but I’m far more interested in the impedance/phase plots than the room measurements. Those are actually of use to me!
 
tuga said:
We already have Stereophile and Soundstage and AVHub and a few other British and German and French magazines making competent measurements.

Do we really need Amir's incompetent ones?
Click to expand...

Yes because these are in a forum and not a commercial magazine and so things can develop differently. Speaker reviews are currently fairly poor and lack detailed help in answering how well suited a speaker might be for a particular room and particular preferences. To answer this reliably one needs to provide more information about off-axis performance and to process it for room interaction. Despite it's clear shortcomings this review is already more useful than the equivalent stereophile review for some of us because there is more readable information about off-axis performance and a smidgen of room interaction considered. This has little to do with Amir and more that the Klippel system is designed to provide engineering information about speakers rather than content to help sell advertising space for magazines.

Whatever his shortcomings Amir will almost certainly learn to use the Klippel system more effectively and is likely to improve the content and format of the information presented. There is a small chance the latter won't happen but I think it is small because ASR has improved with time. Not much and way short of what those with a technical/scientific interest would have liked but it is pushing back against audiophile nonsense which still swamps most of home audio.
 
tuga said:
Besides, as has been noted in the discussion, there are different schools of design amongst the most recognised speaker designers; Toole's word is not law.
Click to expand...

Toole is almost wholly scientific evidence based which he cites (at least in his book) hence most of the words are not his but others. His focus is fairly narrow and he rarely takes much of an interest in the engineering of speakers treating them more as black boxes. If you require an authority he is not a bad one to pick.

Commercially successful home audio speakers need to consider a wide range of other factors apart from technical performance. These factors often result in a house style that is an evolution of what went before. This doesn't mean there is disagreement about the technical performance of speakers but more that objectives are different.

tuga said:
Amir's approach to speakers is biased, his knowledge limited and his measuring methodology flawed.
Click to expand...

I am afraid this is the case for everyone else as well to varying extents. Perhaps the most relevant question is that given his flaws how useful are the reviews and how are they likely to evolve? I think they are reasonable by existing standards and likely to improve. Mind you I stopped looking at ASR a year or two back with Amir being the main reason given it is his blog and I haven't returned much beyond the link in the OP. So what do I know?
 
Still a useful resource, Stereophile is obviously US focused and misses a lot of European models.
Hifi World covers UK and some European models.
I agree with Tony that impedance is very important (and dead easy to measure)
 
Tony L said:
From the AS review:

“We show a dip post our peak in low frequency but they don't. The reason is that they are using gated measurements to eliminate echos and that hugely reduces resolution in a few hundred hertz (to one or two data points).”

(‘They’ being Stereophile).

Why on earth would anyone be interested in the sound of his or John Atkinson’s room? I’ve only skimmed the review, but that seems a massive flaw to my eyes similar to Keith’s +/- 15-20db or whatever ‘measurements’ of various speakers which have little value beyond assessing the impact his room and setup has on the sound he hears. To my mind, unless the intent is to assess a speaker in *your* room (which is how I use them and I’d never argue my measurements of my Tannoys, 149s etc were anything other than that), measurements in anything other than an anechoic chamber is of very limited use. John Atkinson, who’s measurements I respect a lot, obviously uses gating to try and take his room out of what is intended as a more general and useful measurement.

Still interesting and to be encouraged, but I’m far more interested in the impedance/phase plots than the room measurements. Those are actually of use to me!
Click to expand...

A room measurement is useful because it provides information regarding the speaker response in that particular room. Things like floor-bounce and other boundary interference don't show in an anechoic measurement. Ideally this would be accompanied by a description of the room's dimensions and acoustic characteristics; the more room measurements for a particular speaker the better.
It is useful to compare anechoic and in-room response measurements.

Speaker measurements are useful for buyers because they allow one to antecipate speaker behaviour. I use them for shortlisting and for tracking down potential causes of problems that I have identified in a listening assessment.


Regarding Toole's room, it is contradictory fo a designer to defend wide dispersion and then place the speakers in a room that is far from symmetrical which would obviously benefit from the use of narrow dispersion speakers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top