Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
What's the deal?
Unbeknownst to me my wife subscribed me to Stereophile and I got my first
issue yesterday. What I can't figure out is how can so many of their reviews of speakers, praise so many speakers that have sizeable bass humps. Case in point, the Sonus Faber Stradivari Homage. According to SP's measurements there is considerable elevation in the bass response beginning at about 300 Hz and continuing until it falls back to the reference at about 30 Hz. Are the speakers not measured in the room that the reviewer has them set up in? Are their measurements done badly? Or do their reviewers just like over accentuated bass response. Clearly there are speakers they have reviewed that are much flatter, if not as pretty, such as the Merlin VSM, or the Hales Revelation 3, both of which also received favorable reviews. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On 2005-01-19 19:53:43 -0500, "Michael McKelvy" said:
Unbeknownst to me my wife subscribed me to Stereophile and I got my first issue yesterday. What I can't figure out is how can so many of their reviews of speakers, praise so many speakers that have sizeable bass humps. Case in point, the Sonus Faber Stradivari Homage. According to SP's measurements there is considerable elevation in the bass response beginning at about 300 Hz and continuing until it falls back to the reference at about 30 Hz. While it is possible and likely that the speakers are in a room that is emphsizing the bass (room modes) in that frequency range, it is also possible that the speaker vendor pumped up the bass to make it "sound better." I hope that it is an improper acoustics problem, myself. Are the speakers not measured in the room that the reviewer has them set up in? Very possible - and likely. Especially if *every* speaker has the same "problem." Are their measurements done badly? If the room modes are not accounted for or mentioned - the analysis isn't quite up to snuff, even if the measurements are performed correctly physically. Or do their reviewers just like over accentuated bass response. Possible Clearly there are speakers they have reviewed that are much flatter, if not as pretty, such as the Merlin VSM, or the Hales Revelation 3, both of which also received favorable reviews. Thiel has a ruler flat response from the LF cutoff to about 20-22kHz. I don't recall a review in 'phile - but I suspect that if that same reviewer reviewed them, you might just see that hump! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Michael McKelvy wrote:
Are the speakers not measured in the room that the reviewer has them set up in? It is my understanding that yes, that is precisely the case. They're generally not even measured by the same person who writes the review. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Michael McKelvy wrote:
Unbeknownst to me my wife subscribed me to Stereophile and I got my first issue yesterday. What I can't figure out is how can so many of their reviews of speakers, praise so many speakers that have sizeable bass humps. Case in point, the Sonus Faber Stradivari Homage. According to SP's measurements there is considerable elevation in the bass response beginning at about 300 Hz and continuing until it falls back to the reference at about 30 Hz. Are the speakers not measured in the room that the reviewer has them set up in? Not as I understand it. Review and measurements are done by different people in different places. Are their measurements done badly? No. They're the best thing in the magazine. Or do their reviewers just like over accentuated bass response. Reviewers tend to like everything, as long as it shows up free in their living room. Clearly there are speakers they have reviewed that are much flatter, if not as pretty, such as the Merlin VSM, or the Hales Revelation 3, both of which also received favorable reviews. A while ago, somebody posted a link to research by Sean Olive on training subjects for listening panels. It takes a lot of work to learn how to recognize frequency response anomalies, and even with training a lot of people aren't very good at it. I'd bet money there isn't a single reviewer at Stereophile (or any other audio magazine, for that matter) with that kind of training. People think you can just go to lots of concerts and listen to lots of systems, and that makes you an expert. Far from it. But reviewers have to feign this expertise (and probably kid themselves in the process) because their readers demand it. And readers demand it because they want to believe that they have this ability too, or at least are in the process of developing it. bob |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Stereophile" has mentioned this often in articles and people have
frequently raised this point in letters. The bottom line is that "Stereophile" reviewers (and others) frequently give rave reviews to speakers that aren't especially accurate. I think they keep the measurements in the articles as a data point. Another report that is very interesting is the rating that "Consumer Reports" does. "Consumer Reports" rates mid and low price speakers strictly by accuracy. Last year, I had just gone around to several shops and had listened to many of the speakers they tested. My preferences were almost exactly opposite their ratings. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"~~~~~~~~~~~~" wrote in message
... On 2005-01-19 19:53:43 -0500, "Michael McKelvy" said: Unbeknownst to me my wife subscribed me to Stereophile and I got my first issue yesterday. What I can't figure out is how can so many of their reviews of speakers, praise so many speakers that have sizeable bass humps. Case in point, the Sonus Faber Stradivari Homage. According to SP's measurements there is considerable elevation in the bass response beginning at about 300 Hz and continuing until it falls back to the reference at about 30 Hz. While it is possible and likely that the speakers are in a room that is emphsizing the bass (room modes) in that frequency range, it is also possible that the speaker vendor pumped up the bass to make it "sound better." I hope that it is an improper acoustics problem, myself. Are the speakers not measured in the room that the reviewer has them set up in? Very possible - and likely. Especially if *every* speaker has the same "problem." It's not every speaker, but many of the ones I checked both in the mag and on their archives. Ther are some like the Dynaudio Evidence Temptaion and the Merlin VSM, as well the Hales Revelation 3.8 that are pretty flat and trhey also get good reviews. It's the lack of consistency that I find odd. Are their measurements done badly? If the room modes are not accounted for or mentioned - the analysis isn't quite up to snuff, even if the measurements are performed correctly physically. Or do their reviewers just like over accentuated bass response. Possible Clearly there are speakers they have reviewed that are much flatter, if not as pretty, such as the Merlin VSM, or the Hales Revelation 3, both of which also received favorable reviews. Thiel has a ruler flat response from the LF cutoff to about 20-22kHz. I don't recall a review in 'phile - but I suspect that if that same reviewer reviewed them, you might just see that hump! I'll have to check. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ...
Michael McKelvy wrote: Unbeknownst to me my wife subscribed me to Stereophile and I got my first issue yesterday. What I can't figure out is how can so many of their reviews of speakers, praise so many speakers that have sizeable bass humps. Case in point, the Sonus Faber Stradivari Homage. According to SP's measurements there is considerable elevation in the bass response beginning at about 300 Hz and continuing until it falls back to the reference at about 30 Hz. Are the speakers not measured in the room that the reviewer has them set up in? Not as I understand it. Review and measurements are done by different people in different places. Are their measurements done badly? No. They're the best thing in the magazine. In the same issue there's an article about doing bass meansurements, the author only learned about ground plane measurements last Spring! Or do their reviewers just like over accentuated bass response. Reviewers tend to like everything, as long as it shows up free in their living room. Clearly there are speakers they have reviewed that are much flatter, if not as pretty, such as the Merlin VSM, or the Hales Revelation 3, both of which also received favorable reviews. A while ago, somebody posted a link to research by Sean Olive on training subjects for listening panels. It takes a lot of work to learn how to recognize frequency response anomalies, and even with training a lot of people aren't very good at it. I've seen reviews of kits in Speaker Builder and it's present incarnation audioXpress where a bass response like those in Stereophile would get the speaker slammed, precisely because it was audible to the reviewer. I'd bet money there isn't a single reviewer at Stereophile (or any other audio magazine, for that matter) with that kind of training. People think you can just go to lots of concerts and listen to lots of systems, and that makes you an expert. Far from it. But reviewers have to feign this expertise (and probably kid themselves in the process) because their readers demand it. And readers demand it because they want to believe that they have this ability too, or at least are in the process of developing it. bob They need better people. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Aldo Pignotti" wrote in message
... "Stereophile" has mentioned this often in articles and people have frequently raised this point in letters. The bottom line is that "Stereophile" reviewers (and others) frequently give rave reviews to speakers that aren't especially accurate. I think they keep the measurements in the articles as a data point. Another report that is very interesting is the rating that "Consumer Reports" does. "Consumer Reports" rates mid and low price speakers strictly by accuracy. Last year, I had just gone around to several shops and had listened to many of the speakers they tested. My preferences were almost exactly opposite their ratings. I don't have any problem with people who don't like strictly accurate speakers, I just don't understand why you would want something that isn't accurate. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Aldo Pignotti wrote:
"Stereophile" has mentioned this often in articles and people have frequently raised this point in letters. The bottom line is that "Stereophile" reviewers (and others) frequently give rave reviews to speakers that aren't especially accurate. I think they keep the measurements in the articles as a data point. Another report that is very interesting is the rating that "Consumer Reports" does. "Consumer Reports" rates mid and low price speakers strictly by accuracy. Last year, I had just gone around to several shops and had listened to many of the speakers they tested. My preferences were almost exactly opposite their ratings. Meanwhile, Floyd Toole et al did years of comparison of speakers with trained listeners, using careful scientific methodology , and found that people tended to prefer the speakers that 'measured' best as well (it's in his white papers at the Harman International website). Of course, what and how you measure matters a lot....consumer reports might not be measuring what Toole did. -- -S If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one, look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Michael McKelvy wrote:
I just don't understand why you would want something that isn't accurate. Personal preference and matching to the music/ recordings they listen to. Since all speakers are far from perfect, There is a LOT of leeway in choosing what is important to each listeners personal taste. I prefer a neutral/accurate sound, but the most neutral speakers around (and there are a 'family' of them) all have flaws/characterisitcs that make them sound different. I don't understand why that is difficult to understand. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ...
Michael McKelvy wrote: I just don't understand why you would want something that isn't accurate. Personal preference and matching to the music/ recordings they listen to. Since all speakers are far from perfect, There is a LOT of leeway in choosing what is important to each listeners personal taste. Agreed. I prefer a neutral/accurate sound, but the most neutral speakers around (and there are a 'family' of them) all have flaws/characterisitcs that make them sound different. Also agreed. I don't understand why that is difficult to understand. I can't get the idea out of my head that it's called Hi-Fi. I understand there are no "perfect" speakers, but IME the ones that always sounded best were the ones that were more accurate. No big bumps in FR, wide, soundstage, and lowest distortion. I also have a nagging suspicion that many of the speakers SP shows with those bass humps are probably being measured improperly. Typical speakers in a typical room would have dips where these are showing bumps. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Michael McKelvy wrote:
I can't get the idea out of my head that it's called Hi-Fi. I understand there are no "perfect" speakers, but IME the ones that always sounded best were the ones that were more accurate. No big bumps in FR, wide, soundstage, and lowest distortion. A long time ago, used to think (hope?) that the public would get educated and that speaker makers would learn to get these midbass peaks and humps out of their systems. Some have, but in general, the public seems to like thump-thump more than ever and manufactuers have catered to it more than ever. The best example is when ever a car passes by where all you hear is thump-thump and no music whatsoever. And as amplifier power has gotten cheaper, they play them louder, causing hearing damage and the cycle gets worse. So, I have concluded that it's mostly hopeless educating and I just do my thing. I also have a nagging suspicion that many of the speakers SP shows with those bass humps are probably being measured improperly. Typical speakers in a typical room would have dips where these are showing bumps. You can't be sure of that without evaluating how each system behaves. I don't think SP has a full size anechoic chamber where one can figure these things out to to the level of exhaustion with current technology. For example, my speakers have wildly differing peaks and humps in the bass when comparing the channels with a Tact RCS. It's the room: To be sure, I flipped the speakers from the channels and it was the same. Others looking for solutions to these problems encounter the same thing. Rooms are big distorters for reproduced music and it is perhaps where the most improvement could be made for any given system. And there is no perfect solution. Listening to headphones is frustrating for different reasons. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ...
Michael McKelvy wrote: I can't get the idea out of my head that it's called Hi-Fi. I understand there are no "perfect" speakers, but IME the ones that always sounded best were the ones that were more accurate. No big bumps in FR, wide, soundstage, and lowest distortion. A long time ago, used to think (hope?) that the public would get educated and that speaker makers would learn to get these midbass peaks and humps out of their systems. Some have, but in general, the public seems to like thump-thump more than ever and manufactuers have catered to it more than ever. The best example is when ever a car passes by where all you hear is thump-thump and no music whatsoever. And as amplifier power has gotten cheaper, they play them louder, causing hearing damage and the cycle gets worse. I have a vision of an entire generation of people that will respond to every question with, Huh? So, I have concluded that it's mostly hopeless educating and I just do my thing. I also have a nagging suspicion that many of the speakers SP shows with those bass humps are probably being measured improperly. Typical speakers in a typical room would have dips where these are showing bumps. You can't be sure of that without evaluating how each system behaves. I probably misspoke on that one. I don't think SP has a full size anechoic chamber where one can figure these things out to to the level of exhaustion with current technology. Which is kind of astounding, since I beleive Madisond does have one, and if I had to guess, I would guess that SP is a more profitable business. For example, my speakers have wildly differing peaks and humps in the bass when comparing the channels with a Tact RCS. It's the room: To be sure, I flipped the speakers from the channels and it was the same. Others looking for solutions to these problems encounter the same thing. Rooms are big distorters for reproduced music and it is perhaps where the most improvement could be made for any given system. And there is no perfect solution. Listening to headphones is frustrating for different reasons. Agreed, still I'd like to see real professionals doing the measurements for SP. The article about the reviewer just discovering ground plane measurements really stunned me. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Sirius Circuit City Deal Over? | Car Audio | |||
Sweetwater's "Sneaky Deal" is even sneakier than you think! | Pro Audio | |||
Sweetwater's "Sneaky Deal" is even sneakier than you think! | Pro Audio | |||
Sweetwater's "Sneaky Deal" is even sneakier than you think! | Pro Audio | |||
frequency of Best Buy free installation deal ? | Car Audio |