Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112
Results 111 to 115 of 115

Thread: Have you heard the new WAMM? Any good?

  1. #111
    Quote Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

    But, if I've learned anything about this hobby, measurements, as important as they are, mean very little when it comes to some buyer's decisions. I had occasion to see the measurements (e.g. impulse, square wave, phase, FR) of some VERY well respected and very expensive speakers (including respected by me) and some of the measurements were just abysmal. I can't explain it but then, who can.
    I think the answer is that we don't know how, or what to measure.
    The only measurements i take notice of are low frequency response and efficiency

  2. #112
    [WBF Founding Member] audioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Near Atlanta, GA but not too near!
    Posts
    2,680
    Quote Originally Posted by infinitely baffled View Post
    I think the answer is that we don't know how, or what to measure.
    The only measurements i take notice of are low frequency response and efficiency
    At least partially true. But we do know that impulse, square wave, phase, and frequency response measurements are meaningful. It is one thing to have an individual driver out of phase with the other drivers. But a REALLY crappy looking square wave, for example, or an individual driver that shows excessive ringing is NOT a good thing. Yet some speakers that demonstrate those specific very negative characteristics are still well thought of and are very popular.

    And I believe some of it is attributed to listener preference. Regardless of how it measures, our preferences drive us in that direction.

    Who knows? Certainly not me.

  3. #113
    Addicted to Best! awsmone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Canberra Australia
    Posts
    963
    Quote Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
    I don't know about any of the Wilson current speakers, but one of the early versions of what was originally called the "Grand Slam" or some such name, had their tweeters wired out of phase on purpose. Easy to see when doing an impulse measurement. The tweeters are "out of phase" on my current speakers (Triad) but they sound terrific. This showed up when I used a polarity tester and checked the individual drivers.

    But, if I've learned anything about this hobby, measurements, as important as they are, mean very little when it comes to some buyer's decisions. I had occasion to see the measurements (e.g. impulse, square wave, phase, FR) of some VERY well respected and very expensive speakers (including respected by me) and some of the measurements were just abysmal. I can't explain it but then, who can.
    Maybe talking at slight cross purposes
    I think we all know some good ‘sounding’ Audio equipment doesn’t measure so well

    But here we have a manufacturer claiming a certain accuracy in their engineering, and asking for a premium for that engineering
    There is a difference between time coherence and time alignment, and drivers can be in reverse phase and time coherent,this has nothing to do about measuring badly, but not time aligned.
    Very few speakers are time aligned.

    What seems most probable is they use a type of crossover where the lobing of the drivers is directly out from the driver
    As a result, to align the lobes, a certain focus point for the listener is required.
    The wilsons I have seen are time coherent, I am yet to see one time aligned, but the latest being discussed here I have not seen measured, it could be?

    Speakers being such large pieces of engineering are subject to engineering compromises, these compromises can often be mitigated to create an excellent sounding speaker like all good engineering

    Because a speaker is the interface between the listener and the Hifi system, and is influenced by the room and the listening position , we need to be careful about what is meant by measuring badly?
    Since some of the way we hear speakers is how they interact with a room, some engineering is involved to achieve an acceptable balance. A case in point is absolutism in measurement reporting of speakers, for instance flatline to 20khz at the listening position will seldom lead to a neutral balance speaker subjectively
    "An audiophile is only done when they go to the great brick and mortar store in the sky"

    [/B]

  4. #114
    Addicted to Best! awsmone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Canberra Australia
    Posts
    963
    Quote Originally Posted by infinitely baffled View Post
    I think the answer is that we don't know how, or what to measure.
    The only measurements i take notice of are low frequency response and efficiency
    I not sure that’s entirely true, there is a lot about the design of a speaker that is known, in terms of how it will be perceived from measurements
    Because speakers are the interface between the system, the room and the listener, who do not hear in a linear fashion, there are engineering concerns which have to be addressed
    The mitigation of these issues, and engineering accuracy versus how a speaker interacts with a room, and the listener is a balancing act.
    Most serious loudspeaker designs are aware of this balancing act.
    To consider they are not aware of the constraints, and areas where measurement absolutism versus perception are not know is to do them a disservice

    The fact that most of the top speaker designer are using engineering precision to push the envelope of reproduction shows they have a good understanding of the issues.
    They are not building endless prototypes but designing on CADs etc, virtual modelling and measuring and then refining in prototypes.
    Speaker design at the highest levels is not a dark art, but there is always some art in the engineering design decisions that are made.
    "An audiophile is only done when they go to the great brick and mortar store in the sky"

    [/B]

  5. #115
    Member lordcloud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by awsmone View Post
    Maybe talking at slight cross purposes
    I think we all know some good ‘sounding’ Audio equipment doesn’t measure so well

    But here we have a manufacturer claiming a certain accuracy in their engineering, and asking for a premium for that engineering
    There is a difference between time coherence and time alignment, and drivers can be in reverse phase and time coherent,this has nothing to do about measuring badly, but not time aligned.
    Very few speakers are time aligned.

    What seems most probable is they use a type of crossover where the lobing of the drivers is directly out from the driver
    As a result, to align the lobes, a certain focus point for the listener is required.
    The wilsons I have seen are time coherent, I am yet to see one time aligned, but the latest being discussed here I have not seen measured, it could be?

    Speakers being such large pieces of engineering are subject to engineering compromises, these compromises can often be mitigated to create an excellent sounding speaker like all good engineering

    Because a speaker is the interface between the listener and the Hifi system, and is influenced by the room and the listening position , we need to be careful about what is meant by measuring badly?
    Since some of the way we hear speakers is how they interact with a room, some engineering is involved to achieve an acceptable balance. A case in point is absolutism in measurement reporting of speakers, for instance flatline to 20khz at the listening position will seldom lead to a neutral balance speaker subjectively
    I'm not sure how a speaker can be considered time coherent, if the signal leaving the speaker, is disjointed in time.

    Many speakers are wired so that the sound from the tweeter hits your ear first. A time coherent speaker would have the sound from the tweeter hit your ear at the same time as the other drivers. Or at least be designed to make the attempt.

    Time alignment of the drivers is one of the ways you obtain time coherency, along with first order crossovers. At least as the signal leaves the speaker. Wilson, as far as I know, doesn't use crossover topology that would allow their speakers to be time coherent. Their drivers don't move in unison.

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112

Similar Threads

  1. New WAMM details
    By Adrian Low in forum Wilson Audio Speaker Forum
    Replies: 368
    Last Post: 02-18-2018, 05:43 AM
  2. WAMM at CES 2015
    By Adrian Low in forum Wilson Audio Speaker Forum
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 01-02-2015, 05:17 PM
  3. The Return of the WAMM?
    By LL21 in forum Wilson Audio Speaker Forum
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 09-03-2014, 12:47 PM
  4. has anybody heard if John Ulrich is in good or otherwise health?
    By hifitommy in forum General Audio Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-10-2013, 04:23 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •