Do Speakers That Measure Great Always Sound Great

[Jeff Fritz]

I spend too much time on the internet (ask my wife...) and I can't recall having ever seen that particular point made.

P

I have seen that point made before. I think you have to define "measures badly." If we're talking about an amplifier with higher distortion figures than a competing design, then most experienced listeners know that a figure can be meaningless in that context. If, on the other hand, we're talking about loudspeakers that have huge suck-outs at the crossover frequencies because the designer doesn't know what he's doing, then I can flatly state that I wouldn't buy it based on those measurements. So, it depends . . .

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

It was a familiar mantra at several other fora. Perhaps you don't hang out there

I must not. I can certainly understand paying close attention to measurements, particularly independent ones when they're available in this age of internet shopping, but refusing to even listen to it seems foolish. I've ordered in gear that was highly reviewed but didn't measure great. Some of it was disappointing and went back. Some of it sounded pretty good.

If, on the other hand, we're talking about loudspeakers that have huge suck-outs at the crossover frequencies because the designer doesn't know what he's doing, then I can flatly state that I wouldn't buy it based on those measurements. So, it depends . . .

I'd also tend to avoid speakers with a marked mid-bass hump. This is very common and I know what it sounds like and don't care for it. In general, though, I think it's much harder to read measurements and guess at what it will sound like with loudspeakers than it is with electronics.

P

 

[Steve Williams]

FWIW I got into several heated debates at this other forum who would constantly argue that all of his decisions were based only on the mfrs spec sheet and if it didn't measure good there was no need to waste his time

 

[Ron Party]

IMO one is setting oneself up for a fall by relying on manufacturer specs as the sole basis of one's willingness to audition, particularly since manufacturer specs are (almost) never reliable (to state nothing of the facts that manufacturer specs either may not be available or are horribly incomplete). PP has a great point about specs being independently established/confirmed, particularly when those independent specs are derived by one who has a repeated track record of objectivity. For example, Jeff Fritz's gang's measurements of loudspeaker performance is deserving of praise.

 

[Jeff Fritz]

FWIW I got into several heated debates at this other forum who would constantly argue that all of his decisions were based only on the mfrs spec sheet and if it didn't measure good there was no need to waste his time

Well that's pretty misguided, too, on their part. There is an ocean-wide difference between a component that may not measure stellar in a particular area because of a knowing decision made by the engineer versus an incompetently designed component. Measurements certainly can't tell you exactly how a component sounds -- that's why we have reviewers -- but sometimes they can tell you if the product is engineered or just thrown together by someone looking to make a buck that has no idea what they're doing. I can't imagine the position I've offered is controversial . . . Steve?

 

[RBFC]

What happens when that terrible-measuring speaker with the awful mid-bass hump is placed in a room with a suckout at the same frequencies?

Lee

 

[Gregadd]

Often what we refer to as synergy involves in fact technical compatibility. If we knew more about measurements we could avoid toxic mismatches and get the most out of our system

 

[MylesBAstor]

What happens when that terrible-measuring speaker with the awful mid-bass hump is placed in a room with a suckout at the same frequencies?

Lee

There you go again Lee. Stirring up trouble

 

[Jeff Fritz]

What happens when that terrible-measuring speaker with the awful mid-bass hump is placed in a room with a suckout at the same frequencies?

Lee

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I'll answer anyway: a midbass bump can be a very careful design choice. Many, many bookshelf speakers bump the midbass to give the impression of deeper bass -- and that can sound quite good! So, to answer: it might work out fine.

But some products just weren't designed properly: http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/talon_khorus/

Knowing that would rule them out for me. Again, measurements and listening, folks, not either/or.

 

[FrantzM]

Often what we refer to as synergy involves in fact technical compatibility. If we knew more about measurements we could avoid toxic mismatches and get the most out of our system

I agree entirely with Gregadd ...

 

[RBFC]

What happens when that terrible-measuring speaker with the awful mid-bass hump is placed in a room with a suckout at the same frequencies?

Lee

The reviewer then states that the speaker exhibits excellent linearity and no apparent bass anomalies. Then, another individual finds the opposite. Not really trying to stir trouble, actually supporting Gregadd's and Frantz's assertions that technical measurements are necessary to get a "preview" of what you will get in your own room.

Lee

 

[Gregadd]

One of the things I would like to see as mandatory is distortion figures for speakers. Not just because they are so good for electrostatic speakers. The only way they will get better if consumers start making purchase decision based on that figure. I know the potential or mischief. We saw that with amplifiers. Eventually the negative feedback trick was exposed. We now take low distortion and low global negative feed back for granted.


I know. We will make an exception for Steves' LAMM. They do have adjustable feedback.

 

[Steve Williams]

Thanks for the kudos

BTW, I have arranged for Peter Breuninger a reviewer at TAS to do a review on the ML3's. I am also trying to get him to join here

 

[jimtavegia]

I generally ignore the anechoic responses and head right for the reviewer's in-room measurements. My stereo is not set up in my drive way and the room always matters. I know ours are not the same, but still, it is a real world experience and measurement.

If I am interested in the speaker I can then assess my room to see if duplicating those positions the reviewer tried and see if it will be a problem for me.

 

[Albertporter]

Specifications do not tell all

If specifications tell all, will amplifier A or amplifier B perform better on a 4 ohm speaker?

Amplifier A
Two channel @ 40 WPC at 4 Ohms.
Response 20 Hz to 20 KHz @ less than 1% THD.
Signal to noise greater than 94 DB
Damping factor >400 @ 4 Ohm


Amplifier B
Two channel @ 32 WPC at 4 Ohms.
Response 20 Hz to 20 KHz @ less than 5% THD.
Signal to noise greater than 86 DB
Damping factor 2.58 @ 4 Ohms

 

[Albertporter]

If specifications tell all, will amplifier A or amplifier B perform better on a 4 ohm speaker?

Amplifier A
Two channel @ 40 WPC at 4 Ohms.
Response 20 Hz to 20 KHz @ less than 1% THD.
Signal to noise greater than 94 DB
Damping factor >400 @ 4 Ohm


Amplifier B
Two channel @ 32 WPC at 4 Ohms.
Response 20 Hz to 20 KHz @ less than 5% THD.
Signal to noise greater than 86 DB
Damping factor 2.58 @ 4 Ohms

Too obvious for you guys to be baited

Amplifier A is a class AB Kenwood for cars, about $99.00.

Amplifier B is tube Lamm, about $13K

Bet the Kenwood sounds better since the specifications are so superior.

Point is, specifications are only a tiny piece of the puzzle. Shopping for great sound requires experiences and common sense as well as long term listening.

 

[Steve Williams]

I dont know of any Lamm amp for $13K with those specs. Are you referring to the ML3? If so the MSRP is way off

 

[DWR]

Excellent point Albert!

 

[MylesBAstor]

Too obvious for you guys to be baited

Amplifier A is a class AB Kenwood for cars, about $99.00.

Amplifier B is tube Lamm, about $13K

Bet the Kenwood sounds better since the specifications are so superior.

Point is, specifications are only a tiny piece of the puzzle. Shopping for great sound requires experiences and common sense as well as long term listening.

The Lamm might have a rough time with potholes, at least in NYC

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

Let's try to understand that this set of measurements can't tell us the whole story... One can try to pluck all these examples.. They won't tell the story, that is well established... THD, Power Ratings, FR tell some somple aspects of the story ... Far from it all

It has been proven in numerous studies that these don't even correlate well with what we hear...
That's still doesn't mean that measurements are worthless.. We need to develop new measurements that correlate better with our impressions. One person (I am not saying the only) person who's on this path is our very own Earl Geddes and his wife. In paper presented to the reviled AES he showed that many people will take 30% THD without noticing that.. and that THD wasn't the most important parameter ( I am grossly oversimplifying but hey ... you get the gist) not 3% ... 30% and up ... I have often wondered if that would not explain why SET play music the way they do ...

Yet it seems that some manufacturers are on to something... Several of the best speakers currently on the market also measures very well ... Magico, Rockport and Revel among many ...

For a speaker Directivity is an issue , a serious one... What we hear is what the speakers emits on axis but also off, toward the room which reflects it back to our ears ... That needs to be better measured. The correlation between speakers with controlled direcitivty tend to behave rather well in room .... Our knowledge is advancing. We need to open our mind to both measurements and observations ... Measurements do tell a story, so do our observations.. Correlating the two should be IMO the next step.