-
The sources for the tapes in the Evolution Acoustics room were all master tapes or "safes" of master tapes. They worked with The Mastering Labs, Mobile Fidelity, Reference Recordings, and the Super Audio Center to get these priceless tapes. The sound they produced was, far and away, better than anything else. I simply cannot understand how anyone could fail to appreciate the beauty and clarity of that sound. Unfortunately, unless you get access to master tapes, you cannot buy that sound.
All this stresses the importance of the source of various musical systems. For me, master tapes, or close copies, come first in fidelity, followed by vinyl, followed by CDs.
I was totally surprised by the realistic sound in the Audio Note room using only CDs. I usually fled any CD based system within a few minutes, enough time to know I hated the sound. To my delight, the Audio Note, driven by all tube (?) CD players (either the $5,500 CD3.1/Il or the $9,500 CD4.1) sounded anything but bright and hard. I stayed for hours each day listening to the beauty coming from this system, driven by the 27 watt
Jinro integrated amp. No, the speakers could not be positioned correctly (air conditioner). Yes, the room was far too small. Yet the sounds were wonderful and realistic on the type of music I usually play at home. For example, I went to Pearls Jazz Club each monday for months to hear a full jazz band. I went with many different people, and all were SHOCKED by how mellow the live sound was compared to their stereo systems. They played a big band jazz CD in the Audio Note room that sounded very close to what I heard dozens of times live. The same applies to classical music live and what I heard via the Audio Note system. When it comes to pop music live, you are not hearing direct sound, but a whole amplification system and speakers. Ditto for trance or club music. I wonder how the cheaper Audio Note speakers and integrated gear sounds compared to what I heard. If it's close, I'll be tempted to buy.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by theaudiohobby
er no.....it's 92dB with the caveat of it's reduced output below 200Hz. I think it is probably advisable to stick to discussing to sound of the rig without quoting the specs which are a can of worms :eek6: IMO
Not according to their website. There's alot of different versions of the AN-E and I'm not sure which was on display but it was certainly VERY loud for a 20watt amp so I am inclined to believe their numbers.
-
Tube fan.
Personally speaking you don't really need to look at the expensive stuff from Audio Note. The lower stuff gets you there. It's a refinment process going up the lines. Art's AN E/Spe HE is $7,500 and that's the speaker I have my eyes on. The external crossover in the more expensive lines is better but unless you really sit them side by side it's not like it's going to be terribly noticeable. To me it is more about refinment but the general frequency response and drive and bass is unchanged. Resolution increases though but you then need the partnering gear so the amount of money gets stupid fast.
I saw the picture of the room by a fellow reviewer - what a stupid place for the air conditioner - why don't they use those top of the wall air conditioners like they do in Asia - those are not placed in corners. Close to the side wall kinda is okay but since they factor the back wall into the meausrements - well I guess it's the best they could do given what they had. Still it's tough to lose 12-18db in the 20hz range by placing them the way the did. Still, sounds like people felt they did okay given the hands behind their back positioning. :12:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian K
Not according to their website. There's alot of different versions of the AN-E and I'm not sure which was on display but it was certainly VERY loud for a 20watt amp so I am inclined to believe their numbers.
Sensitivity is not all that much of an indicator anyway. Audio Note SETs are generally quite robust. My OTO Phono SE is a 10 watt amp (4.2 watts undistorted according to Hi-Fi Choice) and my J is rated 93db sensitive - 89.2 db not in a corner (though it is easier to drive than the AN E as the J never dips below 5 ohms while the E drops to 3.6 ohms).
The funny thing is does any of that blather matter. I never pay attention to the manufacturer specs - I actually wish Audio Note simply would pull them all off the net. Anyone buying them off the spec is not worthy as Wayne and Garth would say. The AN E will belt it out with deep bass with an 8 watt (4 undistorted) amp. That tells you that the speaker is easy to drive - so posting the spec is meaningless. The AN E in Art's room has more bass than the Wilson Sasha with 2 8 inch woofers and a 7 inch midrange unit and weighs in at 200lbs each http://www.wilsonaudio.com/product_h...sha_specs.html
I heard them at CES and Art is not deaf. The E easily takes them out. (Though the Wilson will play it all a lot louder to be fair and they are a first rate sounding loudspeaker!
Put them in a corner hard with the same 8 watt amp and play a synthesizer note at 20hz (or a frequency test disc from Sound and Vision or the like) and feel it - if you can feel it it is outputting the frequency. That tells you it can can do 20hz. It's not rocket science. One doesn't need a graph - the CD is cheap - something like $10. In fact with that CD and an SPL meter you can make your own graph. Cheap SPL meters are not terribly accurate at the frequency extremes though - but still - there are better ones.
Heck for free you can download frequency toneburst files and do this for free (assuming you trust the quality of the files). But for $20 this one probably works ok http://www.linkwitzlab.com/burst-cd.htm
This one looks good too - http://www.graniteaudio.com/phono/page7.html
-
Tube Fan
I would like to get into the tape arena. I know absolutely ZILCH about tapes. I see a store downtown selling reel to reel machines and several tapes to go with them - is this what you are talking about?
I would definitely like to explore this route - any suggestions where to start?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
You might want to note that the "real world response" that JA measured in Art's room is "free standing" measurement and again not how Audio Note recommends them to be placed. Putting the speaker neart he side wall and in a corner is not the same - the Red blue graph that is shown had the speaker measured not from a corner and according to JA "they were a little more than 15" from the wall behind them" according to JA. 15 inches is more than a foot away from the corner and as such that is not corner loading - (the viscinity of the corner is not in a corner) it's free standing. I am impressed that it did well free standing against a much larger built for free standing position Harbeth. The E manual also notes that bass boom will be an issue if it is out from the corner too far - and that result is pretty clear with the "enetertaining" 31.5 hz boost.
Since it's not designed for free standing and sounds worse free standing then whatever the conclusion of how it sounds there is totally irrelevant. It would be like me putting a speaker not remotely designed for a corner in a corner and blaming the speaker for sounding muddy. The speaker is supposes to be as close to the back wall and side wall as you can get without actually touching - 1or 2 centimeters - not 15 inches. 2 inches it booms so the temptation is to do what Art did and pull them far out from the wall. I don't blame him I did the same thing for a couple of months.
Richard,
Here is where I am running into problem understanding this placement choice. You state the the AN speaker gets an 18db boost in the low frequencies by corner placements, but that cannot be true for a stand mount speaker. In order to get the full 9db per speaker (3db gain per surface per speaker) the speaker must couple directly with the floor and wall directly, or coupling efficiency takes a hit. Since the speaker is on a stand, it is not coupling with the floor efficiently, which means the gain is going to be somewhat less than 3db. Again, since the speaker is facing inwards towards the listening seat, there is no direct coupling of the driver to the wall. So you lose another 6db of efficiency for a number a bit smaller than that .
In order to gain the full 9db boost per speaker, the speaker must be tucked in flat to the wall(which would created a port resonant frequency) which would allow the bass driver to effective couple with all wall surfaces, and place the speaker directly on the floor which would allow it to more effiecient couple with the floor, much like a subwoofer in a corner is placed. Putting the speaker in the corner as you state will give it a proximity boost, but it will not be a full 9db per speaker.
-
Yes from my reading of it the speaker does not achieve a full 9db per speaker but it doesn't need the full 9db to meet spec. The port is designed for corner loading. The original Snell was quite a bit different. The AN E is measured by Audio Note in the corner on a stand and they have all the best measuring equipment that is available. So the matter comes down to trust. Do people think they lied. I don't see the point because even if you cut the 18db gain in half it still would be 22-23hz -6db and usable at 18hz. Since next to nothing is recorded down there it's a non issue. Unfortunately, I can't find the thread on your question at AudioAsylum. If I run across it I will post it. Send em an e-mail if you're curious.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
Yes from my reading of it the speaker does not achieve a full 9db per speaker but it doesn't need the full 9db to meet spec. The port is designed for corner loading. The original Snell was quite a bit different. The AN E is measured by Audio Note in the corner on a stand and they have all the best measuring equipment that is available. So the matter comes down to trust. Do people think they lied. I don't see the point because even if you cut the 18db gain in half it still would be 22-23hz -6db and usable at 18hz. Since next to nothing is recorded down there it's a non issue. Unfortunately, I can't find the thread on your question at AudioAsylum. If I run across it I will post it. Send em an e-mail if you're curious.
I don't think they lied per se, but they appear to do an industry standard...fudge the numbers a bit. But having the port that close to a wall might confirm some of my impressions on its corner loading, and its effect on the mid bass.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
I don't think they lied per se, but they appear to do an industry standard...fudge the numbers a bit. But having the port that close to a wall might confirm some of my impressions on its corner loading, and its effect on the mid bass.
I looked at the picture of the Audio Note room at California Audio Show - they did not have the speakers in the corner. An air conditioner seemed to be placed against the wall. So sadly this was not ideal. At CES Peter and the people he brought had the cheaper room and AudioFederation had the half million room and Peter's room sounded better until AudioFederation put them hard in corners. Like I say - inches matter - it has to be practically touching both the side and the back wall. The pictures I see of the California Show it looks like at least a foot from the back wall and right next to the side wall. I dunno - I don't like My J positioned there - a little muddy and wompy in the bass - but I guess that's the best Mario could do with it.
I found this - on AudioAsylum http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?...er+qvortrup&r=
Actually this one is closer but I still can't find the one that addresses the floor specifically and it was there someplace http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?...er+qvortrup&r=
-
The most recent response was when Peter discussed both the measurements done by Stereophile. http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?...er+qvortrup&r=
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian K
Not according to their website. There's alot of different versions of the AN-E and I'm not sure which was on display but it was certainly VERY loud for a 20watt amp so I am inclined to believe their numbers.
Independent measurements indicate that the actual sensitivity is closer to 92dB which is a more believable figure for a speaker of this size and design. And given the appropriate material a 20W amp can drive 92dB/1m speaker to very relatively high SPLs.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
I don't think they lied per se, but they appear to do an industry standard...fudge the numbers a bit
That a huge understatement, specifying a 92dB speaker as 98dB is a huge fudge.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
I looked at the picture of the Audio Note room at California Audio Show - they did not have the speakers in the corner. An air conditioner seemed to be placed against the wall. So sadly this was not ideal. At CES Peter and the people he brought had the cheaper room and AudioFederation had the half million room and Peter's room sounded better until AudioFederation put them hard in corners. Like I say - inches matter - it has to be practically touching both the side and the back wall. The pictures I see of the California Show it looks like at least a foot from the back wall and right next to the side wall. I dunno - I don't like My J positioned there - a little muddy and wompy in the bass - but I guess that's the best Mario could do with it.
I found this - on AudioAsylum http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?...er+qvortrup&r=
Actually this one is closer but I still can't find the one that addresses the floor specifically and it was there someplace http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?...er+qvortrup&r=
Everytime I see the name Richard "BassNut"Greene, I just want to cry. I really miss that man, he truly was my mentor when he was here.
Getting back to the issue at hand; it is my understanding (and it was confirmed by RG) that in order to get the kind of boost you are looking for the room has to be totally sealed, and the room dimensions must be able to support any boost at 23hz and below by its length(it would have to be at least 25' down a wall for a boost at 23hz). So it would stand to reason that in smaller rooms less than 25' in length, you are not going to get much support at 23hz, and that boost that AN relies on won't support a 23hz extension. As the room gets smaller and smaller, the cutoff point of the AN speaker would presumably get higher and higher. This is why I feel that the AN speaker did not have the frequency extension to reproduce the bass pedals of a Hammond B-3, the room was not big enough to get the gain. So that makes all claims of low frequency response a moving target based on the size of the room. Plus, the amount of driver movement to reproduce those low notes would have a doppler effect on the higher frequencies that the driver also has to reproduce. That can't be good on the upper bass and midrange frequencies when deep bass is playing through the driver. That is why it is better to separate the deep bass drivers from the ones playing the mid bass and higher frequencies(a subwoofer for example)
Also the walls would have to be stiff as bricks, otherwise it will release any energy to the other side of the wall and not provide much boost at all. This is especially so
The second issue is having a speaker that close to a wall really does effect image depth, as you are effectively using the walls and an extension to the front baffle of the speakers, and in setups like this, image depth is compromised in favor of bass boost.
Richard Greene also makes another point, and it completely correlates to what I heard in the AN room. Corner placement is most advantageous to the upper bass, much more so than the deepest bass. In the AN room, every piece of music with the male voice, every piece of classic music that had lower strings, and brass had either a chestiness, or sounded overly ripe and much too warm than reality would have them be.
Just some food for thought.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian K
Not according to their website. There's alot of different versions of the AN-E and I'm not sure which was on display but it was certainly VERY loud for a 20watt amp so I am inclined to believe their numbers.
I must tell you this, I have a speaker with a 92dpw sensitivity, and a 20 watt amp would drive that speaker to senseless levels. So, 92dpw is more realistic than 98dpw, given that most speakers with the higher numbers are horn loaded and the AN is not.
-
I've just spent several hours playing the same vinyl on my home system that I played at the show. The Adgio d'Albinoni sounded better on my system than on any at the show (I played it at Magico, Teresonic, and Lotus rooms, and at a few others). The double bass and pipe organ are a tough test of a system. You have to FEEL the organ (and the lowest notes of the double bass). However, on this stupendous record you also should feel the power and beauty of Karr's playing in your heart. It's not a matter of frequency response. Karr sounds like he is playing for the gods. A lot of it has to do with flow and momentum and tiny subtle details. The Chet vinyl (with an all-star group of Chet Baker, Herbie Mann, Pepper Adams, Bill Evans, Kenny Burrell, Paul Chambers, Connie Kay, and Philly Joe Jones) also sounded better through my Fulton Js than through any of the rooms I played it at (almost all with a tt). Ditto for the great Muddy Waters folk singer vinyl recording. I played this in the JBL room, and several people thanked me for suppling some real music. The sound of the John Coltrane and Jonny Hartman vinyl was matched at the Lotus room (for, what, $400,000?). Here I got to play it at the proper volume. They were going to play the same cut on their record, but the record was defective, so I offered my copy. Perhaps this was why they allowed me to turn up the volume.
The moral of this is: don't believe that the best older equipment cannot match, and often, surpass what is considered the current best. For example, I have yet to hear an electrostatic speaker that matches the KLH 9 or the Quad ESL 57 (with the possible exception of the new King electrostatic). Unfortunately, the turntable in the King room was giving off too much flutter for the super sensitive King, so I had to listen to CDs. The sound was quite good, and nothing like the CD sound in the Audio Note room. The strenghts of each system matched the weaknesses of the other: super detail vs tonal saturation; deep bass vs limitless highs. The King sounded like an almost full range version of the Quad 57, and that is saying a lot. The King seems to be quite hard on other equipment, but, at $8,000, they are a steal. Still, I prefered the Audio Notes, especially driven by the outstanding Jinro.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
Tube Fan
I would like to get into the tape arena. I know absolutely ZILCH about tapes. I see a store downtown selling reel to reel machines and several tapes to go with them - is this what you are talking about?
I would definitely like to explore this route - any suggestions where to start?
Unfortunately, close copies of master tapes, if available, would cost hundreds (and would be worth it!). Maybe someone is going to bring back tapes at an affordable price. There was a time we could buy tapes, but then came the crapy cassette. CDs almost killed off vinyl, but it now seems vinyl will outlive CDs! Turntables and cartridges are far from perfect, and, IMO, current vinyl cannot come close to matching master tapes (or very close copies). Tapes through the Evolution Acoustics speakers sounded better than the best of the King, Audio Note, and Lotus systems: clear, but not hard; tonally saturated, but not soft or slow; unlimited dynamics both micro and macro.
-
Sir T.
I think you are right in the sense that AN puts the speaker in their best theoretical light - correct size room, perfectly rigid walls but to be fair to Peter he is in Europe and probably lives in a home where the walls are not made of plaster like they are here. So he may very well have the room and rigid walls to get those numbers. Martin Colloms may as well. And some may say he should advertise to where most of his consumers live - only 5% of AN's business is in North America. So it's a lot of European solid walls.
The interesting thing about all the measurements is how it seems people measure them so differently. It is kind of nice to see so many AN E reviews. Hi-Fi Choice measured them and they got both the -6db point and 94.5db on the non high efficiency version of the AN E. That actually bettered the AN spec for the model. So did the J in their bass test.
Stereophile has yet to do a corner measurement - well except for Art Dudley and for some reason people seem to assume he doesn't know how to measure - he does.
"for maximum bass reinforcement (footnote 3). I tried that, and while I was amazed by their extension—flat to 25Hz!
Footnote 3: For the newbie: This isn't a horn effect, but rather a simple means of countering the difficulty that a small loudspeaker has when it tries to disperse low-frequency sounds toward the listener. (As notes descend below the frequency whose half-wavelength equals the diameter of the radiating surface, dispersion becomes increasingly spherical and nondirect.) To place a loudspeaker near one or more room boundaries is to close off that many paths to the meandering low-frequency waveform, and thus increase the likelihood that bass energy will make its way to the listening area.—Art Dudley"
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by theaudiohobby
Independent measurements indicate that the actual sensitivity is closer to 92dB which is a more believable figure for a speaker of this size and design. And given the appropriate material a 20W amp can drive 92dB/1m speaker to very relatively high SPLs.
Have you ever even heard the speakers we're talking about? I honestly don't know what you're basing your assertations on. I'm assuming you weren't even there and you haven't cited any sources. I sat in the room with this system for at least an hour on two seperate occassions at the show. I was in the room with someone who had an SPL meter that measured 95db at least 12 feet from the speakers during a bass track. I spoke with at least 7-8 people in in that room who agreed the sound levels were "unbelievable".
I'm not an Audio Note fanboy and I don't care about 'winning' but based on my listening experiences of the system setup by Audio Note themselves, I'm inclined to believe their (Audio Notes) sensitivity numbers.
EDIT:
My response was probably overly harsh. I'm not trying to start a flame war and I understand why people are skeptical of numbers that seem so unbelievable. The number one rule in audio is "Don't believe it unless you've heard it with your own ears". I also believe very little of what I read from manufacturers and reviewers. So far that skepticism has served me very well. I went into the room extremely skeptical and walked out convinced that the system was the real deal.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
Unfortunately, close copies of master tapes, if available, would cost hundreds (and would be worth it!). Maybe someone is going to bring back tapes at an affordable price. There was a time we could buy tapes, but then came the crapy cassette. CDs almost killed off vinyl, but it now seems vinyl will outlive CDs! Turntables and cartridges are far from perfect, and, IMO, current vinyl cannot come close to matching master tapes (or very close copies). Tapes through the Evolution Acoustics speakers sounded better than the best of the King, Audio Note, and Lotus systems: clear, but not hard; tonally saturated, but not soft or slow; unlimited dynamics both micro and macro.
Hi
I read a review at the VSAC show where Audio Note had a Tape machine and the guy loved the sound of the room. So that had my interest up and your comments mirror those. I am sure Peter has a deep collection of tape and reel to reel machines. He has warehouses of stuff from competitors. I am always amused to see a Picture of an Avante Garde Duo in his closet behind a bike. Put $25,000 speakers in the closet -
Check out the ridiculous size of this room the AN E was in - Probably didn't have enough speaker cable to put them in the corners.
http://www.theanalogdept.com/vsac08.htm
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
Unfortunately, close copies of master tapes, if available, would cost hundreds (and would be worth it!). Maybe someone is going to bring back tapes at an affordable price. There was a time we could buy tapes, but then came the crapy cassette. CDs almost killed off vinyl, but it now seems vinyl will outlive CDs! Turntables and cartridges are far from perfect, and, IMO, current vinyl cannot come close to matching master tapes (or very close copies). Tapes through the Evolution Acoustics speakers sounded better than the best of the King, Audio Note, and Lotus systems: clear, but not hard; tonally saturated, but not soft or slow; unlimited dynamics both micro and macro.
I agree completely about the Evolution Acoustics system. Hearing that system was one of the highlights of the show for me. The thing that impressed me the most was that it was one of only a couple systems that just seemed to disappear completely and play the music as if it was floating in the air. The RAAL tweeter/Accuton midrange combos in that system and the Salk SoundScapes really were terrific at presenting a huge, holographic soundstage. It was really something special to hear. I literally could not discern that the music was coming from the speakers. They just seemed to form a holographic layer that came from the space around the speakers and enveloped me with sound. I thought these systems beat out my other favorites from the show (the Magico and JBL systems) in alot of aspects.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian K
Have you ever even heard the speakers we're talking about? I honestly don't know what you're basing your assertations on. I'm assuming you weren't even there and you haven't cited any sources. I sat in the room with this system for at least an hour on two seperate occassions at the show. I was in the room with someone who had an SPL meter that measured 95db at least 12 feet from the speakers during a bass track. I spoke with at least 7-8 people in in that room who agreed the sound levels were "unbelievable".
I'm not an Audio Note fanboy and I don't care about 'winning' but based on my listening experiences of the system setup by Audio Note themselves, I'm inclined to believe their (Audio Notes) sensitivity numbers.
If you need sources - Hi-Fi Choice is saying it meets the bass spec and the sensitivity spec (bettering it as AN posted 94db at that time and Hi-Fi Choice for 94.5db).
Then you have
Martin Colloms (the measurements guy for Stereophile, Hi Fi News, Hi-Fi Critic, and is an expert witness and electroacoustics engineer from Oxford - and chaired the Audio Engineering Society, author of several volumes of loudspeaker design books and the founder of Monitor Audio loudspeakers. (What do you have to do in order to be accepted as a guy who can hold up an SPL meter and measure a frequency tone. If Martin Colloms can't do it nobody out there can. Do we have to show his resume http://www.colloms.com/
Quote from his AN E review: "I checked out the speaker in the lab and confirmed the high 94dB sensitivity, with 3.6 ohm minimum impedance, a wide 28Hz to 20kHz (+/-3dB) response when adjusted for near wall placement, and a 29Hz tuned port with an in-room -6dB point of 18Hz at reasonable drive levels. Hi-Fi News June 2002
Corner gain adds 3db to sensitivity - AN gives you the corner spec. 95db corner. 98db on the HE models. Measured not in a corners you get 91-92db and 94-95db respectively. Seems reasonable to me .
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
I don't think they lied per se, but they appear to do an industry standard...fudge the numbers a bit. But having the port that close to a wall might confirm some of my impressions on its corner loading, and its effect on the mid bass.
And I think your being way too generous. As you know (probably more than anyone here), ALL sensitivity readings are done at 1m anechoic. This is the industry standard and EVERYONE uses it except one funny little speaker company that thinks it's OK to measure their speaker in a way that adds many dB to the numbers. It's inaccurate to call these 98dB speakers when the way they measure them add 6-8dB or MORE (depending on frequency) to the readings.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
And I think your being way too generous. As you know (probably more than anyone here), ALL sensitivity readings are done at 1m anechoic. This is the industry standard and EVERYONE uses it except one funny little speaker company that thinks it's OK to measure their speaker in a way that adds many dB to the numbers. It's inaccurate to call these 98dB speakers when the way they measure them add 6-8dB or MORE (depending on frequency) to the readings.
You make a valid point about 1m anechoic being the industry standard for measurement. Their numbers wouldn't be as high as they are if they used that setup for the measurements. To measure the system in a setup that's completely contrary to the way the designer intended (and has stated numerous times) just doesn't make alot of sense. The whole speaker is designed around this corner loading and to measure it in an anechoic environment will give results that are completely irrepresentitive of the actual performance when the setup is done as intended by the designer. In order to get flat frequency response from them they must be corner loaded as the designers intended.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian K
You make a valid point about 1m anechoic being the industry standard for measurement. Their numbers wouldn't be as high as they are if they used that setup for the measurements. To measure the system in a setup that's completely contrary to the way the designer intended (and has stated numerous times) just doesn't make alot of sense. The whole speaker is designed around this corner loading and to measure it in an anechoic environment will give results that are completely irrepresentitive of the actual performance when the setup is done as intended by the designer. In order to get flat frequency response from them they must be corner loaded as the designers intended.
Actually the frequency response from them is far from flat, corner loaded or not.
Many speakers are designed for specific placement. This does not mean that the manufacturer has the right to claim a specification that is in total disregard of standard measurment practice. FWIW; you could corner load any speaker and come up with wildly enhanced readings. It would be very tempting to fudge the data that way but as far as I know there's only one speaker company that does.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
And I think your being way too generous. As you know (probably more than anyone here), ALL sensitivity readings are done at 1m anechoic. This is the industry standard and EVERYONE uses it except one funny little speaker company that thinks it's OK to measure their speaker in a way that adds many dB to the numbers. It's inaccurate to call these 98dB speakers when the way they measure them add 6-8dB or MORE (depending on frequency) to the readings.
I know Geoff, but I am trying to be nice....something I obviously have not been this week on this site. :devil:
|