First impressions at California audio Show

[Geoffcin]

I know Geoff, but I am trying to be nice....something I obviously have not been this week on this site.

Foo-eee!! In any case this argument was leading the thread way off line, and I've already heard way too much about that one brand for one lifetime!

Thanks for posting your thoughts about the show. Sounds like it was a real blast!

[RGA]

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.

Don't bother - these are the same people who believe that testing a Ferrari in off road tests represents the capability of the Ferrari. And conclude that the Ferrari sucks because it can't go over a bolder like a Hummer. You design a test for the capability of that which you are testing. In psychology you call this "validity" - You do not test something in conditions that it was not remotely designed to operate. The AN is designed to operate in a corner and to use the room as part of the overall sound - all testing must be done with the speaker operating in that environment or it's not a valid test. All they have is what is known as "reliability."

Reliability is a test that will yield the same results over and over and over. Which is fine if what you are testing is valid. Thus, if you create a test made for off road vehicles to see how the shocks hold up going over bolders then for ALL vehicles designed for that you can get highly reliable and accurate results and you can make very accurate and reliable comparisons. In audio the test is designed for free standing speakers - all speakers compared for that would be valid - all other kinds of speakers should not be measured because they will be unfairly treated. Just as the Ferrari is unfairly treated against a Hummer and a Hummer would be unfairly treated against a set of tests designed for speed and handling. This is not rocket science - it is science 9 - validity (the range rule for old geezer posters) vs reliability. And the people arguing against it merely have an axe to grind.

No one treats all the different car designs in the same way and yet people are willing to do so with speakers (those people need a searchlight to find their IQ). The fact that 99% of cars are not built for off road does not mean that we should force the 1% that are built of off road cars to be tested like the other 99% - And the silly thing is it is the panel guys if anyone who should "get" that.

[bobsticks]

I know Geoff, but I am trying to be nice....something I obviously have not been this week on this site.

Lolz...

[frenchmon]

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.

Send me the Chet Vinyl....I want to see if it sounds better on my system as well.

[Feanor]

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.

The more I consider the actual design of the AN speakers, the more I realize that they are, objectively, nothing special. Just simple drivers with a simple crossover in a simple box-- hemp, silver, and Baltic birch notwithstanding. The bottom line consequence is a primitive design with primitive results. Indeed what AN is really good at is cultivating mystique.

Sadly, audiophilia isn't about accuracy at all -- the great efforts of people like Sir Terrence with the goal of accuracy are all in vain. It's about what sounds pretty to the audiophiles, (euphonic: smooth & bloomy). Further, they have no intention of learning the truth; to a remarkable degree they like what they're used to and/or what their audiophile gurus tell them is "organic", "holistic" or similar billsh!t. What can be said of AN, most generously, is that they have nailed this sound.

[RGA]

The more I consider the actual design of the AN speakers, the more I realize that they are, objectively, nothing special. Just simple drivers with a simple crossover in a simple box-- hemp, silver, and Baltic birch notwithstanding. The bottom line consequence is a primitive design with primitive results. Indeed what AN is really good at is cultivating mystique.

Sadly, audiophilia isn't about accuracy at all -- the great efforts of people like Sir Terrence with the goal of accuracy are all in vain. It's about what sounds pretty to the audiophiles, (euphonic: smooth & bloomy). Further, they have no intention of learning the truth; to a remarkable degree they like what they're used to and/or what their audiophile gurus tell them is "organic", "holistic" or similar billsh!t. What can be said of AN, most generously, is that they have nailed this sound.

It would be more credible if the stone wasn't being thrown by a guy who owns magnepans

[Geoffcin]

Don't bother - these are the same people who believe that testing a Ferrari in off road tests represents the capability of the Ferrari.

A poorer analogy has never been postulated!

Have you ever driven a Ferrari? Sat in one at least? Perhaps ogled one from afar maybe?

Ferrari is all about performance, and the use of modern technology to achieve it.

Performance that can be tested against other cars on the track, where numbers (as in lap times) are king, and bullsh!t (like your fake sensitivity readings) gets smacked down hard, and often.

I know you would like to consider your speakers in the same breath as a Ferrari, but they're a better fit with a Yugo. Unsophisticated 60's tech at it's best!

[theaudiohobby]

A poorer analogy has never been postulated!

Have you ever driven a Ferrari? Sat in one at least? Perhaps ogled one from afar maybe?

Ferrari is all about performance, and the use of modern technology to achieve it.

Performance that can be tested against other cars on the track, where numbers (as in lap times) are king, and bullsh!t (like your fake sensitivity readings) gets smacked down hard, and often.

I know you would like to consider your speakers in the same breath as a Ferrari, but they're a better fit with a Yugo. Unsophisticated 60's tech at it's best!

Now that's funny

[jpaik]

.. Indeed what AN is really good at is cultivating mystique.

Indeed. And there is a fanboy cult constantly oiling the AN mystique machine. The truth is an absent feature.

[PeruvianSkies]

Looks like no one cares when it involves certain people around here, interesting indeed.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Looks like no one cares when it involves certain people around here, interesting indeed.

PS, don't get your fanny in a crack on this. Let it be their issue, not yours.

[E-Stat]

The bottom line consequence is a primitive design with primitive results. Indeed what AN is really good at is cultivating mystique.Sadly, audiophilia isn't about accuracy at all...

Yes, but let's not throw everyone into a single AN pile! Most of us are not company disciples.

rw

[Feanor]

Looks like no one cares when it involves certain people around here, interesting indeed.

Truth is more admirable than hypocracy.

[Geoffcin]

Looks like no one cares when it involves certain people around here, interesting indeed.

Yes, I agree!

But,when you have a topic called; "First impressions at California audio Show" which starts off brilliantly, but then becomes a rant about one speaker in particular, a rant that we've all heard incessantly in numerous threads over and over ad nauseum, THEN you have even the most tolerant moderator on AR fuming that he has to wade through piles of "fanboy fiction" to get to hear what people who were actually THERE feelings about what they heard and saw.

[bobsticks]

A poorer analogy has never been postulated!

Sure there has been...Melvin Walker did it with great frequency before his untimely departure

. And the people arguing against it merely have an axe to grind.

That may well be part of it but at the same time I'm sure others have some frustration over the fact that every thread that has the letters "A" and "N" within close proximity becomes a treatise on corner placement.

Clearly you have an immense knowledge about music and sound reproduction theory (as well as great many other things).This was a thread about the California show. Personally, I would've loved to have read about a wide variety of equipment...and in the beginning that wish was granted until the whole got squashed by the particular. Even I forgot the original intent of the thread...which is fine on occasion but it happens an awful lot...

Since we're making bad analogies, watch this and whenever the words "battling/have (prostate) cancer are heard substitute "like/support Audio Note"...and smile a bit, it ain't that serious...

[Mr Peabody]

Sure there has been...Melvin Walker did it with great frequency before his untimely departure




That may well be part of it but at the same time I'm sure others have some frustration over the fact that every thread that has the letters "A" and "N" within close proximity becomes a treatise on corner placement.

Clearly you have an immense knowledge about music and sound reproduction theory (as well as great many other things).This was a thread about the California show. Personally, I would've loved to have read about a wide variety of equipment...and in the beginning that wish was granted until the whole got squashed by the particular. Even I forgot the original intent of the thread...which is fine on occasion but it happens an awful lot...

Since we're making bad analogies, watch this and whenever the words "battling/have (prostate) cancer are heard substitute "like/support Audio Note"...and smile a bit, it ain't that serious...

LOL, that was good. Remember the Geore Carlin old west bit where he substitutes the word "kill" with another four letter word that begins with "f" and ends with uck?

[RGA]

A poorer analogy has never been postulated!

Have you ever driven a Ferrari? Sat in one at least? Perhaps ogled one from afar maybe?

Ferrari is all about performance, and the use of modern technology to achieve it.

Performance that can be tested against other cars on the track, where numbers (as in lap times) are king, and bullsh!t (like your fake sensitivity readings) gets smacked down hard, and often.

I know you would like to consider your speakers in the same breath as a Ferrari, but they're a better fit with a Yugo. Unsophisticated 60's tech at it's best!

So Geoff - how do you compare a Dodge Ram V10 to a Ferrari. Do you believe that both shoppers are after the same goal with said purchase? If you do you're clueless.

The person that buys a Ferrari is after a performance sports car - you SHOULD compare the Ferrari against all other sports cars - they are designed for speed and handling.

A person buys a Dodge Ram V10 for pulling a big ass trailer. USE A BRAIN and THINK! If you have a test that measures handling and speed the V10 will suck donkey balls. But nobody is buying it for that. Likewise the Ferrari isn't going to pull a fifth wheel.

You test the Car for which is was designed for. So you test the Ferrari handling ability and off the line scores and top speed. You don't really have interest in the tow ability because it can't do the job. Of course IF you are remotely intelligent then you KNOW this. That is why there are several different kinds of tests. You don't JUST have the speed and handling test and ignore the rest.

Get it now Geoff? A truck is designed for one type of task while a Ferrari is designed for another. Excellent analogy. And you test accordingly for the job it does. Speakers are speakers but automobiles are automobiles. Free standing speaker you test free standing - corner you test in a corner. That simple.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

LOL, that was good. Remember the Geore Carlin old west bit where he substitutes the word "kill" with another four letter word that begins with "f" and ends with uck?

Oooooooooo, you said the "F" word in two pieces....I'm tellin on ya!

[Geoffcin]

Oooooooooo, you said the "F" word in two pieces....I'm tellin on ya!

Sorry to change the topic, but did anyone get any pics of the rooms at the show?

[jpaik]

How nice of the Dagogo "reviewer" to call some of us stupid, and morons. Wasn't Dagogo the sponsor/lead agency of this show?

I would also like to know more about the products at the Show. Stereophile's coverage was somewhat interesting, in a travelogue kind of way.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

In all fairness to AN, from the midrange up, the speaker's sound was quite good, and once again, I know why Richard likes them as there is much to like. My concern is corner placement and its effect on the mid bass and depth of the front sound stage.

Another issue I would have with these speakers is they cannot be used in a wide room. In a 16+ft wide room, there is no way these speaker will be able to create a coherent sound stage, they would be too far apart to do it. While the left and right side of the sound stage would hold together, the center would be fractured because of the distance between the two speakers. In a room less than 15ft wide, I don't think this speaker would have a problem.

While the spec's definitely seem fudged because of proprietary testing methods(not industry standard testing) i think while misleading it does not take away from the good qualities of this speaker. It was hard to gage the performance of a filterless CD player, because you don't really know the role that other components are playing in getting the good sound I heard. I would love to hear them separately in my own system where I can really gage the benefits of this approach. I really don't think the speakers deserve a trashing, but one can't help but think the proprietary testing methods are used to create a much better picture of the speaker than it might deserve, and it creates a very unique and persuasive marketing angle.

The reality is, there is no way this speaker sensitivity is 98dpw, as the huge Klipschorns with all horn loaded drivers are only 105dpw, and these speakers are not 7db less efficient than that speaker, and no way they are the same efficiency as the Palladium speaker. I will never believe that in a thousand years even if they are corner loaded.

[RGA]

Sir T

On the other hand the K-Horn could be speced too low. It is more sensitive than any Audio Note E and you can clearly tell that. Although the guy to ask might be Constantine Soo since he owns the K-Horn and the AN E. He said the K-horn is considerably more efficient.

I don't see what the issue is - no one hear as explained it to me. A corner speaker gets a 3db gain in sensitivity (in fact all speakers would). So what is the exact problem with a speaker company that designs for a corner and gives you the corner measurement? Why the uproar over that? 92db speaker - stick it in a corner it is 95db. Stereophile measured 92.5 db - stick em in a corner you get 95.5db with a margin of error of possibly 1db. Why on earth is that so wrong? I don't get it.

Why should the manufacturer follow what everyone else is doing when none of them make corner loaded speakers? I would say the same for Allison or any corner horn maker.

I found the Constantine's old review of the very entry level AN E/D made from chipboard some time back. He compares them to an Apogee Duetta II arguably Apogee's best sounding panel, K-Horn and his big Genesis VI servo subwoofer system http://www.stereotimes.com/speak071701.shtml

[Geoffcin]

How nice of the Dagogo "reviewer" to call some of us stupid, and morons. Wasn't Dagogo the sponsor/lead agency of this show?

I would also like to know more about the products at the Show. Stereophile's coverage was somewhat interesting, in a travelogue kind of way.

Actually he called a moderator silly names. Luckily the mod is very tolerent of childish behavior or he might have had all of his posts removed along with his screen name. (a few mods here who would of done exactly that!)

Yes, there's a lot of us who want to hear more about this show. Hopefully we can clear the all the static soon and get back to the threads main topic.

[Geoffcin]

In all fairness to AN, from the midrange up, the speaker's sound was quite good, and once again, I know why Richard likes them as there is much to like. My concern is corner placement and its effect on the mid bass and depth of the front sound stage.

Please don't mis-understand me. I have no problems with the speaker itself, only the incessent hijacking of threads by a certain fanboy of said item.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Sir T

On the other hand the K-Horn could be speced too low. It is more sensitive than any Audio Note E and you can clearly tell that. Although the guy to ask might be Constantine Soo since he owns the K-Horn and the AN E. He said the K-horn is considerably more efficient.

No, the K-horn is spec properly. Still, even if you took the K-horn out of the equation, do you really think the AN speaker is the same as the Palladium? I don't think so, no way, no how. The Palladium is a horn loaded ported design - the AN has no horns on its mid/tweeter driver.

I don't see what the issue is - no one hear as explained it to me. A corner speaker gets a 3db gain in sensitivity (in fact all speakers would).

That would be boost in output in the mid and lower frequencies, not the higher ones. You need a horn to make the mids and treble more efficient. So in this case, it boosts the mid and low frequencies, it does not effect the sensitivity of the speaker overall.

So what is the exact problem with a speaker company that designs for a corner and gives you the corner measurement? Why the uproar over that? 92db speaker - stick it in a corner it is 95db. Stereophile measured 92.5 db - stick em in a corner you get 95.5db with a margin of error of possibly 1db. Why on earth is that so wrong? I don't get it.

To claim a sensitivity change, the speaker has to be more efficient with its output over all frequencies, not just the mid bass and below. If you stuck a horn in front of the mid/tweeter driver, I could understand the claim of increased sensitivity of the speaker, but the AN speaker does not have one.

Why should the manufacturer follow what everyone else is doing when none of them make corner loaded speakers? I would say the same for Allison or any corner horn maker.

Klipsch follows the industry standard, and they make corner loaded speakers. The K-horn uses the corner to efficiently load the entire frequency range, not just the midbass and lower like on the AN. Since a non horn loaded driver becomes increasing directional as frequencies increase, you cannot use a corner to load the frequencies when the wavelength of the signals become smaller. There is a point when a speaker output becomes less spherical, and more directional. The more directional it becomes, the less efficient the corner can load it. At that point you need a horn to increase(or maintain) the sensitivity. This is why I doubt the sensitivity specs listed. He is using a bass boost in the mid and lower frequencies as a sensitivity change on the speakers entire operating range. No fair I say.