-
Well I guess the AN is bad after all....Thank you kind sir for the lesson...now im off to try and educate my self a little....sounds really interesting.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
The spike at 20kHz and the hashy colored lines are not audible.
not audible, but they "contribute" to the speaker's sound, it's character.
@frenchmon:
the chart you shown for the MA RS6's is a very good repsonse indeed, given the "flatter line" it's more neutral sounding, but it definitely has it's own character. the chart doesn't tell everything, but it does tell you some important facts.
just a mere nuance on this charts, a slight difference here or there can be a BIG difference in sound. However, all these nuances are good, as they define the different characters of speakers.
the difference with the chart from the AN speakers, is that the line is nowhere near "linear", in fact, it's more like the alps or the himalaya. this shouldn't be. My 35 year old advent speakers have a better response graph, and they were a very basic design, with some flaws, typical on some (cheaper) vintage speakers. Yes, they sound good, they have their strenghts, given their price and age that is, would I buy something that sounds like my advents, for a serious amount of money, and looks like a beginner's DIY job?
well
no...
-
yeah, but there are quite an amount of speakers that were in there, and measured better.
way better.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by basite
yeah, but there are quite an amount of speakers that were in there, and measured better.
way better.
And look at which one Art Dudley Purchased!
The issue is that speakers will measure differently from room to room. Frequency response is not the most critical aspect of a speaker. The blind level matched panels that Hi-fi Choice conducts where the actual manufacturewrs are involved in the listening throw some independant light on this. The AN E and J have been tested and have won the day - despite some of the panel's comments about some frequency issues the multitude of other factors won the day.
From Chris Redmond who owned the Revel F30 for a few years - a well measuring loudspeaker under the Harman design umbrella:
"without making direct objective comparisons (something I can’t really do due to different placement and cabling anyway), I’ve got to say I now prefer the AN-Es for the simple reason that I end up listening to more music while they’re installed in my system, and that is THE ultimate aim of any piece of audio equipment… surely? To make music more enjoyable - or rather as enjoyable as you‘d imagine the live performance would be?
To those readers who suspect I’m being seduced by any Audio Note house ‘sound’ and that there’s perhaps some warmth being added by the AN-Es, I’d suggest they’re not actually a million miles away from the F30s which are regarded as being as accurate/neutral in their presentation as one could reasonably hope for in a similar price bracket, and that the 100wpc E.A.R. valve amplification I use definitely IS a million miles away from displaying any euphonic tendencies, being more ’studio’ than many solid state alternatives.
No, the AN-Es rely on their qualities of reproduction rather than euphonic introduction to seduce, and subjectively the AN-Es come across as being highly detailed, super articulate and supremely musical, which I’d imagine would manifest itself being highly rated in a blind listening comparison with their competitions, although I could also see that they might not be immediately ‘impressive’ if auditioned in isolation over a short session.../...
While listening in the AN room, one visitor commented on how it made a refreshing change to hear a speaker where the high frequency and midrange drivers blended together properly, as almost every other room seemed to get it ‘wrong’; again, I’m in danger of repeating myself but with AN gear it usually does come down the overall sound being ’right’ rather than the listener wanting to dissect and analyse the qualities - at least for this listener anyway.../...The fact I now have a pair of AN-Es on my own shopping list says more than I ever could, and I’ve said plenty; but for me the Audio Notes have an overall coherence and articulation which results in a more involving listening experience, and this in itself results in more time spent listening to music."
It's all fine to look at specs and measurements in isolation - this is better than that - similar to saying that a baseball team has a better third baseman or better closer - but a balanced high quality team beats a team with 2 stars and a lot of holes. The measurements provide an grossly incomplete picture. They tell you all about 3 positions on the field and not the other 6.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
And look at which one Art Dudley Purchased!
The issue is that speakers will measure differently from room to room. Frequency response is not the most critical aspect of a speaker. The blind level matched panels that Hi-fi Choice conducts where the actual manufacturewrs are involved in the listening throw some independant light on this. The AN E and J have been tested and have won the day - despite some of the panel's comments about some frequency issues the multitude of other factors won the day.
no, the frequency response is not the most important factor. what I was saying however, was that in the same room as where the AN's were tested, there were many speakers there too that weren't as flawed (that is really the only way to put it, looking at the graph...).
If he likes them, as do you, I've got no problem with that. But I see no reason whatsoever in constantly raving on about an overpriced, flawed and from a technical/design point of view utterly outdated speaker.
the one model they have that costs $700 might be worth it's price, certainly, the others that cost way more simply don't.
I truly appreciate and support the art of building a great speaker by using not the newest technology, almost stupendous amount of gadgets to actually make the 8" woofer sound like twin 15 inch woofers. I don't. I support the art of building a speaker by means of proven methods and technologies.
What AN does though, is not using the proven methods, it just simply ignores them, and continues to claim that a rectangular, "lightly braced & hardly damped" cabinet that *ahem* "helps the drivers" is the best way to go...
I mean, what stuff were they on, and can I have some too?
can you see the party the standing waves are having in there?
this is not the only big flaw in their design, well 'design'...
no wonder they have a crossover as big as a krell amp, with all the things to compensate there, you're gonna need it...
could very well be it sounds good. probably very pleasant to listen to, very colored, a good body (although I do think the cabinet resonating has something to do with this too...), but sure, they'll sound good...
but then again, my advents do to, as does my '57 nordmende traviata table radio...
keep them spinning,
Bert.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
Actually that looks like +/- 3dB from 35Hz - 15kHz to me. Pretty darn good!
The spike at 20kHz and the hashy colored lines are not audible.
I look at that graph and say it has a bit of a bass hump and then is pretty flat, but at 1kHz it starts climbing to the point that the treble becomes more prominent than the mid range or bass frequencies. Maybe I am misreading the graph, but I'm just trying to correlate my own impressions of listening to the speaker to what I see on paper. I had the RS5 for a while and found the treble to be way too prominent. I enjoyed just about every other aspect of the sound. It wasn't even that the treble was fatiguing, I could listen to the speaker for long periods of time, rather it was that the highs were so loud that they covered up the rest of the sound spectrum. If music didn't feature a lot of highs it was fine, but when it did forget about it.
I've always kind of marvelled at how PSB and Paradigm have such flat curves. It must have something to do with their access to the NRC facilities.
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...ningwindow.gif
Paradigm Studio 20: Response curve is an average of five measurements:
on-axis, 15 degrees left and right off-axis,
15 degrees up and down off-axis
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...m_studio20_v3/
Now that is flat!
Having said all this, I would say enough people think highly of AN that I wouldn't put much stock in the graphs. I'd want to hear them for myself.
-
Art seems to be reviewing and enjoying some Wilson speakers lately. Will Art jump the AN ship in favor of Wilson's? Only time will tell.
-
I read recently that there are two schools of thought, the first that a speaker is built so that it has no resonances, or as solidly as possible, with lots of bracing and damping and whatever else goes into that. Another is that you do not use a lot of bracing and damping, and a wood such as birch is often used, and the idea is that the speaker will resonate the way that a musical instrument resonates. Clearly AN falls into this latter category. I'm not up enough on speaker design to know this but perhaps it is the reason their frequency response curves look the way they do.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by YBArcam
I look at that graph and say it has a bit of a bass hump and then is pretty flat, but at 1kHz it starts climbing to the point that the treble becomes more prominent than the mid range or bass frequencies. Maybe I am misreading the graph, but I'm just trying to correlate my own impressions of listening to the speaker to what I see on paper. I had the RS5 for a while and found the treble to be way too prominent. I enjoyed just about every other aspect of the sound. It wasn't even that the treble was fatiguing, I could listen to the speaker for long periods of time, rather it was that the highs were so loud that they covered up the rest of the sound spectrum. If music didn't feature a lot of highs it was fine, but when it did forget about it.
I've always kind of marvelled at how PSB and Paradigm have such flat curves. It must have something to do with their access to the NRC facilities.
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...ningwindow.gif
Paradigm Studio 20: Response curve is an average of five measurements:
on-axis, 15 degrees left and right off-axis,
15 degrees up and down off-axis
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...m_studio20_v3/
Now that is flat!
Having said all this, I would say enough people think highly of AN that I wouldn't put much stock in the graphs. I'd want to hear them for myself.
I think your personal experience confirms the graph quite well. The treble does appear tilted up slightly in the graph. The bass hump is common to most speakers that don't have massive woofers, even this Studio 20 has one, although nicely smoothed out.
I agree, those Paradigms have an excellent response. I'm kinda partial to Canadian speakers myself. I've owned Axioms, and my personal favorite standmount is the Totem Mani-2. Not surprisingly both the Mani-2 and my Axiom M-80's have stellar response curves.
I know for a fact that both companies also made extensive use of the NRC data. Only one of the reasons Canadians make good speakers.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
I think your personal experience confirms the graph quite well. The treble does appear tilted up slightly in the graph. The bass hump is common to most speakers that don't have massive woofers, even this Studio 20 has one, although nicely smoothed out.
I agree, those Paradigms have an excellent response. I'm kinda partial to Canadian speakers myself. I've owned Axioms, and my personal favorite standmount is the Totem Mani-2. Not surprisingly both the Mani-2 and my Axiom M-80's have stellar response curves.
I know for a fact that both companies also made extensive use of the NRC data. Only one of the reasons Canadians make good speakers.
That is right, our scientific community did detailed analysis of many speakers. Oh yes, we know how to make them. Very good Geoff. I will tell the border that you may enter.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
Pat D
One reviewer's word?
Constantine Soo Dagogo.com - Owns two pairs of AN E speakers http://www.dagogo.com/View-Staff.asp?hStaff=1
Jack Roberts dagogo.com AN E ( he moved to the Teresonic Ingeniums which is a fine move - not one I would make but he doesn't really have a room suitable so the move makes since - the point though he did own them http://www.dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?hArticle=351
Art Dudley - Owns AN E speakers http://www.stereophile.com/standloud...an/index5.html
Chris Redmond - 6 moons - AN E speaker owner http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/c...ristopher.html
Peter Van Willenswaard - Stereophile contributing measuring guru - owns AN E speakers http://www.stereophile.com/reference/357/index1.html
Hi-Fi Choice Magazine - uses AN E speakers as a reference. they bought a pair in 1992 and then again in 2003 - not available on line
Paul Messenger - Hi-fi Critic, Hi-Fi Choice and others - placed them on a list of the five best speakers made in their best of list.
Steven Rochlin - Editor of enjoythemusic.com - owns AN J speakers
Leonard Norwitz - classical composer and reviewer for enjoythemusic.com - Owns AN E speakers - he left his career to be a dealer because he liked them so much. In fact he owns
Playback Equipment:
Audio Note Io-Gold MC phono cartridge
Triplanar Tonearm
Voyd Reference 3-motor turntable
Audio Note AN-S9 MC transformer
Audio Note M8 preamplifier
Audio Note Baransu 300B amplifier
Audio Note AN-E/SE Sig
Audio Note silver interconnect & speaker wire http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazin...00b_carbon.htm
Bob Neill - Positive Feedback Magazine - liked AN so much he left reviewing and became a dealer.
Wes Philips - Stereophile " Forget best sound of show, for sheer emotional delivery, timbral clarity, dynamic agility, and, yes, the highest fidelity, the Audio Note system may have been the best hi-fi I have ever heard. It was one of those magical moments that we audiophiles put up with all of the hassles for. After the Audio Note demo. the rest was noise, so I quit on a winner. Not many people who come to Vegas can say that." http://blog.stereophile.com/ces2009/...means_ecstasy/
This is just some off the top of my head - only 5% of their business in North America - plenty of magazines in Asia, the mid east, Russia etc. And that's just speakers. The numbers of reviewers who own CD players and Amps is also disproportionately high.
As far as I know, there's only one reviewer posting here.
I looked over a bit of what you linked for other reviewers. Of course, I've heard of Wes Philips and Art Dudley as they do reviews for Stereophile.
Stephen Rochlin of enjoy-the-music posts at AA; Bob Neill posts at AA and also deals in other speakers besides AN; there is a Chris Redmond at AA, too; Paul Messenger and Peter van Willensward I've heard of but that's about all. I know nothing at all about Leonard Norvitz, and all I know about Constantine Soo and Jack Roberts is what I found with the links you provided.
For my part, as speaker reviewers, I'll take John Atkinson, Andrew Marshall, and Doug Schneider over any and all of them.
-
You know...if the speakers are that flawed and out of wac as they are according to the graphs...they might not be as consistent with reproducing good sound dynamics with many different types of music. They might sound good with a certain type of music, but not as good with other types of music. It seems to me the speakers might be to top end heavy, bottom end heavy or have a lost mid range.
-
a quick response...
You will know when you find a great speaker and it will be set apart from the multitude of good, average and poor speakers out there by one simple truth:
A great speaker gets out of the way and lets the music happen without interfering.
-
Even if the room is in those measurements, they are very poor. This is why there is parametric equalization and bass traps. This measurement could have benefited from both, at least on the bass end of things. The second issue is the response between 1000-10khz, it is damn right dreadful. This is the area that should really be the flattest, as it is right in our hearing's sweet spot. I would like to see what the response of the speaker would be with room treatments, because as it stands, you cannot convince me(as a person that voiced more HT and audio rooms than the average bear) that this is a good sounding speaker - room in the measurement or not.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat D
As far as I know, there's only one reviewer posting here.
I looked over a bit of what you linked for other reviewers. Of course, I've heard of Wes Philips and Art Dudley as they do reviews for Stereophile.
Stephen Rochlin of enjoy-the-music posts at AA; Bob Neill posts at AA and also deals in other speakers besides AN; there is a Chris Redmond at AA, too; Paul Messenger and Peter van Willensward I've heard of but that's about all. I know nothing at all about Leonard Norvitz, and all I know about Constantine Soo and Jack Roberts is what I found with the links you provided.
For my part, as speaker reviewers, I'll take John Atkinson, Andrew Marshall, and Doug Schneider over any and all of them.
I would take Bob Hoda over all three of these guys in a snap.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by YBArcam
I look at that graph and say it has a bit of a bass hump and then is pretty flat, but at 1kHz it starts climbing to the point that the treble becomes more prominent than the mid range or bass frequencies. Maybe I am misreading the graph, but I'm just trying to correlate my own impressions of listening to the speaker to what I see on paper.
I seriously doubt that hump at 100hz is all that audible, it is a bit broadband, and less than 5db from the trough at 1k. It may sound a little richer than a speaker with a flatter response at 100hz, but this speaker has the same measurements(minus the trough at 1k) as my custom made mini monitors that just arrived in my home theater in Oakland yesterday.
Quote:
I had the RS5 for a while and found the treble to be way too prominent. I enjoyed just about every other aspect of the sound. It wasn't even that the treble was fatiguing, I could listen to the speaker for long periods of time, rather it was that the highs were so loud that they covered up the rest of the sound spectrum. If music didn't feature a lot of highs it was fine, but when it did forget about it.
Based on this measurement, it sound like your room was more a problem than this speaker. There is no way you are going to get a prominent treble based on the measurements from these speakers, so either your room is too live, or there was too much reverberation in the high frequencies(too many echo's)
Quote:
I've always kind of marvelled at how PSB and Paradigm have such flat curves. It must have something to do with their access to the NRC facilities.
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...ningwindow.gif
Paradigm Studio 20: Response curve is an average of five measurements:
on-axis, 15 degrees left and right off-axis,
15 degrees up and down off-axis
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...m_studio20_v3/
Now that is flat!
Having said all this, I would say enough people think highly of AN that I wouldn't put much stock in the graphs. I'd want to hear them for myself.
I would say they probably need their hearing checked. Graph tell us what the speaker is actually doing frequency wise, but it is either complimentary to the ears, or it isn't.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
I seriously doubt that hump at 100hz is all that audible, it is a bit broadband, and less than 5db from the trough at 1k. It may sound a little richer than a speaker with a flatter response at 100hz, but this speaker has the same measurements(minus the trough at 1k) as my custom made mini monitors that just arrived in my home theater in Oakland yesterday.
I agree, it wasn't bass heavy. I just see a bit of a bump in that region is all. It had good bass performance, and was very fast and detailed. As I indicated, I had no issues from the bass through the mid range.
Quote:
Based on this measurement, it sound like your room was more a problem than this speaker. There is no way you are going to get a prominent treble based on the measurements from these speakers, so either your room is too live, or there was too much reverberation in the high frequencies(too many echo's)
Yes, I realize that the increase in treble isn't drastic. I'm really unsure about the room. I've had treble issues with one other speaker (Wharfedale Evo2-10), and I couldn't pinpoint it. The thing is, other speakers sounded fine. My current 12L2, my old Tannoy Mercury F2 and Energy C-1, and the PMC TB2i when I had it on trial. Could it be the metal tweeter in the RS5? The Energy had a metal tweeter too though. The room is carpeted (wall to wall) has that ceiling with the bumps on it to absorb sound, and has lots of furniture. The walls are a little bare though.
Many people comment that the RS5 (most talk actually centers around the RS6) is too bright, so it's not just me. And I should emphasize that the graph posted here is of the RS6, and most people online who discuss the brightness in fact have that model. I had the RS5. Just worth pointing that out, even though I don't see the results being that much different. But who knows?
Just out of curiosity, when you read a freq. resp. graph, what kind of swing becomes significant in your mind? You mentioned less than 5dB as being not very significant, so I'm just wondering what would be. I'm guessing there must be a number, and perhaps it's also how gradual the changes in frequency response are. Bigger differences are probably okay as long as they are gradual.
Quote:
I would say they probably need their hearing checked. Graph tell us what the speaker is actually doing frequency wise, but it is either complimentary to the ears, or it isn't.
I'd still be interested in hearing them. Graphs are fantastic tools and say a lot, but until you hear a speaker it's an educated guess. And that's not to put down graphs, as it could be a highly educated guess and a person's guesses could be right 95% of the time. But the listening confirms it.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
I seriously doubt that hump at 100hz is all that audible, it is a bit broadband, and less than 5db from the trough at 1k. It may sound a little richer than a speaker with a flatter response at 100hz, but this speaker has the same measurements(minus the trough at 1k) as my custom made mini monitors that just arrived in my home theater in Oakland yesterday.
.
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...ningwindow.gif
There appears to be some confusion here. I think the graph your commenting on here is for the wrong speaker. This graph is the Paradigm which is really excellent, and shows only a modest smooth hump centered at 100Hz. The Monitor Audio that YB Arcam commented on has the slightly rising treble response along with a much more pronounced hump at 80Hz.
http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/1...ig37815499.jpg
-
Some clarification is called for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
Soundstage and Stereophile use different methodologies for frequencies below 300z,, Sounstage's anechoic while Stereophile's are in nearfield 2pi space which results in a 3dB boast. When this differencce is taken account the midbass and upper bass of both speakers is broadly similar with the MA edging out the Paradigm in ultimate bass extension.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by theaudiohobby
Soundstage and Stereophile use different methodologies for frequencies below 300z,, Sounstage's anechoic while Stereophile's are in nearfield 2pi space which results in a 3dB boast. When this differencce is taken account the midbass and upper bass of both speakers is broadly similar with the MA edging out the Paradigm in ultimate bass extension.
Hmmm...I had thought Sterophile subtracted the +3dB from the results?, but I do agree with you that the Monitor definately has the edge in bass extention. Of course that makes sense too as the Studio 20 is a bookshelf, while the MA is a floorstander. Still they both have pretty decent graphs, with the MA having a slightly treble foreward presentation.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
I would take Bob Hoda over all three of these guys in a snap.
I had to look him up. Acoustical consultant. Does he do reviews? I would have a hard time getting his input unless he does.
I used to know a guy who worked for a dealership in Ottawa who had an astonishingly good ear for speakers--I think he must have been a participant in Dr. Floyd Toole's blind speaker tests. He used to tell some stories about some demonstrations Dr. Toole had done. I haven't seen him for over 20 years.
-
Boy....I see graphs bring out the real audionerds. Ima have to learn to get nerdy.
-
The issue was that I was supposedly the only reviewer who liked or supported Audio Note speakers - you have two Stereophile reviewers who own the speakers and a third who claimed the room with AN E in was the best sound reproduction he has ever heard.
Wes Philips ought to carry more weight over Art perhaps because Art is a tube High efficiency guy so he is biased to that technology. Wes Philips is not - he is a SS Harman/Toole speaker guy and this is a quick list of some of the stuff he has reviewed or owned:
Canton Vento Reference 1 DC loudspeaker
Wilson Audio Specialties WATT/Puppy System 8 loudspeaker
Vandersteen Quatro Wood loudspeaker
Definitive Technology Mythos STS SuperTower loudspeaker
Thiel CS3.7 loudspeaker
YG Acoustics Anat Reference II Professional loudspeaker
KEF Reference 201/2 loudspeaker
Dynaudio Confidence C1
Usher Audio Technology Be-718
M&K S-150
Paradigm Atom Monitor 5 (also reviewed the active upscale models a decade or so ago)
Dynaudio Focus 140
Sonics Anima (same designer as Audio Physic)
Proac Response One
"Forget best sound of show, for sheer emotional delivery, timbral clarity, dynamic agility, and, yes, the highest fidelity, the Audio Note system may have been the best hi-fi I have ever heard. It was one of those magical moments that we audiophiles put up with all of the hassles for.
After the Audio Note demo. the rest was noise, so I quit on a winner. Not many people who come to Vegas can say that". http://blog.stereophile.com/ces2009/...means_ecstasy/
So when he makes the comments it is NOT coming from a tube HE lover it is coming from an background rooted in Toole/Harman/Thiele kind of designs. And that was my only point. Close the book on the graphs and give the damn things a good long healthy listen because I can read the graphs just the same as everyone else. They are not pretty, SET amps are not pretty, AN no times oversampling CD players are not pretty - a bunch of not pretty all added together should offer downright terrible sound. And yet Audio Note is often at or near the top of sounding better at most audio shows (without any room treatments versus rooms with it). If virtually all of the subjective opinion concurs in different localities all around the world at every show then the smoke should lead one to think there must be some fire.
You may say Art likes the bad measuring stuff - fine but Wes is not loathe to. Nor would a magazine select the speaker to be used as a reference to judge other equipment against. Both the Harbeth and the Audio Note have in numerous cases very similar whacky measurements which is largely room related. Martin Colloms (the measurements guy for Stereophile for many years) measured the AN E in a room and noted "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 palcement, and a 29Hz tuned port with an in-room -6dB point of 18Hz at reasonable drive levels."
hi-fi Choice also measured the AN E and it did well. No it's not the best there is against the standard mini-monitor but then as I said years ago - it has to measure quite a lot differently in order for it to sound different. In this case different is better in my opinion. After listening to about a hundred rooms at CES - it illustrates the importance of actually bothering to listen because it is pretty clear that the best stuff is not the stuff that necessarily measures all that great which illustrates the point that even the guys firmly rooted in theory can change their mind (like Wes or Colloms) if they actually listen.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
Boy....I see graphs bring out the real audionerds. Ima have to learn to get nerdy.
Yeah, in my profession I read a lot of graphs. If the data is plotted correctly then it's pretty hard to fake results. I like them because you can see right away if something is going wrong or performing poorly.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat D
I had to look him up. Acoustical consultant. Does he do reviews? I would have a hard time getting his input unless he does.
I used to know a guy who worked for a dealership in Ottawa who had an astonishingly good ear for speakers--I think he must have been a participant in Dr. Floyd Toole's blind speaker tests. He used to tell some stories about some demonstrations Dr. Toole had done. I haven't seen him for over 20 years.
Bob Hoda is an acoustical consultant, but he does far more than just acoustical work. He does speaker voicing as well, and the results he produces are staggering.
|