Upgraded to Audio Note J - and other musings.

[RGA]

Woochifer
Hey I only attack Harman because speaker makers that emulate the approach and their own products sound to me like crap. Simple.

Advertising from AN - none. They have a web-site so you can purchase kit and speaker parts - and after you go into a store and listen to them and the dealer tells you yes these speakers are called Audio Note you can go home and look it up - they were not pre-sold to you. Other than the chat I've been providing them - most buyers heard the product before hearing about the company. And speakers are one of the smallest thing they do. Amps and Dacs are their big things.

They don't spend money advertising - the alternate web-sites are dealer run or fan run.

The Harman research I have no faith in when their products may as well be a clock radio in comparison. The proof will be in the sound - and they failed in their proof - easy to prove it against other speakers that are also trying to design home theater speakers - let's get them real competition. But if that happened something might beat what they sell. SO they will handpick what are the competitors - and they don;t list the speakers in the white papers I've read - just because something is expensive doesn't make it good. Choosing a speaker with obvious detriments for all I know. I want the specific speaker so that I can run the same blind test - without that it's in house for them and so what good is it to a consumer? Harman is the one you can read all about - Harman sells all these speakers - the implication is what? It's all wonderous until you listen to them - and even then if the competion is similar which most of it is - you can't really be sure which is better in most stores - so hey lets go back to the Harman research - it must be correct - it sounds all scientific - almost but enough so for the average Joe.

But hey I don't really care - sheesh you try and give a little company a voice in a sea of marketing because I'm like wow why can't the big boys make anything like that(err in fact they can they choose to sell looks). And before I get nailed for just re-stating what Audio Note says - I re-state it because that is in fact the way it sounds. It is either they are designing with looks as a main focus or their speakers are utterly inferior because of their designers - either way the proof IMO is in the sound - and why I'm so ready to believe in Audio Note's position is because upon hearing their gear reading their statements about the competition - hearing both sides products - then it is obvious to me who is correct - at least correct in the terms of the physical representation of their approach - perhaps the theory is correct and just very badly executed.

It may also be the case that I fall into the minority like those in the listening sessions that do not in fact choose those speakers they say MOST people in their sessions select. And Hifi choice measured the E and said that the above 800hz the speaker's measure about as good as speakers can get(with a slight recession from 2khz to 4khz). From 200hz -800hz they are a "shade strong" - below that is the speaker's strength with deep bass and very low distortion(All this measured where the manufacturer believes is the worst possible position - 1 meter from walls and no corner). Looking at JUST Soundstage measurements there would be no need to buy a speaker above the Paradigm Monitor 5 - and frankly to me there damn well is.

[Woochifer]

Woochifer
Hey I only attack Harman because speaker makers that emulate the approach and their own products sound to me like crap. Simple.

So, because you don't like the speakers that they make, that means that all of their research and findings are therefore invalid and entirely marketing driven? The concept of modes is one of the first things you learn when a basic physics class covers the concept of waves. And because Harman's white papers relate that basic concept to how speakers interact with rooms, anything that they say about room modes is also a marketing driven lie? Talk about killing the messenger and ignoring the message.

And your criticisms include ALL of the Infinity, JBL, and Revel models? Since I don't think you've listened to a broad cross-section of Harman's family speakers, you can't make that kind of generalized comment about the entire company and their entire body of research. If your entire exposure to Harman's speakers is the entry level JBLs, then you've missed the boat entirely. What about the Infinity Intermezzo and Kappa lines, or the Revels? Those lines are voiced very differently and cost a lot more than the lower level JBL models, but created using the same acoustical testing facilities. Like I said, READ THE PAPERS before you go blasting the research.

Advertising from AN - none. They have a web-site so you can purchase kit and speaker parts - and after you go into a store and listen to them and the dealer tells you yes these speakers are called Audio Note you can go home and look it up - they were not pre-sold to you. Other than the chat I've been providing them - most buyers heard the product before hearing about the company. And speakers are one of the smallest thing they do. Amps and Dacs are their big things.

Hmmm, I spotted a full page Audio Note ad in either Stereophile or one of the other audio magazines last month. That's how I found out that there's actually a dealer about 30 miles from me, so I can actually try them out one of these days. I don't see anything wrong with letting a customer know about the product and where they can buy it. You seem to look at the lack of advertising as some kind of badge of honor. I look at it as a way to connect with target customers who might be interested in a company's product, and it makes sense for any rational business that can afford to advertise in a targeted magazine like that to do so. Audio Note's just behaving rationally like any other profitable business that wants to grow.

They don't spend money advertising - the alternate web-sites are dealer run or fan run.

Yeah, but their own website looks pretty slick and professional to me.

The Harman research I have no faith in when their products may as well be a clock radio in comparison. The proof will be in the sound - and they failed in their proof - easy to prove it against other speakers that are also trying to design home theater speakers - let's get them real competition. But if that happened something might beat what they sell. SO they will handpick what are the competitors - and they don;t list the speakers in the white papers I've read - just because something is expensive doesn't make it good. Choosing a speaker with obvious detriments for all I know. I want the specific speaker so that I can run the same blind test - without that it's in house for them and so what good is it to a consumer? Harman is the one you can read all about - Harman sells all these speakers - the implication is what? It's all wonderous until you listen to them - and even then if the competion is similar which most of it is - you can't really be sure which is better in most stores - so hey lets go back to the Harman research - it must be correct - it sounds all scientific - almost but enough so for the average Joe.

Your obsession with brand identity really blinds you to the value of actually reading up on what some of the research findings are. You obviously don't understand the purpose of the research and the white papers if all you keep asking for is a ranking of speakers. If you base the credibility of a body of research based entirely on a limited sample of Harman speakers, that's just delusional. I mean you're already conjuring up counterarguments to the research before you even read what it actually says! Making up all these hypothetical scenarios and baseless assumptions to try and discredit the research just demonstrates a lack of intellectual curiosity, since you haven't even bothered to read what Harman makes available to the public. I'm sure you don't find criticisms of Fahrenheit 9/11 by people who haven't bothered to see the movie especially credible.

But hey I don't really care - sheesh you try and give a little company a voice in a sea of marketing because I'm like wow why can't the big boys make anything like that(err in fact they can they choose to sell looks). And before I get nailed for just re-stating what Audio Note says - I re-state it because that is in fact the way it sounds. It is either they are designing with looks as a main focus or their speakers are utterly inferior because of their designers - either way the proof IMO is in the sound - and why I'm so ready to believe in Audio Note's position is because upon hearing their gear reading their statements about the competition - hearing both sides products - then it is obvious to me who is correct - at least correct in the terms of the physical representation of their approach - perhaps the theory is correct and just very badly executed.

Hmmm, judging by their full page ads and slickly designed website, Audio Note sure as hell is marketing like a big boy. It's fine to appreciate their speakers, but don't try to ascribe all these other external attributes like their underdog status or small business aspirations or lack of advertising as some kind of validation that what they are doing is right and what everybody else does is wrong.

Like it or not, a lot of people appreciate the sound of speakers that made use of the original NRC research. Something had to have been done right, otherwise how would all of these Canadian speaker companies have successfully emerged in the U.S. market? They all started small, so obviously it wasn't entirely marketing or hype that led to their success. Maybe they just produced a good product whose sound spoke for itself.

It may also be the case that I fall into the minority like those in the listening sessions that do not in fact choose those speakers they say MOST people in their sessions select. And Hifi choice measured the E and said that the above 800hz the speaker's measure about as good as speakers can get(with a slight recession from 2khz to 4khz). From 200hz -800hz they are a "shade strong" - below that is the speaker's strength with deep bass and very low distortion(All this measured where the manufacturer believes is the worst possible position - 1 meter from walls and no corner). Looking at JUST Soundstage measurements there would be no need to buy a speaker above the Paradigm Monitor 5 - and frankly to me there damn well is.

Given that you've never done a blind speaker comparison, or even see the need for comparing speakers blind, how would you know how you would fare in a blind listening test? You're making all these presumptions that you somehow fall outside of what most people would prefer. Until you put your beliefs to the test, it's nothing more than a guess or wishful thinking on your part.

Soundstage has measured plenty of speakers that are generally more accurate than the Monitor 5 in the frequency response, so that's a false argument.

[skeptic]

You left out Tannoy. I think they own Tannoy too.

[RGA]

So, because you don't like the speakers that they make, that means that all of their research and findings are therefore invalid and entirely marketing driven? The concept of modes is one of the first things you learn when a basic physics class covers the concept of waves. And because Harman's white papers relate that basic concept to how speakers interact with rooms, anything that they say about room modes is also a marketing driven lie? Talk about killing the messenger and ignoring the message.

Umm they have known about room modes since 1930 you're point is what - that Hatrman knows basics physics good.

And your criticisms include ALL of the Infinity, JBL, and Revel models? Since I don't think you've listened to a broad cross-section of Harman's family speakers, you can't make that kind of generalized comment about the entire company and their entire body of research. If your entire exposure to Harman's speakers is the entry level JBLs, then you've missed the boat entirely. What about the Infinity Intermezzo and Kappa lines, or the Revels? Those lines are voiced very differently and cost a lot more than the lower level JBL models, but created using the same acoustical testing facilities. Like I said, READ THE PAPERS before you go blasting the research.

I have not heard Revel and Infinity stopped making the Rabos speakers - the Kappa line was always and stil is irritating. Other companies have bought into the Harman approach like energy and Paradigm and PSB - and I am VERY familiar with them from their top of the lines on down(with the excpetion of the Paradigm Sigs).

Hmmm, I spotted a full page Audio Note ad in either Stereophile or one of the other audio magazines last month. That's how I found out that there's actually a dealer about 30 miles from me, so I can actually try them out one of these days. I don't see anything wrong with letting a customer know about the product and where they can buy it. You seem to look at the lack of advertising as some kind of badge of honor. I look at it as a way to connect with target customers who might be interested in a company's product, and it makes sense for any rational business that can afford to advertise in a targeted magazine like that to do so. Audio Note's just behaving rationally like any other profitable business that wants to grow.

Which issue number and page? And make sure it is Audio Note that ran the ad - Dealers are entiteled to run ads as they often do. Especially when a product is reviewed - dealers will want to jump in and say "Look we carry them - come to this address."

Yeah, but their own website looks pretty slick and professional to me.

Really I think it's pretty poor - the site was originally set-up to order kit parts. It is barely ever updated - and IMO hardly a good web-site - it's something that one could build from software included with your computer - and even then the site was made that good for them by a fan.

Your obsession with brand identity really blinds you to the value of actually reading up on what some of the research findings are. You obviously don't understand the purpose of the research and the white papers if all you keep asking for is a ranking of speakers. If you base the credibility of a body of research based entirely on a limited sample of Harman speakers, that's just delusional. I mean you're already conjuring up counterarguments to the research before you even read what it actually says! Making up all these hypothetical scenarios and baseless assumptions to try and discredit the research just demonstrates a lack of intellectual curiosity, since you haven't even bothered to read what Harman makes available to the public. I'm sure you don't find criticisms of Fahrenheit 9/11 by people who haven't bothered to see the movie especially credible.

I have read the research - and they are trying to draw a conclusion that most people will choose a sound "type" versus other sound "types" once you root through all the extra babble. The three elements they find people will "prefer" are articulated as is their evaluation sessions - they are not specifically stated however with any actual per listener listening sessions. Psychological testing needs to be reproducable by an outside body to confirm - the studies avoid speaker brands intentionally because they want to be able to talk about sound "types." That is fine but it doesn't HELP ME when I'm out buying a speaker. And because Harman or JBL or whoever links the research off of their site it gives a strong implication that their speakers meet this "Ideal." They don't or more to the point many other brands may be meeting it better anyway.

Hi-fi Choice's blind listening panels does not back up the notion that Harman or other manufacturers inspired by that same research are any better than those not using those facilities. Presumably Harman's research means that they are making speakers that follow their ideal - and external listening reveals that the ideal is not for everyone. Though the Rabos Intermezzo did extremeley well(So I looked on the site to listen to them and they're gone) the Kappa series did not - and the lower lines of JBL to me is a marked step down with treble spikes that annoy me. And since ME is the person I'm buying speakers for then ME is the only person I have to justify my reaction.

Hmmm, judging by their full page ads and slickly designed website, Audio Note sure as hell is marketing like a big boy. It's fine to appreciate their speakers, but don't try to ascribe all these other external attributes like their underdog status or small business aspirations or lack of advertising as some kind of validation that what they are doing is right and what everybody else does is wrong.

Audio Note does not run ads - dealers may. As for the Site - chances are you're not going to see the web-sirte until after you heard the product - unless people like me talk about them and other people then go to their web-site. Even Sugden has a web-site these days. This does not mean there is ZERO marketing - people have to go to a site to be able to find where a dealer is located and to buy a woofer or to state a new product. There is still not much information. They want people to listen - which requires people to know about your product - but if you can't see the difference or only think it's a matter of how much advertising then you're not seeing it the way I'm seeing it.

Like it or not, a lot of people appreciate the sound of speakers that made use of the original NRC research. Something had to have been done right, otherwise how would all of these Canadian speaker companies have successfully emerged in the U.S. market? They all started small, so obviously it wasn't entirely marketing or hype that led to their success. Maybe they just produced a good product whose sound spoke for itself.

Yes you can think that if you wish. I would take Paradigm/PSB/Energy over most Advent, Bose, JBLs, and Cerwin Vegas of the 80's and 90s as well.

None of them has any real precence in Europe except JBL but JBL has a separate division there.

Given that you've never done a blind speaker comparison, or even see the need for comparing speakers blind, how would you know how you would fare in a blind listening test? You're making all these presumptions that you somehow fall outside of what most people would prefer. Until you put your beliefs to the test, it's nothing more than a guess or wishful thinking on your part.

I see the need to do a blind listening sessions when price or site or name bias is a factor and the differences are such that I don;t want to pay $2k for a speaker that may be no better than a $400.00 model. It's pretty tough to level match when the Audio Note's superior bass extension and more open airy top end is so superior to what is on tap from ALL the other speakers that Soundhounds carries that I see no point to doing such a test. Especially when ALL of the biases that do exist are ALL ALSO in those other manufacturers favour. And my own biases supported those other speakers. And the blind sessions that have been done externally revealed the speakers to come out on top anyway. Those sessions allow the speakers to be run in stereo and no curtailment of bass applied - as it should be.

Soundstage has measured plenty of speakers that are generally more accurate than the Monitor 5 in the frequency response, so that's a false argument.

Plenty Which ones? more than 5 more than 10 - I have looked at almost every single speaker on the site. I'm sure this is considered to be one of the better measuring speakers around. Fascinating as this is to me they sound like the equivelent of cow dung to the sense of smell.

[Woochifer]

I have not heard Revel and Infinity stopped making the Rabos speakers - the Kappa line was always and stil is irritating. Other companies have bought into the Harman approach like energy and Paradigm and PSB - and I am VERY familiar with them from their top of the lines on down(with the excpetion of the Paradigm Sigs).

Their RABOS system is incorporated into most of their powered subwoofers and tower speakers with powered subs, that includes the Prelude MTS series. You're right that the Intermezzos aren't made right now. I find it very hard to believe that you would compare the original Kappa series with the Energy, Paradigm, and PSB speakers because they had a very different type of sound (and it's not like those Canadian brands sound exactly the same either). I brought up the Revel and Infinity examples because they are voiced differently from the JBLs, yet use the same test facilities.

Which issue number and page? And make sure it is Audio Note that ran the ad - Dealers are entiteled to run ads as they often do. Especially when a product is reviewed - dealers will want to jump in and say "Look we carry them - come to this address."

I'll look it up for you. Might have been The Absolute Sound, but I distinctly remember the ad because I was able to locate a dealer in my area through the ad. It was an Audio Note ad because it listed the types of products that they made and it listed all of their North American dealers. Plus, it used the same font scheme as their website.

Really I think it's pretty poor - the site was originally set-up to order kit parts. It is barely ever updated - and IMO hardly a good web-site - it's something that one could build from software included with your computer - and even then the site was made that good for them by a fan.

Well, your opinion, but it's certainly a lot better setup than a lot of other audio company websites, especially the "little guys" that you like to tout.

I have read the research - and they are trying to draw a conclusion that most people will choose a sound "type" versus other sound "types" once you root through all the extra babble. The three elements they find people will "prefer" are articulated as is their evaluation sessions - they are not specifically stated however with any actual per listener listening sessions. Psychological testing needs to be reproducable by an outside body to confirm - the studies avoid speaker brands intentionally because they want to be able to talk about sound "types." That is fine but it doesn't HELP ME when I'm out buying a speaker. And because Harman or JBL or whoever links the research off of their site it gives a strong implication that their speakers meet this "Ideal." They don't or more to the point many other brands may be meeting it better anyway.

Again, you're focusing in on ONE aspect of the research that they post on their website. Your whole approach obsesses about rank order, and that's not the point of what Harman posts on their website. Like I said, READ THE WHITE PAPERS if you want to learn about how to calculate and identify locations of room modes, compensate for acoustical issues, properly setup a two channel or multichannel system, interpret various audio measures, etc. Those papers proved very beneficial when setting up and calibrating my system, but I guess if I knew everything about everything, then I would not need to do any reading.

Hi-fi Choice's blind listening panels does not back up the notion that Harman or other manufacturers inspired by that same research are any better than those not using those facilities. Presumably Harman's research means that they are making speakers that follow their ideal - and external listening reveals that the ideal is not for everyone. Though the Rabos Intermezzo did extremeley well(So I looked on the site to listen to them and they're gone) the Kappa series did not - and the lower lines of JBL to me is a marked step down with treble spikes that annoy me. And since ME is the person I'm buying speakers for then ME is the only person I have to justify my reaction.

Hi-Fi Choice's goal is about rank ordering and slotting, and since that's your singular obsession with determining the validity of research, then it obviously appeals to you. What Harman tests for is a LOT more complex than that. Just because a company does the same type of research does not mean that the speakers will sound the same. I certainly would never mistake a JBL for a Paradigm model. And in my listenings, Energy speakers have some different characteristics from Paradigms as well. Ever since Toole setup the new testing facilities, Harman has made huge improvements to JBL's lineup, but they did not fundamentally deviate from the "JBL sound" either. If I accept your argument that the same research would result in the same sound, then shouldn't all of Harman's speakers and those Canadian speakers actually sound identical? They sure don't sound that way to me.

Audio Note does not run ads - dealers may. As for the Site - chances are you're not going to see the web-sirte until after you heard the product - unless people like me talk about them and other people then go to their web-site. Even Sugden has a web-site these days. This does not mean there is ZERO marketing - people have to go to a site to be able to find where a dealer is located and to buy a woofer or to state a new product. There is still not much information. They want people to listen - which requires people to know about your product - but if you can't see the difference or only think it's a matter of how much advertising then you're not seeing it the way I'm seeing it.

Like I said, nothing wrong with Audio Note running ads. Your defensiveness about this issue is puzzling given that I would assume that you would want word to get out about the company. And if they're doing well enough to justify paying for a full-page ad in an audio magazine, shouldn't that be a good thing?

Yes you can think that if you wish. I would take Paradigm/PSB/Energy over most Advent, Bose, JBLs, and Cerwin Vegas of the 80's and 90s as well.

None of them has any real precence in Europe except JBL but JBL has a separate division there.

Well, it's not like Audio Note has a huge presence here either. We live in North America and I can find plenty of brands that suit my preferences here easily, so I don't really care what gets sold in Europe.

I see the need to do a blind listening sessions when price or site or name bias is a factor and the differences are such that I don;t want to pay $2k for a speaker that may be no better than a $400.00 model. It's pretty tough to level match when the Audio Note's superior bass extension and more open airy top end is so superior to what is on tap from ALL the other speakers that Soundhounds carries that I see no point to doing such a test. Especially when ALL of the biases that do exist are ALL ALSO in those other manufacturers favour. And my own biases supported those other speakers. And the blind sessions that have been done externally revealed the speakers to come out on top anyway. Those sessions allow the speakers to be run in stereo and no curtailment of bass applied - as it should be.

Quite the contrary, it's VERY easy to level match using a narrowband test tone and SPL meter. Jot down the differential in the SPL, and you make that adjustment for all of your listenings. Not all that complicated, and you only have to do the measurement once at the beginning. But, if you don't believe in measurements, then that point is moot.

And how do you define your own biases? You hate metal dome tweeters, you favor small audio companies, you hate things that are actively marketed, you generally favor European components, you hate speakers that made use of the NRC research in their development. How does your preference for Audio Note run contrary those biases? It's fine to state a preference, but don't pass your preference for Audio Note off as something that ran completely against the grain of what the sight biases would also point towards.

Like I said, if you're so sure that your listening acumen is equally valid under blind conditions, then put it to the test. I'm well aware of how sight biases influence my own judgments because I have put them to the test before and found that sight bias has a significant influence that needs to be minimized wherever possible.

Plenty Which ones? more than 5 more than 10 - I have looked at almost every single speaker on the site. I'm sure this is considered to be one of the better measuring speakers around. Fascinating as this is to me they sound like the equivelent of cow dung to the sense of smell.

This fascination you have with dung would make for quite a psychological profile.

As far as Soundstage measurements go, for starters, Paradigm's own Studio and Signature series models measure flatter than the Monitor 5, with less dipping in the midrange and peaking in the highs. It's not like the Monitor 5 has a perfectly flat response (and plenty of speakers have better bass response), and the others don't either. Why are you so sure that the Monitor 5 is one of the "better measuring speakers around"? Are you saying that if a speaker measures well on the frequency response, then it sounds like "the equivelent [sp] of cow dung to the sense of smell"? So, I guess a colored and inconsistent response measurement should be one of the design goals?

The Monitor 5 measures well, but so do a lot of others. All of them have measurable inaccuracies. The B&Ws, Revels, and Dynaudios also measure well, but all of them have very different areas where their inaccuracies occur. Their inaccuracies aren't huge, but they obviously make a difference in the sound. The frequency response charts give you an idea of where the inaccuracies occur, and you can make your own judgment as to which one would be better for you.

[RGA]

Their RABOS system is incorporated into most of their powered subwoofers and tower speakers with powered subs, that includes the Prelude MTS series. You're right that the Intermezzos aren't made right now. I find it very hard to believe that you would compare the original Kappa series with the Energy, Paradigm, and PSB speakers because they had a very different type of sound (and it's not like those Canadian brands sound exactly the same either). I brought up the Revel and Infinity examples because they are voiced differently from the JBLs, yet use the same test facilities.


Again, you're focusing in on ONE aspect of the research that they post on their website. Your whole approach obsesses about rank order, and that's not the point of what Harman posts on their website. Like I said, READ THE WHITE PAPERS if you want to learn about how to calculate and identify locations of room modes, compensate for acoustical issues, properly setup a two channel or multichannel system, interpret various audio measures, etc. Those papers proved very beneficial when setting up and calibrating my system, but I guess if I knew everything about everything, then I would not need to do any reading.

Let me be clear here - I am not tossing out ALL Harmn research about what they have to say about speaker positioning - that is not the SPECIFIC white paper I am talking about at all. The only relevant one I am talking about is the one that will help me BUY a speaker - not the one that will help me make it sound better once I get it home - that's great and will help anyone no matter what speaker you buy to improve possibly the sound of the speaker. ELAC has apparently a very helpful program you can run for pretty cheap as well.

Hi-Fi Choice's goal is about rank ordering and slotting, and since that's your singular obsession with determining the validity of research, then it obviously appeals to you. What Harman tests for is a LOT more complex than that. Just because a company does the same type of research does not mean that the speakers will sound the same. I certainly would never mistake a JBL for a Paradigm model. And in my listenings, Energy speakers have some different characteristics from Paradigms as well. Ever since Toole setup the new testing facilities, Harman has made huge improvements to JBL's lineup, but they did not fundamentally deviate from the "JBL sound" either. If I accept your argument that the same research would result in the same sound, then shouldn't all of Harman's speakers and those Canadian speakers actually sound identical? They sure don't sound that way to me.

But Hi-fi choice is the only thing that helps someone who is looking to BUY a speaker - all I am saying is that if all Harman speakers are designed to fit the ideal and everyone elses is not as is the "implication" then they should do as well in secondary blind listening sessions as they do in house - and they don't always. I am talking about rank.

This is the entire point - the fact that within house the speakers don't sound the same means there is more to it than summing up mere frequency response even on and off axis. Speakers that measure almost exactly the same within 1db (not likely going to be detectable) or even far more variance in certain frequencies won't be detectable in themselves sound different. I am not supporting a speaker that has poor meadsurements or claiming as you would like to think that I am saying everyone go buy totally non flat speakers - what I am saying is that very flat speakers hardly gaurantee good sound - and that is simply in the listening to them - very easy to tell. The fact that the De Capo has some anomolies has hardly swayed people into thinking it's a dreadful speaker.

Like I said, nothing wrong with Audio Note running ads. Your defensiveness about this issue is puzzling given that I would assume that you would want word to get out about the company. And if they're doing well enough to justify paying for a full-page ad in an audio magazine, shouldn't that be a good thing?

I am not defensive I simply asked you for proof - Advertising and product literature are not things Peter Q believes in - an American Distrubutor might - I have no problems with them doing that. In effect that is what I am doing - except I don't get paid nor do I sell them. Word of mouth is still advertising.

Quite the contrary, it's VERY easy to level match using a narrowband test tone and SPL meter. Jot down the differential in the SPL, and you make that adjustment for all of your listenings. Not all that complicated, and you only have to do the measurement once at the beginning. But, if you don't believe in measurements, then that point is moot.

I believe in measurements that tell me something useful. Explain to me how you would level match the Audio Note J to a Paradigm Monitor 5? Then I get to play them both at 95decibals and I get to alternate ANY disc I choose - including pedal organ. SInce the monotor 5 will have hopeless bass and hopeless dynnamics and compression and an bright crappy tweeter there is nothing to match except a 1khz test tone at 95db.

And how do you define your own biases? You hate metal dome tweeters, you favor small audio companies, you hate things that are actively marketed, you generally favor European components, you hate speakers that made use of the NRC research in their development. How does your preference for Audio Note run contrary those biases? It's fine to state a preference, but don't pass your preference for Audio Note off as something that ran completely against the grain of what the sight biases would also point towards.

Umm my preferences came as a result of listening to an endless stream of this stuff. I did not wake up and say I hate all big name speakers and hate all metal tweeters - nor did I hate marketing. In fact it was Reference 3a and Audio Note - especially the latter and my experience with B&W that got me thinking about ALL the speakers over the years that I liked and disliked - and what do you know there was a pattern. I don't dislike B&W - but my opinion of them has shifted.

As far as Soundstage measurements go, for starters, Paradigm's own Studio and The Monitor 5 measures well, but so do a lot of others. All of them have measurable inaccuracies. The B&Ws, Revels, and Dynaudios also measure well, but all of them have very different areas where their inaccuracies occur. Their inaccuracies aren't huge, but they obviously make a difference in the sound. The frequency response charts give you an idea of where the inaccuracies occur, and you can make your own judgment as to which one would be better for you.

Well so does the Reference 3a MM De Capo. I am not against measurements because the measurement of the De Capo supports, partially, the reason why in the end I didn't buy the speaker - I didn't need the measurement to tell me where the innacuracies are though because I heard them - I also would not have used the term innacuracy - because that very thing is the reason the speaker is so well liked and why I liked it - but the K had a less dark presentation and because my listening genre is far more broad I wanted something more "expressive."

You seem to have an aversion to people who want to listen to speakers - skeptic hates the fact that people have the audacity to listen to Audio Note speakers. They must be giant corporations to be any good - and must have Toole designing them to be any good at all - and they must follow NRC guidelines - great be happy with what you bought and I will be as well. I have heard both and many others over the years - This is my opinion of the sound - some will disagree - even some of those people who did actually hear the speakers might disagree. And those people that did listen to them and bought something else fine.

[Woochifer]

Let me be clear here - I am not tossing out ALL Harmn research about what they have to say about speaker positioning - that is not the SPECIFIC white paper I am talking about at all. The only relevant one I am talking about is the one that will help me BUY a speaker - not the one that will help me make it sound better once I get it home - that's great and will help anyone no matter what speaker you buy to improve possibly the sound of the speaker. ELAC has apparently a very helpful program you can run for pretty cheap as well.

FYI, the Harman room mode calculator is posted on their website for free. I actually used it when positioning my subwoofer.

I am not defensive I simply asked you for proof - Advertising and product literature are not things Peter Q believes in - an American Distrubutor might - I have no problems with them doing that. In effect that is what I am doing - except I don't get paid nor do I sell them. Word of mouth is still advertising.

Like I said, I'll look for it and post the info when I find it. It was some magazine that I thumbed through last month on the newsstand, so I'll have to retrace which magazine it was and see if I can locate a back issue.

I believe in measurements that tell me something useful. Explain to me how you would level match the Audio Note J to a Paradigm Monitor 5? Then I get to play them both at 95decibals and I get to alternate ANY disc I choose - including pedal organ. SInce the monotor 5 will have hopeless bass and hopeless dynnamics and compression and an bright crappy tweeter there is nothing to match except a 1khz test tone at 95db.

The subjective aspect that you describe has less to do with the SPL measurement than the overall efficiency of the speaker would. Since the Audio Note rates at a higher efficiency than the Monitor 5 and most other speakers, obviously that puts the Audio Note at an advantage, regardless of whatever other subjective findings you might have. My own listenings of the Monitor 5 were very favorable, especially considering that it sells for $525USD, and probably even less than that in Canada. Crappy tweeter, hopeless bass, and hopeless dynamics were certainly not how I would describe them subjectively, so I don't know how you're so certain that the Monitor 5 would be difficult to level match.

Just the fact that you're raising this kind of objection indicates to me that you've never used a SPL meter while comparing speakers. It may be science, but it's certainly not a difficult concept to grasp. Like I said, to control for the level you would use a narrow band test tone (one that eliminates the extreme lows but maintains a wide spectrum throughout the midrange and into the highs). Test DVDs like Avia and Video Essentials use this type of test tone for main and surround level matching, and a wider band test tone that includes the lower frequencies for the subwoofer. The reading represents the average SPL over the frequency range that most sound information is in. The last thing you want is to use a wideband test tone, since below about 300 Hz the room acoustic effects take over and you don't want the SPL reading to be driven by standing waves. Since by your claims, the Audio Note would go deeper into the low frequency range, then it has greater potential to develop either a severe null or peak in the lower range, which would create an erroneous SPL reading. The narrow band frequency test (which is obviously not the same as a 1 kHz test tone) simply means that you're minimizing a major source of bias to the greatest extent possible. Whatever other factors, if any, that you want to control for is up to you.

Well so does the Reference 3a MM De Capo. I am not against measurements because the measurement of the De Capo supports, partially, the reason why in the end I didn't buy the speaker - I didn't need the measurement to tell me where the innacuracies are though because I heard them - I also would not have used the term innacuracy - because that very thing is the reason the speaker is so well liked and why I liked it - but the K had a less dark presentation and because my listening genre is far more broad I wanted something more "expressive."

Same deal with the Magneplanars. Those speakers do not measure very well (I've read claims that their dipolar design prevents them from measuring well in an anecholic environment), but looking at the frequency response and seeing how the midrange dominates and the highs roll off, I can easily see why they have their appeal for specific genres.

You seem to have an aversion to people who want to listen to speakers - skeptic hates the fact that people have the audacity to listen to Audio Note speakers. They must be giant corporations to be any good - and must have Toole designing them to be any good at all - and they must follow NRC guidelines - great be happy with what you bought and I will be as well. I have heard both and many others over the years - This is my opinion of the sound - some will disagree - even some of those people who did actually hear the speakers might disagree. And those people that did listen to them and bought something else fine.

No, I don't have an aversion to listening. I listen to and enjoy my own speakers all the time. I just have an aversion to claims that sighted listenings alone are sufficient to discredit the validity of calibrated measurements and bias controlled listening tests. Listening has value because that's the ultimate function of audio equipment. But, at the same time, I'm not going sit here and claim that what I hear during sighted product demos invalidates all technical mesurements and that my conclusion is applicable to all situations just because I said so. There's the room acoustics to consider, the setup, and the source. For specific types of recordings, it can be very advantageous to have speakers with specific kinds of frequency deviations. EVERY speaker has deviations of some kind, so part of the auditioning process is discerning which inaccuracies work best with your listening habits.

And for umpteenth time, Toole is NOT a speaker designer.

And what about the NRC findings (they never set up any comprehensive set of guidelines, only findings that were found to be statistically valid) do you find problematic? Good off-axis response? Low distortion? Even frequency response through the midrange? Those points are really the main conclusions. Whatever else you want to ascribe to the research is nothing more than presumption. Just because a manufacturer voices their speakers with boosted highs and/or lows does not mean that the research dictated that. In fact, a while ago I read that researchers expected to find that people would prefer speakers with boosted highs or lows, but that turned out to be inconclusive and less important than the midrange accuracy, which was a consistent preference.

[skeptic]

Finally something we can agree on!

"Really I think it's pretty poor - the site was originally set-up to order kit parts. It is barely ever updated - and IMO hardly a good web-site "

The AN web site is so poorly designed that you can't even get down to the bottom of the menu on the left side of main page if you have a couple of extra tool bars on your screen because they didn't include a scroll bar.

http://www.audionote.co.uk/

The minimalist approach doesn't work for web sites any better than it works for amplifier or speaker designs but when you have limited knowledge, a religous fervor of how the world is or should be, and are pigheaded to boot, this is the kind of results you get.

[RGA]

Finally something we can agree on!

"Really I think it's pretty poor - the site was originally set-up to order kit parts. It is barely ever updated - and IMO hardly a good web-site "

The AN web site is so poorly designed that you can't even get down to the bottom of the menu on the left side of main page if you have a couple of extra tool bars on your screen because they didn't include a scroll bar.

http://www.audionote.co.uk/

The minimalist approach doesn't work for web sites any better than it works for amplifier or speaker designs but when you have limited knowledge, a religous fervor of how the world is or should be, and are pigheaded to boot, this is the kind of results you get.

It's a shame that his simple approach beats the competitors complex approach - maybe it's just complex for complexities sake. After all his simple one 8 inch woofer and 8 watt SETs can destroy B&W's N801 and the best Solid State you can come up with.

And when you hear one if your a big enough person to admit that this is true - it is you who will take the shackles of ignoance off.

[newbsterv2]

It's a shame that his simple approach beats the competitors complex approach - maybe it's just complex for complexities sake. After all his simple one 8 inch woofer and 8 watt SETs can destroy B&W's N801 and the best Solid State you can come up with.

And when you hear one if your a big enough person to admit that this is true - it is you who will take the shackles of ignoance off.

hey RGA I think you're a helluva guy but come on man why don't u give up? Resonant boxes, flea powered SET's, silver wire, snake oil. For those of us who are engineers and have been to school and have seen complex waveforms on a scope and for those of us who enjoy unamplified "live" music we know when we're getting snowballed and bs'ed. I've heard some smooth tube/silk dome tweetered boxes that were a joy to listen to but far from sounding like a live performance. It's very simple. A system that has a wide frequency response, low harmonic distortion, and a wide dispersion among the entire frequency range is what engineers who know what they are doing are trying to accomplish. I mean take 5 different acoustic instruments such as a piano, violin, cello, clarinet, and sax and all are made of different materials that have different inherent physical properties and then listen to the clown who runs audio note and he says that his cabinets should vibrate because real instruments do. That's absolutely ridiculous. If you like the "sound" your system makes God bless you man but don't tell us that Audio Notes' speakers/amplifiers are the holy grail of audio cause they're not.

[RGA]

hey RGA I think you're a helluva guy but come on man why don't u give up? Resonant boxes, flea powered SET's, silver wire, snake oil. For those of us who are engineers and have been to school and have seen complex waveforms on a scope and for those of us who enjoy unamplified "live" music we know when we're getting snowballed and bs'ed. I've heard some smooth tube/silk dome tweetered boxes that were a joy to listen to but far from sounding like a live performance. It's very simple. A system that has a wide frequency response, low harmonic distortion, and a wide dispersion among the entire frequency range is what engineers who know what they are doing are trying to accomplish. I mean take 5 different acoustic instruments such as a piano, violin, cello, clarinet, and sax and all are made of different materials that have different inherent physical properties and then listen to the clown who runs audio note and he says that his cabinets should vibrate because real instruments do. That's absolutely ridiculous. If you like the "sound" your system makes God bless you man but don't tell us that Audio Notes' speakers/amplifiers are the holy grail of audio cause they're not.

In the strictest sense the cabinet vibrates or resopnates at the frequency Audio Note dictates - and not by accident or because the speaker wasn't damped enough. You also don't need a high damping factor amp if you folow the approach through the line. Audio Note has real engineers with rela degrees working for them - the founder was the chief designer of Sony Corporation - presumably a fellow that knows a bit about design - or he would never have attained the position in the first place. Martin Colloms(B.Sc. (Hons), C.Eng, M.I.E.E.)

William Ellis Grammar School London and University of Westminster [Regent Street Polytechnic.]

Graduated in l97l with a B.Sc. Hons in Electrical Engineering.

Awarded Chartership of the Institution of Electrical Engineers 1981.

MacRobert Award Finalist 2000 (with Neil Harris and Henry Azima), Royal Academy of Engineers

has measured their products from DAC to speakers

"Books ;

The speaker design textbook, first published in 1978 'High Performance Loudspeakers'[ISBN: 0471 97091 3 PPC; 0471 97089 1 Pr.] has been in print for over 20 years. The fully revised and expanded fifth edition [paper and hardback] was published by J Wiley for 1997. It has been translated into several foreign languages and the book received a most favourable review in the Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, Vol 40, Number 1/2.

A second book entitled Computer Controlled Test and Instrumentation, was published in 1983 and provided an introduction to the IEEE 488 control bus. [ now out of print; ISBN 0-7273-0310-4]

Paul Messenger and engineer measures speakers for Hi-Fi Choice among other writings - gee the AN Speakers are so bad he decided to keep them - like his fellow writers form Stereophile and Enjoythemusic.com(who hear all of the cutting edge SOTA products) to be used as reference speakers and also to measure other equipment. More importantly to JUST listen to music on.

I have read the technical arguments about what I should look for in speakers from a design point of view BEFORE I listened to the Audio Notes. They should be a slim line design - they should not have a wide baffle they should have soft corners to reduce standing waves the tweeter and woofer are too far apart - they should not use foam nor should they use paper woofers - they should be very heavily damped and they should also be very large if they are going to produce bass - and if a small speaker DOES produce bass they will be very low sensitiviy.

Yet the engineers - the people who know - are the ones buying em up when they hear them, and musicians and recording studios, and designers from B&W, and average Joe's who when they see the speaker doing EVERYTHING wrong sounds miles better. And why is that? Because the speaker is doing the So-called impossible - Impossible for inferior designers obviously - so who has the best engineers and who simply has a lot of engineers - there is a difference.

When a relatively small speaker with one woofer can generate ~18hz while maintaning a mid band that is startlingly open and uncongested and doesn't sound compressed or nasal is not surprising that blind listening panels would award them top marks - A bit of colour perhaps but the trade-off is to gain Bass depth dynamics open vocals and overall light on its feet musicality.

"A system that has a wide frequency response, low harmonic distortion, and a wide dispersion among the entire frequency range is what engineers who know what they are doing are trying to accomplish."

This is what enginners want right? Is that what you're saying? Then you sir need to listen to Audio Note speakers. And when you do you can be like me and call all the other designers a bunch of talentless hacks or poor souls for letting bean counters dictate speaker design for maximizing profits via using dirt cheap parts(and then conning the masses that their cheaply made boxes and woiring and crossovers may be cheap junk but much much better than using quality drivers, wood, and parts) - Sorry that dog don't hunt.

[gonefishin]

And when you hear one if your a big enough person to admit that this is true - it is you who will take the shackles of ignoance off.

RGA...I have heard some of the AudioNote speakers...a couple of the low cost ones and the high dollar silver voice coil speakers too. You know what. They do sound decent. Do they kill the competetion? no, they don't. But they are fun to listen to. They do make nice music. With the lower proced models actually being good bargins compared to many of the larger companies.


Wooch, if you get the chance to listen to them...do give them a chance...they really do deserve it. The best? no. But they are above average. As far as having a discussion about other speakers, speaker design or construction...amplifier design, use or construction or room effects with RGA, this may be futile. Unless it's written down on the AN website...I doubt you'll get much else. I think we may be lucky that he isn't using the $500.00 wooden volume knob that's treated with c37 lacquer
I'd still like an answer on how in the world he could suggest that all speakers at a show would have equal opportunity to perform well in rooms which were the same. This is within this thread while discussing comparing (relatively) higher end"ish" speakers. So the comment shouldn't have been made in oversight.

have a good weekend all>>>>>

[92135011]

Yeah, but their own website looks pretty slick and professional to me.

Donno bout you...but I sure dont like their website. That thing hasnt been updated for years. Their speakers dont even come in certain models now.
I also find their site a pain to navigate when you first go in. Some menus are on the side while others are on the page. If you want to know any information about their amps, it isnt on the amp page, cuz there is none. It's on level 1, 2, 3. But speakers sure have their own page. One more thing, thier products look better in person most times as there are not glamour shots. Actually the first time I saw the site, it looked so amateur that I directly linked it to the quality of the speaker for some reason. Bad thing to do, but some marketing survey found significant figures that there is a relationship between well designed websites and the likelihood that a customer will buy. So maybe its a natural thing