 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.90.166.129
So, I eagerly read the review of Sjofn Hifi's (the clue) speaker in the January, 2015 Stereophile because I'd been intrigued by the concept (and low price) of these speakers for several years since their introduction. Also, I run Supra cables (imported in the US by Sjofn) in my system and have had pleasant dealings with the Sjofn President, Lars Erickson, in the past.
Seems that Herb Reichert came into the review really wanting to like the speaker - he'd loved it at shows in the past. But no matter what he did - including amp swapping - he couldn't get them to sound right in his listening room.
Both James Croft (the designer) and Lars Erickson penned a lengthy (the longest I remember seeing) manufacturer response in which they marvel that Herb loved them so much at shows and found them so lacking at home, and they conclude that there was a problem with his room or setup. They also marvel that Herb never contacted them to ask for help if he was getting such odd results. (the clue) is designed for a very specific set up: up against the front wall, 22-degree toe-in, specific ratio of separation of speakers to listening seat. They also say, essentially, that JA's measurements were taken incorrectly for such a design.
I don't think I've ever seen a more negative, subjective review in Stereophile. Yes, I've seen lots of instances where a reviewer liked what he/she heard but JA thought they measured poorly, but not one in which the reviewer expressed such open frustration and disappointment.
If you've read the review, I'd be interested in hearing what you think of the review, the measurements and the manufacturer response.
Follow Ups:
The natives are restless:
The manufacturer should be totally out of the review process. if I buy their product are they going to come to my house to set them up for me? Of course not. if a reviewer with experience can't set them up properly how is a normal human being going to do so. I call Bullshit on the criticism of the review.
When they discover the center of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it. ~ Bernard Bailey
OP-
re-read the review today. Not bad at all, every review does not have to be a positive one. It is quite acceptable to not like the piece of gear/speaker under review. If I had a request w/ HR, I would like to have read more about the Creek integrated amp.
> I eagerly read the review of Sjofn Hifi's (the clue) speaker in the
> January, 2015 Stereophile because I'd been intrigued by the concept (and
> low price) of these speakers for several years since their introduction.
This review is now posted in our free on-line archives (see link below)
and includes the manufacturer's comments.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
A reviewer should write what he hears without fear of being blackballed by the industry. A manufacturer should respond appropriately. Both reviewer and manufacturer performed their roles appropriately in this case. Readers can make up their own mind.
Ciao
-Amante
... should probably be deleted from the product literature and replaced with a stern warning:
"Please call or email our office before unpacking these speakers. We cannot and will not be held responsible for disappointing results due to owner's refusal to avail themselves of an individualized setup consultation."
Another good alternative might be to pack a factory trained nordic elf in every shipping crate.
We shall comm4ence with the recruitment of elves on our next trip to the Scandinavian Ancestral Homeland!
In lieu of the type of warning that you recommend, we email every buyer (and reviewer!) of (the clue) and all but plead with him/her to consult with us on placement issues. ZERO customers - or reviewers - who have taken us up on this offer have been less than tickled pink by our diminutive wonders!
I have no reason to doubt that your speakers can sound quite good in a carefully optimized setup.So, I would suggest that you revise the instructions in the "quick start" setup page somehow, in order to reflect the possibility that *serious listeners* who are interested in refining their listening experience should most definitely consider contacting your customer support department for assistance with "The Optimization Checklist" (or another similarly catchy term), regardless of how happy they might be with a hasty or superficial setup.
The unwashed masses need to understand that true audiophiles spend hours if not days or weeks fiddling with the position of their speakers until they are at last satisfied that no further improvements are possible. Your speakers might be a bit more demanding of careful setup than some others are, but they are probably not unique in this regard.
Edits: 12/29/14
"The unwashed masses need to understand that true audiophiles spend hours if not days or weeks fiddling with the position of their speakers until they are at last satisfied that no further improvements are possible."
In my case it was more like a month with my Focal studio monitors. I had to move the speakers fractions of an inch, but I ended up adding a sub and moving that around and figuring out how to set the dozen cross-over controls. This was a hopeless project when done totally by ear, so I got a calibrated microphone and RTA. In the end the sound I was getting went from not quite acceptable to excellent. I don't think I would have gotten these results without a combination of objective measurements and subjective listening.
IMO it is simply insane to judge speakers without understanding their interaction with the room. This is something that the audiophile must know and it's not going to come from any "quick start guide".
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
And come to think of it, it's actually kind of fun fiddling around for days on end.
After all the fiddling and setup, my maid comes and moves the speakers to dust around and underneath. And thus starts all that fiddling and set up all over again.
Cheers
Bill
How long has this been going on? Do you hang around when the maid is on her hands and knees dusting "around and underneath" your speakers?
g
Have some discretion, OK!?
My speakers presently sitting on top of short bookshelves. Yet to try on the floor.
Cheers
Bill
Does your maid have to climb a ladder in order to reach your bookshelf speakers?
The bookshelves are 5 feet tall. The maid has to use the stepladder to move the speakers around and clean which takes some time. This location on top of the shelf with the speaker in horizontal position with slight tilt to focus the woofers towards me is so far the most satisfying. The floor and the stands were not as satisfying.
Cheers
Bill
I must say that I have not heard the deficiencies that the reviewer has. In reading the setup guide it suggests 60-80 hours of use for burn-in. Since I bought these used, this was not a problem, however nothing was mentioned in the review about this. I have mine on 19" sand filled, metal stands and the angled corners are 1/4" from the wall, 22.5 degrees toe-in, however I found that the sweet spot, in my 12 1/2' L x 10' w x 7 3/4' tall room was further back that the 1:1.18 ratio suggests. The speakers are placed on the long wall. I find the speakers revealing, smooth with very good midrange, bass and fun to listen to, especially for a speaker of this size. See the guide below for other setup tweeks. The wall panels have been removed since the photo.
Edits: 01/28/15
Hey, Dill,
Thanks so much for the photos. I'm curious about the fact that you have your electronic and source gear between the speakers. I have my rig (with my Reference 3A De Capo's) set up in a similar fashion out of necessity and room constraints, although the front speaker baffles and most of the cabinets are forward of the gear). But I'd always assumed that a speaker like (the clue) that needed to be right up against the wall wouldn't have worked properly at all with sound waves bouncing off the gear between them and in front of their baffles. Have you not found that to be an issue?
Hi rebbi,I am dealing with a 12 1/2' L x 10' W x 7 3/4' H room with windows on one end & 2 doors at the other, that doubles as an office. There is no other place to put the rack. (the clue) speakers replaced a pair of Silverline Preludes that were placed outside the front plane of the rack. I had the same concerns about the clue speakers being behind the plane and did careful listening tests, using familiar recordings and test cds with both speakers in house. I noticed no real difference in depth, width or height. I prefered (the clue) speakers as they are smoother, faster, provide more bass and fit better in the small room by being tucked away. Remember my listening position is only 7' away from the speakers, so I have a direct line of sight to both speakers. If I had a large room, I would have different speakers - like my former room below (2009). (the clue) speakers work very well for me, with my current ancillary gear and room size.
Edits: 01/28/15
Nice Parts Express box. Which doesn't mean it can't sound good.
When they discover the center of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it. ~ Bernard Bailey
Can you push the rack and the right speaker a foot to the right? The left speaker looks congested.
Cheers
Bill
It looks like a bad position.
-Wendell
Eliminated one of the racks, moved the other to the center. I like the less cluttered look. Early listening tests indicates a tad better depth & width, maybe a bit more clarity.
Edits: 01/28/15
if you could only move the other rack out of the way. :-)
-Wendell
The photo makes the rack look like it is farther out than it is. The speaker front outside corners are 13" from the back wall, the front of the rack is 20" from the back wall and the speakers are 20" from the rack, side to side. I listen 7' from the plane of the speakers. There is no other place in the room for the rack as I need to keep my office intact.
Same distance as the right one Wendall. The photo makes the left one appear to be tucked in behind the rack, it is not.
"The photo makes the left one appear to be tucked in behind the rack, it is not."
Then how do you explain the fact that the photo *definitely* shows the left speaker sitting behind the rack? How do you explain this optical illusion???
-RW-
"Then how do you explain the fact that the photo *definitely* shows the left speaker sitting behind the rack?"
The FACT is, the left speaker is NOT "sitting behind the rack"
"How do you explain this optical illusion???"
Simple, the photo was taken from the right side of a small room.
The left speaker is sitting behind the front plane of the rack...
-RW-
"The left speaker is sitting behind the front plane of the rack..."Yes, it is. It has to for correct boundary reinforcement. I have no other choice for the placement of the rack. The photo is at the listening position about 7 feet from the front of the speakers.
Edits: 01/28/15
Too bad. The left speaker is so close to the rack. If you have no choice and like the sound all is good. I suspect the performance is compromised but still enjoyable.
-Wendell
I can detect no negative effects of the rack. It has open sides and remember I am listening near-field. I broke out my trusty Best of Chesky Jazz & More Audiophile Tests Vol. 2 cd, tracks 34 - 47 and the setup passed with flying colors, especially track 47 General Image & Resolution Test, spooky real. Thanks for all your concerns, however there really is no problem. See link below.
Isn't this the same problem with all bookshelf speakers? What's so special about the clue?
I once did a budget system review that included a nice pair of North Creek bookshelf speakers. I was told by the manufacturer to position the speakers as close as possible to the wall, toed-in. This was in the old place where my main listening room was smaller with no fireplace. I did the best I could. Even bought stands and filled them with lead shot. My preference was to pull them out from the wall a bit which sacrificed the bass but resulted in better overall sound. I could have easily lived with that system.
Sue
See, bellow the JA's post and Accapella's speakers in his room...why would those giant speakers work in there...and how?
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
> See, below the JA's post and Acapella's speakers in his room...why
> would those giant speakers work in there...and how?
I don't understand the question. Yes, the Acapella speakers are large,
but my room is not small, measuring around 25' by 16'. I sit at least
8' away from the speakers I review in that room.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
I didn't know the 'true' size of the room - mine is the same size with the 12' ceiling (but suspended floors) and can't get anything to sound decent in there - acceptable only for the HT listening. Thinking about staring over with the monitors or monitors/satellite. Regards!
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
My experience with suspended wood floors is that they will suck the bass response out of larger/heavier speakers esp. if they are coupled to them via spikes. My Revels sound much better not spiked but I am sure I am still not getting their full potential out of them.
...mine is the same size with the 12' ceiling (but suspended floors) and can't get anything to sound decent in there
Sorry to hear that. Mine is also 25x16 with some dormer extensions front and rear and get very nice sound with some help from bass traps and skylines.
I get measurably very linear bass response from 30-200 hz with my stats.
No doubt. These speakers seem especially sensitive to precise placement based on manufacturer comments. I would be more concerned with the rack than the speaker placement as shown.
-Wendell
In order to get the best, most accurate bass response, you must place the speakers close to the wall. And, because of room setup considerations, the rack must remain between the speakers. This is somewhat unfortunate because of the deleterious effects on imaging that the placement of the rack will engender.
Nonetheless, if it sounds good to you that is all that counts!!
Best Wishes,
-RW-
....and set up instructions. I'm happy that you're happy. That's what it's all about.
Profuse and humble thanks for starting this thread!
The conclusions you reach, in re: the review in question, mirror our own. We really don't think that we got a fair shake - and are heartened that other AA members agree.
Admittedly, I'm late to this party and have no desire to wade through dozens of the usual tedious/snarky posts. So let’s cut to the chase: What do you think prevented the reviewer from duplicating the favorable results he is purported to have heard at various shows?
...getting kind of lazy in your old age, eh sport?
The manufacturer's instructions weren't complete and the difference is they tweaked the placement of the speakers at the shows.
"...getting kind of lazy in your old age, eh sport?"
Guilty, dear boy. But in this particular case I think "indifference" would be more accurate. Since the sine qua non of the subjectivist position is that listeners really hear what they claim to hear and are not delusional, I was merely curious as to why hundreds of hobbyists achieved splendid results with this speaker while a professional reviewer did not.
You attribute sloppy editing as partly responsible for the reviewer’s difficulties, but, again, hobbyists seem to have coped with that “problem” while achieving great results, whereas it was just too much for the reviewer to overcome. As for “tweaking the placement,” are you suggesting this was done without disclosing that fact to listeners? If so, anyone wishing to receive maximum benefit from this speaker in his room would probably hit upon the correct positioning eventually, through trial and error. Assuming he cared enough to expend the effort.
...many audiophiles fail to achieve maximum benefit of even ordinary loudspeakers by getting them positioned optimally in their room.
Much less quirky speakers like these.
Did you read the posts? It was "Quick Start-Up Installation Guide," not the "MI".
I think, two very different things.
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
provide him the podium to whine some more.
"It's all fun and games until someone doesn't pick up on the sarcasm"
...I believe you got one.
Sounds great in some shows set up by the manufacturer.
Not so great in Herb's room following manufacturer's instructions.
Measurements confirm what he heard.
At best a quirky speaker capable of sounding very good for the money in the right situation.
If nothing else, people will be interested in hearing the speaker for themselves.
"There's no such thing as bad publicity."
I have been able to read the online edition of the January 2015 Stereophile. As you may remember, I like to use measurements to screen out speakers from my audition list. The measurements of this speaker are mediocre enough to convince me not to bother looking for it.
-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser
As Jim Croft, the speaker's designer, said in his post on this thread, JA did NOT measure the speakers correctly. (the clue) depends on there being at least three room boundaries for correct bass reinforcement; JA had only one for his testing. JA measured the tweeter on-axis, whereas, on the recommended 18"-22" stand, the tweeter will be below ear level. When measured at ear level, the tweeter is exceedingly smooth - as is the midrange/tweeter when measured in-room with adequate boundary reinforcement.
I am not much concerned about the bass response. It is the large peaks and dips above 600 Hz that bother me and the dip in the off axis dispersion, though as JA said, this would ameliorate one of those peaks off-axis.
I certainly appreciate the importance of vertical dispersion, but I am not much interested in a speaker that is so sensitive to listening height.
The measurements and your remarks indicate to me a speaker that is not very room friendly.
I cannot possibly audition every available speaker and I prefer to screen out some from my audition list based on measurements.
-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser
So STFU.
"We are all in God's hands... and God is a malign thug."
-Mark Twain
...sounds like you're an owner or a big fan.
No need to be so defensive. Whew!
Like most everyone here I read the article and the manufacturer's comments both here an in the mag.
Never said they don't have the ability to sound good.
This thread poses multiple questions: Is "Stereophile" too cozy with the manufacturers with 'pedigree' (the main stream hifi companies)...Awards, the cocktail parties - do they practice "too big too fail" review policy? Is (Stereophile) too powerful that one botched review can potentially destroy the "Indy" company?
LOL we could rename this thread to "Occupy Stereophile" :)
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
If Stereophile was "too cozy with the manufacturers with 'pedigree'" there never would have been a review in the first place.
I think Mr. Kuller has nailed the situation. The speaker is unusually idiosyncratic, to the point where a very experienced audiophile couldn't get it to sound good following the instructions that came with it.
"...there never would have been a review in the first place." That would be too obvious. On the other hand, I do not believe there is any deliberate conspiracy - just a human condition. Incidentally, if the speakers in question were Aerial Acoustic, the proven and solid Giant of the industry we would already 'know' they would perform at their 'usual' level.
As I mentioned earlier, the reviewer made an effort to switch multiple amps...didn't bother to move speakers an inch! LOL!
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
> As I mentioned earlier, the reviewer made an effort to switch multiple
> amps...didn't bother to move speakers an inch!
That's not correct. The speakers were placed close to the wall as
practicable, within 2" of the boundary as recommended. Moving the speakers
further out in the room resulted in an even leaner low-frequency balance
and experimenting with the lateral spacing didn't give an appreciable
improvement. In addition, while not mentioned in the review, two other
Stereophile reviewers tried the Sjofn speakers but were not able, as I
understand it, to get the speakers to produce the anticipated sound quality
in their rooms.
Usually, in cases like this, I would have auditioned the speakers in my
own room. However, my room is not suitable for speakers that require
boundary reinforcement to obtain their intended bass response. (See the
photo at the link below.)
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
...but let's say Mr. Framer gets them to review them, and they don't work in his room. How would you classify them then? He say's NO, you say Class A! What in the case YOU don't get the chance to review them and make them 'work'. Are measurement then a tiebreaker? Why would the laymen trust the measurements?
Thanks!
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
> ...but let's say Mr. [Fremer] gets them to review them, and they don't
> work in his room.He would get to write a follow-up review saying so. Just as when I audition
a product that has already been reviewed in Stereophile, I write a followup,
as I did with the Revel M106 in the current (January) issue of Stereophile.> How would you classify them then? He say's NO, you say Class A!
The ultimate decider of the rating is myself. I am the boss, after all :-)
But if you read Stereophile's "Recommended Components," you can find
plenty of examples where my reviewers disagree. But what matters to me is
that my team doesn't disagree on the description of a product's sound
quality - they are all all expert, experienced listeners and their
descriptions are indeed transportable. Where they _do_ disagree is on the
relative value of the various aspect of a product's sound. Description is
one aspect of a reviewer's skill set; preference is a different thing,
which is why all our reviews include details of the music used to reach
value judgments.> Why would the laymen trust the measurements?
Because they are by definition transportable. If you read Stereophile's
review of the Sjofn (the clue), the measurements sidebar reveals why the
speaker sounds lean even when used against the wall; why its balance
will be susceptible to small changes in toe-in; why the speaker's balance
will depend on how damped the listener's room is; and why, even, its
reproduction in the lower midrange was odd, in that some musical notes
went missing in action, something that bothered our reviewer more than
the lean upper bass.Again, these measured caveats will be found in Stereophile's "Recommended
Component" listings.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Edits: 12/23/14
.
nt
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
nt
NT
Had to have a minimum # of US Dealers to get accepted
What gives here?
I've heard the speaker at RMAF
Des
One may audition and purchase (the clue) from appointment-only associates and dealers in:
L.A.
NY/NJ metro
Chicago
Seattle
Portland (OR)
Boise
Idaho Falls
Billings
Denver
Manhattan (KS)
DC metro
Nashville
We sell the speakers direct to parties who are further than 50 miles from one of the above locations.
Then why not state --available from selected/etc/etc?
Rather than the "just" Sold Direct
Simple I'd thought
Des
> Had to have a minimum # of US Dealers to get accepted
> What gives here?
We have always made an exception to our "5 Dealer Rule" for products that
are only sold direct. As I write in the essay describing our policies at
the link below: "It is the editor's decision whether a product distributed
by mail-order or via the Web qualifies for review. However, at minimum the
company must have a formal US presence and must offer a 30-day, money-back
refund policy."
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
John..........How come Stereophile has not reviewed any Von Schweikert speakers in the past 15+ years? The VSA Vr-22, 33 and 35 speakers are only sold factory direct and are a great value for the money. I seem to have heard somewhere that Stereophile has a problem with VSA.And, don't tell me that you can't get review samples because almost every other magazine in print and internet have. Why, why, why?
"Far away across the field
The tolling of the iron bell
Calls the faithful to their knees
To hear the softly spoken magic spells."
Edits: 12/20/14
> How come Stereophile has not reviewed any Von Schweikert speakers in the
> past 15+ years?
We did receive samples of a Von Schweikert speaker for review a few
years back, but before the review had gotten underway, the speaker was
discontinued. (The drive-units it used were withdrawn from production.)
We returned the samples because there seemed little point in proceeding
with a review of a product that no longer existed.
But yes, a review of this brand is long overdue.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
I wonder how much time you spend posting on various boards. I imagine it's a good bit. There are a lot of boards out here. I have always thought you put a great face forward for Stereophile by the way. Merry Christmas.
E
T
> wonder how much time you spend posting on various boards. I imagine it's a
> good bit.Maybe 20-30 minutes a day. I tend only to respond to questions put to me
about Stereophile. I don't initiate threads.> I have always thought you put a great face forward for Stereophile by the
> way. Merry Christmas.Thank you. May you have a music-filled holiday season.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Edits: 12/24/14
Interesting. Somehow I thought you'd spend a lot of time on this with the number of BBS out there. Glad it doesn't "tax" you heavily. Merry Merry!
E
T
He is a very patient gentleman. They are few and far between.
Even if he attempts to explain it, unless you're in their shoes, I think it would be difficult to grasp how anyone values their time.
"I have always thought you put a great face forward for Stereophile by the way."
'By the way' of what disclaimer?
I don't know what you mean by your post. Also I really don't judge or even really care how any one values their time . I was just looking for a number in hours per month or similar. As Joe Friday said "just the facts".
E
T
"I was just looking for a number in hours per month or similar. As Joe Friday said "just the facts"."
I guess the facts you seek are puzzling to me. Not unlike, 'What's your astrological sign?'.
Well it's like this JA is employed by Stereophile. I was just wondering how much time he spends on various boards as a spokesperson. My guess is a good bit. Perhaps the time spent is billable or part of his working hours perhaps not. That wasn't the goal of my question. Just the time spent. I know as a businessperson with two websites the amount of time emails and posts related to work can take.It seems germain to me where as someones astro sign is not.
E
T
Thanks for the clarification John. I would really love to see a review on one of their lower priced factory direct speakers, like the VR-33. I own a pair but I would love to see what the experts think, especially since I am "toying" with purchasing the Golden Ear Triton 1 speakers in the second half of 2015. Their very narrow footprint would work well in my living room.
"Far away across the field
The tolling of the iron bell
Calls the faithful to their knees
To hear the softly spoken magic spells."
I luv to bend rules too!
Des
They do list 5 dealers but they are online only dealers. Does that count?
Now that they have come to AA to attack the reviewer I wouldn't do business with them anyway. Who needs the BS?
nt
Hope to see y'all at the show
The readers themselves questioned the review - The speaker designer, and rightfully so, respectfully presented his case. The "Critic" forum was meant exactly for this kind of discussion, and participation is optional. Remember, you reviewers are human, and allowed to make a mistake and be occasionally wrong. Nobody is being attacked here.
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
I'll have to get it mail order lol
Aren't you curious? Most likely, you would do the review right.
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
"Aren't you curious? Most likely, you would do the review right."
Are you offering to send me a pair? I'll have to move my fireplace so give me a few days.
Seriously I'm not about to second guess the Stereophile review. I doubt those speakers would do well in my main room. Too large and there is a fireplace on the short wall so system has to be pulled out from the back wall including speakers.
My only curiosity would be my smaller listening room which is square with the system set up diagonally. I've got a boatload of room tunes in there which make for some very interesting listening. I've never tried a book shelf in there. But who's going to spend a grand just for grins?
Sue
I don't own them, never heard them. But, despite the Stereophile's damning review, I'd place them on my 'wish list.'
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
Bring an extra pair and we'll try stacking them.
I've got ribbons on my wish list. I actually put Christmas ribbons on my Coincident speakers but it didn't help much. Makes the room look a bit more festive though.
That's sweet Sue! Don't know about extra pair of speakers, but as i recall you live in the 'frozen tundra' so this little heater I'd bring and would do the job...I think you haven't reviewed it yet?
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
Sure, bring one of those, too. What is it? Lambeau Field could use one of those. You'd be amazed what's under the turf to keep it warm. No more frozen tundra until the season is over, hopefully not next week.
Pass Aleph 3. It emits so much heat someone actually tried to fry an egg. But here the cheaper alternative to 'warming up'
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
.
The question of negative reviews has been launched upon by normal Stereophile fan boys so let's examine that shall we?
The typical line is that the are few negative reviews because the reviewers naturally review things they like, e.g. somehow picked up a favorable impression, e.g. at show(s) etc.
And that seems to have be the case here, the reviewer hears them a shows and really liked what he heard and presumably approached the manufacturer for review. If that's not exactly how it happened it hardly matters, e.g. the manufacturer may well have offered the product for reviews, but that was hardly a big risk given the reviewer has been making positive statements at more than one show.
So then he gets the speakers and low and behold they end up getting the hatchet from the reviewer, and also from the Measurements Monkey.
I guess this is a good sign for those hankering for negative reviews,,, half deaf reviewer that don't really know what they like and/or don't have the talent make the unit perform properly.
---
The other issue, which was prominent in the OP, but mostly ignored by the Stereophile fanboy/apologists (and also by JA) is the question of interaction, specifically lack off interaction, with the manufacturer when things were going wrong.
This has been brought up in multiple posts, i.e. talk of manufacturers visiting a reviewer and doing the setup themselves, replacement test units obtained, favoured manufacturers getting the kid glove treatment after some $$$ unit literally fails and blows fuses on the test bench [Ayre], and so on.
It doesn't take much imagination to see why Stereophile and the fanboys are avoiding this topic like a hot potato, but it is sort of amusing to see the distractors hard at work.
As to working with the reviewer one can argue that an experienced audiophile with manufacturer's instructions should be able to get good performance on his own. And if he can't how can the ordinary user who has not been exposed to as many situations as the reviewer?
Each and every (the clue) buyer (or reviewer!) is offered unlimited email and/or phone consultation on correct set-up in his inevitably unique listening space. NO ONE who has taken us up on this offer and followed our recommendations has failed to be most satisfied with our wee dynamos.
Reasonable answer though I still think what I wrote is relevant. By the way since I haven't heard the speakers I have no real view on them. I just tend to react to negative comments about reviewers who do a decent job by those who often (not all of them) don't know what they're reacting to often not having heard the product them selves. It seems that reviewers are treated like politicians. They're good when you agree with them and lousy otherwise.
And by the way it's scary putting what you write on the line. I've done it at times, even writing for JGH in the old days.
In this case our 'politician' didn't even fully comprehend the new 'bill' before signing it.
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
> The other issue, which was prominent in the OP, but mostly ignored by the
> Stereophile fanboy/apologists (and also by JA) is the question of
> interaction, specifically lack off interaction, with the manufacturer when
> things were going wrong.
As I have repeatedly written in the magazine, merely sounding poor is no
reason to believe a product is broken. And as I have also repeatedly
written, manufacturer don't know what a Stereophile reviewer is going to
say about a review until they receive the preprint of the review. A review
in Stereophile is not a collaborative effort between manufacturer and
magazine.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
No winks, no nods?
But how many times have we read of the following kind of collaborative effort avoiding any chance of the component being placed sub-optimally. Was the reviewer in the case quoted below not capable of following the manufacturer's directions regarding placement--as the consumer would have to do?
If I purchase the speakers written of below will the designer come and place them for me and lend me an amp and cables?
I could have quoted from many Stereophile reviews; this one came up first on the web site.
"Setup
Rather than ship the review samples, Carl Marchisotto brought them over in person, along with 10' lengths of his preferred loudspeaker cable, Nordost Odin. (Though unfamiliar with the Odins, I did do some comparisons with the Kubala-Sosna Elation! cables I'd been using—see later.) Although he had also wanted to bring his Audio Research Reference 75 stereo power amplifier for me to use—an amplifier with which I was familiar, having used it for a while after it was reviewed by Bob Reina for the May 2013 issue of Stereophile—it was not available that day. Marchisotto therefore shipped it to me a couple of weeks later, along with a Nordost Odin AC cable fitted with the appropriate 20A IEC plug.
Using a CD-R of his reference tracks, Marchisotto methodically moved each Metro Grand Reference Gold until he was satisfied that it was speaking with one voice across the audio band. He then placed each speaker on its ball-bearing–coupled base, did some confirming listening, and bade me farewell."
I make this point with no ax to grind. I have no dog in this fight. But I am impressed with the fact of an unconventional and innovative design at a very reasonable price--and a seeming inability of the major review magazine to deal with it. Seems to me to be a discouragement of exactly that kind of imaginative innovation.
Having read the designer's post, I could say the same of the measurements--seemingly an inability to deal with an innovative design.
Your canny comments are right on the money; thank you!
We really don't understand why we weren't afforded the same opportunity (which we did request) as the manufacturer cited in your post - but we're pretty sure that Mr. Reichert's review would have come to very different conclusions if we had.
As repeatedly mentioned in this thread, we invite EVERY (the clue) buyer to consult with us via email and/or phone until set-up is optimized for his listening environment. (Can one get the same level of service from any other manufacturer of a sub-$1000 product?)
Hello everyone,I developed the clue loudspeaker for Sjöfn HiFi.
I thought I would jump in here and hopefully add some clarity relative to the rather negative outcome of the recent Stereophile review by Herb Reichert and John Atkinson.
To start, we weren’t looking for the reviewer “to help out the manufacturer as an unpaid consultant…” or to have the review be “…a collaborative effort,” as suggested by Mr. Atkinson. In fact just the opposite; we merely wanted to help the reviewer be able to realize the full capability of the clue, as he, and other Stereophile reviewers had heard them perform at the audio shows, and then it is our gamble to leave the subjective evaluation to his ears, a gamble that we are willing to take if we know our speaker is operating at full capability, which we would hope is what the magazine wants and what the customer would want from the magazine.
The written instructions define the interface with two room boundaries and the relationship to the listener, in a rather precise manner, and in the majority of cases, the set up instruction is adequate to reach the potential of the loudspeaker.
But, many rooms have unpredictable acoustical attributes, including at least four additional boundaries, of various forms, that impact the performance. In some environments, the setup may require additional adjustment beyond what we specify in the basic instructions, so, we offer additional support to all our customers, and reviewers :-) to help them achieve the best outcome.
That help was offered up front to Mr. Reichert, and that is why we were rather surprised in reading the review after knowing that Mr. Reichert and at least two other Stereophile reviewers had heard the clue perform at the audio shows (in very difficult room acoustics) and in all cases were very impressed as we illustrated in a few example quotations of their impressions in our manufacturer’s reply. In fact some of the statements were actually in direct conflict with the findings of the review. The fact that what was heard at the shows didn’t line up with the Mr. Reichert’s review experience made us wonder why he wasn’t curious enough to give us a call.
That said, from what Mr. Reichert expressed as this experience in his listening room is actually a pretty accurate assessment of what one would hear if the clue was not fully optimized for effective coupling to the room boundaries. So, I would not challenge the astuteness of Mr. Reichert’s listening abilities, but only the fact that unfortunately he stopped short of getting the speakers to their full potential in his room; which again, we would have been glad to help work through that exercise.
Lastly, I would like to clear up part of the measurement results.
First, when we first sent in the clue for test, it was our understanding that it was going to be reviewed without measurements, so we didn’t think to alert the Stereophile that the clue, due to its unusual design for a specific use-model, may require, either a different measurement approach or alternatively, a different interpretation of some of the measurements.
I believe that most of Mr. Atkinson’s measurements were very accurate, as usual, but there were a few data points that were not effectively coordinated with the unique aspects of the clue design and use-model.
Regarding the nearfield low frequency measurement, JA mentioned in the review, and in one of his posts in this forum; “The nearfield measurement technique I use is an exact simulation of the speaker's behavior when used adjacent to an infinite boundary, ie, exactly the condition required by the Sjofn.”
As good as JA’s intentions may have been, unfortunately, this statement is not true. He is correct that his nearfield measurement technique duplicates a single infinite boundary, or “half-space”, but that is not the environment the clue is designed for or placed in, per the instructions. The bass alignment of the clue depends on the frequency dependent, sequential gain that results from placement that invokes a half-space to quarter-space, eighth-space, etc., with the associated gain steps at the appropriate frequencies. A near field measurement only provides the first half-space gain-step, and therefore does not show all the realized LF gain. Think of the front-wall as the equivalent of an infinite half-space, and the 90-degree bend at the floor boundary shifting the environment to a quarter-space environment at a lower frequency, providing additional gain. That is why the coupling to the front-wall and height off the floor are given as exact placements, to have those first two gain steps occur at the correct frequencies.
When effectively coupled to the room, the low frequency response is elevated to reference level, operating essentially flat from ≤ 35Hz to at least the Schroeder frequency of the room.In terms of the high frequency response, one will find from the use-model instructions that the zero-degree tweeter axis is not the listening axis. At the actual oblique-angle listening axis, one will find the top two octaves to measure very smooth and extended, corresponding to Mr. Reichert’s stated subjective experience. In fact, one can actually observe in JA’s measurements, that by looking the lateral response family, just off zero-axis the response comes up to fill in the hole that one sees on the tweeter axis.
I will stop here, as I’m concerned I’ve already hi-jacked more space than I should, but hopefully the above explains some of the review issues, which I feel are more about misunderstandings than shortcomings of the reviewers or the speakers themselves.
I’m glad to answer any questions anyone might have.
All the best,
- Jim Croft
Croft Acoustical
Edits: 01/01/15
James,
I was hoping you might chime in here. Thanks for the insights. I sounds like Stereophile may owe you a follow up review and perhaps even an apology.
> > James,
> > I was hoping you might chime in here. Thanks for the insights. I sounds like Stereophile may > > owe you a follow up review and perhaps even an apology.
Rebbi,
Thanks for starting this thread.
I appreciate that there is a spot where everyone can voice their thoughts on the review.
All the best,
- JC
Croft Acoustical? ... not the same Croft Acoustical of integrated amp fame that Stereophile writers loved and JA trashed?If the answer is yes /// then I would say you deserve what you got
Ho Ho Ho
Edits: 12/18/14
bjh,
No, I am not that Croft Acoustical. Actually, I wasn't aware there was another Croft Acoustical.
Maybe you are referring to Croft Acoustics, in the UK.
- Jim
Yes that one ... magnificent little integrated with phono stage, two reviewers went ape-sh--, Atkinson skewered it ... bigger f'up than this one (thought I suppose you may see it different ;)
Best,
"bigger f'up than this one".
In what manner?
I dug up the review and nothing jumps out at me. Which measurements do you believe were wrong, or where was an inappropriate conclusion drawn from them? Also upon what are you basing your beliefs that the unit was well done?
If you are going to be a critic critic, which I'm all in favor of as closing the loop is good, you'd better have some supporting evidence least you invoke us critic critic critics!
Rick
What'a you know? ... go arrange something
I know all about your rules .... And have noted your penchant to choose to ignore exceptions to same! ... And then there's the goodly portion of -any issue written by the columnists who are totally exempt from the rules (except when doing formal reviews). I realize such thing make perfect sense to you, me too, only I'm certain we'd use different word to describe!
As an actual owner of these speakers with many hours of listening, I wonder if my opinion would actually have any weight compared to the many that have actually NOT heard them. Do I dare share? Or do we base everything on one person's review and measurements? Why do we hold them in so high regard, or is it just another person's opinion, like mine? Google them, many good accolades ...
Many thanks for your cogent comments!
As expressed elsewhere in this thread, I think that the counsel of The Buddha obtains here: "Put no head above your own."
We have received a number of emails and phone calls from other (the clue) owners (as well as guys who have heard the speakers at various audio shows) - all of whom wondered if Reichert was listening to the same speakers that they own. As you know, (the clue) - if even close to properly set up - does not exhibit "lean" bass, "thin" vocals, or poor tonal balance. As you also know, (the clue) features deep, powerful, accurate bass, like no other monitor out there; robust, "you are there" vocals; and consummate tonal balance. All for under a thousand clams.
from the manufacturer's recommendations? Perhaps you should send them your comments along with an invoice. :)
There are other reviews out there where the reviewers were impressed, at least one that had a goodly amount of discussion about setup and room interactions ... why don't *you* go look them up ... run along.
.
http://parttimeaudiophile.com/2012/09/19/second-thoughts-digging-in-to-the-clue-from-sjofn-hifi/
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue53/clue.htm
PF set them up using manufacturer's recommendation as did Stereophile. No new information there.
PTF lowered them from recommended setting. As I indicated earlier, tell the manufacturer what works better than their rec!
Personally I think the idea of a good speaker is one that is designed specifically to suffer the least room ills, i.e. Tannoy Dual-Concenric, size comes with it, but but clearly these little puppies are quite the opposite, chasing the dream, big sound/small box.
In any case referencing the reviews those fellows seemed to have gotten decent sound.
When I attend live, unamplified concerts, I find that the room most certainly plays a part in the sound. As one who finds that dipolar line sources render that experience more convincingly, I have the opposite opinion. The room becomes "the enclosure" for my stats.
From your referenced sources, however, I find no evidence that Stereophile didn't set them up properly. Not everyone likes the same speakers.
Whine about the results however you please.
Mr. Reichert liked our speakers plenty well when he heard them at Capital Audiofest; see his show report comments on the Stereophile blog. Of course, at the show, they were set up properly for that specific room; we were not afforded the opportunity to set up (the clue)s in Mr. Reichert's unique listening space.
should refine their placement recommendations if what they provide doesn't work in home environments.
As I've mentioned in response to several postings, each and every (the clue) purchaser is invited to consult with us via email and/or phone regarding speaker placement in his unique listening environment. We have yet to encounter anyone who was in any way dissatisfied with (the clue) after availing himself of this service.
John Atkinson said the speakers were set up exactly as directed by the owners manual.
Do you question that assertion?
Please see the posting from the speaker's designer, James Croft, in re: that subject.
to update your owner's manual!
He likes em' plenty enough at the shows, eh?
If you like them you need no validation from any of us. I'm sure many here would think that I have tin ears for liking my AR-58's and large Advents as much as I do. I probably do.
Measurements do tell something and the chance to audition much of the gear reported on in Stereophile is not available to many of us. My closest real dealer is over 2 hours away and he is not a dealer of this brand. My chance to audition them is not totally my fault.
Jim Tavegia
The Dill -
So you do have some actual experience to bring to the table here. What do you think went wrong with the review or with the reviewer's set up?
He went through great effort to swap the numerous amps, but didn't cross his mind to try to move them? Incidentally I owned Linn speakers, Tukan not Kan, and if placed too far away from the wall they were like, two different speakers.
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
Love the Bukowski quote!
n
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
What, to be candid and undiplomatic, really frosted my butt was:
1) It is incomprehensible to me that someone who presumes to pen a review for the globe's leading audio mag doesn't know that, to fill in a lean lower midrange and bass and to correct tonal balance that's tilted upward, one need only move a speaker (almost any speaker) closer to a room boundary. That's pretty basic stuff - which I learned in my first week on the job at a hi-fi shop over 40 years ago. But furthermore...
2) When Mr. Reichert asked for a review pair at Capital Audiofest last summer, we of course told him that we'd like to set up the speakers correctly in his room (a professional courtesy that Stereophile routinely grants to others). We were denied. I then went through some set-up basics, and while I was in mid-sentence, talking about moving the speakers closer to or further away from room boundaries to achieve correct tonal balance, Reichert brusquely waved me off, saying that he knew all about such things, having been the Audio Note importer back in the 90s. (The Audio Notes, like our speakers, require boundary-coupling to do their stuff.) His description of our wee wonder's sound is right on the money when it's not getting sufficient boundary support: thin vocals, lean bass, tonal balance tilted upward. No one who owns our speakers or has heard them at shows or at our showroom has ever noted these phenomena. No one. Ever. And neither did the two other guys who reviewed (the clue) - i.e., in Positive Feedback Online and Soundsgoodtome. Neither did anyone who included (the clue) in a show report. In fact, incredibly, no one had anything negative to say in print at all!
3) Reichert gave (the clue) an unqualified rave in his Capital Audiofest show report, having heard them set up properly (and using digital files and solid-state electronics). He contacted us three times as he was evaluating the speakers - but somehow failed to mention that he was hearing something quite different from that which he experienced at the show. JA commented on Asylum that they're not here to collaborate with manufacturers on reviews - but Reichert did, in fact, contact us for some collaboration - just not in re: the critical matter of his contradictory experiences of the speaker.
Each and every (the clue) purchaser is offered unlimited email and/or phone consultation on set-up (in-home set-up for buyers in or near Seattle), associated components, or anything else related to that purchase - with the "Quick Start-Up Installation Guide" being a starting point (albeit one which, if followed, satisfies the lion's share of customers). And we have had not a single owner who failed to be satisfied with our speakers after going through the consultation process. And achieving proper set-up seldom takes more than a few minutes.
Well, I've blown hard for too long. Thanks for reading!
...didn't he position them specifically like the manufacturer recommended?
The reviewer states that he positioned the speakers "more or less" as recommended in our Quick Start Installation Guide. One strongly suspects, given the results he reports, that it was more "less" than more "more." Too, as both the speakers' designer and I have said elsewhere in this thread, what he reports hearing is exactly what the speakers sound like with insufficient boundary reinforcement. At Capital Audiofest last summer - where Mr. Reichert asked for a review pair and after which he heaped effulgent praise on (the clue) on the Stereophile blog - he assured me that he knew how to handle set-up of speakers that require correct boundary-coupling, as he'd been the Audio Note distributor in the 90s.
Bottom line: I'm pretty certain that, had we been granted the opportunity to set up (the clue)s properly in Mr. Reichert's listening room - or if he had just asked us about the discrepancy between what he heard at Capital Audiofest and in his own listening space - he would have produced a much different review. Even though he reveals a strong preference for tubes, vinyl, and speakers with "romantic" lower-midrange colorations (LS3/5As with tubes? Ya gotta be kiddin'), he was delighted with our ACCURATE speakers, properly set up, using solid-state electronics and digital files.
And please note that each and every (the clue) buyer gets all the consultation via email and/or phone required to get our diminutive wonders singing sweetly in his listening space. While our Quick Start Installation Guide - which JA incorrectly identifies as an Owner's Manual - is sufficient for optimum set-up in most rooms, as you know, every listening space is different. And EVERY (the clue) owner who has consulted with us, in re: set-up has come away anywhere from very satisfied to positively tickled pink!
> didn't he position them specifically like the manufacturer recommended?
Yes, exactly as recommended in the owner's manual. If the advice in the
manual was incorrect, it is not the reviewer's responsibility to help out
the manufacturer as an unpaid consultant, which is one interpretation of
the manufacturer's comment.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Agreed. It seems to me that Herb made an effort to position the speakers according to the designer's specs. I don't see how he had any obligation to contact the manufacturer when they didn't perform properly. If they were broken or obviously damaged that would be different but in this case I don't see how he did anything wrong. He simply called it as he heard it. Isn't that the point?
...we are able to change the way they sound, swapping the source, but also the room interaction by physically moving them around. I also believe the most seasoned audiophiles would consider 'recommendation' just as a starting point.
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
Most of the time, most, when I move my gear and speakers around the changes are not glaringly noticeable. I don't really use any scientific method other than the golden triangle. My rooms are not big enough to make movements without messing up the utility of the room.
I have been experimenting with some small, affordable JBL bookshelf speakers and it was my first attempt at placing them more into the middle of the room free of the side and back walls by 4+ feet which places them in a near field situation to my recliner for listening. I am enjoying that position more than I thought with sonic positions of instruments floating freer than I thought they wood.
If HR didn't like them his experience at the show may have been overshadowed by some other factors of which we can never know. Everyone wants their gear to be reviewed favorably, but sometimes a piece of gear does not float someone's boat. I feel their pain.
I looked at the measurement graphs and there are some severe issues in the chamber, but that huge spike in the waterfall plot is much different than I've seen in most speaker measurements, and that must account for some abnormality. The step response is also very slow it appears. Very different from other speakers for sure.
Jim Tavegia
That outplayed (when didn't catch on fire) anything before and after I owned, including the highly praised Pass Aleph 3. *See Golden Tube Audio Se-40
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
Having never heard the speakers I have no opinion on them. What I do find ironic is the criticism of a negative review as Stereophile has been repeatedly accused of publishing only positive reviews or even selling reviews for advertising.
-Wendell
... a reservation about the reviewer in question.
Based on the following quote from his Linkwitz Labs speakers RMAF coverage in Stereophile, I would say that I'm highly unlikely to agree with his subjective opinions about sound.
So many systems have all these good audiophile traits but play music in a woeful joyless manner...
Not my experience at all - and I also find it interesting that the antithesis of the above mentioned abominations is a Linkwitz bottom-of-the-line speaker, driven by an Emotiva amp.
...with not having a second reviewer comment on the review like TAS used to do in the day.
The speaker sounds a bit quirky and the reviewer tried a number of things to get it to sound better, like someone who bought it would.
The measurements in this case bear out what the reviewer described so it's difficult to argue with what he heard.
Please see comments from the designer of (the clue) elsewhere in this thread. Both listening and testing were conducted with incorrect set-up; his comments include cogent elaboration on the matter.
...they followed the manufacturer's instructions carefully like any audiophile who purchased the speaker would.
Were the instructions wrong? Misleading? Incomplete?
What is the designer trying to say?
Perhaps it was his room, but that seems unlikely.
Every listening space is unique.
The speaker's designer is only saying that a speaker interfaces with different rooms differently - particularly when optimum performance depends on correct room boundary coupling. The reviewer gave us to believe that he is well-familiar with setting up speakers for which such coupling is critical (having been the Audio Note distributor in the 90s). His conclusions regarding (the clue) are quite correct - when the speaker receives insufficient boundary reinforcement (lean bass, thin vocals, lack of warmth).
We don't know how closely the reviewer followed the general set-up instructions in the Quick-Start Installation Guide; he said he "more or less" followed them. From the results, we strongly suspect that he followed them "less."
Since the person giving the bad review liked the product so much prior. I agree the product must have been imporperly used byy the reviewer.
Also. Stereophile will bend over backwards to allow manufacturers the chance to 'fix' stuff that sucks..
Why not in this case???
So I agree the review was not right.
Stereophile has always been fair to the manufacturers, allowing them to send new sample if the one sent is faulty. I like that fair habit.
Bill
Let's see. The reviewer expected to like them and didn't and the measurements correlated with what he heard and everyone is sure that Stereophile is wrong. Are these the same people who complain about too many good reviews? I'll with hold judgment either way since I haven't heard the speakers. But unless all of you heard them it seems you should at least give Stereophile the benefit of the doubt and not jump to conclusions about what happened.
and if you don't. I've talked with Herb a few times he's not the kind of person to write a review like that lightly. For a small mfg. a Stereophile review can be a bit of a trial by fire. Perhaps Jim Croft should have conferred with JA about measurement techniques prior to seeing them if he felt there was a unusual complexity about it knowing full well they were going to be measured (maybe JA can do a follow up?). Perhaps they can also listen to against the wall instead of the less then 2" off, though I am not sure how much of a difference that would make.
Except in a very small space, moving (the clue) directly up against the wall - as we suggested to Mr. Reichert before his review - will actually make quite a significant difference. The lower midrange and bass will fill out and there will be added "texture" - particularly in vocals, of course.
We would have greatly appreciated the opportunity to set up our speakers in Mr. Reichert's room - or at least to have received a quick email or phone call from him when he wasn't hearing that about which he raved in his show report from Capital Audiofest (where he requested a pair for review).
I was down the hall from you at Capital, your room had a good buzz though I didn't get a chance to hear it.
Any speaker takes some effort to get the best in any particular room. Especially since you are a small mfg. a follow up would be nice with a chance to help optimize the sound which happens with some regularity in 'phile reviews.
As we're a (proudly) garage-band outfit, it's pretty unlikely that S-phile will have further time or space to devote to (the clue).
We take solace in the buzz we create at every show at which we exhibit, with our room at capacity with avid listeners throughout the weekend. They obviously hear something very different from what S-phile reports in Mr. Reichert's review - and more like what has drawn effulgent praise in every other published review and show report (including from three different S-phile writers: Art Dudley, Stephen Mejias, AND MR. REICHERT HIMSELF).
Thanks kindly for your comment.
...why didn't you deliver them and set them up like many manufacturers do?
We asked if we could set up the speakers for the reviewer - but he wouldn't allow it.
In this thread, others have suggested that only advertisers in and friends of Stereophile are granted the privilege of performing set-up and selecting/providing associated components. While this does seem to fit a pattern, we aren't willing to impute motive in the absence of hard facts. We maintain an attitude of agnostic detachment on the whole matter.
Bottom line: we are 99.9% certain that (the clue) was not set up correctly for the reviewer's room (please see our other posts for details) - and the reviewer failed to contact us, in re: the discrepancy between his experience of (the clue) at Capital Audiofest (which was overwhelmingly positive and shared on the Stereophile blog) and that in his listening space.
You have complained that others did not read the posts.
Did you miss the one where zendada wrote, "we were not afforded the opportunity to set up (the clue)s in Mr. Reichert's unique listening space."
> Perhaps Jim Croft should have conferred with JA about measurement
> techniques prior to seeing them if he felt there was a unusual complexity
> about it knowing full well they were going to be measured...
The nearfield measurement technique I use is an exact simulation of the
speaker's behavior when used adjacent to an infinite boundary, ie, exactly
the condition required by the Sjofn. That the Clue's low frequencies were
still shelved down under this condition strongly suggests that the
speaker's woofer alignment over-compensates for this. As I have already
written, this correlates closely to what Herb heard.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
The nearfield measurement technique I use is an exact simulation of the speaker's behavior when used adjacent to an infinite boundary, ie, exactly the condition required by the Sjofn.
I figured as much I was just politely trying to point out their straw grabbing.
...to find the optimal sound. You guys even kept the tape on the floor where the previous set gave the best sound - for the reference. The same effort should be applied to all speakers. I use to own speakers that heavily depended on positioning. It took some effort but was well worth it.
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
> The same effort should be applied to all speakers.
The Sjofn speakers were set-up exactly as recommended in the owner's manual.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
What are you doing here?
.
Indeed, 'tis the season - and I'm perfectly willing to pass it all off as incompetence. As you might imagine, however, to do so is difficult when one's livelihood is negatively impacted. Too, one legitimately expects demonstration of a certain level of competence in the pages of the world's leading audio mag, no es verdad?
But: let's be generous. For sure. Thanks kindly for your comments!
> Stereophile will bend over backwards to allow manufacturers the chance to
> 'fix' stuff that sucks...Why not in this case???
We ask manufacturers to submit new samples if a product appears to be
broken. That was not the case with the Sjofn, as both speakers measured
identically and sounded the same.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
I know this is cynical but I can't help but think back on all the Stereophile reviews of products from big-time, high-advertising manufacturers where the manufacturer/dealer was allowed to come in, set the speaker up, tweak the sound, etc. Or, if something seemed amiss, the manufacturer was allowed to send a new sample, a repaired sample, or an "updated" sample. I respect Stereophile for telling it like they see it in this case, but could it be that there is some discrimination going on against smaller manufacturers in the review process?
While it does seem suspicious that smaller manufacturers and non-advertisers are frequently not granted the opportunity to set up their products for Stereophile reviewers - and that we seem to get a disproportionate number of negative reviews - I retain a state of agnostic detachment on the matter. I say with certainty, however, that - had I been able to set up our speakers for Mr. Reichert - he would have heard what he did at Capital Audiofest last summer. Please note that, in his show coverage published on the Stereophile blog, he raved about our speakers. As I said in our Manufacturer's Comment, I feel that it impinged on Mr. Reichert to bring up this glaring discrepancy in his experiences of our product before penning his poison words, giving us the opportunity to correct the situation.
There is not doubt that Stereophile throws small manufacturers to the lions. That is because they can't fight back by pulling their ad dollars. They are easy defenseless pray.
Let's look at who Stereophile pummeled in the year or so..Raven Audio, Coffman Labs, and now this speaker manufacturer.
When major advertiser send them a turkey they get do-overs, excuses made for them, and continued support.
These the are facts as I see them.
Nuit,
Yes, those were my thoughts, as well.
This is a real 'WTF' situation.
"We are all in God's hands... and God is a malign thug."
-Mark Twain
mbnx01,
Have you ever actually had the opportunity to hear them? I would still love to hear them one day. Even though they wouldn't work in my rig, it's such an interesting concept to me.
Yes, I've heard them in my home. They're a serious contender in the kilo-buck price range.
Another favorite of mine in that price range is the Peachtree D5.
"We are all in God's hands... and God is a malign thug."
-Mark Twain
Okay rebbi-
I read the article. I venture to say that perhaps the product in question was not musical enough for the reviewer?
We agree with the reviewer that our speakers aren't "musical" - but only when they're not set up for correct boundary-coupling.(Elsewhere in this thread, both I and the speaker's designer point out that getting the boundary-coupling right is neither difficult nor time-consuming.)
Since I am old, it seems to me that some of the most loved speakers from AR, Advent, KLH, and others were not smallish, but had 8", 10" and 12" woofers and still considered "bookshelf" speakers, yet these designs are now nowhere to be found with small $1500 to $2000 2-ways with 5", 6" or 7" bass(?) drivers. It just seems hard for me to believe that someone cannot make a decent 2 way system with a 10" woofer any more that sound as good as my old Large Advents I use every day in one system. I still regret selling my first real speakers, the Dynaco A-25's.
I often marvel at the DeVore's that Art Dudley uses with huge cabinets and front baffles with a 10" bass driver that he loves. I will never give up my 3-way AR-58's (12" bass driver), the last version of the old AR-3a, or my Advents. They are just musical.
Jim Tavegia
A nice point, Jim.
Now? Issues of Stereophile might sit unread for days/weeks not gonna say months, because I will have at least thumbed through it within a couple weeks.
Frankly, I delved through "The Loudspeaker Issue," and wasn't drawn in to any particular review.
Have seen mention of "The Clue" here on audioasylum, so you'd think I'd focus in on that.
Just scanned forward to the "Conclusions" of the review on page 101. My level of interest at this point makes me glad I have 3 dogs. I won't bother with slippers, but I'd also bet I don't bother reading any more of this review.
Sadly? I probably won't put a whole lot more time looking into the issue.
As has been said repeatedly, high-end audio's explosive growth took place in the mid-90s. It got bloated in the late-90s, and imploded in the 2000s.
Yes, in the 90s, subscribers anxiously awaited the arrival of each new issue. They/we dropped everything, to read the new issue. Because of the quality and length of each issue, we needed repeated sittings, in order to absorb each issue.
Over the years, I've seen, on a one by one basis, my audio friends drop out. In the process, they've let their subscriptions run out. For the few of us still remaining, it just isn't the same, nowadays. As I've written, popular music was dead, until, well, 2013. Without popular music, we have nothing to drive new membership. My old audio friends are just tired from the Stereotypical Audiophile canards. Privately, people tell me that they are disgusted by being beat over the head with vinyl and tubes. Since this industry won't move on, my audio friends have.
As I've written before, it's not Stereophile's fault, that today's soulless products don't inspire readers. It's not Stereophile's fault, that the so-called "music lovers" are the worst snobs, denigrating anyone who doesn't share the same tastes. Yet, this is what Stereophile is left with, has to deal with. It's no surprise that new issues go unopened/unread. And when people do read an issue, they are through in one sitting, and toss it into the trash/recycling bin.
Okay, I'm damning with faint praise, but the January 2015 is actually not bad. Even if you disagree with the reviewers' values, their reviews do give you an idea of what the product sounded like in their own homes.
Steve Guttenberg's "As We See It," while well-written, is over 20 years too late. We audiophiles wrote the same thing in the early-90s.
Most readers may not know who Jackson Browne is, but I enjoyed the interview.
If you go over to our three music fora, you'll find some of my music reviews, some dealing with "boutique" CDs (SHM-CD and BSCD2 reissues). Therefore, the ending Aural Robert is appropos.
Anyway, after I read your post, I immediately thought of the line of my former audio friends, who expressed the same sentiments. Back in the 90s, we had fun, trying new audio products, revisiting old ones, sharing music, going over to each person's home. As I said above, one by one, they've dropped out of this hobby. The rest of us are left to stew, or become indifferent.
The Audiophiles' DJ,
-Lummy The Loch Monster
I agree with you in part. For me, a big, systemically incurable, weakness of Stereophile is that it can't cover the small mfrs. who make truly exceptional equipment, such as Fi, Crimson, Tocaro to name just those i have heard and feel comfortable praising .
Of course one can also argue that many of these firms are already covered by dealers, word of mouth and.....6 moons. Also, some of them don't want to grow and perhaps some of those, who do, might not survive if they tried to grow on the basis of a stirling Stereophile review.
Observe, before you think. Think before you open your yap. Act on the basis of experience.
Frihed89's comment about trusting one's own experience is well-taken. Many guys who have heard our speakers have professed to have been blown away by them - but wanted to see a review in Stereophile or TAS before purchasing.
The Buddha's counsel obtains: "Put no head above your own."
Most readers won't know Jackson Browne? What an utterly absurd statement.
z
> Most readers may not know who Jackson Browne is, but I enjoyed the interview.>Most readers of what? Stereophile?
Jackson Browne is the greatest singer/songwriter of the Baby Boomer generation (along with Dylan).
My 24 year old daughter grew up listening to him among other classics and loves his music.
Pretty much everyone knows who he is.
You say Stereophile is tired and outmoded but you read and digested your complete issue before I even received mine.
Edits: 12/15/14
...interesting and entertaining of late.
Different strokes.
See ya. Dave
I will chime in here;
I will check out the review as soon as possible. I had the same experience 2 years ago while auditioning a pair of Aerial loudspeakers. After reading many reviews over the years, I could hardly await. Once I demo'ed the speakers, I did not enjoy the sound? Perhaps, HR had the same impression?
I got a chuckle out of the review because it reminded me of my very first DIY 2-way bookshelf speakers I built some 25 years ago. I used good Vifa drivers, built some really solid cabinets sized according to the distributor's spec for the woofers, and built 4th-order electrical "textbook" crossovers from the equations in Vance Dickason's "Cookbook."
But because I didn't understand (or even know about) baffle diffraction step (that early edition of Dickason didn't explain it at all!), I didn't account for it in the crossover, and for a long time wondered why the speakers sounded so thin and anemic in the LF when mounted on stands out in the room, but sounded OK shoved right back against the wall. Then I discovered they sounded even fuller in the low end on an actual bookshelf, with books on both sides of them, effectively extending the "baffle" much wider.
By this time, I was subscribing to Speaker Builder, and received (like all the subscribers) a project plan from North Creek Audio for their Borealis kit. This contained some of the best information I had learned yet, including a detailed explanation of baffle step and the transition from 4 pi to 2 pi space in a free-air mounted speaker. He detailed the way his particular design compensated for it (a third-order lowpass filter with an oversized L1). So I undertook some more research on the phenomenon, and learned of several strategies for coping with it: 2.5 way, LR shelving filter upstream from the lowpass filter, or a large-value L1 with a modified Zobel to let the impedance rise a bit, shallow out the initial rolloff, and push the crossover point up to a useful frequency to meet the tweeter. Most of my subsequent projects have incorporated one of these approaches, because I prefer my speakers out in the room with lots of air around them, but I did custom-build a couple more non-BSC pairs over the years for friends who intended them for on-wall mounting. Looking at the current North Creek offerings, I see that even their "near-wall specific" designs incorporate a very small amount of BSC, to compensate off-axis LF losses inevitable when the baffle stands out from the wall by the short distance necessitated by the depth of the cabinet.
The Clue speakers in the review are obviously "near-wall specific," with no BSC whatsoever, and additionally real fussy about listener distance and horizontal listening axis. The on-axis raggedness through (and beyond) the crossover region looks like it MIGHT flatten out to correct summation at certain critical angles off-axis, but still seems mighty sloppy. OF COURSE they measured the way they did in JA's usual nearfield-in-free-air FR tests, though I'm as puzzled as Mr. Reichert about why they wouldn't sound right when he set them up "more or less" according to the manufacturer's instructions. This seems like a troublesome design, which may not be worth the trouble to a lot of listeners.
Each and every buyer of (the clue) is invited - both prior to and after purchase - to consult with us via email and/or phone regarding issues of set-up, acoustic treatments (WAF allowing, of course!), associated components, etc. In the lion's share of cases, the general criteria laid out in our Quick Start Installation Guide are sufficient to get the user to Sonic Nirvana - and in a relatively short period of time.
Please note that, via such consultation, we have ALWAYS been able - within a few minutes - to get the user's face a-smilin' and toes a-tappin' when he's willing to accept our recommendations, in re: getting the boundary coupling right. It's NOT difficult - nor is it time-consuming.
I don't see the January issue on line yet.
-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser
...my paper issue yet, either.
Expect it in the next couple of days.
So I don't have a damn thing to complain about...
Rick
(nt)
OK, now I'm set too.
Now what was all the fuss? Oh yea some speaker, let's see, OMG it has a port! Well that's it for me, I don't do speakers with a zero at DC. Ahh, the power of the press, one picture...
Rick
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
