|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
119.237.13.177
In Reply to: RE: Those darn measurements ! posted by Kingshead on June 24, 2017 at 19:48:36
Nah I take little from that in terms of how it sounds. Sub satellites can achieve those sorts of numbers and I've never been impressed by sub satellites.
Follow Ups:
Sub sat system you never liked? BWAAAAAA HA HA HA HA HA.
Edits: 06/24/17
https://www.audioasylum.com/usr/7/72379/230a550f8c2fd43ba159e0b4c3c393c7--infinity-reference-hifi-speakers.jpg
I dont believe RGA is able to evalute such a system , he currently wants every system to sound like his reference system , nothing to do with live music amd dynamics ...
Edits: 06/25/17
The speakers aren't satellites. They are full range loudspeakers augmented with subwoofers. And in truth I don't much care for those either when one factors in the price/performance ratio.I'm not compensating.
Edits: 06/24/17
I beg to differ. I don't know anyone that would run the big Infinitys with just the midrange and tweets, the Wilson watt puppy without the bass unit, and definitely not the MBLs. None of these are full range speakers without the bass units, none. And all of these would make the KEFs bow to their superiors.Open your mind, spread your horizons, you might just find there's a whole world of things you didn't know.
As for your requesting a list of the top 5 measuring speakers of all time and no one stepping up to the plate, you dismiss them out of hand when offered so might this have been the case then also?
Martin
Edits: 06/24/17
You are welcome to use terminology however you please, but I seriously doubt you'll find Arnie calling the IRS or Genesis wings "satellites". Nor by other manufacturers like Nola who refer to them as "towers" with models like the Grand Reference .
Where you will, however, find that term used is with speakers like these .
And I don't call electrical conduit "pipe", but that doesn't make it any less of a piece of pipe.But that's not what this is about if you read the thread. It's about his challenge, "Rich" is the one that brought up sub/sat systems not me. I only provided a set of measurements for his challenge, he doesn't want responses only affirmation.
Martin
Edits: 06/25/17
Rich is the one that brought up sub/sat systems not me.
Which I think you'll find defines a very different sort of speaker to most folks than the examples you provided.
I only provided a set of measurements for his challenge, he doesn't want responses only affirmation.
If you recall, that was not his question:
"Of course I am always happy to have a list of the 5 most accurate loudspeakers on the planet. "
"(with full measurements to back it up)."
I gave him the measurements, he doesn't want to know what they are. Sounds like a politician, is he running for office, I want the chance to cast my vote.
Martin
I gave him the measurements, he doesn't want to know what they are.
I won't speak for him, but I would never attempt to evaluate the total experience of a speaker system based upon a few metrics such as the ones you provided. I too, would be curious to see a list of those which measure best to correlate that with the far more complex real world test of auditioning them.
Years ago, I heard one of the arguably "best" measuring amplifiers at the time (Halcro) in an exceptional system. They sounded clinical and amusical. If memory serves, the journalist who had them chose not to write a review.
EstatThe Halcro was not the best measuring amp , it had the lowest THD as measured by stereophile , this was debunked years ago and if you look at Stereophile's bench measurments there were many signs of issues , especially with any load below 8ohms ..
Their recent test on the boulder power amp is one of the best i have ever seen in print , fantastic achivement by Boulder ...
Regards
Edits: 06/25/17
if you look at Stereophile's bench measurments there were many signs of issues , especially with any load below 8ohms ..
Evidently, JA missed that:
"Halcro's dm58 offers astonishing measured performance for an amplifier, particularly when it comes to harmonic and intermodulation distortion. Most important, this does not appear to have been achieved by compromising other aspects of the amplifier's performance, as was the case in the "THD Wars" of the 1970s. "
Would you care to point at the "many signs of issues" found in the measurements ?
I'm sure you understood JA measured words and understand enuff yourself to see the fly in the ointment test results ...
This amp will have issues driving real world loads and is truly only an 8 ohm load amp , secondly it's distortion knee is pretty sharp , so there is no gradual rise in harmonic distortion which is necessary for audiophilia warmth and since JA did not do a low mW test without the noise for us to see what the first watt looks like i can't comment on that important first Watt..IMO If you place this Halcro amp on a 4 ohm nom speaker, with Z-Min in the 1- 2 ohm range you will find the drive disappointing , also with such low thd/imd levels the pre amp will provide the sonic charateristics of the Halcro , pre-amp and cables will be ultra sensitive here..
If you could describe your Halcro Experience and setup , we could discuss this more ...
Regards
Edits: 06/25/17 06/25/17 06/25/17
If you could describe your Halcro Experience and setup , we could discuss this more ...
At the time (2001?), C-J ART II using Nordost Vahalla interconnects and speaker cable into Nola Grand References.
Apparently JA just doesn't get it, right?
I guess u got me ....
The challenge had nothing to do with evaluating the speakers for musicality, only the criteria of measurements, those I provided thinking if he "really" wanted a list he would be interested to know what they are, instead he assumed and denigrated a whole genre of speaker systems, so the challenge wasn't real, he just wants affirmation, I don't stroke egos.Martin
Edits: 06/25/17
The challenge had nothing to do with evaluating the speakers for musicality...
your criteria is clearly different from mine for speaker selection.
if he "really" wanted a list he would be interested to know what they are
Yes, I think you finally understand his question. So what speakers are they?
Now "you're" assuming, where did I state I evaluate speakers based on measurements? The "challenge" wasn't about evaluating musicality based on listening, it was about measurements, he wanted measurements, I provided them.If measurements were my thing would I own multiple sets of Klipsch speakers lol.
In my original post I stated "if measurements are your thing", they are definitely not "my thing" lol. Obviously they must be Rich's thing, by his own words he's been obsessing about it for more than five yrs just waiting for someone to answer his challenge.
Oh, I understand his question perfectly, he wants everyone to bow to his expertise, again, I don't stroke egos.
Edits: 06/25/17
Oh, I understand his question perfectly, he wants everyone to bow to his expertise, again, I don't stroke egos.
I don't get that impression at all. I think it's clear that measurements don't begin to convey a speaker's real world performance or desirability.
If measurements were my thing would I own multiple sets of Klipsch speakers lol.
Good illustration of the disconnect. Driven by Halcro amps!
Oh, I understand his question perfectly, he wants everyone to bow to his expertise, again, I don't stroke egos.
I don't get that impression at all.
"PS it's also how I got noticed and into becoming a reviewer. It's peiple like you who allow me to get 40-60% off stereo equipment. So thank you for making me richer. Plus when i say stuff i get 70000 unique hits on my opinions...while you have 30 people reading a forum about what you have to say. Chortle chortle."
Well maybe now you get the whole picture. Not able to get the affirmation he so desperately required he finally resorted to proclaiming his greatness himself. Rather embarrassing actually to see a man drop his pants here on the open forum for everyone to see, very sad.
Martin
Edits: 06/29/17 06/29/17
I came up with sub satellite initially because I typed your provided spec into google and got Infinity standmounts and a sub. Which could explain the frequency plot you mentioned. Which is why I gave you the first reply I gave you.Actually, affirmation seeking perhaps is a fair criticism that you make here. I do tend to engage with people too much and let things go down the road too far. So point well taken. This is a nebulous audio board. I am arguing essentially with a computer screen with people I have never met.
Thanks Martin - lesson learned. I probably could avoid all these problems for myself if there was an ignore button. I probably have to try not to bother arguing an experiential based hobby like Audio with graphs and words.
At the end of the day - you either like what you hear or you do not - if you don't like the sound of something no amount of white papers, frequency graphs and arguments made about distortion or frequency or resonance will sway you.
Edits: 06/29/17
"I came up with sub satellite initially because I typed your provided spec into google and got Infinity standmounts and a sub. Which could explain the frequency plot you mentioned. Which is why I gave you the first reply I gave you."
If this is the model of Infinity speakers you Googled it would be a HUGE mistake to lump them in with your typical "package" surround sub/sat system lol.
Sold for $3300 in 1990 dollars, was Arnie's idea of what a high end small monitor / sub setup should be, cost no object. The monitors will stand on their own, but the complete system is the whole point.
Martin
Yes this is what I googled - Back in 1990 I almost bought a similar looking set from M&K (George Lucas' choice of speaker brand).
I preferred Klipsch and Wharfedale horn speakers back then however. Even with the worse measurements.
Ya, I remember M&K's system, gobs of visceral impact for movies but the Modulus system is in another league when it comes to music reproduction.
This is not meant in any way to denigrate M&K, they make some very musical speakers, but the speakers I've shown above were designed with home theater in mind, and they're outstanding in this regard.
Martin
Hi Martin. That's not the setup. Back in the day it was a two way stanmount with a massive subwoofer. It did well for percussion as is often the demo material for these set ups.
Now we're getting somewhere.You asked for measurements so I provided them, something that never comes into play when I'm auditioning equipment. Kind of like using measurements to pick a girlfriend, absolutely insane lol. Don't get me wrong, I'm as superficial as the next guy, but just as in our hobby, when it comes to women measurements can't tell us whether we'll be compatible or not.
Martin
Edits: 06/30/17
Disagree , historically i'm very compatible with D-Cups , never with an A or B- cup so like audio , measurements do help ..
Regards
I live in Hong Kong so I will not likely see a D cup ever again - but there is the internet and the occasional vacation.
As I said, I'm as superficial as the next guy, maybe more so. My late bride of 32yrs was a model so ya looks are important. But compatibility isn't guaranteed just because the measurements are there.
Imagine the elephant man's head on a female body measuring 44-26-36, but the only info you have are the measurements, can we say "but-her-face". LOL
Martin
More Irony .....
Since you follow me from forum to forum replying to most of my threads, I must have gotten under your skin. So please before I get you too irritated I recommend for your blood pressure that you put me on your ignore list. I won't be able to agitate you anymore.
Hope you enjoy your system and have a great day.
Follow you around ..! Hallucinate much ..? ..... LMAOYou may or may not one day become a good reviewer , well , if you could ever get past your current limited level of understanding, maybe if you did an apprenticeship with a seasoned reviewer , like Mikey Fremer or even Brad, Someone with a little SOTA exposure , system and setup knowledge , who could walk you through your current ideological minefield of doom..
As it is ,
very difficult taking you seriously as a reviewer , every discussion leads to the same Angry diatribe about an AN 2 way speaker superior to all and everything else is crap .. if you were really serious about being a reviewer you would actually get a proper listening room / space which would allow you to actual do worth while reviews of someone's product , as it is you would only be wasting someone's hard work , well unless, you are one off those given a copy of the review along with your 40-60% discount..
Regards
Edits: 06/30/17 06/30/17
Thank you for interesting reply. I do try to reply to those posters in need so point by point.1) Exposure to SOTA equipment. To which SOTA equipment should I avail myself to audition that I have missed? I recently had a reply from Kal Rubinson of Stereophile who noted that reviewers listen and evaluate gear at shows, friend's homes, dealers, and not JUST in their own homes. We can't hear everything in our own homes after all. Even Morricab has not had a full AN system in his own home - Thus if it is reasonable or unreasonable for one it is reasonable or unreasonable for all.
I don't begrudge him not having heard an all AN system in his own house because I am not one to make excuses that you need to hear it in your own space to credibly critique it. The best you can do is to be as fair as possible to the gear by hearing it several times in several "different" environments with several different pieces of gear. Stereo equipment is supposed to be designed to operate in a variety of rooms not just the manufacturer's room or an an-echoic chamber.
Morricab claims to have done this. He has heard AN at shows more than once and at friends' houses and he doesn't like them. I am not trying to convince him to like them - no one can like everything.
2)"diatribe about an AN 2 way speaker superior to all and everything else is crap."
I go down this route a lot because I have had many posters on many forums go at me about this speaker and then I get posts where someone says wow thanks Richard you were right - just didn't hear it until the 5th time.
Morricab should know a poster here called the OldSchool who continually blasted me for recommending AN and telling me that he heard them at a show and they sucked - no treble - coloured blah blah blah. For years! Remind you of anyone (ahem Morricab).Then the Old School brought his own records (which is critical) and played them at CAS. This is what Old School Said About AN when he didn't like the AN E at all at several shows:
"IMO, the Audio Notes are full, warm, but far too polite. Everything sounds the same via them, vinyl or digital: smooth, full, relaxed. They thus flunk the "sounds different with different sources" test. The Quads are not nearly as smooth as the ANs, but vastly clearer, and more detailed. What the Quads lack is low bass and impact or force. The Teresonics are a different animal altogether. When I went from the AN room to the Teresonic room (which were right next to each other at the CAS), I was shocked at how different these systems sounded. While the ANs were always polite, the Teresonics could come alive when the source was excellent. Voices, brass, bass, everything just seemed to "be in the room." IMO, the ANs are, ultimately, boring, and the Teresonics are thrilling."
http://www.dagogo.com/devore-fidelity-orangutan-o96-loudspeaker-review-part-3The above criticism is the exact same thing that Morricab writes as critique on these AN speakers. It's SPOOKY how similar the wording is and the fact that like Odeon - Teresonic is a very high sensitive loudspeaker over 100dB sensitive. Umm and I heard the same thing at CAS 2012. I did not choose AN as best sound of show (which nullifies your theory) and in fact they didn't make my top ten. I chose YG Acoustics, MBL, Acoustic Zen, Focal, and Von Gaylord. So there goes your conspiracy theory that it's always AN and everything else is crap.
That said - when AN came together properly under Warren Jarret setting up the room (don't assume that a "buddy" has set them up properly).
The Old School posted this:
"I heard the Triangle Art, Music First, and Audio Note setup at a recent CAS, and the vast improvement of the Audio Note speakers was stunning, compared to all the other setups I have heard. Whereas previous Audio Note systems failed when they were playing my reference vinyl records, the Music First combination was as good as anything I have ever heard at a dealer or a show. Correction: it was far, far better than anything I have heard, aside from my own system. The sound was liquid, fast, coherent, rich and HUGE. Plus, no annoying "sweet spot" that most speakers have. Here the system loaded the whole room, and the sound was fabulous anywhere in the room. On my fantastic Chet Baker vinyl, the trumpet and Pepper Adams's sax were in the room! No compression whatsoever. 40 db plus dynamics (from 65 to over 105) . This was using the Audio Note 2a3 amp. Male and female voices were tonally correct with the unlimited dynamics."
http://www.dagogo.com/audio-note-uk-elx-hemp-loudspeaker-reviewSo yes I am happy to engage about these speakers and I am patient - because Several people who utterly hated the AN E have come around to a polar opposite opinion. Incidentally way back on Audioreview I hated the speakers too!
My diatribes are not angry - they are heavily explanatory and wordy. (Pretty good for a three finger typist).
3)Listening space - What is the problem with my listening space? Large speakers are designed for large rooms - small speakers for small rooms. A small speaker in a large room often sounds horrible and vice-versa. I am merely limited the smaller speakers in a manufacturer's line-up. The Focal Diablo Utopia not the Grand Utopia.
Edits: 07/01/17
RGA, you must be a glutton for punishment lol.
It's somewhat the nature of these discussions. How does one really argue for or against a subjective opinion?
If I say XYZ is the best sound I have heard it is somewaht similar to tje essays I wrote in university. You state an opinion on a topic and it is not accepted unless you can bring in evidence to support your case. Usually, that comes from external, authority, statistics, primary sources, secondary sources.
So that is largely all that can be done on audio. No one can replace another person's primary experience. The only thing that can ve done is to say well XYZ is ecellent because of: appeal to authorities, statistical results, etc etc.
So when XYZ has say 15 authorities, and secondary and tertiary evidence that make a very strong case while ABC has no authorities or evidence to suggest it is a strong product then this is really all we have in audio discourse.
It's an experiential thing which words can't replace. You can read about swimming in the ocean all you want but actually doing it is something entirely different.
The problem, there are so many holes in your reasons for why you argue for AN.Let's just consider one reason, resale value.
Not long ago there was such a demand for Harley Davidson motorcycles the waiting list was quite extensive, so much so when taking ownership you could literally walk out the door and sell the bike for double what you just paid. Harleys hold their resale value still today, does that make them a great motorcycle?
I have friends that refer to their Harley as "old leaker" due to the fact Harleys tend to leak oil. I ride a Honda, more reliable, faster, cheaper to purchase, etc etc., but the Harley will still hold its resale value better.
Is the Harley the better bike? Well if resale and cache value are high on your list then ya. If riding a motorcycle is your priority then the Honda is the better choice.
My point? I never consider resale value when making a purchase, either I like the item or I don't, what I can profit off the deal just isn't important, it's the music.
MartinAnd please don't think I don't like Harleys because I do, the reason mine looks so much like one, my brother rides one, I think they're great bikes, but their resale value has nothing to do with that.
Edits: 07/03/17 07/03/17
Exactly Martin and I wholeheartedly agree with what you wrote. I know a lot of motorcycle guys who tell me that Harley isn't a particularly good motorcycle in any reliability arena. Other bikes perform better for less.
But as I said you provide more than one argument when you write those five paragraph essays in high school. The most important thing is to have your thesis at the end of the opening paragraph and that thesis statement generally contains your three best arguments FOR something. So if it were an essay as to why cats make better pets than dogs it would go something like this.
Cats make better pets than dogs because, cats can be left alone for longer periods of time, cats are less expensive, and lastly cats are easier to maintain.
Then you would write detailed reasons for each and how each combine with each other to make the case stronger. While also knocking down the case against.
So take the resale value case - well the fact that AN holds value in itself means little to nothing. It only means something if it has some context.
So if we have 10 objective motorcycle mechanics review a bunch of bikes and they conclude that the Harley is an unreliable mess but it looks cool and sounds cool then the experts are not really on board with this being a particularly good motorcycle. User experience will also factor in.
A lot of Solid State amplifier often move to Single Ended Triode amplifiers - they don't often go the other way.
So to me it is taking several different arguments and when you put them together you realize that the resale value isn't coming from awesome looking products or nostalgia for collecting.
Of course both of us could do research and explain why a Harley is a worse bike than XYZ but it probably won't stop the guy who loves them from loving them. Maybe they like continuously fixing them.
Me I tend to not like traveling on or in things without a roll cage - but anyway.
I said "let's pick one reason", I could pick apart each and every reason you give that isn't "I just like them better", which is REALLY the only reason that matters.
Here's an example, of the many speakers I've owned I'll use two to help illustrate my point. Both armed with identical sized drivers and similar sized cabinets but with one costing almost five times the other.
First up is a Sony, not exactly a name with a ton of cache value by most in our hobby, but the SS-M3 and it's siblings are no joke, just read the glowing reviews. And if seen in person it's obvious a ton of money went into RD for these little babies, and once heard then you know it was money well spent.
Our second contender carries a name with tons of cache value, Infinity. But this little speaker is from the lowly RS line, the unassuming RS-325. In direct comparison to the Sony it looks like your basic run of the mill 6.5" two way. And adding insult to injury it's ported, something that usually has me looking somewhere else.
The Sonys are a bad ass little speaker, upon auditioning they blew me away with their full bodied sound. They were the little darlings of the reviewing world so I'm not the only one that felt this way.
I purchased the little Infinitys for my now deceased father in law and had them stored away. Although being from infinity the highly affordable RS line are not the darlings of the reviewing world, but these little babies really boogie.
In direct comparison playing music the Sonys now sounded flat with the little Infinitys kicking their butts. This really caught me off guard, I LIKE THE SONYS DAMN IT, but the music didn't lie. I had to admit my prejudices against ported designs was just that, these mothers get my toes tapping.
Moral of the story, reviewers likes or dislikes are meaningless unless you like them too, but it's not proof the reviewers choice is the better one. And definitely not something to use as a club in an attempt to prove a point.
Pictures above of the two combatants.
Martin
Like I say it winds up boiling down to one's individual tastes - that said most people don't just go by individual tastes - if they did there would be no review magazines and no one bothering to do measurements or to use them as clubs.
Subconsciously or not people read reviews and they read measurements, thus all those readers are putting stock into the reviewer opinions and/or measurements.
Not everyone but enough of them to keep the magazines in business.
Hence why we fall back to the clubs. Defensive clubs more than offensive ones I might add. I don't use the club to tell you you should buy X but to say that well a lot of other people like X - it's okay to admit that X is a fine product but that X is simply not your cup of tea.
I don't see why certain people can't accept that. It's not even to the level they are admitting they are wrong. Brussels Sprouts are hugely healthy and I can't stand them. But I am not going to go on forums and tell people they are wrong to like this vegetable. Now if someone tries to tell me that Brussels Sprouts tastes better than hand made Belgium chocolate well then we start to enter this same argument with reviews and graphs and statistics and sales etc.
Lastly, when picking apart an argument - the arguments picking apart the initial thesis can also be picked apart for their quality of rebuttal.
I am not one that just thinks everything is equal and it's all a matter of taste mind you - which is why I engage in these debates. Back in the middle 1990s I would argue Brand A and B are better than C - and we fast forward to today and I wouldn't touch brand A and B with a 50 foot pole. Part of this changes with time and the more I audition. What I once thought sounded good only sounded good against limited options. When more serious contenders enter the field perhaps you will like something three years from now and you will say to yourself wow how did I like Infinity or Sony. That applies to me too. We don't know what future experiences have in store for us.
You're other problem, you assume to much. You're assuming I haven't heard much better speakers, or owned much better speakers. Assuming might be the wrong word, selective reading, poor comprehensive reading skills, whatever the reason only you know.The above speakers are obviously only examples of similar sized speakers for reference, I said as much, would you rather I choose other examples? Much more expensive examples? Would it make any difference with you?
As for your "assumption" the Sonys might have just been long in the tooth for me in comparison to the Infinitys and this somehow biased my opinion, the Sonys were the much more recent purchase, albeit some two decades ago, and long since gifted to my nephew.
Keep on digging that hole.
Martin
Edits: 07/04/17 07/04/17 07/04/17
"You're assuming I haven't heard much better speakers, or owned much better speakers."
I assumed no such thing. You are making the mistake of projecting what you think I am saying when I have said no such thing. No one person can hear every product on the market nor can they hear them all in ideal circumstances - Audio Shows are TERRIBLE places to evaluate the sound of audio equipment and yet most people including reviewers base much of their opinions on show results.
Dealers can be much better but then it depends on the dealer.
What I mean by experience is that in the future you may hear something you have never heard before. And the "new" item may very well displace what you like now.
It doesn't matter if you have heard 5 speakers or 500. The new to you speaker may still make you rethink your speakers.
I have just reviewed an $800 push pull amp that made me rethink what can be done with relatively inexpensive amps and from push pull.
You never know what can come along and surprise you.
My latest surprise and review is the little KingKo amp
"When more serious contenders enter the field" perhaps you will like something three years from now and you will say to yourself wow how did I like "Infinity or Sony".Your words are they not? As I said, you assume I haven't heard or owned "more serious contenders".
No sense conversing with someone that denies their own words, do you even read what you post?
Martin
If you get off your high horse you might actually have something worth saying, until then I'm moving on.
Edits: 07/05/17
I am not a mind reader.
This is what you wrote "But this little speaker is from the lowly RS line."
I looked it up - it's around 30 years old and you called it lowly. They use push pin clip speaker connectors and go for around $125-$150. Infinity as a brand isn't the same as it was either.
If that's all you're taking away from my posts then you are certainly just choosing to troll since these two speakers aren't even the main point.
I'm not put out if you put me on your ignore list.
You didn't list a speaker. You listed a measurement. Which looks like a sub (SMALL) satellite type.The MBL is one system - you don't buy it in pieces like a Sub Satellite - I could buy a $5,000 Genesis subwoofer for my KEF LS-50 and get sparkling measured performance. The KEF LS-50 offers sparkling measured performance within its range. Adding two of the best subwoofers money can buy could match the bass performance of anything (in terms of measurements).
Wilso Watt Puppy is similar to the Gershman X1 Sub one or even the LS-3/5a and their subwoofer (AB1) (well bass anyway) module they put underneath the standmount. I'm not sure they count as sub satellites.
I mean if you look around how many floorstanding speakers on the market today have a tweeter and then a 6 inch or 8 inch woofer under them and then a bigger woofer or two under that. The B&W N801 may as well be called a sub satellite.
The only difference is that one is modular and the other is not. So basically all three way speakers are sub satellites by this rationale. One is physically attached to the sub cabinet and one is not. But the bass driver in the three way is essentially there to serve as a subwoofer (or deepish bass anyway).
But then are they actually serving as true subwoofers? Can you just buy the Puppy or the Gershman sub1 or the AB 1 for the LS-35a and hook it up to all speakers on the market? Do you just buy the MBL subwoofer portion of their flagship speaker and connect it to Infinity Beta RS?
The sub satellites I am referring to are the 99.99% of the sub satellites where someone buys a 2 way standmount and then buys a subwoofer of varying size and often not from the same manufacturer.
The KEF LS-50 is a mini-monitor or standmount loudspeaker. If I buy a subwoofer is it your contention that the LS-50 should be called a Satellite?
If so that's okay I will concede the point because it's not like it matters. If I buy a B&W N801 and then add a sub the B&W can be called a Satellite too if you like.
Edits: 06/24/17
So now we're getting to the nitty gritty. What you don't like are sub sat setups that aren't designed as a system. I'll assume that list would also include designer systems such as the Bose life style et al?And now you're stating the KEFs would benefit from the addition of a pair of quality subs? In essence making them a non matching sub/sat setup? Or is it your contention it's only a sub/sat setup if the manufacturer claims it as such?
My point, you dismissed an alarming number of outstanding speakers as if they were beneath you, speakers that will flat out spank your beloved KEFs into next week.
As for the specs I gave you, when was the last time a magazine reviewed a non matching sub/sat setup as a whole system? And if so, if it had specs setting the standards for others to follow, count me in as someone interested enough to check them out.
I find it curious you never bothered to ask what the speakers are, you just decided to dismiss them even though they met the criteria you set forth in your past challenge. De Nile is not just a river in Egypt.
Martin
Edits: 06/24/17 06/24/17 06/24/17 06/24/17
First let me clear - my KEF's are not beloved. I don't love electronics or "things"
The Bose lifestyle I believe are advertised as sub satellite - if you can call it a sub.
I am not stating the KEF would benefit from a sub. The measurements would benefit from the use of a sub because you would be adding at least two octaves to the resulting sound. Dedicated subwoofers of high quality can measures quite well. And the KEF LS050 is for practical purposes the center section of the KEF Blade $32,000 floorstander.
As I said I am not going to argue the words you wish to use. In a sense the KEF Blade is a glorified KEF LS-50 with a giant bass/subwoofer unit attached to it as you can see in the link below.
It's basically the same but different looking Wilson Watt/Puppy.
But the Watt/Puppy is and the KEF Blade and the MBLs are NOT the speakers I am referring to when using the sub/satellite term. Sub Satellites for all the years I have been in this hobby and using the term mean small standmount speakers and a big cube box that sits on the floor. Like the picture above. Generally if the front speaker can't survive on its own it is not really a standmount loudspeaker. A Will Watt can survive without the Puppy. So can the LS-3/5a.
Using MBL as an example - a person can buy the MBL Radialstrahler mbl 120 standmount and NEVER buy a subwoofer for it and live quite fine. It will cover most of the frequency response on most music. I call it a standmount speaker - if you want to call it a satellite that's fine - I think we're talking about the same things using different words to make the points.
You should be in politics the way you dance around an issue. And wow, you still haven't asked about the speakers, absolutely close minded to anything anyone else might think. Ya, it's all about you.The SIZE of the cabinets have absolutely nothing to do with whether it's a sub/sat setup.
And by your own words the only difference between a sub/sat setup and a more conventional one box design is the fact the bass driver doesn't share the same enclosure as the other high frequency drivers. Thus the vibrational energy from the bass driver doesn't interact nearly as much with other drivers, seems like a good thing to me, and I think the late great Arnie Nudell would agree lol.
SQ isn't the determining factor for why most speaker systems come in a single enclosure, it's the cost of manufacturing.
Edits: 06/24/17 06/24/17 06/24/17
"And wow, you still haven't asked about the speakers."
Sorry I don't understand what you are asking. I asked people to list speakers that are considered the "most accurate" and you gave me a response plot. Instead of answering the question you want me to ask the question a second time. Is there a reason for that. You need the attention?
And then you get angry that I don't re-ask the question.
As I have now said for a third time - if you want to call ANY stereo a sub satellite system because you bought a subwoofer that is fine by me. I have been at this since 1987 and I've reviewed owned and auditioned a LOT of stereos and owned a nicely rated BA sub in the 1990s and I've never liked systems with subwoofers. The exception is when the subs (two) sit underneath the main speakers - like the Watt/Puppy.
So perhaps I am fine with SubS (plural)/Satellite not Sub(singular)/Satellite.
I am not saying you are wrong - when you say stuff on a forum that someone else is close minded to what you think how so? I am saying what I like and what I don't like in general terms. It's based on all the systems I have heard over the years. If someone presents me a system where there is a sub and it sounds good to me then fine - but it hasn't happened yet. I like em fine for movies and car explosions mind you.
But I have tried SUb Satellite from all sorts of brands over the years from KEF, B&W, Infinity, M&K, Paradigm, ELAC, Martin Logan, Dynaudio, McIntosh (the subs were not McIntosh I don't think), PSB, Pioneer and even with panels like Magnepan 1.7s.
I'm not saying I am right - I am stating that none of them have done it for me. But I will be covering the show in California next month and perhaps someone will set-up a system with one sub that impresses me. I always keep an open mind - it's why I continuously listen to gear that in the past I have not much cared for - in the hopes that the next time it will excite me.
.
No. I can't hear everything. Companies are free to contact my editor and request reviews for their speakers and I'm happy to try any subwoofer they wish to send me. If they are supremely confident in their product and that it will impress even perhaps stubborn reviewers then by all means.
I am a bit older school so the subs that I have experience with tend to be the bigger mainstream brands like Paradigm, Velodyne, M&K, B&W, and REL.
I was tempted by a complete M&K surround sound system as I did like their X series sub and their small on wall speakers pack some oomph. But I would pretty much have to recreate the entire room for it. I am still drawn the idea and may go down the path eventually.
You know what you like. I had a M&K sub that I only used for HT.
The Rythmic stomps it and work for music and movies. On rock music the drum kit is in the room.
Didn't you know? Subs are worthless.
Martin
Again, you should run for office.I've owned many subs, not what this is about, it's about "your challenge".
You mention requesting a list of the top five measuring speaks with measurements included and claim "no one responded". I give you measurements and you don't want to know what they are, you dismiss them without any knowledge of what they are, this is the definition of close minded.
No sense beating my head against this thick wall any longer.
Martin
Next time you set out a challenge make sure you make it clear you don't "really" want any responses, you just want to keep on believing your right.
Edits: 06/25/17
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: