Planar Speaker Asylum

Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.

Return to Planar Speaker Asylum


Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website

73.209.29.251

Posted on September 25, 2020 at 03:52:42
triamp
Audiophile

Posts: 653
Location: USA
Joined: August 6, 2008
I don't know that his test method is appropriate for a dipole speaker that is a line source, I think some changes in protocol would need to made from his normal procedure which works well for box speakers but a panel speaker is a rather different animal.

Some useful info comes from the test- but I think overall the test method needs to be redesigned when used with a line source dipole. I don't know what, exactly, should be changed but clearly his results are not consistent with what people hear from the LRS. His method uses math to derive an anechoic response from the many many measurements made by his Klippel measurement robot, but I don't think anechoic response tells you much about a speaker that interacts so with the listening space the way a dipole does.
Science doesn't care what you believe.

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
How did I know the review was negative before I read it, posted on September 25, 2020 at 05:05:53
Posts: 1830
Location: Orange Co., Ca
Joined: September 19, 2001
Because the tests must be wrong! Test methodology is always debatable but the subjective review is not great either.

 

RE: Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website, posted on September 25, 2020 at 05:17:33
Aspheric
Audiophile

Posts: 131
Joined: March 12, 2001
I also follow the Audio Science Review website. They pursue a finely crafted objective analysis of equipment. And objective is where their approach runs into problems.

For example, I own a Topping D50s DAC that tested excellent on their scale and is strongly recommended. Closely comparing it to my other DAC, which is a bit more expensive, the sound is thin, shallow and much less detailed.

Pure measurement does not present the whole story in audio.

 

ASR: Home of the 1 speaker imaging, posted on September 25, 2020 at 08:39:42
emailtim
Audiophile

Posts: 2135
Joined: July 2, 2017
ASR claims a single speaker images.

If so, why record in stereo, why buy 2 speakers, why buy 2 amps, why buy 2 sets of cables ??? I have been doing it all wrong.

 

RE: Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website, posted on September 25, 2020 at 10:08:01
Davey
Audiophile

Posts: 2115
Joined: September 26, 2013
The spherical wave expansion metric is an interesting approach....with point-source (or nearly) speakers, but I'm not sure all the NFS processing and extrapolation are translating to a correct depiction of non-point-source speakers.

One thing I've noticed about Amir though...-...-.once his mind is made up, he NEVER changes his conclusion on a product/test. :)

Dave.

 

"This is not a product finished and fit for use by a consumer.", posted on September 25, 2020 at 11:47:51
Jon L
Audiophile

Posts: 5740
Joined: April 6, 2000
Well, that's a rather conclusive conclusion then..

 

RE: "This is not a product finished and fit for use by a consumer.", posted on September 25, 2020 at 12:29:32
monkuboy
Audiophile

Posts: 3
Location: So Cal
Joined: April 21, 2016
One thing I noticed from looking at the comments to that review was that it is like a cult. His followers are like zombies. One guy who had the 1.7's on order was instantly regretting and bemoaning his decision, even though he hadn't listened to them himself. That seemed to be the character of the comments, that whatever Amir believes, that sets their beliefs as well.

 

RE: Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website, posted on September 25, 2020 at 12:34:25
FX35
Audiophile

Posts: 66
Joined: March 6, 2020
"pure measurement does not present the whole story in audio"

Where have I heard that before.............?

 

Agree, posted on September 25, 2020 at 12:35:00
grantv
Manufacturer

Posts: 6068
Location: B.C.
Joined: January 15, 2002
Strange cult like following almost. Was very surprised to see that regret...

 

Objectivists must have very dull and boring lives..., posted on September 25, 2020 at 13:03:20
Tromatic
Audiophile

Posts: 2674
Location: Portland
Joined: July 27, 2000
Measuring everything they see and hear, never once looking or listening.

 

RE: Objectivists must have very dull and boring lives..., posted on September 25, 2020 at 15:27:15
monkuboy
Audiophile

Posts: 3
Location: So Cal
Joined: April 21, 2016
Amir's subject review of the speakers was negative. I think if he actually liked them during the listening phase, that would present a conundrum because he'd essentially be contradicting the measurements. And since that is a site that puts so much emphasis on measurements, to then say he liked the way they sounded would act to invalidate the philosophy of the site. So I wonder how much the measurements influence what his "subjective" opinion is? He should have listened to the speakers first, gave his subjective listening impressions, then measured them.

 

That is rule number one to win at social media, posted on September 25, 2020 at 17:13:33
farfetched
Audiophile

Posts: 819
Location: Cleveland!
Joined: October 13, 2010
Rush Limbaugh, who in a sense is the father of modern social media, gave the following advice about how to succeed, where success = simple market share ("followers," clicks, etc.):

1. If you take a position, insist it is %100 percent true, obvious to anyone with common sense, and nothing but purely good and wonderful that it is true.

2. Anyone who questions you must be attacked as an idiot, or a hater, a person not to be listened to, worthless, of completely devious and dishonest motives, and listening to them will surely lead to misery and failure in life.

It works! But this is just what the sophists taught as their "secret" back in the days of Socrates. It's an old trick to maximumize your gull rate while trawling marks for $$.

Amir sounds like a classic sophist. Sophistry is predictable, and boring, and a trick that once you see how it works, you rapidly lose patience with.



/ optimally proportioned triangles are our friends


 

it's obvious everyone on that forum loves this, posted on September 25, 2020 at 19:46:20
Green Lantern
Audiophile

Posts: 15368
Location: San Diego, Ca
Joined: November 12, 2002
Contributor
  Since:
June 17, 2003



 

Pendulum must swing, posted on September 25, 2020 at 20:26:09
Jon L
Audiophile

Posts: 5740
Joined: April 6, 2000
to reach the middle, I suppose.
Having been in this hobby for a very long time, I do admit that subjectivism, often very unfounded or interest-driven, has dominated the scene for an eternity.

A bit of measurement-first movement is not the end of the world..

 

RE: "This is not a product finished and fit for use by a consumer.", posted on September 25, 2020 at 20:33:14
Utley1
Audiophile

Posts: 1216
Location: NYC
Joined: July 30, 2010
Most Magnepan admirers soon realize that they must adjust the speaker to the room, very much like a live concert hall to get the joy and the musicality out of them. Because you have the possibility of sculpting the sound and creating a living musical signature, you should not be able to get consistent measurement 'success' out of them, instead you have become an architect of sorts(hence an 'unfinished consumer product', a sound artist. Not a speaker that you just throw in a room and play no more than the rest of the line.
Without being critical of Amir , I wonder how he measures electrostatics?

 

Not everything that counts can be counted, and...-, posted on September 25, 2020 at 20:48:17
MWE
Audiophile

Posts: 815
Location: Hillsborough, NC
Joined: June 8, 2000
...not everything that can be counted counts.

Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon

 

RE: Not everything that counts can be counted, and...-, posted on September 25, 2020 at 21:05:18
rivervalley817
Audiophile

Posts: 2061
Joined: June 15, 2020
that was actually both somewhat profound and in my prenuptial agreement

regards,



 

I learned something years ago, posted on September 27, 2020 at 03:18:47
Story
Audiophile

Posts: 3852
Location: NJ
Joined: December 11, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
February 21, 2019
A major reviewer for a mag talked greatly about a new amp. In the review they included test results and other evals. I bought a pair of these mono blocks new and tried them out at home since hi end stores had become almost non existent for any sampling.

I was pissed off that they sounded like the reviewer had too much wax in his ears and promptly sold them. It was the very last time I did anything stupid like that.


"Leo 2.0!!"


 

RE: Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website, posted on September 27, 2020 at 04:24:20
triamp
Audiophile

Posts: 653
Location: USA
Joined: August 6, 2008
>>For example, I own a Topping D50s DAC that tested excellent on their scale and is strongly recommended. Closely comparing it to my other DAC, which is a bit more expensive, the sound is thin, shallow and much less detailed.<<


Did you do your listening tests of the D50 in a controlled, double-blind experiment?
Science doesn't care what you believe.

 

RE: I learned something years ago, posted on September 27, 2020 at 04:35:54
triamp
Audiophile

Posts: 653
Location: USA
Joined: August 6, 2008
It's important to understand how human hearing works. Most people think their ears work like microphones, and overestimate the accuracy of their golden ear discernment.

-------------------------
Science doesn't care what you believe.

 

RE: I learned something years ago, posted on September 27, 2020 at 04:58:06
Story
Audiophile

Posts: 3852
Location: NJ
Joined: December 11, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
February 21, 2019
Of course I FULLY understand it ever since I was a wee laddy and protected my ears when doing ANYTHING loud like vacuums, saws, drills, yelling wife or whatever. I have and use all kinds of earplugs and ear protection every day.

And I rarely if ever "overestimate" so I am not grasping your comment. My comment was just a statement for consideration, not any criticism.

The point was from my example that you can't trust a 'highly respected reviewer' or magazine - just listen for yourself if you can with known source equipment. It's inevitable nowadays to turn to places like AA when considering a new purchase.

And if it ain't any good for you, just try to sell it off here before it becomes outdated.


"Leo 2.0!!"


 

tell them to put all that equipment in the closet and throw on 'Trane's "Slo Blues", posted on September 27, 2020 at 14:38:08
Green Lantern
Audiophile

Posts: 15368
Location: San Diego, Ca
Joined: November 12, 2002
Contributor
  Since:
June 17, 2003
if their feet aren't tapping within 5 seconds I give up!


 

RE: I learned something years ago, posted on September 27, 2020 at 20:01:27
timm
Audiophile

Posts: 598
Location: Ann Arbor Mi
Joined: January 15, 2008
This is why I listen to 'many' reviews. I listen to you , professional reviews, comparisons of someone that has similar product or to product I have heard . I never 'listen' to specs as they make no sound. Lol. But when I start to see consistent reviews and interpretations of a particular piece of kit - well that speaks volumes to me. Specs like frequency response seem to hold meaning for me. But, I certainly couldn't tell you if I would like them or not based solely on it.

 

The review was absurd, posted on September 28, 2020 at 06:03:17
josh358
Industry Professional

Posts: 12079
Joined: February 9, 2010
Contributor
  Since:
February 3, 2012
Agree completely -- the test methods were flawed -- and I and some others raised objections in that thread.

Davey pointed out that he measured the bass response *with the speakers lifted off the floor*, a fatal measurement error -- the bass response of a dipole will be seriousy screwed if you do that, owing to an acoustic short circuit around the bottom.

There are other egregious errors as well, not the least of which is that Amir did his listening tests with *one* speaker (sigh).

Fortunately, there was a lot of pushback from people who have actually *heard* Maggies! The negatives seemed to come mostly from people who hadn't, but felt themselves experts because they'd read the review.

 

RE: The review was absurd, posted on September 28, 2020 at 08:12:23
Davey
Audiophile

Posts: 2115
Joined: September 26, 2013
It's interesting that on a forum that eschews subjective evaluation he uses (for speakers) subjective evaluation to confirm what he's not measuring. :)

Anyways, I don't think the measurement results are so much about dipole short-circuiting, but rather lack of boundary reinforcement. Even a typical box speaker measured well above the floor would measure differently when sitting on the floor. This is a simple 2pi/4pi environment effect that would manifest with all speakers.
However, typical box speakers are usually designed for above floor usage, whereas the Magnepan speakers are designed to sit on the floor. This is the essential "issue" with the PIR noted. The NFS claims to encompass that discontinuity as result of the measuring scheme......but I'm not convinced it's effective for all types of speakers. After Amir has tested another half dozen (or so) floor-standing dipole speakers then maybe the issues will become clearer.

Now, nobody is going to accuse the MMG/LRS of having room-filling bottom two octaves bass. They are NOT legitimate full range speakers and do need a sub-woofer to be considered such in a typical domestic situation. But, to characterize them as having "no bass below 300Hz" is not correct.

Dave.

 

RE: The review was absurd, posted on September 28, 2020 at 09:08:02
sbrook
Audiophile

Posts: 161
Location: Florida
Joined: November 3, 2004
Josh -

I read/skimmed all 700+ posts on that yesterday (yeah, I have no life). I thought your replies were cogent, well thought out, and relevant to the reality of listening to the LRS, properly setup, as a pair, in a typical listening room. Obviously the speaker has limitations both as a function of size, design, and price point, but measurements do not always tell the story on what speakers sound like. More likely they do somewhat with a standard box monopole but not on a dipole panel.

I found it interesting that none of the posts referencing other panels, varying Maggies and the laundry list of ESL, touched at all on my beloved LFT8. I always feel like such a dark horse but I still think they are a solution that overcomes a lot of issues and combines the best of planar, ESL, and piston. The dual magnet vapor deposited voice coils are fast, the xvr transition from mid to tweeter at 10K is seamless, the xvr transition to the 8" woofer at 180Hz is the only hybrid I have heard that doesn't have a hump that I can hear and it has usable response below 30Hz in my room. Ah well, better to go unnoticed.

I have gotten a lot of useful information from ASR but there is a certain mindset over there from many that makes me wonder if they actually listen to music? Of course there are forums that are the antithesis of ASR and keep the snake oil industry alive and well. Between measurement and observation somewhere in the middle lies truth.

These arguments always remind me of an interview I read with Dave Brubeck many years ago. I think it was back in the 80's in either TAS or Stereophile, when they were both still little trade journal sized books. Dave was going on and on about the music they were listening to and the interviewer just couldn't get past his frustration over Dave's system consisting of a stack of mid-fi gear piled on top of one another and the asymmetry of the speaker positions, one with a chair covered in laundry set in front of it. I know plenty of musicians who care about good audio reproduction but given a choice I'd rather have ability to "hear" music like Dave Brubeck, regardless what it is coming from.

 

RE: Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website, posted on September 30, 2020 at 14:12:15
Reedo
Audiophile

Posts: 12
Location: Florida
Joined: October 12, 2017
I've been thinking about getting some DRC going for my system. I have Home Audio Fidelity filters running via Roon but I want something that lives on any source, maybe the MiniDSP SHD Studio. Anyway last night I was plowing through DSP threads and I found something interesting on ASR. In the thread, Amir links to something that basically said, and he agreed with, that you can't measure what happens in your head regarding sound. I'm going to try to find the link. So yeah, he knows better. Or should I say he knows you can't measure perception. @mitchco on AudiophileStyle has some good stuff on what happens with response curves vs what we perceive. Anyway, I like Amir's work when it comes to measuring hardware. He's very good at rooting out bad designs and finding faulty equipment. It's scary how much faulty stuff is out there. He's also a believer in Dirac DRC. And I'm sorry but that means he knows speakers interact with rooms. Maggies need walls and floors to work. Those same walls and floors can cause problems if you don't have the setup correct. Some may choose their spouse by measurements alone but it rarely works out.

 

RE: Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website, posted on September 30, 2020 at 15:58:28
MarcL
Audiophile

Posts: 283
Location: PA
Joined: February 26, 2019
I've used Dirac for over two years with my 3.7s and as my system has evolved to 7.1.4 with 9 planar speakers. I really like Dirac! It measures great, and it sounds great!
Agilist, Musician, Photographer, Audiophile
Magneplanar: 3.7, CC5, MC1, DWM; Outlaw: UltraX12, LFM-1C; Emotiva: XMC-1, PA-1; Nord: Nord One NC500DM; Outlaw: Model 7500; OPPO 205

 

RE: The review was absurd, posted on September 30, 2020 at 18:51:48
timm
Audiophile

Posts: 598
Location: Ann Arbor Mi
Joined: January 15, 2008
So my opinion.

This ASR site is one of these 'let's create controversy' sites so people will talk about us and notice us. The easiest way to gain attention is to take a stance opposite of the majority. I'm going to listen to one speaker and give an opinion. Riiiight. It's a clown show and I wish people would stop bringing it up.

Pass Labs amps suck
Magnepans suck
Psaudio directstream sucks.

Not really sure how they rated any of the above but....Whatever.

 

measurement technology on planars, posted on September 30, 2020 at 19:09:59
DrChaos
Audiophile

Posts: 1797
Location: San Diego
Joined: July 13, 2009
I'm very wary of all the short-time burst FFTs and other reconstruction techniques to attempt to estimate 'quasi-anechoic' measurements when they are applied to speakers, planars, with driver dimensions which can be significantly longer than the wavelength being emitted. The Klippel system tries to do something with 'spherical harmonics' which is a decomposition for the wave/diffusion equation suitable for systems with certain spherical symmetries, more specifically, the finite-mode truncations (as always used) will work better for quasi point sources vs long line sources. (By the way the spherical harmonic structure & radial modes are the basis of decomposition of Schroedinger equation solutions as the electron wave function orbitals that help govern chemistry)

The algorithms & measurements almost surely were NOT calibrated or designed for that situation, i.e. calibrated and validated for planars against results in full, large, expensive real anechoic chambers (which have to be big enough even there so that the long axis of the speaker is still 'small'!) with AES-paper level science.

I'm a hard core 'objectivist' but further we need to be skeptical of the conditions of the measurements and applicability.

Furthermore, these tests, *like all the Harman preference tests*, in single speaker mono. Alone, Magnepans are nothing special. The perceptual psychoacoustic magic happens to me only in stereo, with a difference stronger than conventional speakers, perhaps with spectral balance perceived changes more than box speakers.

 

RE: Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website, posted on October 1, 2020 at 07:47:49
gadio4533
Audiophile

Posts: 317
Location: FL
Joined: May 28, 2007
Wow, lots of pretty graphs. Good to know all other 'expert reviewers' got it so wrong. Now I have to make a change, anybody interested in a pair of gunned 1.6s.

 

RE: The review was absurd, posted on October 1, 2020 at 12:17:32
BDP24
Audiophile

Posts: 1045
Location: Vancouver, Washington
Joined: September 12, 2013
sbrook, there are a few of us ET LFT-8b owners around. For some reason, most Maggie owners are just not interested in the ET's. I have both (LFT-8b and LFT-4, and Tympani T-IVa), along with the QUAD ESL.

 

RE: The review was absurd, posted on October 1, 2020 at 12:47:16
sbrook
Audiophile

Posts: 161
Location: Florida
Joined: November 3, 2004
I could have been a Maggie owner but for footprint. My first exposure to actually listening to them was an extended session at Lyric hi-fi in NYC with a set of 1.6's and I found them utterly rapturous. I subsequently auditioned a set of MMGs in home back in Florida. While a sub would have been desirable and better mounts, I loved the sound.

I hemmed and hawed between 1.6 and MG12 but I just couldn't handle the visual footprint in my living room. The MMGs had established that the room could support it (the wall behind them encompassed 8 linear feet of sliding glass)but the bigger panels would really block the view. Surprisingly my wife was okay with either but I was the one who couldn't commit.

The 13" width of the ET made them ideal. Bought unheard strictly on reading was a bit of a leap of faith but I have never been sorry. $1350 at the time for the 8A with the Sound Anchor stands was an obscene bargain and the additional $400 for the 8B tweeters was well worth it.

I still feel in the right room a set of MMGs with a small fast sub could have been all the speaker I needed.

 

RE: The review was absurd, posted on October 2, 2020 at 09:48:08
shumi
Audiophile

Posts: 97
Location: Virginia
Joined: January 11, 2020
...and they rated the Denafrips Ares 2 DAC as mediocre. It is more musical, less digital than their top rated (based on measurements) Topping DAC which every member of the ASR forum seems to own.
BEEEEHHHHH...

 

RE: Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website, posted on October 8, 2020 at 19:47:00
Dawnrazor
Audiophile

Posts: 12028
Location: N. California
Joined: April 9, 2004
Sad I was always skeptical of that site because it seems that every dac review came down to THD measurements.

There was a thread on how to measure dipoles and it seems at a cursory reading that the foibles were discussed and the "review" was posted anyhow.

But now I know that site is a silly waste of time...

Cut to razor sounding violins

 

RE: Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website, posted on October 9, 2020 at 15:38:05
Mcmusicman
Audiophile

Posts: 9
Location: Wilmington NC
Joined: April 15, 2020
This.
They rate a lot of stuff well that sounds like crap, thin and ughhhhh.
SINAD is not the end all, be all.
Yes Tubes add noise, and this noise is simply beautiful as one example.

 

RE: The review was absurd, posted on October 13, 2020 at 18:33:28
josh358
Industry Professional

Posts: 12079
Joined: February 9, 2010
Contributor
  Since:
February 3, 2012
Amir insists that all DAC's sound the same, but likes to measure them anyway. Most of the measurements he makes are of things that would be inaudible to a dog.

If they do all sound the same, he should just suggest that people buy the cheapest.

Of course they don't all sound the same, but try to mention the obvious and they'll throw bottles and tin cans at you.

I did a careful and painstaking series of level-matched A/B tests and they did not sound the same; the Sabre DAC's have the infamous "Sabre glare."

I'm not even sure that this is much of a mystery. I'm guessing it's the infamous harmonic distortion bump, although the overpeaked filters may contribute as well; ESS says they aren't correct, but sound good.

Amir doesn't think that ESS is correct about their own DAC's.

But kind of unfair to argue with somebody who isn't here.

 

RE: measurement technology on planars, posted on October 13, 2020 at 18:33:59
josh358
Industry Professional

Posts: 12079
Joined: February 9, 2010
Contributor
  Since:
February 3, 2012
Thanks, interesting and informative.

 

RE: The review was absurd, posted on October 13, 2020 at 18:38:00
josh358
Industry Professional

Posts: 12079
Joined: February 9, 2010
Contributor
  Since:
February 3, 2012
Heh, yes, in-between is where the truth lies, but some of those guys are fanatics who wouldn't believe that the sky is blue unless it had been demonstrated in a double-blind peer-reviewed study.

OTOH, there are some excellent and knowledgeable people on the site -- and they aren't the same as the true believers.

The LFT8's are a curious case -- widely respected, but they don't get much attention, perhaps because they've been the same for longer than most of us have been alive!

 

+1 (NT), posted on October 13, 2020 at 18:40:11
josh358
Industry Professional

Posts: 12079
Joined: February 9, 2010
Contributor
  Since:
February 3, 2012
.

 

RE: Test of LRS on Audio Science Review website, posted on October 16, 2020 at 20:17:23
dinhcamnhung73@gmail.com
Industry Professional

Posts: 1
Location: Hanoi
Joined: October 16, 2020
I also follow the Audio Science Review website. They pursue a finely crafted objective analysis of equipment. And objective is where their approach runs into problems.

For example, I own a Topping D50s DAC that tested excellent on their scale and is strongly recommended. Closely comparing it to my other DAC, which is a bit more expensive, the sound is thin, shallow and much less detailed.

 

Page processed in 0.063 seconds.