Speaker Asylum

General speaker questions for audio and home theater.

Return to Speaker Asylum


Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity

73.249.143.27

Posted on May 25, 2017 at 13:28:39
rockdoc
Audiophile

Posts: 200
Location: Harwich MA
Joined: February 17, 2010
The Stereophile review of the Zu Soul Supremes shows test results at much lower sensitivity than advertised by Zu.

JA- "My estimate of the Zu Soul Supreme's voltage sensitivity was 91.5dB/2.83V/m, which is lower than the specified 97dB/W/m but still much higher than average.

Zu publishes efficiency as 101 dB.

Who's right?

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 25, 2017 at 21:11:58
AudioSoul
Audiophile

Posts: 4594
Location: north central AZ
Joined: July 9, 2005


There was a thread over on Audiokarma I believe. Not just about the Zu but Tekton designs also. The sensitivity on some of Tektons speakers were sever db below the advertised specifications. Some are complaining of false advertising. I ordered a pair Of Tekton Lores before I saw this thread. I was planning on running the Lores on 8 watts of tube power. I hope it is enough.....

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 25, 2017 at 23:00:36
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
It depends how the manufacturer measures the speakers - the same thing came up with my Audio Note E and prior to that my Audio Note J/SPe.

I can't speak for Zu but in my AN E's case - Audio Note measures "both" speakers in room from a corner loaded position. In other words - what you will get with real world results in the ACTUAL way you will use the loudspeakers in 99% of all cases. The corner of a room adds 18dB of gain in the bass (9dB from each speaker) and 3dB of gain in sensitivity from the corner position. Martin Colloms who is a degree holding engineer and was the measurements taker at Stereophile for years got the same number (in fact slightly better) than AN's published number. Hi-Fi Choice also measured both the J and E and got the numbers AN produced. Only JA doesn't.

Of course - Stereophile measures only one speaker in the middle of a room for sensitivity in a quasi-anechoic manner.

Ask Zu if they get their sensitivity measurement from taking a measurement as a stereo pair (as it should be taken) and that if they measure two speakers - you know why there is a discrepancy.

The easier way is to ignore all this crap and go to a shop carrying whatever speaker you are interested in and connect up whatever 3 wattish amp you intend to use and see what happens. You'll find the ease of drive by using your ears.

I would not not buy a Zu or a Tekton because of a measurement from one source especially one where virtually everything fails - umm if everything fails it's in all likelihood a bad test.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 26, 2017 at 02:13:26
PAR
This is a very interestting thread. However it would be good to hear JA's views on this especially in regard to your final paragraph. I am not sure that he picks up on Speaker Asylum . This is, of course, the correct forum for the subject but, bearing in mind the rules on double posting, I wonder if the moderator would consider moving this to Critics as a " more suitable place" in order that JA could respond?

 

RE: JA's views on this , posted on May 26, 2017 at 02:51:04
rockdoc
Audiophile

Posts: 200
Location: Harwich MA
Joined: February 17, 2010
I asked in the comments section (last couple of posts in comments) of this review, and got some response.....

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 26, 2017 at 05:33:52
msa
Audiophile

Posts: 677
Location: Northeast
Joined: November 1, 2002
I run my M-lores on 8-10 watts: its plenty ! I've also used 4-5 watts for some chamber music, and its fine. Enjoy your new speakers.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 26, 2017 at 08:19:38
"Who's right?"

Nobody!!!!!

It's all in how this "sensitivity" is measured, and nobody has set any true standards AFAIC. One loudspeaker manufacturer might specify a particular number and he tests his speakers as a stereo pair placed where he would normally position them in a listening room. A different manufacturer might test for sensitivity by positioning a single speaker in an anechoic chamber. The results are gonna be different so they really cannot be compared to each other.

Then, to further muddy the mix, along comes a "reviewer" who performs his sensitivity measurements by placing a single speaker in the center of his room in a "semi-anechoic" (whatever that means) state (perhaps he lacks the facilities to measure in any other way?) which again will result in a different specification than the two methods mentioned above, therefore adding to the confusion.

I have seen speaker manufacturers such as Klipsch, Tekton, Zu, and quite a few others taken to task because their spec'd sensitivity readings don't match up to some "reviewers" measurements when the reviewer either doesn't know how the manufacturer arrives at his spec, is unable to duplicate this particular method, or is just plain arrogant enough not to care.

You read these figures and want to believe what you see. Just make sure that you have enough salt with you to make them palatable ;-)

To the poster who is concerned about having enough power (@8 watts/ch) to properly drive a pair of Tekton Lores - don't even begin to sweat it. BTDT

Cheers,
SB

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 26, 2017 at 09:15:10
Mick Wolfe
Audiophile

Posts: 3365
Location: AZ
Joined: October 10, 1999
Contributor
  Since:
September 4, 2000
I have a friend who powers his Lores with a MiniWatt amp at 2.5 watts per channel. I trust his ear and he says it sounds surprisingly good. FWIW, this is his secondary casual set-up, but he's quite satisfied. I think you'll be fine to say the least, especially if your 8 watt amp is a 300B SET.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 26, 2017 at 13:57:46
John Atkinson
Reviewer

Posts: 4045
Location: New York
Joined: November 24, 2003
>it would be good to hear JA's views on this especially in regard to your
.final paragraph.

Voltage sensitivity is formally specified as the sound pressure level
produced at 1m when a single loudspeaker is fed 2.83V in an anechoic
chamber. That is the number I quote in my reviews, modified by applying
a B-weighting curve that rolls off the extreme highs and lows. (That is
to prevent a speaker with extended bass, for example, measuring as being
more sensitive than a smaller speaker that produces the same spl in the
midrange and thus is equally loud with music.)

Manufacturers often specify the output of two speakers not one, or they
measure the spl in a room rather than anechoically, in order to be able
to publish a bigger number. With a speaker that has a non-flat response,
they often specify the spl of the highest peak in the response, also to
be able to print a bigger number. All of these methods are dirty pool, in
my opinion.

For more, see my comments on measuring sensitivity on pages 3 and 4
of the article linked below.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 27, 2017 at 05:21:04
bcowen
Audiophile

Posts: 1076
Location: North Carolina
Joined: December 19, 2015
I'm running my Lores with ~21 watts of SET power (300BXLS output tubes), and they will play stupid loud. Unless you like to play rock at 105 dB in a huge room, I'd bet your 8 watts will be plenty. Note that the *perceived* sensitivity will increase as they break in. I have to say that the Lores were the most awful sounding speakers I've ever heard when I first hooked them up. 50 hours later and they were a completely different speaker, and continued to improve up to the 200 (or so) hour mark.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 27, 2017 at 07:38:44
I can't speak for Zu but in my AN E's case - Audio Note measures "both" speakers in room from a corner loaded position. In other words - what you will get with real world results in the ACTUAL way you will use the loudspeakers in 99% of all cases. The corner of a room adds 18dB of gain in the bass (9dB from each speaker) and 3dB of gain in sensitivity from the corner position. Martin Colloms who is a degree holding engineer and was the measurements taker at Stereophile for years got the same number (in fact slightly better) than AN's published number. Hi-Fi Choice also measured both the J and E and got the numbers AN produced. Only JA doesn't.


If that is the way Audio Note specifies sensitivity, then it is useless because it is impossible to compare to other speakers. Once you bring room gain into the measurement, you can't compare your result with others unless they are also measured in the same position in the same room from the same distance.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 27, 2017 at 08:07:45
That is precisely why nobody's right!

In order for anybody to be "right" every speaker would have to be measured in the exact same way using the same (make and model) measuring equipment.

Who's gonna do dat?

Cheers,
SB

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 27, 2017 at 08:43:40
There is an international standard for measuring loudspeakers:

https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/1224

Sensitivity is measured with an input of 2.83V into a single speaker, measured with the microphone on axis at 1m under anechoic conditions.

You don't need to use the same make and model of measuring equipment. Measuring equipment is supposed to be professionally calibrated so that different makes and models produce the same results from the same item under test.

Most loudspeaker manufacturers who actually engineer their loudspeakers have calibrated measuring equipment and publish sensitivity ratings that can be compared.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 27, 2017 at 09:19:13
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
Yes but there is the issue that not EVERY loudspeaker is designed to be placed 3+ feet from every wall. The standard measurement is great for standard speakers. It's why Stereophile ALWAYS makes excuces for the horrible measurements of Magnepan because yak yak yak their "standard" measurement equipment can't properly take a measurement of a panel. Well that should also apply to loudspeakers that are designed for near wall or corner positions (certain horns, Alisons, Audio Notes).

I would agree with you if a free standing speaker manufacturer posted their corner loaded result in order to prop up the numbers. But that's not the case. Besides - Audio Note is a company that sells SET amplifiers and tube CD players without digital or analogue filters. They're never ever going to be able to sell ANY audiophile on the planet who is into numbers! So why even bother? The best SET amp is going to be trounced by cheap SS numbers and their CD players are absolutely terrible measuring - maybe the WORST in the entire audio industry. Broken even.

And guess what - they put both the WORST measuring amplifiers...SET and COMBINE that with the worst measuring CD players and speakers that run counter to all modern design(wide baffle, lossy cabinets, (ie bad), and usually put silver wires (which most consider too bright - thus horrible).

So again measurements SET (Bad), AN CD replay (Bad), Speakers (bad) stick it all together - then have reviewers who have heard virtually everything that measures stunningly awesome in Stereophile with people who can afford both sorts of things and still. It's not difficult - listen to XYZ speaker with 7 watt amp and determine if the speaker is efficient/sensitive.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 27, 2017 at 09:42:53
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
As a bit of an aside - if a person can't tell a speaker is sensitive or not when using say an 8 watt SET amplifier - and the person can't tell if the speaker puts out solid bass response when they listen to said speakers, then isn't this akin to a blind person whose hobby is photography?

Sure I accept there is subjectivity whether you like or dislike a given thing but it's not difficult regardless of preference to be able to tell if a speaker is sufficiently easy to drive versus hard to drive and whether the bass and volume are there. One can determine this if one puts a disc or LP on their machines and pushes play, drops needle.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 27, 2017 at 10:38:44
Dave_K

..........."International standard for measuring loudspeakers."

There is supposed to be an international standard, but not all loudspeaker manufacturers adhere to international standards for one reason or another, nor do all reviewers adhere to these standards. It appears to me that Atkinson doesn't test for sensitivity according to these international standards so isn't it true that only speakers measured with the same Atkinson method can be compared to each other?

"Measuring equipment is supposed to be professionally calibrated............"

But do we know if everyone using this equipment is making use of "professionally calibrated" measuring equipment and how is this standard enforced?

"Most loudspeaker manufacturers............."

Who are these manufacturers? And which manufacturers do not use these methods? Please be specific, after all you're the one who posted this claim!


And finally, why doesn't every component that measures the same sound the same? How many times do components that do not measure well get glowing reviews from professional reviewers? Could it be that measurements don't tell the real story? Could it be that some measuring methods are flawed and/or could the actual measuring equipment be defective or improperly calibrated? Or do the measurement gurus actually know what to measure and how to measure for it? Julian Hirsch comes immediately to mind.

I withhold judgement on every component until I've heard it in a "normal" listening environment. I can't seem to make myself listen to measurements. I listen to music, not measurements, and I know what sounds good (to me) and what doesn't. And some of it measures well, but some of it doesn't ;-)

Cheers,
SB

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 28, 2017 at 00:04:33
Duke
Dealer

Posts: 4429
Location: Princeton, Texas
Joined: March 31, 2000
"Why doesn't every component that measures the same sound the same?"

If one is willing to delve into the details, it would be extremely unlikely to find two different loudspeakers that really do measure the same in every area that matters.

"Could it be that measurements don't tell the real story?"

A comprehensive suite of loudspeaker measurements, correctly analyzed and interpreted, can do an excellent job of predicting subjective preference.

If you aren't familiar with the work of Floyd Toole on the subject of loudspeaker acoustics and psychoacoustics, click on the link below and sit back while he explains what he discovered during a lifetime of research.

(I do not necessarily agree with every single one of Toole's conclusions, and you probably won't either, but imo familiarity with his work is foundational if you are going to discuss the methods, merits and deficiencies of loudspeaker measurements.)

Duke


Me being a dealer makes you leery?? It gets worse... I'm a manufacturer too.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 28, 2017 at 04:00:47
Frihed89
Audiophile

Posts: 15703
Location: Copenhagen
Joined: March 21, 2005
I am pretty sure that a large majority of AN(UK) speaker buyers have AN(UK) systems and aren't that interested in comparisons with other brands. Besides, it's what you hear, not what you measure that matters.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 28, 2017 at 07:49:29
AudioSoul
Audiophile

Posts: 4594
Location: north central AZ
Joined: July 9, 2005

Why would the standard be to measure one speaker? I don't know anyone that listens to one speaker anymore. If I am looking to buy a speaker I want to know the sensitivity of the two with taking into consideration of room size of course......

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 28, 2017 at 07:52:45
AudioSoul
Audiophile

Posts: 4594
Location: north central AZ
Joined: July 9, 2005


Thanks for the heads up. I will let them break in thoroughly before making any judgments. I have made the mistake in the past with other speakers and cartridges of not giving them sufficient time to break in

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 28, 2017 at 08:38:44
If you want to know the sensitivity of two speakers, just add 3dB.

There is no such thing as sensitivity taking into consideration room size. Sensitivity is specified independent of room.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 28, 2017 at 09:42:21
Go troll someone else.

I've never seen two speakers that measure the same. It's impossible to measure everything you would need to fully characterize the sound of a loudspeaker. And it's rare to come close. Yet loudspeakers are the one component in the audio chain where I can look at a good set of measurements and have a pretty good idea whether I'm going to have a generally favorable or unfavorable listening experience. If you don't find them helpful then it's your loss.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 28, 2017 at 09:53:40
You are probably correct about AN buyers. However, given such a large disparity between the "efficiency" numbers posted on AN's web site and the actual measured sensitivity, I suspect there is some intentional false advertising happening. I couldn't find any information online about how Audio Note measures efficiency either.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 28, 2017 at 10:05:44
Dave_K

So I respectfully asked you to elaborate on some of the statements that you've made in this thread and your answer is to accuse me of being a troll. You invite me to "go troll someone else". Wow, you're brave! I don't really believe that you'd respond in such a fashion if we were having this conversation face to face.

I did not insult you, but you feel it necessary to toss an insult into the debate rather than providing a civil answer. Any time you make a post on a public forum you should expect to be questioned or asked for an explanation - instead you resort to name calling, you cowardly POS.

I was attempting to get a few answers on a subject that, by reading the varying opinions presented by other Inmates posting on this thread, could be called controversial. Instead, all I received from you in response is an insult.

Two can play at that game. You don't deserve a polite response from me, so go fuck yourself. I'll not respond to you again, as I don't have the patience to deal with your kind.

SB

 

As JA himself has pointed out in speaker reviews..., posted on May 28, 2017 at 15:15:50
Ladok
Audiophile

Posts: 171
Joined: November 21, 2001
...sensitivity doesn't tell the whole story. The speaker's impedance has a lot to say about the actual "sensitivity." The Supreme is 16 ohms and will draw less power from the amp to achieve the same db level as a 4 or 8-ohm speaker. So using that standard, it's actually more sensitive than 91 db. This has also come up in reviews of Devore speakers, which under JAs test conditions don't meet their sensitivity spec but have 12-ohm impedance so are actually more sensitive than the test indicates.

 

RE: As JA himself has pointed out in speaker reviews..., posted on May 29, 2017 at 18:19:59
Raymond Leggs
Audiophile

Posts: 748
Joined: November 25, 2007
3 watts? Aint enogh for me, I like Big powerful bass!

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 29, 2017 at 18:28:18
Pat D
Audiophile

Posts: 12506
Location: Fredericton NB
Joined: June 20, 2000
Yes, one of the main purposes of speaker measurements for home listeners is to be able to compare speakers.


-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 29, 2017 at 19:06:36
Pat D
Audiophile

Posts: 12506
Location: Fredericton NB
Joined: June 20, 2000
You seem to think that consumers would use sensitivity measurements to see how a speaker would perform in their rooms. That might be interesting, but you can hardly expect a reviewer or manufacturer to do that for each customer's rooms. As a consumer, I want to know how different speakers compare in this respect, and so measuring sensitivity with one speaker is just as good as measuring two.

Since a number of manufacturers use some other system of measurement (and some probably just make it up), manufacturers specs are often not reliable for comparisons. Klipsch, for example, seems to use a reverberant field measurent for sensitivity, which explains why their specifications give higher figures than results of quasi-anechoic or anechoic measurements done by Stereophile or at the NRC by Soundstage. You cannot validly compare Klipsch sensitivity specifications with those for Paradigm or PSB speakers.

-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser

 

RE: As JA himself has pointed out in speaker reviews..., posted on May 29, 2017 at 21:27:56
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
110db sensitive 20hz -3db speakers with a 3 watt amp

110dB - 1 watt
113dB - 2 watts 20hz no problem


84dB stand mount at the usual 50-70hz

84dB - 1 watt
87dB - 2w
90dB - 4w
93dB - 8w
96dB - 16w
99dB - 32w
102dB - 64w
105dB - 128w (speaker compresses pinching the bass and creating distortion
108dB - 256w (standmount explodes never putting out any real bass).

System A utterly destroys system two for both bass and volume level.

Fortunately most people most of the time listen at under 80dB which is why you do see some people with 8 watt amps using speakers in the middle 80s sensitivity. Which is smart because loud listening damages hearing.

 

RE: As JA himself has pointed out in speaker reviews..., posted on May 29, 2017 at 21:58:23
DrChaos
Audiophile

Posts: 2063
Location: San Diego
Joined: July 13, 2009
You mean the difference between acoustic power output per input voltage, versus acoustic power output per input electrical power, which I would call 'efficiency'.

 

Toole's conclusions that you disagree with?, posted on May 29, 2017 at 22:02:10
DrChaos
Audiophile

Posts: 2063
Location: San Diego
Joined: July 13, 2009

Which of Toole's conclusions do you disagree with, and why?

This is a real question, not a troll. I want to hear from manufacturers with experience like yourself.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 29, 2017 at 22:22:24
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
I enjoyed the fact at 32:40 that when he put the speaker nearest the corner the measurement got better. :)

 

Martin logan and electrosts get destroyed by the Toole..., posted on May 29, 2017 at 22:45:27
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
at 1:03:40

 

Methodology problem imo, posted on May 30, 2017 at 00:39:12
Duke
Dealer

Posts: 4429
Location: Princeton, Texas
Joined: March 31, 2000
The methodology used is not dipole-friendly, and is even less dipole-panel/box-woofer-hybrid-friendly. Let me explain:

One of the main benefits of a dipole speaker is its spectrally-correct backwave energy that, with proper setup, arrives at the listening position after a time delay of ballpark 10 milliseconds or more (this figure corresponding with positioning the speakers about 5 feet in front of the wall). My understanding is that the area behind the speakers in the Harman listening room is absorptive, so dipoles get no benefit from their backwave energy.

Also, the spectral balance of a woofer/panel hybrid like the Martin Logan is dependent to a large extent on listening distance. This is because you have a point-source-approximating woofer combined with a line-source-approximating panel. Sound pressure level falls off by 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a point source, but only by 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source. This is not just theoretical - it happens in the real world, I measured it in my living room on SoundLab Dynastats (which are conceptually very similar to the Martin Logans). Now you might say that this is a design flaw of the configuration, and I suppose it is, but it also means that, in order to see what a woofer/panel hybrid has to offer, you gotta pay attention to getting the setup right.

Kinda like evaluating Audio Note speakers on high stands set way out in the middle of the room... that setup would not show what they have to offer. Even moreso with improperly set up dipole/woofer hybrids.

So I really do not think the Martin Logans were given a fair chance to show what they could do. And it's too unwieldy to completely change the test procedure for "special case" speakers like these, so I don't know of a practical solution, but I'm a little surprised that Toole et al apparently failed to understand their specialized setup requirements. Or maybe they do understand them, but figure no one else does, and so they continue to use the Martin Logans as an example of good correlation between objective measurements and subjective preference. Which they are in this case.

And I think THAT was Toole's main point, rather than "stats suck" or something like that.

Duke

Me being a dealer makes you leery?? It gets worse... I'm a manufacturer too.

 

Excellent question!, posted on May 30, 2017 at 01:18:04
Duke
Dealer

Posts: 4429
Location: Princeton, Texas
Joined: March 31, 2000
"Which of Toole's conclusions do you disagree with, and why?"

One of the conclusions Toole apparently draws from his data is, wide dispersion speakers are the way to go if that wide dispersion is highly uniform, such that the reflections are spectrally correct or nearly so.

The only problem I see with this is, you end up with a lot of early reflections, which can impose coloration and degrade clarity. Of course you also get a lot of beneficial later-arriving reflections, which enhance timbral richness and impart a sense of being immersed in the soundfield of the recording. The good outweighs the bad, so wide and uniform dispersion is good, but is there an even better way?

I believe there is. I believe we'd be better off with less energy in the early reflections, as long as we still have a lot of spectrally-correct energy in the later ones. This can be accomplished in several different ways, and multi-channel is not required. Let me know if you'd like a couple of examples.

This is conceptually similar to what has been found to work well in concert halls. Acoustician David Griesinger investigated the difference between a "really good" seat in a concert hall, and a seat that's not so good. Here is what sets them apart:

In a really good seat, you have two distinct energy streams (we don't hear them as "distinct", but they can be described that way): First, you have a clear stream of direct sound. And then you also have a clear stream of reverberant sound. And the key is, there is a time delay in between the two. In fact he found that, in general, the earlier the reflections arrive, the more they degrade the clarity.

So I prefer approaches that are more in harmony with what has been found to work well in a concert hall.

Perhaps my disagreement with Toole is a quibble within a quibble, but it has led me in different directions than the ones normally pursued by Harman companies.

Duke


Me being a dealer makes you leery?? It gets worse... I'm a manufacturer too.

 

RE: Methodology problem imo, posted on May 30, 2017 at 04:36:35
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
I agree with what you're saying but what I see is a guy working for a company and he is there to sell speakers for the brand he works for. He called the ML a "bad design" without specifically calling the brand name out we all know what it is. Of course any speaker that is designed for a room interaction will measure poorly when not measured appropriately.

I understand what you are saying with panels needing extra special attention but the same review outfits doing measurements always measure panels that look horrible on the plots and then say "but they sound great so ignore the horrific measured results" in other words the measurements suck but give me the benefit of the doubt and trust my ears. Well no you can't have it both ways. But they pick and choose which speakers to make excuses for. Then go out of your way and measure a panel properly. Get the appropriate measuring tools.

Then all these great measuring speakers in the same magazines that tout "this is great measured performance" and the reviewers who auditioned and perhaps reviewed those very suped up white papered speakers proceed to buy a speaker like the DeVore, Audio Note, a panel or a Horn that virtually run to the opposite side of the great measuring spectrum.

I can read the Harman papers - watch the video and then I go out to one of the places that professionally set these kinds of speakers up. I spend the time actually listening hard to these speakers. Revel Ultima Salon 2, top of the line Harman made current JBLs, Paradigm S8, PSB Imagine. Scratch my head and think - where did the lifeblood of the music go?

Then I listen to some butt ugly looking enormous monstrosity of a horn system run by those bad measuring tube amps and it's so on another level it's ridiculous. It's why a long time back I was interested in your very own Prisma horns - horns have a tactile lifelike scale to them. Perfect maybe not but not everything comes down to frequency plots and resonances - HE jumps out of the box usually anyway and escapes the box sound - which is why my KEF LS-50 sounds far more boxy shut in and resonancy than my AN E.

And here's the thing - perhaps it's a United States thing that I don't quite get - and JA probably understands because of his Chinese wall references between advertising and the editor. But if a company that SELLS stereo equipment hires an engineer who gets paid from said company conducts a test - produces a paper and then gee whiz - all our speakers under this test indicate that our $1000 speaker is better than the rest selling at $10,000 - however possibly true that might be - those premises and results are a conflict of interest. The guy selling you the widget is the guy conducting the science and the guy telling you his is best (or implies it real real hard). Chinese Wall?

I understand that in the United States - science is now fake news and that Philip Morris claiming that cigarettes are perfectly safe (and now apparently lead and asbestos are just fine too) - Big Tobacco have real bought and paid for scientists with degrees and white papers too that absolutely indicate that cigarettes are perfectly safe. They ran this counter science create doubt machine for 5 decades. They are doing it again with a similar issue that will kill people, but let's not go there. That doubt machine has been going since Carl Sagan.

As you noted yourself - the MLs were not given a fair chance due to their type of design. Now a company selling $1500 standmounts and their own $20k speakers hardly want to go above and beyond the call to be "fair" to a competing product like Martin Logan now do they? Of course not - they want the OTHER speaker to look bad and fail the test miserably. See they suck and we're superior.

The entire premise is faulty - people want the best sound - that is total crap. Bose sells more speakers than the top 5 audiophile approved speaker makers COMBINED. And these speakers often measure and even sound abysmal and they continue to sell above and beyond everyone else! So Toole claiming people will be mad if their speaker doesn't measure flat is absolutely ridiculous. Right out of marketing advert 101 but because he seems like your favorite grandpa everyone just accepts the premise.

Ask dealers - I know several and they tell me that more than 90% of everyone who walks in knows what they want before listening. They often don't trust the dealers so don't listen to any suggestions. And that's high end dealers.

When someone goes to a big box chain in Canada to buy Toole approved Paradigm and PSB speakers - there is no place to properly audition any of this stuff - sound quality is not on the agenda AT ALL in those places.

So the dealer probably trots out reviews and the white papers. See most people in our test choose this speaker because of this graph - see the pretty graph - looks neat don't it. 98% of them have no clue what they are actually looking at and don't know a watt from WhatsApp, but it is "scientific" and since you can't hear them properly anyway - well it's probably good - the review was nice. Here's my CC.

Anyway - conflict of interest is very very clear here. I tip my hat though because big companies do this snow better than Santa.

 

RE: Methodology problem imo, posted on May 30, 2017 at 08:25:38
A.Wayne
Audiophile

Posts: 2527
Location: Front row center
Joined: November 30, 2011
RGA ,

America sell it's fake science to Canadians, who then migrate and spread their cognitive dissonce with a dosh of AN bias .

Regards

 

RE: As JA himself has pointed out in speaker reviews..., posted on May 30, 2017 at 08:38:43
hahax@verizon.net
Audiophile

Posts: 4310
Location: New Jersey
Joined: March 22, 2006
Actually listening at an average level of 85 dB is very loud and even inefficient speakers only need a watt or 2 to do this. Power is needed in these speakers for peaks that in classical music can be 30 Db or so for very short periods. that's the need there for high power, clean peaks to maintain fidelity for very short periods. Efficiency is good but the problem as you pose it is exaggerated.

 

I've found Toole's research to be extremely valuable, posted on May 30, 2017 at 13:36:21
Duke
Dealer

Posts: 4429
Location: Princeton, Texas
Joined: March 31, 2000
I've learned things, imo very valuable things, from Toole and/or others' research that he renders accessible in his writings. Want to learn what matters most in speaker design? As you juggle the inevitable tradeoffs, want to know where you can compromise and get away with it? Do you have what might be a "better idea" and want to take into account relevant acoustic and psychoacoustic principles as you evolve your idea? Want to know where there might still be room for improvement in that magnificent butt-ugly horn monstrosity you mentioned?

In situations like the horn monstrosity, you don't need Toole to validate what your ears tell you, but in most cases Toole will tell you WHY your ears reach the conclusions they do. When he doesn't, then the reasons probably lie in an area he has not delved into. For instance, on another forum, he told me that more research is needed in the area of thermal modulation - it is often much worse than we assume. He mentioned measuring a three-way system and finding that its midrange driver was compressing normal peaks by about 7 dB(!). Our horn monstrosity may not be perfect, but it probably doesn't have this problem.

Unfortunately I lack the energy to respond to your post point by point, and besides I would rather not get into an internet squabble with someone I respect.

Duke


Me being a dealer makes you leery?? It gets worse... I'm a manufacturer too.

 

RE: I've found Toole's research to be extremely valuable, posted on May 30, 2017 at 15:49:50
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
Hi I didn't mean to suggest that everything he says is BS - not at all most of it isn't but let's say I agree with your point here "When he doesn't, then the reasons probably lie in an area he has not delved into. For instance, on another forum, he told me that more research is needed in the area of thermal modulation."

 

RE: As JA himself has pointed out in speaker reviews..., posted on May 30, 2017 at 16:07:45
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
Yes it is an extreme example because there are not very many 110db sensitive speakers.

Most amplifiers however in peaks can go much higher in output for short duration - coupled with the way tube amps clip and the given quality of the amplifier.

Subjectively - the other issue is this - Assuming say 85dB sensitive speakers if amp A is a low powered single ended variety let's say and for 95% of musical listening at normal volume you find it sounds vastly better than amp B that is high power SS - do you take amp A over B even if B does a better job at handling peak loud power passages. If that is the only thing it does better?

The choice to me would be to look for 95dB-100dB sensitive speakers requiring the amp to work 1/10th as hard and cover those peaks. Noting that most people don't listen to pedal organ recordings.

And heck SS is dirt cheap - you can always buy both kinds of amp - so when you really want that juice it's pretty cheap to buy since SS is practically worthless on the second hand market.

 

RE: I've found Toole's research to be extremely valuable, posted on May 30, 2017 at 18:56:13
Duke
Dealer

Posts: 4429
Location: Princeton, Texas
Joined: March 31, 2000
So... we disagree, but there's enough common ground that we can both stand on it? Done!

Thank you for such an agreeable disagreement!

Duke
Me being a dealer makes you leery?? It gets worse... I'm a manufacturer too.

 

RE: I've found Toole's research to be extremely valuable, posted on May 30, 2017 at 19:43:18
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
Definitely good sir - now if only politicians could agreeably disagree on certain things and move on to stuff they agree on.

Yeah I know, but I keep trying to be an optimist and not crush the idealism too much.

Are you going to CAS in July (28-30)? If so let me know as I'll be covering part of it - I will miss the 28th as I'll be in Las Vegas.



 

RE: I've found Toole's research to be extremely valuable, posted on May 30, 2017 at 19:55:17
Duke
Dealer

Posts: 4429
Location: Princeton, Texas
Joined: March 31, 2000
I won't be at the Capital Audio Show, sorry. Nearly all of my energy has been going into prosound projects lately - some musical instrument speaker cabinets, and some studio speaker designs.

Duke


Me being a dealer makes you leery?? It gets worse... I'm a manufacturer too.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 30, 2017 at 23:37:55
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
The speakers are measured from corners. Hi-fi choice for instance doesn't have corners and measured the AN J/Spe as 89.5dB - AN puts them at 92.5 or 93dB as they are corner loaded designs you obviously measure from a corner.

I think most people looking at Audio Note speakers are aware that the speakers are meant to be placed in corners or right up against the either the back wall or the side walls. Since every show for the last 20+ years they have been put in corners.

And given that 90%+ of the amplifiers they sell are under 10 watts - I think you should give the consumer some credit to be able to put 2 and 2 together - umm - this is an easy speaker to drive - otherwise they would be selling 300 watt SS amplifiers.

So i look at JA's measurements of 92.5db not from a corner - add 3dB for corners and his measurement would be 95.5dB (say 96dB). AN says the speaker is 97.5dB-98dB. So AN is off by 1.5dB and 2dB - hardly something to get into a snit over. But Audio Note is misleading right.

But wait - DeVore Orangutan (not misleading and completely honest) they rate their "free standing" speaker as 96dB. John Atkinson measured them as 91dB - a 5dB swing that has not explanation.

AN is off by 2db - Devore is off by 5dB and the AN E is still 1dB more sensitive! So which company is "misleadingly optimistic."

As for bass - Martin Colloms (Hi-Fi Critic) reviewed the AN E and measured them as attaining 17hz at -6db from room corners. Stereophile didn't do their homework much either - if you are reviewing a component and something odd comes up why did JA not contact someone at Audio Note and ask about the tuning port frequency versus their 17hz -6dB specification. It would be fine to disagree or whatever but when I review something I read the manual which clearly states that the best position (the one they want you to put the speaker in) is the corner. PS the manual is online so somebody could have checked no?

JA has also covered many shows and at every one of them AN has the speaker fairly hard in the corners.

I mean he introduced Wes Philips to the Audio Note room - Wes of the accurate loudspeaker/big power measurements first type. See link. see last paragraph - I wonder why Revel wasn't mentioned.

Lastly I like JA in that at least he covers mystifyingly bad measuring stuff like Audio Note CD players, croft amps and Zanden etc and that even with horrible numbers can understand why people like them. I just sorta feel like with the other AN gear - it all generally meets specs so why wouldn't you ring up and ask some questions where they got their numbers.

Then you can write that AN measures this way - corner gain, solid walls, in room bass response. Then you can say yes - the speaker pretty much gets all those numbers and THEN you can say - BUT - they should also post the standard free standing numbers. To me it would be more the right thing to do. And AN should post both sets of numbers IMO - post the free standing standard and then say But you should put them in corners and these is the numbers you will likely get.

Then again controversy is great advertising and it's free advertising.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 31, 2017 at 07:31:10
A.Wayne
Audiophile

Posts: 2527
Location: Front row center
Joined: November 30, 2011
Sensitivity is never measured from corners or in a room, reversing into a false premise wont change the facts . Pretty obvious you love the sound of tooby clipping over SS clipping , no problem, its your preference ...


Enjoy ..!!!

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on May 31, 2017 at 14:44:42
Corner placement might not have that large of an effect.

Per the standard, sensitivity should be measured under free-field conditions using pink noise, with the result weighted. The standard specifies that broadband sensitivity should be measured with a test signal having a two-octave bandwidth centered on 1 KHz (500-2000 Hz). Or, if a different bandwidth is used, it should be stated with the measurement. Toole recommends using a 300-3000 Hz test signal because it contains all the frequencies that contribute to the perception of loudness.

Boundary reinforcement boosts loudspeaker output only in the frequency range where the radiation pattern is omnidirectional. For a wide baffle box speaker like the AN-E, that's only in the bass <200Hz. Therefore, it won't have much impact on a sensitivity measurement made with either the ISO standard's proposed test signal or Toole's proposed test signal.

Obviously, if you used a white noise signal with no weighting, the boost below 200 Hz from corner loading would help raise the result, but then you have a useless number that can't be compared to anything else.

Audio Note is not the only manufacturer to advertise sensitivity or efficiency numbers that are optimistic. It's almost he norm among manufacturers of high efficiency speakers that use dynamic drivers in a box.

Take the Tekton Lore for example. It has an Audax TW025A28 tweeter whose sensitivity is specified by the manufacturer to be 94 dB, and a Eminence Legend B102 woofer whose sensitivity is 92.4 dB. Before you even consider crossover losses, it's obvious that the loudspeaker isn't going to come close to the 98 dB claimed by the manufacturer.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on June 1, 2017 at 01:38:54
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
Perhaps read and see the measurement of Hi-Fi Critic for yourself if you are interested. Martin Colloms measured the speakers and got both the frequency and the sensitivity. Hi-Fi Choice Magazine and Audiophile magazine also measured the speakers and also achieved AN's specs.

It's not like 3dB either way is a big factor. High watt SS amp is dirt cheap - you can always look for that Rotel Power amp that is capable of 1kw at 1 ohm. Probably get it for $300 on the second hand market - then sensitivity is a moot point. And if you are buying a SET amp of the low watt variety chances are you are going to audition to make sure it has enough power to drive the speaker competently because as you note - you can't always trust what the sensitivity number is - since even if something is 95dB it doesn't mean that it will be easier to drive than than an 83dB LS-3/5a at 11 or 16 ohms.

But surely you have some common sense to realize that if a speaker is for 20+ years demonstrated with 6-10 watt amps and manages to on very many occasions win best sound at a show that the speaker is easy to drive. Even JA says the AN E is easy to drive.

So while this is a fun exercise in number crunching - real world application is more relevant to me.

And to that end - if you happen to live in California Steve Hoffman (mastering engineer for the Beatles, John Coltrane, Pink Floyd, Eva Cassidy, Ella Fitzgerald, Bob Dylan, Jackson Browne, Miles Davis, Peggy Lee, Wes Montgomery, Judy Garland etc) is having a get together where you can, on June 17th, go and listen to an AN E (not sure if it is either of Steve's pair or the dealer's) being driven on a 7 watt amp. Then bring your favorite measuring tools and hear for yourself. No cost - no selling - just listening. Special guests apparently and autographs for your albums and free food too. Not too shabby. If I lived there I'd go. Reel to Reel as well apparently.

Close computer screen/books and get off couch and experience what ease of drive means.

 

That's because Zu as a comapny regularly overstate their spkrs sensitivity., posted on June 1, 2017 at 02:08:01
Timbo in Oz
Audiophile

Posts: 23221
Location: Canberra - in the ACT - SE Australia
Joined: January 30, 2002
Get over it.

They are intended for free-space loading and they don't measure up.


Warmest

Tim Bailey

Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger


 

RE: Get over it?, posted on June 1, 2017 at 04:24:50
rockdoc
Audiophile

Posts: 200
Location: Harwich MA
Joined: February 17, 2010
thanks for the advice.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on June 1, 2017 at 08:01:12
A.Wayne
Audiophile

Posts: 2527
Location: Front row center
Joined: November 30, 2011
Crowded room on a 7 watt amp , thats clip city .....

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on June 1, 2017 at 08:15:18
I never argued that AN speakers are not easy to drive. Nor Zu or Tekton or DeVore, etc.

Yet they're all fudging their numbers to claim high-90s when the reality is more like low-90s. There has to be a marketing effect from it otherwise they wouldn't do it. I'm guessing there's a market out there who want to believe they can get close to horn numbers with a box speaker.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on June 1, 2017 at 17:47:23
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
Well that's fair enough. The AN E, DeVore and Tekton won't compete with the big horns on ease of drive - that's for sure.

Although Peter Qvortrup answered some of this in the High Efficiency forum:

Only 39 posts so get out the popcorn for those interested in how they measure and that other magazines achieve the results stated by the manufacturer.


"By the way, Martin Colloms asked me the exact same question when he reviewed the AN system 3 - 4 years ago, as he also had difficulty believing the efficiency rating, I showed a quick if somewhat simplified example of how we arrive at the stated efficiency ratings, which is done by combining 2 far field sound pressure measurements to get a room power response which is then used to calculate the efficiency, backwards so to speak.

Martin clearly agreed with the published 96dB/watt efficiency figure having tested the AN-E/SEC Silver, as he does mention in the review.

So here is a brief outline of the procedure, using the highly sensitive system we also use to match the drivers to the crossover and the reference, to get a near perfect match within pairs and to the reference,

1.) With the speakers in the correct corner loaded position, we take two sound pressure measurements at two different output power levels in two positions, using a broadband complex waveform (music), plus a series of sweep tones 15Hz to 25kHz, why use two different powe levels you may ask?

The reason for this is that I have found that many speakers appear to have an optimised behaviour at 2.83 volt input and their efficiency drops disproportionally if presented with less and in some cases more power, why this is, is a whole different question.

2.) We repeat this procedure at 3, 4 and 5 meters, using two speakers and a 2A3 or 45 and a 300B SET amplifier, each time noting the voltage output power from the amplifier and the corresponding sound pressure level.

We then compare to two reference speakers of "known" efficiency, measured the traditional way (as JA did with ours), then repeat the way we measured our speakers, compare the difference in efficiency at listening distance, average for distance and then work their room energy efficiency backwards so to speak.

We add/subtract the difference between these reference speakers and ours to get the figure we publish.

Inconvenient?

Yes, but it gives a far better and more accurate measure of what the real power transfer and equivalent sound pressure level is, and therefore closed to what the actual efficiency of the speaker is likely to be in situ in room, because if you take a 1.5 watt amplifier and you can get 100dB plus out of a speaker measured at 1 meter before audible clipping, then the speaker must be more than 92dB efficient, wouldn't you say..."

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on June 2, 2017 at 10:18:05
A.Wayne
Audiophile

Posts: 2527
Location: Front row center
Joined: November 30, 2011
Sounds great, unfortunately the discussion is about sensitivity not efficiency and BTW , thats a lot of phooby Dust yaddy yada on measuring speakers , any speaker for sensitivity.

I guess it's all cool if you write in your own rules and science, anything pretty much goes and if you are only using 5-7 watts per channel on those AN speakers your pretty much dead to clipping IMO..

Regards

 

Many manufacturers cheat or lie about this, sad but true, posted on June 2, 2017 at 14:40:05
Head_Unit
Audiophile

Posts: 269
Location: Los Angeles
Joined: February 5, 2004
Let me say as a loudspeaker engineer that efficiency, as called out by Richard Small in his groundbreaking thesis, is a reference FOR THE SPEAKER. Meaning NOT in a room. And not for the bass, by the way, it is a midband quantity.

"Room gain" and "pairs" and similar stuff is just nonsense added to make numbers look more impressive compared to companies that do things more ethically. Which even then due to different equipment and methodologies, may not agree completely, but at least not in such gross error like we see in the case of Klipsch and apparently Zu. Hmm, now I really want to see Stereophile measure some Klipsch!

Are speakers used in pairs in a room? Yes, so what? Sensitivity should be COMPARABLE and when you add random room factors it is not. There ARE standard conditions that can be measured: 2.83 volts at one meter, anechoically or quasi-anechoically (various systems can measure a speaker in a room and window out the reflections, and get a valid mid/upper frequency sensitivity spec.

 

RE: Many manufacturers cheat or lie about this, sad but true, posted on June 4, 2017 at 09:01:06
You claim to be a "loudspeaker engineer".

Please elaborate as to what engineering degree(s) you hold and what engineering school you attended. Also, please fill us in as to what speakers you designed or helped design as this information would help to establish your credibility.

Cheers,
SB



 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on June 4, 2017 at 12:11:57
b.l.zeebub
Audiophile

Posts: 9361
Location: 52deg 28'N,1deg56'W
Joined: April 17, 2006
Compared to a free field measurement every boundary introduced will result in a 3dB rise in bass output.

So compared to free-field a speaker placed on the floor but away from walls gives +3dB;
placed on a wall another +3dB and corner placement adds a further 3dB resulting in a theoretically possible 9dB rise.

If you now measure SPL from 20-20kHz as a single figure it will seem as if the speaker is remarkably sensitive.
Less so if you measure SPL at 1kHz where corner loading has very little effect.

 

Dirty pool indeed!, posted on June 5, 2017 at 11:52:54
Head_Unit
Audiophile

Posts: 269
Location: Los Angeles
Joined: February 5, 2004
Exactly. Lots of baloney rationalization as to why sensitivity should be 2 speakers and/or in a room, but it's just to give a mistaken impression with big numbers.

 

RE: As JA himself has pointed out in speaker reviews..., posted on June 5, 2017 at 12:39:09
Head_Unit
Audiophile

Posts: 269
Location: Los Angeles
Joined: February 5, 2004
Actually few amplifiers have more than 1-2 decibels of peak ("short duration") power output. Interesting idea to have 2 kinds of amp; you could indeed get some real sweet sounding thing, then with a massive switch (break before make!!!!) change to lke a Behringer iNuke to blast the neighborhood. I like the idea!

 

RE: As JA himself has pointed out in speaker reviews..., posted on June 5, 2017 at 20:11:02
RGA
Reviewer

Posts: 15177
Location: Hong Kong
Joined: August 8, 2001
What we need is a high quality amplifier switcher (not a speaker selector).

So you can run say four amplifiers to a switcher box - so when you want to listen to your 3 watt SET you can, then switch to your home theater amplifier when you want to use your 7.1 surround sound system, then you want to listen to your favorite EL34 Push Pull tube amplifier you can, and finally maybe your favorite 211 or 845 based tube amps or your 4000 watt Analog Domain amps.

For instance I have a home theater set-up via a Marantz receiver and a 12 watt tube amp. So when I want to play a movie or video game I have to disconnect the speaker wires and connect the speaker wires from the receiver and back and forth - it's not that big of a deal - but some folks may have speakers awkwardly positioned or use those ridiculously bulky connectors.

But Audiophiles are picky and we don't want some cheap $3 box muddying up the sound of such a connector box. There seems to be a market for this - a silver wired internal shielded blah blah blah box for $200. Someone will pay it. Me for one.

 

RE: As JA himself has pointed out in speaker reviews..., posted on June 6, 2017 at 21:42:50
jumpsturdy
Audiophile

Posts: 194
Location: New England
Joined: April 5, 2002
Love the idea, with all the cosmetic and electronic bells and whistles (so it might actually sell). But for true appeal it must have a stomp box for the foot of the listening position; perhaps with a programmable delay.

This just seems a more personal change (raging through the amps) perhaps not as satisfying if performed with just another remote.

 

RE: Zu Soul Supreme sensitivity, posted on July 2, 2017 at 16:20:06
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
"If that is the way Audio Note specifies sensitivity, then it is useless because..."

Yeah. Agree.

But, also there is some merit since the speakers are supposed to be designed in order to operate in a room, and the AN is designed to be put in a corner.

I know PWK had an anechoic chanber set up with a plywood corner so he could get more realistic user measurements since "the room is part of the speaker"

AN isn't a lot different in this regard.

But it sure makes it harder to compare due to the YMMV factors.
====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

Page processed in 0.049 seconds.