|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
207.91.86.2
In Reply to: Speaker measurements vs Subjective Reviews... posted by mkuller on February 20, 2007 at 16:20:53:
I think. I can't imagine anyone purchasing speakers without listening to them; the measurements simply don't capture enough of the speaker's performance characteristic in a room to be the sole basis for decision.That said, I agree with brother Willis' comment about basic design: that is, dipole speakeers -- especially planars -- do sound "different" from direct-radiator "box" speakers, which, in turn sound "different" from full-range (or mostly full-range) horn speakers.
I suppose the most that I would allow about measurements, is that they might serve as a preliminary screen -- to eliminate certain audition candidates. For example, a speaker whose response curve heads south very steeply, beginning at 100 Hz is just not going to have much bass, no matter what the room is like. Most bass instruments (except pipe organs) produce a lot of harmonics of the fundamental tone, so you're still going to "hear" the bass instrument . . . but what you're going to hear is not the fundamental tone, but the harmonics. AFAIC, music that is missing the bass fundamental is missing something that I don't want to do without. So, a speaker that measures like that would be off my list, even without hearing it.
The other purpose that measurements serve, I think, is to "educate" one's ear. That is, there are certain colorations that are intially appealing (which are pretty obvious in measurements) that, over an extended period of ownership, become tiresome. So, perhaps measurements may educate you to the sound of those colorations, so that you can recognize them.
On the other hand, some folks like colored speakers. Although, in my experience, you will find that those folks may listen to a fairly narrow range of music, that those speakers' colorations flatter, to the exclusion of other kinds of music -- that the colorations do not flatter.
But, looking at a set of measurements and saying, from them alone, "That speaker will sound good." is, I think, pretty impossible, although looking at a set of measurements alone may be able to tell you that that speaker will sound bad.
Finally, it seems that most all speakers have their deficiencies, and it is a matter of individual preference, which deficiencies will be tolerable. One listener may insist on the ability to play loud, even at the expense of, say, bass extension below 50 Hz. Another listener will want full extension, but is perfectly happy with more modest playback levels. And so on. . .
Follow Ups:
Bruce, I thought you'd know batter than to wrongly use the term "direct radiator" the way HT magazine writers do.I've only seen and heard one dipole system that wasn't a direct radiator, Paul Eizik who hangs at the HE asylum has a giant dipolar horn rig with EV components. Imagine a Maggie but with huge balls.
EV also makes a dipolar compression driver though that's not what Paul uses.
sorry to disappoint you this morning, Tom!Yeah, the better term should probably be "forward radiator" although, at lower frequencies box speakers become increasingly omnidirectional, too. Nevertheless, even the omnidirectional sound of a box speaker is different than that of a dipole (either cone or planar) because of how the rear radiation of the cone is treated.
Bruce---Well you know how goofy us hornys get when we wander away from own balliwick. ;-)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: