Hi,
I've always known, so that's 20 years
, that a " sligthly downward tilting" of the "FR curve", also known as Moeller curve, is vastly used i.e. taken as an example by all the designers
So, nothing new
Nowadays, since DIY audio forums exhibith both commercial and professional(s) "incursion", we can vastly talk on how that downward tilt ( I've read about the Canton mid-bass tilt ) is perceived since it brings along direct/reflected sound, directivity...so box form/geometry and its positioning in ambient> which is responsible for direct/ reflected etc and listener location ( if ...)
I've always known, so that's 20 years
, that a " sligthly downward tilting" of the "FR curve", also known as Moeller curve, is vastly used i.e. taken as an example by all the designersSo, nothing new
Nowadays, since DIY audio forums exhibith both commercial and professional(s) "incursion", we can vastly talk on how that downward tilt ( I've read about the Canton mid-bass tilt
) is perceived since it brings along direct/reflected sound, directivity...so box form/geometry and its positioning in ambient> which is responsible for direct/ reflected etc and listener location ( if ...)
My argument is simple. Stereophile is praising hearing aids masquerading as speakers.
Trouble with Stereophile or anybody else measurements is that they usually measure on axis, without bothering about understanding how the designer has been doing his job.
Some design their speakers for off axis ( toe-in) listenning, so that these measure better off axis, while on axis show an insane rising response in the 2 top octaves.
That's how i adjust my speakers, and obsviously has nothing to do with hearing loss compensation.
Btw i do not like speakers that measure flat on axis because the fall in their power response is usually too much making them sound weird in reverberant sound field. Rising on axis response helps correct this with smoother decay of power /steady state response, and a more natural sound with a standard domestic untreated acoustic.
Last edited:
Freddie brings up good points, and I'm feeling ambivalent right now, that is with conflicting ideas that haven't gelled into a single world view yet.
On the one hand, there is more to evaluating a speaker than just the FR. On the other hand, I think that there is strong evidence that there's a market segment deliberately juicing their FR to match what I'm calling the "Stereophile Curve."
I do think it's possible to juice the FR one way or the other, beyond simple questions of flatness and tilt, and that for a lot of buyers this makes a difference.
Best,
Erik
On the one hand, there is more to evaluating a speaker than just the FR. On the other hand, I think that there is strong evidence that there's a market segment deliberately juicing their FR to match what I'm calling the "Stereophile Curve."
I do think it's possible to juice the FR one way or the other, beyond simple questions of flatness and tilt, and that for a lot of buyers this makes a difference.
Best,
Erik
Wilson Audio Specialties MAXX loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
"Stereophile's practice is to average the forward response graphs over a moderate angle.
Fig.3 shows the MAXX's response, 1/3-octave-averaged from 200Hz to 20kHz for the 0 degrees,
15 degrees lateral, and 15 degrees vertical frequency responses."
Last edited:
Glad you brought that one up....
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I am sorry but whatever their reasons, Stereophile methods are their arbitrary own cooking and have no value at all for me. These guys should simply limit to tell if they have been pleased by what they heard, or not
Indeed. Their measurement regime is well-executed and very useful for determining what the overall performance of a speaker is likely to be. And as a bonus, the dance at the end when the measurements show that the chimp reviewer was a banana short of a bunch is always entertaining.
John Atkinson has done measurements for Stereophile for ages. Here he tells about how and why
Measuring Loudspeakers, Part One | Stereophile.com
Measuring Loudspeakers, Part Two | Stereophile.com
And if you don't like to read his text
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j77VKw9Kx6U
Joe d'Appolito on AudioExpress kind of agrees with him
http://www.audioxpress.com/assets/upload/files/dappolito2959.pdf
ps. I practically never have stamina to read through listening impressions...
Measuring Loudspeakers, Part One | Stereophile.com
Measuring Loudspeakers, Part Two | Stereophile.com
And if you don't like to read his text
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j77VKw9Kx6U
Joe d'Appolito on AudioExpress kind of agrees with him
http://www.audioxpress.com/assets/upload/files/dappolito2959.pdf
ps. I practically never have stamina to read through listening impressions...
Last edited:
Finally, is there anything better than a Snell ?
Gods I miss them!
I think that we can do even better now though. See Gravesen's breakdown of the A/III.
If I couldn't build my own speakers, I'd buy a working Snell A/III over any of the Class A speakers at Stereophile right now.
Unfortunately the high mass added to the woofers means that most of them have become unusable by now. I am not sure if the Stereophile Curve was a thing in Peter Snell's days or if it came afterwards.
Best,
Erik
Last edited:
Sounds like you are designing the wrong kind of speakers...
Look back at the excerpt from the post showing four frequency responses (on and off axis) and their relative preference. For the most preferred loudspeakers, the on-axis response is FLAT and the off axis response smoothly follows the on axis response without peaks or dips. This is smooth and nearly constant directivity. Toole and Olive have found, by conducting LISTENING experiments and comparing them to measured (in 3D) frequency responses of the same loudspeaker, that this type of response is preferred in a wide variety of home listening environments.
I can achieve this kind of response using an open-baffle or nude (baffle-less) mounting of the driver(s). This doesn't mean I only build that kind of loudspeaker, but mostly those sound much better than "boxed" loudspeakers that I build... because it is difficult to get the power response of a boxed system to be as smooth as with an OB type system.
It's possible to play games and design for off axis, leaving the "on axis" hotter at higher frequencies to try and balance the power response. I have not found this to help the boxed speaker all that much. It's not horrible, just that the BO/dipole system is able to present the recording with better dimensionality and less coloration.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.