Is there a background check on experience with live concert listening and seating? Surely that would also effect one's perception on accuracy.Lies, damn lies, and statistics..
Actually as far as listener preference is concerned, Toole's (et al.) research indicates a fairly large degree of correlation - at least over a large sample, and when using reasonably different loudspeakers (..not dissimilar to this testing).
The "preference" vs. "accuracy" argument here is garbage.
The test was designed to elicit preference based on accuracy (..though as pointed out by others, from a specific genre of music). In other words people had a preference for a particular loudspeaker because they thought it was more accurate. What was missing however were the notes accompanying each listener describing *why* they thought it was more accurate, something that SL not only advocates - but has published on his site using his own test. IMO, without it - it's far more meaningless than Toole's conclusions.
I think it is the pinnacle of Open Baffle design when all design tradeoffs are considered (SPL, Polar response, etc.). There may be better designs (Nao Note?) but we need to be careful in what respect.
Too bad the Summa was not in the test. Looking at the result would they be beaten ("Less preferred") as well by the IMP?. But again Earl had explained his objection about the test conditions so perhaps that's a "smart" move when "reputation" is considered.
I have to say I really respect SL for putting his neck out there with this test. The Orions after all are his lifelong work/hobby.
I was thinking this too!
I have certainly experienced some pretty bad concert halls...
Not at all, its not like Orion owners will now dislike their speaker and anyone that builds Orion speakers is definitely not the type of person that will stand for having a Behringer speaker in their room
Okay ill settle for mildly disconcerting
I agree that these sorts of tests are kinda pointless being subjective as they are. Blind tests are better for proving / disproving differences between amps, cables, voodoo driver mods etc.
Last edited:
Gotta respect SL -- few others would conduct and post so candid a comparison of their own design with the Behringer as he did....
What it says about SL is that he keeps an open mind and is still willing to learn something new.
Okay ill settle for mildly disconcerting
Or liberating, for those on a tight budget who could get great sound for a bargain price. Its why I like people doing these sort of comparisons - if it means some hifi enthusiast saves some big bucks then more of it (exits stage right miming Lennon's Power to the People
).They were scored by:
1. Speaker disappear
2. Local acoustics not heard
3. Images lateral localization
4. Images depth localization
5. Ambience non-localize
6. Freedom of movement
They are not in the top 6 in my list, and I also don't believe the quality of speakers can be determined by some brief listening sessions. So, I won't spend any time searching for the IMP speakers.
I'm wondering, though, how would the comparisons be if we put these behind the curtain:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?postid=1791579&stamp=1238665746
The Octagon
1. Speaker disappear
2. Local acoustics not heard
3. Images lateral localization
4. Images depth localization
5. Ambience non-localize
6. Freedom of movement
They are not in the top 6 in my list, and I also don't believe the quality of speakers can be determined by some brief listening sessions. So, I won't spend any time searching for the IMP speakers.
I'm wondering, though, how would the comparisons be if we put these behind the curtain:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?postid=1791579&stamp=1238665746
The Octagon
I think this bears repeating - this seems to be the main outcome from this test.
Thanks Earl for posting it.
I just read through SLs repeat of the comparison (thanks for linking to it Gainphile): Spatial distortion I think it has some important conclusions. My take on it is that once a loudspeaker has a smooth polar response, the differences seem to become fairly small. The major difference between dipoles and box speakers is the first sounds more spacious, the second more direct.
They were scored by:
1. Speaker disappear
2. Local acoustics not heard
3. Images lateral localization
4. Images depth localization
5. Ambience non-localize
6. Freedom of movement
They are not in the top 6 in my list, and I also don't believe the quality of speakers can be determined by some brief listening sessions. So, I won't spend any time searching for the IMP speakers.
I'm wondering, though, how would the comparisons be if we put these behind the curtain:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?postid=1791579&stamp=1238665746
The Octagon
The listening distance would be a dead give away ......
Then I am sure you have measured the power response and this data supports your statements, which are contrary to what physics suggest.
Also, if those small speakers you have build "generally do not have uniform power response" then that is your design issue and you are drawing the wrong conclusions from it.
'nuff said.
Thanks for posting this Gainphile! I read with interest. I also am curious about your Econowave with bass support... looks like a great project! So many cannot fathom pairing a 12" pro woofer to a horn in a home setting... having not heard an Econowave before i must admit i am intrigued and have a feeling speakers like this will rock the house as well as provide a very pleasant musical experience. I want to build a pair too!
Zilla
Zilla
Agreed. There are a few very impressive small woofers out there that blur this line, but require a lot of amp behind them and the problems associated with low sensitivity.
Better (and easier) to just go big. But I've heard the precursor to this
DIYCable.com : Intro » Home » Exodus Subwoofers »
along with the peerless HDS tweeter. One of the most impressive "too small" speakers I've heard.
Good point about the amp, I should have included that in my post because its not only the size of the woofer but the low effeciencies all these drivers have.
Give me a 15 or 12" woofer with > 90dB sensitivity to match the sub systems I own.
Even people with the popular PB13 subs have small WAF speakers and huge mismatch in output at the XO point.
btw, Im a big fan of Kevin's stuff. I have 6 of his original anarchy 6.5" woofers, not bad when used in combinations or in horns. Of course his Mal-x 18 and the 21" woofers are pretty damn good but I already own 10 other subwoofer drivers including two LMS5400 18" woofers so I can not find room for the 21" mal-x yet
Give me a 15 or 12" woofer with > 90dB sensitivity to match the sub systems I own.
Even people with the popular PB13 subs have small WAF speakers and huge mismatch in output at the XO point.
btw, Im a big fan of Kevin's stuff. I have 6 of his original anarchy 6.5" woofers, not bad when used in combinations or in horns. Of course his Mal-x 18 and the 21" woofers are pretty damn good but I already own 10 other subwoofer drivers including two LMS5400 18" woofers so I can not find room for the 21" mal-x yet
That's *one* definition of accuracy, and not the most common.
Accuracy encompasses not simply correct or incorrect, but the *degree* to which it is either (..and that degree could be significantly less).
What is "more" correct or "less" correct is limited by each test, and expressly relative to each loudspeaker pair under test. (..and though not necessary in a "shoot-out" test, there was a base-line previously established via the Behringer loudspeakers.)
Under a competitive test condition with the specific tests SL has provided, it isn't necessary.
ie.
Does the Speaker disappear? a.k.a. is it more or less "localized"?
Speaker "A" is more localized than speaker "B". Most would consider that (under a wide grouping of source material), a speaker that is more persistently localized is INCORRECT. Therefor speaker "B" is more correct.
..of course if most of the source material, (recorded music), was panned hard left or hard right for most of it's duration under test then the test results would be inverted. In this case however we rely on those setting up the test to not have chosen music/source material with hard panning and limited reverb.
Last edited:
Gotta respect SL -- few others would conduct and post so candid a comparison of their own design with the Behringer as he did....
Yes, particularly the detailed notes of his own comparison.
Clearly for SL it's an "objective" pursuit of "better", not simply an exercise, nor are other motives given deference.
