Richard, I have tried to stay out of this, but this needs a comment.
You are sure Earl et al do not do critical listening because otherwise they would agree with you. People who probably do more critical listening in a day than you do in a month or even a year.
Have you any idea how preposterous and absurd this is??
Jan
Could you please give an example of such speakers and a recommendation of amplifier(s) to drive them?
Oh please, Jan. as if anyone here knows the amount of time I spent critically listening, also?
Scott should know better - and others here - re speaker distortion and levels and not poo-poo it. Its long been known and preposterous to think distortion in most drivers is very low as to be a non-issue. Its stupid talk from intelligent people IMHO.
THx-RNMarsh
-
Scott should know better - and others here - re speaker distortion and levels and not poo-poo it. Its long been known and preposterous to think distortion in most drivers is very low as to be a non-issue. Its stupid talk from intelligent people IMHO.
THx-RNMarsh
-
Last edited:
I'll try to give something close enough to the meaning I am using.....
We can be said to be engaged in critical listening when the goal is to evaluate or scrutinise what is being heard. Critical listening is a much more active behaviour than informational listening and usually involves problem solving or decision making.
THx-RNMarsh
Correct. If you try to buy the M2, the speaker is only sold as a complete system of amp and active/dsp cross-over to get best alignments and performance.
As I had first planned, you can buy a miniDSP and get the M2 cross-over file downloaded into it and use your own pair of stereo power amps.
There is planned to have a consumer version with passive cross-over and nice wood grain enclosure.
-THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
It's where Richard is critical of everyone except himself (and those who validate his viewpoint), and then doesn't listen to the feedback he gets.
Richard and I tend to put our money where our mouth is. We don't try to get highest resolution from marginal audio equipment. Many here probably have never really heard really high fidelity sound, so their opinions are put aside, and we just use our ears to hear differences for the most part.
I hope this can happen. Problem is though that the Harman beast is taken to consuming its own flesh. I guess we’ll see.
Speakers with minimal phase rotations.
Single driver/full range fed woofer and tweeter fed in by single cap, or very steep crossovers.
Dan.
I guess you are listening with a real hi fidelity ears, many here probably don't have
It's where Richard is critical of everyone except himself (and those who validate his viewpoint), and then doesn't listen to the feedback he gets.
Some times true - especially on those few times when it goes against T&M and critical listening experiences.
I've done a lot of acoustics/speaker work and have formed conclusions from them and from others work in the area. Such studies going back starting around 4 decades ago when I only had thermal strip chart recorder to measure reverb fall time to see reflections. I purchased sn 001 from DRA Labs MLLSA. $2000 back when that was serious money.
Plus mic and lunch box computer. Measuring microphone random incidence response in anechoic chamber etc. Lots of data. I came to same conclusions as JBL for what is required of a speaker... including controlled directivity. I did not do critical listening to the M2 before buying it. Didn't need to. I went by the specs.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
One reason JBL PRO and other professional (Meyer et al) speaker companies do not market to consumers much is the consumer market has been sold on wider dispersion is better. It isnt true, however.
AR started that trend with their low effec but wide freq range in book shelf enclosure size.
THx-RNMarsh
AR started that trend with their low effec but wide freq range in book shelf enclosure size.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
True, I’ve never get over the mid-fi level of my NAD amp and a salvaged Sony CD player, plus my cheap USB external hard drive storing 256Kbps MP3.
This, also my EE and physics prejudices and closed mind, makes me incapable to appreciate the improvements brought by Bybee quantum devices, myrtle block risers, Shakti stones, green CD edge markers, USB cables, high open loop bandwidth, eNabled speaker drives, high end power cables, Eichmann bullet plug RCAs, cable directionality, pure silver wire, Teflon caps, etc...
As it is, I heard the message loud and clear, I am not welcomed here. So I’ll keep silent, stay in read only mode, and have fun without stepping on anybody nerves and toes.
Wide dispersion, even omni or dipole, is great as long as it does not vary too much with frequency. If you want to reproduce the sound of acoustic instruments in your listening space, then your speakers should have dispersion similar to that of the instruments. I guess you can tell I am a Linkwitz fan.
Do you really think those old AR's had exceptional dispersion? I think they were all over the map, and the effects of the enclosures and crossovers did all kinds of strange things to their dispersion characteristics vs freq. They still sounded pretty good compared to the competition back then, though. Funny we can both agree they were flawed but for different reasons!
Wide dispersion, even omni or dipole, is great as long as it does not vary too much with frequency. If you want to reproduce the sound of acoustic instruments in your listening space, then your speakers should have dispersion similar to that of the instruments. I guess you can tell I am a Linkwitz fan.
Do you really think those old AR's had exceptional dispersion? I think they were all over the map, and the effects of the enclosures and crossovers did all kinds of strange things to their dispersion characteristics vs freq. They still sounded pretty good compared to the competition back then, though. Funny we can both agree they were flawed but for different reasons!
I agree with you on all counts!
A reason why a piano in your room (or other acoustic instrument) wont sound the same as a loudspeaker is the sound field radiated pattern is not the same.
I have said this before also here: A better approximation is the calrec sound field microphone (or what ever it is called today) with multiple surround speakers used with it. Unfortunately, a lot of speaker systems and amplifiers and decoder keeps cost high BUT... just saying.... if you want total accuracy or that live sound experience.
Notice pls.... I didnt say AR were great but started the wide dispersion fad which continues to this day. If you wanted the maximum room influence, that's the way to do it.
Thx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Update from the far east --
Amp going into final stages of mfr.... we had delay for less than perfect reliability. Fixed now (I hope). measures well as usual .. Will critically listen later this week. Going to try SMPS with it also.
and ... My girl Sarada -whom I have supported since she was 5 - from dirt poor remote village near Himalayan mountains got college SAT score of 780 out of max possible 800 in math. Wow. A diamond in the rough.
THx-RNMarsh
Amp going into final stages of mfr.... we had delay for less than perfect reliability. Fixed now (I hope). measures well as usual .. Will critically listen later this week. Going to try SMPS with it also.
and ... My girl Sarada -whom I have supported since she was 5 - from dirt poor remote village near Himalayan mountains got college SAT score of 780 out of max possible 800 in math. Wow. A diamond in the rough.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.