Hey
I found it interesting how the width + other times the depth of the soundstage seemed different with some drivers.
Maybe the xo point didn't suit some of the drivers as well as some others?
The 10th is still so far away...
Maybe you can send the ones that completed the poll the names of the drivers
Regardless, thank you for your effort, time and patience!
Cheers
Same here, two favorites and a close third.
I found it interesting how the width + other times the depth of the soundstage seemed different with some drivers.
Maybe the xo point didn't suit some of the drivers as well as some others?
The 10th is still so far away...
Maybe you can send the ones that completed the poll the names of the drivers Regardless, thank you for your effort, time and patience!
Cheers
This is how I found the poll, 2 or 3 were easy to eliminate for hot responses (despite that with correct filtering that could be mitigated greatly)
3 sounded far more laid back "straight out of the box".
I'm fairly sure I eliminated my budget fave the FRS5X for being hot, though I have no intention of using it without a lowpass.
The last 3 really were a tight group, in particular the last 2.
I agree that the last 2 or 3 (in my case) are now in a very tight race. In fact, listening to them over and over and cannot quite decide. One has a particular sense of more "fullness" in the lower register. The other two seem to have more "snap" in the transients though, however, they are accompanied with a bit of a "glassy shimmer". The shimmer sounds pleasant enough on some tracks but I wonder if that is a natural sound and would I get tired of it. We have lots of time left but it is getting tiring to go over and over it.
That's why I deliberately made the process quick. In my experience, when listening for differences, things tend to get "all over the place" when it takes too long. As if my hearing gets unstable or something. Luckily, the best two stood out quite clearly, and it took only a few repetitions between those two to pick my favorite.
This reminds me of a test I did some years ago with the help of my wife. I was responding to a challenge on "ground side electrons" or something of equal silliness. The mod to the CD player was simple: attach an electron tube with all pins tied together to the ground of the CD player and listen for a difference. Of course, any sane person will tell you that there should be no difference provided the player is made anything near half decent, but I did a blind test nonetheless in an attempt to silence the debate.
I (un)soldered the tube socket to the CD player's ground, while my wife was listening on the other side of the door using my headphones (HD650) connected to the player's headphone output. She couldn't see or hear me, and I checked beforehand if it was possible to hear me solder through the headphones. It wasn't. I played the same set of clips a couple of times, while I rolled a dice to determine if the clip was to be played with the tube in or out of the circuit. Initially, the clips played with and without the tube sounded the same to her, but as the test progressed and she was doing more and more her best to spot a difference, she noticed that her perception started to change haphazardly, both during and between clips, up to the point that she quit because her hearing obviously started to play tricks on her. So that's what she reported back to me. Her observations did not correlate with the tube being in or out of the circuit.
Although I didn't expect the test to yield anything, it provided this little revelation nonetheless. Many differences between gear are simply heard or exaggerated because we try too hard, and then a little bit of expectation bias or a very subtle clue are all that's needed to tip the scale in a certain direction. The process of desperately trying to hear stuff makes us hear stuff. In a sense, the ear and brain give us what we want, and by doing so, they send us into the woods. I think this is normal behavior for human hearing, surely my wife and I aren't the only ones susceptible to this.
To make a long story short, here is my tip. Try to pick your favorite quickly, cast your vote and be done with it. Doing the test over and over again doesn't necessarily make the outcome more reliable, it probably just messes things up.
This reminds me of a test I did some years ago with the help of my wife. I was responding to a challenge on "ground side electrons" or something of equal silliness. The mod to the CD player was simple: attach an electron tube with all pins tied together to the ground of the CD player and listen for a difference. Of course, any sane person will tell you that there should be no difference provided the player is made anything near half decent, but I did a blind test nonetheless in an attempt to silence the debate.
I (un)soldered the tube socket to the CD player's ground, while my wife was listening on the other side of the door using my headphones (HD650) connected to the player's headphone output. She couldn't see or hear me, and I checked beforehand if it was possible to hear me solder through the headphones. It wasn't. I played the same set of clips a couple of times, while I rolled a dice to determine if the clip was to be played with the tube in or out of the circuit. Initially, the clips played with and without the tube sounded the same to her, but as the test progressed and she was doing more and more her best to spot a difference, she noticed that her perception started to change haphazardly, both during and between clips, up to the point that she quit because her hearing obviously started to play tricks on her. So that's what she reported back to me. Her observations did not correlate with the tube being in or out of the circuit.
Although I didn't expect the test to yield anything, it provided this little revelation nonetheless. Many differences between gear are simply heard or exaggerated because we try too hard, and then a little bit of expectation bias or a very subtle clue are all that's needed to tip the scale in a certain direction. The process of desperately trying to hear stuff makes us hear stuff. In a sense, the ear and brain give us what we want, and by doing so, they send us into the woods. I think this is normal behavior for human hearing, surely my wife and I aren't the only ones susceptible to this.
To make a long story short, here is my tip. Try to pick your favorite quickly, cast your vote and be done with it. Doing the test over and over again doesn't necessarily make the outcome more reliable, it probably just messes things up.
Last edited:
I agree with Timpert also, I have difficulties if not deciding relatively quick. But we are all different, aren't we. I have friends that go on for ever before deciding whatever is on……..
But I think also for me, it would be more obvious if I could have extended periods with speakers, especially when differences aren't so big. But this isn't possible for me, so a massive thanks for your work, xrk!!
Peter
. I have friends that go on for ever before deciding whatever is on……..But I think also for me, it would be more obvious if I could have extended periods with speakers, especially when differences aren't so big. But this isn't possible for me, so a massive thanks for your work, xrk!!
Peter
My test method consisted of first eliminating the drivers which had obvious linear distortion problems - a few of the drivers had a zinger near the top end of the freq response which 'enhanced' some tracks but would sound awful on others - I hate using subjective buzzwords but 'shrill' or 'nasal' is probably the best way to describe it. One driver had some holes in the midrange response, so I eliminated that one as well.
The next elimination was harmonic distortion on the lower end. Again, some tracks would be 'enhanced' by excessive distortion which made them seem more bassy while comparatively the more linear drivers sounded a bit weak/thin, but then on another track the non-linear drivers could produce slightly flabby sounding bass or sound a bit 'honky'.
That left me with just two drivers. It was pretty close and i had to do 3-4 passes of each track but I eventually picked the one which sounded like it had the most balanced freq response - consistently sounded most like the tonal balance of the original recording. Perhaps not the most exciting driver for any given track, but it did the least wrong overall.
The next elimination was harmonic distortion on the lower end. Again, some tracks would be 'enhanced' by excessive distortion which made them seem more bassy while comparatively the more linear drivers sounded a bit weak/thin, but then on another track the non-linear drivers could produce slightly flabby sounding bass or sound a bit 'honky'.
That left me with just two drivers. It was pretty close and i had to do 3-4 passes of each track but I eventually picked the one which sounded like it had the most balanced freq response - consistently sounded most like the tonal balance of the original recording. Perhaps not the most exciting driver for any given track, but it did the least wrong overall.
Last edited:
Different with me. One possible reason why too long can mess up everything is when there is BIAS in the judgement, such as "Okay I prefer driver Z, what driver is it possibly? Hmmm it looks like a Peerless! No way! It's a cheap driver with false treble! I will change my preference to driver Y!".
In general, for me, more time will only add more information and accuracy. Especially because for me the difference is so obvious (and can be proven with blind test with 100% accuracy). What is not so obvious, is to pick preference.
At first listening round (not even finishing the music with bad drivers) I can quickly removed 2 drivers (fatiguing distortion) and had 2 drivers stand out because of (1) "neutrality" of one driver (2) "sweatness" and added 2nd harmonics of the other driver (which makes guitar instrument easy on ears and vocal becomes sweeter than it should). If I had to make decision within those few minutes, I would have picked those 2 drivers (even tho I knew that 2nd order distortion will bring some consequences).
Only with further listening I understand the different between each of the drivers. But still, my #1 preference is decided by a bit of subjectivity than objectivity. Objectively, it is not the cleanest, but subjectively, in my ears the tonality is more correct. It is hard to know the correct tonality of a guitar keys because I'm not a guitar player. But Eric Clapton male voice is special imo, and I felt one driver can do it tonaly better so that is my #1 preference. But I haven't voted yet.
Judging the correctness of tonality is probably not an easy job (needs experience), and it works only on limited frequency bandwidth. I might want to download other musics to make sure that I picked the right preference between the top 2 or 3 drivers.
I will also need extra time if I want to compare the non-linear distortions between the top drivers. But I found that in general, the average drivers non-linear distortions are better than I expected. Probably because of the high XO frequency and the good phase behaviour of the crossover. So I think I don't need to go very analytical here.
The point/conclusion is, more time will only add more accuracy for me.
Haha, okay may be I don't need to try it. I downloaded the 4 reference clips and I found that that music was so disturbing with my laptop and headphone. So it is from the recording then. But what's wrong with Mariah Carey sound?
I believe that a characteristics of a good speaker (per my criteria) is that it should be able to show the quality of great musicians and singers. And I believe Mariah Carey was a diva, or at least famous for a reason. Ha! May be your speaker is not up to it!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.