You mean these?
I've heard those before and can't say the remotely sound like B2031P. 😕
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I've heard those before and can't say the remotely sound like B2031P. 😕
I was interested in listening to these because they were advertised to have 180deg directivity, and they had the ice class D modules. Some shouting characteristics described by Siegfried Linkwitz was heard on the Beolab 5 when I listened to them.
Wish I could hear and measure some of these speakers you guys talk about out here in the middle of not anywhere at all U.S.A. Almost every speaker I have ever heard I did not like and seemed very not natural, lively like life, or music. Dull, lifeless, and boring. This experience is what got me into audio more deeply 40 years ago.
SUM, you are not missing anything with those. So no worries. I actually heard them in Tokyo. My wife sad they sound like they look--real bad. Could be partly d/t placement or whatever, but I was forced to agree. She said amazed, "someone designed those on purpose." On the other hand, she loves the little Behringers--even better than my own DIYs. Actually said it's really not close. Ouch. Never marry an honest woman. All my work down the tubes and I regrettably agree with her after several comparisons. I bet my impulse is uglier. Anyway, subjectivity has no real place in a measurement thread unless it's accompanied by a measurement. The measurements on the Behringers look pretty good by any standard regardless of price. They have faults, but they're certainly small and forgivable at this price.
The Infinity 160 or 162 Primus look pretty good on the cheap as well:
SoundStage! Measurements - Infinity Primus P162 Loudspeakers (11/2008)
The response ripple between 500-1000Hz looks like insufficient damping material--a cheap fix. And it looks like they do well at pretty high output for a bookshelf. The build quality looks cheap, but if the performance is there.... I mean for $86/ea.
Thoughts?
Dan
The Infinity 160 or 162 Primus look pretty good on the cheap as well:
SoundStage! Measurements - Infinity Primus P162 Loudspeakers (11/2008)
The response ripple between 500-1000Hz looks like insufficient damping material--a cheap fix. And it looks like they do well at pretty high output for a bookshelf. The build quality looks cheap, but if the performance is there.... I mean for $86/ea.
Thoughts?
Dan
Once, a prototype like this was build and measured.
sounded like nothing bad, nor nothing special. Normallized polars looked quite good up to 180deg included angle, but the SPL was like the rocky mountains.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
sounded like nothing bad, nor nothing special. Normallized polars looked quite good up to 180deg included angle, but the SPL was like the rocky mountains.
Certainly subjective needs to be coorelated with objective measurements. That's why those only got to prototype. Lot's of experience was gained though.
So what are we supposed to do?? Listen to everything blind?? It has limitations but let's face it that is how we listen to them.
Rob🙂
Yea, don't you and I know it Rob, but perhaps I need to expand my previous statement. Nothing can be done unless manufacturers are going to start posting detailed measurements--the ones that have been correlated to subjective evaluation and consumers would then need to be familiar with what has been shown. This horse has been beat to death, that's the reason I kept my previous statement so short. Even ones that measure well in reality aren't being listed by manufacturers. 😕
Discussing what I or you(no one in particular) think, feel or believe we hear in a loudspeaker just doesn't seem productive in a loudspeaker measurements thread. Too many outside influences, conscious or otherwise, for any sort of objectivity. I mean entirely too many to even attempt to discuss. If measurements correlate, then I'd accept some usefulness but it would be largely unneeded though still thought provoking to read. The measurements would speak for themselves however. What Soongsc and I think, feel and believe we hear in the same loudspeaker model do not even resemble each others' observations. Add SLs in there and it just becomes a mess. Now if there were measurements on each end that suggested the models didn't perform similarly it would make some sense. It might be even more interesting on various levels if they were very similar. Since only one side has measurements for the Behringer and neither side for the Beolab and we're all going off memory it seems like a useless conversation to me. If someone else can get something useful out of it that won't bias their thoughts, feelings and beliefs etc... for evaluation.... Ah what am I saying? I just don't see how a person could remain completely neutral after reading 3rd party discussions about what they think they hear and what they possibly attribute it to in a loudspeaker. IOW, I can't see any use in continuing this conversation at all, and especially in a measurements thread.
There are many threads and forums for subjective evaluation. 🙂
Sorry if this comes off in any negative light. I'm just hoping to keep the thread useful and somewhat on topic by not loading it down with a lot of guessing. 😉
Happy Fourth of July America!
Dan
Discussing what I or you(no one in particular) think, feel or believe we hear in a loudspeaker just doesn't seem productive in a loudspeaker measurements thread. Too many outside influences, conscious or otherwise, for any sort of objectivity. I mean entirely too many to even attempt to discuss. If measurements correlate, then I'd accept some usefulness but it would be largely unneeded though still thought provoking to read. The measurements would speak for themselves however. What Soongsc and I think, feel and believe we hear in the same loudspeaker model do not even resemble each others' observations. Add SLs in there and it just becomes a mess. Now if there were measurements on each end that suggested the models didn't perform similarly it would make some sense. It might be even more interesting on various levels if they were very similar. Since only one side has measurements for the Behringer and neither side for the Beolab and we're all going off memory it seems like a useless conversation to me. If someone else can get something useful out of it that won't bias their thoughts, feelings and beliefs etc... for evaluation.... Ah what am I saying? I just don't see how a person could remain completely neutral after reading 3rd party discussions about what they think they hear and what they possibly attribute it to in a loudspeaker. IOW, I can't see any use in continuing this conversation at all, and especially in a measurements thread.
There are many threads and forums for subjective evaluation. 🙂
Sorry if this comes off in any negative light. I'm just hoping to keep the thread useful and somewhat on topic by not loading it down with a lot of guessing. 😉
Happy Fourth of July America!
Dan
Last edited:
Science has dealt with the fact that you cannot prove a negative for centuries. That does not mean the ABX/DBT test is not "strong" or useful.
If a difference is so slight that it cannot be detected in a DBT, you could not logically specify a preference based on sound alone. In that case the preference is attributable to other factors, like brand, price, aesthetics, reputation, expectation, etc... There is actually nothing wrong with that set of metrics, but it does not further ones understanding of what is _objectively_ important in audio.
No not at all. I have always have had good correlation as far as good measurements means I like it subjectively. Just that when you are rolling your own I always felt I needed a real "Reference System" that I use to compare against in an OH MY GOODNESS
sighted comparison. It's great because it gives you an excuse to build even more speakers. Like we need one?
Happy 4th I have to go light the barbecue and have a beer.
Rob🙂
I have to ask what cymbal makes sounds upto and past 18KHz? Its it the harmonics?
Not that I care since I do not even hear anything past 16KHz anyways. Very few people can.
It's not a matter of how high an instrument plays or not. What matters is what effects the sound reproduction. For example:
How will the changes shown hear effect Mr. Domingo's singing? I can tell you from experience, it makes difference big time.
But how can I explain orgasm? Just by showing data? You just have to experience one regardless what the data says.😀
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
How will the changes shown hear effect Mr. Domingo's singing? I can tell you from experience, it makes difference big time.
But how can I explain orgasm? Just by showing data? You just have to experience one regardless what the data says.😀
If you can not hear it, it won't matter a damn bit 😉
Measurements past 20K are completely useless since they are extremely inaccurate, Sorry.
Mr. Domingo's singing??? Do you know the highest frequency he can hit?
This is audiophile type babble and has no place in a measurement thread, IMO.
Measurements past 20K are completely useless since they are extremely inaccurate, Sorry.
Mr. Domingo's singing??? Do you know the highest frequency he can hit?
This is audiophile type babble and has no place in a measurement thread, IMO.
Last edited:
Ok but that doesn't mean you can't hear the difference between a CD being played out to one with a tweeter above 10K
Rob🙂
Last edited:
You are doing the technical babble. I show data corelated with what I hear.
If you say your capability is limited by what others try to convince you to be, it makes no difference to me.
The fact is, as I had mentioned before, I first found Domingo's singing to be nasty at certain specific parts/notes. So I went to improve the high frequency breakup mode, and it improved the situation. The more I improve it, the better it gets.
Last edited:
Hi soongsc, how can you be sure that the difference you are hearing isn't solely due to the differences in the CSD's between 3k and 20k? If the plots were identical *except* for the resonances above 20k then I think you have a case, but when there are differences in the normal human hearing range as well then I can't see that you can make the conclusion that the difference is due to the higher frequency breakups (even if they are bigger than the differences between 3k and 20k).
Whether or not the harmonics above the human hearing threshold are processed by the brain or not I don't actually know, but I found this on wikipedia Seems it is a somewhat controversial topic.
Tony.
Whether or not the harmonics above the human hearing threshold are processed by the brain or not I don't actually know, but I found this on wikipedia Seems it is a somewhat controversial topic.
Tony.
I think we have to consider that different parts have different effects. Making the 3KHz~20KHz cleaner does make the background echo in the recording more distinguishable, but when we consider the most significant change only associates with a very narrow range of a few notes of the singing, then it normally is attributed to a very narrow range of problem area. Quite interestingly, the singing of other tenors showed less difference. Some tests I think anyone could try is mix a 20KHz signal with another lower frequency, and see how it changes the sonic quality of the lower frequency. I'm sure one will find that at some combination, the sound of the lower frequency becomes very different. Little experiments like these can go a long way in getting a feeling what effects what we hear. I think it's a great mistake to only think in terms of audibility of single frequency.
We should be concerned with measurements within the audible band (20Hz to 20kHz).
Not to say that > 20kHz performance of tweeters can't impact on < 20kHz performance - it may do. But its only revelant for the audible portion of the band.
I think it would be unwise to say a tweeter that had better > 20kHz performance was preferred over one that didn't, if in fact its < 20kHz performance was worst than the competitor.
Not to say that > 20kHz performance of tweeters can't impact on < 20kHz performance - it may do. But its only revelant for the audible portion of the band.
I think it would be unwise to say a tweeter that had better > 20kHz performance was preferred over one that didn't, if in fact its < 20kHz performance was worst than the competitor.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.