Here are some speakers from the Harman Group:
Infinity Primus:
SoundStage! Measurements - Infinity Primus P162 Loudspeakers (11/2008)
JBL L890:
SoundStage! Measurements - JBL L890 Loudspeakers (6/2006)
Revel Concerta F12:
SoundStage! Measurements - Revel Concerta F12 Loudspeakers (3/2006)
So, not all Harman speakers are held to the same standard.
Coming to the sub $1500 category, this Polk Audio looks good:
SoundStageNetwork.com | SoundStage.com | SoundStageNetwork.com | SoundStage.com
Eminently reasonable performance can be achieved using not so fancy drivers. I don't see anything fancy in the cabinet either.
Infinity Primus:
SoundStage! Measurements - Infinity Primus P162 Loudspeakers (11/2008)
JBL L890:
SoundStage! Measurements - JBL L890 Loudspeakers (6/2006)
Revel Concerta F12:
SoundStage! Measurements - Revel Concerta F12 Loudspeakers (3/2006)
So, not all Harman speakers are held to the same standard.
Coming to the sub $1500 category, this Polk Audio looks good:
SoundStageNetwork.com | SoundStage.com | SoundStageNetwork.com | SoundStage.com
Eminently reasonable performance can be achieved using not so fancy drivers. I don't see anything fancy in the cabinet either.
Last edited:
I tend to agree with you there. It's the baby and the bathwater thing.
There are some things I'm comfortable EQing, but some don't lend themselves to electrical EQ. Some are obvious, others less so. But I am generally leery of too much response shaping, especially if something needs more than a gentle nudge.
I think the 2 khz peak, and undampened metal cone breakup are MUCH larger factors to the speakers (lack of) sound quality then having a smooth polar response.
Basic design considerations for fixing issues like that aren't even factored into mid-fi (and most high end) commercial speakers because you cant see them. It saves a good chunk of change, and it may even give the impression of detail (wow) in a showroom. After a few months your ears are bleeding.
This is the kind of stuff DIYers fix with even the cheapest drivers, and why we do create designs that regularly outshine commercial fare.
Last edited:
Dispersion graphs are usually normalized, that's why we must look at on-axis performance too. To me, bass nearfield measurement profile tells a lot too. Stereophle publises also in-room power response graps which is very nice but must be read with a caution.
THD, cabinet resonance, impulse response, phase and impedance are important too. But it takes some brain work to make a synthesis of your own. Editor's listening impression tell something but usually I ignore them, mostly because they blabber about irrelevant things.
THD, cabinet resonance, impulse response, phase and impedance are important too. But it takes some brain work to make a synthesis of your own. Editor's listening impression tell something but usually I ignore them, mostly because they blabber about irrelevant things.
Well there is also Beranek's law involved. I have heard some DIY speakers that were awful, but the builder loved them. The problem with DIY is objectivity.
This is why here at DIY it is even more important to use objective data - the subjective data is always loaded with bias to he point where it really is useless. Objective data I can deal with even if it is not all that well done or complete. But "I built ... and it sounds great." Well that's not of much use.
True, but in room measurements are hard to do, at least in the low end. It's nice to see some measurements taken outside, but not everyone can do that. And of course that tells us little to nothing about how the speaker works in the room.
It's not an easy task. Worthwhile, but not easy.
One thing that intrigues me is what makes big speakers sound big and little speakers sound small? Some of that is bass, but not all of it.
It's not an easy task. Worthwhile, but not easy.
One thing that intrigues me is what makes big speakers sound big and little speakers sound small? Some of that is bass, but not all of it.
Also, what is the point of building "objectively" "great" system if one does not like it at the end ?
Yes, but the other thing about DIY is, it is completely up to the person potentially building a design to decide if the present factors are enough to try the build. Nothing is being sold (outside of a select few component retailers) when a design is made available, there is no requirement for anything, outside of having the personal integrity to not mislead.
If a designer/builder is happy with the results then that is all that matters. If someone decides to build a design without data made available, that is completely on the person doing the build, the designer owes nothing else.
Is that worse then charging someone several thousand to listen to a metal cone breakup, without making any of that data available to consumers?
The same issue exists in the commercial realm, but when name brand and cost is involved. Look at how many people buy Wilson speakers. 😉
I personally do almost no in-room measurements except at modal frequencies.
The measurements that I want to see are polar maps above about 200 Hz. Below 200 Hz is all room.
My opinion of "big" versus "small" is thermal modulation. A small speaker has almost 1000 times more modulation than a big one does. Is this audible? I don't have any data on that, but I suspect that it is. The theory of perception presented by Griesinger suggest that the ear detects even minor signal modulation above about 700 Hz.
Hence there is a lot of data that "indicates" that thermal modulation might be an issue, but no solid proof.
Until you brought up David Griesinger I'd almost forgot about him. Pretty bad on my part. Met him in Indianapolis when he redesigned the system. Very nice, VERY sharp
A lot of reading to catch up on. Thx for mentioning him Earl 🙂
A lot of reading to catch up on. Thx for mentioning him Earl 🙂
You are not allowed that option!
If it is objectively great, then it IS great - and you must like it. All other thinking is wrong. That sort of behavior will not be tolerated.
Doesn't he have to build the "objectively" great system first? Are we presupposing it will sound bad? What if it actually sounded good?
What is our bias?
What is our bias?
What phenomonon are you referring to? Is this just compression due to coil heating? Thats a slow moving effect tied to the time constants of the voice coils.
David S.
You are the one who presumes an objectively great speaker will sound bad. What did you mean by objectively great? Describe the objectively great speaker that you built that sounds bad.
David
- Status
- Not open for further replies.