2. speakers
  3. 178022-139155

Interesting ASR review of small GR Research speaker kit

I bounce between various kinds of analysis — more subjective listening reports, more quantitative measurement analyses and, my favorite, those that combine both strategies to tell a useful story about audio products.

Amir of ASR has just done a very powerful takedown of a fairly inexpensive kit being sold by Danny at GR Research. Not only does he prove his point about the speakers, he also makes (to my mind) a very convincing case that Danny put his finger on the scale in how he reported his own measurements. 

I'm not in any camp — Danny's or Amir's or anyone else's. What I appreciate is thoroughness and meticulousness in exposition. Danny does that in his own videos. (Again -- to me. I'm really still learning and cannot easily spot gaps in argument in this subject matter.)

I know people with some of GR's best kits — and I've heard one of them. They sounded incredible. I've watched a bunch of Danny's videos where he criticizes other companies; I've come away thinking, "Wow, he really revealed some of the grift embedded in that product." 

But here, the tables are turned, it seems, on Danny. I hope he responds, both to defend his reputation and methods, but also because it will set in relief where some of the distance may be between these two dominant online figures' methods in assessing what makes for a good speaker.

https://youtu.be/IikqAg38FPs

128x128hilde45
dekay's avatar
dekay
5,541 posts
 

The ASR review is (IMO) the equivalent of reviewing/measuring large Sound Lab's in a 4' x 6' room.

I've used cheap 3" wide band speakers in a desk top situation (arm's length away) and they were pretty good.

Mine were vintage Foster (later became Fostex) 10F3 alnico magnet drivers in Realistic Solo 103 cab's.

The best 3" drivers I've listened to (15-20 years ago) were the metal cone offerings from Ted Jordan (1st and 2nd versions).

Oddly enough Danny Richie (along with Bruce Edgar) were present the first time I heard them @ a DIY speaker gathering in Orange County, CA.

The host (Thor) had mounted the Jordan's to small (maybe 2.5L) ceramic pots that had been internally damped.

There were also Jordan's in wide/flat (TL?) cabs and 3" Fostex in BLH cabs.

DeKay

noske
783 posts
 

@thyname What has worked for me over the years: take exactly opposite of what AmirM says. In other words, if he likes something, I will never consider buying it. Scratch from my list.

This suggests to me that measurements are very reliable in predicting your (and others expressing similar sentiments) listening preferences.

noske
783 posts
 

@hilde45  Darko reports that Amir is not the absolutist objectivist

What Darko is quoting from Amir is on the public record over at ASR.  It is not news.

russ69's avatar
russ69
3,497 posts
 

@lanx0003 Attack to Amir’s comments and disrespect got to end here, folks.

You're not my supervisor! 

 

realworldaudio
174 posts
 

I have watched it up to minute 10 - by then Amir showed the freq graphs, and gave his opinion on them. I have noticed this his measurements are sound, but his interpretation is flawed.

Amirs frequency measurements confirmed Dannys. However, he placed them in a context that his own measurements did not support.

Here’s the details:

Amirs ⅓ octave smoothing looks very close to Danny’s, a good confirmation - no contradiction whatsoever, it is a good confirmation of Danny’s published freq response curve.

At the start Amir shows a finer scale measurement that reveals more details. This is no contradiction, no surprise, every professional knows that finer resolution will give a rougher picture. What it should not give is sudden large (approx 10dB or so) peaks and valleys. Amir confirms there are none of those, so he in fact confirms Danny’s measurements for being solid.

More to discover