What if a high end speaker measures really badly?

Some bumps are good and others not so much.

With DSP, you get to add bumps where needed and where you want them to be, not where they just happened to be when the product shipped.

I find with most speakers I tend to like a bump from ~4-6khz. That adds a bit of edge and definition, much like one might expect with a very good pair of high efficiency horns. In particular it helps to keep your attention at lower volumes. The other tweaks I might apply often tend to be more room and listening position dependent.

In the chart in the original post, that relative peak at ~10k in conjunction with the dip just below will likely result in a piercing sound (more fatigue) that might only benefit in certain more extreme cases of hearing loss. Would not be for me most likely. though again it may be nothing that some smartly applied DSP couldn’t resolve. But even if so, better to not have to apply DSP to fix what appears to be a significant design flaw. Better to go with a more suitable design right out of the gate where any bumps perhaps might be better located and maybe even work in your favor in some cases. You decide! To me a good design is always preferrable.

I'm thinkin' someone switched out the real speaker graph for a recent DOW stock market graph!

Regards,

barts

I'm of two minds about this question.

On one hand, I do want my speakers to measure well.  It suggests good engineering for one thing.  Also, if something is too colored I think it will bother me either immediately or over time.  So I always look at measurements.

On the other hand:  I have really liked some speakers that have been torn to shreds on ASR, e.g. the Devore O series speakers.  Devore managed a canny combination of generally neutral on axis sound (O/96) but with some zigs and zaga and I think some resonance.  The end result is a speaker with a character that I found utterly engaging, on all types of music.  Since I've never owned them I'll never know if my initial audition impressions would hold up, or improve, or if I'd get tired of them over time.

I like that my Joseph Audio speakers generally measure well, and are generally well regarded even among the "measurements" crowd.   They have a mild "smile" eq, but it is so cannily done it I find it extremely pleasing and seems to give a bit more tonal "life" to the sound.

Asked another way, if this is a high-end speaker, then is there anything we can objectively point to besides the price tag as "high-end?"

It’s curious that expectation bias from speaker measurements is just as likely to develop as from a speaker’s: appearance, price, name brand etc. (i.e. “conventional” sources of such bias).

Where measurements get interesting is how folks can have more-or-less informed background knowledge / experience with which to interpret them and develop extrapolations.

An important consideration is how “good” measurements could be used to fillip experimenter bias much the way some “conventional” speaker preference-driving traits have been used. In the case of measurements, I wonder if the effect will be more pronounced. That seems a possibility given (1) the average consumer’s probable lower level of consistency in understanding a suite of data, a spin graph / score, etc. (vs. a characteristic that doesn’t require as much understanding of analytics), and (2) the obvious fact that while good measurements don’t insure a speaker will sound good to a given listener, there is good reason to predict / assume this.

For average consumers, I think measurements = just another category with which folks will have to pick their individual points of “honesty-with-oneself” in order to use them efficiently (or avoid them) … (again, as consumers). Obviously, it’s different for designers, who by virtue of their trade should be increasingly considerate of measurements since they’ll potentially face an increasing trend of such data for their products. The recent thing between one designer and a couple of data gurus online is an extraordinary free lesson towards this angle, for anyone else in, and everyone entering, the trade (IMO).

As some of the knowledgeable designers have pointed out, relevance of measurements really depends on certain things more-or-less important to the given listener, and how the listener will have the speakers set up. But predictions / assumptions developed without a sufficient first-hand frame of reference (comparing multiple measurements x multiple speakers) could be spurious.

And even with much experience (in measurements x speakers consumerism), starting a speaker hunt with measurements in mind is starting a speaker hunt with bias. Perhaps not all bias produces poor real-world results. 😉 It’s an intriguing conundrum.