Only three listeners is insufficient to reach the conclusion stated.
Yet we are told to believe sighted, listening of DACs, cable, etc. by single individuals here.
By if you want to be dismissive of a test that favors your cause, be my guest....
Some thoughts on ASR and the reviews
I’ve briefly taken a look at some online reviews for budget Tekton speakers from ASR and Youtube. Both are based on Klippel quasi-anechoic measurements to achieve "in-room" simulations.
As an amateur speaker designer, and lover of graphs and data I have some thoughts. I mostly hope this helps the entire A’gon community get a little more perspective into how a speaker builder would think about the data.
Of course, I’ve only skimmed the data I’ve seen, I’m no expert, and have no eyes or ears on actual Tekton speakers. Please take this as purely an academic exercise based on limited and incomplete knowledge.
1. Speaker pricing.
One ASR review spends an amazing amount of time and effort analyzing the ~$800 US Tekton M-Lore. That price compares very favorably with a full Seas A26 kit from Madisound, around $1,700. I mean, not sure these inexpensive speakers deserve quite the nit-picking done here.
2. Measuring mid-woofers is hard.
The standard practice for analyzing speakers is called "quasi-anechoic." That is, we pretend to do so in a room free of reflections or boundaries. You do this with very close measurements (within 1/2") of the components, blended together. There are a couple of ways this can be incomplete though.
a - Midwoofers measure much worse this way than in a truly anechoic room. The 7" Scanspeak Revelators are good examples of this. The close mic response is deceptively bad but the 1m in-room measurements smooth out a lot of problems. If you took the close-mic measurements (as seen in the spec sheet) as correct you’d make the wrong crossover.
b - Baffle step - As popularized and researched by the late, great Jeff Bagby, the effects of the baffle on the output need to be included in any whole speaker/room simulation, which of course also means the speaker should have this built in when it is not a near-wall speaker. I don’t know enough about the Klippel simulation, but if this is not included you’ll get a bass-lite expereinced compared to real life. The effects of baffle compensation is to have more bass, but an overall lower sensitivity rating.
For both of those reasons, an actual in-room measurement is critical to assessing actual speaker behavior. We may not all have the same room, but this is a great way to see the actual mid-woofer response as well as the effects of any baffle step compensation.
Looking at the quasi anechoic measurements done by ASR and Erin it _seems_ that these speakers are not compensated, which may be OK if close-wall placement is expected.
In either event, you really want to see the actual in-room response, not just the simulated response before passing judgement. If I had to critique based strictly on the measurements and simulations, I’d 100% wonder if a better design wouldn’t be to trade sensitivity for more bass, and the in-room response would tell me that.
3. Crossover point and dispersion
One of the most important choices a speaker designer has is picking the -3 or -6 dB point for the high and low pass filters. A lot of things have to be balanced and traded off, including cost of crossover parts.
Both of the reviews, above, seem to imply a crossover point that is too high for a smooth transition from the woofer to the tweeters. No speaker can avoid rolling off the treble as you go off-axis, but the best at this do so very evenly. This gives the best off-axis performance and offers up great imaging and wide sweet spots. You’d think this was a budget speaker problem, but it is not. Look at reviews for B&W’s D series speakers, and many Focal models as examples of expensive, well received speakers that don’t excel at this.
Speakers which DO typically excel here include Revel and Magico. This is by no means a story that you should buy Revel because B&W sucks, at all. Buy what you like. I’m just pointing out that this limited dispersion problem is not at all unique to Tekton. And in fact many other Tekton speakers don’t suffer this particular set of challenges.
In the case of the M-Lore, the tweeter has really amazingly good dynamic range. If I was the designer I’d definitely want to ask if I could lower the crossover 1 kHz, which would give up a little power handling but improve the off-axis response. One big reason not to is crossover costs. I may have to add more parts to flatten the tweeter response well enough to extend it's useful range. In other words, a higher crossover point may hide tweeter deficiencies. Again, Tekton is NOT alone if they did this calculus.
I’ve probably made a lot of omissions here, but I hope this helps readers think about speaker performance and costs in a more complete manner. The listening tests always matter more than the measurements, so finding reviewers with trustworthy ears is really more important than taste-makers who let the tools, which may not be properly used, judge the experience.
- ...
- 1166 posts total
Once again, a blind test alone is insufficient to produce reliable results. You must match levels, and repeat enough times to get statistical rigor. If someone doesn't know to do these things, then they don't know what they are doing. The test I post above followed the right protocols. As did the tests that I have run that also showed positive outcomes. The importance of repeating enough times cannot be underemphasized. Here is me attempting to pass an ABX test: --- foo_abx 1.3.4 report ---- Notice how I was doing well to the bolded trial with 7 out of 8 right. But once I kept going, it was clear that was accidental and I had to terminate with defeat at the end. Someone passing such a test once or twice is meaningless.
|
An extremely old test that proves nothing and a deaf ASR member saying he hears no difference... That is all you got? Go on, how about the old Audio Magazine test of amps....you can use that one.....look it up....... Pathetic.....you will never prove your point......you just keep looking for crumbs.....We have the whole loaf.....You are not even standing in your loafers. But go on.....find us more silly tests that are meaningless. I am sure you can. For those of us that listen......you are irrelevant......However, your lies limit peoples ability to get better sound. So, you are a happiness limiter. You will have to live that truth till you admit you are wrong. You are a downer.....debbie downer. How do you make your stereo better? Listen and experiment. Try things you have not tried. How do you get good sound and think that you have incredible sound? Follow the guru of limitation....Amir. You decide what you want in your life. Do you want an ever expanding stereo gift that keeps giving you more and more goosebumps and fun?......or do you want to feel ego smug and comfortable that you have the best stereo in the world for pennies? Happiness exists every second. Embrace it NOW. You can be slightly happy and ego smug.....or you can be ecstatic and ever expanding......you choose. Enjoy whatever you do......feel the love that exists....right now! |
You've posted 60x on this thread. Irony is dead. Hypocrisy is waking up |
- 1166 posts total