Wilson Audio TuneTot Review (high-end bookshelf speaker)

[Godataloss]

Do not get mislead and make false statements.
They do not sound good or bad, they are just liked by Amir if and only if equalization applied.

Don't get mislead and make false statements. You don't know that he wouldn't like them also without eq. He did no blind testing.

 

[rammster]

Don't get mislead and make false statements. You don't know that he wouldn't like them also without eq. He did no blind testing.

superb, bravo!

 

[MrHifiTunes]

Do not get mislead and make false statements.
They do not sound good or bad, they are just liked by Amir if and only if equalization applied.

I based my judgement on
in-room response and Amir evaluation.
But he didnt go deep into it...so most contribution comes from the in-room response.

 

[rammster]

I based my judgement on
in-room response and Amir evaluation.
But he didnt go deep into it...so most contribution comes from the in-room response.

To be honest, I totally ignore that predicted room response graph because it is literally unpredictable parameter changing significantly from case to case.

I used to watch Andrew Jones interviews , who worked in KEF, TAD/Pionee and ELAC. He has rare skill of explaining complex matters in simple way, and as an engineer, despite being commercial guy now, sometimes he spills out some " behind the scenes truth".
Room response was one of the "pains" he had, when was designing the speakers.
He had to consider some single average level.
So I totally ignore it for myself in Amir's measurements, since it has 0 relation to my particular case, unless I build a dedicated listening room and apply some treatment.

 

[MrHifiTunes]

To be honest, I totally ignore that predicted room response graph because it is literally unpredictable parameter changing significantly from case to case.

I used to watch Andrew Jones interviews , who worked in KEF, TAD/Pionee and ELAC. He has rare skill of explaining complex matters in simple way, and as an engineer, despite being commercial guy now, sometimes he spills out some " behind the scenes truth".
Room response was one of the "pains" he had, when was designing the speakers.
He had to consider some single average level.
So I totally ignore it for myself in Amir's measurements, since it has 0 relation to my particular case, unless I build a dedicated listening room and apply some treatment.

I value in-room response more then the Frequency response. it combines all other graphs. Early reflection + frequency response.
The frequency response also doesnt resemble what you get in a real room. I think I posted a graph from genelec somewhere in the beginning. Those who think that with a flat genelec in an untreaded room listen to flat FR are not correct either.

Also Amir mentioned the female voices sounded fine before EQ, HE did go deeper into the bqss bump though...pity he didnt say more about the rest of the spectrum. But if the 10-15db dip was there I would expect him to mentioned it.

After EQ he liked it more then revel M106. But the frequency response is pretty flat not looking at the bass bump and the dips at 1-3k.
He didnt EQ anything in the 1-3k and leaved it as is.

 

[rammster]

I value in-room response more then the Frequency response

Then you must be more satisfied than me, I guess ))
Because I see pretty room response graphs more than flat frequency response graphs in reviews here.

 

[MrHifiTunes]

Then you must be more satisfied than me, I guess ))
Because I see pretty room response graphs more than flat frequency response graphs in reviews here.

Yes...that also why Amir likes them I guess.

Just for the sport I looked for the graph of the flat freq response from genelec and what it gives in an untreated room

 

[Dialectic]

The thread continues....

 

[rammster]

Yes...that also why Amir likes them I guess.

Just for the sport I looked for the graph of the flat freq response from genelec and what it gives in an untreated room

I have UMIK-1 and REW, so these graphs do not surprise me at all.
Only need to get over my laziness and build some acceptable looking bass traps.

 

[rammster]

The real problem is you heard it and you hate it but you didn't know it was the distortion.
Something like that..........

In my opinion, this fact should be driving people to get best speakers/equipment in terms of technology and performance. Then you will have trust in what you hear, and then you could blame sound_producer/enginerr/artist for unpleasant sound of the music piece.

 

[rammster]

It translates to Aussie fine.
But nearer XMAS and Easter then FCS is pretty common.

Still not clear. What is FFS?

 

[Godataloss]

In my opinion, this fact should be driving people to get best speakers/equipment in terms of technology and performance. Then you will have trust in what you hear, and then you could blame sound_producer/enginerr/artist for unpleasant sound of the music piece.

This sounds exactly like what someone with silver plated unicorn hair woven speaker cables would say.

 

[rammster]

This sounds exactly like what someone with silver plated unicorn hair woven speaker cables would say.

I have never heard about measured performance of cables, only aesthetics and price. Maybe you meant something else?

 

[Godataloss]

I have never heard about measured performance of cables, only aesthetics and price. Maybe you meant something else?

I do. It's what I've been saying in reference to this entire thread. Objectivism can be taken too far in the same way subjectivism can. Claiming that your system is infallible because you assembled products that comply with the measurement parameters or "technology" you think are most important, is no different than the morass of Audiophools that swear by snake oil. To me even making that statement- that you need those measurements to validate what you are hearing is absurd in the face of overwhelming evidence that measurements are not the final arbiters of musical preference. #tunetotlives

 

[rammster]

I do. It's what I've been saying in reference to this entire thread. Objectivism can be taken too far in the same way subjectivism can. Claiming that your system is infallible because you assembled products that comply with the measurement parameters or "technology" you think are most important, is no different than the morass of Audiophools that swear by snake oil. To me even making that statement- that you need those measurements to validate what you are hearing is absurd in the face of overwhelming evidence that measurements are not the final arbiters of musical preference. #tunetotlives

At least, one of the sides can rely on science

 

[dpturner]

Still not clear. What is FFS?

just google it, sheesh!

 

[voodooless]

just google it, sheesh!

What is google?

 

[Godataloss]

At least, one of the sides can rely on science

Except you aren't. You only take into account the aspects of science that suit your preconceived beliefs- in exactly the same way the kilo-buck$ interconnects guys do.

 

[rammster]

Except you aren't. You only take into account the aspects of science that suit your preconceived beliefs- in exactly the same way the kilo-buck$ interconnects guys do.

That is false argument. Science is able to work with GHz speeds and bands, kHz region is peace of eaten cake.

 

[rammster]

just google it, sheesh!

Actually it is explained further in discussion, directly, without evasive attempts.
Holmz showed his interest on topic, so I decided to give him chance to express himself more.