At least that's funny, but you are making a big deal about nothing, and destroying your credibility along the way.
No surprise they sound different (considering the Berillium tweeters in Scalas and massively different cabinet designs). May I ask you to describe the differences (comparative advantages, deficiencies)? I am quite curious to learn what types of music, or even specific pieces of it, in your opinion, sound best on Giyas (G3, right?) and which ones are better suited for Scalas (I'm not sure which generation and variant they are). And what is your experience with adjustable treble and bass on Scalas?
Re: the LS50, the active speaker being made much of here hardly has better-controlled horizontal polars, it must be said (notwithstanding that the LS50's verticals are going to be miles behind):
View attachment 21419
https://www.princeton.edu/3D3A/Directivity/Genelec 8351A/Re: the LS50, the active speaker being made much of here hardly has better-controlled horizontal polars, it must be said (notwithstanding that the LS50's verticals are going to be miles behind):
View attachment 21419
Looks like someone is hung up on the LS50. It's like the "I rather push a Ford than drive a Chevy" crowd.
https://web.archive.org/web/2016092...5/JBL-LSR-305-308-Nahfeldmonitore-TestberichtPlot of the old LSR308 by Earl Geddes. Different angles shown from some above so take that into account. Dr. Geddes thought this was an amazing speaker for $200. As he says in this video.
View attachment 21421
Me hung up on the LS50? I was just trying to point out that its horizontal polar response is not particularly worse than an active speaker touted as having superior polar response.
No worries @Ron Texas, like I think I said earlier, the LS50 measures very well in terms of polar response, especially given we're now comparing it to Genelecs costing 4 to 6 times the price (and only the model costing 6 times the price is appreciably better on this metric).
At least @Erik has a sense of humour about it though
Plot of the old LSR308 by Earl Geddes. Different angles shown from some above so take that into account. Dr. Geddes thought this was an amazing speaker for $200. As he says in this video.
View attachment 21421
No worries @Ron Texas, like I think I said earlier, the LS50 measures very well in terms of polar response, especially given we're now comparing it to Genelecs costing 4 to 6 times the price (and only the model costing 6 times the price is appreciably better on this metric).
At least @Erik has a sense of humour about it though
Not really, it is severely anomalous, and it is curious to see so much pushback against calling out bad polar response. Just because there are many designs that are just as bad, or that they are popular does not render bad engineering irrelevant. The midwoofer narrows and broadens (ie. can't even keep directivity control as a singular driver), the crossover exhibits obvious mismatch as well. I deliberately used a 2-way coaxial as the basis of comparison to keep everything equal, but even more seamless horizontal response is possible with a waveguide on non-coaxial drivers.
The psychoacoustic importance of polar response has been detailed as well. It is uncontroversial. This is to speakers like Schiit multibit is to DACs: severe compromise disguised by or glossed over based on mere anecdotal experience.
So you would say it has significantly worse polars than the 8331? I can't see it, but I do see a marketing campaign built around the 8331's polar response, and a baffling unwillingness on the part of some to call it out in the same way that they have this LS50 (which costs 1/4 of the price BTW).
Like I've said earlier in the thread, I've never heard the LS50 and have no personal stake in this. I just think it is a bit hysterical to call a speaker that performs better than average on this metric in its price range "severely anomalous" etc etc.
Bowing out of this one now....
I'll also note you used Genelec's own polars for the 8331 to compare with Princeton 3D3A polars for the LS50 - different measuring rigs and conditions needless to say. @Erik was using Princeton polars for the 8351 and LS50.
Also, I fail to see how being "better than average" somehow diminishes the compromise of extensive polar anomalies throughout 800 to 5kHz. If it is indeed better, it is more an indictment of backwards manufacturers and an uncritical consumer market to keep the average at such a low level, than a reflection of KEF releasing a comparatively well-engineered product.
All this obsessing with speakers' ability to reproduce square waves has me a bit concerned.these speakers reproduce a square wave... better than anything I have seen
Only if that loudspeaker preserves the phase relationship between this large number of sinewaves.All this obsessing with speakers' ability to reproduce square waves has me a bit concerned.
Would you be nearly as impressed if I showed you a speaker capable of reproducing a large number of sine waves simultaneously?
As a side note, I suspect that the issues you heard when listening to the LS50s may have resulted more from the axial rise in response at around 2KHz than they did from anything going on off-axis.