Should we (I) get into speaker testing & measurement

[LeftCoastTim]

While I also find JA's logic weird, in my mind:

1. If all the speakers are measured in the same room at the same place in the same way, relative comparisons become possible, even if not as pure as an anechoic / Spinorama / Jupiter room set up

2. We all listen in real rooms, anyway, where results below Schroeder dominate, so anechoic results are only semi-applicable in real life, anyway.

3. I'd rather have some speaker measurements than zero

4. We're not trying to publish AES papers or do speaker design

Again, the limitations of in-room aren't stopping Stereophile from publishing in room measurements and I don't see them getting crap for doing so.

First, #2 is straight up false. For #1, it would be true if a room acted as a linear transfer function. Since it is not, measurements could give you negative (that is, entirely wrong) information (#3). #4: the most valuable information is in CES 2034.

Similarly, non-standardized headphone measurements will do the same (as pertained to a different thread).

 

[watchnerd]

First, #2 is straight up false. For #1, it would be true if a room acted as a linear transfer function. Since it is not, measurements could give you negative (that is, entirely wrong) information (#3). #4: the most valuable information is in CES 2034.

Similarly, non-standardized headphone measurements will do the same (as pertained to a different thread).

It's rather moot, at this point, as in-room testing has been ruled out.

The decision tree now appears to be:

/how to fund Klippel rig

or

/endthread

 

[LeftCoastTim]

It's rather moot, at this point, as in-room testing has been ruled out.

As it should be.

 

[watchnerd]

As it should be.

Yay, a conclusion.

Does the Klippel need to be individually owned by Amir, or should we set up a corporate structure to allow for capital investors?

 

[Vovgan]

My hands are tied behind my back in membership not wanting advertising and sponsorship.

IMHO sponsorship is the way to go and I don't get why some members would object to it. As long as your tradition of objective, meaningful measurements continue, it is much better than no speaker measurements and no sponsorship.

 

[watchnerd]

IMHO sponsorship is the way to go and I don't get why some members would object to it. As long as your tradition of objective, meaningful measurements continue, it is much better than no speaker measurements and no sponsorship.

Sponsored by 'whom' is probably the key question.

Sponsored by speaker makers would raise conflict of interest concerns.

Other options (Amazon HD Music Streaming Service ads), less so.

I also don't see any ethical conflict with "viewer supported" sponsorship.

Lastly, monetize via YouTube. Plenty of subjective speaker reviews that seem to be monetized, based on the ads I have to click.

 

[Juhazi]

I have voted "No" because it is so difficult to do valid and reliable acoustic measurements of loudspeakers. Logistics is another issue. Third is that room acoustics have so important role on how they really sound.

We have several sources of measurement already, but done with different methods. Learning to compare them takes time and intelligence, and there is always the preference factor involved.

 

[Vovgan]

James at Audioholics has the best manual system to approximate the CEA-2034A/Harman system. If you are that anxious for data, follow his work.

Thanks for this tip! Then I think I'll just trade my B&W 703's with their harsh twitter for the tower version of Revel PerformaBe which he recently reviewed and be done with it

Then the only open question which remains for me is what to do with AVR, no obvious choice has been revealed here yet. Looking forward to seeing Denon 3500 reviewed, but given the audibly poor performance of DAC on my Denon x6500, I only have some hopes to see its amp part performing well.

If you endorse Audioholics' measurements, and given that great amps, headphone amps and DACs have been discovered here, then finding great AVR begs to become the highest priority I think.

 

[Blumlein 88]

As it should be.

I do believe the Klippel system is an in room measurements system. So maybe in room should not be ruled out.

 

[Blumlein 88]

IMHO sponsorship is the way to go and I don't get why some members would object to it. As long as your tradition of objective, meaningful measurements continue, it is much better than no speaker measurements and no sponsorship.

Sponsorship always tends to be a polluting corrupting influence. No matter how much you tell yourself you are not going to allow it to happen.

 

[Vovgan]

Sponsorship always tends to be a polluting corrupting influence. No matter how much you tell yourself you are not going to allow it to happen.

There is a whole spectrum between being slightly biased and being corrupted as a result of getting sponsorship and I see no reason why Chief should end up anywhere close to the dark side of it.

He's well earned our faith in him, and if getting sponsorship can help - I'm positive that he'll find a way to avoid the pitfalls of it.

As most of us pay nothing, and most of those who pay pay (I assume) very little, we shouldn't be too restrictive I think. As the saying goes, beggers cannot be choosers: if I ask him to do the speaker measurements, I'd rather not admonish him how to fund it.

 

[Wombat]

Amir, golf would be cheaper and get you out of the house.

 

[Absolute]

The Klippel machine is the only viable way to get accurate and reliable measurements if the aim is to provide objective data about loudspeaker quality. This site needs to provide accurate and objective data if any measurements are to be published, otherwise the science-part can be ignored.

Toole has many times written that the only way to determine speaker quality from measurements are proper spinorama measurements. In-room, outdoor etc will be subject to so many possible variances that the results can not be deemed reliable.

John Atkinson's in-room curve doesn't provide any information about speaker quality whatsoever.

 

[LeftCoastTim]

One more vote for @amirm accepting sponsorship and ads to fund speaker testing. If a sponsor wants to pull an existing bad measurement of their products so be it. After some time, missing measurement would just imply pulled / bad measurements. And some sponsors might not mind bad measurements. It’s their signature sound after all.

And if a measurement is pulled after publication, someone else could keep an archive around off this forum. (I volunteer for this role)

 

[Vintage57]

One more vote for @amirm accepting sponsorship and ads to fund speaker testing. If a sponsor wants to pull an existing bad measurement of their products so be it. After some time, missing measurement would just imply pulled / bad measurements. And some sponsors might not mind bad measurements. It’s their signature sound after all.

And if a measurement is pulled after publication, someone else could keep an archive around off this forum. (I volunteer for this role)

I agree it’s time to do something or get off the pot.
the web would not exist without ads.

 

[Julf]

the web would not exist without ads.

The web existed just fine without ads.

 

[Juhazi]

"75% of the site said they want it."

Pretty easy to say that. I have always wanted a helicopter as Father's Day gift....

 

[Vintage57]

The web existed just fine without ads.

really ‍

 

[Julf]

really ‍

Really.

 

[watchnerd]

"75% of the site said they want it."

Pretty easy to say that. I have always wanted a helicopter as Father's Day gift....

Then there needs to be a second poll asking people how to pay for the $70k.