Infinity R162 Bookshelf Speaker Review

[ROOSKIE]

The audioholics article seems only applies to bass.

Woops, yes indeed. Google this stuff. There is a fair amount devoted to this around the web.
Here is the Axiom article which is about speaker THD in general.
https://www.axiomaudio.com/blog/distortion/

Here is a site I think may yield results for you
http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/papers.aspx
A power point summary from some of the above site
http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/The Perception of Distortion.pdf


By the way, I am not saying any distortion is good, but that 2nd order (and 3rd for some people) is not a very audible or at least the least bothersome distortion if there is going to be distortion.
These JBL 530 tweeter distortions are very narrow band and low order, I suspect they are not audible but someone would have to create and conduct a test to verify my claim.
Back when I was more into the DIY, many people discussed this on the DIY forums as they were creating speakers and trying to determine the best crossover for tweeters and picking low distortion drivers and whatever else. Generally 2nd and 3rd were considered very non-offensive (especially 2nd). If you hit up a couple DIY builders sites I am sure you can find the conversations. I am sorry I just don't have the exact linkage anymore.
Here is one convo that may help or be interesting.
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/139046-tweeter-distortion-audible.html
another
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/121253-geddes-distortion-perception.html

It is also possible that that distortion is cone break up from the midwoofer not fully suppressed. The tweeter might not be stressed in the R162. (I would much rather have cone break up/ringing than a stressed tweet.)

 

[ROOSKIE]

How on earth can Harmon sell for this sale price?

Honestly, 1st you are buying direct from them. A vendor typically has 50-70% markup on speakers. (sometimes less but not often)
2nd, by this point in time you could say all the R&D is paid off and the expenses of tooling the manufacturing equipment are essentially in the past as well. (7 year old speaker line)
3rd this means I'd guess the total cost to build, package and receive the speaker pair in the USA for a company the scale of Harman is likely $40-60 for the set.
They also hope you will buy more stuff.
The typical retail price of speakers is around 5-10 times the cost to make.

 

[HammerSandwich]

For the Infinity R162, looks like distortion is dominated by the 3rd harmonic. Whereas for the JBL Studio 530, 2nd harmonic seems the dominant one. Is this just a matter of the drivers' design which makes 2nd dominant for some units but 3rd for others?

In addition to what @ROOSKIE posted, note that Toole & Olive don't say much about distortion. They just don't consider it very meaningful at this point, because speakers have bigger problems. Geddes writes the same (example, excerpt below), though he definitely uses large woofers & multiple subs. My read on this is that concentrating on adequate bandwidth & SPL automatically makes speaker distortion a relatively minor issue.

But you asked about specific, small speakers. Frankly, my knowledge of motor & suspension design is just enough to embarrass myself, so I'll link instead.

Examine a bunch of driver measurements at Hificompass (don't miss the Purifi!) or Zaphaudio for plots of H2-H5. You'll see the curves frequently cross, so a woofer might have more H2/4 in the bass but more H3/5 in the mids. At Hificompass, trust the nearfield curves below ~200Hz.

That's engineering. Klippel has published a ton of actual science. This poster gives a good synopsis of distortion.

The point that I make over and over and over again, is not that one cannot create a bad design where distortion is audible, but that I CAN create a design where it is not the most significant audiblity problem, and the THD on any individual driver will have virtually no relavence to audibility. Thus, if distortion is audible in the design, then the system design is faulty.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Honestly, 1st you are buying direct from them. A vendor typically has 50-70% markup on speakers. (sometimes less but not often)
2nd, by this point in time you could say all the R&D is paid off and the expenses of tooling the manufacturing equipment are essentially in the past as well. (7 year old speaker line)
3rd this means I'd guess the total cost to build, package and receive the speaker pair in the USA for a company the scale of Harman is likely $40-60 for the set.
They also hope you will buy more stuff.
The typical retail price of speakers is around 5-10 times the cost to make.

And does no marketing for Infinity.

 

[BYRTT]

Some frequency dependent comparison of radar animations for R162 based upon Amir's nice spindata . . .

Horizontals:

Frequency:

Verticals:

Frequency:

 

[Doodski]

T

Some frequency dependent comparison of radar animations for R162 based upon Amir's nice spindata . . .

Horizontals:

View attachment 56956
Frequency:
View attachment 56957

Verticals:

Frequency:
View attachment 56958View attachment 56959

Those are fantastic!

 

[GXAlan]

Thanks - got any source for 2nd not being a problem?

Nelson Pass has written about this, and actually designed a device that added distortion. What is really interesting is how genuine and honest he is in his interviews.
https://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/the-pass-h2-harmonic-generator/
1) when talking about distortion, he says the right sound is the sound that customers want (and pay for). Who is he to say what is right or wrong!

2) he supports DIY amps and helps enthusiasts

3) he uses radio shack cables because he says he wants his engineering to take all of the credit for the performance of a system

 

[thewas]

Should be noted that 2nd order is often considered a very minimal issue , extremely hard to hear- even desirable in some cases. I forgot this. This makes the measurements for the 530 even better in my world.
4 and 5th are considered by far the worst offenders and 3 not so great as well.

Even order harmonics (2nd, 4th,...) are not so problematic and rather give kind of a fullness of notes played by natural instruments (a reason why clipping from a tube amp does not sound as nasty as from a transistor amp), its the odd order ones (3rd, 5th,...) that sound unnatural and aggressive.

 

[BYRTT]

.....As noted, this is at a both below tweeter. When measuring at tweeter axis, there was a pronounced dip around 1.7 to 2 kHz. This did not show up however in the spinorama. Not sure what explains it....

Had seen same weird phenomen in past and took me a long time to realize the cause, it was some specific frequency that was very few uS or mS in forward or advance to rest of curve and in that CSD/waterfall present nothing slize/slizes before time zero we only get presented the later slizes for that culprit frequency that is too fast or maybe kind of non minimum phase, think group delay graphs should be good to resolute if any missing slizes is a micro bit too fast and hidden on the other side of CSD.

 

[Cahudson42]

Some frequency dependent comparison of radar animations for R162 based upon Amir's nice spindata . . .

Beautiful! Any chance you could do the same over at the DBR-62 review?

 

[BYRTT]

Beautiful! Any chance you could do the same over at the DBR-62 review?

Sure but in some other stuff get in the way it will be later today.

 

[QMuse]

Even order harmonics (2nd, 4th,...) are not so problematic and rather give kind of a fullness of notes played by natural instruments (a reason why clipping from a tube amp does not sound as nasty as from a transistor amp), its the odd order ones (3rd, 5th,...) that sound unnatural and aggressive.

Sure thing. It gets even more clear if you take a look at the notes: 2nd harmonic is a full octave higher than fundamental so it sounds quite pleasing. 3rd harmonic is perfect fifth over the second, not too bad but not necessarily pleasing, it may sound harsh to some. 4th hramonic is 2 octaves above fundamental so again qutie pleasing, and so on.

What needs to be mentioned that while odd harmonics are not pleasing as even ones they are still not nearly as bad as IMD harmonics which reallly hurt ears as most of them are completely out of tune from the perspetive of fundamental tone.

 

[lonewolf]

Thanks for the review! I've heard so many people say good things about these, so it's nice to have these measurements to tell us why!

Does anyone know of a place in Canada one could buy these from? I have a friend looking for cheap speakers, and maybe these will be cheap enough for him lol. I did a quick google but came up empty

 

[CJ Miller]

I had these speakers for maybe 3 years. Pretty good overall but I dont miss how bright they were at all.

 

[laudio]

My expereince as well with Primus (not these) - bright but very good. Based on preference rating and price, I think the Studio 530s are the better deal, but with the 6.5 inch woofer these look appealing to. Would be nice to have a "real world" price in the speaker index for new buyers + MSRP.

 

[MickeyBoy]

My story with these speakers. It started when I suspected that one could get Revel quality at an attractive price. Encouraged by the response to my post here months ago I took a flyer and bought a pair of refurbs from Harman for $175 shipped. There was nothing to lose as there was a 30-day return window, shipping paid. A flautist and I listened to them in stereo comparing with Magnepan LRS and Elac Uni-Fi UB5. It was immediately apparent they were better owing to their clarity and the opening up of a large stereo panorama. Perfect as surrounds. Harman kept sending me emails daily or nearly so. I kept looking for deals on Revels - no chance of that. A few weeks later I noticed a new pair fo 162s for $165. (Why not $162?) Grabbed them ads rears and then messed around with setting up an 8.2 system with two Rythmik L12s and Dirac. An old pair of Dahlias with Colloms's improved crossover are perched on top of two bookshelves for Atmos. Then a fortnight ago I noticed the center RC-263 3-way with the same tweeter new for $170. Did not hesitate. Finally figured out what I screwed up with Dirac, having dropped my UMIK-1 and ruined it. (Is it repairable?) My now 9.2 system sounds gorgeous especially with AIX Blu-Rays. The RC-263 is between a pair of GoldenEar Triton Ones and blends in perfectly -a least the only difference I can hear is a diminishing of the huge stereo panorama.

BTW, in addition to three old stereo power amps the electronics are the NAD T758 v3 AVR I acquired before Amir's devastating review. I suspect that an AVR or pre-pro that measures much better would indeed sound a bit cleaner and more realistic. So a happy story for an old pair of ears. Onward and upward.

 

[Euphonious]

Got my pair about 18 months ago, and these 71 year-old ears enjoyed them right out of the box. Which I expected knowing that their lineage goes back to the Interlude IL60s that have anchored my modest home theater for almost 16 years.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

My story with these speakers. It started when I suspected that one could get Revel quality at an attractive price. Encouraged by the response to my post here months ago I took a flyer and bought a pair of refurbs from Harman for $175 shipped. There was nothing to lose as there was a 30-day return window, shipping paid. A flautist and I listened to them in stereo comparing with Magnepan LRS and Elac Uni-Fi UB5. It was immediately apparent they were better owing to their clarity and the opening up of a large stereo panorama. Perfect as surrounds. Harman kept sending me emails daily or nearly so. I kept looking for deals on Revels - no chance of that. A few weeks later I noticed a new pair fo 162s for $165. (Why not $162?) Grabbed them ads rears and then messed around with setting up an 8.2 system with two Rythmik L12s and Dirac. An old pair of Dahlias with Colloms's improved crossover are perched on top of two bookshelves for Atmos. Then a fortnight ago I noticed the center RC-263 3-way with the same tweeter new for $170. Did not hesitate. Finally figured out what I screwed up with Dirac, having dropped my UMIK-1 and ruined it. (Is it repairable?) My now 9.2 system sounds gorgeous especially with AIX Blu-Rays. The RC-263 is between a pair of GoldenEar Triton Ones and blends in perfectly -a least the only difference I can hear is a diminishing of the huge stereo panorama.

BTW, in addition to three old stereo power amps the electronics are the NAD T758 v3 AVR I acquired before Amir's devastating review. I suspect that an AVR or pre-pro that measures much better would indeed sound a bit cleaner and more realistic. So a happy story for an old pair of ears. Onward and upward.

Boy have I been down your road. The only way you will find Revels discounted are open boxes at Crutchfield or Music Direct. A few true retailers exist that that will deal over the phone. If new, you will need to pick up. Austin, TX and Dayton, OH come to mind. Do Infinities and certain JBL match Revel? Maybe this site will help determine. I purchased Anthem 520 after bad review. Anthem room correction was mandatory for me. The AVR is solid and I can talk to a professional at Anthem if needed. I have heard complaints about Dirac on sub integration Who needs room correction at a million hz anyway?

 

[laudio]

You guys with 9+ speakers in the room make me jealous Surrounds don't matter that much however. I was up to 7 speaks, then said why bother. Back to 5. Overkill.

The 263 as a center seems nice because it's cheap, but a vintage full ranger would make you more happy if using room EQ. Most any decent vintage speak ranger could best the 263 as a center.

Just my two cents.... Revel is overpriced, always has been, not worth chasing. One of these days I will show my setup.

And what is a flautist BTW?

 

[Dj7675]

You guys with 9+ speakers in the room make me jealous Surrounds don't matter that much however. I was up to 7 speaks, then said why bother. Back to 5. Overkill.

The 263 as a center seems nice because it's cheap, but a vintage full ranger would make you more happy if using room EQ. Most any decent vintage speak ranger could best the 263 as a center.

Just my two cents.... Revel is overpriced, always has been, not worth chasing. One of these days I will show my setup.

And what is a flautist BTW?

I may be wrong, but I would be doubtful if any vintage speaker has the wide, even dispersion you see here. In particular for a center channel where dialogue is important, I would think something like this would be better. Could certainly be wrong, and it would be interesting to see a few more vintage speakers tested so we know how they do.