If I set 100hz up whats about low-max level ? 50% less?
I can't really comprehend what you said.
If I set 100hz up whats about low-max level ? 50% less?
I see 2 knobs , I am interested Hi/low level min max . On mine is 50%..I can't really comprehend what you said.
Can you read your manual and figure out what each knob does?I see 2 knobs , I am interested Hi/low level min max . On mine is 50%..
You should be able to get away with 80hz if you dont want to cross it over so high, that was my sweetspot when I had it. 80 - 100hz is still alright, 150 - 200 is way higher than I would even try.Crossover is in 60-50hz position..to be clear I need bass support , not completely replace it by sub
No, I buy speakers to lick. Especially the ports and the dust caps.Yes maybe you are doing something wrong, why are you listening to speakers?
Hey, no apology necessary Mark. Your earlier post made it sound like you thought measurements should be totally ignored. But without measurements we are stuck with subjective opinions only, and we know that our own opinions are always better than everyone elses. So in my opinion, measurements get us in the ballpark, but purchasing requires listening. It sounds like you agree with that?Clearly you do not comprehend what Im saying here in this context. If it measures good, you still have to listen to it. Listening is the only thing left after all the measurements are known. Example, 2 different data is now shown for 1 particular speaker. 1 got a golfing panther, the other had a less than average review. What else can one do? Listen. As I did. And I hated the A130 uneqed even before Erin's review came out. Golfing panther? More like golf ball panther. Listen listen listen and listen, its way better than any preference score or panthers. Thats what I meant. Measuring good dont mean it will sound good. My apologies for not making myself clear.
I tried it and it seems to be working.. I didn't seal the ports, unnecessary. ThanksI can't help you if you don't want to try what i'm suggesting.
Sometime during the summer, they rolled out a model number change for the A130. It was noted in this thread. Reportedly, Harman customer support claimed it was just a regional numbering change, but it's entirely possible they were mistaken and a real change was made. There are two listings on Crutchfield as well, the old one, and the new one.I can't help but wonder if they didn't secretly roll out a design change after the A130 measured by Amir in this thread.
Where did that graph come from? That's not even that bad: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/pair-deviation-list-s-r.18058/
Sometime during the summer, they rolled out a model number change for the A130. It was noted in this thread. Reportedly, Harman customer support claimed it was just a regional numbering change, but it's entirely possible they were mistaken and a real change was made. There are two listings on Crutchfield as well, the old one, and the new one.
Only way to be sure would be to measure multiple samples, of course.
Yeah, totally agree -- that's why I mentioned it. I've also had poor experiences asking for technical data from CS, especially from larger companies. With the notable exception of Genelec.Customer support at most companies is not a reliable source for technical data. It's often outsourced to companies that hire people at minimum wage who are not well educated on finer details.
Either Amir will get the same results on the same sample - proving that the sample variation is real and large, or his results will be different, proving that it's not just down to sample variation. In the latter case hopefully there might be some clues as to whether the difference is systematic, environmental, or something else.Proof of what, though? ...
I would note that Erin's other NFS measurements match Amir's incredibly closely.Either Amir will get the same results on the same sample - proving that the sample variation is real and large, or his results will be different, proving that it's not just down to sample variation. In the latter case hopefully there might be some clues as to whether the difference is systematic, environmental, or something else.
99.99% it's not a measurement error. They've both measured the same speakers enough times for us to know that their results are incredibly reliable and produce nearly identical results. They are using the same machine after all .Either Amir will get the same results on the same sample - proving that the sample variation is real and large, or his results will be different, proving that it's not just down to sample variation. In the latter case hopefully there might be some clues as to whether the difference is systematic, environmental, or something else.
Oh I completely agree, the chance of a measurement difference is very small. But if it was found to be the case then it would be very valuable knowledge. Equally, proving that level of sample variation would allow the community to hold the manufacturer to account without any ambiguity - they'd be two different speakers sold as the same speaker.99.99% it's not a measurement error. They've both measured the same speakers enough times for us to know that their results are incredibly reliable and produce nearly identical results. They are using the same machine after all .
It's gotta be either sample variation or a stealth design change.
Was it really unnecessary or you didn’t try it?I tried it and it seems to be working.. I didn't seal the ports, unnecessary. Thanks