PS Audio sent Erin their speaker??!!

[tmtomh]

I 1000% trust Erin's measurements. He's great for this hobby.

I skip his subjective because I've seen what I mentioned above happen.

I personally don't think he would be as offended as his fangirls , at my comment....

He is known for his Klippel measurements and fully trusted... he is not known for Golden Ear subjective reviews...

You didn't "skip his subjective" - you listened to it, misunderstood it, and then called him a liar.

You can call folks "fangirls" if you want (and how stupid do you have to be to think the "girl" part is an insult?) - but it doesn't change the fact that you're apparently emotionally incapable of simply admitting that you made an error.

 

[amirm]

Far from "word salad" I found Erin's descriptions gave me a nice sense of his subjective impressions of the sound, the strengths and weaknesses and general sonic character of a speaker.

Go ahead and summarize it for us and defend their accuracy.

 

[Chester]

You didn't "skip his subjective" - you listened to it, misunderstood it, and then called him a liar.

You can call folks "fangirls" if you want (and how stupid do you have to be to think the "girl" part is an insult?) - but it doesn't change the fact that you're apparently emotionally incapable of simply admitting that you made an error.

@Music1969 is entitled to his opinion. I tend to agree I’m not sure I believe these were done prior to the measurements. If it was Darko saying this, it would be acceptable for everyone to pile on and criticize but Erin seems to be afforded special treatment by a lot here, hence I’m guessing that is where the fan girl comment comes from.

He is a reviewer, we don’t all have to believe everything that he says, even if some of you do.

 

[amirm]

Let me be blunt: I don't trust any reviewer who measures that they listen without peaking at measurements. It is like saying everyone who takes a test doesn't look at the answers if they had them. There may be exceptions but the rule must be what I said. They routinely make comments that imply they have looked at measurements. Even trained listeners are not able to get so specific as some of these people are.

Don't let your guard down.

 

[CleanSound]

@Music1969 Erin seems to be afforded special treatment by a lot here,

Of course he gets special treatment.

How many other reviewers are as technical as he is? Heck, how many reviewers are legit engineers of any type?

How many other reviewers knows about speaker design as much as he does?

How many other reviewers has a NFS? Heck, how many speaker manufacturers has an NFS?

How many reviewers do you know actually gives bad reviews and many bad reviews?

I know of only one other reviewer, and I don't even consider him a reviewer, rather I consider him a fact checker.

You dare put Darko or other jokers in the same breath as Erin? Give me a break.

hence I’m guessing that is where the fan girl comment comes from.

Damn right I'm a fan girl of Erin, because I'm a fan girl of science and engineering and data, just not a fan of his corny dad jokes. Would you want me to be a fan girl of the likes of Darko, Steve Guttenberg, Thomas Tan?

 

[Music1969]

Exactly , we know better here than to trust any subjective reviews

 

[amirm]

Adding on, for a reviewer to be correct subjectively, i.e. their assertion is backed by measurements, means that you don't need the measurements! You have to accept that they are just as good as a machine measuring on and off axis response of a speaker. Otherwise, their subjective review would be in conflict with measurements which would not be a good look for them.

 

[amirm]

How many other reviewers are as technical as he is? Heck, how many reviewers are legit engineers of any type?

How many other reviewers knows about speaker design as much as he does?

How many other reviewers has a NFS? Heck, how many speaker manufacturers has an NFS?

Huh? You are excluding present company?

How many reviewers do you know actually gives bad reviews and many bad reviews?

I give more bad reviews than anyone and don't couch it in a way that is hard to see. Erin gets a lot of sponsored products which always makes it difficult to be direct about negative outcomes. A headless panther screams such directness by me.

Really, what is going on here???

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

I started this post earlier today, and am just now finishing it, so it is a bit off the current discussion topic...:
Good job @ Chris and the team at PS Audio.
Despite PS Audio's reputation, I would say this speaker is definitely a solid performer, at least based off the measurements.
The low distortion and good horizontal directivity are really nice to see, and based off Erin's compression graph, these speakers can actually get loud.
Yeah, the on-axis frequency response isn't perfect, and the vertical directivity is narrow, but given the intended application of these speakers, I believe that there is merit to the narrow vertical directivity.
Now on to my take on the subjective evaluation of these speakers:
In my experience, I find that speakers which can handle high SPL levels tend to sound good, even when their other measurements are "compromised". So given that these speakers have good dynamic performance, they should gain some points there.

Now to my word salad summarizing the video:
- His statement about the floor bounce reduction due to placement of the woofers, I believe has merit here, but I would have to hear the speaker vs other more traditional tower speakers to fully believe that it makes an audible effect as I personally never listen for it when auditioning speakers.
- Soundstage width: This is pretty straightforward. Look at the horizontal polar, it is crazy wide and also pretty consistent.
- HF boost: The graphs show a slight HF boost. But he states that the manufacturer recommends toing the speakers out a bit anyways, which will counter that a bit given the directivity trace in the CEA2034 graph.
- His statement that this is a warm sounding speaker I cannot agree with at this time, but given the HF variations his definition of "warm" could be met by this speaker.
- He claims that Michael Jackson's Thriller album is good. I cannot confirm or deny this based off the speaker's objective measurements. Personally, I do not use that album in my reference playlist, but it ticks the boxes for a good reference sound.
- The claim that the sound is not fatiguing would require more effort than I am willing to put in now to prove or disprove, but given that there isn't any excessive resonances or other treble boosts, I would say that nothing in the objective data would indicate a fatiguing sound.
- Dynamic sound, low distortion: Yeah, look at the plots. The distortion is very low, and Erin's compression graph shows very good dynamic performance.
- "Good sound" Attack / clarity... I can't prove this, but generally I would say that most people in the world would say that this speaker would "sound good", given my experience in the audio field. Once again, the low moving mass midrange and tweeter / low distortion / other design choices of this speaker would lend themselves to these traits.
- Dip around 600hz: There is a dip in the graph. Yes, when you apply EQ and do a sighted comparison you'll notice differences. Personally, I am not sold on the merit of correcting something like that, because if it sounds good both with and without the EQ, it is often easier to just not EQ it, and good subjective sound is my ultimate goal in a music listening system.
- Dip around 6khz: Yeah, you ain't gonna notice that. Frequency-hearing-resolution and all, that narrow of a dip at that high of a frequency, you'll only notice it if you are looking for it and have magical hearing.


So yeah, I don't think any of his statements are without justification, at least at a basic level. Now, I have not heard this speaker, I have also never interacted with Erin, so I cannot comment on whether or not I would like this speaker or come to the same subjective conclusions. However, I think, for the target audience of this speaker, it is pretty good, and given the few special qualities of it, and the admittedly nice look, I would say they do justify the price.

However, one must wonder whether or not these objective issues could have been solved with: cable risers and quantum-tuned cables, a power regenerator, special fuses, weird rocks, and of course, everyone's favorite: tube connectors. (And the answer is: No, just no.)

 

[Chester]

Of course he gets special treatment.

How many other reviewers are as technical as he is? Heck, how many reviewers are legit engineers of any type?

How many other reviewers knows about speaker design as much as he does?

How many other reviewers has a NFS? Heck, how many speaker manufacturers has an NFS?

How many reviewers do you know actually gives bad reviews and many bad reviews?

I know of only one other reviewer, and I don't even consider him a reviewer, rather I consider him a fact checker.

You dare put Darko or other jokers in the same breath as Erin? Give me a break.



Damn right I'm a fan girl of Erin, because I'm a fan girl of science and engineering and data, just not a fan of his corny dad jokes. Would you want me to be a fan girl of the likes of Darko, Steve Guttenberg, Thomas Tan?

So what?! That means I must believe everything he says. I don’t think so.

 

[MattHooper]

Go ahead and summarize it for us and defend their accuracy.

Well...given your previous aversion to accepting subjective descriptions I don't expect this will land but...

In Erin's subjective portion he talked about playing with speaker positioning and finding the speakers could be closer to the back wall than other speakers without sounding bloated in the bass. He pointed to where that makes sense in the measurements in terms of the bass dip starting around 150Hz and why that makes sense of his observation.

He talked about a satisfying sense of lower mid upper bass transition and kick/punch that he found very satisfying, especially around 200 to 500 Hz region. He discussed why that would make sense given the design with the woofers lower to the floor. And in the measurements 150Hz to a little over 500Hz on axis is slightly raised and in room measurements also indicate a bit of a hump in the region that would provide that punch.

He described a wide, open soundstage, as opposed to a constricted tighter stage, and the evenness of the imaging, so you got an open airy sound, but with precise imaging, as described in his Jackson soundtrack referencing footsteps. That gave a very nice description easy to understand. He pointed to the horizontal radiation measurements supporting the wide radiation.

He described the high frequencies as sounding slightly elevated when aimed on axis but not to the degree of other speakers like the Focal and Klipsche etc that he's reviewed. which have a more obvious rising trend. But when he toed the speakers about 20 degrees off axis as the manual suggests, he said it sounded like it alleviated the high frequency bump and smooths out the sound. To the point he would consider the sound more on the "warm sounding" speaker. That makes sense with the measurements suggesting a generally downward sloping response in room.

Erin described how this meant he could listen for hours without listening fatigue, and he used a nice example of the shaker in Michael Jackson's Gotta Be Startin' Something, which can sound more aggressively forward on a speaker that exaggerates the highs (I know that track and exactly what he's talking about - I've used it to diagnose similar issues). He explained how the PS Audio speakers maintained the sense of easy to hear detail and never made that sound bright or aggressive. That is informative to me. Again, I don't see anything in the measurements that would suggest Erin's description is inaccurate.

Also informative was that Erin said he didn't notice a "scoop" around 600Hz when listening. But later seeing it in the measurements and going back to play with EQ, he found that filling it in was audible in making vocals sound a little more full. And that there is a narrow strong dip around 6 or 7K that he also didn't notice, but didn't seem consequential when applying EQ to even it out. For me this good info. Erin has a good ear and his listening before measuring impressions suggest that the 600Hz scoop while audible if eq'd, isn't obvious simply on listening and so doesn't need to be considered a big deal (depending on your criteria).

So overall I came away with a nice sonic "picture" from his description of a loudspeaker that goes satisfyingly deep in the bass, provides good punch in the "punch" region, kick drums etc (which is something I really like), has a wide open, airy soundstage but with very good precision in imaging, and has an overall "warm" tone (sounds rich, doesn't have rising high end harshness) that doesn't sacrifice high frequency detail in doing so, but is easy to listen to for long periods. It has flaws, but in his account they are not obvious, and the virtues make it an engaging listen.

And, again, not that I'm an expert with measurements, but on Erin's account the measurements seem to track pretty well with that, or at least don't seem to contradict his impressions.

 

[CleanSound]

Huh? You are excluding present company?

Yes, I am. Then I realized people may bark at me for excluding present company so I added the below:

"I know of only one other reviewer, and I don't even consider him a reviewer, rather I consider him a fact checker."

And let me add some more: a fact checker, an educator and the gate keeper of facts vs. fiction.

 

[CleanSound]

So what?! That means I must believe everything he says. I don’t think so.

No, you don't.

But he still gets special treatment from many of his fan girls because he publishes data and he speaks to the science regardless with or without his subjective impression and his corny dad jokes.

 

[CleanSound]

Huh? You are excluding present company?

I give more bad reviews than anyone and don't couch it in a way that is hard to see. Erin gets a lot of sponsored products which always makes it difficult to be direct about negative outcomes. A headless panther screams such directness by me.

Really, what is going on here???

And I asked the question of how many others, I never said, "no other."

 

[GXAlan]

In this review he talks about recesses in specific frequency ranges, listening to music.... that magically show up in his measurement.

There is no way someone can pick a small scoop in 500-700 Hz range by listening to music.

But apparently Erin can.

I point out my L52 subjective review relative to what was ultimately measured by the spin. I don’t have golden ears (I love my Bose 901’s and tube electronics) but my subjective opinions matched the measurements later.

500-700 Hz is a pretty classic area where the “right hand” of a typical piano piece lives since it’s just right of “middle C.” It’s also the area associated with “boxiness/nasal” in voices with vowels being around 500 Hz.

There are definitely “areas” associated with specific content. The piano is nice if you are a pianist since it will sound like the right hand is a bit softer than the left hand if there’s a dip at 500-700 Hz.

@amirm has gone through training (and Harman used to have a Windows 32 bit app to help you train your hearing.

 

[amirm]

In Erin's subjective portion he talked about playing with speaker positioning and finding the speakers could be closer to the back wall than other speakers without sounding bloated in the bass. He pointed to where that makes sense in the measurements in terms of the bass dip starting around 150Hz and why that makes sense of his observation.

Any such claims need to be backed by in-room measurements. None were provided. Room modes mix with speaker response creating a very complex, and situation specific experience. No way what he said can be taken at face value and be useful for anyone else.

He talked about a satisfying sense of lower mid upper bass transition and kick/punch that he found very satisfying, especially around 200 to 500 Hz region. He discussed why that would make sense given the design with the woofers lower to the floor. And in the measurements 150Hz to a little over 500Hz on axis is slightly raised and in room measurements also indicate a bit of a hump in the region that would provide that punch.

Phrases like "satisfying sense of lower mid upper bass" have no specificity. There is no reason to think that Erin has special acuity to determine something this nebulous. This is stuff we read from random subjectivist reviewer. And who is to say the range is 200 to 500 Hz? Where did that come from? Maybe it is 200 to 350. On the lower woofer thing, again, he would have to provide a measurement to demonstrate that. With no data, he can't say that is the reason for said "satisfying sense." Maybe the in-room measurements show the exact opposite.

He described a wide, open soundstage, as opposed to a constricted tighter stage, and the evenness of the imaging, so you got an open airy sound, but with precise imaging, as described in his Jackson soundtrack referencing footsteps. That gave a very nice description easy to understand. He pointed to the horizontal radiation measurements supporting the wide radiation.

Soundstage is predominantly a function of the recording. Next in line is the very complex interaction of a speaker with its room. Further, someone's sense of characterizing soundstage is totally unreliable and unverifiable. Does your room look like his? Do you listen to the same track? Do you have his sense of the concept of soundstage?

Proper science says that speakers with wide dispersion cause an apparent image shift (toward the walls). They give a more diffused soundstage. That is all that you can say about it. Anymore more is pretending to be some golden ear subjectivist reviewer imagining things you can't prove.

He described the high frequencies as sounding slightly elevated when aimed on axis but not to the degree of other speakers like the Focal and Klipsche etc that he's reviewed. which have a more obvious rising trend. But when he toed the speakers about 20 degrees off axis as the manual suggests, he said it sounded like it alleviated the high frequency bump and smooths out the sound.

If the frequency response shows this, then I don't need his subjective remarks. And sure, everyone knows you can play with toe in to reduce high frequencies.

Erin described how this meant he could listen for hours without listening fatigue, and he used a nice example of the shaker in Michael Jackson's Gotta Be Startin' Something, which can sound more aggressively forward on a speaker that exaggerates the highs (I know that track and exactly what he's talking about - I've used it to diagnose similar issues).

Classic nonsense praise from every subjective reviewer. Oh I did not get fatigued. What if I get fatigued? Where is the research that indicates what causes fatigue?

The main cause of fatigue by the way is listening too loud for too long. It can also be caused by frequency response but again, we would know that by looking at the measurements, not listening to a subjective comment like this from a reviewer who has been loaned an expensive speaker.

He explained how the PS Audio speakers maintained the sense of easy to hear detail and never made that sound bright or aggressive.

Reads even more like an Absolute Sound reviewer than anyone saying they believe in objectivity.

So thanks for writing all of this up. You correctly reflected what he said. But as you see, it is not anything that is useful. The useful bit are the measurements and the fact that with EQ he was able to get improvements in the response of the speaker.

 

[Music1969]

@amirm has gone through training (and Harman used to have a Windows 32 bit app to help you train your hearing.

Nobody has seen Erin's room measurement with the PS Audio speakers in room

He might have major room and speaker issues, before he measures

We don't know

 

[JaMaSt]

Really, Erin's intro was all word salad which could have been written by AI. I can't believe folks are praising that. Soundstage on Michael Jackson track is this and that? Really? You all throw out science this fast and run with such commentary?

When we describe with words [word salad/commentary] what we experience in one sense modality, we make analogies with experiences in other sense modalities. No one of our single senses has its own "unique" words. That's not how the brain works. All sensory experiences are multi-modal and can be described in multiple ways. Words are broad but finite abstractions. Sensory experiences, however, are continuous tactile experiences and cannot be verbally described without making analogies to different sense modalities. And yes, analogies can always be deemed as inaccurate "word salad" from a third-party perspective. But analogies are not first-party "subjective".

When we say that the background is "dark" or the treble is "bright" or the bass is "sluggish" or has "punch" we are making analogies to visual and kinetic sense modalities, respectively.

In the above quote you use the terms "throw out" and "run with". Are you anti-science because you use such analogies? Or do we really physically "throw out "science and "run with" commentary?

Of course we don't. These are cross modal analogies. We all do it. It's unavoidable. It's fundamental to how we differentiate and integrate percepts into concepts and concepts into words.

Erin's review was perfectly fine. And I (and others, apparently) see real value in evaluating equipment before measuring it. If you see the graph, you'll hear the graph. Unless you have golden ears.

 

[Talisman]

It really irrelevant which order this is done in... the measurements are not going to change.


JSmith

The measurements will certainly not change, the subjective perception, as we well know, can instead change and be influenced by good or bad measurements.
The bias does not only apply to seobjectivists....

 

[JSmith]

The measurements will certainly not change, the subjective perception, as we well know, can instead change and be influenced by good or bad measurements.
The bias does not only apply to seobjectivists....

Sure, but listening first isn't that useful when the point is the measurements. The measurements tell us what issues to listen for. Distortions and artefacts can be picked up this way, but not so easy with minor FR deviations without a point of comparison (i.e. switching between). I would buy speakers based on measurements alone (although would prefer an in my own room trial), but not on a subjective impression only.

If the measurements are simply an afterthought, I don't agree with this method.


JSmith