• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

802 D3 vs Revel Salon 2

OP
M

MasterApex

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 3, 2021
Messages
126
Likes
60
I am learning a lot from this thread, which will influence my future upgrade :)
What design parameters (materials, crossover, electronics ...) contribute to the off axis response?
I do notice the speakers present difference frequency balance , sitting down vs standing up.

When I made the decision, I was listening for what sounds more "real life" .
On good master recording, what sounds like as if I was in the auditorium listening to real orchestra, was in close proximity of musician playing real violin (which will sounds very dynamic between soft and loud) , or was close up to a singer , while revealing how the recording master the sound mix whether it is too bright or too dark.
 

Kal Rubinson

Major Contributor
Industry Insider
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
3,982
Likes
6,371
Location
NYC/CT
When I made the decision, I was listening for what sounds more "real life" .
I am not being snippy here but I suggest that you can do this best with good, well-balanced recordings of live acoustical music. Otherwise, one can have (and should have) preferences but without references.
 

Descartes

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 27, 2020
Messages
798
Likes
377
To each their own, we all have different preferences and for some scientific data is not convincing, they prefer subjective attributes and are influenced by biases!
 

Kal Rubinson

Major Contributor
Industry Insider
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
3,982
Likes
6,371
Location
NYC/CT
To each their own, we all have different preferences and for some scientific data is not convincing, they prefer subjective attributes and are influenced by biases!
To be sure. However, there are times where the objective scientific data does not offer sufficient differentiation and, then, other factors may come into play. In this specific comparison, imho, that ain't the case.
 

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
647
Likes
884
Location
USA
When I made the decision, I was listening for what sounds more "real life" .
On good master recording, what sounds like as if I was in the auditorium listening to real orchestra, was in close proximity of musician playing real violin (which will sounds very dynamic between soft and loud) , or was close up to a singer , while revealing how the recording master the sound mix whether it is too bright or too dark.

A technique I use, admittedly controversial here the last time I posted about it, but I think produces interesting results, is to make your own recordings and use them in speaker auditions. Some of my recordings are musical in nature, but some aren't. One of my all-time favorites is to record someone on a well-tuned piano very carefully playing an extended scale. It can be surprising how many speakers are revealed to introduce some anomalous behavior around the woofer-midrange crossover frequencies, or some notes are noticeably louder than others. Someone tapping various cymbals with a wooden stick, like a dark ride and a china, can also be revealing. Great speakers can, in my experience, make cymbals sound completely real. Some don't. I find a slammed car door in my garage interesting. So are speaking voices, and if you know someone who can really sing, acapella vocals. Especially men with deep voices. I have used some high-end mics in the past to make these recordings, but in the last few years I find that handheld digital recorders with integrated mics do surprisingly well, like this one:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1263849-REG/tascam_dr_100mkiii_linear_pcm_recorder.html/?ap=y&ap=y&smp=y&smp=y&lsft=BI:514&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI5KD2wNe18AIVtDizAB332gkAEAYYByABEgLpzPD_BwE

You don't have to get very fancy about sampling rates and word depth either. 16/44.1 allows you to burn a CD and take it to dealers (or friends' homes).
 
OP
M

MasterApex

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 3, 2021
Messages
126
Likes
60
I tend to make decision based on data and be scientific.
I would like to learn more which scientific measurement (data) present the "life-like" characteristic of the speaker.
I am sure good frequency response and off axis do have a play but I feel there are more than just that.

Some speakers do sound good but when I play reference recording , but it does not replicate the life like sound, you can tell the sound is coming from a box speaker.

I forgot which year of CES in Las Vegas where they have two rooms.
One room played life string quartet and the other room played a recorded version via high-end speakers/amps.
The demo was so good that audience thought the speaker room was life performance.
 

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,289
Likes
6,446
I am not being snippy here but I suggest that you can do this best with good, well-balanced recordings of live acoustical music. Otherwise, one can have (and should have) preferences but without references.

That is certainly a good way to get a sound that's closer to the real thing, but what if you prefer a less neutral sound? Do you get the sound you enjoy more, or the sound that's more transparent?
 

Kal Rubinson

Major Contributor
Industry Insider
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
3,982
Likes
6,371
Location
NYC/CT
That is certainly a good way to get a sound that's closer to the real thing, but what if you prefer a less neutral sound? Do you get the sound you enjoy more, or the sound that's more transparent?
Sure. We were discussing how one makes judgements using objective and subjective means. That does not mean one cannot simply prefer something else. (Don't we see lots of audio components that, apparently, are designed just for such folks? )
 

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,289
Likes
6,446
I tend to make decision based on data and be scientific.
I would like to learn more which scientific measurement (data) present the "life-like" characteristic of the speaker.
I am sure good frequency response and off axis do have a play but I feel there are more than just that.

There is certainly more to it than just frequency response(at all angles), but that's 90% of it. As Toole says, ~"if the frequency response is wrong, then nothing else matters". To get a transparent(life like) sound, you have to have a speaker with good frequency response. Once you've got that , then you can (imo) start looking at distortion, and finally time domain.

The most important aspect of comparing speakers side by side is that you can't know what you're listening to. It's my view that the brain actually contributes just as much - or more - to the sound you hear as the sound waves hitting your ears do. Once your brain knows what it's listening too, there is no avoiding all the unfortunate bias that comes with it. Go to a hifi store blindfolded, give the dealer your budget, and have him walk you around and demo speakers :). If you can't do that, then listening half blind(knowing what, but not when) is still better than listening sighted.
 

Descartes

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 27, 2020
Messages
798
Likes
377
Well designed equipment will sound good to the majority of people!

The apparence of the speakers will have a very big impact on the decision to like and buy such equipment due to our esthetic preferences and biases!
 

blackmetalboon

Active Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2016
Messages
109
Likes
127
Location
UK
@MasterApex I have to ask, what is the reason for wanting to change your speakers?

Almost twenty years ago I did have the option of buying a pair of N801’s but they were physically to big for my room so opted for the N802’s.
 

LTig

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
4,156
Likes
6,718
Location
Europe
Now for what possible good reason would you go and write something this stupid and childish? If you have any sincere, honest reason to understand where I'm coming from, please read the reply I wrote to preload, which should show up immediately above this.
In the posting I cited you wrote:
Not that I don't enjoy plopping down in a favorite chair and listening to some favorite music. Just that I wouldn't want a system that will sound annoying anytime I'm in or near that room but not sitting in that one special location. The idea just does not sit well with me.
Bose claims that its Waveradio fills the whole room with good sound. There is some truth in it. My late uncle had one, placed on a coffee table in a very large room with two storey height, and wherever you were in this room the sound quality was consistently close. Of course SPL is very limited, but that was not the point.

So don't feel pi..ed off - if you never have heard one try to get a listen.
 
Last edited:

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,240
Likes
1,427
Location
California
There is certainly more to it than just frequency response(at all angles), but that's 90% of it. As Toole says, ~"if the frequency response is wrong, then nothing else matters".

"74% of it" is probably more accurate. At least if you're referring to the Olive regression formula. And the contribution of frequency response to listener preferences is even less than 74% when it comes to recordings that differ in characteristics from the ones the Harman research is based on. And far less than the 74% if your method of evaluation is limited to eyeballing a spinorama, or worse, eyeballing only part of a spinorama (such as the graphs presented in stereophile).
 
Last edited:

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,289
Likes
6,446
"74% of it" is probably more accurate. At least if you're referring to the Olive regression formula. And the contribution is of frequency response to listener preferences has even less than 74% when it comes to recordings that differ in characteristics from the ones the Harman research is based on. And far less than the 74% if your method of evaluation is limited to eyeballing a spinorama, or worse, eyeballing only part of a spinorama (such as the graphs presented in stereophile).

Don't worry about that 90% figure lol. I pulled that out of my ass with less than a second of thought. The important bit is the Toole quote "if the frequency response is wrong, then nothing else matters".
 
OP
M

MasterApex

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 3, 2021
Messages
126
Likes
60
@MasterApex I have to ask, what is the reason for wanting to change your speakers?

Almost twenty years ago I did have the option of buying a pair of N801’s but they were physically to big for my room so opted for the N802’s.

I was smitten by the 802D3 demo at one of the dealer ; the voice , high frequency cymbals , orchestra sound more life like.
I always try to keep up with new speakers, sometimes audition speakers above my budget just so I know what they sound like :)
 

Descartes

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 27, 2020
Messages
798
Likes
377
I was smitten by the 802D3 demo at one of the dealer ; the voice , high frequency cymbals , orchestra sound more life like.
I always try to keep up with new speakers, sometimes audition speakers above my budget just so I know what they sound like :)

Coming from 800Diamond I felt the 802D3 were to bright and really fatiguing after more than 15 minutes listening to them! In addition I find the new look really ugly! To me the bass drivers look like porthole!

Maybe the 800D series version 4 will sound and look better?
 

TomJ

Active Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2019
Messages
121
Likes
148
Location
Palo Alto CA
I owned N801 since 2004 and have been tracking / listening to various speakers to keep up with progress...

Re tracking the progress in technology, you might want to try DRC with your current speakers before you replace them. As an example, here's the FR of my N805 (bought new 20 yrs ago, still enjoying) in my living room at my sofa with vs without Dirac v3 running on a miniDSP SHD Studio. The LF dip is caused by a ceiling beam reflection. The SQ improvement with DRC is astonishing for its life-like, natural balance and imaging.

FR SPL with DRC vs w:o.png
 
Last edited:
OP
M

MasterApex

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 3, 2021
Messages
126
Likes
60
Re tracking the progress in technology, you might want to try DRC with your current speakers before you replace them. As an example, here's the FR of my N805 (bought new 20 yrs ago, still enjoying) in my living room at my sofa with vs without Dirac v3 running on a miniDSP SHD Studio. The LF dip is caused by a ceiling beam reflection. The SQ improvement with DRC is astonishing for its life-like, natural balance and imaging.

View attachment 129211

Tom, is this the product ? https://www.minidsp.com/products/streaming-hd-series/shd-studio

So it sits between pre-amp and amplifier? Sorry I am newbie to this stuff.
 
Top Bottom