Adam T5V Review (Studio Monitor)

[March Audio]

You made no valid points. It was all darts thrown at the wall of a competitor:

1. You misread and misstated the low-frequency response of this speaker.

2. You claim people don't know and can't EQ this speaker. They clearly can based on data I have provided and measurements they can produce.

3. You think simple shelving to bring out the highs in a competitive market as "fundamental" error when it clearly is not.

4. You didn't understand the significance of low distortion in bass region in this speaker.

5. A bunch of guesses about the sound of this speaker made with simplistic view of the response.

Bottom line remains: objectively and subjectively this is one heck of a bargain speaker. It doesn't need to be perfect. It just needs to perfectly mix the required compromises to hide them all from the listener. And that is what it does.

Trying to discredit again Amir. It won't work the data is there for everyone to see.

1. How do you conclude this is a competitor to my speaker? Completely different products and markets.

2. My issue is not with the speaker. It is with your conclusions and basis for them. I see the same issues across many reviews, and no I don't agree with auditioning after you have seen the measurement data You will be led.

3. I did not say people could not EQ this speaker. I said EQ was perfectly valid and useful.
I said that many consumers (most in my experience and I deal with them every day) don't have the knowledge or interest in doing so.

4. A significant rise over a significant range is a fundamental response error. How can you conclude otherwise?

5. I do understand. It has limited LF extension and high LF distortion.

6. Simplistic? Guesses? Its all in the data, plus you said it was bright. Amir, you can't bluff your way out of that.

7. Of course it doesn't need to be perfect. It is indeed fantastic value for money. However you totally over egged its performance which can only be achieved if you correct its fundamental response errors. Out of the box it is not balanced. Period.

 

[March Audio]

So, do you not think that price should not form part of a subjective assessment of a speaker? Yes, this speaker clearly does not have a flat anechoic FR, but could you show me one for a similar price that does? If that existed, then I think you would have a point. But the fact that with some very simple EQ you can reach that response curve at a significant lower price than Genelecs and the like, in my mind, make these speakers worthy of a recommendation.

Can I refer you to multiple other posts where I stated its great value for money.

I also made the point that therexare two things to consider, absolute performance and performance when taking price and market segment into account.

 

[akarma]

In this video T5V response is not so good at all

 

[March Audio]

I’m also working on a new formula that doesn’t take into account the slope of the PIR, but even with using those scores the Kali LP6 is a bit better still. But, of course not taking into account EQ (as well as near-field vs far-field). Odd how Amir says the ADAM has better bass, maybe it is due to being rear-ported as another user suggested.

Can I just check something? You say doesnt take into account PIR slope?

 

[Ron Texas]

Its FR only measures well if you EQ it. It has high LF distortion that even with masking taken into account is borderline audible. Certainly don't turn the volume up any further. It has limited LF extension.

Regardless it is certainly cheap and great VFM. So in that context its great.

There are 2 things to consider here, Absolute performance and then in the context of price and market segment.

It has been pointed out that the EQ applied is trivial. Are you making a mountain out of a molehill?

 

[GDK]

Can I refer you to multiple other posts where I stated its great value for money.

I also made the point that therexare two things to consider, absolute performance and performance when taking price and market segment into account.

The absolute performance is there for all to see in the form of the objective measurements which clearly show the exaggerated HF response. Once again, I am sorry but I fail to understand your concern here. Are you suggesting that Amir should not have recommended these speakers because they measured poorly, or should have phrased his recommendation differently. How would you have written the conclusion?

 

[Ron Texas]

@amirm I would like t see the Adam A7X monitor tested. These are $750 each, have been reviewed many times, won awards, and are widely available in the US as they are stocked by Guitar Center.

 

[March Audio]

It has been pointed out that the EQ applied is trivial. Are you making a mountain out of a molehill?

I'm not. I made some valid points and made them in a reasonable and calm way.

It can be EQd. But this whole "it can be eq'd" is just glossing over the fact that out of the box its not right. We are seeing this in many reviews.

Many (most in my experience) people don't know how or have any interest in eqing to get the sound right. They expect a speaker to be right without that. If a dac had a wonky response it would be slated yet I'm sure that could be eqd. Not sure why speakers get a free pass.

My points are made, I'm happy with them and their validity. Surely this forum is about discussion? You may disagree which is fine.

 

[ace_xp2]

... 1. How do you conclude this is a competitor to my speaker? Completely different products and markets. ...

How is it not? The sointuva appears to be roughly the same size, and if this site has confirmed anything it's that cost has no bearing on final performance. This is precisely the point I was making earlier, no matter the cost of an expensive speaker, if a cheap speaker plus eq only equals it, then the better of the two is the cheap speaker. One should hope that for the extra cost there's at least less distortion coming out of it, but whatever it does it does.

Now if it measures better? Awesome! A better speaker that costs more, nice that if nothing else the money has gone somewhere. Frankly it's a given that it should.

 

[March Audio]

How is it not? The sointuva appears to be roughly the same size, and if this site has confirmed anything it's that cost has no bearing on final performance. This is precisely the point I was making earlier, no matter the cost of an expensive speaker, if a cheap speaker plus eq only equals it, then the better of the two is the cheap speaker. One should hope that for the extra cost there's at least less distortion coming out of it, but whatever it does it does.

Now if it measures better? Awesome! A better speaker that costs more, nice that if nothing else the money has gone somewhere. Frankly it's a given that it should.

I refer you to my previous points.

Let's move on, my points have been made.

 

[ace_xp2]

Move on if you like, but the statement I quoted you making is incorrect, this is a competitor to your speaker, here if nowhere else. High cost seemingly has little power here, only performance. Additionally, eq is a fundamental part of speaker reviews here. Should your speaker show up, at least it will have that going for it, just the same as all the others.

 

[March Audio]

Move on if you like, but the statement I quoted you making is incorrect, this is a competitor to your speaker, here if nowhere else. High cost seemingly has little power here, only performance. Additionally, eq is a fundamental part of speaker reviews here. Should your speaker show up, at least it will have that going for it, just the same as all the others.

I think you need to take a look and compare the two speakers to understand why it is not in any way a competitor. Totally different markets.

 

[MZKM]

Can I just check something? You say doesnt take into account PIR slope?

Current formula likes a steep PIR, thus boost the score for narrow directivity and lowers it for wide directivity; this is most likely just an accident. Olive in the paper acknowledges that the “target slope” is likely based on directivity, so it only needs to be smooth.

So, one thing I am doing is calculating the slope and then normalizing it so that the slope is 0; thus from say 100Hz and up it ideally would look identical to the on-axis response.

One thing I currently am not doing that may lead to better accuracy is punishing peaks over dips.

We have the spins of the 13 bookshelves Olive originally used and the human given scores (sadly not all 70 speakers), so I am trying to make a new formula that conforms well to the human given scores using variables that don’t rely on the slope of the PIR.
Here is what I have got so far (ignore the Infinity R253, that was using the old data):

Before anyone asks, the 8010a got brought down due to the limited bass.
LP6 gets boosted from 5.2->5.7 and the T5V from 4.2->5.4.

When COVID is over and Amir can invite people over to do blind listening tests as he has mentioned, then that would be very useful data in advancing the accuracy of the formula.

 

[RealityCheck18]

Part of my point as someone who deals with a very wide range of consumers is that few of them have the knowledge or interest in performing EQ.

.

I took the bait as a guess,

Figured if your customers are clueless about EQ, you must not sell anything that contains EQ. Most likely an audiophile type place that sells amps with a power LED and a pretty case. Soooo, I looked you up and there it is! No power meters, adjustable gains just aluminum boxes with a power switch and LED. Well, considering what you sell, I would not expect your customers to use EQ since they won't have subs, multi-channel systems and so on. Basically, your customers are audiophile types with 2 channels and reliving the 60's.

I think it is rather rude to suggest that ASR dumbs down their reviews to fit the audiophile model. There are plenty of sites that babble on about 2 channel so why pick on a site that tests things and improves results with EQ? Seriously! You have 6Moons, Audiogon and dozens of sites and publications that offer opinions without testing so why pick on the one site that uses tests, EQ, provides accurate information and suggestions to the end user looking for audio gear?

You business model depends on keeping the status quo--ASR is obviously not in the same vein as audiophile sites so why waste time? Are you planning on sending one of your minimalist amps, DACs or cables to get tested and want him to dumb down the testing? Not sure how that would help you in sales, since your target market does not do EQ it would be a stretch to expect them to read actual performance testing charts.

For the record, I applaud ASR for providing suggested PEQ filters to improve speakers that can be improved with PEQ. My HT system has plenty of EQ to spare and I use it as a minimum my subwoofers demand it. Even if an ASR member does not have EQ capability when they purchase a speaker, this does not mean their system will forever remain without that capability. Some folks might give the speakers a shot then upgrade their perforrmance with EQ at a later date. Some people do that, part off the hobby as they add capability as their wants/needs grow.

This is more a hobbiest site, not a consumer that picks up audio gear as a fashion statement to drive 2 speakers an a record player. At least most other audio sites are on your side--you have that. I don't think ASR will dumb down thier testing for audiophiles, quite the opposite actually. I find it rather confusing why you even post because this forum is not your customer base. It would be interesting to see how well you assemble your product though--planning on sending one in? Odd

 

[ace_xp2]

Again, they're not terribly far off in size, so congratulations! You're in the same market! Cost discrepancies mean nothing, however you feel about it. Yours hits much lower? "F3 about 45Hz and F6 about 38Hz" That's great but in the real world room modes need well placed subwoofers, what else you got? Distortion looks better:

Black THD H2, H3
Red H2
Orange H3

So there ya go! There's your edge! Oh wait, that directivity though:

Yeah, okay now I see why you don't like eq... how much is this going to cost us again?

 

[March Audio]

I took the bait as a guess,


You business model depends on keeping the status quo--ASR is obviously not in the same vein as audiophile sites so why waste time? Are you planning on sending one of your minimalist amps, DACs or cables to get tested and want him to dumb down the testing? Not sure how that would help you in sales, since your target market does not do EQ it would be a stretch to expect them to read actual performance testing charts.

For the record, I applaud ASR for providing suggested PEQ filters to improve speakers that can be improved with PEQ. My HT system has plenty of EQ to spare and I use it as a minimum my subwoofers demand it. Even if an ASR member does not have EQ capability when they purchase a speaker, this does not mean their system will forever remain without that capability. Some folks might give the speakers a shot then upgrade their perforrmance with EQ at a later date. Some people do that, part off the hobby as they add capability as their wants/needs grow.

This is more a hobbiest site, not a consumer that picks up audio gear as a fashion statement to drive 2 speakers an a record player. At least most other audio sites are on your side--you have that. I don't think ASR will dumb down thier testing for audiophiles, quite the opposite actually. I find it rather confusing why you even post because this forum is not your customer base. It would be interesting to see how well you assemble your product though--planning on sending one in? Odd

Then the guess would be wrong.

I have previously designed an active 3 way with dsp crossover and correction. Just not released as a commercial project. There will be an active dsp version of the Sointuva next year. I have often said here that active dsp is the way forward.

I disagree that this site is aimed at hobbiest technophiles, it has a very broad base of users. I havent asked ASR to dumb down testing. I have said that I dont agree with using EQ to give speakers that have a wonky response a free pass.

I am not scared of my products being technically examined and tested. How many other manufacturers have or would be willing to release the data I have in the other thread?

 

[March Audio]

Again, they're not terribly far off in size, so congratulations! You're in the same market! Cost discrepancies mean nothing, however you feel about it. Yours hits much lower? "F3 about 45Hz and F6 about 38Hz" That's great but in the real world room modes need well placed subwoofers, what else you got? Distortion looks better:

Black THD H2, H3
Red H2
Orange H3

So there ya go! There's your edge! Oh wait, that directivity though:

Yeah, okay now I see why you don't like eq... how much is this going to cost us again?

Im sorry you dont understand the reasons why these arent remotely in the same market.

Im not going to indulge you further. The Sointuva will wipe the floor compared to this speaker for a number of reasons and wont need correction to sound good.

 

[amirm]

2. My issue is not with the speaker. It is with your conclusions and basis for them. I see the same issues across many reviews, and no I don't agree with auditioning after you have seen the measurement data You will be led.

Oh, now your beef comes out. Don't like what I do.

Let's see the measurements said this speaker "is bright." I listen and this is not so. How on earth was I "led?" You are the one that is led to the wrong conclusion about this graph due to inability to properly analyze the data in front of you.

Once I adjusted the highs with EQ, the response of this speaker is near textbook good. Is your position that it should have sounded bad? Did you throw out every bit of research about what makes good sound to arrive that that conclusion?

 

[amirm]

Im not going to indulge you further. The Sointuva will wipe the floor compared to this speaker for a number of reasons and wont need correction to sound good.

Once you have objective third-party data to back that, we can listen. For now, this is not a forum for empty bosting of speaker fidelity. Please take it elsewhere.

 

[March Audio]

Oh, now your beef comes out. Don't like what I do.

Let's see the measurements said this speaker "is bright." I listen and this is not so. How on earth was I "led?" You are the one that is led to the wrong conclusion about this graph due to inability to properly analyze the data in front of you.

Once I adjusted the highs with EQ, the response of this speaker is near textbook good. Is your position that it should have sounded bad? Did you throw out every bit of research about what makes good sound to arrive that that conclusion?

I dont agree with your method in that particular respect of auditioning after seeing measurements. Its a fundamentally flawed methodology, oh unless you are immune to bias? You would lambast anyone else for suggesting so. Im not alone in that opinion and it has been commented on by others previously. Whether it was a significant factor in this particular example is neither here nor there.

I simply dont agree with your conclusions for the reasonable reasons cited. It has nothing to do with "like". It is not a "beef". Im not sure why you seem to be unable to take on board a different POV without getting aggressively defensive.

No my point is that out of the box this speaker is not balanced. *YOU* said so yourself. *YOU* said it was bright.

Not everyone can or wants to EQ. In my view therefore its not appropriate for this speaker to receive the over effusive recommendation it has. It should be caveated. Which is what I have said all the way through.

So I disagree with you Amir, get over it. Your view is not the only possible correct one. Judging the number of likes I have received through this thread I am not alone in my opinions.

Oh perhaps just dont worry about it, any speakers performance is good, just fix the problems with EQ