I've offered an apology. See a couple of posts above. The comments here or anywhere that annoy is when someone claims an alliance to science and facts but refuses to be believe them when they don't support their world view. At 64 I should be use to that. It is still quite tiresome and disappointing. Oh well.
I guess not, but we’ve had plenty of people here claim otherwise.
No worries
Given my statement above, you may understand why we reacted the way we did. I’m glad it’s cleared up now.I don’t think you have.
Thanks I guess what bothered me is a broad non belief with nothing other than beliefs as support for their arguments.I guess not, but we’ve had plenty of people here claim otherwise.
No worries
I don’t think you have.
It has a 3 to 5dB boost from 7kHz onwards, that makes it sound way too bright. I can handle some treble boost, but over 3dB usually is a bit too much. The off-axis response also doesn't look to great.64 maybe? It's on your profile as that anyway.
I don't think any insult was intended, but it can be confronting to hear negative things about ones choice of speakers for sure.
That is maybe going a bit far... certainly there is room for improvement in the higher frequencies;
GoldenEar Technology Triton One.R loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
Sidebar 3: Measurements I used DRA Labs' MLSSA system and a calibrated DPA 4006 microphone to measure the GoldenEar Triton One.R's frequency response in the farfield, and an Earthworks QTC-40 mike for the nearfield responses. I removed the loudspeaker's front and side grilles for the nearfield...www.stereophile.com
JSmith
I think I see what you are talking about. Peaking around 12k or so. I can remove the grilles to eliminate the high(er) frequency concern which isn't a big one. Your comment "way to bright" has merit only if you've heard them. Have you? It only tells us you don't like bright speakers. Thanks for the info. Nothing perfect. Let's focus on the reviewers final words:
Look, if imma get knocked out, I intend to go out with a bang! Cable threads are too tame for a last hoorah.You say that like it's a bad thing. It might be a badge of honor to be banned from a number of these types of sites.
The sensitivity numbers are bogus especially for this application. Sensitivity is the same as frequency response. Lets' look at one:
Have you heard it? (GoldenEar 1.R) Kal's review says nothing about it being "way too bright". The AMT response narrows above 7kHz, and the diminished off-axis response (clearly visible) compensates for the rise in on-axis in the total power in the room.
And have you confirmed with blind listening tests that the difference between a 400W amp and (say) a 40W amp is actually audible?
I have. Auditioning a 40 W/ch Yamaha receiver, a Yamaha 80 W/ch integrated, a Yamaha 130 W/ch integrated amp and the 130 W/ch integrated amp had a different sound. More power in hand it felt like too. Could really drive the woofers to the stops.
The sensitivity numbers are bogus especially for this application. Sensitivity is the same as frequency response. Lets' look at one:
This speaker appears to have 87 dB sensitivity. But that is at 100 Hz and above. Music energy is highest around 40 Hz in a survey I did a while back. By 40 dB this speaker is down substantially to 77 dB or 10 dB lower. That is 10X the power for the same loudness above 100 Hz! Yes, this speaker doesn't play deep bass but neither do most speakers.
Bass is also where our hearing has least sensitivity. Combine the two and you see why you need so much amplification power to get good dynamics. I have actually paired 400 watt amplifiers with small bookshelves to great effect.
So please, please, put aside these simple calculators. They tell you nothing.
And you did this listening blind? Was it level matched? Did you do an ABX test?
Did it in a med sized sound room with a comparator switchbox. No volt meter used. For there to be a difference it had to be noticeable and repeatable. Yamaha product was the mainline therefore only Yamaha gear was in this comparison. When turning up the power levels it was pretty obvious the 130 W/ch was superior. No volts meter required. If auditioning at lower power levels a DMM is required but in this specific test it was simply a matter of superior power output. The amp was a Yamaha AX-900 that has +/- 62.3 V DC rails at idle. A loosely regulated power supply with high initial DC voltage means good peak output within rated power specifications.
True. There's a lot to it, especially speakers. That's what makes it a challenge!If there's one thing the audio hobby has, it's topics that divide people
But your little graph also does not the whole story. The response of that speaker in a room will be significantly different, especially down low. The average room will add quite some dBs.
