ASR/amirm has opened my eyes.

[MarkS]

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.

I hope you will not take this as criticism, but I do not regard this as a valid test. It needs to be blind and level-matched. This was not.

I remain unconvinced of Amir's claim that "good dynamics" of bookshelf speakers requies huge amounts of power. I would really like to see a level-matched blind test of this claim.

 

[Doodski]

I hope you will not take this as criticism, but I do not regard this as a valid test. It needs to be blind and level-matched. This was not.

The superior power output of this specific amp made a blind test redundant and a waste of time and energy because at elevated power levels there was no contest. No DMM required when one amp is pumping out great sound and the others are clipping.

 

[Doodski]

I remain unconvinced of Amir's claim that "good dynamics" of bookshelf speakers requies huge amounts of power. I would really like to see a level-matched blind test of this claim.

I would like to see level matched tests everywhere. At all publications and online test reviews etc. It involves getting people together and that's sometimes a pain.

 

[afinepoint]

From what I've seen, the dude is very generous with the stamp that says "excellent measured performance"

Better look at the measurement data yourself an draw your own conclusions.



I agree, but.... what is the topic?

Eh, they all are. Hard to find a negative review of things. That's why I've stopped really caring about someone else's ears. "To bright for me". What does that even mean? Especially if the person hasn't listened to them. It's just another unsupported opinion. I agree in looking at the data but things like speakers are harder to judge. It's easy to test an amp for instance. Put it on a bench and away you go. I've watch amir video on speakers reviewing. Sorry I can't remember the title. Many things come into play. But mainly you want a flat frequency response. And watch the on and off axis response.

I'm sure they are out there but of the loudspeakers I could audition I don't remember any with a ruler flat response. There were peaks and troughs all over. Remember I said of those I could audition.

In the end I bought what I could afford and sounded the best to me. The Goldenears have a magnificent sound and depth. A wide field. But no not perfect but what is the closest I could achieve with my room, music, money and ears.

Some are so quick to find fault poo pooing another's tastes or choice because it doesn't align with what they believe, own, can't own or many other reasons. I never asked for speaker recommendations for the reasons above.

And let's not cherry pick. A review is offered as criticism yet the very reviewer takes no issue with the faults others (unqualified) have "found". They aren't there by his very "excellent performers " conclusion. Again I really don't care about his ears but as I said I've only found glowing reviews for the One.R. There has to be negative ones but they are well hidden. And no I don't want to see them or any positive either.

Again these speakers are in no way perfect. But instead of bashing them buy what you like. How did we end up here? This whole subject has grown tiresome.

Thanks amir for chiming in. Feel free to PM me on your opinion of the One.R data. I wouldn't post as that will only start another round of poo flinging.

Good point beans what is the topic? I started this post but have lost my way.

 

[Galliardist]

I hope you will not take this as criticism, but I do not regard this as a valid test. It needs to be blind and level-matched. This was not.

I remain unconvinced of Amir's claim that "good dynamics" of bookshelf speakers requies huge amounts of power. I would really like to see a level-matched blind test of this claim.

I've tested "nominally" 50w and 200w into 8 Ohm blind at two level matched settings, one within the reach of both, and one where the weaker amp gave less bass and clipped. I could not tell the difference reliably at the lower level. I think you can guess how hard it was to tell at the higher level... my speakers are nominally 92dB/w floorstanders, another pair of which I've seen basic measurements for and they are a bit less than that, and don't dip much below 4 ohm impedence anywhere. If I can get that result, a pair of typical modern hard to drive bookshelf speakers will require a fair bit more power than you think for high level listening.

In any event, in room response, use of subs, use of EQ (may increase the power requirement a fair bit) and preferred level will have a lot to do with the final result. I rarely listen loud, and used the lower powered amp of the pair for several years with no problem as I normally listen at low volume - I'm in a small apartment and have to consider the neighbours.

Use case is always important. It's a lot easier to demand a blind test than to establish the use case and do the sums, especially on a text based forum for a user in a different country.

 

[Koeitje]

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:


"Like its predecessor, GoldenEar's Triton One.R offers excellent measured performance."—John Atkins

They are "excellent" performers to quote Mr. Atkins. End of story. Can we please move on now and stay on topic. Whereas I appreciate the input this isn't a speaker review post. Anyone is welcome to start one.

It's peaking way earlier. Just look at the graphs. Excellent measured performance means they are "ok". If you read more of his reviews you may notice that you need to read between te lines. When a loudspeakers is truly good he will use words like textbook performance or state of the art. But as I already said, you don't need a perfect loudspeaker. You just need one that matches your preference, and since you prefer a boost in the treble these are perfect for you.

 

[Koeitje]

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.

I have heard speakers with similar boosts and narrow (and uneven) directivity.

But it's not a bad deal for the package you get. You can do much worse for more money.

 

[afinepoint]

It's peaking way earlier. Just look at the graphs. Excellent measured performance means they are "ok". If you read more of his reviews you may notice that you need to read between te lines. When a loudspeakers is truly good he will use words like textbook performance or state of the art. But as I already said, you don't need a perfect loudspeaker. You just need one that matches your preference, and since you prefer a boost in the treble these are perfect for you.

I see the earlier peaks. I'm looking at the higher ones where if they are audible they would be more pronounced. I wasn't clear. Sorry.

I listen to classical music and own these speakers unlike most if not all here and don't hear the elevated highs but I don't have a trained ear. If they are indeed there I'm sure an artist or audio engineer would pick them out with ease.

As for his review let's not put words in his mouth. If we begin doing that why read any review at all. Why read any comment here? I could "read between the lines" of any comment here and make it what I want. I could do it wirh yours and I'm sure you wouldn't want that. He said "excellent performance". I for the life of me can not understand why that is so hard for people to accept at face value. It's just a learned opinion which he is likely more qualified than any here to make. And I use the word opinion. Remember he also listened to them. How many here have? Vice construeing what they think this or any speaker "might" sound like. Regarding actually hearing them in this case that appears to makes two of us him and me.
If someone else has actually listened to them I'd love to hear your thoughts. Anyone?

For those that don't Iike these loudspeakers that's fine. Doesn't bother me in the least. Just buy what you do like. It's your money.

Thanks for the input.

 

[afinepoint]

I have heard speakers with similar boosts and narrow (and uneven) directivity.

But it's not a bad deal for the package you get. You can do much worse for more money.

Not similar. These. You're insisting on holding a view and wanting to be right based on speakers you have not listened to. I've driven cars "similar " to mine but mine performs quite differently. So what value would my opinion have been for others had I not owned or at least driven it. It would hold little. And people should rightfully be suspicious. Speculation is not fact.

Listen to them then come back. Your opinion would leave the area of "I think" to the area of "I know" and thus be more convincing. Extrapolation only holds value from system experts or those qualified to make them. We're a bunch of guys and girls that like to share the love of a hobby.

A problem I do see with you listening is a prejudice. You already believe and have convinced yourself there is an audible treble spike. I say audible. You will be wanting to hear it so you most likely will. It's how pre judging works. So I'm not sure if it would be worthwhile unless you can convince yourself to be unbiased which it sounds you wouldn't be able to. Your opinion is tainted.

I seriously doubt if you are willing to put in the effort to honestly listen to them. And I don't mean that rudely. So let's just agree to disagree.

And I have spoken with another (much younger) who has listened to them and he was impressed. No mention of exaggerated highs but I did not know then to ask.

I'm not blowing you off but regarding their performance the weight of the evidence says otherwise. And per some I couldn't do much better for twice the price. Before the stones start flying I'm not dissing any other loudspeaker. That is just a professional opinion. Which neither of us is.

 

[Koeitje]

Not similar. These. You're insisting on holding a view and wanting to be right based on speakers you have not listened to.

That's the power of measurements for you: I can use them to identify those speakers that I know I won't be to my liking because they show similar issues to those I already listened to.

 

[afinepoint]

If you say so. I can see that as the beginning of a search but not as exclusionary. I think you are eliminating speakers and perhaps other equipment that might surprise you. But as I said it's your money. Regarding the Goldenears no one else has heard what your measurements say is there. No one. And neither have you. Think about that.

Every negative comment is from someone who admittedly hasn't heard them. They are coming to conclusions based solely on a piece of paper. Listening in the end is all that matters. And a good warranty. But I understand your logic. To each there own. I'm not trying to convince you to change your SOP. Just saying in this instance, with these speakers regarding the treble and overall performance and based on live listening your (and others) conclusion is wrong.

Best to you.

 

[Killingbeans]

I've driven cars "similar " to mine but mine performs quite differently.

I don't really get the analogy. If both cars have oversteer or turbo lag or whatever, other differences in performance aren't going to make those things disappear.

Whether they are a deal breaker for your enjoyment is a completely different question.

Besides, every single speaker in existence is designed around a large number of compromises. Personal taste in audio is largely about finding the ones that bother you the least.

 

[Mart68]

If you say so. I can see that as the beginning of a search but not as exclusionary. I think you are eliminating speakers and perhaps other equipment that might surprise you. But as I said it's your money. Regarding the Goldenears no one else has heard what your measurements say is there. No one. And neither have you. Think about that. Listening is all that matters here. And a good warranty.

Best to you.

for what it's worth I have had a demo of the Goldenear and did not percieve any searing treble nor did I think the balance was bright.

Having said that I'm 54 and the only thing I've ever had tested are my eyes (which are rubbish).

I thought they were not a speaker with a balance designed to impress the rubes in a quick showroom demo but one that would satisfy long-term.

Pretty obvious from the measurement that the treble peak is only from around 9/10 KHz up and - IME - you need the lift to be lower than that to make a speaker unpleasantly bright.

 

[afinepoint]

I don't really get the analogy. If both cars have oversteer or turbo lag or whatever, other differences in performance aren't going to make those things disappear.

Whether they are a deal breaker for your enjoyment is a completely different question.

Besides, every single speaker in existence is designed around a large number of compromises. Personal taste in audio is largely about finding the ones that bother you the least.

I'm just awkwardly trying to say similarities don't mean the same.

But well said about compromise. I can't imagine what it would cost to have loudspeakers built to someone's hearing.

 

[afinepoint]

for what it's worth I have had a demo of the Goldenear and did not percieve any searing treble nor did I think the balance was bright.

Having said that I'm 54 and the only thing I've ever had tested are my eyes (which are rubbish).

I thought they were not a speaker with a balance designed to impress the rubes in a quick showroom demo but one that would satisfy long-term.

Pretty obvious from the measurement that the treble peak is only from around 9/10 KHz up and - IME - you need the lift to be lower than that to make a speaker unpleasantly bright.

Finally! Someone that's actually heard them.
Now I'm honest enough to say violins, cymbals and I think even female voices can touch 15k or so. But this is at the limit for such. The majority of music is lower. And with the rarest exception all fundamental tones are well below. If the music was to hang out in the mid teens yeah i could see the argument. But it doesn't.

And another nail in the "too bright" belief. But I can see both sides of the argument and I feel both have merit. Can we let it go now? That horse is not getting up.

 

[Koeitje]

for what it's worth I have had a demo of the Goldenear and did not percieve any searing treble nor did I think the balance was bright.

Having said that I'm 54 and the only thing I've ever had tested are my eyes (which are rubbish).

I thought they were not a speaker with a balance designed to impress the rubes in a quick showroom demo but one that would satisfy long-term.

Pretty obvious from the measurement that the treble peak is only from around 9/10 KHz up and - IME - you need the lift to be lower than that to make a speaker unpleasantly bright.

At 50+ you will have a significant hearing loss in the 9-12kHz range (12kHz is about the max you can hear at 60) so its not surprising it doesn't bother you as much. Apart from the treble the midrange is nicely flat so its not a showroom sound for sure.

 

[afinepoint]

At 50+ you will have a significant hearing loss in the 9-12kHz range (12kHz is about the max you can hear at 60) so its not surprising it doesn't bother you as much. Apart from the treble the midrange is nicely flat so its not a showroom sound for sure.

No one is hearing this treble harshness. Please don't make assumptions about others. My hearing extends to 12k+ at least the last time tested and that was in my 60s. Maxing out in the low teens. Nothing I can remember beyond that. The person I knew that listened critically to them was around 30. He heard nothing. Did he have a hearing loss too? But as mentioned I didn't ask. Beyond 15k I could care less. Yes I know harmonics can reach that as I stated.

Strange that only the people that haven't listened to them are saying there is a (significant) audible treble shine. And what's the smallest db change a human ear can hear? Go listen yourself. Then make leading statements. That's only fair and honest.

Are there treble peaks. Absolutely. The curve clearly show them. No debate there. BUT are they shrill/bright? The jury (that) has heard the evidence and says NO. I'm sure my cats could hear it but they don't care. Like I'm starting to. I'm sure people with what was the word? Oh yeah "bionic" ears can hear this supposed offending brightness.

If we believe enough we can convince ourselves of anything. See what is not there. And in this case hear what is not there.

I thought to invite anyone to come to my house to honestly listen but I can see the camps are firmly divided and there's no hope for objectivity.

All of this audible brightness talk is called conjecture. Conjecture: "an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information". I'm not trying to be a smart ass. I had to look it up to verify the definition.

Come on guys let it go. Stop beating the poor thing. It's dead.

I will be discussing this glaring treble business with Goldenear. If they have definitive information either way I'll return and post it otherwise:

I know I started it but I'm done monitoring this thread. It's gotten WAY off topic. I just wanted to thank ASR and amir. Then I answered the seemingly innocent question of what type of speakers I had and the nonsense flooded forth. Goldenear and my ears fell under seige. Sorry I have great hearing for an old guy. I'm guessing it's a few of the young guys it bothers so. Get over it. I also have 20/30 uncorrected sight and need no glasses. That was also tested annually for the past 31 years. Are my eyes also suspect? Why is truth so hard for some to accept? Every excuse gets flung. Every "yeah but . . ."

Thanks to all for the advice in other areas. It was interesting and helpful. I'm not upset. People are entitled to their opinions. But without listening and then coming armed with first hand evidence and facts they remain only unsubstantiated opinion.

I really don't care if the speaker peak or can fly at this point This whole thing has entered the land of belief, conjecture and imagination. As such anything is possible. Like in the song all you have to do is believe.

Best.

AFP

 

[Mart68]

At 50+ you will have a significant hearing loss in the 9-12kHz range (12kHz is about the max you can hear at 60) so its not surprising it doesn't bother you as much. Apart from the treble the midrange is nicely flat so its not a showroom sound for sure.

it didn't bother me at all. Also if I use EQ to boost the area above 12Khz on my own system I can hear the difference it makes. So that dog doesn't hunt.

I would suggest everyone tries a bit of EQ just to see what is required to make a speaker unpleasantly bright. IME you need to boost between 1Khz and 5Khz, above that you just get 'air and space' and, although that boost can sound un-natural, it will ofc depend on the speaker/room balance that you start with.

Treble lift way up in the 10Khz plus region just does not sound 'bright'. Yet we see this 'bright' assertion on a lot of the speaker reviews even when the lift is only above 15Khz.

That's the limit of FM radio. Do youngsters think FM sounds 'dull'?

Real world experience is invaluable for comparing speaker measurements to what will be perceived.

 

[voodooless]

That's the limit of FM radio. Do youngsters think FM sounds 'dull'?

I think youngsters will ask: what if FM?

But yea, it’s dull, not because the frequency response, but because the massive amount of compression that is generally even present on the DAB(+) version (and often even the internet stream) of the radio station as well.

 

[Mart68]

I think youngsters will ask: what if FM?

But yea, it’s dull, not because the frequency response, but because the massive amount of compression that is generally even present on the DAB(+) version (and often even the internet stream) of the radio station as well.

Fair point about the youngsters. (In UK we have Radio 3 which does not have a ton of compression, its live broadcasts were the gold standard prior to digital).