ASR/amirm has opened my eyes.

[Koeitje]

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.

I know what makes a speaker sound to bright: any boost above 5kHz. I've literally got speakers on my desktop that need a -3dB correction for everything above 5kHz to not make them sound bright. Issues in the 9-11kHz range still bother me though, especially if you have loudspeakers without those issues in the same price range.

The fact that you can hear 12kHz when you boost it doesn't really prove a point, hearing loss doesn't mean you can't hear the frequency at all. It is a combination of the frequency and the spl level you can hear it at. A younger person will hear that 12kHz while its 10-20dB quieter than you can hear it at.

 

[afinepoint]

Ok guys/Gals. I said I'd be back with what was learned. I've spoken with Goldenear tech, Crutchfield senior sales, pro audio and other sources.

First let me say I'm not upset at all. People have opinions. It's when they refuse to acquiesce in the face of facts that saddens one. Some opinions are so much part of their core beliefs that they can not nor will not change which and this is why some topics are forbidden at the table. Others just want to be right and grasp at any straw.

Any way off the soap box.

First point: Are Goldenear (One.R) speakers categorically "bright" ?

Answer: No they are not.

Rebuttal: Why not? "The curve say they are." Say some.

Answer: Because brightness is design and frequently dependent. These things the ear combines to hear that treble boost. Also that brightness frequently is about 3k to 8k hz. The Goldenear "boost" is above that and further are not by design bright. Ok we're done with that.

I know some of you guys can hear well into the teens whereas my hearing likely rolls of at 14k. But what is being heard there is not brightness by definition. It may be something you don't like but most music does not hang out there. Look at a chart.

To be considered bright the speaker has to create a "sustained" treble boost and in that area of music which is <10k hz or so. Again looking at the curve the sound wouldn't be sustained where the curve shows an increase at 3 db and is simply not going to have any noticeable affect. Regardless of our hearing range. It's rarely if ever a sustained tone. Music being dynamic the notes will have changed long before any human hear picks it up. I don't have "bionic" ears and neither does anyone else. And remember it's music we are listening to not hearing test tones. I'm not at all saying you can't hear those tones but they are not sustained, are above the range by definition for brightness and honesty folks are not going to be noticed.

Brightness is a sustained enduring fatiguing anomaly. By all definitions speakers of this design are not bright.

BUT something that was a surprise to me is that an amplifier or receiver can cause a speaker to exhibit the characteristics of brightness. Yamaha receivers are one. Never knew that and I'm using a Yamaha Avantage pre amp out to feed my power amp. Hmm.

Polk, Goldenear and wharfdale are considered by professionals as warm speakers.

Klipsch for example are bright.

Silk dome and ribbon speaker tweeters produce warmer tones. Horn tweeter bright. Golden specifically used ribbon tweeters for this reason - warmth not brightness.

Another fact I learned is that there are more Klipsch speakers in movie houses than any other. The reason being for that brightness. As it was explained to me the movie makers want the audience to plainly hear the cracking of leaves under foot.

Lastly all the people I spoke with found it laughable to judge a speaker without hearing it. It made no sense to them. The only fact presented by those saying the speakers are bright has been disproved. The curve shows the Goldenear to not be bright. They are clearly outside of the zone.

I know there's going to be those that vehemently stick to their opinions. Worse comparing this curve with what they "know" to be bright speakers. This is just one step in evaluating a loudspeaker and as we've seen here an error prone one. To you I say the curve has been been explained. And professionals including design, pro audio, sales and reviewers have stated these speakers by design and performance are not bright. I and all those who have heard them agree. That reviewer didn't say they were either. Stereophile called them "excellent performance". I remember someone trying to discount that but the reviewer is a respected professional and you are? If anyone is not convinced at this point I sorry. Ditch that I want to believe and join us in fact world.

Sadly YOU have not heard them, they are not bright and the earth is not flat.

But go ahead and argue that too.

Thanks to the others for the useful, reasonable and learned input. It's been interesting. And nice to get the facts out.

You know I might just schedule an audiogram. Been a couple of years. With warm speakers like these 14k is fine but it would be interesting to know where I really land. Wouldn't want to be kidding myself. Unlike some I'm not afraid of the truth.

Now I'm done monitoring. Again thanks to all for the input and the chuckles.

Afinepoint

 

[JSmith]

Also that brightness frequently is about 3k to 8k hz. The Goldenear "boost" is above that and further are not by design bright.

From 2 - 10kHz, 5dB.

All speakers are different from room to room... only you know the response in your room. No one has heard them in your room, so can only go by the data. If you're happy with them, I wouldn't worry what others are saying.


JSmith

 

[Waxx]

All speakers are different from room to room... only you know the response in your room. No one has heard them in your room, so can only go by the data. If you're happy with them, I wouldn't worry what others are saying.


JSmith

That is something people forget here. The most important in speaker choice is if you like it. I don't speak much about my speakers here because i have a taste that i like that won't be liked here (single driver fullrange systems), but i like it, and don't care what you think about it.

And yes, they are not neutral, narrow dispertion and so. But i like them. I even mix on them in stead of studio monitors (as i know them inside out) with good results... (off course i check on neutral monitors after that). The measurements here are very valuable, but don't tell your pesonal taste, only what is most technical perfect and what will appeal to most statistical.

 

[voodooless]

View attachment 300504

From 2 - 10kHz, 5dB.

All of these are high-Q resonances which should be largely inaudible. Yes, there is a rise, by it’s not as bad as it looks. That extends to the off-axis response as well: except for high-Q resonances, it’s actually quite smooth.

I can imagine that @afinepoint likes them, and that’s totally okay. Don’t worry about it.

 

[MarkS]

The graph is from Stereophile: https://www.stereophile.com/content/goldenear-technology-triton-oner-loudspeaker-measurements

The response falls quickly off-axis in the high treble. Listen 10 degrees off-axis, and the peak is gone. Power in room should be approximately flat also.

 

[afinepoint]

Ok I lied about monitoring but wanted to say I was curious and did get an audiogram as my hearing range was questioned by a few when I said unchanged. And as I said I was curious.

I can clearly hear to 16k where the test was stopped. My hearing begins rolling off at ~10k. So the speaker occilations don't matter to me fortunately unless it's a sustained boost. As my hearing begins to roll off there and with exceptions of harmonics there's little musically beyond. Certainly not at 16k.

So it is unchanged for the past many years which I know those few doubters understood that is what I meant perfectly well. And normal hearing per the tech with the exception of the young, teenagers and such. They have a much lower threshold and higher range which is to be expected. I have always gone to great lengths to guard my hearing.

Not bad for an (64 year) old guy. Hopefully some have learned about making asumptions.

 

[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.

You're way off the mark here. See the post above. Torpedos your first sentence. Take care with making sweeping statements. They can come back to bite. Just a fine point.

Again thanks to all for a most lively discussion. Now I'm done. Again.

 

[Koeitje]

You're way off the mark here. See the post above. Torpedos your first sentence. Take care with making sweeping statements. They can come back to bite. Just a fine point.

Again thanks to all for a most lively discussion. Now I'm done. Again.

Yes, I was indeed wrong about you hearing 16kHz, but you actually point on the issue you are having in your post. Your hearing already rolls off at 10kHz. It doesn't in much younger people (up to about 25). So speakers with boosts in the treble at 9-10kHz+ won't bother you as much as it would someone younger. The roll-off is pretty significant.

 

[afinepoint]

The roll-off is pretty significant.

Which one the speaker or my ears? The roll off for my ears begins around 10k but it's not significant until 12k+ or so. Those 15 - 16k test tones were painful. Thank goodness there's little musical worth there.

You make good points. Thanks.

 

[Koeitje]

Which one the speaker or my ears? The roll off for my ears begins around 10k but it's not significant until 12k+ or so. Those 15 - 16k test tones were painful. Thank goodness there's little musical worth there.

You make good points. Thanks.

It is already significant at 10kHz compared to younger people

 

[afinepoint]

It is already significant at 10kHz compared to younger people

Agreed. Thats why I excluded them. I'm in no way comparing myself to that crowd. I'm just talking about me. Comparing my other audiograms things are basically unchanged for the past years. But I know there is a steady decline however small. Sadly. But to be positive hearing is great in the range that matters. I can still enjoy music and talk audio with you guys.

 

[BDWoody]

I can clearly hear to 16k where the test was stopped.

Most don't test beyond 8k. Did you have to look to find an audiologist that tested that high?

 

[afinepoint]

Most don't test beyond 8k. Did you have to look to find an audiologist that tested that high?

You are correct. Seems they do normal range in my case he stopped at 10k.

Referral from my primary care doc office. I was a bit annoyed he stopped at 16. I told him I wanted a 20 to 20k sweep.

Audiologists are (more) concerned with hearing loss from issues outside of aging. He originally just tested normal range. I had to ask to be retested at the higher frequencies.. He didn't get it. He also started the test at 250hz.

He did have to boost the high frequency but greatly over did it. I was cringing from the pain. I think he stopped when he saw a large drop even with the boost. Looking at the trends the curves were skewed due to the excessive boost. It would have been flatter but not by a lot.

It was only $80. I may have a separate one done on my terms.

Guys to love music and our hobby take the best care of your ears possible. Be more concerned about that than the equipment. If you can't hear the music the equipment doesn't matter so much. Hearing loss though may greatly simplify choices. Toss high end out if the difference between that and cheaper is inaudible. Curves might be more useful here in selecting what will work with your hearing.

Once gone like time you can't get it back and hearing aids can't recover frequency loss. He schooled me on that little nugget.

 

[AdamG]

You are correct. Seems they do normal range in my case he stopped at 10k.

Referral from my primary care doc office. I was a bit annoyed he stopped at 16. I told him I wanted a 20 to 20k sweep.

Audiologists are (more) concerned with hearing loss from issues outside of aging. He originally just tested normal range. I had to ask to be retested at the higher frequencies.. He didn't get it. He also started the test at 250hz.

He did have to boost the high frequency but greatly over did it. I was cringing from the pain. I think he stopped when he saw a large drop even with the boost. Looking at the trends the curves were skewed due to the excessive boost. It would have been flatter but not by a lot.

It was only $80. I may have a separate one done on my terms.

Guys to love music and our hobby take the best care of your ears possible. Be more concerned about that than the equipment. If you can't hear the music the equipment doesn't matter so much. Hearing loss though may greatly simplify choices. Toss high end out if the difference between that and cheaper is inaudible. Curves might be more useful here in selecting what will work with your hearing.

Once gone like time you can't get it back and hearing aids can't recover frequency loss. He schooled me on that little nugget.

Here is a good and free hearing test you can use at home with a good set of cans. If I recall correctly this test goes up to 20 kHz. It does matter what cans you use and they need to be capable of flat FR across the full 20 to 20 kHz range. It’s not perfection but not bad for free. It does allow you to create an Audiogram that can be imported into Apple’s Audio settings and then applied directly to any audio device you drive. My Audiogram loaded right into my IPod Pro’s and did make a noticeable difference. Granted my hearing is far inferior to yours and I can barely hear anything past 10 kHz.

Apple App link:

‎Mimi Hearing Test

‎The Mimi Hearing Test is the easiest way to assess your hearing ability. This hearing test will give you understandable results in about 6 minutes. - Modern hearing assessment: Easy-to-use and in-depth testing of a wide range of frequencies. - Get instant results: We turn your auditory data...

apps.apple.com

Android App link:

Mimi Hearing Test - Apps on Google Play

Test your ears for free and get insights into your hearing ability

play.google.com

Mimi Website:

Mimi Hearing | Hearing & Sound Personalization Tech Platform

Mimi offers a digital wellbeing platform that bridges the gap between hearing wellbeing and the best personalized listening experience.

mimi.io

 

[afinepoint]

Here is a good and free hearing test you can use at home with a good set of cans. If I recall correctly this test goes up to 20 kHz. It does matter what cans you use and they need to be capable of flat FR across the full 20 to 20 kHz range. It’s not perfection but not bad for free. It does allow you to create an Audiogram that can be imported into Apple’s Audio settings and then applied directly to any audio device you drive. My Audiogram loaded right into my IPod Pro’s and did make a noticeable difference. Granted my hearing is far inferior to yours and I can barely hear anything past 10 kHz.

Apple App link:

‎Mimi Hearing Test

‎The Mimi Hearing Test is the easiest way to assess your hearing ability. This hearing test will give you understandable results in about 6 minutes. - Modern hearing assessment: Easy-to-use and in-depth testing of a wide range of frequencies. - Get instant results: We turn your auditory data...

apps.apple.com

Android App link:

Mimi Hearing Test - Apps on Google Play

Test your ears for free and get insights into your hearing ability

play.google.com

Mimi Website:

Mimi Hearing | Hearing & Sound Personalization Tech Platform

Mimi offers a digital wellbeing platform that bridges the gap between hearing wellbeing and the best personalized listening experience.

mimi.io

Thank you. I'll check them out.

 

[soerenssen]

Sticking to the "cheap" OPA1612s is probably a very sensible choice. Fancy opamps are nothing but jewelry, if you ask me.

Implementation is king. A good engineer can design circuits, that function like the fabled wire-with-gain in any practical sense, using "pleb" opamps. And a crummy engineer can easily wreak havoc with the fancy boutique ones.

Discrete OpAmp Review: Sonic Imagery vs Sparkos

Recently I reviewed the Nord Three SE 1ET400A Dual Mono Stereo Amplifier. That unit came with the Sonic Imagery's 990ENH discrete operational amplifier ("opamp") in the buffer stage (pre-amplifier). The owner then ordered a set of Sparkos Pro SS2590 discrete opamps. This gave me a chance to...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Speaker: Kef Reference 3 Meta
Amp: NCx500

- I asked Nord, they recommend Sonic Imagery 990.
- I asked Apollon, they recommend OPA1612.
- Audiophonics is using LM4562 (and now recommends switching to Purifi 1ET400A mono blocks). I'm quoting them: "Purif has more than enough power and more musical and less tiring sound, Purifi based amps are simply better (more enjoyable) to listen to, they share the other qualities with the Hypex ones (transparency, clarity, neutrality, punch, dynamic)."

I understand that an input buffer stage is required if one needs more gain options (in my case for example, to combine a stereo DAC with an AVR with different output voltages). But how do you know which op amp is the right one for a specific speaker?
I have the speakers already, but I have no idea what pre-amp (Hegel or other) was driving it in the shop. I liked the sound signature there and I'm trying to achieve something similar at home.
Is it possible without ordering 2-3 different op amp chips and swapping them back and forth for AB testing?

 

[Killingbeans]

But how do you know which op amp is the right one for a specific speaker?

This question doesn't make any sense. A buffer op-amp, that's implemented in a way that gives it a signature similar to the kind you get from a speaker setup, is really, really badly done so. Any reasonably good op-amp implemented by just a reasonably good designer will have a "signature" that's absolutely minuscule compared to anything downstream.

The concept of "matching" it to other parts of the chain is not even on the table.

Again: Just go with the cheapest buffer option and let go of the FOMO.

I liked the sound signature there and I'm trying to achieve something similar at home.

What you heard, was most likely a mix of four things. The power headroom of the amp, the placement of the speakers in the room, the room itself and finally a cocktail of psychological factors. The mood of the setting, your mood, the mood of the salesman, his suggestive behavior etc. etc.

If you really want to achieve something similar in terms of "signature", you'll probably get 99.9% of the way by focusing on acoustics.

 

[voodooless]

But how do you know which op amp is the right one for a specific speaker?

Simple: they are all fine. The likelihood that you'll hear any difference is very small.

 

[soerenssen]

What you heard, was most likely a mix of four things. The power headroom of the amp, ...

You mentioned this at the first place so I guess it's quite important to have clean power with plenty of reserve. I'm probably better off going for those NCx500 mono blocks instead of the stereo version that I have currently with a single PSU.

(Room acoustics / treatment will be my next project.)