Bookshelf speakers for low volume & near-field listening?

[kotmj]

I now this story by heart. Alan Shaw IS Harbeth and the hole story is part of his unique selling point. But I still can't believe, that a graduated engineer like him doesn't make use of all the software out there which helps manufacturers like the before mentioned Neumann and Genelec (or Revel, Kef etc...) to develop SOTA speakers right to taste (Harman curve!) in reasonable time.

It just fits too perfect in the cliché of a small high end manufacturer. If he would be able to reach his goal ("perfect replication of his daughters voice") in much shorter time by using modern development tools: don't you think he will use them? Or actually does in order to get the job done without spending months unwinding coils?

He actually studied Business, but was making speakers for himself since young.

He develops his crossovers in a simulator on a PC like everyone else. His body of knowledge predates Harman---he has read all the BBC papers. And continues to read all the new publications.

He would rent the BBC anechoic chamber to measure his speakers. Until it was decommissioned. He would hoist his speakers on a long pole outdoors and measure them.

Yet, he still spends a long time voicing each speaker by ear.

 

[Count Arthur]

You wouldn’t believe if I told you what I use it for, so I better let someone else do that.

I thought it was a deep fat fryer.

So, does the chain waxing thing work? I've been using Smoove and at the rate I'm going through it it will last me a while, but I was thinking of trying the molten wax thing when it runs out.

Sorry, totally off topic.

 

[q3cpma]

He actually studied Business, but was making speakers for himself since young.

He develops his crossovers in a simulator on a PC like everyone else. His body of knowledge predates Harman---he has read all the BBC papers. And continues to read all the new publications.

He would rent the BBC anechoic chamber to measure his speakers. Until it was decommissioned. He would hoist his speakers on a long pole outdoors and measure them.

Yet, he still spends a long time voicing each speaker by ear.

Yet his website doesn't offer any measurement of his products... all the while droning on about "realism", "clarity" and "transparency". Are they bad? Probably not. Are they as good as the kool-aid you drank make you say? Definitely not.
Most importantly, prices are completely ridiculous. The M40.3, which is the only model that has a chance of having a decent directivity and power handling are around 17k £ and between 20 and 24k € in Europe. Ludicrous is the word.

PS: measurements posted on his private user group don't matter, as they don't wager the brand's credibility compared to publicly available ones.

 

[redshift]

I now this story by heart. Alan Shaw IS Harbeth and the hole story is part of his unique selling point. But I still can't believe, that a graduated engineer like him doesn't make use of all the software out there which helps manufacturers like the before mentioned Neumann and Genelec (or Revel, Kef etc...) to develop SOTA speakers right to taste (Harman curve!) in reasonable time.

It just fits too perfect in the cliché of a small high end manufacturer. If he would be able to reach his goal ("perfect replication of his daughters voice") in much shorter time by using modern development tools: don't you think he will use them? Or actually does in order to get the job done without spending months unwinding coils?

I’m not sure there are tools for that tells how much an inductor (with its tolerances in resistance and inductance) should be unwound to match the speaker and driver. Either you do that by trimming with pots (such as PSI does) or the hard way unwinding coils until they match desired values.

Near fielders must be the easiest to calibrate and compensate by “ear”.

 

[kotmj]

Yet his website doesn't offer any measurement of his products... all the while droning on about "realism", "clarity" and "transparency". Are they bad? Probably not. Are they as good as the kool-aid you drank make you say? Definitely not.

PS: measurements posted on his private user group don't matter, as they don't wager the brand's credibility compared to publicly available ones.

I'm amazed by your arrogance.

 

[q3cpma]

I'm amazed by your arrogance.

On the other hand, I'm not impressed by your lack of arguments.

 

[redshift]

I thought it was a deep fat fryer.

So, does the chain waxing thing work? I've been using Smoove and at the rate I'm going through it it will last me a while, but I was thinking of trying the molten wax thing when it runs out.

Sorry, totally off topic.

Yep, that’s a door that can’t be closed if opened. The thing with paraffin is that dirt doesn’t bind to the surface of the chain. That’s what wear out chains. And no more “big ring tattoos” on your calves.

Try squirt lube, it is paraffin dissolved in a solvent that then evaporates. But first make sure you’ll clean the chain properly before application.

Yep, gomenne nasai to the OP for the OT shenanigans.

 

[abdo123]

I'm amazed by your arrogance.

I'm actually amazed by your gullibility. tuning the speaker to his daughter's voice? really?

I really have heard it all at this point.

 

[Grotti]

I’m not sure there are tools for that tells how much an inductor (with its tolerances in resistance and inductance) should be unwound to match the speaker and driver. Either you do that by trimming with pots (such as PSI does) or the hard way unwinding coils until they match desired values.

Near fielders must be the easiest to calibrate and compensate by “ear”.

Sorry, I give up. I can't express myself in English the way I would like to. I just hope other members take the effort to comment on this "tuning by ear"-BS.

Please don't take it personal, but I faced this kind of high end fairy tales much to long and often in my time as hifi salesman. That's why I came here, btw.

 

[redshift]

On the other hand, I'm not impressed by your lack of arguments.

I think he would be better off simply by stating that the speakers are hand tuned to a sound signature that is adjusted against a stated known reference plus his subjective preferences and skip the gobbledygook.

If I’d found that speaker to sound great, then by all means. If it measures good, even better.

I’m not sure I understand the problem here.

 

[abdo123]

I’m not sure I understand the problem here.

that a lot of people take these things at face value and get gaslighted that what they're listening to is 'state of the art'.

 

[kotmj]

Well, then by the standards of this forum, Derek Hughes is also a charlatan.

 

[redshift]

Sorry, I give up. I can't express myself in English the way I would like to. I just hope other members take the effort to comment on this "tuning by ear"-BS.

Please don't take it personal, but I faced this kind of high end fairy tales much to long and often in my time as hifi salesman. That's why I came here, btw.

You bloody well can tune a crossover reasonably well using your ears. If you got a knack for it and a known reference to cross validate with.

Of course that can’t be realistically compared with a frequency sweep from a signal generator and a competent data acquisition system.

 

[abdo123]

Derek Hughes is also a charlatan.

not a charlatan, but a hobbyist. that's pretty much what it is when a person is working in their basement without using any industry standards.

 

[kotmj]

So Alan Shaw is a charlatan and Derek Hughes is a hobbyist. I'm finally getting it. Toole is God. Amir is demigod.

 

[tomtoo]

So Alan Shaw is a charlatan and Derek Hughes is a hobbyist. I'm finally getting it. Toole is God. Amir is demigod.

I would ask a x-over pro like @Dennis Murphy. He has proofen that he knows what he does.
Realy if he would tell me, measurements are not needet, i do it by ear. I would say, cool.
Thing is, they measure also well. So i dont know?

 

[redshift]

So Alan Shaw is a charlatan and Derek Hughes is a hobbyist. I'm finally getting it. Toole is God. Amir is demigod.

Perhaps they all got a knack for what they are doing?

I guess the audiophile lingo is what ticks people off.

At least it irritates me, how the £<$}*%% am I going to make an informed decision when there isn’t a known reference to go by? At least a flat frequency response and low THD+N is something quantifiable.

As for far-fielders, forget about anaechoic measurements conveying exactly how the speaker will behave with your room. It is a sieve for removing chaff from the grain.

 

[redshift]

that a lot of people take these things at face value and get gaslighted that what they're listening to is 'state of the art'.

I bet their crusty old houses and moldy wall panels isn’t state of the art, and buzzes, flexes and resonates like their wife’s ****** as they jack up the volume with some of those behemoth speakers.

I mean, let’s be realistic.

 

[LightninBoy]

A big part of the problem seems to stem from the perception that speakers are a form of digital technology when they are in fact analogue. Speakers are very imperfect when compared to even the worst DAC. There is a strong colloraly to lenses in photography, which are also analogue.

No, a big part of the problem is thinking that camera lenses and speakers have any parallel at all. There is no corollary between camera lenses and speakers. Lense choice is part of the artistic creation of the work (photograph). The photographic corollary to speakers would be the computer monitor/TV/smart phone or other device used to view the photograph. These viewing devices are always judged based on their accuracy to established display standards.

 

[redshift]

A big part of the problem seems to stem from the perception that speakers are a form of digital technology when they are in fact analogue. Speakers are very imperfect when compared to even the worst DAC. Several orders of magnitude more imperfect.

There is a strong colloraly to lenses in photography, which are also analogue.

How you ration the compromises is a big part of the engineering.

The Harman school would probably strive for a flat response and make compromises elsewhere. The BBC school may prioritise the subjective reproduction of the human voice and is willing to make compromises in the freq response, directivity, etc.

Then those electro acoustic actuators gets plopped inside a room that is even more imperfect than the speakers.

No wonder people get all confused when few parameters are controlled for, except for the excellent work by Toole, Amir, et al.

At least there is a basis for further evaluation when a speaker measures reasonably well.

If the speaker design house would supply a design spec for the speaker, as in per BBC or Toole, then the speakers could be spinorama’d towards that spec?