• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Can't we all just get along?

deano454

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2017
Messages
16
Likes
4
We’re talking about listening to speakers here and not designing them though, right? Listening to one speaker and making a conclusion on how it will sound set up in a 2 channel listening room seems sort of like telling a car reviewer he can only drive slowly around a closed course when reviewing a car because driving around town introduces too many outside factors. Maybe that’s just me.

Also, I’m sorry but I have to disagree with your assertion that speakers are not designed as a stereo pair. How else do we explain the differences in paired speakers and center channel speakers? Offset tweeters? Designers absolutely make design choices all the time with stereo imaging etc. in mind.

Thanks for providing the names of the researchers, I’ll look to see if I can find publicly published papers on the topic and read them.
I agree , speakers are designed with stereo in mind because that's the way they are listened to . They might be measured singularly and if they sound terrible most likely so will two of them , but if the basics are followed you generally get pretty good results . Danny bashing for the sake of it isn't fair or fruitful, I have seen unearth some pretty ordinary crossover components in some big brand names.
 

goat76

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2021
Messages
1,270
Likes
1,385
The way we listen to speakers has nothing to do with the way they are designed. They are designed to be transducers; you can use them anyway you wish. The information for the stereo effect is embedded in the recording, and has nothing to do with the speaker.

Let's say you have a stereo amp and two KEF coax speakers. You want to upgrade to 7.2, so you go out and get a 7.2 receiver and 5 more of the exact same speaker. That speaker doesn't know that you just went from 2 channel to 7 channel listening. Because of the electronics, not the speaker, it will work just fine.

Perhaps you want to listen to Ambiophonics. Ambiophonics normally uses, I believe, 12 speakers. Those speakers would not be any different from your KEF speakers that you used for 2 channel listening. Again, that design will work just fine.

In my mind, the speakers that have been mentioned as taking stereo into account in their design, like the Bose and the Polk, were experimental. I've heard them. I was not impressed. They yielded no improvement to the majority of listeners, and the majority of listeners is what provides a company with income. As for speakers with offset tweeters, the vast majority of those were offset to either mitigate diffraction effects or deal with crossover nulls in what the designers may have thought were "normal" residential rooms. Although there were a few (the minority) that were advertised as being offset for the purposes of "balancing" the "stereo effect", that was something that the advertising department used as an advantage. To go back to the analogy of reviewing cars, a car with suicide doors will not drive differently, either on the track or across town, even though the door symmetry is different.

And one last point, if I may. Where has anyone printed anything regarding listening to one speaker and predicting how it will sound for stereo effects set up in a 2 channel listening setup? If I am wrong, please point it out to me, because as I see it, that is a straw man argument. Speakers are tested for function as a transducer. If they have a peak (or shelf) at 5KHz, then listening will reveal that they sound either harsh or bright. If they have a dip between 200 and 500 Hz, that is noted, and listening will reveal a "hollow" sound. No comment is made about how that affects their sound in, specifically, a 2, 4, 5, or 7 channel setup. The brightness or the "hollow" sound will show up in any or all of those setups. The stereo effect (or the sound effects in movies) will still be there, and still be the same, effects-wise, as on a different speaker.

The strengths or weaknesses of a speakers are strengths or weaknesses as a transducer, not as strengths or weaknesses as an instrument of spatial effects. Again; those spatial effects are in the recording.

Jim Taylor
Why all this talk about how the speakers were designed and if one or two speakers were used in that process?

The way we listen to the final product (the speakers) has everything to do with how the reviewer should be listening to them, he or she is not designing them and should therefore review them as close to how the end-user will use them. Take a look at Erin's review of the Wharfedale Linton 85th Anniversary, he got a lot of good information about how he set them up to get a good soundstage and minimize a little "too hot" tweeter.

Different speakers will sound different when it comes to soundstage width, depth, and separation when listening to the same recordings.
No one has printed anything regarding how the speakers will sound for stereo effects, because that can't be done without listening to the two of them in stereo, which is why some of us are pointing out the importance of using two properly setup speakers in the reviews. :)
 

goat76

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2021
Messages
1,270
Likes
1,385
Are you talking about a subjective reviewer or someone who tests the loudspeaker? Jim
I'm talking about all reviews as long as they have a listening test included in the review.

This whole discussion about using one or two speakers for the listening test when reviewing a speaker started with the things Danny had to say about it, it got nothing to do with designing loudspeakers and what is done making them.
 

Andysu

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 7, 2019
Messages
2,885
Likes
1,478
 

krabapple

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
3,168
Likes
3,715
I laughed, but it's a great point.

When I see that graph, or the other one showing single speaker versus pair, I often wonder at the perverse interpretation usually given here. Being a scientist in another discipline and all.

My guess is that Calvinists and purity-ring wearers are suspicious of pleasure-seeking, and seek virtue in self-abnegation. :)

Except, sighted listening won't always increase preference rating vs blind

Here's a thought experiment (which AFAIK has never been done):

-Perform sighted and blind ratings tests of a panel of speakers.
-Then reveal the results to the subjects
-Then perform the sighted test again

Would the rating change to conform more to the blind results?
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,751
Likes
4,633
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
no, no we cannot get along.

Childish and cowardly by Danny. If you are a man, you say what you think of another man. Straight and clear, you address the person you are talking to, you do not wrap it in silly waffle with nicknames.

In any case limitations, performance regarding miniDSP are addressed in this thread:


Edit:
Also applies: If you are a woman, you say ...:)
 
Last edited:

JSmith

Master Contributor
Joined
Feb 8, 2021
Messages
5,153
Likes
13,217
Location
Algol Perseus
Childish and cowardly by Danny. If you are a man, you say what you think of another man. Straight and clear, you address the person you are talking to, you do not wrap it in silly waffle with nicknames.
I agree completely... when challenging someone, it is best to address the person you are posing the challenge to. The way he has done this is extremely rude and unprofessional, not to mention the false facts in there too. Clearly he has no understanding of blind testing, auditory memory, psychoacoustics or perception/expectation bias.

If that's all he's got... he 'aint got nothin'.


JSmith
 

voodooless

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
10,226
Likes
17,806
Location
Netherlands
So Mo.. ehh @amirm, time to review those binding posts separately ;)

Funny enough, the difference between the impulse response of the old version and the new (stock) version, is negligible. So it's actually not a phase issue, but just a bad (or deliberate) crossover component choice. Directivity shows that you can easily EQ the dip away without issues. In fact, the 1st order crossover of the GR version ruins the vertical directivity.

He may (a very liberal "may") have a point about the crossover distortion though. For some reason, the distortion and resonances between 400 Hz and 1 kHz are improved in the modded version. The area from 200 to 400 Hz though is significantly worse. Bass distortion is better in the original as well. So the question here is also how much is due to sample variance..? Who knows? Even so, I don't need $ 244 to replace an electrolytic cap with a film cap. And clearly, he did never read this:


And to be fair, not all speakers can be fixed with EQ. Some issues may very well need a crossover upgrade, but then don't buy the speaker in the first place ;) Interestingly, he didn't mention one thing that his crossover does better than the stock crossover and also cannot be fixed with DSP: control the woofer resonance. It's only about 20dB down in the stock version. The GR version has much better attenuation. Well done Danny!
 
Last edited:

beagleman

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
1,157
Likes
1,576
Location
Pittsburgh Pa
I just watched Danny's Klipsch (MOE) video, and sadly, while he STARTS off with some great points about the Crossover Versus EQ changes, he slowly drifts off into silly crap, and a huge sales pitch, that does NOTHING to actually try to get along NOR address the differences truly.

He mentions a few things he agrees with about our measurements, "here",and then gets this smirk and starts yet again, bashing us here, but too afraid to mention this site by name. It comes off, as a tad infantile, and not genuine.

I get the feeling he thinks cause he mentions a few true things, that EVERYTHING he says afterwards, must be totally factual and apply to all things he deems important.

I realize now, he is just a veiled sales pitch guy, that knows some stuff for sure, but then uses his knowledge in silly ways to try to sell tube connectors.

He can not seem to separate petty differences, true real world knowledge, from snake oil.

You can not combine all three, and expect to be taken seriously.
But I think that may be his Forte. A bit of truth mixed with a dash of nonsense to attract disagreement and push up his viewership over a contrived "disagreement"
 
Last edited:

mj30250

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2021
Messages
426
Likes
853
I stumbled upon a video of his a while back without knowing who he or his business was. I barely lasted to the sales pitch segment as I had already been thoroughly turned off within the first couple of minutes. He made some thinly-veiled implications regarding what he considered to be an over-priced speaker (an absolute hoot after I learned of his "premium" speaker cables), at least one of which I knew to be 100% false. However, his implications were skillfully worded so as to leave himself an escape hatch were he to be called out on them, but he infused them with just enough confidence and firmness to ensure that the vast majority of his audience wouldn't bother to take 20 seconds to fact-check him. It was quite reminiscent of a very similar tactic frequently employed by a certain, umm, popular politician over recent years. Life's too short to pay that sort of posturing any mind.

But hey, if his fans find happiness in being misled and taken for what basically amounts to legal robbery (even his competently designed stuff is often very expensive relative to similar options), who am I to argue?
 
Last edited:

Ageve

Active Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2021
Messages
192
Likes
640
Location
Sweden
Childish and cowardly by Danny. If you are a man, you say what you think of another man. Straight and clear, you address the person you are talking to, you do not wrap it in silly waffle with nicknames.

I think the reason is quite obvious.

Danny doesn't want potential customers to read anything on this site.
 
Last edited:

Spkrdctr

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
2,212
Likes
2,934
Except, sighted listening won't always increase preference rating vs blind

Here's a thought experiment (which AFAIK has never been done):

-Perform sighted and blind ratings tests of a panel of speakers.
-Then reveal the results to the subjects
-Then perform the sighted test again

Would the rating change to conform more to the blind results?
Yes it has basically been done. Well, not all of it. People who fail blind listening tests will about 99.9% of the time bail on a test as soon as they fail the blind test portion. They also will not do a blind test again. It is the sad state of affairs in audio. So much has been done, but since the marketing keeps churning out massive myths and outright lies, it is all the average person knows. Being on this site does open the door to learning what has been done before. Many older guys who "had been there and done that" though are dying out. All the information dies with them. It gets snowed under with the mountain of marketing.
 

Old Listener

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2016
Messages
499
Likes
556
Location
SF Bay Area, California
Would you look at that. Danny apologizes to Amir for the previous video he made. Danny will probably also remove his previous video from the web.

Unexpected but well said and done by you Danny.:)

All through this video, Danny paints himself as being right and pointing out errors in "Moe's" posts. He does not have the guts to admit any errors on his part.

He describes his attacks on"moe" as being in fun. It is quite clear that his responses to "moe" are driven by anger and a desire to damage and discredit "moe".

I think that it is very naive to accept this as a sincere apology.
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,751
Likes
4,633
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
I see your assessment as being somewhat optimistic. Jim
All through this video, Danny paints himself as being right and pointing out errors in "Moe's" posts. He does not have the guts to admit any errors on his part.

He describes his attacks on"moe" as being in fun. It is quite clear that his responses to "moe" are driven by anger and a desire to damage and discredit "moe".

I think that it is very naive to accept this as a sincere apology.
We will see what happens in the future. In any case, it's an attempt on Danny's part. Honest or not, well maybe, ..or not.

That Danny would admit any mistakes, other than he seems to think he went too far with the nickname "joke", I do not think will happen.
 

pablolie

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 8, 2021
Messages
2,025
Likes
3,324
Location
bay area, ca
ASR isn't perfect, but the HiFi world is so disgracefully distorted by utterly nonsensical prose and bizarre engineering choices that half those crazies deserve to revealed as butt-naked emperors... with bodies that aren't great. ;-) Everyone that appeals to "soul" and "musicality" when it comes to electronics clearly has hazy notions of recording tech and music reproduction fundamentals. Every time I hear the artificial schmaltz some equipment tries to go for, I know why they try and how, but I also know that it'll only work with some music... and therefore limit me to appreciate other stuff.

Mind you, I also don't fancy myself to be able to distinguish a SINAD from 120 to one that is 100, nor to hear 1% differences in linearity as some people here claim :) ... But unless there is a proven equipment malfunction (which would make me question manufacturing standards), I want to see certain values in equipment measurements clicked. My long "audiophile" journey has taught me that I like "true to source", I don't want the end chain designer to flatter it, and measurement fundamentals are key to it.

Once that is the case, I'll listen some. To declare the human ear infallible is ludicrous, I don't trust any reviewer out there to have magical ears that can overrule my own. "Who are you going to trust, your own ears and judgement or MY seat of the pants judgement?" is not a powerful line. Like someone else stated, it is impossible to convince those whose job relies on holding flawed opinions though. :)

I enjoy this site, it is the most direct line to get true audio equipment info - even though I don't agree with the recommendation column and the decision process that went into it every time, but hey. Of course Amir has biases when it comes to recommendations, he likes powerful amps and full-range speakers etc. But his measurement methodology and evaluation thereof -before he gets to the brief listening and conclusion paragraphs- is what tells the story and makes ASR superior.

Let the charlatanry in audiophilia go on for those who care.
 
Top Bottom