Complaint thread about speaker measurements

[JohnBooty]

While most, if not all, manufacturers will sacrifice dozens of samples in the interest of testing theoretical limits in reality... most reviewers are contractually prevented from this. In @amirm's case, it's not the manufacturer, but the equipment owner that's likely to either directly (or at least implicitly) express a desire to have a working device returned.

It's easy to destroy a car. Also cars have a finite lifespan. In a way, each time you drive a car you are creating damage that eventually leads to the car's eventual demise.

This is much less true for loudspeakers. It's pretty hard to blow them out and if you do, there's a pretty good chance your amp was clipping which is avoidable by employing a suitably beefy amp.

I don't think most (any?) of us are really talking about driving speakers beyond their manufacturer-stated limits. I don't know of too many speakers that aren't spec'd to play 100dB+ @ 1M. I don't think anybody is talking about intentionally driving speakers to their doom.

In practical terms, folks sending their speakers in could simply opt-out of the more strenuous tests if desired.

 

[Thomas_A]

What is the official specification (error range) that Klippel give ?

Since the measurement > 2 kHz is using gating, how are reflections from the setup equipment itself handled, e.g. microphone attachment/holder?

Bump.

 

[Koeitje]

If we are talking about SPL I don't think we need to reach crazy levels. But I would like to see something that results in at least 85dB at 3 meters. I am not interested in the extremes, but loud listening is something that should be looked at.

 

[restorer-john]

Speaker manufacturers have for many decades exploited power handling specifications.

If the loudspeaker specifies a figure, it should be confirmed.

No different to testing the claimed 0-100 times or the fuel consumption of a car. No excuses like "I didn't floor the accelerator in case I wore out the tyres or blew the engine"

 

[digicidal]

Do not for one second assume that testing to specified performance limits, implies destruction. It does not. I do it all the time with amplifiers.

An amplifier that fails to achieve its rated specifications deserves to be lambasted in no uncertain terms. A speaker that fails to achieve its rated performance characteristics needs the same level of derision.

A product that exceeds its rated and advertised specifications also needs to be acknowledged.

I have to chuckle a little as I presumed this would be the result of my analogy... and upon returning from my quest for food I was not disappointed. I admit the applicability was minimal at best... but the point was in the general reception (and critiques) - not as much in the similarity of an automobile and an amplifier. That and the fact that even with largely objective review publications and forums... there is some level of obfuscation and or limitation at play preventing 100% transparency and dissemination of data. Apparently I failed in that endeavor.

To be clear, no I don't believe driving a properly manufactured and responsibly treated amplifier or speaker to their stated performance limit implies destruction - just that it makes it slightly more likely in cases of poorly manufactured or let's just call it "very used" devices. Between that and the inherent limitations of the test environment and overall logistics... I am simply more understanding of the result than you are.

If the testing was done in a production/laboratory environment as opposed to a home and garage, if there was adequate bonding, etc. to cover damaged samples (or better yet, a support/legal department to fight for the consumer who was provided the provably faulty gear)... then I would have all the same complaints about the testing itself. As it is, an email stating "well, the manufacturer either lied about the specifications... or yours was just a bad sample" is something I could understand wanting to avoid... even if it's a better demonstration of inadequacy or defect.

@JohnBooty Actually, just like it is with both... if you buy a car and operate it completely within the specifications of the manufacturer - it certainly shouldn't blow up... (well until age related wear is an issue, but not within the warranty period at least). I agree that their aren't too many speakers not spec'd to play 100dB+ @ 1M... but consider the reality of these tests is a garage in a home. Again if everything is optimal, then sure... but while we're at it why not demand a ~$2M anechoic chamber be built as confirmation .

Anyway, carry on - all my point really was is that, although I agree with more (and "proper") being better... I can also sympathize with @amirm in wanting to have a comfortable limit on both time spent and condition maintained as it pertains to other people's property. I also think of all the devices that we've already seen fall far, far short of their stated specifications in other areas... it's not hard to imagine a few would do so catastrophically as well. Hopefully not many, but likely some of the most expensive - at least if $3K+ DACs are any indication.

 

[MZKM]

I don't use their amplifier (it is too low power made for driver testing). The one I am using is one that I have reviewed before (Behringer A500): https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...easurements-of-behringer-a500-amplifier.5070/

I wonder if you'll get any flak for using an amp you yourself stated:

Given the high distortion levels and somewhat uneven frequency response, I can't recommend the Behringer 500. If you just want loud amplification, then you do have a bargain here.

Granted, these levels of noise and distortion won't really effect your regular graphs, but the THD graphs may likely be effected.

 

[MZKM]

Soundstage.net tests at 90 and 95 to show comparitive FR and level.

70dB to 90dB @ 2m anechoic, equivalent to 76dB to 96dB @1m anechoic.

 

[MZKM]

When Olive says he has .86 correlation which group of listeners is that with? I assumed it was trained listeners only. And perhaps he says that which I simply don't remember reading at the moment.

AES paper link

The preference ratings in one of the tests are based on the mean preferences of 268 listeners (12 trained and 256 untrained) reported in [24]. All other tests were done using trained listeners

 

[digicidal]

Speaker manufacturers have for many decades exploited power handling specifications.

If the loudspeaker specifies a figure, it should be confirmed.

No different to testing the claimed 0-100 times or the fuel consumption of a car. No excuses like "I didn't floor the accelerator in case I wore out the tyres or blew the engine"

Completely agree - however the reality is that even in those reviews which do... they are always done in "press cars" which are specifically produced and supplied by the manufacturer... suddenly when John Q. gets one and tries the same thing... the results are not always identical.

I agree that between media manipulation and in the interest of a "full and complete test" you are 100% correct. I merely understand why that's not likely to happen on this site (at least at this time). Maybe I'm wrong on that... but I presume there are valid reasons you don't have your own review site with more rigorous testing methodologies for us lowly hobbyist-consumers to peruse?

 

[MZKM]

I'm already in audio nirvana with a mediocre 2.8 preference scoring Yamaha HS7 (should've similar performance to HS5). Have heard the much higher 4.5 scoring KEF LS50 and I still prefer the HS7 to my subjective preferences

Near field or far? These ratings are for far-field, near-field will have less emphasis on on-axis and place more emphasis on the listening window. The HS7 will also have more bass than the LS50.

 

[tomtoo]

A loudspeaker that not does 100dB+ @ 1M without showing sings of astma is not a loudspeaker. Or at least this thing would not make me happy. And a speaker that makes me not happy can't be a good speaker for me.

 

[Doodski]

I've replaced some thousands of drivers in speakers under warranty and I very thoroughly frequency swept them after and yes I've damaged some drivers and found some badly resonating cabinets. I estimate I've damaged by frequency sweeping maybe a ~dozen drivers to my knowledge and most of those being small 4"-6.5"woofers. I fried a B&W 801 woofer and that almost was refused warranty coverage from the manufacturer and I killed a Klipsch Cornwall woofer too(not warranty). I replaced the majority of all those woofers/tweeters under a parts and labor warranty. The manufacturers are very good at warranty coverage but what if this is like a B&W 800 series or some other very expensive driver. There may be a inspection of the driver before warranty coverage is authorized by the manufacturer and therefore the service department will void the warranty. Not all companies turn a blind eye to warranty service and replace drivers even if they smell burnt like the majority of my experience is. The people sending in their speakers should maybe make the ultimate decision if they want a NDT test or a maximum torture test.

 

[PierreV]

Speaker measurements are a mixed blessing tbh. I was becoming a bit addicted to visiting this site, not really for measurements but because there was a ton of useful information on implementations, pluses, and minuses of different architectures, repair and diagnosis information, civil contributions, etc

In the speaker threads so far, not a lot of that goodness. Apparently valid points made by competent members, most of which I learned a lot from in the last few months are casually dismissed, very little meaningful discussion follows, uncivility shows up at an alarming rate. On the plus side, this has somewhat cured me of my "is there any interesting information here today?" addiction.

I guess that was to be expected since speakers are intrinsically more subjective and so dependent on their environment anyway...

 

[Doodski]

Speaker measurements are a mixed blessing tbh. I was becoming a bit addicted to visiting this site, not really for measurements but because there was a ton of useful information on implementations, pluses, and minuses of different architectures, repair and diagnosis information, civil contributions, etc

In the speaker threads so far, not a lot of that goodness. Apparently valid points made by competent members, most of which I learned a lot from in the last few months are casually dismissed, very little meaningful discussion follows, uncivility shows up at an alarming rate. On the plus side, this has somewhat cured me of my "is there any interesting information here today?" addiction.

I guess that was to be expected since speakers are intrinsically more subjective and so dependent on their environment anyway...

Once the testing standard has been agreed upon and set things will smooth out and be fun, informative, calm and stuff again.

 

[Theo]

I guess that was to be expected since speakers are intrinsically more subjective and so dependent on their environment anyway...

You're right, IMHO it is difficult to obtain absolute measurements which everybody may agree on, especially those who don't really like measurements.
However, sticking to a stable measurement protocol, even if not perfect, will allow us to compare relative figures and be able to draw some conclusions about differences between speakers. IME, this is where the audible character of a system lies (together with the amplifier if it is not adapted to the speaker requirements).
So, Amir, thanks for having started this process, it will certainly get very valuable when you'll have worked on many systems! Please, continue the good work

 

[Hayabusa]

There seems to be never ending set of protest posts, complains, personal insults, etc. regarding speaker measurements in the review thread. That is not what those threads are about. They are making it difficult for people who just want to read a review about a speaker to follow through. Seemingly the same argument is also dragged from on review thread into another.

From now on, if you have a beef about how or why speakers are measured, this is the thread for it. If you post it in the review thread, Thomas or I may delete or move it here depending on how we feel about you at the moment. I suggest not taking the chance and vent here.

I also like to remind the membership that this is a professional forum and highly values positive and constructive contributions.

Maybe also add then a "Suggestion thread about speaker measurements" thread, for these positive an constructive contributions on speaker measurements?

 

[Soniclife]

On listening tests, it is become a major bottleneck to testing. Do you all want me to hold up reviews in general and speakers in the specific until I listen?

I want them to continue as is, at least for now, down the line if they don't add anything then drop them, but if we drop them now we will not know if they add something. It adds a sanity check to the measurements, both if there is something wrong with the speaker, and to check people getting too worked up over small measured defects that are not audible.

I'm fine with the reviews being held up, don't work yourself too hard, slow down and smell the veneer, listen to some music, either way in a year or 2 there will be more speaker reviews here than anywhere else.

 

[tomtoo]

@amirm
I would like a short listening impression but before the measurement. Take a reference like the 305, give short impression, than meassure. Use 5 mins for that , make a mixed musik track for that. Just a mono AB impression in the garage.

 

[mhardy6647]

Don't confuse complaining with disagreement or difference of opinion.
....

Thread title specifies complaints. No complaints here!

EDIT: Upon reflection, I have had free food that disagreed with me -- now that you mention it.

 

[hardisj]

There's been numerous pages of this back and forth regarding SPL and others. As much as I'm a fan of data, I think we are all just spinning wheels and talking over each other at this point.

I agree with what @jhaider said in an earlier post: have a checklist. It's up to @amirm to make the call on what he wants to have wrt to the checklist. State what he's *always* going to provide anything else would just be a bonus.