• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Documenting Sources of Loudspeaker Measurement

Joined
Mar 21, 2019
Messages
34
Likes
34
#1
Although the product of a known troll, I found the premise of the “Who do we trust?” thread interesting. For me, the sharing of measurements is an important contributor to my trust in a brand or publication. And so I’ve been taking note of which brands and publications provide useful measurements about their products or with their reviews. My list is far from comprehensive and only includes some detail about what each source of measurement includes, but I felt it might be of interest to some members here. The document also includes a “database” of speaker measurements, with links to about 500 loudspeaker measurements from SoundStage, Stereophile, Audioholics, and 3D3A.

Ideally this would turn into a collaborative document where we catalogue the brands and publications that provide this information. That said, I think providing unrestricted edit access might lead to vandalism, so if you want to add something please either post the content here or PM me a request for edit access. Also, if this already exists in a superior form, please feel free to tell me how stupid I am for having wasted my time on this :)

I’ve included a screenshot of the document below, and the full document can be accessed here.

A few notes:
- I have only included brands and publications on the list if they at least provide on & off-axis frequency response measurements
- So far I’ve only noted how each source presents their off-axis measurement info and what horizontal range they take those measurements over
- I’ve referred to XY Plots with lines for On-axis, listening window, directivity, and sound-power measurements as “Harman Style”, not sure if there’s a better term for it
- If a brand only provides measurements in the form of outside reviews they post on their own site, I’ve not included them on the list
- I know a lot of Harman brands provide measurements, but I can't consistently find them for JBL or Revel (the ones I looked into)
- Expect some errors & broken links as I generated data semi-programatically

Screen Shot 2019-06-12 at 17.03.58 .png

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ncqOcZAqe0dTxE2-TFsXMeohQfSXMdSYhN3UwrGTCco/#gid=0
Screen Shot 2019-06-12 at 17.05.23 .png

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ncqOcZAqe0dTxE2-TFsXMeohQfSXMdSYhN3UwrGTCco/#gid=2005430245
 
Last edited:

Arnandsway

Active Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2018
Messages
205
Likes
144
#3
Great initiative. But I did notice some names corresponding incorrectly with the websites.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
61
Likes
80
#4
Great idea. On the Harman graphs note, those are usually called Spinoramas or just "spins."l Also, KEF and Q acoustics include some on and off axis charts in the whitepapers for some of their speakers.

Not trying to self-promote, but I write some speaker reviews and I'm beginning to include measurements in them, including off-axis with my next reviews (KEF R3 and B&W Formation Duo). I'm still learning and refining how I want to go about measurements because I write for a mainstream tech publication - not an audio site - so I can't dedicate 1000 words just to interpreting graphs, and I need to strill be accessible to people outside of audiiophilia.

At first I figured I'd just take measurements for my own reference, but then thought I might be able to teach readers a bit more about the science behind speakers along the way. My hope is to educate more people on the importance of on-axis response and directivity, and highlight lesser-known brands that perform well. Plus I get to try a lot of speakers before average consumers can get their hands on them, so I get to contribute to the audio community by providing some actual data in addition to my subjective impressions. I'm measuring at home and I've only been testing the waters the past couple of months, but so far my results have been consistent with other published results from established sources.

So far the plan is to include a similar amount of data to ascend acoustics, with 0/15/30/45 horizontal, 0/5/10/15 vertical, and a listening window - although I actually end up measuring horizontal response to 90 degrees for the sake of thoroughness. I also plan on including an in-room measurement for an idea of how it all comes together plus bass extension within a normal listening setup.

Here are some measurements I made of the B&W Formation Duo for instance (and some of the LS50W as well for reference).
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2019
Messages
34
Likes
34
#5
Great initiative. But I did notice some names corresponding incorrectly with the websites.
I found what I think is the only error on the main page (link for JBL Pro was to Arendal sound). Please let me know what others you saw!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 21, 2019
Messages
34
Likes
34
#6
Great idea. On the Harman graphs note, those are usually called Spinoramas or just "spins."l Also, KEF and Q acoustics include some on and off axis charts in the whitepapers for some of their speakers.

Not trying to self-promote, but I write some speaker reviews and I'm beginning to include measurements in them, including off-axis with my next reviews (KEF R3 and B&W Formation Duo). I'm still learning and refining how I want to go about measurements because I write for a mainstream tech publication - not an audio site - so I can't dedicate 1000 words just to interpreting graphs, and I need to strill be accessible to people outside of audiiophilia.

At first I figured I'd just take measurements for my own reference, but then thought I might be able to teach readers a bit more about the science behind speakers along the way. My hope is to educate more people on the importance of on-axis response and directivity, and highlight lesser-known brands that perform well. Plus I get to try a lot of speakers before average consumers can get their hands on them, so I get to contribute to the audio community by providing some actual data in addition to my subjective impressions. I'm measuring at home and I've only been testing the waters the past couple of months, but so far my results have been consistent with other published results from established sources.

So far the plan is to include a similar amount of data to ascend acoustics, with 0/15/30/45 horizontal, 0/5/10/15 vertical, and a listening window - although I actually end up measuring horizontal response to 90 degrees for the sake of thoroughness. I also plan on including an in-room measurement for an idea of how it all comes together plus bass extension within a normal listening setup.

Here are some measurements I made of the B&W Formation Duo for instance (and some of the LS50W as well for reference).
That’s great! Do you have a link to a description of your measurement methodology? I’d be happy to add an index of your reviews to the list.
 

Arnandsway

Active Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2018
Messages
205
Likes
144
#7
I found what I think is the only error on the main page (link for JBL Pro was to Arendal sound). Please let me know what others you saw!
Q Acoustic 3020i --> goes to 3050i of SoundStageNetwork
Q Acoustic 3050i --> goes to Reference 3A MM DeCapo on SoundStageNetwork
Cambridge Audio Aero 2 --> goes to Canton Chrono SLS 780 DC on SoundStageNetwork
Cerwin Vega CLS 215 --> goes to Elac Uni-Fi Slim FS U5 on SoundStageNetwork

And that's just in 5 minutes...
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
61
Likes
80
#8
I plan to include my methodology in a gallery image with each review, but I suppose I'll write it down in an article at some point.

But so far:
0/15/30/45 horizontal, 5/10/15 vertical, measured by placing speakers on a stand on top of a lazy susan turntable such that the listening axis is at the center of rotation. I calculate the listening window as an average of +/- 0/15/30 horizontal and +/- 10 degrees vertical. Measurements are made with REW and a Mini DSP Umik-1 (calibrated by Cross Spectrum Labs) at 1 meter. The impulse response is gated at 7ms, giving me accurate results down to about 140hz, but so far I've been splicing the nearfield bass at 300hz after compensating for box baffle step.

I also usually run a few measurements at 1.5m to make sure measurements aren't skewed by poor driver integration at 1m . So far I haven't tested a speaker that measures significantly different at 1.5m than 1m, but that might just be because almost everything I review is a bookshelf or standmount unit.

This is far from a perfect system - I'm measuring in an apartment with occasionally shifting furniture with and a couple of dogs sometimes snoring in the background. It's not exactly the most controlled setting. But I've retaken my measurements several times and they've been very consistent so far. In any case, my goal is more to provide a general overview of a speaker's tonality and dispersion rather than something super specific, and to be able to point to measurements where I might hear a particular quirk in the sound. Not trying to compete with the NRCC or Stereophile, but I do hope I can provide some useful information aside from my subjective impressions and comparisons.
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2019
Messages
34
Likes
34
#9
Q Acoustic 3020i --> goes to 3050i of SoundStageNetwork
Q Acoustic 3050i --> goes to Reference 3A MM DeCapo on SoundStageNetwork
Cambridge Audio Aero 2 --> goes to Canton Chrono SLS 780 DC on SoundStageNetwork
Cerwin Vega CLS 215 --> goes to Elac Uni-Fi Slim FS U5 on SoundStageNetwork

And that's just in 5 minutes...
Thanks - I've fixed the first three links (couldn't find the 4th issue). They were all close to together in the list, so I must have done some accidental transposition. I guess I should have put my error disclaimer in bold haha
 
Top Bottom