Epos ES 14 N - best passive Speaker in SpiNorama.org so far? (7.4/10 with equalisation without subwoofer)

[ahofer]

There is a lot happening with cabinet vibrations, but most people here tend to ignore it, just looking at Spinorama pictures. Once you learn how to measure the radiation of the cabinet in relation to the active speaker output, you realise what kind of problem you have. What people like about Wilsons is the lack of cabinet output. I think they never have been great at making crossovers....something you can easily see on certain Stereophile measurements, but some of them are sounding not bad at all. To say it's only marketing without really having tested a few of them is not correct.

Well, let’s clarify, are you saying speaker resonances don’t show up in the standard suite of measurements here - FR, distortion, and decay, but matter to listeners?

My points are:
1) They are audible or not, and that’s what matters
2) over-engineering a non-audible phenomenon by making speakers ridiculously huge and heavy is more about marketing than engineering

Do you disagree with one or both of these?

 

[sigbergaudio]

What do you mean with artefacts from processing?

Too agressive EQ in the filters of the speakers sometimes have adverse, audible effects.

 

[Ron Texas]

Doesn't the Ascend Sierra LX have a preference score of 6.8 without EQ? I don't see anyone getting excited about them, and some comments are they sound bright.

 

[dogmamann]

To agressive EQ in the filters of the speakers sometimes have adverse, audible effects.

Like what and proof ?

 

[YSC]

To agressive EQ in the filters of the speakers sometimes have adverse, audible effects.

I do doubt there are excessive EQ filters within the well designed DSP speakers, and in my understanding, if such is present it will show up in spins, say you would have deviated FR, and distortion spikes... if what the intended signal goes into the speaker isn't reproduced faithfully it should show up as uneven FR or distortion, or both?

 

[Ron Texas]

Like what and proof ?

It's been discussed around here many times. High Q filters can ring. Boosting bass reduces dynamic range and increases distortion. That's well known.

 

[thewas]

To agressive EQ in the filters of the speakers sometimes have adverse, audible effects.

I agree to such, although also such can be usually seen in an extended measurement set like the ones from ASR or EAC.

 

[dogmamann]

I agree to such, although also such can be usually seen in an extended measurement set like the ones from ASR or EAC.

So that means that the idea of fixing speakers with eq or DSP is flawed right?

 

[Ron Texas]

So that means that the idea of fixing speakers with eq or DSP is flawed right?

No. In the case of active speakers it's part of the design. For passive speakers it's part of the audiophile hobby.

 

[totti1965]

Sorry but most of the "measurements ultras" aren't able to do an accurate interpretation of the spinorama measurements. You don't consider things like the deviation between the on axis frequency response and the early reflections and so on...

You are right that a bit less smoothing can increase the score but if you go from 1/12 to 1/20 that is minimal about 0.1 to 0.2 point should be the impact.

Than it is contradicting that you on the one hand claim that the spinorama data and science behind it is that important, so no small deviation can be a good thing, but on the other hand you dismiss the high predicted preference score which is a result from exactly this research direction. So you essential claim to be better at judging a speakers tonality than the algorithm of the research you ironically praise. Disclaimer you are most likely not.

Can‘t find any better words! Thank you!

 

[totti1965]

I'm not arguing your general points, I'm arguing the assumptions that one can take any two speakers and know which speaker sounds subjectively best to a given listener from the measurements alone.

I think it is possible if the difference between two Spinorama.org rankings is more than let‘s say 2.0 out of 10.

 

[test1223]

I strongly doubt that, a small entry series Genelec (the same like 8030C) recently measured at Stereophile had possibly the cleanest cabinet acceleration spectrum ever measured there, hope KHF will send his Epos there, but I doubt it will happen.

Source: https://www.stereophile.com/content/genelec-g-three-active-loudspeaker-measurements

Genelec are generally very good designs there is no doubt, but you have to take some compromises when you only have a small volume and want to use bass reflex, so the walls of the Genelec box can't be that thick and the placement of the damping and port can't be optimize compared with a bigger box. Even if you build the box as clever as you can you hit at some point the physical wall. A bigger cabinet doesn't necessarily have to be built that cleverly to be in total better.

These measurements you are citing with attaching a single accelerometer are heavily dependant on the area where it is attached to the box some cm left or right and you can get a totally different results. To find every weak spots like the bass reflex port, the tweeter plate, terminals or a spot where the inner cable are slightly rattling is very time consuming and you can't be sure if you missed one weak spot.
Since you don't have any none curved walls with a Genelec box it isn't easy to accurately measure the real acceleration of the surface anyways. So I am very sceptical if these measurements with attaching an accelerometer can be used to compare very different speaker cabinet in a meaningful way.

 

[totti1965]

Yepp, you know that and I know that...and it has been that way for ages. Again making a waveguide is easy, but not everybody likes the sound of them. Also, even the waveguide is a compromise, as it tries to compensate something "not so good" of the woofer (starting to beam) by making the nice radiation of the tweeter as bad as the woofer, so it's continuously bad. OK, this is of course a bit cynical....but maybe it can make you understand that there a people who don't think Sean Olive's way is the only one to go.

Yes! Perhaps that is the reason of the 7.4 points of the Epos in Spinorama.org - even without being a deep bass wonder…..
Not every waveguide speaker is doing so fine!

 

[ahofer]

BTW, it’s great when engineers engage here, but it is weird when there is a third person acting as an oddly strong advocate (near salesperson) and the engineer avoids direct questions and occasionally speaks in riddles or challenges. That is setting off my BS detector.

I’m ready to believe it’s the language barrier, but that’s what I’m seeing here.

 

[Soniclife]

BTW, it’s great when engineers engage here, but it is weird when there is a third person acting as an oddly strong advocate (near salesperson) and the engineer avoids direct questions and occasionally speaks in riddles or challenges. That is setting off my BS detector.

I’m ready to believe it’s the language barrier, but that’s what I’m seeing here.

I'm not getting alarms from the engineer, you have to be very careful engaging in the internet in your profession, but the other one is into brand damaging territory, wherever their motivation.

 

[totti1965]

But some people say, I have the most expensive Mono system in the world, so I don't count..

Ha ha ha ha….. My speakers are about 1.4 m apart. Listening Distance is 2 m. Count‘s also as Mono-System?

 

[totti1965]

Yes if you really want you can build a box out of paper which has not a single resonance which you can easily see in spinorama measurements.

Edit: but obviously there is sound coming out ot this cabinet which is significant.

Audioplay Charly from 1982. Yogurt cup.

 

[ahofer]

you have to be very careful engaging in the internet in your profession

For sure, but if you won't address a simple question about audibility/measurability directly, that always looks like hiding the ball....something one should be careful about while interacting with potential customers.

If you engage Alan Shaw about directivity or audibility of some of his driver material claims, he won't answer directly (or he will delete your post). Why? My first guess is because he knows there are weaknesses there he can't defend in a full-throated way.

 

[Soniclife]

For sure, but if you won't address a simple question about audibility/measurability directly, that always looks like hiding the ball....something one should be careful about while interacting with potential customers.

If you engage Alan Shaw about directivity or audibility of some of his driver material claims, he won't answer directly (or he will delete your post). Why? My first guess is because he knows there are weaknesses there he can't defend in a full-throated way.

I fully agree about AS, be can be very cult leader when asked direct questions he does not want to address.

 

[thewas]

So that means that the idea of fixing speakers with eq or DSP is flawed right?

Depends what you want to fix, for example linear phenomena can be usually corrected, non linear usually not.