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

[thewas]

I was explaining the whole time why such measurements of the magazine you linked have to be taken with conscious. They obviously can't glue the sensor to the cabinet.

Which is the smallest problem of such measurements, but still they show good accordance to what is expected, for example when they measure some Magico loudspeakers.

Edit: The whole point was that I want to empathize that especially none flat surfaces are more difficult to measure without getting none comparable measurements. Even if you use glue with such surfaces you change the resonance frequency significantly more compared with a flat surface, since you have much more glue between the sensor and surface compared with a flat surface.

Not really as mainly the thickness and thus stiffness of the adhesive layer counts and this can be have a smaller minimum when the convex surface of the enclosure meets the flat mounting surface of the sensor.

Edit edit: if you use wax or some removable adhesive which is typically worse than wax you get a shifts with this specific sensor in significant frequencies where the resonance is about 6 to 8kHz on a flat surface with a curved surface you get in the region of hand probe measurements which is a resonances frequency of about 2kHz

Nope, see above.

In the end we are now theorising on details while loosing the substance.

 

[test1223]

Which is the smallest problem of such measurements, but still they show good accordance to what is expected, for example when they measure some Magico loudspeakers.


Not really as mainly the thickness and thus stiffness of the adhesive layer counts and this can be have a smaller minimum when the convex surface of the enclosure meets the flat mounting surface of the sensor.


Nope, see above.

In the end we are now theorising on details while loosing the the substance.

You have no idea what you are talking about. I have done such measurements and the results are the same you can read im scientific literature. There is no much better removable adhesive which has better properties than wax therefore pcb is selling their special wax...

 

[dogmamann]

Just take a look at the detailed frequency plots at spiNorama.org. / Erins audiocorner / or audiosciencereview.com. Meanwhile there are 500 of them.

Did not get the point. Take one graph and mark some parts of it and please show what you are trying to say.

 

[Karl-Heinz Fink]

Sorry about the first question, imo it’s impossible to have two speakers with identical driver and crossover, only different cabinet to have the same measurement, on axis yea, that could be done but when it goes to directivity and distortion, it should always be different simply with different cabinet resonant and volume, be it distortion or say front baffle related effect due to directivity or even bass extension, if all you try to say is about on axis measurements I would say we didn’t disagree on that, but if things like overall spin I don’t feel like there could be unmeasurable attributes only able to be heard by ear

Sure, you can have. One of the tests was with a cabinet on one side using a standard MDF panel and the other one with the same thickness panels but done with constrained layer damping (two layers, damping in the middle). The cabinet was a smaller 2-way, so no other internal bracing was used.

But this is the problem here at ASR: Whatever I say, somebody says something like "I don't feel like" - like you did above. On one hand, people are screaming for blind A/B test, but never did anything themselves to prove their own theory.

This is nothing against you.....but think about it and read some of the comments to understand why I'm turning around and walking away.

I have no problem discussing with people who have worked on the same things as we did here. It's only difficult to discuss with people who are biased in one direction and turn whatever argument does not fit into their world down with "I don't believe, show me the AB test".

 

[dogmamann]

Partly you may be right. But Bernd Timmermanns from German Magazine Hobby HiFi who measured thouthands of speakers mentioned that the OLD KEF B110 speaker Chassis, which is build in in the 3/5a speakers (it is from 1974 or so!) is for its 110 mm size still the world record holder in mechanical losses Rm.
So you can simply measure und you find something out about the Faszination this speaker has for generations of listeners!

And yet, when you build up a speaker with that driver, it still is way behind modern speakers like the KEF R3 Meta in every aspects. And for the selling price, it’s kind of snake oil territory!

 

[Purité Audio]

Sure, you can have. One of the tests was with a cabinet on one side using a standard MDF panel and the other one with the same thickness panels but done with constrained layer damping (two layers, damping in the middle). The cabinet was a smaller 2-way, so no other internal bracing was used.

But this is the problem here at ASR: Whatever I say, somebody says something like "I don't feel like" - like you did above. On one hand, people are screaming for blind A/B test, but never did anything themselves to prove their own theory.

This is nothing against you.....but think about it and read some of the comments to understand why I'm turning around and walking away.

I have no problem discussing with people who have worked on the same things as we did here. It's only difficult to discuss with people who are biased in one direction and turn whatever argument does not fit into their world down with "I don't believe, show me the AB test".

I am sure it is possible to make two enclosures with identical internal volume/drivers/crossover and that they sound different but that’s somewhat a straw man argument, the final design cabinet should ensure that not enough energy is stored to create audible resonance.
Unless of course your design goal is to turn a transducer into a musical instrument.
Keith

 

[thewas]

You have no idea what you are talking about. I have done such measurements and the results are the same you can read im scientific literature. There is no much better removable adhesive which has better properties than wax therefore pcb is selling their special wax...

It is usually a sign that people run out of arguments when accusations get personal, what exactly was wrong that I wrote so you conclude I have no idea what I am talking about? I don't know what your experience with such measurements is (maybe you can write it here) but operational vibration and modal analysis for research and industry was part of my academic career. For example there are special two components glues for such purpose which can be easily removed from most surfaces with a shear force.

 

[totti1965]

And yet, when you build up a speaker with that driver, it still is way behind modern speakers like the KEF R3 Meta in every aspects. And for the selling price, it’s kind of snake oil territory!

KEF R3: My opinion is the same as Amir’s: maybe it measures good, but I can’t get warm with this speaker: Overall experience was unexciting and unengaging for lack of a better word.
Don’t know if I can say the same of the Rogers LS 3/5a. There is something nice with this speaker.
Just my subjective 2c.

 

[thewas]

KEF R3: My opinion is the same as Amir’s: maybe it measures good, but I can’t get warm with this speaker: Overall experience was unexciting and unengaging for lack of a better word.
Don’t know if I can say the same of the Rogers LS 3/5a. There is something nice with this speaker.
Just my subjective 2c.

Most current KEF models have a slightly decreasing FR on direct sound and quite a high directivity which means there is less sound power in the treble and the older I get I see I need more treble probably due to my deteriorating hearing, it seems to me many "high end" brands tune their loudspeakers according to their target market.

 

[Purité Audio]

‘Musical’ is the epithet you are looking for.
Keith

 

[DSJR]

Don’t know if I can say the same of the Rogers LS 3/5a. There is something nice with this speaker.
Just my subjective 2c.

Probably the U shaped mid bass to upper mid response, adding a false feeling of some 'depth' in the midrange and the artificially added bump at 120Hz deliberately put there so it didn't 'squeal' too much taken as a whole. Back in '74 - '75 before KEF destroyed the B110 as used then, the 1.5kHz peak wasn't so bad, but the 5khz peak was and apparently it was very difficult to minimise. The pressed steel chassis of said driver was quite common I recall, so nothing particularly special (other makers used it and may still do so now).

Whatever the polarised views expressed on here, speaker design is still very much an art-form, only less of an issue maybe than fifty years back when the tech we have today wasn't available. My personal beef is with some makers (two especially that I'm rather fond of) charging so very much for their products when in materials terms, there's not so much there really. Maybe cheap far eastern manufacturing facilities have skewed my pricing perceptions somewhat.

To @Karl-Heinz Fink - Please don't go. I appreciate you have something called 'work' to do, but unlike some makers, you've tried to explain what and why you've done things which is a wonderful education for those with a desire to learn (as I got all those decades ago from Robin Marshall even in his Audiomaster days and also other UK notables I've mentioned before, who knew their stuff and were willing to share it without patronising pomposity...).

Is the ES14N the only design of yours that you can more freely discuss?

 

[test1223]

It is usually a sign that people run out of arguments when accusations get personal, what exactly was wrong that I wrote so you conclude I have no idea what I am talking about? I don't know what your experience with such measurements is (maybe you can write it here) but operational vibration and modal analysis for research and industry was part of my academic career. For example there are special two components glues for such purpose which can be easily removed from most surfaces with a shear force.

Would you use this glue on a speaker cabinet you supposed to give back to the manufacturer? I guess you wouldn't.
I even wouldn't use wax on most wood surfaces. So that is the measurement situation we are talking about. The situation for the measurements of the magazine you linked.
With this you can only use a not perfect mounting which decreases the resonance frequency significantly (edit).
If you have a curved surface on top of this situation with a not so good filler your resonance frequency goes down even lower (edit). As I wrote it is near hand probe territory.

I agree that you can screwed glue with special glue or do a lot of other things to get better results but not with a cabinet you aren't willing to ruin.

Edit: and even if you are allowed to do that to the cabinet you then have to do the procedure for ever single measurements point and there are a lot of potential problem areas of a loudspeaker cabinet.

Edit edit:

Not really as mainly the thickness and thus stiffness of the adhesive layer counts and this can be have a smaller minimum when the convex surface of the enclosure meets the flat mounting surface of the sensor.

This a theoretical advantage which doesn't work in general in the real world. Therefore you have flat mounting plates for sensors and no curved ones. You can't reliability mount a sensor with such a very small contact area, abling pressure for mounting and the cooling of the glue have to be taken into account. You also have to consider that you form a spring mass damper system where the spring part becomes bigger and also nonelinear behavior is more likely, due to a small area where the sound resistance is very low and therefore a detachment of the adhesive is much more likely. All in all you simply don't do that if you can avoid it.

 

[computer-audiophile]

To @Karl-Heinz Fink - Please don't go. I appreciate you have something called 'work' to do, but unlike some makers, you've tried to explain what and why you've done things which is a wonderful education for those with a desire to learn (as I got all those decades ago from Robin Marshall even in his Audiomaster days and also other UK notables I've mentioned before, who knew their stuff and were willing to share it without patronising pomposity...).

+1

 

[totti1965]

To @Karl-Heinz Fink - Please don't go. I appreciate you have something called 'work' to do, but unlike some makers, you've tried to explain what and why you've done things which is a wonderful education for those with a desire to learn (as I got all those decades ago from Robin Marshall even in his Audiomaster days and also other UK notables I've mentioned before, who knew their stuff and were willing to share it without patronising pomposity...).

Is the ES14N the only design of yours that you can more freely discuss?

Yes! The last 6 days were such a pleasure for me. I learned so much, especially from his quotes.
His other brand „Finkteam“ is about speakers much more costly than the Epos ES 14 N.
Yesterday I learned that there are passive Designs with an Autotransformer in the Crossover Design!
Look- They are talking about the Finkteam Borg Episode II:

 

[Music707]

KEF R3: My opinion is the same as Amir’s: maybe it measures good, but I can’t get warm with this speaker: Overall experience was unexciting and unengaging for lack of a better word.
Don’t know if I can say the same of the Rogers LS 3/5a. There is something nice with this speaker.
Just my subjective 2c.

From Amir's review:

"EDIT: later testing showed that the room mode at about 105 Hz was impacting the tonality of the speaker. Once I filtered that, the sound was very good."

Are you sure you got Amir's opinion right?

 

[totti1965]

From Amir's review:

"EDIT: later testing showed that the room mode at about 105 Hz was impacting the tonality of the speaker. Once I filtered that, the sound was very good."

Are you sure you got Amir's opinion right?

After that he also quoted that there was a deviation from „Harmans findings“ and that Harman perhaps tells us not the whole story. Double Blind listening tests are necessary - and they do it even after measurable perfection.

Perhaps he wanted to find Kind words for the poor guy who sent him the R3 and invested USD 211,— for that, and so he mentioned the 105 Hz problem and the speaker was fine all in all…
I read it more so, as the typical stereophile tests, when they wanted to say that something isn‘t soooooo good, but they have to find other, more kind words………

 

[ahofer]

So you also include the heavy and optimized boxes from Revel as over-engineered? The biggest model weight about 80kg or 180lbs. If you put the weight in relation to the volume it is clear that it is a very very heavy box.
I don't think so. You simply need a lot of volume and weight to hinder sound from transmission and building up resonances.

I think you’ve missed my point - in order for it to be marketing BS, they have to…market it. Mass and damping are certainly one’s tools. But I notice Revel doesn’t pretend that they’ve created a unique solution that gets rid of (measuring at inaudible level) resonances better, whereas Wilson is constantly putting it in your face, both with their marketing material and the robot-like presentation (below) of their speakers.

Alexia V’s enclosures are crafted from many exotic and proprietary materials. Included in these handcrafted enclosures are the latest versions of X-Material & S-Material, V-Material strategically nested throughout its form, carbon fiber, aerospace grade aluminum, austenitic stainless steel, and gold connections throughout the entire signal path.

Now that’s some high-grade BS. But Revel’s not immune:

Beryllium - Element 4 on the Periodic Table - is a rare earth metal that is renowned for its remarkable physical properties that make it the ideal material for a high-frequency transducer. Compared to aluminum and titanium tweeter diaphragms, Beryllium offers 4.5 times the stiffness and three times more damping, and does so at only half of the weight. Beryllium tweeters are the centerpiece of the Revel PerformaBe loudspeaker series.

…

PerformaBe crossover networks utilize all film capacitors and air core inductors in the midrange and tweeter circuits. These premium components allow Revel's world-class engineers to extract nuances and details from music that would otherwise be lost.

This is also massive over-sell of design choices. Part of ASR’s value is to help look through this stuff to the actual audible differences - for instance the differences in measured performance between the f228Be and F208 seem rather small compared to the investment required.

IMO, Wilson has gone much further with design choices that make no audible difference whatsoever, but certainly give the consumer a visual, tactical, and wallet-lightening impression of weight and technology that likely makes an impression in sighted listening (only), at the expense of simpler choices that produce better fidelity - while claiming better fidelity. I find that reprehensible.

 

[Ron Texas]

Great speakers, indeed! Ascend uses the Klippel NFS since 2020 or so. Erin seems to have an Ascend Audio Speaker in the pipeline as quoted in a post in the middle of this thread (The Sierra LX?). The Sierra LX is also on my shortlist. The Epos ES 14 N seems to have a tiny bit more beef / it’s the larger speaker and also seems to have the more massive Cabinet……. But it is 2.5 times as costly as the Sierra LX.

I have a pair of non-meta LS50's. With a little EQ {especially at 2.5k Hz) and 2 Rythmik L12 subs crossed over at 100 Hz, they can really sing. The subs and modest size room allow for reference volume playback without strain, even with the small 5" mid/woofer. A MIniDSP 2x4HD is used for crossover, delay and EQ.

 

[DSJR]

I'd suggest that many 'audiophiles' haven't a clue what larger speakers really sound like and are blown backwards by the hulking hugeness of some Wilson models, as well as the wall of sound they no doubt produce. I only really knew the original Witts, which weren't at all bad for a 12" three way passive, albeit with black lacqured sides of 'Best Quality British Leyland Orange-peel' paint... Also a ghastly sounding pair of Watt/Puppy's at a show which were the dogs danglies in those circles in the early noughties - I found them boomy almost and dull and that was in free space too.

 

[Ron Texas]

After that he also quoted that there was a deviation from „Harmans findings“ and that Harman perhaps tells us not the whole story. Double Blind listening tests are necessary - and they do it even after measurable perfection.

Perhaps he wanted to find Kind words for the poor guy who sent him the R3 and invested USD 211,— for that, and so he mentioned the 105 Hz problem and the speaker was fine all in all…
I read it more so, as the typical stereophile tests, when they wanted to say that something isn‘t soooooo good, but they have to find other, more kind words………

The R3 also has some excess energy through the high frequency area. This may be why our host did not like it so much. As you say Harman doesn't tell us the whole story. One thing I recall is the frequency bands are equally weighted because they never got around to working on which bands were more important.