Erin's review for the March Audio Sointuva

[Sancus]

Thank you. Just to clarify, have you created the spinorama from the measurement charts or Harman had supplied them as is?

All top three chart toppers have an inbuilt subwoofer but somehow IL60 has scored considerably higher. Do you have an answer why could that be? What measurement of IL60 made the score to go higher?

All scores based on the old harman measurements tend to be overestimates, they're pretty smoothed or their methodology just didn't show flaws as effectively as the NFS does, whichever.

That does apply to all non-NFS measurements and especially vendor measurements too, one should mentally take at least half a point off if it's not an NFS measurement. For example, the ASR measurement of the Infinity RC263 scored 0.7 points lower than the vendor measurement.

 

[jhaider]

Thank you. Just to clarify, have you created the spinorama from the measurement charts or Harman had supplied them as is?

All top three chart toppers have an inbuilt subwoofer but somehow IL60 has scored considerably higher. Do you have an answer why could that be? What measurement of IL60 made the score to go higher?

Thank you in advance.

I’m not sure, but I am pretty sure this is the “mystery” $2000 or so speaker Dr. Toole praised this speaker highly in Sound Reproduction. Consider also that it’s a 4-way, with the expected implications on dispersion (when developed by good engineers with access to excellent measurement facilities.) The seminal research would’ve been known in house at Harman at the time it was designed.

 

[tktran303]

Nobody gets to control the narrative. People can nit-pick all they want.

The speaker appears to be a very decent performer based on your testing. But it is very expensive and in-efficient for a two way standmounter with a couple of PRs.

Yeah and this is where we can nitpick comments and people who are flat out wrong too.

It’s an excellent performer.
It uses state of the art components, including a state of the art passive radiators and woofers.
It is very affordable compared to the price of its component parts.
It can play down low in a relatively small cabinet precisely because it has low sensitivity. This is Hoffman’s Law.
Low sensitivity matters if you are using last century’s amplifiers that can’t drive low impedance loads (in this case: ~150W into 4ohm)
All modern amplifiers are optimised for 4 ohm loads, so this speaker just goes all the way to 102dB.

It’s curious to me- No one seems to complain when an active speaker can play low, because it has a 150W amplifier for the woofer, along with DSP to boost the bass.

Don’t you realise it is inherently low in sensitivity but uses onboard amplification/gain to hide this fact?

But it has limiters to stop it from flapping out or killing itself at high volume? (96-102dB) eg. Buchardt A500 or Genelec 8331.

Meanwhile this speaker goes all the way up. It plays as loud and cleanly, for lack of a better term, than a Revel F226Be (modern passive speaker) or Kii Three (modern active speaker)

You can have a cursory look at the data, but you need to engage what’s between your ears too.

With too much “audio-science” data to process, I wonder, are you starting miss the wood from the trees?

Maybe you need a Scientific Measurement in Audio & Research Translation? (SMART)

Hint: have a closer look at Erin’s compression tests… (Dynamic Range (Instantaneous Compression Test))

this is a tough market for Alan.
The passive speaker is what last century’s audiophiles were buying, but today they still complain about low sensitivity, without the understanding of the need for a moderate high powered amplifier.

I can see why Erin tapped out.
Too much noise and not enough signal.

 

[sarumbear]

I’m not sure, but I am pretty sure …

This must be the best start to a post

 

[tuga]

Yeah and this is where we can nitpick comments and people who are flat out wrong too.

It’s an excellent performer.
It uses state of the art components, including a state of the art passive radiators and woofers.
It is very affordable compared to the price of its component parts.
It can play down low in a relatively small cabinet precisely because it has low sensitivity. This is Hoffman’s Law.
Low sensitivity matters if you are using last century’s amplifiers that can’t drive low impedance loads (in this case: ~150W into 4ohm. All modern amplifiers are optimised for 4 ohm loads.

It’s curious to me. No one seems to complain when a speaker is inherently low sensitivity but jams a 150W amplifier in there, along with DSP to boost the bass.

Don’t you realise it is inherently low in sensitivity but uses onboard amplification/gain to hide this fact?

But it has limiters to stop it from flapping out or killing itself at high volume? (96-102dB) eg. Buchardt A500 or Genelec 8331.

Meanwhile this speaker goes all the way up? It plays as loud and cleanly, for lack of a better term, than a Revel F226Be (modern passive speaker) or Kii Three (modern active classic speaker)

You can have a cursory look at the data, but you need to engage what’s between your ears too. With too much “audio-science” data to process, I wonder, are you starting miss the wood from the trees?

Maybe you need a Scientific Measurement in Audio & Research Translation? (SMART)

Hint: have a closer look at Erin’s compression tests… (Dynamic Range (Instantaneous Compression Test))

this is a tough market for Alan.
The passive speaker is what last century’s audiophiles were buying, but today they still complain about low sensitivity, without the understanding of the need for a moderate high powered amplifier.

I can see why Erin tapped out.
Too much noise and not enough signal.

Bloody hell, I was just curious as to what could be causing the discontinuity in the directivity plot...

At least some people like @ctrl can engage in a adult conversation without fanboyism or oversensitivity.

 

[mrmojo2022]

He is not grumpy. He will just fight to death if anything negative is said about anything he sells. And that fight threatened members to leave the forum. This is on top of numerous insults to forum owner, and moderators. And lapses of ethics.

The person before he started his business is who you want. Not this version.

I have had discussions with Alan (im looking to buy an amp and Im interested in the speakers too) and specifically asked about this. He says you banned him because he criticised your speaker testing methods and deleted his critical post.

I don't know which to beleive, to be honest dont care that much, but there really wasnt any reason for you to pass comment unless you felt like sticking the knife in.

The speaker performance is superb, which I think is a more interesting subject to discuss.

 

[mrmojo2022]

FWIW, the olive score I came up with for this is 6.9 w/o sub. I don't know if it's the highest in the passive speaker category but I believe it is.

And if the score alone isn't enough (which, I never believe should be), then the distortion and compression data are also quite great as well.

So, let's understand that you're nitpicking to the nth degree what - by all accounts - appears to be an incredible speaker.


View attachment 190589

Hi Erin

What was your subjective impressions, or do we need to wait for the review video?

 

[amirm]

I have had discussions with Alan (im looking to buy an amp and Im interested in the speakers too) and specifically asked about this. He says you banned him because he criticised your speaker testing methods and deleted his critical post.

I don't even remember such an interaction let alone it being the reason he was banned. He can criticize my speaker testing all he wants. Plenty of people do. Or I should say did. His history of tangling with the membership on stuff he sells predate this back to his first product: a DAC. Here is the thread: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ew-and-measurements-of-march-audio-dac1.5755/

He sells a DAC built on a module made by another company. The module sold for $99. He sold the DAC for $449. Members quickly realized the identity of what was in it and challenged me and him of shenanigans. I thought for sure he would step forward and say what was what. But he did not, forcing me to eventually do it. Let me out to hang dry there as his accomplice.

That was in 2018 and pattern continued. Member challenges him on quality of capacitors in Hypex modules he was using. He fights to death claiming neither that member, or the rest of us know what we are talking about. Read here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...pex-nc2k-amplifier-teardown.16920/post-549594

By then I had two moderators stepping in trying to talk sense into him. Neither succeeded. Such arguments continued to other threads leading to senior members threatening to quit. That was the line that I could not let him cross.

Remember, by then I had tolerated his antics for 3 years. If I wanted to ban him for my personal need, could have done so back in 2018 and for good cause.

Bringing us to this thread, I don't believe a word he says regarding first speaker being sent to Erin being the wrong/prototype model that no one received. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. When you lose credibility, nothing you say can be relied upon.

When asked why I would not measure his speaker, I said that no matter what the outcome was, he would complain about the results and demand more tests. That is exactly what happened with Erin.

You are welcome to have any opinion of him. But don't for a second call my intentions into question. Plenty of people know what has gone on and why he is no longer a member. He lacks common sense, doesn't take advice from anyone, puts his head in the sand as your message indicates, blaming everyone else but him. Shame as he is very smart and could go very far. He is his worst enemy as they say....

 

[mrmojo2022]

A question I have is what effect the narrower directivity this speaker has on the perceived sound?

 

[tktran303]

A question I have is what effect the narrower directivity this speaker has on the perceived sound?

I think this is an area that needs further research.

Do more people, as a group, prefer narrowed response at the top two octaves? (This speaker)

Do people, prefer wide dispersion at the top 2 octaves? (5-20Khz) Eg. Philharmonic BMR monitor/Tower?

Do people prefer coaxial point source with near equal (albeit reduced vertical dispersion and horizontal dispersion Eg. KEF Blade?

Do people prefer cardioid response? Eg. Kii Three

Do people prefer dipole response? Eg. Linkwitz LX521?

Do people prefer omnipolar response (albeit ragged top 2 octaves) Eg. MBL Radialstrahler

I think it depends on the room. And I’m not sure research/listening tests in a standardise anechoic chamber will help.

 

[mrmojo2022]

I think this is an area that needs further research.

Do more people, as a group, prefer narrowed response at the top two octaves? (This speaker)

Do people, prefer wide dispersion at the top 2 octaves? (5-20Khz) Eg. Philharmonic BMR monitor/Tower?

Do people prefer coaxial point source with near equal (albeit reduced vertical dispersion and horizontal dispersion Eg. KEF Blade?

Do people prefer cardioid response? Eg. Kii Three

Do people prefer dipole response? Eg. Linkwitz LX521?

Do people prefer omnipolar response (albeit ragged top 2 octaves) Eg. MBL Radialstrahler

I think it depends on the room. And I’m not sure research/listening tests in a standardise anechoic chamber will help.

Alan's response to me when I asked about it was that there is no right or wrong answer. He said wide v narrow gives a different spatial presentation, but it's down to I divide all preference. He did say that narrower will give more consistent sound in different rooms.

I don't have experience of comparing a wide v narrow speaker to understand which I think is better.

 

[Sigberg Audio]

I think this is an area that needs further research.

Do more people, as a group, prefer narrowed response at the top two octaves? (This speaker)

Do people, prefer wide dispersion at the top 2 octaves? (5-20Khz) Eg. Philharmonic BMR monitor/Tower?

Do people prefer coaxial point source with near equal (albeit reduced vertical dispersion and horizontal dispersion Eg. KEF Blade?

Do people prefer cardioid response? Eg. Kii Three

Do people prefer dipole response? Eg. Linkwitz LX521?

Do people prefer omnipolar response (albeit ragged top 2 octaves) Eg. MBL Radialstrahler

I think it depends on the room. And I’m not sure research/listening tests in a standardise anechoic chamber will help.

I guess the directivity is one area where the Olive score is a bit limited, and it matters quite a bit. I suspect our two speakers:

• SBS.1 (small size, 2.5 way sealed enclosure)
• MANTA.1 (medium size, 3 way cardioid enclosure)

Would get relatively similar scores. But boy do they sound different and boy are they different speakers. The score can certainly weed out poor speakers (as can the measurements if you look at them). But to tell two good speakers apart (both which is "best" and which you'd prefer) it's probably not enough to look at the score, and for the vast majority of us also not enough to look at the graphs.

 

[Newman]

Would get relatively similar scores. But boy do they sound different and boy are they different speakers.

You have the wrong idea if you think the research says same score => same sound.

 

[Newman]

And I’m not sure research/listening tests in a standardise anechoic chamber will help.

Who do you know is doing this? Or are you building a straw man in your own head?

 

[sarumbear]

I guess the directivity is one area where the Olive score is a bit limited, and it matters quite a bit. I suspect our two speakers:

• SBS.1 (small size, 2.5 way sealed enclosure)
• MANTA.1 (medium size, 3 way cardioid enclosure)

I agree that the preference score is limited, I started a debate on it. However, may I suggest that, as you are a speaker manufacturer, why don't you send your speakers to ASR so that we can indeed have more proof that "the score" is limited.

 

[BDWoody]

He says you banned him because he criticised your speaker testing methods and deleted his critical post.

Actually, I banned Alan. I'm not surprised he misled you regarding what actually happened.

He had more deleted inappropriate posts than any member before or since, scattered over years.

When he was in Dr. Jekyll mode, he could be great. Unfortunately, Mr. Hyde too often showed up leaving wreckage all around.

I'm not in the habit of talking negatively about former members, but if you want to try to cast aspersions related to the matter based on what he has to say, I'll make an exception and at least fill in a blank or two. There is a lot more to it.

We don't ban people for disagreeing with Amir, we ban them for unacceptable behavior. He had plenty of warnings, but he just couldn't manage to stay within the boundaries of what is acceptable here for any member, let alone a manufacturer.

We also aren't going to relitigate the situation, so let's just get back to the speaker please.

 

[Sigberg Audio]

You have the wrong idea if you think the research says same score => same sound.

I don't have that idea, but I suspect a lot of people looking at reviews at ASR (or elsewhere) have a whole host of different ideas around this.

 

[Sigberg Audio]

I agree that the preference score is limited, I started a debate on it. However, may I suggest that, as you are a speaker manufacturer, why don't you send your speakers to ASR so that we can indeed have more proof that "the score" is limited.

As mentioned elsewhere I have some reservations about that, but it's certainly under consideration - and Amir has been kind enough to say yes to test our SBS.1 speakers if I do send them. The Manta.1 is nowhere near production ready at this time.

 

[mrmojo2022]

So I am seriously considering these speakers and several people have commented on price which is obviously a big consideration.

I took a look at @pierre site and the preference scores he has collated. I looked up the price of speakers that perform as well or better than the Sointuva. I appreciate the preference score is limited in scope and accuracy and that there is more to consider, but I just wanted perform a comparative exercise to look at pricing. please excuse correct any errors, I only did a quick pricing look up.


KEF Blade 1 Meta 7.7 $35k

Kii Audio Three 7.7 $14k

KEF Reference 5 7.6 $19k

Mesanovic RTM10 7.6 $7.5k

Infinity Prelude MTS 7.5 $8k

Dutch Dutch 8C 7.4 $12.5k

KEF Blade 2 Meta 7.4 $22

Perlisten r5t 7.3 $5.5k

Revel Ultima Studio 7.3 $16k

Infinity Intermezzo 4.1t 7.2 $7.5k

Revel Ultima Salon 7.1 $22k

Genelec 8351B 7.0 $4k

GGNTKT M1 7.0 $8k

March Audio Sointuva 7.0 $4k


sso does $4k seem outrageous in this context?

 

[Absolute]

Yes, 4k for a small two-way passive speaker is outrageously expensive. There, I said it.

Hard to see how to get it much cheaper given the material cost, though. You get what you pay for both in pure parts quality and system integration, so the sense of value is then a purely subjective concern.