You are very wrong. I listen to more audio gear in a week than people do in a year. This review included one. I suggest you watch that video before making more statements that make my assertion even more true. I made that video precisely for people making your argument. Pay attention to how poorly audio magazine reviewer did in formal tests.
No one is trying to stop you from doing those things. But with all due respect, recognize the community you are posting in.
You must care a lot after accusing us of not using our ears: "I think far too many of you look at measurements and do not use your ears. That is rather sad."
We have learned in research that comments like yours have zero value. I can give change the color of one DAC's box and have you tell me it sounds warmer now. You are here, take a breath and read and learn what audio science is all about. You are repeating nonsense that this site is designed to debunk. Watch this video, user your ears properly to evaluate sound and then we will listen to what you have to say:
This forum is for discussing how good something sounds; why and how. Contrary to popular belief, audio equipment, at least here on earth, is not exempt from the physical laws of the universe. It just so happens that this forum is all about trying to connect physical properties as they are measured to this notion of 'good'. There are many other places where opinions and guesswork reign supreme. Those places can be fun for some people, especially those who possess the authority which can be appealed to.
Hi Amir, I'm wondering if near field testing is an ideal way to measure speakers with passive radiators (and for that matter ported designs too?) Designs from Sandy Gross, like Def Tech 8080ST's for example, have both passive radiators and rear firing mids and tweeters, and always produce "false" measurements with any room correction software I have used unless the speaker has been positioned really well within the room. My distances have been wrong, when those towers were too close to the side wall, polarity issues occur, too close to the rear wall would cause issues, etc. And when I have used REW to measure those speakers closely, I would always get odd results, but when I moved out into the room a bit more, the results were always better.
What does this mean?
Hi there. The near-field scanner is not producing near-field measurements. It is producing far-field radiation of the entire speaker. It measures in near-field but that data is transformed using complex math to solve the wave propagation formula. It matters not to it what makes up the speaker. It samples at over 1000 points around the speaker and creates a 3-D model of the radiation of the speaker as whole.
That only happens if you use more than your ears you judge the audio equipment.....
Msx as this is the result of numerous blind listening tests, I would say you are talking through an orifice that is not your mouth.
There was a statement upthread about value: Aurum Cantus sells an AMT that is pretty damn flat from 1K to 20K, is 98dB efficient and can hit 120 dB peaks. Price about 350, maybe 400 now per piece. To me that represents value. I can verify the FR, I have a friend with a pair. In any event, trivial to EQ.
You are in the wrong forum.
I think these use AMT tweeters rather than ribbon tweeters.
A folded ribbon.
