GR Research Speaker Upgrade Review (Sierra-2EX V2) [Video]

[DSJR]

As it turns out, James Larson at audioholics measured the original. His setup is far superior to Danny's with elevated speaker, outdoor measurements, etc. Anyway, he did not at all measure the same droop in high frequency that Danny shows:

View attachment 530579

Here is James Larson:

Seems like just like Ascend, his measurements are under-reporting high frequency energy. As such, he is making these speakers brighter.

He also shows the deepest dip at 1.2 kHz whereas James' response shows that to be essentially flat.

Also, when you listen to him talk about the cabinet, he uses words like, "it is going to buzz" making me think he didn't even listen to the speaker before the mod!

Do please watch the Y axes on the plots, as the GR ones seem magnified with quite 'expanded' 5dB per major division, while broadly showing similar results to me as the bottom graph with 10dB per major division... I ain't taking any sides here, but that's how the plots look to me.

 

[Ropeburn]

Do please watch the Y axes on the plots, as the GR ones seem magnified with quite 'expanded' 5dB per major division, while broadly showing similar results to me as the bottom graph with 10dB per major division... I ain't taking any sides here, but that's how the plots look to me.

Yeah let's see...

Right one cropped to 2kHz upwards, then zoomed to align vertical scale.

At first glance it looks like Danny's measurement is severely off axis, lol. Though it just can't be that much, it's another problem as already mentioned.

 

[DatSpeakerTho]

Wouldn't it be funny if someone made a youtube channel called Audio Debunker and did a series called "GR Research is Lying about..." that were quick 5 or so minute videos tacking specific lies and pseudo science Danny pushes. Heh, yeah that'd be pretty funny. Stay tuned!

 

[Ageve]

Do please watch the Y axes on the plots, as the GR ones seem magnified with quite 'expanded' 5dB per major division, while broadly showing similar results to me as the bottom graph with 10dB per major division... I ain't taking any sides here, but that's how the plots look to me.

This is the difference with proper scaling (50dB). It matches the other speakers mentioned here:

 

[Rick63]

Wouldn't it be funny if someone made a youtube channel called Audio Debunker and did a series called "GR Research is Lying about..." that were quick 5 or so minute videos tacking specific lies and pseudo science Danny pushes. Heh, yeah that'd be pretty funny. Stay tuned!

Yes. Do it!!

 

[dfuller]

This is the difference with proper scaling (50dB). It matches the other speakers mentioned here:

View attachment 530741

Like clockwork, his measurements are 2-3dB lower treble than everybody else's.

 

[amirm]

Do please watch the Y axes on the plots, as the GR ones seem magnified with quite 'expanded' 5dB per major division, while broadly showing similar results to me as the bottom graph with 10dB per major division... I ain't taking any sides here, but that's how the plots look to me.

I did note that and carefully analyzed the numerical difference before posting.

 

[Ageve]

Like clockwork, his measurements are 2-3dB lower treble than everybody else's.

Yep, here's another example.

Danny measured a Jamo Concert 8, and made a crossover mod fixing the "bad design", without realizing that the speaker was broken. After a lot of backlash from his viewers, he deleted his first video, and measured two other samples. This is how they compare to mine:

With 1/3 smoothing, one sample is down 1-2 dB, and the other 2-3 dB compared to my measurement:

This is the broken speaker he designed a mod for:

(I had nothing to do with him re-measuring these, but it inspired me to do a full spin )

edit: Here's a comparison of the off-axis response (He measures at 0, 10, 20, 30 and 40 degrees horizontal. This is the 40 deg measurement, blue line in his graphs).

Looks like he got the angle right. It's a good match except for the treble.

This is the off-axis response after his mod...

If you didn't have it near a wall, and even if you've got them toed out a little bit to the listening position, that's not gonna be any kind of an issue at all.

Well, if you say so, I guess.

 

[Chaos01]

Maybe his microphone is old and need a new calibration? I read somewhere that mic's loosing detail after years and need new calibration. This could explain why his measurements seem to be 2-3 db lower than Others. Correct me if i am wrong.

 

[amirm]

It could also be the amp he is using to drive the speaker.

 

[Paul7777x]

Wouldn't it be funny if someone made a youtube channel called Audio Debunker and did a series called "GR Research is Lying about..." that were quick 5 or so minute videos tacking specific lies and pseudo science Danny pushes. Heh, yeah that'd be pretty funny. Stay tuned!

Pleeeaase do

 

[amirm]

OK, solved the problem of how Danny builds the crossover, yet not in finished form to fit int he speaker. Look at this video from Jay Iyagi after he visited him:

I have queued the timecode to the frame where we see he has spread out all the parts with jumper wire and such. I think he then measures them and calls it done. Never mind all the cheesy wires and such.

 

[DatSpeakerTho]

Nothing says quality and craftsmanship like pipe and drape lol. What aan ugly space.

 

[amirm]

He has repeatedly said other people don't have good enough rooms to review his speakers. Yet he has that disaster of a room where all the highs are absorbed by those thin drapes. Maybe this is the reason he hypes up the highs!!!

 

[kyuu]

OK, solved the problem of how Danny builds the crossover, yet not in finished form to fit int he speaker. Look at this video from Jay Iyagi after he visited him:

I have queued the timecode to the frame where we see he has spread out all the parts with jumper wire and such. I think he then measures them and calls it done. Never mind all the cheesy wires and such.

Hey, don't leave us hanging Amir. Is GR Research legit or not??

 

[Ropeburn]

OK, solved the problem of how Danny builds the crossover, yet not in finished form to fit int he speaker. Look at this video from Jay Iyagi after he visited him:

I have queued the timecode to the frame where we see he has spread out all the parts with jumper wire and such. I think he then measures them and calls it done. Never mind all the cheesy wires and such.

This man alligator clips like a champion

 

[xray]

So Danny's response to all the questions was basically "just trust me, I've done this before"

 

[DatSpeakerTho]

So Danny's response to all the questions was basically "just trust me, I've done this before"

Always is.

 

[Skcir]

That’s very interesting, but how is it that Danny’s measurements look similar to Erin’s Klippel measurements, as he stated at 16:10 in his video?View attachment 530588

Please see the other review thread as this is discussed more specifically.

The most interesting aspect being that Danny had an older model of the speaker than Erin!

 

[TimVG]

When a customer brings in a speaker for measuring, we can set it up and take every measurement in about five minutes."

LOL. Assuming he has a fixed measurement setup somewhere, it would still take a couple of hours to make accurate horizontal and vertical measurements. It's impossible to properly setup and align a speaker in 5 min. Just making sure everything is at a fixed distance, aligning the mic with the intended measurement axis, verifying all of this.. can take half an hour -easily- before making a single measurement. Then repeat this for vertical measurements, IF you have a jig that can support floorstanders (challenging!). Then taking nearfield measurements, merging.. you'll have spent half a day before you know. This is assuming you have a fixed setup consisting of a turntable and a microphone. Need to set up from scratch? Add another couple of hours.

Even then, as said, it's impossible to match anechoic or NFS resolution in the midrange even with a decent time window (8ms). Can we get close, sure, especially if there are not high Q anomalies anywhere. Measuring directional behaviour in the low range is impossible altogether this way. We also miss all of the oblique angles, something perhaps not crucial, but often overlooked - adding again to the resolution.

Five minutes - what an absolute tool. How does this guy have 90k subscribers?