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

[tw 2022]

Absolutely not. Both are competing for a similar audience. And ASR is the embodiment of evil in Danny’s world. He can’t ignore ASR because the platform has grown so large that it’s impossible to overlook. Like wise, Danny and his company embodies a lot of what ASR thinks is wrong with this industry. In many ways it’s the perfect feud

ok , i'm not going to argue that , as a matter of fact it fuels clicks so it actually helps both parties in the short term...

 

[Power Pop 23]

I have a higher tolerance for this discussion than threads touting the audible benefits of the latest 'roll' of an op-amp.

 

[RickS]

Putting aside all the attacks or tribalism,

Despite some attempt to paint this as objective vs subjective audio enthusiasts, that is just deflection away from the real issue. Danny failed at the first version of this upgrade and has been in denial and damage control since. Along with an apology to Ascend, the only other person he really owes is his original customer.

- a test of the Sierra with the "correct kit" would be interesting

As with the Danny's original upgrade, the question should be the value in doing so. There is negative value at ASR (as would mean time taken from other reviews). Even more so for Ascend. Danny does not have the speaker. If he did, does not seem he is interested in another round of Klippel testing...

- is there any value to D's comment about the components being incorrectly wired?

Unlikely, much more likely is just another Danny deflection as he has done previously when reality gets in his way. He should not be questioning other's products or efforts unless he demonstrates exemplary technical discipline. He has not and shows no inclination to improve.

 

[ErVikingo]

Despite some attempt to paint this as objective vs subjective audio enthusiasts, that is just deflection away from the real issue. Danny failed at the first version of this upgrade and has been in denial and damage control since. Along with an apology to Ascend, the only other person he really owes is his original customer.



As with the Danny's original upgrade, the question should be the value in doing so. There is negative value at ASR (as would mean time taken from other reviews). Even more so for Ascend. Danny does not have the speaker. If he did, does not seem he is interested in another round of Klippel testing...



Unlikely, much more likely is just another Danny deflection as he has done previously when reality gets in the way. He should not be questioning other's products or efforts unless he demonstrates exemplary technical discipline. He has not and shows no inclination to improve.

Thanks Rick.

FTR my comment about tribalism and attacks is that a lot of threads here and there become just that; entertaining but we don't learn a lot. I was exploring if there was something to be learned since he comments that the speaker tested was not the correct kit and see if there is a positive difference with the kit.

 

[RickS]

Thanks Rick.

FTR my comment about tribalism and attacks is that a lot of threads here and there become just that; entertaining but we don't learn a lot. I was exploring if there was something to be learned since he comments that the speaker tested was not the correct kit and see if there is a positive difference with the kit.

Despite his crude approach to measuring, you can see the V2 upgrade results in Danny's posts or his YouTube. Simply put, there is a difference in voicing but more of a tradeoff than any advantage. Horizontal off-axis performance is worse and vertical is a wash. He does manage a minor apparent improvement in impedance, but even that is not entirely clear as he does not include phase measurements. The lack a phase data is another Danny epic mistake. Not sure why he does not include but is useful info and has been an established metric for decades.

 

[kimmosto]

...he does not include phase measurements. The lack a phase data is another Danny epic mistake. Not sure why he does not include but is useful info and has been an established metric for decades.

If you mean phase of electrical impedance, it's minimum phase without excess phase i.e. phase and EPDR can be calculated from impedance magnitude response with some free tool. Graphically traced magnitude response does not give exact result, but it's better than nothing if impedance phase is really interesting. Not very difficult task.
Acoustical phase to on-axis or LW is totally different thing because it's usually far...extremely far from minimum phase. That has been asked several times to reviews as phase response, group delay, excess group delay and ETC, and minimum phase version of step as overlay with the same scale. The justification is that impulse and step response don't show quantity of timing error. Just some more or less messy curve where quantity of error is not readable for human being. Danny is as limited in this - if it comforts someone.

 

[RickS]

If you mean phase of electrical impedance, it's minimum phase without excess phase i.e. phase and EPDR can be calculated from impedance magnitude response with some free tool. Graphically traced magnitude response does not give exact result, but it's better than nothing if impedance phase is really interesting. Not very difficult task.

In the context of impedance, I meant electrical phase. For that matter, the axis is labeled on his graphs so guessing Danny chooses not to provide.

Acoustical phase to on-axis or LW is totally different thing because it's usually far...extremely far from minimum phase. That has been asked several times to reviews as phase response, group delay, excess group delay and ETC, and minimum phase version of step as overlay with the same scale. The justification is that impulse and step response don't show quantity of timing error. Just some more or less messy curve where quantity of error is not readable for human being. Danny is as limited in this - if it comforts someone.

I understand you want more data on acoustic phase and clever of you to segue to your desire! Let's start a new thread to discuss.

 

[kimmosto]

In the context of impedance, I meant electrical phase. For that matter, the axis is labeled on his graphs so guessing Danny chooses not to provide.

That's what I was talking about. Impedance phase can be calculated from magnitude with minimum-phase extraction.

After that we have access to e.g. EPDR.

I understand you want more data on acoustic phase

Single attached file, either on-axis magnitude+phase or preferably impulse response would be okay. That file would serve immediate needs for visualizing linear distortions in time domain, and anyone could use it. Not a big job for reviewers; just one export and attack command.

 

[RickS]

That's what I was talking about. Impedance phase can be calculated from magnitude with minimum-phase extraction.
View attachment 531894

Yes, I understand. Not sure why Danny does not supply…

 

[Mart68]

Having just recently finished the documentaries on the Oceangate incident.....the "My genius is misunderstood by everyone else" personality is tiresome. At least Danny isn't building a submersible I suppose.

Whilst there's no comparison in the severity of the outcome there is a parallel there. Some otherwise intelligent, educated people are able to set aside basic common sense and quite happily put their trust in the salesman, this happens a lot in Hi-Fi.

 

[kimmosto]

Yes, I understand. Not sure why Danny does not supply…

Graphically traced magnitude produces phase & EPDR:

Maybe extreme laziness because phase should be overlaid in CLIO. That action requires three extra clicks before exporting image
Linearized impedance magnitude has also more linear phase so difficulty and significance are lower than with very jumpy (assuming that minimum value does not drop much due to linearization).

 

[beagleman]

Despite his crude approach to measuring, you can see the V2 upgrade results in Danny's posts or his YouTube. Simply put, there is a difference in voicing but more of a tradeoff than any advantage. Horizontal off-axis performance is worse and vertical is a wash. He does manage a minor apparent improvement in impedance, but even that is not entirely clear as he does not include phase measurements. The lack a phase data is another Danny epic mistake. Not sure why he does not include but is useful info and has been an established metric for decades.

Rick, I said this before:

He puts just enough to convince people that do not know a "lot" that he knows what he is doing and this is his proof of it.
Anyone with a good bit of real speaker building/engineering knowledge, can see through him and his excuses and lack of actual in depth data.

 

[RickS]

Rick, I said this before:

He puts just enough to convince people that do not know a "lot" that he knows what he is doing and this is his proof of it.
Anyone with a good bit of real speaker building/engineering knowledge, can see through him and his excuses and lack of actual in depth data.

Based on Youtube followers, he is fooling a number of people! Need to keep up the vigilance.

 

[Dogsled21]

BTW, these are the published measurements on Ascend's website:

I have to think he did not bother to even look at them. As otherwise, anyone would conclude that there was nothing there to fix.

Well that looks great but as we all know there is more to the performance. BTW Raal lists the tweeter used (I think) in the Ascend loudspeaker as xover 3Khz. From my experience with ribbon tweeters, they quite sensitive to distortion from excessive excursion.

 

[Dogsled21]

Based on Youtube followers, he is fooling a number of people! Need to keep up the vigilance.

This Ascend "issue" reminds me of Danny's mod of the LRS32 speaker. He really laid into JBL for their "terrible" design....I seriously doubt he bothered to research the effort that went into that speaker, and the targeted application (monitoring).

 

[amirm]

Well that looks great but as we all know there is more to the performance.

That's orthogonal to this discussion. Danny uses frequency response measurements to re-do the crossover. So that is what I examined. He also says he doesn't need to listen to the speaker to know the problems before or after.

 

[Dave Bullet]

Audio Theory Review?

This is quite funny. By intentionally slurring the website, Danny has inadvertently promoted the content to theory status

Congratulations amir, that's quite an achievement.

 

[heflys20]

The fact that he uses childish insults and doesn't even know what a "theory" means in relation to research shows what kind of audience he attracts...LOL. It's even more telling that none of them have shown up here to refute the measurement. It's likely due to the fact that most of them are laymen with only a basic understanding of how speakers work, let alone Klippel.

 

[Everett T]

The fact that he uses childish insults and doesn't even know what a "theory" means in relation to research shows what kind of audience he attracts...LOL. It's even more telling that none of them have shown up here to refute the measurement. It's likely due to the fact that most of them are laymen with only a basic understanding of how speakers work, let alone Klippel.

His die hard, trash talking followers won't show up here, they definitely know they would get exposed for blindly trusting someone's word. Do they believe Danny is always in the right when multiple reviewers, industry personnel, and an audio manufacturer called him out, I don't think so? If they do believe him after this has happened so many times they deserve to get taken, financially or educationally and I'm convinced many of them do what they do because they believe that Danny is a close friend, lol.

 

[Buckchester]

It’s ironic that Danny makes his living criticizing speaker companies, then when someone criticizes his methods, he can’t take it. Now it’s an attack on his poor, small business. Dude, that’s all YOU do!