Do i understand it correctly that you think a design-oriented sculpture-like 4-way active speaker w/o proper amplification, introduced some 32 years ago and disappearing from the stores soon after, is on a massive scale driving sales of standard-looking, affordable boxes (and headphones, Wifi speakers and like) today, solely because this is the same brand? With all due respect, it does not really sound convincing. I would guess that the majority of people who spend more than 3 Grand on a pair of speakers would at least briefly listen to them in a store, if not making this or that comparison with competitor´s models.
Which leads back to my initial question why brands like Revel are not by far market leader for 20 years already, if they had the internal resources to exactly know, with scientific certainty, what people prefer. Me thinks that there is some error in this logic, while with other Harman products this logic worked pretty well.
Wouldn't it mean as a matter of consequence that all audio objectivism, scientific listening test and measurements are doomed to have no influence on buyers at all?
Seemingly they are relevant and very popular, but why don't they dominate the market for classic hi-fi, reasonably priced high end speakers as well?
I am far from sympathizing with the way B&W speakers sound, but we should be honest enough with ourselves admitting that people buy them in mass quantities after having done numerous listening tests, ignoring competitor´s models which are said to be sounding right from scientific or measurement point of view. Which leads to the question why the research on subjective preference tests failed to predict this. Will be interesting to see that speaker manufacturers with such an opposing philosophy will be operating under the same roof in future.
I’m mused about the same phenomenon.
It’s interesting that the amount of research Harman Kardon has put into blind testing and speaker research hasn’t necessarily translated into dominating the market… or some sort of sales figures that would seem to point to their clear sonic super superiority.
This is not too undermine all that has been learned through the type of testing Harman has done on the subject.
But it’s just interesting about how challenging it seems to translate the results to some obvious advantage in sales.
As you point out, it’s most common for the type of consumer likely to buy a Revel to do some auditioning of different loudspeakers to make their selection. If the amount of bias involved in casual listening scenarios affects perception to overwhelm the sonic superiority of the Revels, at least in commercial terms, one might be left wondering what all that effort and blind testing was for. (what’s the point of the blind testing if the results aren’t going to play out in the real world in which people actually listen?)
I myself went on a very large speaker auditioning search to replace my (slightly too big aesthetically for my room) Thiel 3.7 speakers. I listened to an enormous variety of loudspeakers, and it included 2 or 3 auditions of Revel speakers including the Revel Performa F228Be, well set up in a good room.
What I heard under my informal, listening conditions seem to me quite consonant with what would be predicted from the measurements: a very neutral, evenly balanced sound from top to bottom, with very smooth off access frequency response (I always test off axis listening as well).
So it just said to me “ very competent speaker design.”
And yet I preferred my Thiels, and even some other speakers like “worse” measuring but significantly different sounding Devore speakers. And I was not nearly as mesmerized when listening to the Revel speakers as I was when I was auditioning the Joseph Audio speakers that I ended up purchasing.
Of course it’s entirely possible that under the blind testing conditions, I would’ve chosen the Revel speakers over those other speakers. But since I’m going to be using the speakers in sighted conditions, I personally choose to go with the speaker I preferred under those conditions. And it’s not like my impressions of the Joseph speakers changed once I owned them: they still have exactly the qualities I loved when I auditioned them in the store, and six years later I’m still completely thrilled with them. So if it was just a bias effect, it’s a very consistent and long lasting one. (Or… the speaker’s really do sound damn good!)
And since B&W has come up, as I’ve said before having auditioned the B&W 803 D4’s a few times I get the appeal. They sound really open, “boxless,” dynamic and highly detailed, giving an impression of peering right into the studio space of a recording. Ultimately, it’s not for me, but I understand the appeal.
My friend has reviewed speakers for 25 years (I’ve heard a gazillion speakers over at his place), most recently speakers from Vivid Audio, YG Acoustics, Estelon, Dali Epcore 9 etc. He told me the top of the line B&W 801s he had for a few months in his room were the most impressive sound he’s ever heard in his place. The combination of scale, dynamics, detail, clarity, out-of-the-box quality, soundstaging and imaging blew his mind.
It’s not like he didn’t notice the somewhat peaky quality in the upper frequency response. He certainly did. But it seemed to come with what seemed such low distortion overall that he found the sound nonetheless disarmingly “ smooth” to listen to. He said he never had listening fatigue over the months he had them. And they were replaced with the B&W monitor version that he’s been using for quite a while and he still absolutely loves them.
Do I think that my pal just has ears of clothe and is living in pure delusion? No. I usually find his descriptions of loudspeakers to be accurate to what I perceive as well.
I think the B&Ws really are thrilling him - even if under blind conditions he might like most people select Revels as superior.
I think this is because: even if a Revel speaker is more refined tonally, we are still talking about loudspeakers that can be quite impressive in of themselves. “Less good than” does not automatically equate to
“ sounds bad” and so clearly many audiophiles who are buying Revel’s competition are still having very compelling listening experiences.
, it is astonishing that anyone can afford to buy a house any more in most of the country.
