• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

I cannot trust the Harman speaker preference score

Do you value the Harman quality score?

  • 100% yes

  • It is a good metric that helps, but that's all

  • No, I don't

  • I don't have a decision


Results are only viewable after voting.

More Dynamics Please

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
562
Likes
715
Location
USA
Toole and Olive began their objective speaker performance research at Canada's National Research Center and the data was shared with the speaker industry where it was widely accepted by many. Harman believed enough in the validity of the research to hire Toole and Olive to continue that research and help apply the results to the development of speakers produced for Harman brands.

Given the above it's perfectly logical why Harman's marketing department would promote the results of the research that has been engineered into the speaker designs of the brands it sells. It's not uncommon for companies to promote the engineering behind their product designs which is preferable to marketing fluff. If we believe in the results of the research we should also believe in the products that best incorporate those results in their design and manufacture.
 

Axo1989

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 9, 2022
Messages
622
Likes
490
... If we believe in the results of the research we should also believe in the products that best incorporate those results in their design and manufacture.
The idiom "believe in" is too weird for me, especially related to an inanimate object. That the research is informative, and reflects aspects of performance of the devices in question, is less weird to my mind.
 

More Dynamics Please

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
562
Likes
715
Location
USA
The idiom "believe in" is too weird for me, especially related to an inanimate object. That the research is informative, and reflects aspects of performance of the devices in question, is less weird to my mind.

Your second sentence reflects what I was referring to "believe in" which I assumed would be assumed. :)
 

More Dynamics Please

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
562
Likes
715
Location
USA
The idea that a disinterested party would "believe in" (as opposed to be informed about) a product was what struck me.
I understand your concern about the semantics. By definition a belief in something can be based on sound reasoning as well as blind faith. In this instance my use of "believe in" is based on the former, not the latter. I hope this clarifies it for you.
 

Axo1989

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 9, 2022
Messages
622
Likes
490
I understand your concern about the semantics. By definition a belief in something can be based on sound reasoning as well as blind faith. In this instance my use of "believe in" is based on the former, not the latter. I hope this clarifies it for you.
Yes, probably a regional idiom that got me, I understand your meaning. Thanks for elaborating.
 

Aperiodic

Active Member
Joined
May 2, 2019
Messages
213
Likes
332
I don't 'get' the cachet of the 'Harman curve'- for speakers or headphones.. It seems that it is based on the same concept as a popularity contest. More people 'like' speaker/headphone 'A' than speaker/headphone 'B', so it must be better. According to that criterion, Beats headphones would be the best headphones on the market, whereas they are actually trash.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
1,750
Likes
2,033
^^^ there is a world of difference between the 'wannabe coolest' type of popularity, and the 'most highly rated on sound quality in blind tests' type of popularity.

Also, preferences are not as widely distributed as you might be thinking. A headphone with a major deviation from the 'curve' is going to get top rating with very few people indeed, in a controlled listening test.

Finally, your mention of Beats is ironic: Dr Sean Olive recently noted that the Beats Solo Pro headphone has excellent conformance with the target curve, link. You have severely overgeneralised about that brand, although, like many brands, it would be no surprise to find bad-sounding models.

cheers

 

oversky

Active Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
108
Likes
88
With EQ, how many of you consider Neumi BS5P($140/pair) is in the same broad bucket with Genelec 8010A($700/pair)?

The score is not significant ±0.5. It means that 2 speakers which have a difference in score less than 1 are in the same broad bucket. No point to look at the decimals.

Fe9SCc0.png



XJHORte.png
 

IPunchCholla

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
403
Likes
424
I can’t say for those two speakers, but with proper EQ using REW and ARC3, not manual, my speakers improved enormously. To the point that my timeline for new speakers is way out, since all my noticeable flaws seem to have shrunk well past the variation in recordings themselves.

I would be curious what would happen to speaker preference scores if speakers were software calibrated to the same target before the preference test.
 

Flak

Active Member
Industry Insider
Joined
Nov 18, 2018
Messages
294
Likes
402
I can’t say for those two speakers, but with proper EQ using REW and ARC3, not manual, my speakers improved enormously. To the point that my timeline for new speakers is way out, since all my noticeable flaws seem to have shrunk well past the variation in recordings themselves.

I would be curious what would happen to speaker preference scores if speakers were software calibrated to the same target before the preference test.
Good question (in my admittedly biased opinion) :)
 
Top Bottom