Is The Revel Ultima Salon2 STILL the State Of The Art?

[Imakeller]

JBL explicitly requires the 705i to be used with JBL amps or processors that provide the necessary equalization. A lot of the JBL pro and home theater line is designed that way, the M2 for instance ...

I’m sure they perform well as designed. I’m just not familiar with them. It does seem restrictive to require usage with certain JBL amps or processors, but clearly there are advantages to being in that ecosystem.

 

[jhaider]

To be clear, the blue curve represents the output of the processor as modified by the AEQ filter bank for Salon2, not a room measurement ...

Just for fun, here is the AEQ correction applied for Voice2:

View attachment 510455

And here is the AEQ set of filters required for JBL 705i:

View attachment 510456

Obviously the 705i was designed to use digital EQ from the start. Imagine trying to implement that transfer function using passive filters in the XO network ...

That is consistent with my BSS measurements of the 705i curve. However, note in the 708i thread that the resonances of the tweeter were now misaligned with the filter. (Same tweeter.) I wonder if there was a running change to the unit, because my early production ones (ca 2017) align perfectly with the EQ. Have you checked a quasi-anechoic measurement?

I’m sure they perform well as designed. I’m just not familiar with them. It does seem restrictive to require usage with certain JBL amps or processors, but clearly there are advantages to being in that ecosystem.

There’s the plate amp 705P model for standalone use.

 

[Scott Borduin]

That is consistent with my BSS measurements of the 705i curve. However, note in the 708i thread that the resonances of the tweeter were now misaligned with the filter. (Same tweeter.) I wonder if there was a running change to the unit, because my early production ones (ca 2017) align perfectly with the EQ. Have you checked a quasi-anechoic measurement?

All of my 705i are hard mounted near room boundaries, so any quasi-anechoic measurements would have to be aggressively windowed. What is the FR area of concern?

My 705i were, I think, 2018 production.

 

[hvbias]

I don't see free. Members and cost $33

https://www.audioroundtable.com/misc/Welti_Multisub.pdf

I read Bogle's book and adopted his financial philosophy way back in my 20s. Highly recommended for anyone needing investment guidance. ASR readers will really appreciate Bogle's thinking and data. But making the psychological shift to spending is one I am actively working on as I just retired earlier this year. There's the logic of, oh, I can buy that and it will make absolutely no material difference to our daily lives financially and then there is the decades old practice of being reasonable and valued conscious! Not automatic to undo the latter.

Indeed, I deviated from Bogle's strategy a bit by buying individual tech stocks and SPY LEAPS and rolling them after they entered long term cap gains. But for the most part I was pretty much VTI. Looking back on my performance the former was pure luck having never invested through a market crash, had I stuck with just VTI I'd have still been able to FIRE at roughly the same age. For the last several years I've mostly been following the mega thread on brokerage transfer bonuses which I've done a few of and that "free money" has essentially let me pay off my next stereo, multiple luxury vacations, and far more. Those folks really know how to squeeze the system!

 

[gabo4au]

I understand all the measurements and graphs, and am a big proponent of how great that has been for evaluating speakers. And appreciate all the value this site and also Erin's site have had for all of us chasing perfection.

My one problem with measurements and things like spinorama is correlating what the small differences in some of the graphs produce when you listen. When you listen to speakers and A/B two sets of speakers, you can generally hear things you like or don't like about each of them. But knowing exactly where those things are in the graphs is sometimes challenging.

I've done this a few times and have been surprised that what I thought was the "culprit" of something I did or didn't like turned out not to be the case. To test this, I've listened, found some thing that I like, looked at the data and theorized that "this little thing on this chart is responsible for that." Then used technology to tweak that same spot on the graph and listened to see if it accentuates or reduces what I liked, only to find out it did not! Then spent a bit of time trying to accentuate or reduce what I was hearing to find that it was something completely different than I thought.

This makes it sometimes difficult to see graphs/charts and correlate that to "what I like" in a speaker.

But the fortunate part is that speakers that measure really well in all categories, almost always sound great. The minor differences are not nearly as big as the differences in how recordings are produced and mastered. There are many recordings of great songs by great artists that you just can't get to sound great due to the production. Other songs that are just average songs, sometimes just sound so good you have to play them!

 

[MattHooper]

My one problem with measurements and things like spinorama is correlating what the small differences in some of the graphs produce when you listen. When you listen to speakers and A/B two sets of speakers, you can generally hear things you like or don't like about each of them. But knowing exactly where those things are in the graphs is sometimes challenging.

I have the same problem.

Especially once the measurements start getting pretty close, and lots of little zigs and zags along the way, I just have a hard time predicting which speaker I would like better from the measurements.

For instance both the Paradigm Persona speakers and Joseph Audio Perspective (original) that I auditioned have a rising top end and a peak around 10 K.

The Joseph speakers rise is a little bit more gradual and doesn’t peak quite as high at 10 K. But just looking the measurements, and even though I have sensitive ears, I didn’t know which speaker I would actually like better.

As it turned out when I auditioned them I found the highs in the paradigm speakers irritating. I found them fatiguing and I had to turn the volume down over time and finally, I just gave up on the audition.

In contrast, I found the Joseph speaker sounded incredibly smooth and I could listen as long as I wanted comfortably. I was completely mesmerized by the overall presentation of the Joseph speakers.
(I ended up buying the Joseph speakers and later upgrading them to the newer drivers and crossover, where they are actually smoother and free currency response in the high-end, which makes them even more relaxing to listen to).

 

[amirm]

This makes it sometimes difficult to see graphs/charts and correlate that to "what I like" in a speaker.

It is certainly non-trivial to fully imagine what the graphs are saying in one's head as far as tonality and overall impression. This is why I develop EQ filters to test the level of audibility of impairments and the actual difference they make.

 

[MarkS]

they are actually smoother and free currency response in the high-end

Wait -- your speakers dispense free currency? Which one? US dollars?

I need a pair of those ...

 

[BobbyTimmons]

I understand all the measurements and graphs, and am a big proponent of how great that has been for evaluating speakers. And appreciate all the value this site and also Erin's site have had for all of us chasing perfection.

My one problem with measurements and things like spinorama is correlating what the small differences in some of the graphs produce when you listen. When you listen to speakers and A/B two sets of speakers, you can generally hear things you like or don't like about each of them. But knowing exactly where those things are in the graphs is sometimes challenging.

I've done this a few times and have been surprised that what I thought was the "culprit" of something I did or didn't like turned out not to be the case. To test this, I've listened, found some thing that I like, looked at the data and theorized that "this little thing on this chart is responsible for that." Then used technology to tweak that same spot on the graph and listened to see if it accentuates or reduces what I liked, only to find out it did not! Then spent a bit of time trying to accentuate or reduce what I was hearing to find that it was something completely different than I thought.

This makes it sometimes difficult to see graphs/charts and correlate that to "what I like" in a speaker.

But the fortunate part is that speakers that measure really well in all categories, almost always sound great. The minor differences are not nearly as big as the differences in how recordings are produced and mastered. There are many recordings of great songs by great artists that you just can't get to sound great due to the production. Other songs that are just average songs, sometimes just sound so good you have to play them!

Erin falls victim to this quite a lot in his reviews but he also acknowledges whenever he might be falling victim to it which is refreshing.