JTR Noesis 212RT Measurements

[Liberal Democracy]

For those who haven't seen it, Matthew Pose reviewed and measured these speakers here: https://www.avnirvana.com/threads/jtr-noesis-212rt-review-and-measurements.6779/

I figured quite a few people here would be quite interested in seeing the results. Very interesting speakers. I think Matthew does a pretty excellent job of measuring considering no anechoic chamber or Klippel.

@amirm these look interesting, could we reach out to manufacture and get a pair in to measure?

 

[direstraitsfan98]

155lb each

 

[Liberal Democracy]

155lb each

Amirm bicep curls with more weight than that .

 

[tuga]

Yes, that's what the questions I was addressing were asking about.

I agree, if you're looking for flaws that's where you would point. I'd venture to guess some of that is being introduced by the horn/waveguide, but I'm not well versed enough in horn/waveguide design to speculate on any details. Some could also be some of the common issues with concentric drivers at high frequencies.

Regardless, when the "waves" are high-Q and less than +/- 2 db on axis, their audibility is questionable.

If you're aiming for the "Audiophile snobbery" award for the day, comments like that will make you a lock.

There are a lot of people using these for 2-channel systems as they are quite popular with people who prefer narrow dispersion and like extremely high dynamic capabilities. I thought you were a fan of narrow dispersion speakers? You may actually love the way these sound.

I am willing to bet that the waviness is the "bad" horn sound that people object to.

Proper horn profiles (JMLC, Tractrix) don't do it.

 

[tuga]

Lovely sound of a french horn:

 

[Jon AA]

I am willing to bet that the waviness is the "bad" horn sound that people object to.

Can you give an example of one single person who has heard these speakers "objecting" to "bad horn sound?" You're doing much speculating/extrapolating. I'd sure like to see them a bit smoother on top as well, but I'm in no way sure if I'd be able to hear a difference.

Proper horn profiles (JMLC, Tractrix) don't do it.

Interesting those are the examples you pick. Neither offer constant directivity. Is this what you'd call "Proper?"

You couldn't pay me to use that horn.

 

[MZKM]

What I find interesting is their cheapest model (110HT, $2000/pair) is the only model that is described as an “audiophile loudspeaker” on their site, it uses a 10” coaxial:
https://m.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1501114836708649&type=3&comment_id=1505976699555796

 

[richard12511]

A two way going down to -3 dB @ 35 Hz? I'd like to see some distorsion measurements. Looks like there are some resonance at 6~7 kHz too. And is this me, or the baffle step is strangely high for such a big speaker?

I think it's a 3 way.

 

[q3cpma]

I think it's a 3 way.

You're right, it apparently uses a "coaxial compression driver". Something like the driver in the JBL M2?

 

[richard12511]

What I find interesting is their cheapest model (110HT, $2000/pair) is the only model that is described as an “audiophile loudspeaker” on their site, it uses a 10” coaxial:
https://m.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1501114836708649&type=3&comment_id=1505976699555796

It could be that in the more expensive models, he aims for very narrow dispersion, where as the surrounds he aims for wider dispersion. I have both, and I can definitely tell the surrounds have much wider dispersion, which (imo) is more aligned with "audiophile".

 

[Shazb0t]

You need to learn to ignore clowns @Jon AA

 

[tuga]

Can you give an example of one single person who has heard these speakers "objecting" to "bad horn sound?" You're doing much speculating/extrapolating. I'd sure like to see them a bit smoother on top as well, but I'm in no way sure if I'd be able to hear a difference.

Interesting those are the examples you pick. Neither offer constant directivity. Is this what you'd call "Proper?"

View attachment 59330

You couldn't pay me to use that horn.

Do note that it's already "silent" 40° off axis and that horn should be low-passed below 7kHz anyway.

Still you'd rather have the tromboneing effect... It should sound nice with the Ride of The Walküre.

 

[Jon AA]

You're right, it apparently uses a "coaxial compression driver". Something like the driver in the JBL M2?

No, this is an actual coaxial--a midrange driver and a tweeter being fed separate signals. The driver in the M2 is not a coaxial. The M2 is a 2-way speaker.

What I find interesting is their cheapest model (110HT, $2000/pair) is the only model that is described as an “audiophile loudspeaker” on their site, it uses a 10” coaxial:
https://m.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1501114836708649&type=3&comment_id=1505976699555796

I'm not sure I'd read any more into that than the 110HT being a newer model with some flowery language added that wasn't added in the past.

Do note that it's already "silent" 40° off axis and that horn should be low-passed below 7kHz anyway.

Still you'd rather have the tromboneing effect... It should sound nice with the Ride of The Walküre.

Wow.

You need to learn to ignore clowns @Jon AA

You're right, but it's hard.

 

[Jon AA]

I have both, and I can definitely tell the surrounds have much wider dispersion, which (imo) is more aligned with "audiophile".

I don't think it has anything to do with that. Surrounds generally need much wider dispersion than the LCR in a multi-channel system. Toole's book has a good section on it.

 

[q3cpma]

@tuga might be right, though. That HF rippling looks suspiciously like diffraction, and that coaxial compression driver (as in driver larger than the horn's throat, right?) thing is worrying me.

 

[richard12511]

@tuga might be right, though. That HF rippling looks suspiciously like diffraction, and that coaxial compression driver (as in driver larger than the horn's throat, right?) thing is worrying me.

It very well might be, but I don't think that diffraction up top makes this a horrible speaker, as@tuga is suggesting. They still seem to measure pretty well, to my eye, at least.

I knew they would measure pretty neutral as I've tested and measured these side by side with Revel M105 many times, and they measure almost identically in my room. They sound incredible, especially if you like narrow dispersion(I think I'm more in the wide dispersion camp now), and they'll knock your pants off with output.

 

[q3cpma]

It very well might be, but I don't think that diffraction up top makes this a horrible speaker, as@tuga is suggesting. They still seem to measure pretty well, to my eye, at least.

I knew they would measure pretty neutral as I've tested and measured these side by side with Revel M105 many times, and they measure almost identically in my room. They sound incredible, especially if you like narrow dispersion(I think I'm more in the wide dispersion camp now), and they'll knock your pants off with output.

Well, from Geddes' research, I think I remember that the famous "horn sound" comes from diffraction.

 

[amirm]

@amirm these look interesting, could we reach out to manufacture and get a pair in to measure?

Manufacturer has already contacted me.

 

[amirm]

Good grief:

I may need to hire someone just to lift the darn thing onto measurement gear!

 

[Jon AA]

@tuga might be right, though. That HF rippling looks suspiciously like diffraction,

Nobody is disputing there's probably some diffraction/reflections going on with the horn causing those ripples. Matthew even mentions that in the review. It's everything Tuga said about them that's wrong.