• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Magnepan LRS Speaker Review

How do you perform a listening test with one flipping speaker? Here's an idea, you don't.
Actually using one speaker removes all the special effects of the recording process and makes makes the speaker show it's true sound without room imaging effects and such. One can hear the frequency response better and determine if the speaker is distorting easier.
 
How do you perform a listening test with one flipping speaker? Here's an idea, you don't.
Ah, you seem to be unaware of the research. Controlled listening tests involving comparison between different speakers show that using one speaker (instead of two) significantly improves our ability to clearly identify which speaker we prefer, including which speaker we will prefer in stereo.

Welcome to audio science, where assumptions are put to the test.
 
Ah, you seem to be unaware of the research. Controlled listening tests involving comparison between different speakers show that using one speaker (instead of two) significantly improves our ability to clearly identify which speaker we prefer, including which speaker we will prefer in stereo.

Welcome to audio science, where assumptions are put to the test.
Where assumptions are put to rest :)
 
Ah, you seem to be unaware of the research. Controlled listening tests involving comparison between different speakers show that using one speaker (instead of two) significantly improves our ability to clearly identify which speaker we prefer, including which speaker we will prefer in stereo.

Welcome to audio science, where assumptions are put to the test.
That's a vast oversimplification of what Floyd Toole reports in his book.

To take just one example, subjective ratings of dipole speakers (BB) change much more significantly from mono to stereo than subjective ratings of forward-firing speakers (AA and E):

toole.8.12.jpg
 
Ah, you seem to be unaware of the research. Controlled listening tests involving comparison between different speakers show that using one speaker (instead of two) significantly improves our ability to clearly identify which speaker we prefer, including which speaker we will prefer in stereo.

Welcome to audio science, where assumptions are put to the test.
What kind of asinine comment welcomes someone to a forum they've been reading for years?

Next time I go to test drive a car I'll go half the speed limit see what I learn about its performance.

No one sits at home and listens to a half a speaker pair, or half a soundbar. Argue semantics all day, it's a dumb test.
 
What kind of asinine comment welcomes someone to a forum they've been reading for years?
I didn't welcome you to the forum, I welcomed you to audio science.
Next time I go to test drive a car I'll go half the speed limit see what I learn about its performance.

No one sits at home and listens to a half a speaker pair, or half a soundbar. Argue semantics all day, it's a dumb test.
It's not semantics, it's science.

Amir has taken the time and trouble to explain this issue. Check it out!

 
What kind of asinine comment welcomes someone to a forum they've been reading for years?

Next time I go to test drive a car I'll go half the speed limit see what I learn about its performance.

No one sits at home and listens to a half a speaker pair, or half a soundbar. Argue semantics all day, it's a dumb test.
And no one sits around all day doing speaker evaluation listening for enjoyment of music. If you do however want to evaluate a speaker, there are good reasons mono is more revealing than stereo. Amir has a video on that.
 
That's a vast oversimplification of what Floyd Toole reports in his book.

To take just one example, subjective ratings of dipole speakers (BB) change much more significantly from mono to stereo than subjective ratings of forward-firing speakers (AA and E):

View attachment 437512
And that's a vast misunderstanding of what Floyd Toole wrote in his book.

I have corrected this misunderstanding before, link. And I know you read it, since you were giving likes just a few posts upstream and downstream.

Icing on the cake, Floyd Toole has endorsed my correction.
 
What kind of asinine comment welcomes someone to a forum they've been reading for years?

Next time I go to test drive a car I'll go half the speed limit see what I learn about its performance.

No one sits at home and listens to a half a speaker pair, or half a soundbar. Argue semantics all day, it's a dumb test.
It makes sense when taking into consideration the advantages.
 
And no one sits around all day doing speaker evaluation listening for enjoyment of music. If you do however want to evaluate a speaker, there are good reasons mono is more revealing than stereo. Amir has a video on that.
Stereo imaging is surely skipped in the evaluation. I think its quite an important quality of speakers..
 
Stereo imaging is surely skipped in the evaluation. I think its quite an important quality of speakers..
It is dependent upon the speakers. Clearly the results show mono is more discriminating than mono. So how do you think two lesser speakers would fair better than two better speakers? The stereo testing is skipped because results indicated it was less dependable, reliable and less discriminating in other performance parameters.

It is not like speakers that have done well in the mono testing are not good in stereo. I've heard a few models that do well in such testing and they do well in stereo. Stereo to some extent dilutes differences in loudspeaker quality.
 
It is dependent upon the speakers. Clearly the results show mono is more discriminating than mono. So how do you think two lesser speakers would fair better than two better speakers? The stereo testing is skipped because results indicated it was less dependable, reliable and less discriminating in other performance parameters.

It is not like speakers that have done well in the mono testing are not good in stereo. I've heard a few models that do well in such testing and they do well in stereo. Stereo to some extent dilutes differences in loudspeaker quality.
Conclusion: Do main evaluation in mono with a final evaluation in stereo.
Some speakers (line sources for instance) have a quite different stereo imaging than more point source speakers for instance.
 
Conclusion: Do main evaluation in mono with a final evaluation in stereo.
Some speakers (line sources for instance) have a quite different stereo imaging than more point source speakers for instance.
You can do that of course. Line source or panel speakers are very different from point source speakers anyway.
 
Next time I go to test drive a car I'll go half the speed limit see what I learn about its performance.

No one sits at home and listens to a half a speaker pair, or half a soundbar. Argue semantics all day, it's a dumb test.
Your analogies are bad, just like your arguments.
 
Stereo imaging is surely skipped in the evaluation. I think its quite an important quality of speakers..
No, stereo imaging is a function of the speakers and how smooth their response, which can be readily measured and heard from a single speaker. What is missing is the influence of your specific listening room, but even that is handled. The Klippel system also measures radiation pattern, which provides insight into how the speakers will perform in a room, once you know more about the room itself (dimensions, absorption/refection coefficients, etc.) I agree imaging is important, but you do not need two speakers to assess imaging.
 
A forum member has just alerted me to this discussion, and my name is being circulated, so I have decided to add some clarification. The topic of sound quality is of fundamental importance, and stereo soundstage and imaging are undeniably key factors in our entertainment. However, the factors affecting all of these perceptual dimensions interact with each other, sometimes in destructive ways. Adding enormous complications is the fact that much of what matters to all factors, especially soundstage and imaging is determined by recordings. Stereo is a directionally and spatially deprived format, and since its inception listeners have sought to "fill in the blanks" with imaginative loudspeaker designs, electronic processing, and audio jewelry of various kinds. There is no "hardware" solution, no "perfect" loudspeaker or wire or amplifier that will suddenly bring "reality" to the listening room. But, audio forum activity indicates no end of trying. In this context, the notion of evaluating loudspeakers in mono sounds ludicrous - or is it?

The manuscript of the 4th edition of my book is now with the publisher, anticipating publication around September. In it this subject is, I would like to think, exhaustively examined and explained, using scientific evidence. Long story short, human listeners are increasingly less sensitive to sound quality degradations in loudspeakers as the channel count is increased from one to two and two to five. The overall result of adding channels is more spatial and directional information, which can be highly entertaining, but the end result is that the binaural hearing system has difficulty separating the spatial cues in the recordings, from the spatial cues in the listening room. Increasing channel count increases the persuasion of the recorded space. As a result listeners are unable to discern timbral errors caused by resonances in loudspeakers with the same sensitivity as in mono/single-loudspeaker comparisons.

The reality is that most stereo and multichannel recordings include isolated, hard-panned, sound images providing instances when the true character of the loudspeakers can be heard. In simple stereo recordings instruments often appear in left and right loudspeakers - mono. All phantom images are double mono. This explains why loudspeakers that win monophonic comparison tests always win stereo and multichannel tests, The reverse is not always true. So, to determine how good your loudspeakers are, do comparison listening tests in mono. Then, if they are good, impress your friends in stereo and multichannel - but choose the recordings carefully: they are a major determinant of what is heard.

Here is something I wrote a couple of years ago - it is long but still not the complete story, as it is currently understood.
 

Attachments

  • stereo vs mono.pdf
    361.9 KB · Views: 55
Then, if they are good, impress your friends in stereo and multichannel - but choose the recordings carefully: they are a major determinant of what is heard.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge and research.

Are there any recent recordings that you recommend (and enjoy) for mono evaluation, and stereo demonstration?
 
Thank you for sharing your knowledge and research.

Are there any recent recordings that you recommend (and enjoy) for mono evaluation, and stereo demonstration?
As explained in AES papers and my books, the most revealing music in multiple-loudspeaker comparison tests tends to have complex instrumentation - a dense spectrum - wide bandwidth - especially bass extension - and reverberation. The musical genre is unimportant.

For listening pleasure or demonstration the choice is yours.
 
Back
Top Bottom