Meyer Sound Amie Monitor Review

[Robbo99999]

I don't mean to single you out, but there is a substantial group here convinced that the objectively better speakers are their personal preference. I wonder how many would pick the same speakers in a blind/double blind comparison.

Have you personally done any blind listening tests to see if your certainty of relative quality is backed up with statistically relevant empirical evidence?

Well, no, I haven't done blind comparisons. I've done a lot of experimentation with EQ on speakers and headphones that have been positively reviewed here on ASR or measured by Oratory, mostly on headphones, but with speakers I bought on Amir's review of the 305p and got the 308p (JBL) whilst it was on sale and then he subsequently measured it and found it to be good, upon which time I experimented using an Anechoic EQ based on his measurements to perfect it along with roomEQ and also experimenting vs using roomEQ over the whole frequency range vs Anechoic EQ above transition zone & room EQ in the bass. So I have quite a bit of experience with "good sound" and using EQ to perfect it, which I think helps you interpret the spinoramas better and how that actually translates on a subjective listening level. But no, I can't say I've compared a load of speakers in a blind testing environment, that's indeed very complicated to do, and very few have done that - but what I am confident in is that the spinorama measurements don't lie, my 308p purchase combined with Anechoic EQ to the ideal Anechoic Flat makes me believe that the spinorama and Anechoic Flat/good directivity/low distortion is essentially the key to good speaker sound - I'd buy a speaker blind on that basis, without listening demos, because let's face it how many times when you demo a speaker has it been optimised in layout within the room and also with RoomEQ (rare, right!). I'd buy a speaker blind every time. Something Neumann or Genelec would be my next speaker purchase if I ever bought another speaker, but probably a long time till I need to, I don't think my JBL 308p will fail anytime soon.

(So with my various EQ experiences within headphone & speakers, I have a good understanding of what different frequency extensions sound like into the bass (I have a subwoofer that goes down to 20Hz too), and just a general practical understanding of "frequency response" in terms of what it sounds like in both headphones & speakers, along with how changes in that frequency response can affect the sound.) I find it pretty easy to read frequency response graphs for speakers & headphones, but it's harder to prove to you that I'm accurate in doing so, I can't really prove that to you.

 

[Robbo99999]

Looking at all the graphs still won't tell you definitively which one is "better" or which one you prefer, especially when they are relatively similar with no obvious flaws. If you have heard a number of speakers that you've also seen the spinorama for, that will help, but will still not necessarily be conclusive.

Don't get me wrong, these measurements are great tools, but they're not gospel.

If two different speakers measure almost identically perfect, then no I wouldn't be able tell which one was better from the measurements, I might have some ideas or intuitions on which one would likely sound the best, but I suppose you'd have to listen to them to be sure, and any experiment doing so would have to be meticulously controlled which in reality is hardly worth the effort - I'd keep it simple and just buy the best speakers that measure the best for the budget I can afford - simples!

 

[Sokel]

For everyone that underestimates the higher SPL ability ,specially in mid-bass and higher,lower is easier,remember that some excellent ones are divided by 30k$ (each),not a pair) just because of that and it's their strong advertised point.
The difference here is not big but still...

(oh,I hate the money stuff on reviews,it's predictable and boring)

 

[GXAlan]

We are well past the point of diminishing returns once you get to the JBL 3-series. Justin Hurwitz uses that and has won Grammy Awards.

But
1) Circle of confusion is real. It’s not a snake oil belief. It’s well established science by even Sean Olive that non neutral recordings can sound better on non neutral speakers.

2) Sometimes you want to hear what the engineers intended and sometimes you want to hear more than the engineers (Bass EQ) even with the same content. This makes it personal preference when you think breaking the circle of confusion is good.

3) You can recognize the limitations of the preference score without ignoring the science. That’s often where people get confused.

This is from 2005, and to my knowledge, there is no update to this since it’s patent protected so no one wants to disclose they are violating the patent and no one wants to pay the licensing fees.

US20050195982A1 - Method for predicting loudspeaker preference - Google Patents

A general model is provided for predicting a loudspeaker preference rating, where the model's predicted loudspeaker preference rating is calculated based upon the sum of a plurality of weighted independent variables that statistically quantify amplitude deviations in a loudspeaker frequency...

patents.google.com

Higher is better with good predictability, but with the sample sizes from 2005, the best sounding speakers were NOT the highest preference.

What is most telling is that the most expensive and most modern speaker from Harman is the SCL-1

Measurements for speaker JBL Synthesis SCL-1

www.spinorama.org

 

[ernestcarl]

Yea, the Meyer has more headroom (while they both have (probably) comparable real world dispersion). but $5000? You better get the S360

We aren’t their customers — that’s not really hard to accept. I’d just move on and look for something else.

 

[ernestcarl]

Also realistically, I don't think Meyer has some high SPL special sauce with driver design, selection and integration Neumann is unaware of. I think they simply optimised slightly more for high SPL but with disproportionately high compromises (DI, port resonance) at all but extreme SPLs, and with a roll-off slightly higher up.

Who said or claimed that? What would be nice is for someone to actually compare the drivers side-by-side with their measured parameters.

As for the waveguide, port and baffle optimization, I think Neumann is ahead here with their computer aided simulations. But also because they are not likely to compromise on certain attributes more for the sake of SPL. Meyer Sound is a PA speaker company as well; they may have a different engineering point of view.

 

[dasdoing]

We aren’t their customers — that’s not really hard to accept. I’d just move on and look for something else.

I am a fan of PA speakers....love to see this company in this segment. But we are also on a mission here to show the real value of products. This product just makes no sense at all at this price point.

 

[NTK]

I don't know how the Neumann and Genelec behave. I'm not aware of a free tool to take the EASE data from Neumman and Genelec to generate these plots.

Have you tried EASE Focus?

EASE Focus 3 - Free Download | Ahnert Feistel Media Group

www.afmg.eu

This is my experiment with 8351's.

 

[GXAlan]

Have you tried EASE Focus?

EASE Focus 3 - Free Download | Ahnert Feistel Media Group

www.afmg.eu

This is my experiment with 8351's.
View attachment 317722

That’s great. But the FR simulation seems really low resolution. 1-octave resolution?

 

[NTK]

That’s great. But the FR simulation seems really low resolution. 1-octave resolution?

Yes. Unfortunately EASE Focus only have 3 choices for the bandwidth. The Meyer Sound plots you showed in post #201 were generated, I believe, with 1/6 octave bandwidth. I guess this is one of the limitations of this free software.

The free EASE GLL Viewer can export the complex transfer function data (if valid data is included in the speaker's GLL file, those in the Genelec 8531 GLL file look a bit suspicious, see below for the TF at 2 different angles). We should be able to use the complex transfer function data to calculate complex sums of multiple speakers to generate narrow bandwidth comb filtering plots (and do other perhaps more interesting things). That will need to involve some math and programming. If there is interest, I can start a new thread for the discussion.

 

[GXAlan]

Yes. Unfortunately EASE Focus only have 3 choices for the bandwidth. The Meyer Sound plots you showed in post #201 were generated, I believe, with 1/6 octave bandwidth

That’s right, but you can generate higher resolution calculations like I show in this post.

Meyer Sound Amie: First Impressions

Yes, these are already en route to @amirm for a formal spin on the Klippel NFS. $8160/pair MSRP (Sept 2023) Manufacturer's Website Specifications Frequency Response 45 Hz – 20 kHz ± 4 dB Phase Response 190 Hz – 20 kHz ± 45° Linear Peak SPL 120.5 dB with 18.5 dB crest factor (M-noise)...

audiosciencereview.com

We should be able to use the complex transfer function data to calculate complex sums of multiple speakers to generate narrow bandwidth comb filtering plots (and do other perhaps more interesting things). That will need to involve some math and programming. If there is interest, I can start a new thread for the discussion.

It would be cool if Pierre’s database which aggregates a lot of NFS data can be used to do interesting things

 

[uwotm8]

Score is 5.1

With EQ, score would increase marginally up to 5.6

As expected, Dynadio LYD 5 with its score of 5.7 (no EQ!) just runs circles around. 350 Euro each

 

[pierre]

That’s right, but you can generate higher resolution calculations like I show in this post.

Meyer Sound Amie: First Impressions

Yes, these are already en route to @amirm for a formal spin on the Klippel NFS. $8160/pair MSRP (Sept 2023) Manufacturer's Website Specifications Frequency Response 45 Hz – 20 kHz ± 4 dB Phase Response 190 Hz – 20 kHz ± 45° Linear Peak SPL 120.5 dB with 18.5 dB crest factor (M-noise)...

audiosciencereview.com

It would be cool if Pierre’s database which aggregates a lot of NFS data can be used to do interesting things

happy to do some coding. I have a Helmotz solver that i can run to generate similar plots. I would need the phase information that Amir does not provide.

 

[375HP2482]

2) Sometimes you want to hear what the engineers intended and sometimes you want to hear more than the engineers (Bass EQ) even with the same content.

Since I can't know what the engineers heard, in spite of well-meaning attempts to standardize what they should be hearing, I'll stick with hearing as much as I can.

 

[Xyrium]

Thanks for sending these in GX! These are a great step forward for USA-made products.

 

[GXAlan]

Thanks for sending these in GX! These are a great step forward for USA-made products.

It’s also an 8 year old design!

What we do see, unfortunately, is the cost of production in the US.

Meyer Sound makes the drivers in California

Meyer Sound HQ - A Laboratory of Sound - LightSoundJournal.com

LightSoundJournal visits the headquarters and laboratories of Meyer Sound, one of the most famous and appreciated audio brands in the world.

www.lightsoundjournal.com

They invest in having an environmentally thoughtful factory, as stewards of our planet.

Breaking the sound barrier in West Berkeley with precision manufacturing

[Sponsored] At its large West Berkeley complex of buildings, Meyer Sound manufactures precision products that are used at venues large and small around the world.

www.berkeleyside.org

“No old or rejected electronic components go to landfill,” says Robinson. “We take an amplifier down to the PC board, stripping and recycling the copper, aluminum and plastic, even the steel screws”

(Although we are waiting to see if they can take in the damaged enclosure)

And supposedly even controls their supply chain to the wood being used to make their wood pulp.

Meyer Sound Amie Monitor Review

This is a review, listening test and detailed measurements of the Meyer Sound Amie Studio (active) monitor speaker. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $4,080 each (sold in pairs?). The deep, horn like waveguide sets the speaker apart from its competitors. The large throat of the...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[userb]

How does the time domain performance of the Amie compare to similarly priced Genelec & Neumann?

 

[userb]

Not necessarily, JBL 708p seems to be a slightly wider directivity loudspeaker compared to KH150 and Amie, look at the DIs (reference):View attachment 317073

TBH I'm not sure you can get the exact sound the mixing engineer heard anyway, unless you have equivalent room treatment and room EQ corrections implemented; and these are probably unknowns (for the most part).
Also, at this level of quality I feel the response differences are probably only relevant in direct comparison and otherwise IMHO largely irrelevant. Probably not a popular opinion on an audio enthusiast forum

To my knowledge there is no evidence supporting the hypothesis that mimicking real sound source dispersion patterns in loudspeakers is beneficial. To my understanding research from NRC and Harman concluded only that listeners prefer loudspeakers with smooth directivity over those with irregular directivity characteristics.
In practice many real sound sources have increasing directivity with frequency so naturally there is some similarity there - but I'm not sure how much we can extrapolate out of this fact.

I would think it is well established that a dedicated center speaker improves intelligibility compared to just L+R. Stereo famously introduces a dip in midrange spectrum for centrally panned content (due to interference between the two channels). This is also discussed in dr. Toole's book.

All I would dare say is that DI of Amie shows well-controlled dispersion, that is somewhat on the narrow side. This might result in a narrower soundstage, but with well-focused phantom images compared to wide-directivity loudspeakers (and assuming use in a 'small' room with relatively reflective side walls).
In case first reflection points are heavily treated (as is sometimes done in specialized rooms / studios) I suspect directivity pattern differences would be much less relevant in practice.

"Stereo famously introduces a dip in midrange spectrum for centrally panned content (due to interference between the two channels). This is also discussed in dr. Toole's book."

Does the book mention the exact frequency range of this midrange dip? Curious to know.

 

[NTK]

"Stereo famously introduces a dip in midrange spectrum for centrally panned content (due to interference between the two channels). This is also discussed in dr. Toole's book."

Does the book mention the exact frequency range of this midrange dip? Curious to know.

See Dr Toole's article at Audioholics, go down to the section "The Phantom Center Channel Superiority Myth".

Room Reflections & Human Adaptation for Small Room Acoustics

Dealing with acoustics in small rooms is no trivial matter. This article focuses on how to treat early reflections based on listening habits, your loudspeaker choice. Absorb, diffuse, reflect; decide.

www.audioholics.com

 

[userb]

See Dr Toole's article at Audioholics, go down to the section "The Phantom Center Channel Superiority Myth".

Room Reflections & Human Adaptation for Small Room Acoustics

Dealing with acoustics in small rooms is no trivial matter. This article focuses on how to treat early reflections based on listening habits, your loudspeaker choice. Absorb, diffuse, reflect; decide.

www.audioholics.com

Thank you!