GelbeMusik
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2020
- Messages
- 445
- Likes
- 290
5dB down at 10k at 60°. Any questions?
https://www.tymphany.com/transducers/da25tx00-08/
Ah, this applies to all directions, not only to the horizontal.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!
Quality Perception: ID vs Name Brand
- Thread starter 2DFlier
- Start date
5dB down at 10k at 60°. Any questions?
https://www.tymphany.com/transducers/da25tx00-08/
Ah, this applies to all directions, not only to the horizontal.
Any commercial dome designs with similar horizontal directivity to a narrow ribbon?
- Thread Starter
- #63
I allowed several things to bias my opinion of the Evoke 10 before ever actually hearing them so I'm not sure my opinion is worth much. The reason I'd consider revisiting is to give it the fair shot it didn't get the first time. So, if you want to know the truth and save yourself some time I suggest you stop reading now.
If you continue reading I'd disregard half of what follows and suspect the other half is BS.
I first "demo'd" the Evoke 10, M105 and several others using an online speaker comparison tool offered by a brick and mortar retailer with a significant E commerce presence. It's actually a pretty interesting tool but I couldn't tell you how well it represents the real deal. That said, prompting the user to select the headphones being used to listen lent it some credibility.
What I heard across that tool was a speaker that seemed relatively thin through what I'll describe as mid and upper mid range. I can't say for sure what the actual range was, but it sounded a bit lifeless compared to the other speakers while listening to the same pieces of music. So what do you suppose I expected to hear and then actually heard when the speakers arrived?
The speakers came with a notice advising a 50 hour break-in period was require before they could perform at their best. Marketing or real I don't know but they got maybe a couple of hours total.
My opinion was further biased before listening by their aesthetic. It's a relatively small speaker, which was fine, but I didn't really care for the shape of the cabinet (top and bottom parallel, wedge shaped sides) and the finish and the color I chose looked better in the pictures. True to Danish sensibilities but Strike 2.
Finally, what I recall was an unimpressive knock test especially compared to the M105 and Sierra 2 EX. Strike 3 before even listening.
In retrospect I also took on way too much at once which also influenced how I approached this. I had too many speakers and too many amplifiers on hand at once so I was too quick to disregard a couple of speakers. If I had the time and patience to go through all combinations I could have launched my own YouTube channel.
In the end I suspect the Evoke 10 is a better sounding speaker than my biases and impatience allowed me to appreciate.
snapsc
Member
Since you already have the BMR...and since none of the speakers you are considering are likely to sound as good as the BMR (which as you know is very highly thought of) and since the 2EX will sound more like the BMR than the M105....why not go for the M105 just because it is different and in doing so, you will gain some nice insight as to where your preferences lie...which should be really helpful for future loudspeaker decisions.
- Thread Starter
- #65
That is definitely among the reasons for considering the Revel or something comparable. Though they sound good I have to reconcile some ill feelings I have for Revel quality, but that’s me whining.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2019
- Messages
- 1,172
- Likes
- 2,323
Thanks. I am using their older model X12 on my desktop and like them a lot. I can see the evoke being brighter, as someone posted a comparison of measurements between the Evoke and M16 and the Evoke runs several db higher from about 2k to 7k.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...10-why-the-heck-not-lets-have-some-fun.12331/
Again I will nudge you towards considering Neumann
They have incredible build quality, and sound quality probably superior to Revel and Ascend.Right now I am actually comparing my Neumann KH310’s vs my Revel F206 in the same room for fun, and the Neumann absolutely dominate IMO. The Neumanns are much better in every single way imaginable — better, deeper, flatter, and more powerful bass — better more natural mids — treble so flat and linear they probably would give the RAAL ribbons very good competition if I compared with the Ascend towers (maybe I should do that next). In comparison to the Neumann KH310s, the Revel F206 sounds simultaneously muddy and tinny (for having that typical mid bass bump passives often have, for lacking the extremely flat and deep bass extension of the Neumann, and for having overall less neutral and smooth treble response than the Neumann).
It’s amazing considering how much smaller the KH310 vs the F206 towers, but I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised if I look at the measurements. But FYI the same should be true of the Neumann KH120 vs the options you are considering. I understand if active speakers aren’t an option for other reasons, but personally I wish I had tried them sooner. They are so much better.
Last edited:
Having very good powered monitors from Neumann and now Genelec, how do those 2 compare? Both have very good Spins with the main difference in the vertical plane due to the point source vs line source setup. Do you notice any differences between the 2?
I will have to compare them side by side at some point. I probably will have to turn off the Genelec room correction for the comparison to be “fair” in a sense, since that makes a big difference. Otherwise, the Genelecs will of course win by a large margin regardless.
What I can say though is that the Genelecs are far better for near field listening because the KH310’s are more mid-field oriented, since the KH310 drivers don’t all integrate together until you’re a few feet out at least. The coaxial Genelec has the most consistent sound I have ever heard, as you move around the room (not counting bass response, which of course has different hot zones around the room). Standing vs sitting makes no difference to the overall tonality, which is the most unique aspect. It’s so consistent that it’s almost weird.
Due to this, the Genelecs actually sound quite good even when sitting on my desk relatively close to my listening position, while the Neumanns only become brilliant once several feet away. I can even lean all the way in until my nose almost touches my computer monitor and the sound is the same — better actually, because the soundstage seems a bit wider when the speakers are farther out to the side relative to my head. With that said though, even the Genelecs definitely still sound much better when on stands and closer to the corners of the room (in this room, at least), since when on my desk they have treble spikes (from desk surface reflections I assume) and bass nulls (from who knows what) that do not seem to exist when the speakers are placed closer to the walls and corners of this room.
Buy from a good dealer.
Now if they could put this amazing sound tech into a cabinet that looks acceptable outside of a studio environment. Preferrably with ways to hook them up that don't require me to run thick black studio-grade XLR cables through my livingroom. Ah, one can dream...
Thin XLR cables exist, so I don’t think that should be a problem. That said, I do share frustration that most audio streamers and AVRs seem optimized towards the amplified outputs, and less friendly to XLR devices. However I have not had any problem with simple RCA to XLR connector cables so far.
Regarding aesthetics: I suppose looks are subjective. Personally, I agree with the OP that Revels look cheaper than they actually are / perform. Because they are built with visibly plastic parts (not that it compromises the sonic performance at all). For example:
Personally, I do not find a feeling of quality exudes from the plastic waveguide screwed in, nor the visible bolts, nor the metal bars over the tweeter dome, nor the plastic top piece over the otherwise nicely finished piano black wood.
In contrast:
Everything about the Neumann feels and looks quality, at least to me. Unlike the Revel, the waveguides are perfect and smoothly transition into the solid front panel that also encapsulates the drivers. The exterior is finished with a nice matte gray with metallic speckles that reminds of a premium metallic matte auto paint on an exotic supercar. (Edit: Apparently the front is plastic too — but it doesn’t look it). The woofer, midrange, and tweeter all have a quality and custom designed look to them (with a waveguide for each).
I don’t mean to be unnecessarily negative to the Revel (I still own one myself, I’m not a hater), but I do have to agree with OP that Revel does have relatively poor build quality from an aesthetic “furniture” perspective, compared to some ID brands or pro audio. I find Neumann’s to be much superior, in sound quality and build quality and aesthetics. But yes, there are other audiophile brands that are truly beautiful works of art, far beyond these both. I really like the look of KEF and Sonus Faber, for example.
I would agree the KH310 has an odd look, though, due to its unusual driver configuration. But the KH120A is, to my subjective eye, beautiful in its own utilitarian way:
Granted, beauty is in the eye of the beholder
I will say that they feel and look even better in person, due to the all-metal design.That said, I do think Genelec’s metallic particle paint finish is nicer, but I’m just nitpicking at that point
Last edited:
Those Neumann's look like beasts. Very nice appearance if a bit utilitarian. Thanks for the close up revel pics, I assumed they'd be a bit more polished than that.
Yeah I think it depends on whether you subjectively like the “gray metallic paint” look. I do. Genelec’s is even more “sparkly” than Neumann. (They offer white and black finishes as well for those who don’t like gray.)
It’s hard to capture in a photo, but those little specks are little metallic reflective particles in the finish/paint that sparkle as you change perspective. The entire body itself is metal, but is finished with this sparkling matte paint much like you might see in an exotic car paint job.
IMO it’s far less boring than piano black, or even most wood designs (aside from maybe Sonus Faber’s beautiful works of art, and some others). And it’s not so overdone that it looks like it’s studded with diamonds or anything quite that gaudy. But of course beauty is subjective, so to each their own
It’s hard to capture in a photo, but those little specks are little metallic reflective particles in the finish/paint that sparkle as you change perspective. The entire body itself is metal, but is finished with this sparkling matte paint much like you might see in an exotic car paint job.
IMO it’s far less boring than piano black, or even most wood designs (aside from maybe Sonus Faber’s beautiful works of art, and some others). And it’s not so overdone that it looks like it’s studded with diamonds or anything quite that gaudy. But of course beauty is subjective, so to each their own
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2020
- Messages
- 6,923
- Likes
- 17,020
Mind you only the KH120 casing and KH310 rear side is made from metal (aluminium, like the nearfield and midfield Genelecs), the KH310 front is made from polyurethane and the rest from MDF, but still its quality is excellent.
Regarding aesthetics: I suppose looks are subjective. Personally, I agree with the OP that Revels look cheap. Because they are cheaply built.
In contrast:
Everything about the Neumann feels and looks quality, at least to me. Unlike the Revel, the waveguides are perfect and smoothly transition into the solid aluminum block that also encapsulates the drivers. The metal is finished with a nice gray with metallic speckles that reminds of a premium metallic matte auto paint on an exotic supercar. The woofer, midrange, and tweeter all have a quality and custom designed look to them (with a waveguide for each), as opposed to a bunch of different OEM drivers thrown together with bolts and glue like the Revel.
Granted, beauty is in the eye of the beholder
It was not my intention to take the Revels as examples of luxurious finish, they certainly are not.
I was thinking more along the lines of KEF, Dali, Cabasse, Harbeth or some Dynaudios. While i agree that the Neumann speakers look fine on their own, they don't integrate with a comfy environment. They might not look out of place on an office desk, amid screens and computer gear, but in a livingroom? I was considering the white version, but even in very strict Scandinavian or Bauhaus-style interiors they look too much like medical devices or high powered tools. And the white is blue-ish in hue which doesn't mesh with typical whites of walls and furniture.
As much as i like the pursuit of sound quality, in the end a speaker is a very prominent item in the space it is placed in and has to look the part. I think we all chose our chairs, tables, shelves, cutlery etc. as much by their looks as by their function. If we could do the same with speakers, that would be amazing. So far it seems like the only options to have both are the KII, D&D and B&O offerings which are not relevant to 99% of us.
Which reminds me, i would love to see measurements of the Dynaudio Focus XD. Although i suspect that they won't measure quite as well as Neumann or Genelec.
vavan
Senior Member
f208 piano black lacquer looks great for me and with grilles on its cheap plastic, nuts and bolts are invisible
Good point, fixed.
Sure, but this does become quite subjective. I agree that a gray Neumann might not be for everyone. But I do think Genelec’s unique curved enclosures and white or black finishes can make for a very nice looking addition to many modern room styles. They might even be mistaken for modern art, to an uninformed observer.
Granted, I do agree that there are other speakers that look even more beautiful and exotic, but it also really depends on what look you’re going for, e.g. high end Focal vs Sonus Faber etc.
It ultimately boils down to how important sound quality vs aesthetic customization is to you. Personally, I’m of the perspective that if I’m going to pay $10k on speakers, there had better be solid objective evidence for why that speaker is among the best in the world, or offers something sonically unique at the very least.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #80
I’ve since been spending some quality time with a pair of piano black Evoke 10. I’ll post impressions as they relate to available data but will say the build quality is superior to the M105 and SQ is very good for what it is. I’m waiting on the epiphany some professional reviewers experienced, but they do deliver on descriptions of seemless and wide soundstage.
From what I gathered and heard they appear to be relatively narrow dispersion, HF rolls off too early, and 80-7kHz response isn’t neutral enough for my tastes. Question is are these tastes aural or visual? Referring again to March’s early comment about blind listening tests, I’m not sure I’d pick these out. But I can’t unsee what I’ve seen.
In the end I finally decided to minimize compromises, maximize (expected) sound quality, and blownup the budget by ordering the Salk Supercharged SongSurround. Let the waiting begin...
Similar threads
