Research Project: Infinity IL10 Speaker Review & Measurements

[amirm]

Too funny, I still have these as side surrounds.
They are way too high and mounted on the wall with “pivot” ball mounts so I am able to point them somewhat.
I couldn’t tell you what year I bought them but I can tell you it was from Circuit City since I got them at a deep discount.
(One wouldn’t play and I went and grabbed a screwdriver from the car and the sales rep and I opened it up and I reattached a spade lug that had came off.)

Chris

So how does it sound to you?

 

[GXAlan]

A factor remains that my hearing acuity for distortion/small detail is well above average due to extensive training. Harman listeners did not have such skills. So it is entirely possible that what bothers me doesn't bother hardly anyone else.

Which brings support of the world of the golden ear'd audiophile.
Distortion cannot be the only issue since you thought the Canon S50 sounded good.

How does the IL10 sound in stereo? Does the grunge disappear?

 

[aarons915]

A factor remains that my hearing acuity for distortion/small detail is well above average due to extensive training. Harman listeners did not have such skills. So it is entirely possible that what bothers me doesn't bother hardly anyone else.

This may be but I would seriously consider doing the test blind and level-matched just to ensure your thoughts don't change. Even better would be to blind test others as well to get a bit of data.

 

[amirm]

This may be but I would seriously consider doing the test blind and level-matched just to ensure your thoughts don't change. Even better would be to blind test others as well to get a bit of data.

Well, other testers don't have such training (to hear small distortions). The number of people in the world that have this training is very small so getting them to participate in this kind of testing is impossible.

So it comes down to me being tested somehow not others.

 

[zermak]

Interesting reading and thank you Amir for testing it.

It looks like a good speaker after all even if these distortions made it sounds bad to you. What is for you, a trained listener, the distortion threshold?

 

[amirm]

Just for people who have not heard me say this, I have attended Harman's blind testing twice. Each time, the speakers in question were tonally very different so I only focused on that. And I voted both times as majority had in the research.

When examining just one speaker, I am not comparing it to anything else but listening to clarity and clean response. If I were put in the same pool comparing this speaker to its competitors, I could have very well arrived with identical conclusions and scoring.

 

[amirm]

Interesting reading and thank you Amir for testing it.

It looks like a good speaker after all even if these distortions made it sounds bad to you. What is for you, a trained listener, the distortion threshold?

Every distortion profile is different as far as audibility. So I have no way of quantifying it for you that way. I can show however the ability to hear small impairments in double blind tests that are impossible for most people to detect.

Here are a couple of quick examples, here are the difference between 320 kbps MP3 and original:

---
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/19 19:45:33

File A: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling 16 44.wav
File B: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling 16 44_01.mp3

19:45:33 : Test started.
19:46:21 : 01/01 50.0%
19:46:35 : 02/02 25.0%
19:46:49 : 02/03 50.0%
19:47:03 : 03/04 31.3%
19:47:13 : 04/05 18.8%
19:47:27 : 05/06 10.9%
19:47:38 : 06/07 6.3%
19:47:46 : 07/08 3.5%
19:48:01 : 08/09 2.0%
19:48:19 : 09/10 1.1%
19:48:31 : 10/11 0.6%
19:48:45 : 11/12 0.3%
19:48:58 : 12/13 0.2%
19:49:11 : 13/14 0.1%
19:49:28 : 14/15 0.0%
19:49:52 : 15/16 0.0%
19:49:56 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 15/16 (0.0%)

--

Here is another from AIX records:

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/31 15:18:41

File A: C:\Users\Amir\Music\AIX AVS Test files\On_The_Street_Where_You_Live_A2.mp3
File B: C:\Users\Amir\Music\AIX AVS Test files\On_The_Street_Where_You_Live_A2.wav

15:18:41 : Test started.
15:19:18 : 01/01 50.0%
15:19:30 : 01/02 75.0%
15:19:44 : 01/03 87.5%
15:20:35 : 02/04 68.8%
15:20:46 : 02/05 81.3%
15:21:39 : 03/06 65.6%
15:21:47 : 04/07 50.0%
15:21:54 : 04/08 63.7%
15:22:06 : 05/09 50.0%
15:22:19 : 06/10 37.7%
15:22:31 : 07/11 27.4%
15:22:44 : 08/12 19.4%
15:22:51 : 09/13 13.3%
15:22:58 : 10/14 9.0%
15:23:06 : 11/15 5.9%
15:23:14 : 12/16 3.8%
15:23:23 : 13/17 2.5%
15:23:33 : 14/18 1.5%
15:23:42 : 15/19 1.0%
15:23:54 : 16/20 0.6%
15:24:06 : 17/21 0.4%
15:24:15 : 18/22 0.2%
15:24:23 : 19/23 0.1%
15:24:34 : 20/24 0.1%
15:24:43 : 21/25 0.0%
15:24:52 : 22/26 0.0%
15:24:57 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 22/26 (0.0%)

And test of high-res audio versus downsampled:

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/10 18:50:44

File A: C:\Users\Amir\Music\AIX AVS Test files\On_The_Street_Where_You_Live_A2.wav
File B: C:\Users\Amir\Music\AIX AVS Test files\On_The_Street_Where_You_Live_B2.wav

18:50:44 : Test started.
18:51:25 : 00/01 100.0%
18:51:38 : 01/02 75.0%
18:51:47 : 02/03 50.0%
18:51:55 : 03/04 31.3%
18:52:05 : 04/05 18.8%
18:52:21 : 05/06 10.9%
18:52:32 : 06/07 6.3%
18:52:43 : 07/08 3.5%
18:52:59 : 08/09 2.0%
18:53:10 : 09/10 1.1%
18:53:19 : 10/11 0.6%
18:53:23 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/11 (0.6%)

 

[tuga]

When examining just one speaker, I am not comparing it to anything else but listening to clarity and clean response.

This is how a listening assessment of loudspeaker performance (or of any other piece of equipment) should be performed: listen (observationally) for shortcomings.

I for one am not at all surprised by your findings.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I find I have the same subjective experience with a couple of Harman designs. I've the Revel F12 Concerta speakers, and the JBL LSR305 speakers with LSR310 subs.

Now just listening to the 305's the basic correct tonal balance and I'm supposing good directional qualities it sounds very good. You can switch between it and some more expensive speakers that lack these Harman design qualities, and the 305s mainly sound honest, and balanced. Smoothness or grunginess factors may or may not lean toward the non-Harman speakers, but the basic honesty sits obviously with the 305's.

However, the F12's, which I don't have full spins of, are subjectively nicer sounding. Apparently lower distortion, a sense of cleanliness in fine details and while not overtly smooth sounding in direct comparison to the 305s the 305s sound a little dirty a little rough. Even used as nearfield monitors where SPL of the 305 isn't challenged they are less clean sounding. I don't know what to attribute this to. My amps on the F12s are clean vs what is in the 305's. The distortion at a given level isn't grossly different between them though the nod goes with the F12 when measured in room with REW.

In a Harman style shootout, I think the 305s basic tonal honesty and good directional character would cause it to stand out as preferred vs other speakers with bigger design issues. It would be interesting to know what work Harman has done on speakers that garner a very similar score on their formula yet one outscores the other in real listening tests.

I think we can all say the Harman formula while a decent general guide has been oversold, and the claimed high correlation with listening tests appears to have been overstated. Mostly likely due to having too few data points (not enough speakers in the data).

The design guidelines seem solid, the formula less so.

 

[tuga]

In a Harman style shootout, I think the 305s basic tonal honesty and good directional character would cause it to stand out as preferred vs other speakers with bigger design issues.

I don't think that a Harman-style shootout is even adequate for determining preference let alone assess performance... Spins tell you how a speaker wees into the room but little about the characteristics of the fluid.

 

[zermak]

Every distortion profile is different as far as audibility. So I have no way of quantifying it for you that way. I can show however the ability to hear small impairments in double blind tests that are impossible for most people to detect.

True and I knew it (the phon scale about the equal loudness) and I just generalized.

Here are a couple of quick examples, here are the difference between 320 kbps MP3 and original:
-cut-

I've seen them before, very clinical earing and maybe I am glad I am not trained as you are. And my question now is: is there a comparison (I am sure you are aware of the DeltaWave software by @pkane) between the originals and the compressed ones so I can kinda figure out how much distorion/noise was added during the encoding?

 

[Worth Davis]

I even pulled my wife over to listen and she said there was some small difference with EQ but not enough for her to care.

LOL, thanks for this - throwing shade on the dumbest audiophile comment in every subjective review in the last 30 years

 

[Laserjock]

So how does it sound to you?

They sound good for surround duty but I’ve never listened any other way.
I should pull them down and put them in one of my setups.
Revel F208/C208/F208 for mains.
Actively searching for F206 to replace these now.
Chris

 

[phoenixdogfan]

I find I have the same subjective experience with a couple of Harman designs. I've the Revel F12 Concerta speakers, and the JBL LSR305 speakers with LSR310 subs.

Now just listening to the 305's the basic correct tonal balance and I'm supposing good directional qualities it sounds very good. You can switch between it and some more expensive speakers that lack these Harman design qualities, and the 305s mainly sound honest, and balanced. Smoothness or grunginess factors may or may not lean toward the non-Harman speakers, but the basic honesty sits obviously with the 305's.

However, the F12's, which I don't have full spins of, are subjectively nicer sounding. Apparently lower distortion, a sense of cleanliness in fine details and while not overtly smooth sounding in direct comparison to the 305s the 305s sound a little dirty a little rough. Even used as nearfield monitors where SPL of the 305 isn't challenged they are less clean sounding. I don't know what to attribute this to. My amps on the F12s are clean vs what is in the 305's. The distortion at a given level isn't grossly different between them though the nod goes with the F12 when measured in room with REW.

In a Harman style shootout, I think the 305s basic tonal honesty and good directional character would cause it to stand out as preferred vs other speakers with bigger design issues. It would be interesting to know what work Harman has done on speakers that garner a very similar score on their formula yet one outscores the other in real listening tests.and

I think we can all say the Harman formula while a decent general guide has been oversold, and the claimed high correlation with listening tests appears to have been overstated. Mostly likely due to having too few data points (not enough sp eakers in the data).

The design guidelines seem solid, the formula less so.

Anyone who listens to flagship level headphones, and hi end loudspeakers both, will tell you that the speakers sound a lot grungier than the headphones. That is backed up by any number of measurements which show many of the better phones registering l.t. 1% THD over their entire frequency range with spls in the 90 db range. Very few loudspeakers with the exception of JBL's and possibly the higher end Revels can even approach that level.

And yes, the distortion is indeed audible on most speakers, it's just that most listeners are fish that have swam in that polluted water all their lives, and, therefore, are oblivious to it.

 

[amirm]

I've seen them before, very clinical earing and maybe I am glad I am not trained as you are. And my question now is: is there a comparison (I am sure you are aware of the DeltaWave software by @pkane) between the originals and the compressed ones so I can kinda figure out how much distorion/noise was added during the encoding?

His tool cannot create lossy compression artifacts. The process is exceptionally complex and not easily modelled. Best to compress a track progressively to lower and lower rates and see where your detection threshold stops.

Note however that in doing so you will start your journey in getting trained so you may not want to try.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I don't think that a Harman-style shootout is even adequate for determining preference let alone assess performance... Spins tell you how a speaker wees into the room but little about the characteristics of the fluid.

What would you propose that would work better than how Harman does this? I've a few quibbles about how they do this myself, but don't think it grossly inaccurate as an approach to finding what people find to sound best to them.

 

[zermak]

His tool cannot create lossy compression artifacts. The process is exceptionally complex and not easily modelled. Best to compress a track progressively to lower and lower rates and see where your detection threshold stops.

Note however that in doing so you will start your journey in getting trained so you may not want to try.

You can extrapolate the missing parts and the added noise from his software using the function in it (the delta after matching them) and just listen to it (and well look at the graphs if you know what you are doing/looking for).

I have the "Harman how to listen" program installed on my PC, wondering if go for it or not ahah

 

[Blumlein 88]

Anyone who listens to flagship level headphones, and hi end loudspeakers both, will tell you that the speakers sound a lot grungier than the headphones. That is backed up by any number of measurements which show many of the better phones registering l.t. 1% THD over their entire frequency range with spls in the 90 db range. Very few loudspeakers with the exception of JBL's and possibly the higher end Revels can even approach that level.

And yes, the distortion is indeed audible on most speakers, it's just that most listeners are fish that have swam in that polluted water all their lives, and, therefore, are oblivious to it.

I don't agree. Certainly speakers may have higher distortion at and below 200 hz. On up from there plenty of good ones manage .5% or less into the mid 90 dbSPL range.

 

[amirm]

You can extrapolate the missing parts and the added noise from his software using the function in it (the delta after matching them) and just listen to it (and well look at the graphs if you know what you are doing/looking for).

It doesn't work that way. Lossy compression converts everything to frequency domain. A perceptual model is then applied to which frequencies can be truncated that are less audible. Then depending on how full the internal buffer is (i.e. how difficult past content has been to encode), the level of quantization (truncation) varies. The result is that distortion shoots up and down from one note to another. Even a full model of the encoder can't estimate the distortion correct as used in lossy encoders.

 

[RayDunzl]

It seems odd (without looking at other speaker measures to be sure) that the tweeter output increases as the frequency goes down.

A 10dB difference with the woofer would seem to leave its croaking it in the audible range.

Maybe run a sweep with just the tweeter wired and hear what you hear...