Revel M106 vs. stock Linn Katan

[thewas]

I know who Toole is. It just was not clear that what he descussed in that thread was actually part of his research or if it was just his ”common sense” who was arguing. Since he didnt state it was from his research.
But maybe I need to read the whole thread and not just the pages you linked to.

He writes that these were mainly the finding of his 50 years of research in the National Research Council of Canada and later at Harman:

All of my research, starting about 50 years ago shows that in double blind tests, listening to a variety of commercial recordings, listeners clearly preferred flat direct sound = flat on-axis response.

 

[Thomas_A]

With respect to Ingvar Öhmans ”main speaker” the pi60s I would not say it deviates much from Floyd Tooles argument of a linear on-axis response as a main factor for good sound. Below measured with Eartworks microphone at 50 cm distance in a room. So naturally some dips and peaks but basically linear.

faktiskt.io • Visa tråd - B&W 800-serie frekvensgång

 

[Punchrulle]

With respect to Ingvar Öhmans ”main speaker” the pi60s I would not say it deviates much from Floyd Tooles argument of a linear on-axis response as a main factor for good sound. Below measured with Eartworks microphone at 50 cm distance in a room. So naturally some dips and peaks but basically linear.

faktiskt.io • Visa tråd - B&W 800-serie frekvensgång

Woopsie
I might have to withdraw that statement then.
I had a pair of ino pr18 studio monitors some years ago that Ingvar Ö said didnt have the compensation for the ”stereo system errors” that his domestic speakers has. That stereo system error is just that the direct sound pressure at 3-4 kHz is lower in that region but the reflected sound is more linear. Many years ago though, might have it all backwords now/memory distorted.

 

[thewas]

That stereo system error is just that the direct sound pressure at 3-4 kHz is lower in that region but the reflected sound is more linear.

That can happen, typical loudspeakers without waveguides often had a drop at the directivity in the presence region which needed to be compensated with a dip in the direct sound as otherwise they would have a peak in the sound power there.

 

[Thomas_A]

Woopsie
I might have to withdraw that statement then.
I had a pair of ino pr18 studio monitors some years ago that Ingvar Ö said didnt have the compensation for the ”stereo system errors” that his domestic speakers has. That stereo system error is just that the direct sound pressure at 3-4 kHz is lower in that region but the reflected sound is more linear. Many years ago though, might have it all backwords now/memory distorted.

Yes, these have been long discussion in the past on Swedish fora. And yes, he does have some tiny compensation for the "stereo errors" (e.g Shirley et al), meaning a bit more energy 1-2 kHz compared to 2-4 kHz. But looking it at another angle, it is a speaker with very good on-axis response. Speaking of such "compensation", you could also look at on-axis response of Revel M106.

The trend is probably similar in all his speakers, but apparently with larger deviations for the smaller speakers. For example the Ino "pIP", shows a larger drop in the treble area. Why they are voiced that way can only the designer tell us, but one thing that can be read about this speaker is that it was designed as a portable small, near field monitor for recording purposes. Now, everyone here is probably very familiar with the Toole "room curve" for a speaker in a normal room at far-field distance. It shows a typical loss of power with frequency. A question that I have raised on this forum is, what happens if you listen to a speaker in far-field, and then moves closer using it as a near-field monitor? Is the timbre the same? (Trick question...) So, depending what you want to achieve, there may be a reason for voicing a near-field speaker different from a far-field speaker.