Well, you don't want to go there because I can tell you from experience that trained listeners care far less for superficial aspects of audio products than everyday audiophiles. And I firmly fall in the "don't care" category compared to someone who has bought a new toy, or lacks the experience in any kind of audio evaluation.
That's not the case whatsoever. I have never said that. What I have said is that the factors that bias me are not nearly as strong as what biases you all. So you can't be dismissive of my results out of hand that way.
They do look very similar and non-offensive. About directivity, how do you look at those graphs and determine how good directivity is? Do you look at the two bottom curves (Early Reflections DI & Sound Power DI)? In terms of looking at those curves is it where they end up at 20kHz that's important....ie they're all ending up at around 10 & 5 dBr, so from that you would say they all have the same directivity? Or do you look for places on the Early Reflection Curve (3rd curve) that do not match the ON in terms of direction of trend.....so for instance if Early Reflection Curve is rising in places where ON is going down for instance? What's the best way of interpreting these graphs to assess directivity brilliance or lack thereof?Regarding the score of this speaker… its two immediate neighbours (with sub) are the KEF R3 and the Revel M106, which have similar scores and similar ON/PIR breakdowns. And if we look at the spinoramas side-by-side, I would tend to agree with the score in the sense that it's not really obvious that one of these three speakers is better than the other:
View attachment 76296
View attachment 76297
View attachment 76298
View attachment 76299
I can only imagine it will look eratic:Looking forward to the LRS measurements. So board of poxy bookshelf speakers. Be nice to see something different.
You absolutely should care.
Here’s what Toole says about the MartinLogan above:
I am really looking forward to the polar plots though.
Of course Amir has limitations and biases, there are zero humans that do not.The more sensible conclusion from the mismatch between measurements and Amir's impression is that Amir might have limitations and reliability issues, not the method. He does mention that he might have bias towards Revel before every review of their speakers, so I choose to go with that explanation rather than some mysterious unknown objectively affecting actual performance
I don't see this an an overwhelmingly negative review.How can a speaker like this get an overwhelming negative review, where as the Polks T15 didn't?
The measured in-room response versus the predicted in-room is something I would like to see for an electelstatic.Hmm...
I'm sure the polars will be ugly, but I listen on-axis.
MartinLogan - was $4500 list, paid less, vs JBL LSR 308, both speakers active (left and right) on-axis at listening position, no EQ, 1/24th smoothing, at 10 feet, at a comfortable for both level:
View attachment 76308
MartinLogan vs an M2, with EQ on both (different house curve, though), in different rooms, left and right speakers individually measured on both, at their respective listening positions:
View attachment 76311
So.
I don't see this an an overwhelmingly negative review.
Quite the opposite as it has great measurements presented.
So what if Amir didn't like it all that much?
The measurements indicate it will sound good to many, like all current speakers it will NEVER work for all. Maybe Amir is in the minority here.
The discussion (and language of the review post) make this possibility clear.
Try it via the return policy.
Quoting my earlier post because I feel like you're looking to start a fight that isn't there and that I've already addressed. Bolding the part that matters the most so we don't keep going rounds on this.
It's not about Amir anymore than it would be about *anyone* providing the subjective data. Even if it were myself. I would not advise anyone to simply take my word over the data. Again, reference the bolded.
Peace.
And if we look at the spinoramas side-by-side, I would tend to agree with the score in the sense that it's not really obvious that one of these three speakers is better than the other:
View attachment 76296
Comparatively, these are fine enough speakers for their price point,
You don't think that attention to dispersion through the crossover is necessary at $1000/pr? NHT offers a similarly-sized 3-way with superb acoustic engineering at the same price (C3). Revel offers a similarly-sized 6.5" 2-way with attention to dispersion through the crossover for less (M16). So what's the excuse here?
This is patently disingenuous. Whether you did or did not specifically mention the score isn't relevant. What you did do, and ought not try to deny, was to place fault with Amir for sharing an overall, not-fully-objective assessment of the speaker when his assessment was not in synch with the objective measurements. And furthermore, in your original reply you wrote a couple of sentences that put Amir squarely in opposition with Olive, which implicitly makes it about Amir vs. the score. So even thought you might not have referenced "the score" explicitly, you did so in an implicit way that for intents and purposes was as clear as if you had said it explicitly. Which is why I pointed out, correctly and honestly, that what you wrote here is disingenuous. It is.
And I don't think it should care about that. Maybe you're not claiming that it should either, but in any event the point of the research was to explore what factors correlate with listener preferences using speakers as designed, as consumers would. What I think might be a much more important limitation is one you identified--the equal weighting of vertical and horizontal dispersion (at least I think that's a feature of the score). I absolutely agree, based only on my listening and designing experience, that horizontal dispersion characteristics are much more important than vertical. But I'm still not sure why. Do you have any insight on this?
Intresting. In the same way a truly omnidirectional (MBL let's say) speakers will have great directivity but as you said they can impact everything to sound in a similar way (as the Magnepans). For some kind of jazz, acustic, liver or orchestral music is just perfect for my tastes but maybe not so much on other kind of music.
Did you ever got to test omnidirectionals at Harman or they are just to rare of a speaker type to be researched?