Totem Acoustics Rainmaker Speaker Review

[Flaesh]

It reminds me of the B&W 805 D4:

One of these two FRs must be right:

Well, or at least better.

 

[pablolie]

One of these two FRs must be right:
View attachment 419212
Well, or at least better.
View attachment 419213

Wow an on-topic response :-D

Bringing this one back...
Post in thread 'Totem Acoustics Rainmaker Speaker Review' https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...s-rainmaker-speaker-review.40906/post-2184787

 

[Heinrich]

So, I would imagine a test where a speaker is subjected to independent, clearly separated tones that vary greatly and rapidly, even in milliseconds, and whether those tones when measured over time, create splash into the next tone.
...
What leads me to thinking in this direction, is that speakers like my Totem Arro's are known for their imaging, i.e. localization, ability.
...
And finally, referring back to equalization changes to reduce sound masking. Is it possible that an equalization curve with high points at bass and high frequencies, as shown a couple of posts up, will reduce masking with some kinds of sound sources, ...

"Tones" cannot, logically, change rapidly. You have told, that you've got a technical background. Please refer to

Fourier analysis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

for starters. As I already said, the idea of a frequency is a mathematical concept that doesn't hold as itself even in Quantum Mechanics, where everything (all reality that means) is built of it. "Imaging" is a nonsensical audio term, in that it lacks any stringent definition. So we've all found many irritating paths in audio, are you willing to follow each in a sequence?
The most relaxing thing about the speaker in discussion is its mediocre, at best, general usability. Once the availability of simply better and alos cheaper options, e/g from KEF with their new series, is understood, why bother with a century long lived-in "somehow o/k" for the Rainmaker?

 

[Artsfols]

"Tones" cannot, logically, change rapidly. You have told, that you've got a technical background. Please refer to

Fourier analysis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

for starters. As I already said, the idea of a frequency is a mathematical concept that doesn't hold as itself even in Quantum Mechanics, where everything (all reality that means) is built of it. "Imaging" is a nonsensical audio term, in that it lacks any stringent definition. So we've all found many irritating paths in audio, are you willing to follow each in a sequence?
The most relaxing thing about the speaker in discussion is its mediocre, at best, general usability. Once the availability of simply better and alos cheaper options, e/g from KEF with their new series, is understood, why bother with a century long lived-in "somehow o/k" for the Rainmaker?

Of course they can and do change rapidly. You must not understand what I mean. If I play a series of 1/32 beat notes on a piano, say, they change more rapidly than a series of 1/8 notes.
So what I am concerned with here is the speaker cone response to a changing series of tones of widely varying in frequency and changing very rapidly, even in milliseconds.
Does the speaker cone material, firmness, et cetera, affect how well a cone can follow such a series, or does the speaker change the ADSR of such tones from the source, and/or will one tone bleed into the next tone even though they do not do so in source.

 

[Artsfols]

"Tones" cannot, logically, change rapidly. You have told, that you've got a technical background. Please refer to

Fourier analysis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

for starters. As I already said, the idea of a frequency is a mathematical concept that doesn't hold as itself even in Quantum Mechanics, where everything (all reality that means) is built of it. "Imaging" is a nonsensical audio term, in that it lacks any stringent definition. So we've all found many irritating paths in audio, are you willing to follow each in a sequence?
The most relaxing thing about the speaker in discussion is its mediocre, at best, general usability. Once the availability of simply better and alos cheaper options, e/g from KEF with their new series, is understood, why bother with a century long lived-in "somehow o/k" for the Rainmaker?

Sound does not move in quanta. And so far as I know there is no slit experiment to undermine wave theory of sound as it does for the wave theory of light.
To my understanding, frequency is a numerical measurement of the speed of vibration of air molecules. Air molecules do not move from the speaker to the ear, as say, light quanta move. Nor do the air molecules themselves act like a wave; they only move back and forth. Nevertheless the overall effect is that of a wave and the wave moves, at the speed of sound. Just like the top surface of a volume of water, except that the wave moves out in 3 dimensions. However, it is captured by the ear in 2 dimensions but at 2 different points.

 

[Mart68]

I have an REW SPL graph of what my Totem speakers put out. Would that be beneficial to anyone in advising me on the benefits of a speaker upgrade?
(I have no doubt that better speakers exist, but it's a question of diminishing returns for money spent. I am not unhappy with the current setup.)

Yes I think you should post that and all the other info about your listening room and so forth. People will certainly be able to advise.

I don't think there's any doubt that you get get a significantly better speaker, but - you're happy as it is and the process of selecting new speakers can be long and a little fraught.

 

[Artsfols]

Yes I think you should post that and all the other info about your listening room and so forth. People will certainly be able to advise.

I don't think there's any doubt that you get get a significantly better speaker, but - you're happy as it is and the process of selecting new speakers can be long and a little fraught.

My room is 12 feet by 10 feet.

Speakers, sound system and TV on one of the 12 feet walls (I'll call it the front wall).
Couch (Danish teak to save space) along the back wall.
Ceiling is 8 feet, except on the right side (right, when facing front wall), we opened up to the rafters, and on that wall I have a bookcase varying from 8 feet to 15 feet in height with maybe 1000 books. The opening is about 33 inches with a skylight also.
On the left side is a case holding about 1000 of my CDs.
There is also a window in the left wall, and in the back front wall, size 27x54 interior dimensions (excluding trim work).
Doorway is in the back wall, on the right side.

Frequency response graph below.

 

[Mart68]

My room is 12 feet by 10 feet.

Speakers, sound system and TV on one of the 12 feet walls (I'll call it the front wall).
Couch (Danish teak to save space) along the back wall.
Ceiling is 8 feet, except on the right side (right, when facing front wall), we opened up to the rafters, and on that wall I have a bookcase varying from 8 feet to 15 feet in height with maybe 1000 books. The opening is about 33 inches with a skylight also.
On the left side is a case holding about 1000 of my CDs.
There is also a window in the left wall, and in the back wall, size 27x54 interior dimensions (excluding trim work).
Doorway is in the back wall, on the right side.

Frequency response graph below.

That doesn't look at all bad in the low frequencies to me. Presume you don't ever find the sound too bright?

 

[Artsfols]

That doesn't look at all bad in the low frequencies to me. Presume you don't ever find the sound too bright?

No, my hearing begins to tail off at 8-10 kHz given my age.
If I put on headphones and turn up the sound, I can hear up to 12kHz.
I use a Totem Tribe subwoofer in addition to the Arro's.
Very happy with the sub.

Totem Tribe Solution Sub

Bay Bloor Radio is Toronto’s premier audio video store, family-owned/operated since 1946. TVs, speakers, headphones, turntables, custom design/installation services & in-store repairs.

baybloorradio.com

 

[Heinrich]

Of course they can and do change rapidly. You must not understand what I mean. If I play a series of 1/32 beat notes on a piano, say, they change more rapidly than a series of 1/8 notes.
So what I am concerned with here is the speaker cone response to a changing series of tones of widely varying in frequency and changing very rapidly, even in milliseconds.
Does the speaker cone material, firmness, et cetera, affect how well a cone can follow such a series, or does the speaker change the ADSR of such tones from the source, and/or will one tone bleed into the next tone even though they do not do so in source.

Sound does not move in quanta. And so far as I know there is no slit experiment to undermine wave theory of sound as it does for the wave theory of light.
To my understanding, frequency is a numerical measurement of the speed of vibration of air molecules. Air molecules do not move from the speaker to the ear, as say, light quanta move. Nor do the air molecules themselves act like a wave; they only move back and forth. Nevertheless the overall effect is that of a wave and the wave moves, at the speed of sound. Just like the top surface of a volume of water, except that the wave moves out in 3 dimensions. However, it is captured by the ear in 2 dimensions but at 2 different points.

This is all not right. You mess up the basics—me mentioning QM was meant to underline the limitations of „frequency“ or „tone“ as a concept. One should know exactly how to use that term (in engineering), and as a teaser the Fourier Analysis was linked (wiki). Once the concept was understood, all your questions dissolve into the blue.

But I cannot deny to be under the impression, that you still celebrate some merits of the Rainmaker. It being „fast“ or „resolving“ was your original statement here, right? Now you bend, in my pretty personal, yet pertinently educated view, the meaning of technical terms, even cone movement in relation to sound generation comes into question, waterwaves (surface: perpendicular, depth: circular) versus soundwaves (gas: longitudinal, … …) …

Could it be that Rainmaker lacks bass a whole lot, has exaggerated treble, hence trades „resolving“ for „warmth“—a pretty ol‘ scheme? Just a guess.

Edit: sure, it does. I voted „poor“ for a verdict anyway. If cost was a more critical criterion, it would be more poor at 1k a pair back in the 2000s, some 2000 in today‘s money. That‘s a noble price of such a thing.

 

[Mart68]

No, my hearing begins to tail off at 8-10 kHz given my age.
If I put on headphones and turn up the sound, I can hear up to 12kHz.
I use a Totem Tribe subwoofer in addition to the Arro's.
Very happy with the sub.

Totem Tribe Solution Sub

Bay Bloor Radio is Toronto’s premier audio video store, family-owned/operated since 1946. TVs, speakers, headphones, turntables, custom design/installation services & in-store repairs.

baybloorradio.com

I thought the bass went impressively low!

 

[Artsfols]

This is all not right. You mess up the basics—me mentioning QM was meant to underline the limitations of „frequency“ or „tone“ as a concept. One should know exactly how to use that term (in engineering), and as a teaser the Fourier Analysis was linked (wiki). Once the concept was understood, all your questions dissolve into the blue.

But I cannot deny to be under the impression, that you still celebrate some merits of the Rainmaker. It being „fast“ or „resolving“ was your original statement here, right? Now you bend, in my pretty personal, yet pertinently educated view, the meaning of technical terms, even cone movement in relation to sound generation comes into question, waterwaves (surface: perpendicular, depth: circular) versus soundwaves (gas: longitudinal, … …) …

Could it be that Rainmaker lacks bass a whole lot, has exaggerated treble, hence trades „resolving“ for „warmth“—a pretty ol‘ scheme? Just a guess.

Edit: sure, it does. I voted „poor“ for a verdict anyway. If cost was a more critical criterion, it would be more poor at 1k a pair back in the 2000s, some 2000 in today‘s money. That‘s a noble price of such a thing.

I don't have Rainmaker's. I have Arro's.

 

[Heinrich]

I don't have Rainmaker's. I have Arro's.

Ah, I was under the impression that you support the topic with first hand experience. Anyway, your approach to audio is non standard when it comes to language, at least from an engineering perspective. The terms used sound familiar, but mean something else, obviously and stated.
You said, that you are in the business of translating customers‘ demand into strict computer code. But what if the customer is talking computer code vocabulary, but has the grammar all wrong and an OR is actually meant as a NAND, occasionally? (Please don‘t take offense, English was my forth language after maths and Latin, really.)

Rest assured, all your problems are reflected in the amplitude and phase versus frequency response graphs.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

In my previous post I have done just that, a series of complex tones at various frequency mixes with pauses in between along a time axis. Capture the result from the speaker and see how closely the tones match, along a time axis, with an emphasis not on capturing distortion but capturing delay

What don't you like about waterfall analysis of broadband impulse, such as these:

 

[amirm]

The information here is too interesting to be hidden in the Totem Rainmaker thread. mods?

We have discussed it many times. It is kind of hard to pull it all and stick it elsewhere.

 

[Duke]

We have discussed it many times. It is kind of hard to pull it all and stick it elsewhere.

Imo the good stuff is not that hard to find once you know a cheat code or two. Here's one: Go to @Floyd Toole's profile and click on "Postings". I have saved forty-one pages of Floyd Toole quotes (some from here, some from elsewhere) as my own little supplement to the 3rd edition of The Book.

 

[kharan]

We have discussed it many times. It is kind of hard to pull it all and stick it elsewhere.

There's a plugin for Xenforo called Threadmarks Pro that essentially allows pinning specific posts in a thread in some kind of table of content.

That might be an interesting option to explore. If members feel that a discussion or a post is especially interesting in a thread, they could tag a mod who could then create a threadmark for the post or the start of the discussion, and everyone reading the thread would know about it. It's an intermediate between surfacing interesting posts for everyone to see, and not doing anything.

The biggest downside is that it creates a supplementary load for mods or for anyone who would have to make a decision on what to threadmark and what not to threadmark.

 

[Soniclife]

Or someone could create a new thread, with a helpful title, a short description of this discussion and a link to this thread where is starts. This discussion has much more value than the review of an uninteresting speaker.

 

[RickS]

Or someone could create a new thread, with a helpful title, a short description of this discussion and a link to this thread where is starts. This discussion has much more value than the review of an uninteresting speaker.

I only recently discovered how to do this well using the moderator tools. As @amirm posted, we have discussed previously. So is more a matter of when to do at this point. At this writing, my plan is to wait until the discussion tapers off. In any case, it is on my todo list.

 

[Sokel]

Now that is paused, I have to say that the last pages of this thread is the sole most interesting thing that happened at ASR for months, it's a shame that is stuffed in this review thread.
New thread, pinned please, if it wasn't for jj's avatar shown up at it I wouldn't even notice.

(I'll delete that of course, anything spoiling this is unneeded)