Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 86

Thread: An important discussion / evaluation on recent blind shootout.

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bikeman View Post
    As much as I admire Dave as both a person and an engineer (I've purchased eight speakers from Ascend), it's not reasonable to add multiple footnotes or total retractions based on speculation no matter how knowledgeable the source. If Dave had been present, I'm sure, like so many of us in attendance, he could have zeroed in on several areas that made this listening session less than ideal. This event wasn't constructed to be the end all in speaker comparisons. I haven't seen anyone who attended frame it as such.
    This was an opportunity for some very serious audio nuts to get together and experience what would otherwise have been impossible. For me it was nine hours of driving that day. For some others it was way too much time spent in airports and airplanes. Those factors alone would have effected the results to a good degree. How would you handle that as a footnote?
    The session was what it was. I could nitpik it to death. That would add nothing. The session was a data point. Nothing more. Dinner and the comradery were not data points. They were the stars of the show. No one will forget having spent the day at Craig's. But few of us will remember what speakers we auditioned in the years to come. The listening session was fun and informative but not for the scores.

    David
    I am not trying to take anything away from the get together, it sounds like a lot of fun, but we both know that people who read about it do make conclusions based on the results regardless of what the participants think. I think you are talking as a participant that experienced the event and I am talking about the effect the event has on people who didn't experience the event. To answer your question, I wouldn't handle that footnote because you obviously can't. I am not really trying to nitpick. I'm just expressing my opinion. Ours differ I am sure for a couple reasons, but one is that you were there enjoyed a great time and experience. I am not trying to denigrate that at all and I really don't have anything to gain by even posting. I am just looking at it from a point of view of fairness to the mfg. of the speakers in the test. If you think the test was fair to the mfg and vendors involved, then perhaps it was.
    Last edited by randyb; 10-10-2007 at 08:52 AM.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    913

    Default

    The most common way such things are handled in the print mags is through vendor responses to reviews, which are usually published in the same or next issue (print mags usually send vendors a copy of the review before it goes to print, so often a response makes it into the same issue). The vendor responses are usually something like "good review, but this item is incorrect...". Sometimes the publisher or author will add a note about the response like "we double-checked this and the vendor is correct" or "the vendor's assertions do not match our experience".

    The publisher decides how they handle articles/footnotes/responses/etc, so I suggest you contact them if you would like to see something specific. Arguing the point here doesn't seem productive.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    17

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by BradJudy View Post
    Arguing the point here doesn't seem productive.
    I agree it does not seem productive and I don't really care whether there is any note at all. It certainly should not come from me as I wasn't participant nor am I technically qualified to make the point. I did, however, have an opinion, stated it, and now will vanish into the night

  4. #44
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    69

    Default

    [SFX]Whooshing Sound[/SFX]

    Please let me know how you like your stands and be sure to post pics once you've got them all set up!

    J.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,538

    Default

    Hi Guys,

    I am certainly not calling for a retraction from the print mag. That is not what my study and comments were about.

    However, I do think that for the sake of that particular magazine, they should indeed be careful as they have crossed a line that has not been broken before. That is, publishing a review based on an event sponsored by a non-affiliated consumer. They can indeed open themselves up to potential legal problems from larger companies. Right or wrong, I am sure they do not have the resources to defend litigation and I have seen this before.

    Don't get me wrong, I love this particular publication and I APPLAUD what they are doing. I personally have no problem with the publication of the article (believe me, if I did - they would have heard from me already)

    I conducted my study, as previously mentioned, because the comments received about the performance of the 340SE were very far off from nearly every 340 SE owner and professional reviewer. When one of my products that I am intimately familiar with is not performing as it should, be that in a customer's home or at a listening session, I am going to look into it. These are not mass market loudspeakers; I personally measure each and every loudspeaker that leaves our factory.

    I also do my due diligence and let me just say that my sensitivity measurements (taken with reference standard gear and using several different methods) do not correlate with what was reported from the listening session. I don't know the cause of this discrepancy but I certainly invite anyone to do the comparison in their own home. The difference in sensitivity is audible...

    Again, this is not what this is about though... This was a study detailing the effects of series resistance on loudspeaker performance. The effects are real; even 1 ohm of series resistance can alter performance by as much as 2-3 dB. I am not trying to take anything away from Craig's efforts, I am trying to improve the process for the next time -- and I am rather confident that this will now occur…
    .
    .
    .
    Good Sound To You!

    David Fabrikant
    www.ascendacoustics.com

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,538

    Default

    My photoshop skills are bad but below is an overlay of graphs posted by Craig. These are measurements that he took of his 340 SE in his room in response to me taking issue with the passive level-matching switcher which was used. The first graph is with the speakers behind the screen with no attenuation (switcher being used but no padding). The second is with 2dB attenuation and the third is with 4dB attenuation.

    I normalized the graphs to keep the relative sensitivity levels the same between 1 kHz and 2 kHz. It is fairly easy to see the effects of the inline resistance (attenuation).

    Only 2dB of attenuation caused a 4dB drop in the 6 kHz + range relative to the 1 kHz – 2 kHz range, and a 3dB drop starting from about 2.5 kHz. Additionally, the graph also clearly shows the beginning of the dramatic midrange dropout starting at about 700Hz and lower (as indicated on the graphs I posted). I must say once again that this would constitute a dramatic change in the character of any loudspeaker.

    A "neutral" loudspeaker will now have its mids and highs recessed, sounding very laid back, a term that was indeed used to describe many of the higher efficiency speakers. A bright or overly forward sounding speaker will now sound more neutral.

    It is also important to note that Craig's frequency response graphs clearly show the nasty effect of any attenuation and these effects are identical to the measurements I originally posted. At no fault of Craig's, his graphs do not show the change in filter slopes and Q (which is what my electrical response graph reveals) which also have a dramatic effect on loudspeaker performance, even though these effects may or may not show up in a simple frequency response graph. For example, even though an on-axis graph between two different speakers may look exactly the same, they will not sound the same because the crossover points are different and the filter slopes and Q are different. It is the shape and the "blending" of these crossover filters that precisely control phase and off-axis response....

    I must additionally stress that even 1 dB of attenuation will result in similar performance degradations.

    In my opinion, it is a bit silly to go back and forth with this -- the proof is right there. Regardless of which speaker is being claimed as the more sensitive -- even as little as 1dB of attenuation for any of the loudspeakers changes the performance of that particular loudspeaker. It is simply not a valid way to compare 2 different loudspeakers. That issue is not subject for debate.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    .
    .
    .
    Good Sound To You!

    David Fabrikant
    www.ascendacoustics.com

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    501

    Default

    Hi David, do you think the screen they put up in front of the speakers could also have had an influence?

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GirgleMirt View Post
    Hi David, do you think the screen they put up in front of the speakers could also have had an influence?
    The screen does not concern me, it would have equal influence on both speakers being compared. The switch box will affect one set of speakers but not the other.

    The screen will influence the sound for all of the speakers, such that any of the speakers being compared at the listening session might sound different with the screen removed.

    After further thought, a screen such as this will attenuate the high-frequency response equally from one speaker to another. A bright speaker will sound less bright while a neutral speaker might sound a bit dull. However, I don't see any other way to have a blind listening session with so many attendees without using such a screen.

    Craig could have blindfolded every participant... THAT would have been interesting
    .
    .
    .
    Good Sound To You!

    David Fabrikant
    www.ascendacoustics.com

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galwin View Post
    The flags went up for me when representatives of organizations who have a financial interest in the findings participated in the forum discussions before and after the event. One actually attended the GTG. The flags also went up when the description of the sound of the 340SE, the speaker I own, was so different from my personal experience. The article in Affordable Audio states that the listeners heard subdued horns, felt vocals were hard to follow, and experienced the sounds as sitting in row 50, and not row 5. That’s nothing like how the speakers sound in my room. How can you account for such a difference?
    I assume that you are talking about Mark Schifter of AV123. He did not participate in the listening tests. In fact, in several forum posts when asked which speaker was the best out of the ones that he listened to before and after the blind comparisons, he has stated that it was the Sierra 1. I don't think that your insinuations hold any merit.

    I also wanted to point out that Dave F continues to harp on the series attenuation issue, but in the test involving the 340SE, it was the other speaker that was attenuated.

    Getting back to your question about how can it be that you experience the 340SE speaker differently: that's easy. The testers were comparing two speakers simultaneously. Notice that some of the testers found the treble on the winner to be overbearing. This would give them a very forward sound. The 340SE may "sound like the 50 row" when directly compared. Who knows. On that day, to those ears, it sounded that way.

    There is a very easy way to see if they are correct. The speakers that were in the comparison cost $250.00 per pair and have a 30-day return policy. You can put them on a credit card, do your own comparison and sent them back. You would be out the postage back (which won't be bad since they're not that heavy.)

    Jim

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    501

    Default

    I think his post held merit. There's a lot of stealth marketing out there and as previously mentioned, when reviews are posted by non-reviewers, what's to stop a company to pay someone to write a review and just publish it anywhere as a review by a consumer? Sponsored events to compare the products of a company with the products of another?

    Like Galwin pointed out, the point is that to me, who have the 340SEs in my living room and have listened to them for countless hours, in no way do the way they were described seem to fit the way I know they do sound. Be it for whatever reason it was, the screen, switcher...

    It becomes even more important when the product reviewed is compared to another. For some reason the speaker didn't seem to sound as it normally sounds and they preferred a 250$ over it. Why? I guess that's what Mr.Fabrikant tried to find out. By your own words, after reading that review, you should buy the 250$ speakers, if only to find out what they said was true.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •