robs
Minor Hero
Posts: 52
|
Post by robs on Apr 29, 2019 13:33:52 GMT -5
It has peaks and dips all over the midrange. It also has rising treble, a massive midbass bump. It rolls off too quickly. Vertical dispersion is horrible with ribbons. 2, 8" drivers that don't have to reproduce midrange should go significantly lower and stay flatter than a JBL LSR 308 that costs half as much. Sigh....well just listen to it. I have heard more expensive JBLs than the ones mentioned and I would pick the T2. It's one of the best speakers I've heard. Having said that it is dependent on positioning, so results can vary depending on that. The midbass hump: Read more at www.stereophile.com/content/emotiva-audio-airmotiv-t2-loudspeaker-measurements#CcHdJ8tw7BkaYphz.99 So it's not "all over the place" or "awful" but according to John Atkinson who did the measurements: "evenly balanced", bass being "maximally flat, "optimal crossover design", "Superbly clean spectral plot in the treble". "Cleanly spaced contour lines offering stable imaging". Some aberrations present like a minor 3-4 db peak at below 3 khz and a +5 db peak at 15 khz. So, far from a poor showing imo. At worst you could say - minor issues present. Thanks for the additional info. I usually jump for the measurements and expect flat lines even in room. (Which if I'm not mistaken would need a waveguide, great off axis response, etc... But most speakers are broken by design because they don't use either of these things to a great enough extent, and aren't JBL speakers. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 29, 2019 14:11:09 GMT -5
"The only problem I have there is that "emotional response" isn't a real thing"
Try telling that to my wife 
And, with well over 200,000 pairs of Magneplanars sold, yours may very well be the minority view. I'm a hybrid. I'm not a fan of Maggies or ML's due to a lack of immediacy and some lack of microdynamics - a slight veil if you might- when I heard it. But I also think that one's response to the speakers i.e. the emotional response is a very real thing and far more important than if the speaker is accurate or not. I've also noticed that speakers that don't sound all that great in one room will sound much nicer in another and vice versa. I've heard accurate components sound somewhat lifeless in certain rooms while components I would consider too bright sound quite nice in the same room. |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,276
|
Post by KeithL on Apr 29, 2019 14:19:22 GMT -5
Perhaps you prefer the word "tangible" or "external". An emotional response is something that happens inside you in response to something that happens outside. (But that response is also affected by internal things like memories, mood, and mental state.)
And, while we can measure the chemicals and electrical signals involved, the details tend to be obscure.
However...
If you had your eyes closed, and, quite literally could not tell whether you were listening to a recording or a live performance, then they would produce the same reaction. And, in the converse, if you could somehow tell the difference, then there must actually be a difference, and it could be measured if you measured the right thing.
(Your brain, and any emotional responses it has, must rely on what it hears - and what it sees - but only if you have your eyes open.)
There is simply nothing "magical" that cannot be measured... at least not in the real world outside your ear drums.
HOWEVER, because sound and music are so complicated, there are many opportunities for the APPEARANCE that something intangible is going on.
For example, let's assume, for the purposes of discussion, that what you heard at a live performance, from your seat half way back in the audience, had a lot of harmonic content. Then let's also assume that, when they recorded that concert, it was recorded using microphones positioned very close to the individual instruments. The result might be that the recording had proportionally much less harmonic content than you heard from your seat in the audience. Therefore, a perfectly accurate rendition of that recording would NOT be an accurate reproduction of what you heard sitting in the audience. (What you heard in the recording was really "the recording engineer's idea of what he or she thought it should sound like" - which may or may not be what the audience heard.)
If that were the case, it's quite possible that some device that deliberately added "fake harmonic content" might end up delivering a result that was more like what you heard...
However, it would be fake... It's not an accurate reproduction of the original... It's more like the proverbial "stopped clock that's accurate twice a day"... (You might even say that it's "a really good counterfeit of an accurate recording"... )
As for Magneplanars.... I would not suggest quoting sales figures as any sort of proof of technical excellence.  They most certainly appeal to a significant part of the market.... And many people agree that they sound quite pleasant.... (I don't personally find them objectionable... I could certainly listen to them... I just prefer other alternatives.)
(However, I'll bet that, historically, Bose has sold far more speakers... and I much prefer Magneplanars to theirs...)
"The only problem I have there is that "emotional response" isn't a real thing"
Try telling that to my wife
And, with well over 200,000 pairs of Magneplanars sold, yours may very well be the minority view. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,276
|
Post by KeithL on Apr 29, 2019 14:57:37 GMT -5
I would add one more bit of detail....
There is no such single thing as "great off-axis response"... The OPTIMAL off-axis response for a speaker in a given room depends largely on the acoustics of the room itself.
In an anechoic chamber, where there are no room reflections, and no room acoustics, ALL that matters is the on-axis response - period.
In a room with near-ideal acoustics, a reasonably wide and reasonably consistent off-axis response will produce a nice "lively, open, and airy" sound and a wide sweet spot for listening.
However, in many rooms with less-than-ideal acoustics, a wide off-axis response will merely contribute to the (bad) contributions that the room makes to the sound you hear. And, in a studio environment, both vertical and horizontal response are often kept narrow to avoid allowing the room to alter the sound of the mix itself.
(A room with good acoustics will have absorptive materials on the walls, floor, and ceiling at the "first bounce points" to reduce or eliminate room interactions that often cause issues.)
So, to a degree, when a speaker is designed, it is designed to work optimally in certain sorts of rooms... The purpose of a waveguide is NOT "to make the widest possible dispersion" - but to allow the designer to "program" the dispersion to fit their requirements in either direction. (And, since most people aren't willing to install diffusers on the ceiling, most designers choose to limit the vertical response for all speakers, and especially center channels.)
There is also the question of listening position and "sweet spot". (Would you prefer a speaker that sounds great from the center of the couch, but lousy everywhere else in the room, or one that sounds just pretty good in then entire room?)
Sigh....well just listen to it. I have heard more expensive JBLs than the ones mentioned and I would pick the T2. It's one of the best speakers I've heard. Having said that it is dependent on positioning, so results can vary depending on that. The midbass hump: Read more at www.stereophile.com/content/emotiva-audio-airmotiv-t2-loudspeaker-measurements#CcHdJ8tw7BkaYphz.99 So it's not "all over the place" or "awful" but according to John Atkinson who did the measurements: "evenly balanced", bass being "maximally flat, "optimal crossover design", "Superbly clean spectral plot in the treble". "Cleanly spaced contour lines offering stable imaging". Some aberrations present like a minor 3-4 db peak at below 3 khz and a +5 db peak at 15 khz. So, far from a poor showing imo. At worst you could say - minor issues present. Thanks for the additional info. I usually jump for the measurements and expect flat lines even in room. (Which if I'm not mistaken would need a waveguide, great off axis response, etc... But most speakers are broken by design because they don't use either of these things to a great enough extent, and aren't JBL speakers. |
|
robs
Minor Hero
Posts: 52
|
Post by robs on Apr 29, 2019 15:27:53 GMT -5
The problem is that you're attempting to view a speaker in the same context as an electronic component. This is leading you to make assumptions and simplifications that simply don't accurately represent the facts.
A speaker is part of a very complex electro-mechanical system that includes the speaker, your ears, and the room you're playing it in. For one thing, the frequency response will vary widely, depending on the acoustic properties of the room, the characteristics of the speaker, and the location of the speaker and the listener.
Because of this, it is physically impossible to make a speaker that will measure universally well in a variety of different rooms. The ONLY standard way to measure a speaker is in an anechoic chamber. Unfortunately, not only is an anechoic chamber unrepresentative of any real world listening situation, but most people agree they sound really unpleasant.
Vertical dispersion with vertical ribbons is NOT at all "horrible". The vertical dispersion of a vertical ribbon is LIMITED, or "controlled", which is a desirable virtue. If you're designing a speaker that you want to sound good in most typical rooms, then you want to limit the vertical dispersion, to limit floor and ceiling interactions. This is even more important in a studio environment.
(Every designer, and every reviewer, has a different opinion on exactly how much vertical dispersion is "desirable" and how much is "too much" in a particular application.)
Likewise, bass tuning is a choice...
For a given speaker cabinet volume and driver, the designed gets to choose between a gradual roll-off that starts higher, and a flatter response, or even a slight bump, followed by a sharper drop at a lower frequency. (So, would you like a speaker that is flatter, or one that goes lower, or one that plays loud low notes more cleanly, or one that's bigger and costs more?)
If you do a bit of research - you'll find a lot of other specs on the JBL LSR 308 - including a modest maximum peak output level of 112 dB SPL. You will also find that it is down a full -10 dB at 37 Hz.... and no mention of maximum output level at any low frequency. You might also look for some waterfall plots to help figure out how clear and concise (or how imprecise and blurred) they sound on transients - if you can find any.
Note that neither we nor they quote THD specs (those are very difficult to interpreted with loudspeakers - and are rarely if ever specified - but I'll bet the THD on the T2's is much lower.) The LSR 308's are also clearly designed to be used as near-field monitors (close to the listener). I've never heard the JBL's, but I doubt they'd compare well to the T2's in a moderately sized room at typical listening levels and distances.
It has peaks and dips all over the midrange. It also has rising treble, a massive midbass bump. It rolls off too quickly. Vertical dispersion is horrible with ribbons. 2, 8" drivers that don't have to reproduce midrange should go significantly lower and stay flatter than a JBL LSR 308 that costs half as much. Frequency response will not vary as widely with the use of a waveguide, coincident driver, and/or cardioid dispersion using other drivers to act as a baffle or cancel side and rear emissions. The room will also matter less using one or more of these things to focus the sound. A Kii Three or Dutch & Dutch 8C will measure better than most in a variety of rooms. Of course I'm not saying there is a speaker that works universally well, but I'd like to get closer to that instead of using legacy drivers in boxes. If vertical dispersion being limited is desirable, great. I still want the ribbon or any other tweeter in at least an MTM setup with a waveguide so the balance doesn't change so much in the vertical plane. Ideally, put it in the midrange driver. I don't see a situation where that wouldn't be desirable. I'll concede the point about "how much dispersion" is desirable. The only caveat is that the frequency response changing as one moves in the vertical plane seems always undesirable, and most speakers have nasty constricted listening windows at one or more areas where the vertical dispersion turns to garbage at a crossover point... Unless it's a coincident driver. In a moderately sized room at typical listening levels I'd prefer neither as they have far too small of a bass/driver size ratio, and neither seems to have extension as a design goal. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Apr 29, 2019 17:46:44 GMT -5
Perhaps you prefer the word "tangible" or "external". An emotional response is something that happens inside you in response to something that happens outside. (But that response is also affected by internal things like memories, mood, and mental state.)
And, while we can measure the chemicals and electrical signals involved, the details tend to be obscure.
However...
If you had your eyes closed, and, quite literally could not tell whether you were listening to a recording or a live performance, then they would produce the same reaction. And, in the converse, if you could somehow tell the difference, then there must actually be a difference, and it could be measured if you measured the right thing.
(Your brain, and any emotional responses it has, must rely on what it hears - and what it sees - but only if you have your eyes open.)
There is simply nothing "magical" that cannot be measured... at least not in the real world outside your ear drums. HOWEVER, because sound and music are so complicated, there are many opportunities for the APPEARANCE that something intangible is going on. For example, let's assume, for the purposes of discussion, that what you heard at a live performance, from your seat half way back in the audience, had a lot of harmonic content. Then let's also assume that, when they recorded that concert, it was recorded using microphones positioned very close to the individual instruments. The result might be that the recording had proportionally much less harmonic content than you heard from your seat in the audience. Therefore, a perfectly accurate rendition of that recording would NOT be an accurate reproduction of what you heard sitting in the audience. (What you heard in the recording was really "the recording engineer's idea of what he or she thought it should sound like" - which may or may not be what the audience heard.)
If that were the case, it's quite possible that some device that deliberately added "fake harmonic content" might end up delivering a result that was more like what you heard...
However, it would be fake... It's not an accurate reproduction of the original... It's more like the proverbial "stopped clock that's accurate twice a day"... (You might even say that it's "a really good counterfeit of an accurate recording"... ) As for Magneplanars.... I would not suggest quoting sales figures as any sort of proof of technical excellence. They most certainly appeal to a significant part of the market.... And many people agree that they sound quite pleasant.... (I don't personally find them objectionable... I could certainly listen to them... I just prefer other alternatives.)
(However, I'll bet that, historically, Bose has sold far more speakers... and I much prefer Magneplanars to theirs...)
"The only problem I have there is that "emotional response" isn't a real thing"
Try telling that to my wife
And, with well over 200,000 pairs of Magneplanars sold, yours may very well be the minority view. Nevertheless, that is a lot of Magnepan speakers sold considering they make them one by one by a human being and with little or not advertising. |
|
|
|
Post by bluemeanies on Apr 30, 2019 9:54:42 GMT -5
I'm not sure what measurements you're looking at. For a speaker, and especially for one that you can own without a mortgage, I would say they measure pretty well. (Although, as with speakers in general, I would also say that how they sound is far more important than how they measure.)
What's up with the measurements on the T2s? Those look awful. Who cares about measurements or graphs...it's your ears in the final analysis. The ears, our hearing, one of our senses, are the natural mechanism we appreciate sound...music. I don't listen to my system I listen to the music. It does not matter to me what the measurements are for my speakers or distortion I hear thru my tube amplifiers. I will listen to that distortion any day...but that's another topic. How many people walk into a b&m store and ask what the measurements are on a particular speaker and or amplifier? We make decisions in this hobby based on what we hear..how it sounds, the soundstage, dynamics. The swirl of a brush on the hi-hat, the three dimensional sound, and most importantly that LIFELIKE presence of an artist such as Eric Alexander in your living room. Measurements IMO are in many respects are as important as a $10,000 power cord. I read something on this forum stating the ERM-1 was based on the design of the B&W platform...IMO...not even close in sound given that the writer himself admitted the B&W's had more bass, wider soundstage, smoother vocals and better mid-range but he could not justify an $1100.00 price difference between the B&W805's and the ERM's. Tell me ..WHAT IN HELL DO YOU LISTEN TOO, regarding speaker performance? If you want something to sound good you don't have to rob a bank but don't go cheap..your not going to get a Cadillac ride driving a Voltswagon. |
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Apr 30, 2019 10:21:30 GMT -5
As for Magneplanars....I would not suggest quoting sales figures as any sort of proof of technical excellence. They most certainly appeal to a significant part of the market....And many people agree that they sound quite pleasant....(I don't personally find them objectionable... I could certainly listen to them... I just prefer other alternatives.) (However, I'll bet that, historically, Bose has sold far more speakers... and I much prefer Magneplanars to theirs...) He's not quoting sales figures to prove technical excellence of the Maggies. Ironically, he's using sales figures to prove sound excellence to your point of "how they sound is far more important than how they measure". And he's pointing out the lack of marketing to differentiate them from other manufacturers, like Bose, who also sell a lot of speakers. |
|
robs
Minor Hero
Posts: 52
|
Post by robs on Apr 30, 2019 11:18:52 GMT -5
I would add one more bit of detail....
There is no such single thing as "great off-axis response"... The OPTIMAL off-axis response for a speaker in a given room depends largely on the acoustics of the room itself.
In an anechoic chamber, where there are no room reflections, and no room acoustics, ALL that matters is the on-axis response - period.
In a room with near-ideal acoustics, a reasonably wide and reasonably consistent off-axis response will produce a nice "lively, open, and airy" sound and a wide sweet spot for listening.
However, in many rooms with less-than-ideal acoustics, a wide off-axis response will merely contribute to the (bad) contributions that the room makes to the sound you hear. And, in a studio environment, both vertical and horizontal response are often kept narrow to avoid allowing the room to alter the sound of the mix itself.
(A room with good acoustics will have absorptive materials on the walls, floor, and ceiling at the "first bounce points" to reduce or eliminate room interactions that often cause issues.)
So, to a degree, when a speaker is designed, it is designed to work optimally in certain sorts of rooms... The purpose of a waveguide is NOT "to make the widest possible dispersion" - but to allow the designer to "program" the dispersion to fit their requirements in either direction. (And, since most people aren't willing to install diffusers on the ceiling, most designers choose to limit the vertical response for all speakers, and especially center channels.)
There is also the question of listening position and "sweet spot". (Would you prefer a speaker that sounds great from the center of the couch, but lousy everywhere else in the room, or one that sounds just pretty good in then entire room?)
Thanks for the additional info. I usually jump for the measurements and expect flat lines even in room. (Which if I'm not mistaken would need a waveguide, great off axis response, etc... But most speakers are broken by design because they don't use either of these things to a great enough extent, and aren't JBL speakers. Withing the controlled dispersion, response should be even. In an anechoic chamber, it's still bad in my opinion if shifting my head a foot up or down changes the balance of treble and mid-range when a coincident coaxial driver would solve that problem. |
|
|
|
Post by selind40 on Apr 30, 2019 11:35:50 GMT -5
I'm so confused right now.....  |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 30, 2019 12:40:29 GMT -5
I would add one more bit of detail.... There is no such single thing as "great off-axis response"... The OPTIMAL off-axis response for a speaker in a given room depends largely on the acoustics of the room itself. In an anechoic chamber, where there are no room reflections, and no room acoustics, ALL that matters is the on-axis response - period. In a room with near-ideal acoustics, a reasonably wide and reasonably consistent off-axis response will produce a nice "lively, open, and airy" sound and a wide sweet spot for listening.
However, in many rooms with less-than-ideal acoustics, a wide off-axis response will merely contribute to the (bad) contributions that the room makes to the sound you hear. And, in a studio environment, both vertical and horizontal response are often kept narrow to avoid allowing the room to alter the sound of the mix itself.
(A room with good acoustics will have absorptive materials on the walls, floor, and ceiling at the "first bounce points" to reduce or eliminate room interactions that often cause issues.) So, to a degree, when a speaker is designed, it is designed to work optimally in certain sorts of rooms... The purpose of a waveguide is NOT "to make the widest possible dispersion" - but to allow the designer to "program" the dispersion to fit their requirements in either direction. (And, since most people aren't willing to install diffusers on the ceiling, most designers choose to limit the vertical response for all speakers, and especially center channels.) There is also the question of listening position and "sweet spot". (Would you prefer a speaker that sounds great from the center of the couch, but lousy everywhere else in the room, or one that sounds just pretty good in then entire room?)
Withing the controlled dispersion, response should be even. In an anechoic chamber, it's still bad in my opinion if shifting my head a foot up or down changes the balance of treble and mid-range when a coincident coaxial driver would solve that problem. I don't think there is one right way to make a speaker. Every approach introduces compromises. I haven't heard a single speaker design element that is a must have for better sound. I have heard well reviewed speakers with: Coaxial drivers (KEF) time aligned drivers with the Vandersteen and Thiels, speakers with and without waveguides, horn loaded, phase plugs, bipolar electrostats and quasi-ribbons, ported, sealed, side drivers, active subwoofers, active speakers, active bi amped speakers, passsive bi amped speakers, bi wired speakers, 10 inch bass and mid drivers, 4 inch bass and mid drivers, 6 and 8 inch bass and mid drivers, single full range speaker drivers silk tweeters, ring radiator tweeters, folded ribbon tweeters, ferro-fluid tweeters, berrilium tweeters, silk tweeters, Aluminium, paper, silk, berilium, diamond drivers, didn't make one better than the other simply due to the presence of these elements in the design phase. None of these would I consider necessary to sound better than another. You have to take both two speakers and actually listen to it to see if it's what you want imo. The design decisions used to get the sound you like are usually optimized for that specific speaker to tackle its specific challenges. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2019 13:08:15 GMT -5
"On that same sampler, Swedish singer Sophie Zelmani's voice in "How It Feels" (from her Sing and Dance) was rich, sweet, and uncolored. I did, uh, feel that the top end was a bit airless, and so resorted to a non–audiophile-approved fix I've used before: a 1dB boost from the Marantz pre-pro's Treble control." -author.
"The T2s enthusiastically joined in the fun..." Oh, that was profound.
"The only remaining option is the use of a subtle application of room equalization. I typically don't use it, for reviewing or my own listening, but can I at least mitigate the most obvious bass limitations in my room to get a better feel for the T2's capabilities?"
May I reply? "DUH"
I get so tired of those self-proclaimed audio gurus and their stupid believes & comments. Too many are ridiculous, to say one can't not use tone controls or you're not an audiophile. Those same geniuses will then bloviate about the effect of room acoustics and how it changes sound. It sounded like this...but could be caused by that...
Some of the reviewers write as if they were auditioning for a Cambridge creative writing professorship, with such self-importance. Stereophile does write toward the sophistication, eloquence the Prescotts, Niles & Hamiltons prefer. (eye roll)
Back to the T2s- To compare them to the Monitor Audio Silver 10 was quite a positive review. Bravo Emotiva.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Apr 30, 2019 14:10:21 GMT -5
Wow, this place truly amazes me sometimes. This thread has gone way over the edge of reality. There is not a big enough roll eyes emogie for this one. Help me novisnick, I need a big one!!! 🙄 |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Apr 30, 2019 15:42:09 GMT -5
Wow, this place truly amazes me sometimes. This thread has gone way over the edge of reality. There is not a big enough roll eyes emogie for this one. Help me novisnick , I need a big one!!! 🙄 I rarely ever dive face first into a pile of Schiit, not sure where this is going but I’m not up for the ride! 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Apr 30, 2019 15:42:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by tchaik on Apr 30, 2019 15:43:55 GMT -5
Wow, this place truly amazes me sometimes. This thread has gone way over the edge of reality. There is not a big enough roll eyes emogie for this one. Help me novisnick, I need a big one!!! 🙄 I thought it was "help me Obi wan, you're our only hope". |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Apr 30, 2019 15:46:57 GMT -5
He was our last hope. No, there is another.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Apr 30, 2019 19:08:59 GMT -5
What really gets me is how some folks think they are better than others at telling you what speaker sounds good or bad. What do they have inside their ears that I don't? 🤔🤷♀️
|
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 30, 2019 19:53:22 GMT -5
What really gets me is how some folks think they are better than others at telling you what speaker sounds good or bad. What do they have inside their ears that I don't? 🤔🤷♀️ Well apparently what they must think they have that you don't is a brain between their ears.  |
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Apr 30, 2019 21:26:49 GMT -5
What really gets me is how some folks think they are better than others at telling you what speaker sounds good or bad. What do they have inside their ears that I don't? 🤔🤷♀️ Well apparently what they must think they have that you don't is a brain between their ears. That must be it now I can sleep good tonight knowing.😋 |
|
