It’s All a Preference

[Gregadd]

Terry's this is pretty simple. If the Harman tests were revealing a preference, among trained and untrained listeners, for the expensive, audiophile- endorsed brands like Gregg's Martin Logan's, the vocal subjectivists on this board would be declaring Harman's research a breakthrough. It is wrong, for a hundred unfounded reasons, because it disagrees with them.

Tim

There is nothing new about Seans work. He has more resources and probably does it better than most. That FR argument has beeen around since the dawn of the subjective reviewing. If you recall that is why JGH founded the subjective press... becuse there was a difference between what he measured and what he heard as compared to live music. He was terninated for pointing that out.

The Martin Logan CLS 1 was first purchased by me in the mid 1980's. I walked in the store (Excalibur-Old Towne Alexandria, VA. long ago defunct)to audition the CJ PV5. I had never heard of NL. I puirchased the CJ PV 5. Alnost two weeks later after signifcant auduitoning I purchased it for $2500 plus tax. Before buying it I did not A/B it or read a review prior to purchase. I did read reviews after purchase. Some called it good some called it unacceptable. Currently the CLS ! can be had for $1000 used. I had to replace the panels that ran $900-$1500. i also supplemented the bass with a pair of Janis w3 subwoofers (10" woofers") with accopanying anp/crosover.

In response to people on this forum not beleiving what I say. Well I can't think of anything nice to sa,y so I'll just be quiet.

I thought this was a discussion forun. Therefore it would be ok to wonder aloud how and why a nenber had expereinced suh an about face about ML

I an remided of the story of the "Enperor with No Clothes." Clearly anyone could see the King was naked. That was the easy part. The child spoke not because he had superior eyesight, but because he was naive to the possible consequences of criticizing the kKng.

 

[microstrip]

(...) And now I know I'm not alone. You keep repeating that Toole quote as if it reveals something. It does not; it is obvious. Of course we must like what we listen to and if what someone likes is valves and vinyl and speakers with very bad off-axis response (and not great on-axis) that's fine with me. That is your preference, enjoy it. I've never said anything else. But if you can't accept that it is just your preference, if you insist on making up weak synonyms for "accuracy" and insisting that your distortions are more natural than a lack of distortion - and this happens in the audiophile community all the time - I will insist that they do not sound more natural to me, nor evidently to the statistical majority when listening blind at Harman laboratories.

And then, of course, we'll enter into the inevitable "but but but but but......"

Tim

Tim,
The F. Toole quote reveals the fundamentals of his work and as usual when you have no arguments you move in distortions, vinyl and tubes ... And forget the fundamentals.
And remember, I was using it just to show your disagreement, as you requested. Nothing else.

 

[Gregadd]

Conflict of interest

definition of 'conflict of interest '
a situation where a professional, or a corporation, has a vested interest which may make them an unreliable source. The interest could be money, status, knowledge or reputation for example. When such a situation arises, the party is usually asked to remove themselves, and it is often legally required of them.

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/conflict-of-interest.asp#ixzz1ujfr61bp

We cam see then that a person with a conflict of interest is not "guilty" of anything In order to preserve credibility and to avoid the appearence of imprpriety or bias it is better not to participate.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim,
The F. Toole quote reveals the fundamentals of his work and as usual when you have no arguments you move in distortions, vinyl and tubes ... And forget the fundamentals.
And remember, I was using it just to show your disagreement, as you requested. Nothing else.

The quote, as always, is out of context. But nonetheless, of course preference is important. It is, however, Toole's work that reveals the fundamentals of his work, not a one-liner pulled from his book and waved about repeatedly. And what his work reveals, at least in the context of this conversation, is this :

Hypothesis: Measured FR accuracy can be heard and corelates to preference

Evidence: Two decades of remarkably successful Canadian speaker development based on measurements and Harman's blind listening tests.

Let's not use the word "proof" in spite ot the definitive nature of the evidence. It just stirs up trouble.

That is my argument, Micro. That is Toole's argument as it relates to this conversation.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

They do have an array of speakers at all price ranges, from Infinitys to JBLs to Revels, that meet market needs at those levels. There is a lot more to capturing market share, if that's what you're driving at, than building a good product. And if you're under the impression that AR had dominant market share at all price points in the 60s, I seriously doubt that is true.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

There is nothing new about Seans work.

The notion that good measurements of this kind could be correlated to good sound drove the development of an entire Canadian speaker industry. The idea not new at all. This very direct, ver strong evidence is.

In response to people on this forum not beleiving what I say. Well I can't think of anything nice to sa,y so I'll just be quiet.

I believe you like your speakers, Greg.

I thought this was a discussion forun. Therefore it would be ok to wonder aloud how and why a nenber had expereinced suh an about face about ML

Why would you wonder when he has explained it to you in such detail, complete with graphs and charts and detailed reports of personal, subjective experience?

I an remided of the story of the "Enperor with No Clothes." Clearly anyone could see the King was naked. That was the easy part. The child spoke not because he had superior eyesight, but because he was naive to the possible consequences of criticizing the kKng.

I'm unsure of what this has to do with anything, but I'm still curious -- you seem to believe that the Harman testing and Amir's experience is somehow illegitimate. Do you believe that the measurements were wrong, or do you believe that the listeners did not report their preferences accurately?

Tim

 

[mep]

I hardly recognize the thread that I started, but that’s ok. Somehow Harman research is being held up as the holy grail of what is needed to design loudspeakers that people will prefer in listening tests (but not necessarily throw their money down and buy though). I asked this question before several times: How many people on this forum own Harman branded speakers? So far, the answer has been 1. How many people does this forum have now? Do we really only have 1 person out of all the people that belong to this forum that own Harman branded speakers? Let’s double it and say we have 2, or better yet, let’s quadruple the number and say we have 4. Doesn’t that tell us something? Or do we have a bunch of closeted Haman speaker owners who don’t want to admit they own Harman speakers??

If the majority of people prefer Harman speakers in their listening tests, how come the majority of people on this forum don’t own Harman speakers? Surely the word has gotten out on how great Harman speakers are. There must be a big buzz on the street about all of their research and how it has translated into great sound.

I’m also tired of hearing about ML speakers not measuring well next to all of those swell Harman speakers. I also don’t care about people telling other people who own ML speakers to stand up, crouch down, walk around your speakers, blah, blah, blah. I don’t judge any speaker unless I’m sitting down in the sweet spot and seriously listening to them. I don’t judge their quality by how good they sound if I’m doing gymnastics around my listening room. Most speakers weren’t designed to sound great sitting against the rear wall or side walls. The further you have a speaker like MLs from side walls; there will be less reflected sound.

As I said before when I started this thread, every purchase we make is based on our preference whether we admit it or not. If only one person on this forum admits to owning Harman branded speakers, apparently people prefer to buy other speakers-even those terrible ML speakers.

 

[mep]

They do have an array of speakers at all price ranges, from Infinitys to JBLs to Revels, that meet market needs at those levels. There is a lot more to capturing market share, if that's what you're driving at, than building a good product. And if you're under the impression that AR had dominant market share at all price points in the 60s, I seriously doubt that is true.

Tim

I bet they had the dominant market share in every price catagory they were in. If you think Harman speakers are so great, how come you don't own a pair??

 

[microstrip]

The quote, as always, is out of context. But nonetheless, of course preference is important. It is, however, Toole's work that reveals the fundamentals of his work, not a one-liner pulled from his book and waved about repeatedly. And what his work reveals, at least in the context of this conversation, is this :

Hypothesis: Measured FR accuracy can be heard and corelates to preference

Evidence: Two decades of remarkably successful Canadian speaker development based on measurements and Harman's blind listening tests.

Let's not use the word "proof" in spite ot the definitive nature of the evidence. It just stirs up trouble.

That is my argument, Micro. That is Toole's argument as it relates to this conversation.

Tim

Tim,

You said it all. The question you refuse to debate is the way a preference is established. You want to go on playing with this word, ignoring its deep meaning and why we can refer to it in defined way.

Your summary of the hypothesis in only the tip of the iceberg and your evidence is not great, happily those that can be found in F. Toole book or presented by Amir are much better.

I agree about your comment about the one-liner quotes : I already expressed it. Any one not knowing the book will always take your position, as probably he will not understand the quotes. And I am not a good patient schoolteacher as Amir.

 

[rbbert]

I bet they had the dominant market share in every price catagory they were in. If you think Harman speakers are so great, how come you don't own a pair??

But nothing compared to the market share Advent had for its speakers in the first half of the '70's, I'll bet

 

[Gregadd]

The notion that good measurements of this kind could be correlated to good sound drove the development of an entire Canadian speaker industry. The idea not new at all. This very direct, ver strong evidence is.

Does not Stereophile try to correlate what they hear to the neasurenments they make? As do others/

I believe you like your speakers, Greg.

Thanks. But the argument goes beyond my making an independent decision doesn't it?. i hope i would like it better if it measured perfectly in the tine donain and the frequency donain. We get back to the point- Is it disqualified because of the frequency problens common to electrostats? Or is it's excellence in other areas worth the conpronise?

Why would you wonder when he has explained it to you in such detail, complete with graphs and charts and detailed reports of personal, subjective experience?

It seens to be at odds with so many NL customers, nyself, and his own previously stated opinion.

I'm unsure of what this has to do with anything, but I'm still curious -- you seem to believe that the Harman testing and Amir's experience is somehow illegitimate. Do you believe that the measurements were wrong, or do you believe that the listeners did not report their preferences accurately?

It's just an anology. You do concede however taking on Harnon ,et al and Amirm is a daunting task. Remember how kings use to kill the messenger? I bet they moved heaven and earth to fix problems before taking then to the king.

Do you disagree to nake such a statement that FR is the preference would require a scitenfic poll with a proper demographic? Do you doubt listeners could be trained to be nore sensitive to donain errors and a questionaire could be structured to reflect that?Tim

gregadd

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I bet they had the dominant market share in every price catagory they were in. If you think Harman speakers are so great, how come you don't own a pair??

Well I might start with my lack of awareness of their approach the last time I was in the market and my lingering impression of JBL from the 70s. And I'd tell you that infinity speakers were on my short list before I decided to go active, but at the time I didn't evenknow they were a Harmon product. Which would lead me to their lack of an active consumer product. There is a lot more to capturing market share, or even consumer awareness, than good product development. Based on what I've read and their design philosophy,I'm a fan of HKs integrated amp. Why don't I own one of those? I don't need one. I've never heard a pair of PSBs I didn't like, or a pair of Vienna acoustics I didn't like...don't own any of them. I like Martin guitars; I've owned a couple of dozen guitars...never owned a Martin.....

In fact, i was not aware of this research or Sean's blog the last time I was in the market for audio, but knowing what I know today,I'd sure go listen to Harmon products if I was inthe market. But I would do so based onwhat I've learned here, not on anything I've heard from Harmon on the subject. Maybe they're really good at engineering and lousy at marketing. wouldn't be the first time that happened. But instead of asking irrelevant question with dozens of possible irrelevant answers, let's get back to the questions before us -- what is the source of your doubt? They took comprehensive FR measurements; they conducted very buttoned up listening tests. The results correlated and you don't believe them. What don't you believe?

Tim

 

[Gregadd]

What bass bump?

AS spekers go then we see this as a pretty good curve for the sunnit x
given the harnon test are in mon using 15 second nusuic clips or tone pulse tones.

Each speker has a 30 dgree dispersion. I would like to see graphs of itoff axis response.

Ideally we want the speaker in stero as intended by the manufacturer.

One thing I cnsidere was that the NLs dom't sound good cold and may have cooled waiting for thier turn on deck. Noreover 15 seconds may not have been sufficient to get thier juices flowing.

 

[MylesBAstor]

AS spekers go then we see this as a pretty good curve for the sunnit x
given the harnon test are in mon using 15 second nusuic clips or tone pulse tones.

Each speker has a 30 dgree dispersion. I would like to see graphs of itoff axis response.

Ideally we want the speaker in stero as intended by the manufacturer.

One thing I cnsidere was that the NLs dom't sound good cold and may have cooled waiting for thier turn on deck. Noreover 15 seconds may not have been sufficient to get thier juices flowing.

Well certainly they have to be plugged and allowed to charge up for 24 hours before any serious listening sessions. Otherwise they suck. One wonders whether that was covered? Or did they plug them in the morn of the listening tests?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

"Each speker has a 30 dgree dispersion. I would like to see graphs of itoff axis response."

Page one.

Tim

 

[Robh3606]

Here's a larger version with an explanation so we all don't have too look back

Rob

 

[amirm]

A bit about Harman the company. They literally make billions of dollars from this research. The #1 application for it is for automotive audio where the space is even more hostile than in our homes. The revenue from that business funds continued research here.

As a consumer company, yes, they are not doing nearly enough to tell their message. They are wonderful to work with from our (work) perspective. But at the end of the day, they don't make a huge speaker like Wilson, or fifty speakers like Paradigm. And so, their market share reflects that.

But really, we should not be discussing the company. The research is what it is and presented on its own merits.

 

[mep]

A bit about Harman the company. They literally make billions of dollars from this research. The #1 application for it is for automotive audio where the space is even more hostile than in our homes. The revenue from that business funds continued research here.

As a consumer company, yes, they are not doing nearly enough to tell their message. They are wonderful to work with from our (work) perspective. But at the end of the day, they don't make a huge speaker like Wilson, or fifty speakers like Paradigm. And so, their market share reflects that.

But really, we should not be discussing the company. The research is what it is and presented on its own merits.

When the Harman research is presented here to “prove” how their branded speakers are better than the competition, how do we not discuss the company? I started this thread to talk about how our audio purchases boil down to preferences and somehow this became a Harman superiority thread which I certainly didn’t start.

And my point remains, if Harman’s superior testing methods lead to superior speakers, how come only one person on this forum claims to own them?

 

[MylesBAstor]

When the Harman research is presented here to “prove” how their branded speakers are better than the competition, how do we not discuss the company? I started this thread to talk about how our audio purchases boil down to preferences and somehow this became a Harman superiority thread which I certainly didn’t start.

And my point remains, if Harman’s superior testing methods lead to superior speakers, how come only one person on this forum claims to own them?

Because we all have an inferiority complex? Sorry couldn't resist

 

[microstrip]

(...) But really, we should not be discussing the company. The research is what it is and presented on its own merits.

Amir,
I support your point.

But when the research is presented with a graph of a competing usd 11000 stating that it shows the principal distinguishing features of the speaker in the preceding post, it is not easy. And I can not avoid asking to the forum : is it is the ML Prodigy? Audiophiles are really curious people...