Vivid Giya G3

[dallasjustice]

Yes, but unlike the S5, the Giya G2 THD is raising. I rather hear less of a tweeter then more of its THD

Both speakers have low THD. All speakers have higher THD as SPL goes up. The Magico does too. The S5 has slightly lower THD. However, THD may be one of the least important measurements soundstage has NRC take. Lateral off axis is really THE measurement which most closely relates to stereo image and musical enjoyment.

 

[microstrip]

Both speakers have low THD. All speakers have higher THD as SPL goes up. The Magico does too. The S5 has slightly lower THD. However, THD may be one of the least important measurements soundstage has NRC take. Lateral off axis is really THE measurement which most closely relates to stereo image and musical enjoyment.

It is why most of us take all measurements with many grains of salt. If the "best measurement" only suits the preference of a few of us, something must be missing from them. Anyway it is good to know that in your case measurements did their job. BTW, did you select the speaker because of the measurements or did you listen to it extensively before reading them?

 

[dallasjustice]

As far as lateral off axis, that's not a personal preference. There's significant research which proves its importance.

I based my decision on both listening and measurements.

Oh, I think I know what you want to know. You think measurements have a placebo effect on the listener? I loved the vivid Giya the first time I heard it at RMAF about 6 or 7 years ago. At that time, I had no idea what a loudspeaker measurement was.

[/I]

It is why most of us take all measurements with many grains of salt. If the "best measurement" only suits the preference of a few of us, something must be missing from them. Anyway it is good to know that in your case measurements did their job. BTW, did you select the speaker because of the measurements or did you listen to it extensively before reading them?

 

[bonzo75]

As far as lateral off axis, that's not a personal preference. There's significant research which proves its importance.

Are MBLs and other omni speakers known to have good lateral off axis measurements?

 

[microstrip]

As far as lateral off axis, that's not a personal preference. There's significant research which proves its importance.

I based my decision on both listening and measurements.

Oh, I think I know what you want to know. You think measurements have a placebo effect on the listener? I loved the vivid Giya the first time I heard it at RMAF about 6 or 7 years ago. At that time, I had no idea what a loudspeaker measurement was.

This is your thread, I will not question here your deep beliefs.

I have always been very skeptical about first love at shows, most of the time you are listening mostly to the whole equipment being exhibited, quality of setup and unknown room. And yes, IMHO dogmatic use of measurements can induce placebo effect on par with reviews, our previous experience and our wishes. We also have to deal with it.

For me measurements are particularly useful to diagnose setup and system optimization.

 

[Purite Audio]

Are MBLs and other omni speakers known to have good lateral off axis measurements?

A true omnidirectional speaker radiates the same amount of energy in every direction, very different from a virtual point source.
Keith.

 

[amirm]

If the "best measurement" only suits the preference of a few of us, something must be missing from them.

Fortunately the research into loudspeakers shows the opposite. But carry on.

 

[dallasjustice]

For me measurements are particularly useful to diagnose setup and system optimization.

Totally agree.

So you don't accept my listening impressions AND the measurements. I guess there's no pleasing you! Next?

 

[amirm]

Are MBLs and other omni speakers known to have good lateral off axis measurements?

What is important here is not any and all off-axis energy. For example, you don't sit behind your loudspeaker so what comes out of there has far less importance than say, +-15 degree of the axis of the loudspeaker. Turns out what correlates highly with our preferences is a weighted sum of the different degrees of radiation. No single measurement or sum of all of them will do this.

 

[microstrip]

Fortunately the research into loudspeakers shows the opposite. But carry on.

I was addressing just the WBF usual contributors population ...

 

[amirm]

I was addressing just the WBF usual contributors population ...

No, you are addressing their purchase decisions. That doesn't translate into any facts about loudspeaker performance and usefulness of measurements as you stated.

 

[microstrip]

Totally agree.

So you don't accept my listening impressions AND the measurements. I guess there's no pleasing you! Next?

I am very interested in the Giya's debates - I appreciated a lot the fabulous Nautilus. I care about your opinions, but I like to know how I should weight them - it is how I learn from audio foruns.

 

[dallasjustice]

did you come across a speaker that measured better than the giya but you found to be less enjoyable to listen too?

Which measurement? For example, the Quad doesn't measure as well off axis but has other qualities that really attract me to that speaker. The Quad has an immediacy that is startling at first. I believe some of that can be measured by the unbelievable step response. Overall, I would say the Quad's flaws make it not very practical for me.

I have heard Magico speakers a few times. They measure very well on axis, but I've never really liked the sound. However, their measurements off axis might explain why I don't like them very much. I haven't heard one in a few years, so maybe the newest models are much better.

For me, the Vivid Giya G3 are the closest thing I've heard which is able to combine something like the immediacy/transparency of a Quad but with mega big dynamics.

I think it's fair to say that the KEF Blade measures almost as well as the vivid off axis and on axis. I do like the Blade II. One of the issues I have with that speaker is the bass. When I heard it, it seemed like I could hear the tuning port. I thought the bass was very sloppy. It was kind of a disappointment for me, because I like the overall design and the rest of the sound too.

I think the ultimate speaker shootout for me would be something like the JBL M2 vs Vivid. They are different designs. The M2 measures as well or better off axis. My only hesitation with the M2 is the looks and the ecosystem isn't my style.

I never said measurements are the final arbiter for a loudspeaker. I certainly think there's still much to be learned about loudspeaker measurements. For my money, I would only buy a loudspeaker who's designer obviously has a great respect for the significant work which has already been done testing loudspeakers with measurements and listener preferences.

 

[dallasjustice]

Are MBLs and other omni speakers known to have good lateral off axis measurements?

Here are some recent measurements from the NRC lab done on some highly touted and very high dollar omnis.

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/in...&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153

These measurements look pretty bad, but it may be the case that an anechoic chamber is not necessarily the best place to measure an omni speaker like this since the whole idea behind the omni is total power response. I believe there are ways to infer or project what the power response might be "in room" but I'm not sure how accurate those projections would be.

I've always found omnis to sound fake to me. The soundstage sounds very artificial. Some folks like that big omni sound though. But it's not for me.

 

[microstrip]

Which measurement? For example, the Quad doesn't measure as well off axis but has other qualities that really attract me to that speaker. (...)

It is curious you consider so as many people refer that the Quad ESL63 and derivate have excellent polar measurements. They were considered a real achievement, that was modeled mathematically to a defined target by Peter Walker. He used segmented circular sections of the stators and delays lines to achieve a particular model of dispersion versus frequency.

Surely they do not play loud and all types of music - but this is a different matter.

 

[microstrip]

Are MBLs and other omni speakers known to have good lateral off axis measurements?

It depends on what you consider good lateral off axis measurements. A perfect omni is supposed to show a set of regular superimposed set of equal curves, something that does not fit typical speaker models. The shape of this unique curve must complement the room acoustics - it is why they are not easy to setup and do not fit all rooms. Perhaps also why the usual extreme love or extreme hate reaction ...

 

[KeithR]

I've always found omnis to sound fake to me. The soundstage sounds very artificial. Some folks like that big omni sound though. But it's not for me.

+1. I find them artificial as well - at first you're like "wow!" and then after some listening you realize it isn't right.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

+1. I find them artificial as well - at first you're like "wow!" and then after some listening you realize it isn't right.

the other thing I typically find with Omni's is that it's difficult to get the SPL's to the right level for extended listening comfort.

either it's too loud to allow the soundstage to come alive, or too tame for comfort and not involving. which causes me to get fatigued since they are played too loud most times I've heard them.

maybe amps get stressed and 1st watt magic gets missed. 50th watt magic will never equal 1st watt magic.

maybe were I to spend extended time in an Omni based mature system that was involving at modest SPL's my viewpoint might change.

 

[microstrip]

(...) maybe were I too spend extended time in an Omni based mature system that was involving at modest SPL's my viewpoint might change.

My main complain of my first generation of MBL 101 speakers - they needed to be played loud. No experience with the current models.

 

[anders]

Which measurement? For example, the Quad doesn't measure as well off axis but has other qualities that really attract me to that speaker. The Quad has an immediacy that is startling at first. I believe some of that can be measured by the unbelievable step response. Overall, I would say the Quad's flaws make it not very practical for me.

I have heard Magico speakers a few times. They measure very well on axis, but I've never really liked the sound. However, their measurements off axis might explain why I don't like them very much. I haven't heard one in a few years, so maybe the newest models are much better.

For me, the Vivid Giya G3 are the closest thing I've heard which is able to combine something like the immediacy/transparency of a Quad but with mega big dynamics.

I think it's fair to say that the KEF Blade measures almost as well as the vivid off axis and on axis. I do like the Blade II. One of the issues I have with that speaker is the bass. When I heard it, it seemed like I could hear the tuning port. I thought the bass was very sloppy. It was kind of a disappointment for me, because I like the overall design and the rest of the sound too.

I think the ultimate speaker shootout for me would be something like the JBL M2 vs Vivid. They are different designs. The M2 measures as well or better off axis. My only hesitation with the M2 is the looks and the ecosystem isn't my style.

I never said measurements are the final arbiter for a loudspeaker. I certainly think there's still much to be learned about loudspeaker measurements. For my money, I would only buy a loudspeaker who's designer obviously has a great respect for the significant work which has already been done testing loudspeakers with measurements and listener preferences.

I am curious if you have ever listened to Earl Geddes speakers? Not sure if he has shown at hifi shows recently. His off axis measurements are very good, unfortunately I dislike the way the speakers look