$2,000-3,000 Tower speaker comparison: Need help picking the contenders

[AcuDefTechGuy]

It's been said a thousand times that bias is force to be reckoned with. David Copperfield made my bias brain believed that the Statue of Liberty disappeared right in front of my eyes.

I knew it was an illusion, but I still saw it disappeared.

So to believe that one speaker sounds more detailed or whatever is a much simpler task compared to the disappearance of the Statue of Liberty.

My latest greatest is probably the TAD 2201. For some reasons, probably bias, I feel as if the TAD pro monitors deliver more details than "any other speakers".

But after another year, I may think differently.

 

[Irvrobinson]

We really need to live with the speakers for a while to truly compare. And when we compare, it also takes a lot of time, not just a few sessions, but months. Why? They are not double-blinded tests. There will be bias. Yes, the Latest-Greatest Syndrome or "Latest Pretty Girl to the Dance" is a factor. I'm only human.

Any unblinded comparisons done less than a year is premature and should be considered first impressions IMO. And I have plenty of first impressions.

I think there's a lot of merit to this perspective. While I don't have any variety in my equipment as you do, the tuning process for my system, in terms of crossovers, speaker placements, and subwoofer level took the better part of a year to finalize. Just as I thought I had everything perfect my perspective changed. I also find my perceptions of what the relative subwoofer level should be has changed over time - it is going down in level over time.

I posted about the Phil3, I think I only had them for a relatively short time. And the comparisons were based on 1 or 2 comparison sessions.

After living with the Phil3 for about a year now, I will say that they don't sound "as good as" the Salon2 or "more lifelike" than the Salon2 or Orion3, but the Phil3 also cost a lot less. So I doubt that you should buy the Phil3 since you own the Salon2. The Phil3 are still worth auditioning, as do the Salk. But I don't think the Phil3 or Salk SS will ever be "as good as" the Salon2 IMO. Just my opinion. My bias. My brain.

And I think I'm getting to know your style better, and I'm learning how to interpret what you post, and not to take you too literally on the first hearing, so to speak.

I will say this, I'm completely impressed that my respect for the Salon2 is increasing over time as I own them, which is a first for any speaker with me. Usually my enthusiasm for a speaker has a half-life of about two years. I'm currently a bit hung-up on electrostatics, but my continued respect for the Salon2 keeps me from putting them in a closet and spending a fortune on big ugly replacements.

newest "pretty girls" in my HT room are the 802D2 & TAD 2201, so yeah, I still have that "honeymoon period" with them. It has been a few months. I still love them. I don't care what the measurements say, the 802D2 sound fantastic to me, but not anymore fantastic than the Salon2, Orion3, or KEF 201/2.

I can understand your honeymoon with the 802D. I've posted more than once that someone with different taste than I have might prefer them to the Salon2. I have one friend who thinks imaging is a big "So what?" sort of thing, and his hearing isn't all that hot in the high frequencies, so he likes a little more bite like the 802Ds offer, and that's what he bought (I'll admit, against my advice).

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

An additional problem if you will, that I see in blind comparisons, is that there may be some people who are eminently familiar with the model they own and this sonic signature if you will becomes consciously or subconsciously recognizable and hence preferred.

I think if we set all speakers to small, XO 80Hz or even 100Hz, use the same subs, and level match in a blinded test, this "sonic signature" will not be as easy to recognized as most people think.

GTG, like everything else, has limitations. But they can also be useful. For example, people could not even tell the "sonic signature" of their own speakers once people were blinded to the speakers.

So people can talk about sonic signature all they want. Set the speakers to Small, XO @ 100Hz, use the same Subs, Level match, Blind the test, and then we will see about "Sonic Signature".

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I'm currently a bit hung-up on electrostatics...

See, no one is immune to the "latest pretty girl". We just can't help it.

And no one is immune to bias and how they perceive the sound. We're not Bad Robots.

 

[Tomorrow]

An additional problem if you will, that I see in blind comparisons, is that there may be some people who are eminently familiar with the model they own and this sonic signature if you will becomes consciously or subconsciously recognizable and hence preferred.

Having run some rigorous blind comparos with a number of reviewers, I can unconditionally tell you that this statement is not true. I have a lot of data that shows that people cannot reliably identify their own speakers, much less prefer them.

Your other assessments of GTG difficulties are on the money, but are only part of the complex issues involved in designing a GTG which can provide reliable results. Nonetheless, with well designed protocols, an A/B/N blind audio test can be quite valuable with rewarding and informative data.

 

[Nuance AH]

Any unblinded comparisons done less than a year is premature and should be considered first impressions IMO.

Have you ever seen that show Looney Tunes? Your statement is looney tunes.

After living with the Phil3 for about a year now, I will say that they don't sound "as good as" the Salon2 or "more lifelike" than the Salon2 or Orion3, but the Phil3 also cost a lot less. So I doubt that you should buy the Phil3 since you own the Salon2. The Phil3 are still worth auditioning, as do the Salk. But I don't think the Phil3 or Salk SS will ever be "as good as" the Salon2 IMO. Just my opinion. My bias. My brain.

You're definitely biased, yes, probably more than anyone here. If you don't own it then it must be inferior - that's your motto. You haven't even heard the SS but claim they can't sound as good as another speaker. I've seen you say the same about other speakers/brands too. Hilarious!! You change the tune of your song constantly, but you contradict yourself just as much. You have zero credibility on these forums anymore.

Your other assessments of GTG difficulties are on the money, but are only part of the complex issues involved in designing a GTG which can provide reliable results. Nonetheless, with well designed protocols, an A/B/N blind audio test can be quite valuable with rewarding and informative data.

Only ones that last over a year, at least according to ADTG.

Seriously, though, I agree that such GTG's can be invaluable; even sighted ones can. I would imagine many who attended yours were not owners of any of the speakers in attendance, which is a huge bias reducing factor right there. ADTG's bias will always blind him, which is why he makes claims that such GTG's and auditions lasting less than a year aren't credible. It's sad, really...

 

[Irvrobinson]

Have you ever seen that show Looney Tunes? Your statement is looney tunes.

Oh come now, he was clearly joking. You left off his big grin at the end of the statement. On the other hand, as I mentioned, I think a long term perspective can be valuable for judging speakers.

You're definitely biased, yes, probably more than anyone here. If you don't own it then it must be inferior - that's your motto. You haven't even heard the SS but claim they can't sound as good as another speaker. I've seen you say the same about other speakers/brands too. Hilarious!! You change the tune of your song constantly, but you contradict yourself just as much. You have zero credibility on these forums anymore.

As Cher Horowitz would have said, way harsh, Nuance. Way harsh.

Only ones that last over a year, at least according to ADTG.

Seriously, though, I agree that such GTG's can be invaluable; even sighted ones can. I would imagine many who attended yours were not owners of any of the speakers in attendance, which is a huge bias reducing factor right there. ADTG's bias will always blind him, which is why he makes claims that such GTG's and auditions lasting less than a year aren't credible. It's sad, really...

More of the same. You're just being difficult because of this Salk thing you two have going.

 

[Chu Gai]

Having run some rigorous blind comparos with a number of reviewers, I can unconditionally tell you that this statement is not true. I have a lot of data that shows that people cannot reliably identify their own speakers, much less prefer them.

Your other assessments of GTG difficulties are on the money, but are only part of the complex issues involved in designing a GTG which can provide reliable results. Nonetheless, with well designed protocols, an A/B/N blind audio test can be quite valuable with rewarding and informative data.

Hi. I'd be interested in any data summaries you might have especially those where the person hosting the event was in a position where his speakers were also being evaluated, presumably located in his favorite listening spot. If that's too much work maybe you can point me to threads which you mayve bookmarked.

 

[Nuance AH]

Oh come now, he was clearly joking. You left off his big grin at the end of the statement. On the other hand, as I mentioned, I think a long term perspective can be valuable for judging speakers.



As Cher Horowitz would have said, way harsh, Nuance. Way harsh.



More of the same. You're just being difficult because of this Salk thing you two have going.

It's not Salk, it's his attitude toward anything he doesn't own or hasn't heard. It's silly really. And his grins after his statements don't mean anything to me (his grin wasn't after the statement I quoted, plus he uses them way too often). He wasn't joking, though now he may try to play it off that he was.

My intent is not to be harsh, by the way. He said some ridiculous things and I called him on it. Simple as that. When a student answers incorrectly in class does the teacher ignore that it happened? No, the teacher corrects the student so they don't mislead others and so they know the truth. That is what I did, but without any fluff or sugar coating. At some point it's time to call a spade a spade.

Okay, enough about our favorite forum clown: this thread is about NHTB and his listening sessions. Hopefully he doesn't need to listen for more than a year before deciding which speaker is better (I just couldn't resist!!! ).

 

[Nuance AH]

Hi. I'd be interested in any data summaries you might have especially those where the person hosting the event was in a position where his speakers were also being evaluated, presumably located in his favorite listening spot. If that's too much work maybe you can point me to threads which you mayve bookmarked.

I know he has a thread out there, and I personally thought the event was very well done. I cannot for the life of me find the thread, though. Maybe it was at AVS???

 

[NewHTbuyer]

It's not Salk, it's his attitude toward anything he doesn't own or hasn't heard. It's silly really. And his grins after his statements don't mean anything to me (his grin wasn't after the statement I quoted, plus he uses them way too often). He wasn't joking, though now he may try to play it off that he was.

My intent is not to be harsh, by the way. He said some ridiculous things and I called him on it. Simple as that. When a student answers incorrectly in class does the teacher ignore that it happened? No, the teacher corrects the student so they don't mislead others and so they know the truth. That is what I did, but without any fluff or sugar coating. At some point it's time to call a spade a spade.

Okay, enough about our favorite forum clown: this thread is about NHTB and his listening sessions. Hopefully he doesn't need to listen for more than a year before deciding which speaker is better (I just couldn't resist!!! ).

I don't think either Dennis or Ed at SVS would be too happy if I wanted to demo these for a year before I decided! It would be fun though. I will have some more time on Wenesday and Friday for some more listening.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I don't think either Dennis or Ed at SVS would be too happy if I wanted to demo these for a year before I decided! It would be fun though.

Not at all, they'd love it. The terms of a year-long demo are just a wee bit more stringent. You pay the full retail price up front to Dennis or Ed, and if you don't like the speakers after a year you return them to someone else, at a price generally about 40-50% less than retail. It works out great for everyone.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Oh come now, he was clearly joking. You left off his big grin at the end of the statement. On the other hand, as I mentioned, I think a long term perspective can be valuable for judging speakers.

As Cher Horowitz would have said, way harsh, Nuance. Way harsh.

More of the same. You're just being difficult because of this Salk thing you two have going.

I have this Nuance guy on my IGNORE LIST for a while now. He should place me on his Ignore List. Perhaps the moderators could encourage this for like the 10th time.

BTW, the only way I see his posts is if someone quotes his responses. Perhaps one day they could find a way to hide his responses even when they are quoted by other members. That would be nice.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Not at all, they'd love it. The terms of a year-long demo are just a wee bit more stringent. You pay the full retail price up front to Dennis or Ed, and if you don't like the speakers after a year you return them to someone else, at a price generally about 40-50% less than retail. It works out great for everyone.

LOL.

I'm planning on auditioning my speakers for like 20 years; how about you?

 

[steve1616]

Since I only ended up with 2 sets, not 4, I did not have to use my speaker selector but instead hooked them up to the A and B speaker outputs (HK calls it speakers 1 and 2). I can switch back and forth with the remote and then just either go up or down 2 ticks on the volume depending upon which set is playing. It is not perfect, but pretty good. If I had to use the selector, it is manual, so I would have to get up or have a 2nd person stand up front and push the buttons while I listened.

I am glad I found this discussion since I just went through a similar process last year. I know it doesn't seem like a big deal, but the time frame for you to go up or down 2 ticks can definitely color your impression. You might try putting one speaker on one channel and the other speaker on another channel of your amp. Adjust your amp sensitivity to get both speakers at the same sound level using a meter. I did this and couldn't believe the difference that instant switching makes. I made my wife switch the speakers without me knowing when and which speakers were being used. I compared the SVS MTS-02's to different speakers including some of my favorite budget speakers called Nat p's. I ended up buying the SVS speakers and I liked the Nat P speakers also. The only other speakers I demoed were high end ones from the local high end audio store. I thought the SVS and Nat P's blew everything else away even though the cheapest speaker from the store was $2800.

 

[Tomorrow]

Hi. I'd be interested in any data summaries you might have especially those where the person hosting the event was in a position where his speakers were also being evaluated, presumably located in his favorite listening spot. If that's too much work maybe you can point me to threads which you mayve bookmarked.

I have alluded to such results from a couple of GTGs both here and on AVS. I say alluded, because use of actual names of those involved and missing their own speakers (which would be obvious with a report in the form you wish to see) would be tantamount to audio hobby suicide by yours truly. In terms of the specific data...you'll have to drop by my house and dig it out of a big box...where it lies in raw (paper) form and not really amenable to posting or forwarding to you. Feel free to come on by...I'll chill the beer.

I, on the other hand, would like to know where you got your information, providing it's something beyond your affirmative speculation.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I have alluded to such results from a couple of GTGs both here and on AVS. I say alluded, because use of actual names of those involved and missing their own speakers (which would be obvious with a report in the form you wish to see) would be tantamount to audio hobby suicide by yours truly. In terms of the specific data...you'll have to drop by my house and dig it out of a big box...where it lies in raw (paper) form and not really amenable to posting or forwarding to you. Feel free to come on by...I'll chill the beer.

I, on the other hand, would like to know where you got your information, providing it's something beyond your affirmative speculation.

Being a drug guy and seeing plenty of double-blinded clinical trials in my hospital and having a few speakers in my house and auditioning many speakers, I believe I'm actually one of the least biased persons.

And I think that when blinded, it is very difficult to tell the sonic signature differences among accurate speakers when the bass is removed from the equation. The key is "blinded" listening.

Of all those who claim to be able to tell the sonic signature of the midrange & treble of their speakers among the other speakers, I doubt any of them were blinded. But they believe that being blinded makes no difference. However, in 2.0 Direct mode, I think it can be very easy to tell the sonic signature.

 

[monkish54]

....

I don't want to start another hundred-years war with you, but it seems when you "call a spade a spade" or "play devils advocate" you really mean being rude to someone because of prior history..often proclaiming they lack credibility...

Can we just cut it out? I don't enjoy arguing with you, ADTG doesn't enjoy it, and I'm sure you don't enjoy it. We're all adults here can we just chill out and talk audio?

ADTG was being totally cool and you went postal. He too has been short when it wasn't necessary, and he was wrong. You're doing the same now and you're wrong.

He "ignored" you for the sake of the community. Please extend the same courtesy to us and do the same.

Sorry for derailing your thread NewHTbuyer...

 

[monkish54]

Being a drug guy

I KNEW IT!!

seeing plenty of double-blinded clinical trials in my hospital

Ohhhh...wait...

 

[steve1616]

Being a drug guy and seeing plenty of double-blinded clinical trials in my hospital and having a few speakers in my house and auditioning many speakers, I believe I'm actually one of the least biased persons.

And I think that when blinded, it is very difficult to tell the sonic signature differences among accurate speakers when the bass is removed from the equation. The key is "blinded" listening.

Of all those who claim to be able to tell the sonic signature of the midrange & treble of their speakers among the other speakers, I doubt any of them were blinded. But they believe that being blinded makes no difference. However, in 2.0 Direct mode, I think it can be very easy to tell the sonic signature.

I almost forgot to say that I was blind folded when my wife was changing speakers on me during listening, and I agree 100% about what you said. I think the key is among accurate speakers. I could tell a huge difference between bad speakers and good speakers, but it is almost impossible to tell the difference between to really good speakers. I could tell the difference between the Nat p and svs because of bass, and because one made the sound seem like it was way to the side somehow. In fact I thought I picked the Nat p as my favorite speaker because I knew where they were positioned and it sounded like the speaker I chose was to the right of the other. I was shocked when my wife said that the SVS speakers were the ones I thought sounded to the right. I even had to make sure that the speaker selector was working right. It was a weird observation that made no sense to me.