Boutique (or high end internet direct) vs. "NRC" Brands

[Jason997]

I am in the market for speakers for a relatively high end 2 channel stereo system. I ask the question here because I think that home theater people tend to be more clued in on technology and less interested in fluff than many 2 channel audiophiles.

This question might not mean anything anymore since speaker design is a very advanced. However I am trying to decide which direction to focus on. The boutique firms (for example Salk/Philharmonic or Ascend Acoustics) vs. the “Canadian” firms like Harman (Infinity/JBL/Revel), PSB, Paradigm etc. The former seem to focus on driver quality, good crossovers and cabinet design. The other guys care about those things too but they have the resources and the theory to understand (or try to understand) “what the human ear wants” and the belief is that they can make outstanding products using less than stellar parts.

I know that the answer is: “Listen to speakers and decide for yourself”, but I am interested in what you think about this question. I am not looking for speaker suggestions.

 

[shadyJ]

I think all the companies you have mentioned are basically on the same page. They all strive for a flat frequency response and uniform off-axis response. When I think of 'boutique' brands, I think of speaker companies who sell deleriously expensive speakers that have their 'unique' design philosophy that may or may not have anything to do with real science. That does not describe Ascend, Salk, or Philharmonic, as far as I know.

Harman, Paradigm, and PSB will use good components on their speakers, but they don't have to talk about their drivers, because their drivers are made in-house for specific speaker designs. It probably isn't correct to say their parts are 'less than stellar'. Smaller companies like Salk talk about the drivers they use to reassure buyers that their components are top-notch. Its a marketing approach that they can do since they are using off-the-shelf drivers. It does not mean the components they are using are better or worse than larger companies like Paradigm or Revel.

 

[Pogre]

I think all the companies you have mentioned are basically on the same page. They all strive for a flat frequency response and uniform off-axis response. When I think of 'boutique' brands, I think of speaker companies who sell deleriously expensive speakers that have their 'unique' design philosophy that may or may not have anything to do with real science. That does not describe Ascend, Salk, or Philharmonic, as far as I know.

Harman, Paradigm, and PSB will use good components on their speakers, but they don't have to talk about their drivers, because their drivers are made in-house for specific speaker designs. It probably isn't correct to say their parts are 'less than stellar'. Smaller companies like Salk talk about the drivers they use to reassure buyers that their components are top-notch. Its a marketing approach that they can do since they are using off-the-shelf drivers. It does not mean the components they are using are better or worse than larger companies like Paradigm or Revel.

Agree. I've never thought of Philharmonics, Ascend or Salk as boutique brands. All of the brands mentioned have the same or similar goal in mind and all make great speakers.

 

[KEW]

Not sure how you get Harman as a Canadian firm! Revel is a newer name in speakers, but JBL and Infinity both have a deep USA legacy.

I, too think of boutique as where you are paying a premium, much of which goes to an almost surrealistic presentation. I joke about Woodcraft being a woodworker's boutique because of how clean and "shiny" the stores are for "he-man" woodworkers. They sell many high dollar products that are indeed capable, but you won't find many professional carpenters (or even cabinet shops) that buy their stuff! You can buy a beautiful Leigh jig that allows you to make beautiful dovetails for your joints with very minimal training, but if you do it for a living, you can make the joints (that fit just as well) faster using a saw and chisel.

But I digress!

Looking at value as sound quality per dollar, I believe all of the companies have their Gems. Philharmonic Audio offers the most consistently highest value because Dennis Murphy is not really trying to build/grow a company or earn his livelihood. As he has said he is on a comfortable pension. I asked him what he made building the Philharmonic 3's I bought from him and he said right around $6.50/hr. He is a retired accountant, so I do not believe this was a wild guess! He just enjoys building and sharing good sound!
Any of the large companies can represent great value, but it usually takes a really good sale on one of their most competitive products to get there. Unfortunately these great sales involve clearing out excess inventory and high-end doesn't allow for much excess inventory.

The other guys care about those things too but they have the resources and the theory to understand (or try to understand) “what the human ear wants” and the belief is that they can make outstanding products using less than stellar parts.

I think Harman Labs has done more work on this than anyone; but they have published a lot of their research and had lots of publications analyzing their findings. Happily this information id available to any designer.
There are companies that have chosen to pursue a specific design approach such as Martin Logan with Electrostatic speakers and they definitely have an advantage (including patents) over any small company attempting to develop an electrostatic speaker! Simularly JBL has an edge on horn technology. But, while these technologies do offer unique advantages, they do not represent a clearly superior "across the board" approach to speaker design! If you hear an electrostat and the sound is exactly what you want than you have a clear answer, but most designs are more mainstream with dome or ribbon tweeters and are fair game for a well trained/experienced/talented individual to have a competitive entry against the large companies.

On the extreme high end, yes I would expect "the very best" a company like Harman has to offer to equal or better anything else out their. The smaller companies just do not have the resources to produce a $80,000 speaker that stands a chance of turning a profit!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I am in the market for speakers for a relatively high end 2 channel stereo system.

The former seem to focus on driver quality, good crossovers and cabinet design.

The other guys care about those things too but they have the resources and the theory to understand (or try to understand) “what the human ear wants” and the belief is that they can make outstanding products using less than stellar parts.

If you are talking about high-end (apples to apples comparison), then both camps will use high quality parts. There is nothing "less stellar" about it.

If you are thinking that one costs less, that's not true either.

Much smaller companies don't have the volume and can't get much discount on parts.

Much bigger companies have the volume and can get more discount on parts.

Consumers may get 0% discount from smaller companies and 35% discount from bigger companies.

So in the end, it usually balances each other out. Just don't pay 100% MSRP if you buy from the bigger companies.

 

[Gooddoc]

I'm a bit of a Harman advocate, so I'll put that out there immediately.

But that's because of all the research out there that I'm familiar with, Harman leads the way in applying that research to their speaker designs.

The measurement methodology developed by Dr. Toole is an industry-standard, yet I'm not aware of any other companies that are designing their speakers utilizing that methodology.

As well, as far as I'm aware, it's the only measurement methodology that has been scientifically correlated to listener preference with a high degree of statistical certainty . I like proven approaches.

 

[lovinthehd]

@Gooddoc just curious if you'd heard the Studio 5 series from JBL and what you thought? I'd sure like to hear your M2s!

 

[shadyJ]

I'm a bit of a Harman advocate, so I'll put that out there immediately.

But that's because of all the research out there that I'm familiar with, Harman leads the way in applying that research to their speaker designs.

The measurement methodology developed by Dr. Toole is an industry-standard, yet I'm not aware of any other companies that are designing their speakers utilizing that methodology.

As well, as far as I'm aware, it's the only measurement methodology that has been scientifically correlated to listener preference with a high degree of statistical certainty . I like proven approaches.

I'm not sure that Dr. Toole developed a measurement methodology so much as he helped to correlate what sounds good to people. And I don't think he did it alone either.

The design goals he advocates, a flat direct-axis response with a uniform off-axis response and wide dispersion, is certainly not limited to Harman products. Look at measurements from Paradigm, PSB, Dynaudio, KEF, among others.

 

[Gooddoc]

I'm not sure that Dr. Toole developed a measurement methodology so much as he helped to correlate what sounds good to people. And I don't think he did it alone either.

The design goals he advocates, a flat direct-axis response with a uniform off-axis response and wide dispersion, is certainly not limited to Harman products. Look at measurements from Paradigm, PSB, Dynaudio, KEF, among others.

Well, no one does anything alone . But as far as I'm aware, the spinorama is the brainchild of Dr. Toole. He published the papers describing it, so I would assume it's his IP.

"A flat direct-axis response with a uniform off-axis response and wide dispersion, is certainly not limited to Harman products"
True. But the spinorama describes far more about loudspeaker behavior than that, and is capable of analyzing the comparative weighting of each of those measurement components on preference. At this time it is the only game in town.

 

[Gooddoc]

@Gooddoc just curious if you'd heard the Studio 5 series from JBL and what you thought? I'd sure like to hear your M2s!

I have not, but would very much like to. I suspect I would like them very much

 

[shadyJ]

Well, no one does anything alone . But as far as I'm aware, the spinorama is the brainchild of Dr. Toole. He published the papers describing it, so I would assume it's his IP.

"A flat direct-axis response with a uniform off-axis response and wide dispersion, is certainly not limited to Harman products"
True. But the spinorama describes far more about loudspeaker behavior than that, and is capable of analyzing the comparative weighting of each of those measurement components on preference. At this time it is the only game in town.

Spinorama is just a way to measure off-axis performance. Speaker manufacturers have been measuring off-axis response for a long time, and I would be very surprised if Toole's group at the NRC or Harman were the first to come up with it. I am not trying to take away from his accomplishments, which are considerable, of course. I think it would be more fair to say that that Toole's team discovered how on-axis and off-axis response played into how good people felt that loudspeakers sounded.

 

[Gooddoc]

Spinorama is just a way to measure off-axis performance. Speaker manufacturers have been measuring off-axis response for a long time, and I would be very surprised if Toole's group at the NRC or Harman were the first to come up with it. I am not trying to take away from his accomplishments, which are considerable, of course. I think it would be more fair to say that that Toole's team discovered how on-axis and off-axis response played into how good people felt that loudspeakers sounded.

It's not simply a way to measure anechoic response or off-axis performance, it's a method to predict in-room off-axis, power response, and directivity indexes. And yes, they were the first to come up with it. The only traditional direct measurements are the on-axis and listening window curves. The first reflection, power response, and directivity index curves are calculated, and those calculations were developed by Dr. Toole.

Those curves were then correlated to preference.

 

[shadyJ]

I don't have a detailed knowledge of speaker measurement history, but power response and directivity index measurements have been around for many decades. Acoustic scientists have been using reverberant chambers to measure power response for decades, and have also been using directivity indexes for decades as well. How they relate to predicted room response would certainly have been a product of research from Dr. Toole's team.

 

[Gooddoc]

How they relate to predicted room response would certainly have been a product of research from Dr. Toole's team.

The (spinorama)curves are not related to predicted room response, they are the predicted room response

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Obviously loudspeakers do not have to be designed and tested by the Harman team to sound great or sound the best.

It is a fact that not everyone thinks Harmon speakers sound better than all other brands.

I think the Revel Salon2 speakers are among the best. But I sure didn't hesitate for 1 second to sell my 2YR old Salon2 for $11K. That's because there is a speaker for everyone.

A lot of speakers from many different companies big and small sound great.

 

[shadyJ]

The (spinorama)curves are not related to predicted room response, they are the predicted room response

Not quite correct, but you can use the spinorama curves to generate a predicted response. For predicted room curves of a normal loudspeaker, the 'sound power' curve will get you closest to predicted room response in low frequencies. Direct axis and early reflections serve as a predictor for mid frequencies, and high frequencies are best predicted by the direct axis curve alone. I am getting this all from Dr. Toole's latest edition of Sound Reproduction, by the way.

 

[Gooddoc]

Obviously loudspeakers do not have to be designed and tested by the Harman team to sound great or sound the best.

It is a fact that not everyone thinks Harmon speakers sound better than all other brands.

I think the Revel Salon2 speakers are among the best. But I sure didn't hesitate for 1 second to sell my 2YR old Salon2 for $11K. That's because there is a speaker for everyone.

A lot of speakers from many different companies big and small sound great.

+1000

We're talking measurements .

 

[Gooddoc]

Not quite correct, but you can use the spinorama curves to generate a predicted response. For predicted room curves of a normal loudspeaker, the 'sound power' curve will get you closest to predicted room response in low frequencies. Direct axis and early reflections serve as a predictor for mid frequencies, and high frequencies are best predicted by the direct axis curve alone. I am getting this all from Dr. Toole's latest edition of Sound Reproduction, by the way.

Interesting. I have his new book on my nightstand, but haven't cracked it yet. It was my understanding that aside from the on-axis and listening window measurements, the other curves were predicted room curves. In fact, one is called "early reflections", and those don't happen in anechoic chambers .

But now you've encouraged me to open it

 

[agarwalro]

ID brands will never have advertising exposure comparable with MNC corporations. The latter have brand awareness. This plays a huge role in perceived quality.

In an AH GTG having Seaton Sub or Funk Audio 18 or JTR 228 or Salk SS12 has significance. In a non-AV setting they will not give the "show and tell" factor of JL F212 or B&W Nautilus D3.

 

[zieglj01]

Obviously loudspeakers do not have to be designed and tested by the Harman team to sound great or sound the best.

It is a fact that not everyone thinks Harmon speakers sound better than all other brands.

I think the Revel Salon2 speakers are among the best. But I sure didn't hesitate for 1 second to sell my 2YR old Salon2 for $11K. That's because there is a speaker for everyone.

A lot of speakers from many different companies big and small sound great.

Bingo! and again Bingo!