SVS Ultra Evolution Pinnacle Review

[buckchester]

James,

I would like to provide some constructive feedback.

First, you are a great reviewer. I enjoy reading your detailed descriptions and analysis of the speaker designs.

But, there are two things that I think could be improved upon to make your reviews even more valuable to the consumer.

One - I find your graphs difficult to read. Compared to a spinorama graph, your graphs are not always easy to interpret.

Two - all of your reviews tend to be overly positive. It's difficult to compare one review to another to get a sense of which might be better and why.

I know a lot of hard work goes into your reviews. So thank you for doing all that to provide the community with this valuable resource. But maybe a few changes could make your reviews even more valuable.

Thanks.

 

[isolar8001]

James,

I would like to provide some constructive feedback.

First, you are a great reviewer. I enjoy reading your detailed descriptions and analysis of the speaker designs.

But, there are two things that I think could be improved upon to make your reviews even more valuable to the consumer.

One - I find your graphs difficult to read. Compared to a spinorama graph, your graphs are not always easy to interpret.

Two - all of your reviews tend to be overly positive. It's difficult to compare one review to another to get a sense of which might be better and why.

I know a lot of hard work goes into your reviews. So thank you for doing all that to provide the community with this valuable resource. But maybe a few changes could make your reviews even more valuable.

Thanks.

You've been bad mouthing Audioholic reviews for 4 years now...maybe you need lunch with Amir.

 

[everettT]

James,

I would like to provide some constructive feedback.

First, you are a great reviewer. I enjoy reading your detailed descriptions and analysis of the speaker designs.

But, there are two things that I think could be improved upon to make your reviews even more valuable to the consumer.

One - I find your graphs difficult to read. Compared to a spinorama graph, your graphs are not always easy to interpret.

Two - all of your reviews tend to be overly positive. It's difficult to compare one review to another to get a sense of which might be better and why.

I know a lot of hard work goes into your reviews. So thank you for doing all that to provide the community with this valuable resource. But maybe a few changes could make your reviews even more valuable.

Thanks.

Is the shading below the "spins" what is throwing you off, because it's the same information otherwise? I'm pretty sure Pierre is collecting all of everyone's measurements so everyone's work is shown the same manor (though for comparison purposes).

 

[shadyJ]

James,

I would like to provide some constructive feedback.

First, you are a great reviewer. I enjoy reading your detailed descriptions and analysis of the speaker designs.

But, there are two things that I think could be improved upon to make your reviews even more valuable to the consumer.

One - I find your graphs difficult to read. Compared to a spinorama graph, your graphs are not always easy to interpret.

Two - all of your reviews tend to be overly positive. It's difficult to compare one review to another to get a sense of which might be better and why.

I know a lot of hard work goes into your reviews. So thank you for doing all that to provide the community with this valuable resource. But maybe a few changes could make your reviews even more valuable.

Thanks.

Thanks for your feedback. I am always looking for ways to improve these reviews. Per your point about the graphs, I tried to make them as intuitive as possible. We do have links to articles that explain their meaning below every graph that isn't a flat frequency response or impedance/phase response. Compared to spin-o-rama, I would have guessed my graphs are much more intuitive since they are just different ways of looking at amplitude response per angle. In comparison, spin-o-rama needs careful explanation, even for audio industry veterans.

As for handing out negative reviews, I need to get sent products that provide more of a negative experience than a positive one. Even for products I reviewed that I am not crazy about, they still have their positives and use cases where they work well in. Most manufacturers know better than to send me something that is just junk, and I don't accept products in for review that I think will be bad from the get-go. Nonetheless, few products sent to me are perfect, and I like to think I do shed light on their flaws. For example, this review of the Ultra Evolution Pinnacles is probably the most critical review of this particular speaker out there so far, even though I did quite like the product.

 

[Golfx]

I have no problem understanding the nuances of your “word paintings” when presenting pro/cons and things you would like changed.

And regarding the graphs, perhaps it is a comprehension deficit by the reader?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Thanks for your feedback. I am always looking for ways to improve these reviews. Per your point about the graphs, I tried to make them as intuitive as possible. We do have links to articles that explain their meaning below every graph that isn't a flat frequency response or impedance/phase response. Compared to spin-o-rama, I would have guessed my graphs are much more intuitive since they are just different ways of looking at amplitude response per angle. In comparison, spin-o-rama needs careful explanation, even for audio industry veterans.

As for handing out negative reviews, I need to get sent products that provide more of a negative experience than a positive one. Even for products I reviewed that I am not crazy about, they still have their positives and use cases where they work well in. Most manufacturers know better than to send me something that is just junk, and I don't accept products in for review that I think will be nad from the get-go. Nonetheless, few products sent to me are perfect, and I like to think I do shed light on their flaws. For example, this review of the Ultra Evolution Pinnacles is probably the most critical review of this particular speaker out there so far, even though I did quite like the product.

How about providing both the “new and improved more detailed 3D FR graph” and the “old less detailed simple 2D on-axis FR graph for dummies”?

I have said this before as well- the old simple 2D on-axis FR graphs (like Stereophile) is a “quick and dirty” glance of the response.

 

[buckchester]

I have no problem understanding the nuances of your “word paintings” when presenting pro/cons and things you would like changed.

And regarding the graphs, perhaps it is a comprehension deficit by the reader?

Perhaps. But I find it easier to compare the frequency response between spinoramas than the graphs James produces.

 

[buckchester]

Thanks for your feedback. I am always looking for ways to improve these reviews. Per your point about the graphs, I tried to make them as intuitive as possible. We do have links to articles that explain their meaning below every graph that isn't a flat frequency response or impedance/phase response. Compared to spin-o-rama, I would have guessed my graphs are much more intuitive since they are just different ways of looking at amplitude response per angle. In comparison, spin-o-rama needs careful explanation, even for audio industry veterans.

As for handing out negative reviews, I need to get sent products that provide more of a negative experience than a positive one. Even for products I reviewed that I am not crazy about, they still have their positives and use cases where they work well in. Most manufacturers know better than to send me something that is just junk, and I don't accept products in for review that I think will be nad from the get-go. Nonetheless, few products sent to me are perfect, and I like to think I do shed light on their flaws. For example, this review of the Ultra Evolution Pinnacles is probably the most critical review of this particular speaker out there so far, even though I did quite like the product.

Thanks for the response. Maybe Audioholics could find different avenues of reviewing speakers than just getting them from the manufacturers.

 

[Golfx]

Thanks for the response. Maybe Audioholics could find different avenues of reviewing speakers than just getting them from the manufacturers.

Like what? Buy them outright? Will you help fund that? Or get owners to send them in like ASR? Or—-what?

 

[Splicer]

Like what? Buy them outright? Will you help fund that? Or get owners to send them in like ASR? Or—-what?

In all honesty? The former. Buy it themselves. They can then sell them afterward while still having an income from their review. Put their money where their mouth is, I say.

 

[Golfx]

In all honesty? The former. Buy it themselves. They can then sell them afterward while still having an income from their review. Put their money where their mouth is, I say.

Audioholics has placed themselves over the years as a very influential and worthwhile liaison between us, the consumers, and industry. More than one improvement has come from discoveries (during reviews) and insights from audioholics to manufacturers.

They have been doing this for years using this business model. Why would they change their model to accommodate two critics who have a different idea of how to fund their reviewed samples?

This is a very niche market but perhaps there is always room for critics to open their own website with a different business model. Putting their money where their mouth is—I say.

 

[lovinthehd]

I can't imagine Gene hasn't considered other avenues but is most comfortable with the current model. Then again shadyj only has so much time

 

[shadyJ]

How about providing both the “new and improved more detailed 3D FR graph” and the “old less detailed simple 2D on-axis FR graph for dummies”?

I have said this before as well- the old simple 2D on-axis FR graphs (like Stereophile) is a “quick and dirty” glance of the response.

Most of my reviews have a simple on-axis FR graph in them somewhere. The problem is that such a graph alone can be misleading regarding the loudspeaker's performance.

 

[lovinthehd]

FWIW I have no issues with the provided graphics in AH reviews. Expanding measurement capabilities means we need to buy shadyj a convenient anechoic facility?

 

[shadyJ]

In all honesty? The former. Buy it themselves. They can then sell them afterward while still having an income from their review. Put their money where their mouth is, I say.

I bought the Behringer Nekkst K8s which yielded this very negative review indeed, and now the problem is who is going to buy those monitors from me after what I said about them? I am stuck with those things!

 

[Golfx]

FWIW I have no issues with the provided graphics in AH reviews. Expanding measurement capabilities means we need to buy shadyj a convenient anechoic facility?

Or a klippel

 

[shadyJ]

FWIW I have no issues with the provided graphics in AH reviews. Expanding measurement capabilities means we need to buy shadyj a convenient anechoic facility?

If you could do that, that would be great. It's only about $600k for a usable anechoic chamber or one to two million for one that has some low-frequency resolution. I won't stop you! The only problem is my measurements already match anechoically performed ones, so they wouldn't really be any better except I would have the ability to perform distortion measurements. Also, I wouldn't need to wait for nice weather to measure a loudspeaker.

 

[lovinthehd]

Or a klippel

Convenient still applies as I believe shadyj has an actual regular life

 

[lovinthehd]

If you could do that, that would be great. It's only about $600k for a usable anechoic chamber or one to two million for one that has some low-frequency resolution. I won't stop you! The only problem is my measurements already match anechoically performed ones, so they wouldn't really be any better except I would have the ability to perform distortion measurements. Also, I wouldn't need to wait for nice weather to measure a loudspeaker.

I was more thinking year round and more convenient....but don't want to see you become speaker measurement slave either!

 

[gene]

James,

I would like to provide some constructive feedback.

First, you are a great reviewer. I enjoy reading your detailed descriptions and analysis of the speaker designs.

But, there are two things that I think could be improved upon to make your reviews even more valuable to the consumer.

One - I find your graphs difficult to read. Compared to a spinorama graph, your graphs are not always easy to interpret.

Two - all of your reviews tend to be overly positive. It's difficult to compare one review to another to get a sense of which might be better and why.

I know a lot of hard work goes into your reviews. So thank you for doing all that to provide the community with this valuable resource. But maybe a few changes could make your reviews even more valuable.

Thanks.

James is one of the most pragmatic reviewers out there and it has actually ruffled some feathers with manufacturers as a result. It doesn't take a lot of effort to see how critical James was with performance aspects and marketing claims of this speaker. Being overly negative to impress readers or feed personal ego is not in his MO nor any staff writers of Audioholics.