Interesting subjectivist vs. measurements experiment, with actual speakers to test!

[ski2xblack]

So Dan Richie from GR Research got embroiled in a forum flame war, where he was taken to task in harsh fashion by one of the more objectivist/engineering types. The threads are entertaining to say the least, if you're into that sort of carnage.

Dan couldn't let things go unanswered, so he put his beliefs to the test. He took some entry level Behringer monitors, installed a second set of crossovers with identical measured specifications, and the ability to switch between stock and his own crossovers. The speakers are traveling around in a demonstration of subjective differences which are not reflected in standard measurements, presently on their way to the Bay Area Audio Society. Here are the links:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=83233.0

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=83841.0

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=9abah8ujeubsbmjjenk3peja6s2rtrpj&topic=87808.0

I would love for Audioholics to get thier hands on these, for shits and giggles if nothing else. Given the recent Green Mountain and Vienna Acoustics threads, there seems to be quite a bit of interest. Waddaya say, Gene? Is this a truth worth pursuing?

 

[JerryLove]

The premises an results don't correlate. The thread (third) claims to disprove that well built speaker wire is interchangeable by showing that the passive crossover in a cheap speaker is sub prime. The two are not related.

Further, it is not a goods test of the speaker anyway. Nose established long ago that people like certain sound emphasized.

What are we tryin.lb to prove or disprove here? I have become confused.

 

[highfigh]

So Dan Richie from GR Research got embroiled in a forum flame war, where he was taken to task in harsh fashion by one of the more objectivist/engineering types. The threads are entertaining to say the least, if you're into that sort of carnage.

Dan couldn't let things go unanswered, so he put his beliefs to the test. He took some entry level Behringer monitors, installed a second set of crossovers with identical measured specifications, and the ability to switch between stock and his own crossovers. The speakers are traveling around in a demonstration of subjective differences which are not reflected in standard measurements, presently on their way to the Bay Area Audio Society. Here are the links:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=83233.0

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=83841.0

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=9abah8ujeubsbmjjenk3peja6s2rtrpj&topic=87808.0

I would love for Audioholics to get thier hands on these, for shits and giggles if nothing else. Given the recent Green Mountain and Vienna Acoustics threads, there seems to be quite a bit of interest. Waddaya say, Gene? Is this a truth worth pursuing?

In the first link, DanTheMan posted "It's distortion elements are only 20-30 dBs down and even though they're low order, I believe they're audible." and if the original signal is present, nothing 20dB-30dB down will be audible because the original will mask it. Also, -20dB=1% and can't be considered 'highly distorted' WRT speakers in general. -30dB comes in at .1% and that's even harder to hear.

 

[ski2xblack]

The premises an results don't correlate. The thread (third) claims to disprove that well built speaker wire is interchangeable by showing that the passive crossover in a cheap speaker is sub prime. The two are not related.

Further, it is not a goods test of the speaker anyway. Nose established long ago that people like certain sound emphasized.

What are we tryin.lb to prove or disprove here? I have become confused.

The stock passive crossover was not shown to be sub-prime, at least to the measurements; in fact it measures exactly the same as the new crossover, and appears from an objective point of view to be perfectly adequate to the task.

I think Dan Richie is trying to prove that he knows what he's talking about, in response to a a poster who he got in an argument with. Simple as that. Still, it may yield information valuable to the larger community, who knows. It's keeping me from doing chores, so theres that.

 

[JerryLove]

So the salient claim is that he has two speakers which he claims measure the same but sound different.

That indeed sounds like a claim worth testing, and very testable with a mix of DBX (do they sound different) and measurements.

There's a microphone that, when placed on a blimp, can hear underground atomic bombs on the other side of the world. I tend to believe that instruments are more sensitive than ears when correctly used.

 

[ski2xblack]

In the first link, DanTheMan posted "It's distortion elements are only 20-30 dBs down and even though they're low order, I believe they're audible." and if the original signal is present, nothing 20dB-30dB down will be audible because the original will mask it. Also, -20dB=1% and can't be considered 'highly distorted' WRT speakers in general. -30dB comes in at .1% and that's even harder to hear.

He was the prime instigator of the whole challenge. Some of what he said was bs and he eventually became confrontational, but he was absolutely right on a lot of things. He struck me as a slightly more polite AJinFLA type, if that makes sense, at least in the posts which weren't deleted. It's too bad he let someone bait him into threats, which got him banned, as he was driving the discussion. He was being a good sport to Dan Richie, and the result was more than just a flame war, we now have Dan's hot-rodded behringers headed to interested parties for the 'measures the same, sounds better' challenge.

 

[billy p]

Dan Richie has being taken to task some on his claims here as well. I believe he was arguing on the side of actual speaker break in.

Starts about pg 9 at post #88 > http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13377&page=9

 

[ski2xblack]

So the salient claim is that he has two speakers which he claims measure the same but sound different.

That indeed sounds like a claim worth testing, and very testable with a mix of DBX (do they sound different) and measurements.

There's a microphone that, when placed on a blimp, can hear underground atomic bombs on the other side of the world. I tend to believe that instruments are more sensitive than ears when correctly used.

Dan Richie didn't post freq resp or waterfall plots, or anything else, using the new crossovers, merely stating that the measured response was unchanged and the crossovers were electrically identical (impedance, phase). Seeing such data would lend credence to his claims, remove ambiguity about what he's trying to prove, and raise this above the level of an overblown forum flame war with nothing new to contribute. That's why I would like Gene to get in line for these speakers and do some independent testing. This seems to be a good natured foray into actual testing and data collection, rather than two sides taking rigid dogmatic stances and talking past each other.

 

[gene]

I would love for Audioholics to get thier hands on these, for shits and giggles if nothing else. Given the recent Green Mountain and Vienna Acoustics threads, there seems to be quite a bit of interest. Waddaya say, Gene? Is this a truth worth pursuing?

If there are true audible differences present than all it means is the person did NOT take the necessary measurement to reveal those differences.

 

[lsiberian]

Just link the McGurk effect. I think it explains their position.

 

[Matt34]

I won't be surprised if we don't see some "upgrade kit" for the Behringers in the near future.

 

[cschang]

If there are true audible differences present than all it means is the person did NOT take the necessary measurement to reveal those differences.

Right, or doesn't have the proper equipment to measure those differences.

 

[Shike]

Also, -20dB=1%

I'm pretty sure it's -40dB=1% according to soundstage and various other online sources . . .