Check out the frequency response of these

[3db]

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=431:nrc-measurements-selah-audio-verita-loudspeakers&catid=77&Itemid=18

The review of Selah Audi Verita ....nevewr heard of them but the response looks really flat.

http://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=154:selah-audio-verita-loudspeakers&catid=55:full-length-reviews&Itemid=4

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/images/stories/loudspeakermeasurements/selah_verita/fr_on1530.gif
That doesn't impress me much ..... For $2650/pr bookshelfs

I'd take JBL LSR25p any day
http://www.jblpro.com/pub/recording/lsr25p.pdf

 

[Dennis Murphy]

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/images/stories/loudspeakermeasurements/selah_verita/fr_on1530.gif
That doesn't impress me much ..... For $2650/pr bookshelfs

I'd take JBL LSR25p any day
http://www.jblpro.com/pub/recording/lsr25p.pdf

I'm not quite sure what your point is. You're comparing unverified factory plots with independent measurements by the most respected testing facility I know of. Not to mention the huge difference in the price, and I suspect the quality, of the drivers. The RAAL tweeter is probably the best unit I've ever tested and used.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

I'm not quite sure what your point is. You're comparing unverified factory plots with independent measurements by the most respected testing facility I know of. Not to mention the huge difference in the price, and I suspect the quality, of the drivers. The RAAL tweeter is probably the best unit I've ever tested and used.

Hmm, I don't doubt the quality of components, but I thought that flat FR graph is good FR graph - I guess I was incorrect.
Also for some reason I thought that LSR25p were based on the legendary BBC's LS3/5A .... I guess I wrong again..

Terribly apologize for talking out the line
Sorry, Wont happen again

 

[billy p]

I believe that speakers was part of the Northwest GTG and received a very favourable review. Here are some of the comments fwiw.... http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67150&highlight=northwest+gtg&page=10

 

[GranteedEV]

I suspect the quality, of the drivers. The RAAL tweeter is probably the best unit I've ever tested and used.

I don't know about those drivers in particular, but I thought harman has excellent drivers. Does your experience say otherwise?

 

[digicidal]

Yeah, I'm gonna have to side with BSA on that one - although I don't doubt that the Veritas sound very nice - $2700/pair is pretty damn expensive for something that doesn't get going until 70-80Hz and has a near 4db dip in the mid-bass region as well.

Considering that Salk SongTowers with the RAAL tweeter upgrade won't run you that much and will look much nicer (granted the look isn't what's important and they are still much nicer looking than those JBLs - at least until you hold the FR graph up in front of them). And at least as far as my eyes are concerned the Salks are flatter than those as well - with similar off-axis response... which isn't surprising since he also employs that tweeter (as an upgrade that is).

I'm sure they are a delightful speaker - and if they were about $1300/pair I'd consider them a real bargain - but at that price-point I would expect better. Thats Harbeth territory there - and I'd definitely pick them if my wallet agreed to one or the other.

 

[3db]

Yeah, I'm gonna have to side with BSA on that one - although I don't doubt that the Veritas sound very nice - $2700/pair is pretty damn expensive for something that doesn't get going until 70-80Hz and has a near 4db dip in the mid-bass region as well.

Define the midbass frequency band please.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I don't see anything special about that response.

I think the NHT Absolute Zero has a better response (Home Theater Mag measurement).

 

[GO-NAD!]

Yeah, I'm gonna have to side with BSA on that one - although I don't doubt that the Veritas sound very nice - $2700/pair is pretty damn expensive for something that doesn't get going until 70-80Hz and has a near 4db dip in the mid-bass region as well.

Would that be a dip in the mid-bass, or humps in the lower bass and mid-upper bass?

 

[jcl]

The frequency response doesn't seem that special to me. Compare to the Ascend CBM170 at the same site - http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/ascend_cbm170/

Perhaps not as smooth, but not far from it at a much more modest price. Or am I reading it wrong?

Not saying they have the same sound quality at all, just comparing the graphs.

 

[3db]

I ask again..what are the frequencies assicated with midbass? If I look at graphs 1 & 3 , there is a 2db dip between 100 and 200 Hz... Graph 2 shows off axes repsonse starting at 45 degrees and going up to 75 degrees and its a 3db dip. No where do I see a 4db dip between 100 -200 Hz

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Hmm, I don't doubt the quality of components, but I thought that flat FR graph is good FR graph - I guess I was incorrect.
Also for some reason I thought that LSR25p were based on the legendary BBC's LS3/5A .... I guess I wrong again..

Terribly apologize for talking out the line
Sorry, Wont happen again

My point was that you can't accept factory plots at face value. The plots for the Selah are quite flat when you compare them with measurements for other speakers done at the same independent and extremelty well-equipped facility. Check out the Wilsons some time. I personally hope the LSR25 isn't based on the BBC monitor, because I've heard and measured that in several incarnations, and it doesn't do very well by modern standards--not enough baffle step compensation for one thing. I have a lot of respect for Harmon, but the quality of the drivers obviously varies depending on price. I'm not sure it's possible to pay much more for tweeters and midwoofs than Rick did for the Selah Veritas, at least not in a bookshelf speaker. But in the end, you have to hear the speakers. There is definitely a dip in the lower highs considerably off axis. Is that really a problem? You can only tell if you hear them. BTW--I did hear them in Oregon. But I won't comment due to my obvious conflict of interest, having designed a speaker that was "in competition" to the Selah at Oregon (it was a very friendly competition), along with a lot of Salk speakers that compete with Rick's.

 

[j_garcia]

Actually, it says averaged 300-3K, so I don't think those plots are true representations of real response of one speaker.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Actually, it says averaged 300-3K, so I don't think those plots are true representations of real response of one speaker.

That refers to the sensitivity measurements. You can't pick any single frequency and say that's how loudly it will play for a given input. You have to average over a band of frequencies to get a meaningful idea of how sensitive the speaker is. The measurements are for a single speaker. One other thing to note is that both the Canadian measurements and the JBL factory plots use a 10 db demarcation. That's kind of a cop-out. The real standard is 5 dB, and either plot will look a lot less flat if you expand it to fit a 5 dB window, which is what any standard measurement program will use as the default mode.

 

[3db]

That refers to the sensitivity measurements. You can't pick any single frequency and say that's how loudly it will play for a given input. You have to average over a band of frequencies to get a meaningful idea of how sensitive the speaker is. The measurements are for a single speaker. One other thing to note is that both the Canadian measurements and the JBL factory plots use a 10 db demarcation. That's kind of a cop-out. The real standard is 5 dB, and either plot will look a lot less flat if you expand it to fit a 5 dB window, which is what any standard measurement program will use as the default mode.

Who is publishing these standards that you are talking about?

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Who is publishing these standards that you are talking about?

There really isn't any one standard. That's why sensitivity ratings are so meaningless. You can design a speaker without any baffle step compensation--which will produce a peak around 1 kHz--and use 1kHz as the reference frequency for the rating. But that will only tell you how loud the problem area is, the one that's making the speaker honk and blur detail. The Canadian lab is using a much more rigourous and meaningful approach by averaging the response over a wide range that includes (most importantly) the area below any peak that might exist, and also above that point.

 

[digicidal]

I ask again..what are the frequencies assicated with midbass? If I look at graphs 1 & 3 , there is a 2db dip between 100 and 200 Hz... Graph 2 shows off axes repsonse starting at 45 degrees and going up to 75 degrees and its a 3db dip. No where do I see a 4db dip between 100 -200 Hz

OK... maybe it's a 3.5db dip from peak to trough... in any case it's far from a flat line despite being produced by a single driver with nominal phase swings in the same range. Although I suppose it could be more an issue of the cabinet resonances creating peaks... not sure. In any case, it's not horrible by any means - there are TONS of speakers that look far worse... but there are plenty that look much better too.

For the most part (and to my definition) the mid-bass region starts about 140Hz and ends around 400Hz... it's where lots of exciting stuff happens - second only to midrange - at least that's my take on it. Of course, someone else might only like picolos...

Although I've seen variances in definition that put mid-bass as high as 600-700Hz and others that narrow it further and inclued regions between 80Hz - 600Hz as being LoBass,MidBass,HighBass...

And of course everyone's favorite around this forum... SubBass - or ~80Hz and below.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

OK... maybe it's a 3.5db dip from peak to trough... in any case it's far from a flat line despite being produced by a single driver with nominal phase swings in the same range. Although I suppose it could be more an issue of the cabinet resonances creating peaks... not sure. In any case, it's not horrible by any means - there are TONS of speakers that look far worse... but there are plenty that look much better too.

For the most part (and to my definition) the mid-bass region starts about 140Hz and ends around 400Hz... it's where lots of exciting stuff happens - second only to midrange - at least that's my take on it. Of course, someone else might only like picolos...

Although I've seen variances in definition that put mid-bass as high as 600-700Hz and others that narrow it further and inclued regions between 80Hz - 600Hz as being LoBass,MidBass,HighBass...

And of course everyone's favorite around this forum... SubBass - or ~80Hz and below.

600 Hz is high bass? The orchestral tuning frequency is A=440 Hz. That's the highest string on a viola, the second highest on a violin. A standard male non-professional tenor voice can hit concert A a couple of times before turning red and faking a cough. That's solid midrange territory.
On most any modern 3-way, the midrange--not the woofer--would be handling those frequencies. Upper bass is more like 250 Hz at the highest. I'm not sure what's causing the little dip in the upper bass (240 Hz) of the Selah. I've seen that a number of times on several designs, including my own. It doesn't seem to have any audible consequences.

 

[GranteedEV]

I'm not sure what's causing the little dip in the upper bass (240 Hz) of the Selah. I've seen that a number of times on several designs, including my own. It doesn't seem to have any audible consequences.

Isn't that just a peak centered around 100hz combined with below 6db of BSC (which is understandable because people don't live in anechoic chambers)