B&W Nautilus vs Sonus Faber Cremonas

[Alex2507]

... the 362 ... in all probability would beat the $8000 loudspeaker in a carefully controlled double-blind listening test.

Hmmm ... you're not just trying to get on my good side ... are you?

 

[tonmeister]

Hmmm ... you're not just trying to get on my good side ... are you?

I thought I already was - apart from making you do all that detective work for nothing.

But the knowledge did save you having to spend another $500, and hopefully made you feel good about your purchase decision ..

 

[tonmeister]

Hmmm ... you're not just trying to get on my good side ... are you?

Here is some more scientific evidence that I summarized in my blog where the sonic shortcomings of the $8000 loudspeaker are well-documented. This study involved over 300 listeners (both trained and untrained) in carefully controlled listening tests.

You can download the original AES paper for free here:

The 802N is identified as speaker B in this study, and it consistently was rated 3rd by most of the listeners (both trained and untrained), most of the time. Also, you can clearly pick the winners and losers in this test based on the comprehensive anechoic measurements shown on the right.

These measurements are pretty reliable predictors of how the loudspeaker will be rated in a listening test. So much so, that I've developed a model (see references 1 and 2 ) based on these measurements that will predict the results of the listening tests with 86% accuracy based on 70 different loudspeakers tested. The measurements may not tell the entire story, but enough of the story that you know whether the loudspeaker sounds excellent, good, fair or poor.

It also confirms that if you don't get the frequency response right - nothing else really matters -- something Dr. Floyd Toole first documented in his research papers back in 1987 (those papers you can download for free on this page ).

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Wrong again. The power response/horrible polars is the story.
It negatively affects the sound and is uncorrectable. Your repeated denials are irrelevant. The facts remain.


Again, based on what? What data? You continue to frantically wave your hands...and show no data. The only thing "meticulous" is the job their marketing department has done on you.


Supporting data to shown relevance to audibility. Chris? Data?

More Chris anecdote...or data? Chris? Data to support your anecdotes?


"Reasonably" linear?
The caveats aren't helping your anecdotes.


. So it isn't mediocre.....because mediocrity is rampant. Nice


Let's say??? Umm, then you don't have a B&W 802D, you have a Chris modified loudspeaker, just like you said here

If ifs. You have distortion data for the 802 tweeter crossed at 2.5K? Show it.


The only thing odd is your hoodwinking by B&W marketers and your living in denial despite the shown data. Or lack thereof.

cheers,

AJ

So what would you get for $8K & up?

Linkwitz Lab?

Bipolar speakers?

 

[Alex2507]

... the knowledge did save you having to spend another $500, and hopefully made you feel good about your purchase decision ..

I was happy about owning these before but now I'm ecstatic. The links in your other post are much appreciated and I'll read over then later on tonight.

 

[lsiberian]

I thought I already was - apart from making you do all that detective work for nothing.

But the knowledge did save you having to spend another $500, and hopefully made you feel good about your purchase decision ..

You're telling me that a 100 dollar speaker(Fry's occasionally insane sale) is as good as an 8k one. Don't get me wrong I love Infinity products, but I'm having a hard time buying this. I've always thought Wmax was a little overboard on the bracing, but I'm still having a hard time believing this.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I've listened Revel, JBL, & Infinity speakers, and I was never too impressed.

I guess everyone is different, or maybe I'm just weird.

 

[tonmeister]

You're telling me that a 100 dollar speaker(Fry's occasionally insane sale) is as good as an 8k one. Don't get me wrong I love Infinity products, but I'm having a hard time buying this. I've always thought Wmax was a little overboard on the bracing, but I'm still having a hard time believing this.

In terms of overall sound quality I would wager that the $500 speaker would beat the $8000 speaker in a double-blind listening test, as long as it's played within its normal linear operating range. The measurements don't lie (they are based on 25+ years of research beginning at the Canadian National Research Council with Dr. Floyd Toole, and continued at Harman International ), and the $500 loudspeaker has better measurements.

Price is not a reliable indicator of loudspeaker sound quality. Price only matters if the engineering is guided by design factors that matter in terms of sound quality, and are validated using accurate and reliable subjective and objective measurements combined with psychoacoustic guidance.

If you want another example: speaker M shown in the same graph as the $8000 speaker B, cost $11,000. Look at its subjective and objective measurements: the $500 loudspeaker beats it hands down based on measurements and double-blind listening tests.

 

[no. 5]

I've listened Revel, JBL, & Infinity speakers, and I was never too impressed.

I guess everyone is different, or maybe I'm just weird.

Try a controlled listening test next time.

 

[AJinFLA]

So what would you get for $8K & up?

I roll my own Projects with room specific tailoring.

Linkwitz Lab?

For that money, yes, I recommend you at least listen to some Orions. Rather than suggest you buy something specific, I suggest you listen, then decide for yourself. If one really (as opposed to virtually) attends enough live, unamplified instrument music, the answer should be clear. I would also include Earl Geddes speakers, KEF Reference, Revel, Music and Design NaOs, Gradient, Danley Sound Labs and ME Geithain.
Unfortunately, some of those are difficult to find, but if there's a will, there's a way. Also unfortunate, is almost none will have the jewelery like looks of the "high end" icons in the boutique glamor stores.

Bipolar speakers?

Had some Bipoles in the 90's (Paradigm Eclipse). Closer to what I was looking for, until I heard some Orions. They have similar sound field depth and spatial realism like a dipole, but no sidewall nulls (early reflections), so they need more breathing room. They also excite modes maximally below the schroeder frequency of the room, among other issues.
Like everything audio, it all depends one ones needs and demands for fidelity.

cheers,

AJ

 

[Alex2507]

Here is some more scientific evidence ...

Wow ... I'm not getting through that last night, tonight or any other one night.

I went back to Part 1 of your musings and got stuck on like the third word in -'mean'- and Googled that. I knew it meant something other than average so Wiki further scrambled my brain and that 'Trained' and 'Untrained' placement on that graph also further confused me. Man, at this point I don't even know what I am confused about.

I'm not asking to have my hand held or anything. I'm just stating that I will get through this. I may have to learn how to learn again ... if I ever actually knew that is and I suppose learning is it's own reward ... no, that's nonsense.

Seriously, thanks for participating. There's lots of us that are interested and appreciate the time you give to the forum.

 

[tonmeister]

Wow ... I'm not getting through that last night, tonight or any other one night.

I went back to Part 1 of your musings and got stuck on like the third word in -'mean'- and Googled that. I knew it meant something other than average so Wiki further scrambled my brain and that 'Trained' and 'Untrained' placement on that graph also further confused me. Man, at this point I don't even know what I am confused about.

I'm not asking to have my hand held or anything. I'm just stating that I will get through this. I may have to learn how to learn again ... if I ever actually knew that is and I suppose learning is it's own reward ... no, that's nonsense.

Seriously, thanks for participating. There's lots of us that are interested and appreciate the time you give to the forum.

You're welcome! In this particular case, average and mean are mathematical equivalents: mean or average is the sum of all the ratings divided by the number of ratings. In statistics, mean is generally the preferred term to use since average can imply mean, median or mode.

Feel free to ask any questions if there is something I didn't explain very well.

 

[Nuance AH]

This thread has been a great read. Many thanks to Sean Olive (one of my idols) for his participation. I've learned so much from you. Thank you!

 

[tonmeister]

I roll my own Projects

Had some Bipoles in the 90's (Paradigm Eclipse). Closer to what I was looking for, until I heard some Orions. They have similar sound field depth and spatial realism like a dipole, but no sidewall nulls (early reflections), so they need more breathing room. They also excite modes maximally below the schroeder frequency of the room, among other issues.
Like everything audio, it all depends one ones needs and demands for fidelity.

cheers,

AJ

David Clark is currently running some sort of listening experiment in Detroit on the Orions to prove whether or not they are the "perfect" loudspeaker. So far, it seems they can't seem to design an experiment prove that they are perfect.

 

[randyb]

Dr. Olive,

One thing that puzzles me (although I am not an expert at reading measurements) is that while the Primus 162 measurements made by the NRC look respectable, they don't look quite as good as I would expect from your measurements of the 362.

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/infinity_primus_p162/

 

[randyb]

David Clark is currently running some sort of listening experiment in Detroit on the Orions to prove whether or not they are the "perfect" loudspeaker. So far, it seems they can't seem to design an experiment prove that they are perfect.

I just got some pictures from that as I am a member of that club (from afar). I am not sure the Orion is the "perfect" speaker although I have not heard the results of the listening test. There were I think 33 people that reviewed blind the Orions against a Behringer B2031A set-up. Basically the Detroit audio club (SMWTMS) took up the challenge given at AES by Mr. Linkwitz.

I have asked for permission to link to the pictures of the event.

 

[Matt34]

Dr. Olive,

One thing that puzzles me (although I am not an expert at reading measurements) is that while the Primus 162 measurements made by the NRC look respectable, they don't look quite as good as I would expect from your measurements of the 362.

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/infinity_primus_p162/

Randy, I'm interested in what he has to say on this as well but if I had to guess on the advantages the 362 has over the Primus bookshelf offerings has alot to do with the 4" midrange driver and the way it is crossed-over to the tweeter and woofers.

 

[randyb]

Randy, I'm interested in what he has to say on this as well but if I had to guess on the advantages the 362 has over the Primus bookshelf offerings has alot to do with the 4" midrange driver and the way it is crossed-over to the tweeter and woofers.

Could be...on another note, got permission to post Linwitz challenge

http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/20100313.htm

 

[tonmeister]

Dr. Olive,

One thing that puzzles me (although I am not an expert at reading measurements) is that while the Primus 162 measurements made by the NRC look respectable, they don't look quite as good as I would expect from your measurements of the 362.

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/infinity_primus_p162/

As someone pointed out, the Primus 162 uses a different mid/bass driver than the more expensive 362 (which has 2 bass drivers and a 4-inch mid) and this largely explains the differences in the measurements. Other than the high Q resonance at 750 Hz, which looks worse than it sounds, its performance is quite decent, although not quite as good as the 362.

This is the first time I've seen the Sound Stage measurements of the 162, and shape of the resonance at 750 Hz looks different than in my measurements. This is either due to a manufacturing variance or something else. Otherwise, the measurements look quite similar to ours except below 100 Hz.

I recently discovered from a Sound Stage review of the Revel Ultima Salon 2 - that the NRC anechoic chamber was never calibrated below 100 Hz when they rebuilt it after I left NRC in 1993. When I worked there, it was accurately calibrated to 20-30 Hz by measuring speakers on a 10 m tower and using that as a reference for correcting loudspeaker/room errors from standing waves in the chamber. So I'm sad to say that below 100 Hz, the NRC measurements are no longer as accurate as they once were.

 

[Nuance AH]

Well that's odd. Why would NRC not strive to make the newer chamber at least equal to the old?