SVS Ultra Evolution Pinnacle Review

[gene]

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.

Just how do we "have an income from a review"?

An idiotic request based on someone with zero experience running an online magazine or any for profit business for that matter.

You want us to assume ALL the expense and risks of buying and selling products so we can review them while you reap the benefits of those efforts for FREE. I tell you what, the next speaker you want reviewed, you can buy, pay shipping both ways to James for review and then sell them yourself. While you're at it, you can pay his review fee which I currently pay. Hmm, I like that business model, actually.

 

[gene]

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

I am not a fan of reviewing samples that consumers submit to us. There is no QC and no way of knowing if the product has been damaged or modified by the user whether willingly or unwillingly. I also don't like taking the risk of us damaging an owners product just so we can review it. Our business model has served us exceedingly well for 25+ years and counting and there is NO need to change it. We get factory fresh samples from manufacturers production line. We review the product. We allow the manufacturers to fact check the review before publishing. We send the product back. Done.

 

[buckchester]

I am not a fan of reviewing samples that consumers submit to us. There is no QC and no way of knowing if the product has been damaged or modified by the user whether willingly or unwillingly. I also don't like taking the risk of us damaging an owners product just so we can review it. Our business model has served us exceedingly well for 25+ years and counting and there is NO need to change it. We get factory fresh samples from manufacturers production line. We review the product. We allow the manufacturers to fact check the review before publishing. We send the product back. Done.

Fair points, Gene. From a business standpoint, I'm sure you know what you're doing. However, from a consumer standpoint, I think the business model leaves a few things left to be desired.

If you are reliant on the manufactures for all of your review samples, than it makes one wonder if you are really free to be as critical of a product that you otherwise might have been. After all, if you are overly negative about a product, a company might not want to send you more products to review.

Also, how can you ensure that the products a manufacturer sends you are representative of what they sell? An example that comes to mind is that Starke Sound amp that ASR measured. They had two samples, neither of which performed as spec'd. Your business model cannot capture that. I am very grateful that it was caught and pointed out to the consumer because I was considering purchasing one of those amps after reading about it on your website.

If you reviewed products sent to you by members, you could have more reviews, which could mean more website clicks. And if you were sent products by members that were flawed and not representative from the manufacturers perspective, then maybe they would send you separate samples to review and compare. Even more reviews. Even more clicks.

I don't mean to sound patronizing here. You know your business model better than I do. I'm just saying from my perspective, I can see room for improvement from a consumer perspective.

 

[buckchester]

Just how do we "have an income from a review"?

An idiotic request based on someone with zero experience running an online magazine or any for profit business for that matter.

You want us to assume ALL the expense and risks of buying and selling products so we can review them while you reap the benefits of those efforts for FREE. I tell you what, the next speaker you want reviewed, you can buy, pay shipping both ways to James for review and then sell them yourself. While you're at it, you can pay his review fee which I currently pay. Hmm, I like that business model, actually.

Points taken. This would cost money. This may not be viable. But let's also not lose site of the fact that Audioholics would be nothing were it not for it's readers...

 

[Golfx]

Points taken. This would cost money. This may not be viable. But let's also not lose site of the fact that Audioholics would be nothing were it not for it's readers...

Not you though.

 

[Trebdp83]

Pleasant enough read of a competent review. @shadyJ remains the most agreeable and tactful of ALL Audioholics staff.

The speakers themselves are Focal knock offs with silly crossovers and ugly grills that will endanger “budget” amps at volume. Next!!!

 

[Danzilla31]

Fair points, Gene. From a business standpoint, I'm sure you know what you're doing. However, from a consumer standpoint, I think the business model leaves a few things left to be desired.

If you are reliant on the manufactures for all of your review samples, than it makes one wonder if you are really free to be as critical of a product that you otherwise might have been. After all, if you are overly negative about a product, a company might not want to send you more products to review.

Also, how can you ensure that the products a manufacturer sends you are representative of what they sell? An example that comes to mind is that Starke Sound amp that ASR measured. They had two samples, neither of which performed as spec'd. Your business model cannot capture that. I am very grateful that it was caught and pointed out to the consumer because I was considering purchasing one of those amps after reading about it on your website.

If you reviewed products sent to you by members, you could have more reviews, which could mean more website clicks. And if you were sent products by members that were flawed and not representative from the manufacturers perspective, then maybe they would send you separate samples to review and compare. Even more reviews. Even more clicks.

I don't mean to sound patronizing here. You know your business model better than I do. I'm just saying from my perspective, I can see room for improvement from a consumer perspective.

I am so tired of this so called argument that UNLESS a reviewer isn't critical enough or buys the product on their own they MUST be being influenced by the company that's sending them the product in for review.

Out of all the reviews I've read of these speakers to date @shadyJ is the only reviewer that has pointed out these speakers

1 being voiced not in the side of neutrality

2 Not being able to crossover with subs without issues

3 And the issues these speakers can cause with receivers and some amplifiers

Everyone else has been singing these speakers and this speaker lines praises.

As mentioned if this was so easy to do you BUY them and ship them in to review. Better yet you buy them and buy all the equipment like a Klippel do all the work of measuring and then flip them for a loss. All while not doing any revenue from advertisers and sponsors and such. Only relying on donations from your subscribers

The reason Audioholics is so good to us their members is because Gene's business model. And this is not the only review that they have pointed out issues with products Monoprice Monoliths new line of budget amps is another one I can call up to mind right off the bat.

You can point out a products issues without beating them into the ground just to appeal to a few subscribers wishes that doing so means YOUR NOT INFLUENCED BY A COMPANY who sent you these speakers in to review.

If they did it your way no company would send in equipment to review sites for objective review. They'd only send in products to review sites that were subjective and could be bought off by their money and you'd never get any good reviews at all

 

[Danzilla31]

Another weakness of relying on your idea of subscribers sending in products to review is if it's a crap product the suscriber just took a massive hit sometimes to their wallet to find out they spent that money on crap. And now they have to go to the trouble of trying to recoup that money. Which isn't easy electronics such as speakers are a lot like cars. Once they are driven off the lot it's difficult for any of them to retain most of their value.

The way Gene does it companies are willing to send him products in. Audioholics can review them and tactfully point out their strengths and weaknesses.

And we the subscriber can better spend our money on products. All thanks to Audioholics giving us a better idea of what we are getting before we put our hard earned money at risk on a product

 

[isolar8001]

Fair points, Gene. From a business standpoint, I'm sure you know what you're doing. However, from a consumer standpoint, I think the business model leaves a few things left to be desired.

If you are reliant on the manufactures for all of your review samples, than it makes one wonder if you are really free to be as critical of a product that you otherwise might have been. After all, if you are overly negative about a product, a company might not want to send you more products to review.

Also, how can you ensure that the products a manufacturer sends you are representative of what they sell? An example that comes to mind is that Starke Sound amp that ASR measured. They had two samples, neither of which performed as spec'd. Your business model cannot capture that. I am very grateful that it was caught and pointed out to the consumer because I was considering purchasing one of those amps after reading about it on your website.

If you reviewed products sent to you by members, you could have more reviews, which could mean more website clicks. And if you were sent products by members that were flawed and not representative from the manufacturers perspective, then maybe they would send you separate samples to review and compare. Even more reviews. Even more clicks.

I don't mean to sound patronizing here. You know your business model better than I do. I'm just saying from my perspective, I can see room for improvement from a consumer perspective.

Point to us where Audioholics touched you.

 

[shadyJ]

The speakers themselves are Focal knock offs with silly crossovers and ugly grills that will endanger “budget” amps at volume. Next!!!

The Ultra Evolution Pinnacles are absolutely NOT Focal knock-offs. The design philosophy is entirely different, from driver design, crossover design, port design, etc. The only aspect that mildly resembles Focal is the bend in the enclosure, but SVS handles it in a very different manner.

 

[ryanosaur]

Some chatter over on ASR was hoping these would be more like KEF than Focal!

Nobody is happy with anything just being what it is.

Oh... and because another review was met with derision, EVERYBODY DRINK!

The Official _/Unofficial/_ AH Drinking Game!

I've been joking about this for far, far too long. It started up as an idea in my head after AH was inundated with people buying lower-tier B&W Speakers and coming on the Forum to find out why they sounded like @$$ once they set them up in their home. :) After that, there were... other topics of...

forums.audioholics.com

(I might need to revisit that and amend some of the conditions. Hmmm...)

 

[gene]

Points taken. This would cost money. This may not be viable. But let's also not lose site of the fact that Audioholics would be nothing were it not for it's readers...

Let's not lose site of the fact that Audioholics owes you nothing. You choose to come here and consume our content for free. Since you don't support the site in any way and only criticize what we do, you have no voice to be critical. I value our readership that appreciates our hardwork and supports us. Those are the people I listen to when they have valid arguments or concerns.

 

[gene]

Fair points, Gene. From a business standpoint, I'm sure you know what you're doing. However, from a consumer standpoint, I think the business model leaves a few things left to be desired.

If you are reliant on the manufactures for all of your review samples, than it makes one wonder if you are really free to be as critical of a product that you otherwise might have been. After all, if you are overly negative about a product, a company might not want to send you more products to review.

Also, how can you ensure that the products a manufacturer sends you are representative of what they sell? An example that comes to mind is that Starke Sound amp that ASR measured. They had two samples, neither of which performed as spec'd. Your business model cannot capture that. I am very grateful that it was caught and pointed out to the consumer because I was considering purchasing one of those amps after reading about it on your website.

If you reviewed products sent to you by members, you could have more reviews, which could mean more website clicks. And if you were sent products by members that were flawed and not representative from the manufacturers perspective, then maybe they would send you separate samples to review and compare. Even more reviews. Even more clicks.

I don't mean to sound patronizing here. You know your business model better than I do. I'm just saying from my perspective, I can see room for improvement from a consumer perspective.

I have zero desire to pursue what you suggest and it would be far less efficient to how we run things now. For the record SVS was not overly pleased with James review and it's possible they won't send another product to us from this series. It's a risk we take and we've lost many advertisers over in the past. Life goes on and we always find brands that appreciate our work. I'm still very fond of the folks at SVS regardless what happens in the future. Anyone thinking James review was overly positive really has poor reading comprehension or they just like trolling. In either event, I've found our most vocal critics are not the ones that support this site in any financial way via patreon or our affiliate links. So I don't give their criticism much weight.

 

[Danzilla31]

Some chatter over on ASR was hoping these would be more like KEF than Focal!

Nobody is happy with anything just being what it is.

Oh... and because another review was met with derision, EVERYBODY DRINK!

The Official _/Unofficial/_ AH Drinking Game!

I've been joking about this for far, far too long. It started up as an idea in my head after AH was inundated with people buying lower-tier B&W Speakers and coming on the Forum to find out why they sounded like @$$ once they set them up in their home. :) After that, there were... other topics of...

forums.audioholics.com

(I might need to revisit that and amend some of the conditions. Hmmm...)

I'm a recovering alcoholic does it count if I drink soda?

You drink 2 shots I drink 2 Coke

You drink 3 shots I drink 3 Pepsi

You pass out and Im up all night peeing

 

[Trebdp83]

The Ultra Evolution Pinnacles are absolutely NOT Focal knock-offs. The design philosophy is entirely different, from driver design, crossover design, port design, etc. The only aspect that mildly resembles Focal is the bend in the enclosure, but SVS handles it in a very different manner.

Saying they "mildly" resemble the Focals is putting it, well, mildly. Putting woofers and mids above and below the tweeter and then forcing it to power through the mess because the ones above point downward and the ones below point upward isn't the best use of any of the parts. Toed in and nine feet away from the listening position may sound great to some at reasonable volume levels playing two channel music with no sub in the mix. Others using them straight on at fifteen feet away with a sub in the mix using room correction may have different feelings about them. But, I guess there aren't meant for the latter folk.

On another note, put something out there for free and you invite all kinds to come around and talk a mess. Let them get under your skin until you become good and angry and lash out and that's on you. If I can make a suggestion regarding reviews of any speakers, how about playing something on them familiar to many of the ol' farts frequenting this joint. How does "Peg" sound on those fuckers?

 

[Sal1950]

WOW, Once again SVS is offering a product with a price/performance ratio that breaks thru the barriers. At $5k the pair I don't think you can find a better speak for that amount or twice that amount. Buyers should have a good sized room to take advantage of it's strengths and use a little bit of EQ to smooth the bottom octaves. But that is good advice to anyone who wants relatively flat bass in all sort of rooms. Also as mentioned, an amp with some serious muscle into 4 ohms is highly recommended.
Thanks James, Gene and all for this great review.
Sal1950

 

[Auditor55]

Another weakness of relying on your idea of subscribers sending in products to review is if it's a crap product the suscriber just took a massive hit sometimes to their wallet to find out they spent that money on crap. And now they have to go to the trouble of trying to recoup that money. Which isn't easy electronics such as speakers are a lot like cars. Once they are driven off the lot it's difficult for any of them to retain most of their value.

The way Gene does it companies are willing to send him products in. Audioholics can review them and tactfully point out their strengths and weaknesses.

And we the subscriber can better spend our money on products. All thanks to Audioholics giving us a better idea of what we are getting before we put our hard earned money at risk on a product

With that being said, a speaker is something one must listen to themselves and then make a decision. There's only so much a third party reviewer can do. I personally don't think it's smart to make a decision based soley upon a reviewer results.

 

[Auditor55]

WOW, Once again SVS is offering a product with a price/performance ratio that breaks thru the barriers. At $5k the pair I don't think you can find a better speak for that amount or twice that amount. Buyers should have a good sized room to take advantage of it's strengths and use a little bit of EQ to smooth the bottom octaves. But that is good advice to anyone who wants relatively flat bass in all sort of rooms. Also as mentioned, an amp with some serious muscle into 4 ohms is highly recommended.
Thanks James, Gene and all for this great review.
Sal1950

So you have a pair of them?

 

[Sal1950]

So you have a pair of them?

Me no, too big for my room. But the composition of the speakers components and the measurements speak for themselves.
Measurements may not tell you everything but they definitely will separate the highly inaccurate and distorted garbage from the good and very very good. This one falls in the "very very good" category. Of course if you don't think Gene or James Larson know what they're talking about, your welcome to believe the BS from any internet audiophool you like.

 

[ryanosaur]

I'm a recovering alcoholic does it count if I drink soda?

You drink 2 shots I drink 2 Coke

You drink 3 shots I drink 3 Pepsi

You pass out and Im up all night peeing

U do u, boo!