Jump to content

Anybody Here Follow This Site?


SWL

Recommended Posts

This statement caught my attention:

"The FR of their flagship bookshelf isn’t much better, but the directivity is golden, so it’ll respond well to EQ/DSP."


An honest question.....For the years I've owned Klipsch speakers it has been mandatory for me to use EQ/DSP with them. Does this statement have merit?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, SWL said:

 

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/klipsch-r-41m-bookshelf-speaker-review.11566/

 

Interesting. Comments?

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

I don't know much about his measuring techniques, but at least, it all looks very trustworthy and he does a lot of testing.

Of course, one listens with ones ears, not by watching graphs and specs, so numbers don't mean a lot.

 

I find it interesting to hear alternative opinions - question remains if they are honest and unprejudiced. One comment over there is about my cherished RP160M speakers:

 

"The only thing that surprises me is that this looks alot like the response I measure from my Klipsch RP160m. Looks like they aim for that particular horrendous tuning in their speakers. Perhaps someone important at Klipsch have a hearing disability? Tuning is one thing, but the impedance and crossover behaviour is not particularly comforting. Let's be honest, these speakers are utterly shite and there's nothing that can save them from that fact."

 

I appreciate these speakers a lot myself, so I don't understand where these negative evaluations come from...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Audition based on review....ok...Blindly buying, never.....Opinions......who ain't got one, only mine matters ultimately....Information, GREAT, just not overdone....Science can explain very little about the brain and interpretation. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was struck by the many opinions, strongly stated, based on the testing done and reading, even though the other writers had done no testing. 

 

FWIW, my La Scalas came out +/- 4 dB up to 14k in my old room without any tilt in the curves or odd peaks and dips. 

 

Near-field measurements may be partly at fault here, but mostly it looks like a case of expecting too much from a $200 speaker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, JohnA said:

...Near-field measurements may be partly at fault here...

You'd take on Klippel and NFS measurements?  I personally wouldn't try to elevate my ego that far.  I do believe that the NFS measurements can be better than anechoic--as Klippel himself has demonstrated. (At $100K+ for the measurement rig, they better be.)  I do believe that the person initiating the NFS measurements and reviewing them in this case has interpretation issues.

 

Note that this thread is redundant--see https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/189344-klipsch-r-41m-bookshelf-speaker-review-from-audio-science-review/

 

Chris

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Chris A said:

You'd take on Klippel and NFS measurements?  I personally wouldn't try to elevate my ego that far.  I do believe that the NFS measurements can be better than anechoic--as Klippel himself has demonstrated. (At $100K+ for the measurement rig, they better be.)  I do believe that the person initiating the NFS measurements and reviewing them in this case has interpretation issues.

 

Note that this thread is redundant--see https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/189344-klipsch-r-41m-bookshelf-speaker-review-from-audio-science-review/

 

Chris

 

Yes, in a way.  Not many of us listen near-field so a measurement made that way, done correctly, can help a designer voice his speaker, just how applicable is that to a real listening environment?  How many times have we marveled at the sound of the big Klipsch from 30 feet.  Would that little one be much different? 

 

I whole-heartedly agree with your opinion on Amir's interpretation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JohnA said:

Not many of us listen near-field so a measurement made that way, done correctly, can help a designer voice his speaker, just how applicable is that to a real listening environment?

 

I'll take the NFS measurements over someone's subjective opinions (if those are the choices you imply)...any day.  Especially if benchmarked with known loudspeaker models, i.e., I don't blindly accept the full set of Toole's and Olive's "loudspeaker requirements" because they're incomplete, inaccurate, and biased, IMO.  Have you gazed at the results from the NFS?  I'm very impressed with what I see--and he didn't post nearly all of his measurement plots.   I do wish that I had one of those measurement rigs: it would save gobs of time trying to use one's subjective listening skills to identify performance issues. 

 

I find that listening to the results of design, test, and tweaking of the design is really to confirm compliance to, and validity of, the set of requirements chosen for design...in my experience.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...