Speaker Asylum General speaker questions for audio and home theater.

---

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Speaker Asylum ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

Re: You have to have some understanding of the measurements . . .

Posted by Pat D (A) on February 3, 2007 at 07:15:47

In Reply to: Re: You have to have some understanding of the measurements . . . posted by RGA on February 3, 2007 at 05:55:25:

"The 63 and the 57 are irrelevant."

You brought them up. You told me how they shared the Quad sound, but as I told you, the Quad 57 is not a dipole above the bass. Also, it is a three way speaker and does not have the same dispersion pattern at all.

Besides, the ESL-63 and the 989 have some similar features in their measurements, as JA points out.

"The 989 is what is now sold and that speaker is what I was talking about."

Also other models, the 988, 2805 and 2905. BTW, you can still build Quad 57s from parts and the last I knew there were people who will do this for you. I think you can also build ESL-63s and they are certainly available from refurbishers.

"You seem to imply that the greatest difficulty in the world is reading a frequency response graph. You say that I totally have no clue as to what is going on yet it is simply a loudness at a given frequency graph -- far less difficult than most charts and graphs I have created and read. DB is level - frequency is how load."

No, I think you seem incapable of interpreting them in a very meaningful way. As well, for a speaker, the frequency response varies with the direction, both horizontally and vertically. This seems to make little impression on you.

"I have said nothing about most speakers that have not been said or implied by people like John Atkinson himself. Though he has been careless with other speakers and implied things incorrectly."

Well, you do manage to repeat some things he said.

"Scientific measurements if it is going to be used need to DIRECTLY speak to that which is initially stated and not "interpreted" using a bunch of weasal words as to "well this measurement stinks but it's a big speaker and we can't do big speakers accurately" Which begs the question that "if you can't measure big speakers properly why the hell are you doing them?" Do it correctly or don't bother. Ahh to let amateur nobodies on forums "interpret" if they're any good and because it helps sell magazines."

Well, your silly demand that one should be able to measure what is needed "directly" would explain why you can't understand speaker measurements! I suppose much of physics is lost on you.

You also mix up evaluation with the measurement results. The measurements done by JA for Stereophile, the measurements done at the NRC for Soundstage, the measurements done by AIG, Sound & Vision, Audioholics, and so on, simply are what they are. Some may be more accurate than others but there doesn't seem to be anything basically wrong with the ones they do. They could do others, however, but most speakers are forward radiators and so it's probably not practical to try to fully accomodate dipoles.

But we are also getting into how much is displayed. I suspect the NRC can provide very adequate measurements for dipoles, but Soundstage doesn't display all the measurement results available.

"The measurements provided in Stereophile just looking at frequency implies that you would get more bass than is really evident in listening. Granted in room at distance that will balance down but then so does treble at distance which he should have mentioned and did not. Well he kind of did mentioning a big room would make them too mellow."

Ahh, "just looking at!" You and Srajan Ebaen!! The bass curve in Stereophile simply is what it is--it needs to be interpreted! You have no clue why the bass measured flatter in a room--even though Richard Greene has posted on dipole bass. The treble response is quite a different phenomenon, not much different in principle from conventional speakers.

"And lastly if the magazines online ones too, are going to do measurements they oughta be completely useful in a self-contained way. Not relying on customers to get measurements from seven different publications and to "interpret" what it might be like when listening. And if "you have to listen to really know" anyway - which all those publications end up directly stating or implying then exactly what use directly that you can directly prove are they going to give you?"

Life is hard, then you die.

Measurements can often give one a good idea of some of things one will hear--overbearing mid bass, recessed upper midrange, harsh upper mids and lower treble, etc., and dispersion characteristics.

"I can see some general uses -- is the speaker efficient enough to be driven by a SET amp. Does the speaker adequately cover a frequency response? How loud will it play. Is the speaker a head in the vice speaker or not. some of the other ones I thought about adding I do not because when listening they do not usually directly indicate their truths in room."

Ahh, you're learning a little, then. Most review measurements don't give much indication as to how loud a speaker will play. "Head in the vice speaker" is related to the dispersion characterists; it is not particularly applicable to the more recent Quad ESLs.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

VH Audio

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---