[warpdriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cujobob /img/forum/go_quote.gif Proof? What proof would you like? And what proof do you have that Revel is better than the Gedlee speakers I use?

Duh. I don't have proof but neither do you. That's my whole point. I didn't make any judgement statements purporting to be fact like you did. (like this one I quoted earlier "Many consumers tend to think that larger companies have these far superior engineering departments and technology which helps them build better speakers, but that's not the case"). I'm still laughing at all the assumptions and biases built into that quote. Never once have I claimed that Harman makes superior speakers to all other brands. I just used them as an example of a large successful speaker company. They are mass market company, making some speakers that sell in Best Buy and your appliance superstore, but even those utilize the same R&D facilities that Revel does.

If I were to make a claim, all I said is that Harman's R&D facilities are top class. which is a far cry from the average DIY'er who buys a laptop and some software. It's only common sense that a company like Harman, which uses their speaker switcher to switch between several prototype designs at an instant, using double blind techniques with large samples of people, should be able to test, verify, and tweak their designs in a very scientific manner. In this case, it's not rocket science, but it's a science nonetheless. They have done better than most companies and designers with correlating actual sound quality perception with design parameters and measurements. The speaker designers at Harman publish white papers all the time especially in this regard, and my guess is that the speaker design community is probably even close enough that Harman designers might be friends with Dr Geddes and probably follow each other's work. I know in my engineering field that even though some designers work at competing companies, we follow each other's work and learn from each other.

As for proof, you might even be able to show a few specific measurements that speaker model A from Mr Home Designer XYZ can beat a large corporate model from Revel for 7/10's the price, but that still doesn't mean Revel is a poor value. Not only are we getting a great sounding speaker that measures well in objective manner, Revels look good as well with a good selection of shapes and finishes that would get spousal approval, and are well made. To me they constitute great value. Working with my local dealer, I can get a great price on one as well, so I have no problems with the price.

 

[cujobob]

Since Revel has not done as much to minimize diffraction, control directivity, minimize compression, or show the polar response patterns for their designs, I question how well their speakers are designed. The response patterns for my speakers were linked, but Revels are unavailable. Their frequency response may be good in one spot should you never: lay down, have a guest, use more than a row of seating, have extra seats in the one row, turn your head at all, stand up, etc.

Harman actually has done some research, but it doesn't help the argument that the other companies I actually mentioned (B&W,Klipsch, Paradigm) do very little for the extra cost associated. You really fail to understand how good a home testing system can be. Is it perfect? No, but its close enough. You also didn't really prove that B&W, Klipsch, and Paradigm have facilities like Harman.

My claim is that there are better values available in the same category than the companies I mentioned. You've done nothing to counter that argument.

If I had $22,000, I would not buy the top Revel offering nor would I if I were looking in any of their priceranges. I will agree they are a step up from B&W.

Find me similar responses from your speakers and we can compare.

As for cabinetry, I had a beautiful custom hardwood (woofers braced in MDF) Open Baffle subwoofer cabinet done for me for just a few hundred dollars...at $22,000, I'd expect amazing cabinet-work.

Here's a $6,000 speaker's cabinet..

 

[Matro5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cujobob /img/forum/go_quote.gif My claim is that there are better values available in the same category than the companies I mentioned. You've done nothing to counter that argument.

Why are you "arguing" about speaker designs in a thread about headphones you've never heard?

 

[cujobob]

I gave an opinion about the quality of B&W products, someone asked for an opinion about speakers, I gave it, then was brought into a discussion about various speakers. It happens. Besides, there's nothing to say about these headphones yet.

 

[Matro5]

What you meant to say was, "there's nothing FOR ME to say about these headphones." There is a difference between your opinion and fact.

But, others might want to talk about these headphones here, and speakers in a speaker thread. Lots of threads about announced, but unheard headphones, continue at great length.

 

[warpdriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cujobob /img/forum/go_quote.gif Harman actually has done some research, but it doesn't help the argument that the other companies I actually mentioned (B&W,Klipsch, Paradigm) do very little for the extra cost associated. You also didn't really prove that B&W, Klipsch, and Paradigm have facilities like Harman.

Again, I am not here to defend any particular company. For all I know B&W could be measuring their speakers a Radio shack meter, or they could have even more advanced facilities than Harman, but at least I'm not making any assumptions about what their R&D is doing or not doing behind their closed doors. We do know that Paradigm does have extensive R&D facilities with their own manufacturing and anechoic chambers and so does Klipsch, but anything more specific is again more speculation

Quote:

My claim is that there are better values available in the same category than the companies I mentioned. You've done nothing to counter that argument.

That is your claim. I did not claim either way. I was waiting for you to somehow prove it. You haven't or can't so it becomes just being another opinion masquerading as fact. Until you take a blind test with your own speakers against a similarly priced Paradigm, B&W, or Revel, then it has some basis in the one thing that matters, real perceived sound quality.

 

[warpdriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matro5 /img/forum/go_quote.gif But, others might want to talk about these headphones here, and speakers in a speaker thread. Lots of threads about announced, but unheard headphones, continue at great length.

cujobob brought up the build quality of crossovers from discontinued B&W speaker model in a thread about headphones (which don't even have a crossover at all). He just saw an opportunity to dump on the B&W brand, and took it. Personally, I'm looking forward to hearing these headphones. More headphones to choose from is always a good thing. They look kind of uncomfortable, and I think their focus is more on portability and mobile use, but we'll see once I hear them. I'm certainly not going to even hint at their build quality or sound quality based on the fact they used electrolytic capacitors in some speaker models from a few years ago.

 

[cujobob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by warpdriver /img/forum/go_quote.gif Again, I am not here to defend any particular company. For all I know B&W could be measuring their speakers a Radio shack meter, or they could have even more advanced facilities than Harman, but at least I'm not making any assumptions about what their R&D is doing or not doing behind their closed doors. We do know that Paradigm does have extensive R&D facilities with their own manufacturing and anechoic chambers and so does Klipsch, but anything more specific is again more speculation That is your claim. I did not claim either way. I was waiting for you to somehow prove it. You haven't or can't so it becomes just being another opinion masquerading as fact. Until you take a blind test with your own speakers against a similarly priced Paradigm, B&W, or Revel, then it has some basis.

If they have such great technology, why do they not show better measurements?

Since the speakers I'm for do have more in depth measurements (which I've linked to), then whoever is for the opposing argument should probably provide measurements to counter. Proof can always be called into question (basic Philosophy course right thurr).

Since Revel won't reveal in depth measurements (which I'm sure they are quite capable of doing), its enough proof that they can't compare.

I've said before its subjective since nothing can actually be proven. I stated my opinion (don't recall saying it was fact) and have given plenty of information for what Gedlee speakers do that Revels do not do. You haven't shown that a bigger company's research is any better, only alluded that they have better technology. Since they have this superior technology, again, what are they doing to: minimize diffraction, control directivity, minimize compression, etc.
Are their measurements so poor that they can't post them on their website?

Again, you SERIOUSLY underestimate how good measurements can be without an anechoic chamber.


Matro, if all of us have to say 'in my opinion' after every post...that's ridiculous.

 

[cujobob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by warpdriver /img/forum/go_quote.gif cujobob brought up the build quality of crossovers from discontinued B&W speaker model in a thread about headphones (which don't even have a crossover at all). He just saw an opportunity to dump on the B&W brand, and took it. Personally, I'm looking forward to hearing these headphones. More headphones to choose from is always a good thing. They look kind of uncomfortable, and I think their focus is more on portability and mobile use, but we'll see once I hear them. I'm certainly not going to even hint at their build quality or sound quality based on the fact they used electrolytic capacitors in some speaker models from a few years ago.

Yes, because you are the superior person, clearly. It is not wrong for a person to have an opinion...especially one based on information that is well known (Electrolytic capacitors being used in crossovers of $8,000 designs).

A company that would sacrifice sound quality and reliability for a dollar of savings (cheap poly caps could have been used) should be questioned IMHO.

I would love to see these headphones turn out to be great...though I doubt B&W will put out a set that will be inexpensive.

 

[warpdriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cujobob /img/forum/go_quote.gif Since Revel won't reveal in depth measurements (which I'm sure they are quite capable of doing), its enough proof that they can't compare.

No, it's enough proof that you fail at basic deduction principals.

Harman actually doesn't publish any measurements beyond the simple spec sheet. Not where you got the impression they publish any in the first place. If you saw measurements, it's probably a third party. Blame them for not providing polar measurments.

Not sure why they need to publish measurements when they have already correlated many measurements to sound quality already (which is the real design goal). Why would measurements done in their private lab (using probably propriertary measurement tools and software) would be useful to the general public? It might be a goodwill gesture to please measurement masturbaters, but it'd be waste of their time IMO when you can judge the result for yourself using the real instrument that matters, your ears.

 

[cujobob]

A polar response would show what ANY consumer needs to know. Do you know what angle their speakers are setup to achieve their response? What's the response in the seat next to the middle? How will you know how to setup your speakers and treat your room properly if their measurements don't show?

You haven't proven that they've done more to minimize diffraction. Dr. Geddes goes into great detail and has a patented plug to minimize HOMs caused by that diffraction.

I don't know what you want from me...the data is all there. Get the same data for your Revels and we'll compare to see which is the technically better speaker. Polar response does not favor any particular speaker company. Their directivity won't be nearly as controlled, that is a key principle in sound quality. Please e-mail them and find out.

Edit: Apparently, you've again deleted parts of your post, so this came out funny. You were implying they do a better job of minimizing diffraction.

 

[warpdriver]

ok, done editing

Your turn.

 

[cujobob]

Honestly, you're just kind of making excuses for their lack of measurements despite you believing they have incredible resources.

If you accept that polar responses are accurate representations for how something can sound in room, then please post polar responses for those speakers (Revels).

 

[warpdriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cujobob /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't know what you want from me...the data is all there. Get the same data for your Revels and we'll compare to see which is the technically better speaker. Polar response does not favor any particular speaker company. Their directivity won't be nearly as controlled, that is a key principle in sound quality. Please e-mail them and find out.

I don't have Revels, nor do I actually care whether any particular Revel is worse or better in any particular technical spec, so I won't be emailing them or even visiting their website to look for such technical information

If you expect me to do so, then you've missed the point of my posts.

edit: you seem to keep thinking that I've made a claim that Revels are better speakers.

Probably the only claim I'll make is that your value proposition statements only reflect your individual narrow set of priorities, made using questionable assumptions and biases, Most laughingly, they apparently are not even based on real listening tests with the speakers you are debasing.

 

[cujobob]

You really seem to have a hard time discussing something you disagree with.

I've listened to more speakers than I care to mention...owned plenty, too. The speakers I mentioned before in my recommendations are all solid choices and offer more value despite mostly being developed in-house without fancy research facilities (though at some point, they've been used by the designers I've mentioned) than the larger brand-names with massive costs added on.

Name me a speaker and I can more specifically debate with you why a speaker I'll recommend will have a higher value quotient. Debating generalities, as we're doing now, is pointless. You believe they offer value because of their research trickling down to better their own designs (thats how I'm interpreting it, at least). Ok, that's fine, give me specific examples, model numbers...something.

You seem adamant that I'm wrong, but what if I'm right? You may be surprised to find out how good audio can be at a low-price by checking out Dr. Geddes' setup in Novi. He does his testing in-house, uses a cheapo receiver, cheap cabling...no fancy tricks.

Maybe sometime when I'm not quite so busy you could hear my own setup, if you'd prefer...I'm somewhat local. I wouldn't have been able to afford very good Revels, B&W, or Paradigms for the price I paid for my speakers...and after hearing them, you'll definitely agree it sounds spectacular.