# In a blind test no one could really tell the difference between most brands...



## Ultimateherts

Just wanted to debunk the myth that all brands sound very similar in a blind test...


----------



## ErinH

Depends on how they really measure among other things. Have you read any of Floyd Toole's research regarding "seeing is believing"? If not, you need to. It'll pretty much shut this thread down itself. 

http://www.infinitysystems.com/home/technology/whitepapers/audio_art_science.pdf

Sent from my iPhone. Pardon the grammar.


----------



## simplicityinsound

i never got this whole argument....it would be relevant if were as a species are all blind...but we arent, so even if its a visual "trick" it is what it is and therefore makes a difference.


----------



## ErinH

At the end of the day, emotion is tied to music. I'm fine with a purchase decision or choice rationale based on emotion. However, few will acknowledge the impact of emotion and psychoacoustics and instead default to making generic statements and conclusions to only fan the flames of those who are uniformed and gullible. 

^copied myself from another thread.


The issue, IMO, is people are quick to say something actually sounded 'better' than something else. They use subjective words like "warm, dry, neutral, loud, bright, crisp, transient", etc. It's great you're happy with a purchase. The problem is that others read that and assume you really did hear a change and that in no way was your opinion at all rooted in psychoacoustics (knowing what you're hearing and/or your emotion of the purchase leading to your subjective thoughts on the product). So, then we get threads like "Class D amps are dry"... well, does the user even understand why that is? Is there a reason for it, or did they expect to hear something and therefore used the most penned term they could think of? Did you set the gains the exact same for the amp? Did you measure the speaker system's response (both left and right, individually) to understand what may have changed? These are ways you can identify if what you're hearing is real. 
Then, how about the use of those terms being interchanged easily. So, when someone says "dry", the other person relates it to what they know as "warm" and the cycle gets even crazier. 

Take, for example, the car you've heard so much about. I've had instances where I expected so much, I was let down. Even though it sounded good... it just didn't blow me away. On the flip side, I've heard cars that I didn't expect to sound good blow me away... were they really that bad/good or was it my preconceived notion that influenced my opinion? Probably the latter. We do this with movies... my buddy says The Avengers is awesome... it better freaking be all that and a bag of chips because the bar has been set by his subjective opinion. 
Or another very common example is the one where people want to hide speakers so others' opinion of the system isn't influenced by them seeing either a) the location of the speaker(s) and/or b) the type of speaker(s) used. For example, people often used to say that speakers in the pillars sounded forward... so folks would hide them with cloth or something else. Some have gone so far as to make pseudo installs so that judges in competition would think the speakers were somewhere they were not, in the hopes that the common idea that (for example) speakers in the kicks sound better than speakers in the pillars. 

Like I said above, I'm not really a stickler for people's subjective evaluation on a product because I already know they're being influenced by the purchase itself or the reason that led to the purchase (ie: Harry said it made his system warm so I must buy it). I just tread lightly when I read it. And, to be honest, I really don't trust anything subjective anymore because it's all a wash; put it in my car and let my car's environment plague the FR... now, how in the world can I honestly say that everyone else should hear the same thing I heard when it's really all driven by FR - and there shouldn't be any amp/dsp/headunit made today that changes FR in the least bit and I've yet to measure one that does***.
If you can point me to data or some sort of evidence that can show me why you hear what you hear, then it's likely your brain getting in the way of your ears. We all do it. I still do. Hell, that's why I don't even bother listening to speakers anymore. I've done it enough to know what is numero-importante, besides the environment itself. Hint: frequency response. 
Distortion is one often used explanation, but let's be real: distortion really isn't an issue with any electronic component anymore. There's really no reasonable explanation for an electronics product to impart it's own sound anymore... it's mainly just people talking out of their butt. Though, there have been some tests that show some products not performing well at all and these certainly lend credence to the _possibility _that someone can hear something _different_; whatever that may be. 


I just look at subjective opinions based off sighted evaluations as a means to an end. If nothing else, it gets conversation going. The reader and evaluator should just take care to at least address the impact and understand how knowing what you're listening to can _absolutely _alter what you hear. It's been documented by people waaaay smarter than me. The funny thing is that the real engineers of audio understand this. The hobbyists still cling to the idea they have golden ears and can trust them over their brain. I'm not even trying to sound above it all... I'm just more or less expressing my disdain for the people who ignore it. 

***that wasn't faulty and prompted a design change.


----------



## Audiophyle

I think in a true blind test where listening conditions were exact, equipment placement and volume was identical, and they were played back to back without a hiccup in the sound as it changed back & forth, I doubt anyone would hear a difference as long as the equipment was somewhat similar. I do believe there would be a noticeable difference if the equipment were dissimilar enough, like a low end uber cheap coax vs a high end component (even setup as a coax, with tweeter centered) but the differences would need to be pretty significant in quality, materiality, and design.


I think on a more common level, the idea of auditioning equipment like at a store or in another persons car, is a lost cause. There is an unfathomable number of variances impacting the performance of a speaker in any environment, from acoustic properties, to the "enclosure" the woofer is interacting with, and to the solidity and quality of the installation. I believe there is no way to ever get a fair comparison between any equipment unless one is significantly inferior to the other, and as many other variables remain as constant as possible.

This is why I try to pay as much attention to all of the variables as possible, so no matter what equipment I run the odds of it performing to my satisfaction is as great as I can get it.


----------



## rc10mike

Nevermind...


----------



## Niebur3

Audiophyle said:


> I think in a true blind test where listening conditions were exact, equipment placement and volume was identical, and they were played back to back without a hiccup in the sound as it changed back & forth, I doubt anyone would hear a difference as long as the equipment was somewhat similar. I do believe there would be a noticeable difference if the equipment were dissimilar enough, like a low end uber cheap coax vs a high end component (even setup as a coax, with tweeter centered) but the differences would need to be pretty significant in quality, materiality, and design.


As someone who conducted a 16 driver BLIND midrange test with several people involved and someone who is about to do a midwoofer test using 6 high-end drivers for the test, this couldn't be more from the truth. In the midrange test, the drivers were vastly different from one another, keeping all other variable to a minimum or non-existent. There were some inexpensive drivers, but non were "uber cheap" coaxials. All were 3-4" midrange. If you would like, PM me your email and I will send you a copy.

Now, FWIW, I have a demo board with 3-amps level matched based on voltage at the output and (as it is much closer than speakers) you are still able to hear a difference between the amps. The same with Head Units. Now, one can argue the difference between amps/HU in a car would be VERY hard to hear...but please don't say there isn't a difference.


----------



## Audiophyle

Niebur3 said:


> As someone who conducted a 16 driver BLIND midrange test with several people involved and someone who is about to do a midwoofer test using 6 high-end drivers for the test, this couldn't be more from the truth. In the midrange test, the drivers were vastly different from one another, keeping all other variable to a minimum or non-existent. There were some inexpensive drivers, but non were "uber cheap" coaxials. All were 3-4" midrange. If you would like, PM me your email and I will send you a copy.
> 
> Now, FWIW, I have a demo board with 3-amps level matched based on voltage at the output and (as it is much closer than speakers) you are still able to hear a difference between the amps. The same with Head Units. Now, one can argue the difference between amps/HU in a car would be VERY hard to hear...but please don't say there isn't a difference.


Email addy PM'd, eager to learn what you know.


----------



## TrickyRicky

simplicityinsound said:


> i never got this whole argument....it would be relevant if were as a species are all blind...but we arent, so even if its a visual "trick" it is what it is and therefore makes a difference.


Quick and short reply but it left a :surprised: (woah) look on my face. Your absolutly right, I sometimes wonder if we REALLY can tell a difference in a blind test..... I bet most would probably go for the Legacy/Boss sound, lol.


----------



## Ultimateherts

See I had never really thought about this till the other day. Most of us on here spend so much time planning and installing our equipment that do we really benefit from such higher end gear... I know certain things you need like processors etc, but at the rate and quality we install is it really worth it to spend the extra money on the higher end stuff???


----------



## Niebur3

I really don't even get this whole thread. It is purely a statement with no facts to back it up, just more questioning statements. I wish everyone one this forum could have been a tester in the midrange shootout, because each speaker in the test sounded very different. The speakers were all ran through 2x and the testers impressions matched very close both times.

Again, I don't see where this thread has any merit or anything to back up what the OP is stating. I have actually tested and can tell you, this is soooooo not the case.


----------



## Oliver

The *tune* of the system may have something to do with the sound 

_*If u can't get it tuned, it don't matter !*_


----------



## BuickGN

Oliver said:


> The *tune* of the system may have something to do with the sound
> 
> _*If u can't get it tuned, it don't matter !*_


What a revelation! :mean:

I don't agree with the topic. In the midrange shootout, didn't everyone pick the same midrange for first place and the same one for second place, Jerry? This is all the proof I need that all speakers don't sound the same. All speakers obviously had the same tune and were level matched. 

We all know the car and tuning have a huge influence on sound but why not start out with something that sounds great with a good FR and low distortion so you only have to worry about the room's effects rather than having to compensate for crappy frequency response of the speaker itself as well. 

There are some speakers like Infinity Kappa that 99% of the people who have heard them describe them as bright. In my experience no amount of EQ helped. My Massive Audio SK-6 sounded terrible (backed up by the Klippel) no matter what I did. I even tried one in an enclosure as the center channel my my HT and it sounded just as bad there as in the car. 

I was short on time when I installed my Dyn342 set so I only got one side done the first day which gave me a ton of time to flip left and right comparing the two comp sets. While I'm sure FR varied from side to side the Dyns were in a different league in all aspects then that ID CTX-65cs. There was enough of a difference that no one in their right mind could not tell the two apart. I just can't imagine it would be possible to use EQ to make the IDs sound as good as the Dyns. 

Subs, the sub that stands out the most was the Tempest X. Low end monster, noting above 50-60hz. The MS8 attempted to level it out. I also boosted 10db from 63-80hz and cut 20-50hz -10db. It's a HT sub and it did what it was supposed to do but I don't think there is anything that could be done to make it sound like the 12W6 it replaced or the IB15s that replaced it. 

I'm not saying it's totally impossible but each speaker had it's own signature and I can't comprehend how you could make them sound identical. As of late, I've wanted to try a $200 or less set of comps and see how good they can be made to sound but that won't happen until I learn a lot more about tuning and have a processor with more tuning ability.... or maybe the MS8 is the perfect processor to make everything sound the same.


----------



## Ultimateherts

BuickGN said:


> What a revelation! :mean:
> 
> 
> I was short on time when I installed my Dyn342 set so I only got one side done the first day which gave me a ton of time to flip left and right comparing the two comp sets. While I'm sure FR varied from side to side the Dyns were in a different league in all aspects then that ID CTX-65cs. There was enough of a difference that no one in their right mind could not tell the two apart. I just can't imagine it would be possible to use EQ to make the IDs sound as good as the Dyns.


Were you inclined to believe that because they were expensive DYNS or did it actually sound better. Again my gear is all higher end too so I'm in the same boat as you are!


----------



## BuickGN

Ultimateherts said:


> Were you inclined to believe that because they were expensive DYNS or did it actually sound better. Again my gear is all higher end too so I'm in the same boat as you are!


No one can experience that large of a difference and have it be in their head. They were expected to sound better, of course, but the actual difference was bigger than I would have expected. I was a bit skeptical that it was possible to get a whole lot better than what I already had.


----------



## 14642

Speakers often sound VERY different. Amps and head units? Not so much.


----------



## ErinH

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Speakers often sound VERY different. Amps and head units? Not so much.


agreed. that's what the meat of my post was regarding.

however, it doesn't mean that people's opinions can't be swayed by what they see/know about what they're listening to.


----------



## Ultimateherts

bikinpunk said:


> agreed. that's what the meat of my post was regarding.
> 
> however, it doesn't mean that people's opinions can't be swayed by what they see/know about what they're listening to.


Exactly... To an untrained ear anything is possible like when they did (2) 6.5's and tested average people on the street and most said they thought they were 15's!!!


----------



## BuickGN

Ultimateherts said:


> Exactly... To an untrained ear anything is possible like when they did (2) 6.5's and tested average people on the street and most said they thought they were 15's!!!


There could be a million variables in a test like that. Does the person being tested even know what a sub is? Enclosure type the same for both subs? Different speakers sound very different.


----------



## Ultimateherts

BuickGN said:


> There could be a million variables in a test like that. Does the person being tested even know what a sub is? Enclosure type the same for both subs? Different speakers sound very different.


I understand that, but to many seeing is believing...


----------



## 14642

This is a relatively stupid thread. The reason for blind testing is to isolate a variable. In the case of subjective evaluation of the PERFORMANCE of loudspeakers, amps or what-have-you, the variable we want to isolate is one's perception of sound quality as a function of hearing. After that test, it's credible to say, "listeners prefer the SOUND of speaker A over speaker B. If you're testing whether people will buy the product or whether people "like" the product, then the other variables that may affect one's preference should be added to the test.

Brand is a purchase consideration for many people and I'd guess also influences the "I prefer this product" statement even for people who have no intent to purchase anything, but it's silly to say that brand alone plays a part in sound quality. If I put a JBL logo on a speaker of another brand, would it automatically sound better or worse? Of course not. Would the purchase intent of a person who either loved or hated the brand be affected by the change? Probably, so long as he didn't see me super glue the logo to the grille. 

It's equally silly to suggest that all speakers that are made in the same factory are the same or that they are the same because they use the same or similar materials. If I were going to make two pizzas with the same ingredients, would they taste the same? Only if the ingredients were used in exactly the same proportions and the process of making and cooking the pizza were exactly the same.

Different equipment MAY sound different, but only if it sounds different. We can determine this both subjectively and objectively. Thanks to lots of work by Floyd Toole, Sean Olive and others, a correlation between objective and subjective analysis has been proven. If you want to know more about this, read Sean Olive's blog.


----------



## minbari

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> This is a relatively stupid thread. The reason for blind testing is to isolate a variable. In the case of subjective evaluation of the PERFORMANCE of loudspeakers, amps or what-have-you, the variable we want to isolate is one's perception of sound quality as a function of hearing. After that test, it's credible to say, "listeners prefer the SOUND of speaker A over speaker B. If you're testing whether people will buy the product or whether people "like" the product, then the other variables that may affect one's preference should be added to the test.
> 
> Brand is a purchase consideration for many people and I'd guess also influences the "I prefer this product" statement even for people who have no intent to purchase anything, but it's silly to say that brand alone plays a part in sound quality. *If I put a JBL logo on a speaker of another brand, would it automatically sound better or worse? *Of course not. Would the purchase intent of a person who either loved or hated the brand be affected by the change? Probably, so long as he didn't see me super glue the logo to the grille.
> 
> It's equally silly to suggest that all speakers that are made in the same factory are the same or that they are the same because they use the same or similar materials. If I were going to make two pizzas with the same ingredients, would they taste the same? Only if the ingredients were used in exactly the same proportions and the process of making and cooking the pizza were exactly the same.
> 
> Different equipment MAY sound different, but only if it sounds different. We can determine this both subjectively and objectively. Thanks to lots of work by Floyd Toole, Sean Olive and others, a correlation between objective and subjective analysis has been proven. If you want to know more about this, read Sean Olive's blog.


I would argue that if you had two identicle speakers, neither of them made by JBL, but one had a JBL logo on the front and the other had radio shack. people would pick the JBL as sounding better. Perception of quality is just as important as actually quality.


----------



## Niebur3

^^That is why "blind" testing is relevant. And Andy said the exact same thing you just did, so I don't think he would argue at all....lol!


----------



## trojan fan

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> This is a relatively stupid thread.



x2....exactly....pointless and very subjective:laugh:


----------



## Woosey

Niebur3 said:


> As someone who conducted a 16 driver BLIND midrange test with several people involved and someone who is about to do a midwoofer test using 6 high-end drivers for the test, this couldn't be more from the truth. In the midrange test, the drivers were vastly different from one another, keeping all other variable to a minimum or non-existent. There were some inexpensive drivers, but non were "uber cheap" coaxials. All were 3-4" midrange. If you would like, PM me your email and I will send you a copy.
> 
> Now, FWIW, I have a demo board with 3-amps level matched based on voltage at the output and (as it is much closer than speakers) you are still able to hear a difference between the amps. The same with Head Units. Now, one can argue the difference between amps/HU in a car would be VERY hard to hear...but please don't say there isn't a difference.


I totally agree on that last statement, we also have a demo wall in our shop with the possibility to switch amps without interruptions.. And you could easy tell if the Rf or audio system was playing... Just listening to the Rf was ok, but then switching to the Audio system was like a curtain was removed in front of the speakers.

We also have no prices on our speaker-demo wall, just to let the customer make a decision on sound quality and not on price... Almost every time they choose the higher end of our speakerrange....


----------



## kevin k.

BuickGN said:


> I was short on time when I installed my Dyn342 set so I only got one side done the first day which gave me a ton of time to flip left and right comparing the two comp sets. While I'm sure FR varied from side to side the Dyns were in a different league in all aspects then that ID CTX-65cs. There was enough of a difference that no one in their right mind could not tell the two apart.


Are you certain some or perhaps even a lot of what you perceived as a difference wasn't just the variance in amplitude and frequency response between the two sides? Being able to somehow pick up on the individual frequency variations, assimilate them and account for them somehow, and then make an unbiased, quantitative evaulation would be a quite a challenge.

Don't get me wrong, as I've found variations in sound between different speakers but when I did allow myself to make such a decision it was under much more controlled circumstances with speaker levels matched, band matched, and each 1/3 octave band matched to within a couple 1/10 of a db. Admittedly, there's room even there for misinterpretation on my part. When it comes to amps and headunits, yeah, I'm with Andy. 



BuickGN said:


> I just can't imagine it would be possible to use EQ to make the IDs sound as good as the Dyns.


This statement could be interpreted as potential subjective bias.


----------



## kevin k.

I see you looking, Jim


----------



## Ultimateherts

Woosey said:


> I totally agree on that last statement, we also have a demo wall in our shop with the possibility to switch amps without interruptions.. And you could easy tell if the Rf or audio system was playing... Just listening to the Rf was ok, but then switching to the Audio system was like a curtain was removed in front of the speakers.
> 
> We also have no prices on our speaker-demo wall, just to let the customer make a decision on sound quality and not on price... Almost every time they choose the higher end of our speakerrange....


Again they are seeing each brand of speaker... If they were all no name blank drivers labeled above on an index card "A", "B", "C" etc which would they pick?


----------



## Woosey

Ultimateherts said:


> Again they are seeing each brand of speaker... If they were all no name blank drivers labeled above on an index card "A", "B", "C" etc which would they pick?


Most of them don't even know the brands we sell.... Gladen and Exact! are the only brands we sell... Everybody knows the big commercial names like RF Jbl and so on... 

So it's almost every time a blind test for our customers...


----------



## Niebur3

Ultimateherts said:


> Again they are seeing each brand of speaker... If they were all no name blank drivers labeled above on an index card "A", "B", "C" etc which would they pick?


No, you said "In a blind test...." I don't know anyone that would be completely objective looking at brands/price tag. But in a blind test, the differences are extremely easy to hear, when it comes to speakers.


----------



## spl152db

if you guys really think you can tell the difference, by all means go make some money and put up or shut up. 
Richard Clark Amplifier Challenge FAQ


----------



## Niebur3

^^Oh good lord. Speakers all sound different. Amps and Head Units sound different as well. Richard Clark's challenge has been discussed many times. His challenge simply states that all amps that measure the same, must sound the same. Not even all amps off the same assembly line sound the exact same due to various differences in gain pots, etc. So, all amps will sound different, because they will measure different. Drive the amp into even the slightest amount of clipping and see the difference grow even larger.


----------



## spl152db

so basically you're saying its different, yet you don't have $10k from him. interesting... 

also with tuning and processing all items can be FORCED to sound the same. look up bob carver amp challenge. He matched his amp output to another, because they do sound different and they really couldn't tell by the end which was which since they were sounding exactly the same. 

Im not saying that they sound the same or don't. I do believe that higher quality amps and components will have less distortion and greater tolerances that in fact create a better reproduction. Some amps have coloration. The difference does exist, but with mild processing you can come close to reproducing the same sound with different equipment.


----------



## Niebur3

spl152db said:


> so basically you're saying its different, yet you don't have $10k from him. interesting...


I am saying that his challenge says "if all amps measure the same, they will sound the same". So, if I say all amps sound different because they will all measure different, he wouldn't let me do the challenge in that fashion. He would make them measure the same and keep them within tolerances that keep those measurements the same. Also, in order to get the green, you have to be perfect 20 out of 20. So would you say a 19 out of 20 is just good guessing or maybe there is a difference? He has also never posted the scores of the testers. So yes, they will all sound different (some more than others) but I will never be cashing his check!


----------



## 14642

Man, this thread is like quicksand--or $hit and unfortunately I've stepped in it.


----------



## ErinH

spl152db said:


> also with tuning and processing all items can be FORCED to sound the same.


I disagree. There are traits that some drivers have that are audible and cannot be tuned away. Inductance based distortion, and power compression are two I believe could certainly sway a listener's opinion in a blind test. Especially if they are given the opportunity to listen at varying levels that would expose these parameters. 

And I absolutely agree that if one hears an audible difference, it can be shown via measurement. In some cases the differences are easy to spot. In other cases, it may take some more work. Of course, the test setup and method really are key. If I set up a test that never drives any speaker to a point where distortion is audible or to some level that is set as a criterion, then the odds of you hearing a difference are diminished, assuming linear distortion (frequency response) is the same. But, good luck pulling that off. No drivers - that I've seen - have a flat response curve and therefore few are really close to each other out of the box. 

A speaker/driver is absolutely the weakest link in any signal path. 
And that's why I put a ton of emphasis on driver testing/measurements and hardly any at all in amplifier/headunit/processor measurements other than power and basic functions to check for flaws. 

I believe most of the differences in electronic components people hear are rooted more in their inability to perform a proper and valid a/b test sighted. Much less 'blind'.


----------



## ErinH

bikinpunk said:


> Depends on how they really measure among other things. Have you read any of Floyd Toole's research regarding "seeing is believing"? If not, you need to. It'll pretty much shut this thread down itself.
> 
> http://www.infinitysystems.com/home/technology/whitepapers/audio_art_science.pdf
> 
> Sent from my iPhone. Pardon the grammar.


BTW, did anyone bother reading this at all before they posted? 




Sent from my iPhone. Pardon the grammar.


----------



## kevin k.

bikinpunk said:


> BTW, did anyone bother reading this at all before they posted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone. Pardon the grammar.


Yes, thank you.


----------



## spl152db

kevin k. said:


> Yes, thank you.


you read it in 4 minutes?


----------



## tyketo

Ceteris Paribus, that is all other things equal and only brand of speaker changed, I think a difference would be heard.


----------



## kevin k.

spl152db said:


> you read it in 4 minutes?


Seen it before


----------



## trojan fan

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Man, this thread is like quicksand--or $hit and unfortunately I've stepped in it.



Quick!!!!....hold your hand out, I'll throw you a rope:laugh:


----------



## trojan fan

tyketo said:


> Ceteris Paribus, that is all other things equal and only brand of speaker changed, I think a difference would be heard.


So, if speaker A and B sounded exactly the same to YOU, but speaker A cost more, would that make speaker B the better speaker or less of a speaker


----------



## BuickGN

kevin k. said:


> Are you certain some or perhaps even a lot of what you perceived as a difference wasn't just the variance in amplitude and frequency response between the two sides? Being able to somehow pick up on the individual frequency variations, assimilate them and account for them somehow, and then make an unbiased, quantitative evaulation would be a quite a challenge.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, as I've found variations in sound between different speakers but when I did allow myself to make such a decision it was under much more controlled circumstances with speaker levels matched, band matched, and each 1/3 octave band matched to within a couple 1/10 of a db. Admittedly, there's room even there for misinterpretation on my part. When it comes to amps and headunits, yeah, I'm with Andy.
> 
> 
> This statement could be interpreted as potential subjective bias.


Nope, the Dyns sounded better in every possible way.

I saw some $6 midbass drivers at Autozone. You should buy those and EQ them to sound just like the high end speakers.


----------



## trojan fan

BuickGN said:


> I saw some $6 midbass drivers at Autozone. You should buy those and EQ them to sound just like the high end speakers.



CLASSIC....:laugh:.......:beerchug:


Thanks I needed that


----------



## thehatedguy

When did this turn into an amp thread?

If you read the Carver challenge you mentioned, you would understand the vast lengths he went through to make the same measure the same.
It was far from "mild processing." Hell if it were that simple, I would be emulating a Western Electric 300b through a DSP...but it's not.

How can you do that with a speaker?




spl152db said:


> so basically you're saying its different, yet you don't have $10k from him. interesting...
> 
> also with tuning and processing all items can be FORCED to sound the same. look up bob carver amp challenge. He matched his amp output to another, because they do sound different and they really couldn't tell by the end which was which since they were sounding exactly the same.
> 
> Im not saying that they sound the same or don't. I do believe that higher quality amps and components will have less distortion and greater tolerances that in fact create a better reproduction. Some amps have coloration. The difference does exist, but with mild processing you can come close to reproducing the same sound with different equipment.


----------



## t3sn4f2

bikinpunk said:


> Depends on how they really measure among other things. Have you read any of Floyd Toole's research regarding "seeing is believing"? If not, you need to. It'll pretty much shut this thread down itself.
> 
> http://www.infinitysystems.com/home/technology/whitepapers/audio_art_science.pdf
> 
> Sent from my iPhone. Pardon the grammar.


Thanks, saved that one into my little stash of goodies.


----------



## kevin k.

BuickGN said:


> Nope, the Dyns sounded better in every possible way.


So, then you actually are saying that you can account for inherent differences in frequency response between brands, left versus right install variations in amplitude / frequency response, as well as sensitivity differences between brands and their individual drivers to name but a few variables and then, while taking all of the above into account at the same time, you somehow solely through your own sheer brain power process that data utilizing your own apparently faultless, quantitatively-based and non-biased comparative methodology thus extracting the so-called differences / improvements while discounting any potential brand bias at the same time?

Yeah, no, I don't believe that you arrived at a well-founded and unbiased test result and neither would anyone else that values scientifically-sound (no pun intended) testing methodologies. 



BuickGN said:


> I saw some $6 midbass drivers at Autozone. You should buy those and EQ them to sound just like the high end speakers.


Perhaps you should re-read my post as you seem to have entirely missed the point, however you have managed to remind me of something else... individuals around here who place themselves above any sort of reasoned scrutiny or challenge and instill within themselves and their fragile egos superhuman (read 'imagined') abilities to somehow do the impossible and when questioned on said abilities resort to posts like the above. I challenged your opinion in a gentle, reasonable and respectful fashion and the best you can do is come back with the above sort of ill-reasoned and infantile garbage. I am always interested in learning and sharing but I have better use for my time than to deal with personalities that are seemingly uninterested or incapable of respectful and mature conversation. Goodbye and good luck to you.


----------



## spl152db

thehatedguy said:


> When did this turn into an amp thread?


When the first post didn't say speakers. 


thehatedguy said:


> If you read the Carver challenge you mentioned, you would understand the vast lengths he went through to make the same measure the same.
> It was far from "mild processing." Hell if it were that simple, I would be emulating a Western Electric 300b through a DSP...but it's not.
> 
> How can you do that with a speaker?


I didn't imply you could with a speaker. The first post didn't specify. It's a topic, I'm stirring the pot. Sorry I didn't stir up the right pot for you.


----------



## BuickGN

kevin k. said:


> So, then you actually are saying that you can account for inherent differences in frequency response between brands, left versus right install variations in amplitude / frequency response, as well as sensitivity differences between brands and their individual drivers to name but a few variables and then, while taking all of the above into account at the same time, you somehow solely through your own sheer brain power process that data utilizing your own apparently faultless, quantitatively-based and non-biased comparative methodology thus extracting the so-called differences / improvements while discounting any potential brand bias at the same time?
> 
> Yeah, no, I don't believe that you arrived at a well-founded and unbiased test result and neither would anyone else that values scientifically-sound (no pun intended) testing methodologies.
> 
> 
> Perhaps you should re-read my post as you seem to have entirely missed the point, however you have managed to remind me of something else... individuals around here who place themselves above any sort of reasoned scrutiny or challenge and instill within themselves and their fragile egos superhuman (read 'imagined') abilities to somehow do the impossible and when questioned on said abilities resort to posts like the above. I challenged your opinion in a gentle, reasonable and respectful fashion and the best you can do is come back with the above sort of ill-reasoned and infantile garbage. I am always interested in learning and sharing but I have better use for my time than to deal with personalities that are seemingly uninterested or incapable of respectful and mature conversation. Goodbye and good luck to you.


Okaaay douchebag. Get that stick out of your ass.


----------



## kevin k.

BuickGN said:


> Okaaay douchebag. Get that stick out of your ass.


You're predictable and waaaay too easy. It's funny, actually, as I almost ended my last post to you with "And now you should probably resort to calling me names." :laugh:

Did your precious ego fall down and go 'boom!'? Your brilliant riposte only serves to further my point regarding your inability to engage in mature debate as well as serving to continue diminishing you. So, good for you, you silver-tongued wordsmith, as you did no better than I had you figured for. It never ceases to amaze me when primitive know-it-alls like yourself go to pieces in a hot second whenever they're speciously faulty dogma is questioned. But, then again, it shouldn't really as you've readily demonstrated that you're nothing more than an insecure non-entity with a million dollar ego that's futilely supported by nickel and dime self esteem.

And since you've defaulted to the base, childish behavior of namecalling (truly the last resort of the mentally and emotionally challenged) and made mention of objects in asses, here's one for you, you catamite. Yeah, look it up. By the way, it's Mr. Douchebag to you.


----------



## spl152db

kevin k. said:


> You're predictable and waaaay too easy. It's funny, actually, as I almost ended my last post to you with "And now you should probably resort to calling me names." :laugh:
> 
> Did your precious ego fall down and go 'boom!'? Your brilliant riposte only serves to further my point regarding your inability to engage in mature debate as well as serving to continue diminishing you. So, good for you, you silver-tongued wordsmith, as you did no better than I had you figured for. It never ceases to amaze me when primitive know-it-alls like yourself go to pieces in a hot second whenever they're speciously faulty dogma is questioned. But, then again, it shouldn't really as you've readily demonstrated that you're nothing more than an insecure non-entity with a million dollar ego that's futilely supported by nickel and dime self esteem.
> 
> And since you've defaulted to the base, childish behavior of namecalling (truly the last resort of the mentally and emotionally challenged) and made mention of objects in asses, here's one for you, you catamite. Yeah, look it up. By the way, it's Mr. Douchebag to you.



you've contributed nothing to this conversation for the past 3 posts. why not leave?


----------



## BuickGN

kevin k. said:


> You're predictable and waaaay too easy. It's funny, actually, as I almost ended my last post to you with "And now you should probably resort to calling me names." :laugh:
> 
> Did your precious ego fall down and go 'boom!'? Your brilliant riposte only serves to further my point regarding your inability to engage in mature debate as well as serving to continue diminishing you. So, good for you, you silver-tongued wordsmith, as you did no better than I had you figured for. It never ceases to amaze me when primitive know-it-alls like yourself go to pieces in a hot second whenever they're speciously faulty dogma is questioned. But, then again, it shouldn't really as you've readily demonstrated that you're nothing more than an insecure non-entity with a million dollar ego that's futilely supported by nickel and dime self esteem.
> 
> And since you've defaulted to the base, childish behavior of namecalling (truly the last resort of the mentally and emotionally challenged) and made mention of objects in asses, here's one for you, you catamite. Yeah, look it up. By the way, it's Mr. Douchebag to you.


Again, douchebag, you're picking an e-fight under false pretenses. I know what you're doing, you know what you're doing, everyone else knows what you're doing. So instead of cluttering up this thread, we have a SoCal meet in a couple weeks and I'll be happy to discuss it with you then....douchebag.


----------



## Woosey

come on guys....


----------



## MarkZ

I'm not familiar with the $6 speakers you're referring to, BuickGN, but I'm sure you're well aware that there are plenty of folks in this forum using $6 speakers (like the Dayton ND20) or even OEM speakers (e.g. me, Andy, a few others) with great results.

I know this sounds like the old "budget speakers ruuuuuule" mantra -- and I guess it is to some extent -- but I also don't think it's coincidental that a lot of the people doing this sort of thing are relying pretty heavily on various forms of processing and measurement.

So, even if you're right that you can't completely mimic the response properties of a speaker with processing, I think you have to admit that a lot of people can probably come pretty close, assuming you're not starting out with garbage and that you're not exceeding the output capabilities of the driver.


----------



## BuickGN

MarkZ said:


> I'm not familiar with the $6 speakers you're referring to, BuickGN, but I'm sure you're well aware that there are plenty of folks in this forum using $6 speakers (like the Dayton ND20) or even OEM speakers (e.g. me, Andy, a few others) with great results.
> 
> I know this sounds like the old "budget speakers ruuuuuule" mantra -- and I guess it is to some extent -- but I also don't think it's coincidental that a lot of the people doing this sort of thing are relying pretty heavily on various forms of processing and measurement.
> 
> So, even if you're right that you can't completely mimic the response properties of a speaker with processing, I think you have to admit that a lot of people can probably come pretty close, assuming you're not starting out with garbage and that you're not exceeding the output capabilities of the driver.


I agree with you. I'm sure some of those cheap setups with great tuning sound better than mine with an MS8 sucking the life out of $3,500 worth of speakers. If anything, I've learned the value of tuning the hard way.

Judging from some of the Klippel results, it looks like many of the more expensive speakers have more xmax and xmech and a flatter FR to begin with. Less power compression and less HD and IMD. Not always the case but most of the time. 

I see the SQ gap between ultra cheap and expensive widening as power levels rise. There are some that are so terrible I can't imagine any amount of EQ making up for it. My Massive SK-6 that I used for a center channel as an example. It sounded awful and I believe Erin said it tested the worst he has ever seen on the Klippel. It was bad enough that I didn't ask for it back when he was done even though the set was $180 if that tells you anything. What can you do with less than 1mm xmax and super high inductance?

When I went from my CTX-65 set with 2 years of listening time to the Dyn 342 set, immediately there was a huge difference. The IDs flat out were not capable of the midbass output of the Dyns. The Dyn tweeters stay detailed but neutral at high volume where the IDs would get harsh. I have run the Dyns down to 2khz so it's not just that they are normally crossed over higher. Midrange resolution is worlds apart. Whether you can get that with tuning, I don't know. But I do know with both sets on passives and no EQ they should not be mentioned in the same sentence the Dyns are so superior. 

I definitely wouldn't mind trying a processor first on a stock system before adding speakers. I enjoy that sort of thing, always have. I was the annoying kid back in the '90s that had an 11.90 car with $500 in mods not counting tires while others had 10x the money to go that fast. I enjoy doing things that way but the Dyns have a certain vocal quality that I haven't heard from any other brand. And I have to bring up Jerrry's midrange shootout where everyone unanimously chose the same midrange for first place in a blind shootout. So of course there are differences in the way speakers sound and it's very unlikely you can eq them all to sound exactly the same.


----------



## Spyke

Brands are brands and price is price. I can see the argument on both sides. And there is a difference between a $5 speaker and a $500 speaker, Just not a $495 difference. The problem is that some people use price as a reference to how good their system sounds. I saw a $4000 set of 5.25" component speakers once and just though "what moron is going to buy those" You know what, I'll bet they found buyers for them. And if they were happy with the purchase and it sounded good...then fine. If they thought they were just gonna pop them and have the best system ever, then I feel sorry for them. (not really :laugh Tuning is *everything*. I have $20 in my front stage (2 midbasses and 2 tweeters) and it is absolutely sublime. I can hear everything and feel everything. The music plays from somewhere on the hood and draws me in. It didn't happen overnight but it is totally worth it when I tell people how much I paid. I'm not saying I have the best system ever but I'm sure it's better than some systems costing 30x's the price. Would I be able to make it better with better speakers...maybe...probably. Would it be worth it? Not to me.


----------



## thehatedguy

Pot, kettle...black.



spl152db said:


> you've contributed nothing to this conversation for the past 3 posts. why not leave?


----------



## Niebur3

Can someone tell me why it is acceptable for people who buy cheap drivers to "make fun" of those that want to buy expensive drivers? And before you say "it's because they think it is all you need to do to make a system sound good"....I personally have seen people attack with nothing of the sort stated, other than someone is looking for expensive brand a or brand b. 

This is the same logic to me as fat people being able to make fun of thin people, but if thin people retaliate, then the fat people take offense. There are many more examples of this in our society and I just get a little annoyed sometimes.


----------



## chad

Niebur3 said:


> Can someone tell me why it is acceptable for people who buy cheap drivers to "make fun" of those that want to buy expensive drivers?


You really want an answer for that?

There's 2 camps, those that make fun of price blindly, and others (like me) that know enough to extrapolate value. 

As you can probably understand, many, many, many overpriced drivers just don't have the value. And many, many, many people that purchase them use the "just because" explanations when they lack even elementary acoustics skills. The skills needed to make the value shine. and those skills, especially with Dynaudio, do not involve tiny ass kickpanels. In other words I believe, well I KNOW, there is a little self-soothing that goes on as the bigger checks get written.


----------



## chad

Here's an example:




























Would you pay 400 bucks for that? (well one that's not ****ed up)

Because that's what they cost.


----------



## minbari

Do you always keep $400 tweeters at the gym? 

Sent from my Motorola Electrify using Tapatalk 2


----------



## chad

It's a 50 dollar tweeter that costs 400 

And that section of gym lockers is full of violas


----------



## TrickyRicky

chad said:


> It's a 50 dollar tweeter that costs 400
> 
> And that section of gym lockers is full of violas


LOL, where can I get a pair of those 50 dollar tweeters? And could I get them for 20bucks for a pair????? lol.


----------



## chad

Madisound. They don't have the Neo version anymore. Vifa stopped making them (the large format neo mag) because neo is ungodly expensive now and the ferrite version sounds the same since the gap geometry remained unchanged.


----------



## chad

Forgot to add a smiley and I'm a tapatalk newb and don't know how to edit.

Just figured it out.


----------



## styxnpicks

ears are easily fooled... thats why we have tools to measure things with other than our ears


----------



## Niebur3

chad said:


> You really want an answer for that?
> 
> There's 2 camps, those that make fun of price blindly, and others (like me) that know enough to extrapolate value.
> 
> As you can probably understand, many, many, many overpriced drivers just don't have the value. And many, many, many people that purchase them use the "just because" explanations when they lack even elementary acoustics skills. The skills needed to make the value shine. and those skills, especially with Dynaudio, do not involve tiny ass kickpanels. In other words I believe, well I KNOW, there is a little self-soothing that goes on as the bigger checks get written.


For 1, my Dynaudio 430's actually prefer a very tiny ass enclosure in the kick panels...lol. I do know what you mean. I just get tire of the first camp you described. And I am a full believer that only a proper install and tuning will yield anything of worth from any driver, no matter the price. There is some self-soothing and there is some looking for the best possible and do everything right...hell, they can be the same person. People do buy a BMW M3 when a Honda Civic gets you from point a to point b just the same.



styxnpicks said:


> ears are easily fooled... thats why we have tools to measure things with other than our ears


Interesting you brought that up. See this is where I have to point out that this thread is asking "in a BLIND test no one could really tell the difference" which is complete poo. If the test is done properly, it hold a lot of merit, especially when the klippel testing of many of the drivers show similar results.


----------



## chad

Niebur3 said:


> For 1, my Dynaudio 430's actually prefer a very tiny ass enclosure in the kick panels...lol.


It's a tiny ass midrange (tweeter)  If it were say a 6.5-8" my response would be as follows, and the only reason I'm including it it to make people squirm.

Well, likely, NO _THEY_ don't. YOU prefer them in a tiny ass (sealed) enclosure because you have oodles of boundary loading and a natural waveguide. Because of this the natural heavy damping of the tiny ass enclosure keeps the low end in check so you can dump a ****load of power at them and they do.... nothing. As opposed to dumping a sane amount of power into them, EQing the boundary effects out (if needed) and reducing power compression  Same camp goes for the tiny ass subwoofer enclosure camp that has yet to figure you that an EQ has a cut section too.



Niebur3 said:


> People do buy a BMW M3 when a Honda Civic gets you from point a to point b just the same.


As much as I would love a BMW it's simply wasteful, I have a Civic. Here's why. 

No matter what car I drive I'm going to put a metric ****load of miles on it as a daily driver making a mind numbing trip down the same road and back every single day. A BMW, etc will not make the road look different, it won't make my coffee taste different, and it won't make the traffic frustration any easier. But what it will do is lay more green on that road surface for every mile I drive it. Instead I purchased a less expensive reliable car that I could pay off early and put the money into my property (which I'm well over halfway through the mortgage on since 2005) that will gain equity. Cars will not gain equity, ever.

THEN from doing this I can then purchase a nice ass car, put it in the other garage that I built from saving money, and drive that cocksucker when I can actually enjoy it and not rack up the miles and not have to park it next to careless morons. 

So, if you are in the camp that has a nice ass car because you enjoy the weekend drives, the handling, and performance, I have no issues with that whatsoever. But if you drive one because it increases your 4 popped collar douchebag status while you are slamming down 60K+ miles a year, then well sir, you have more money than sense.


----------



## minbari

chad said:


> It's a 50 dollar tweeter that costs 400
> 
> And that section of gym lockers is full of violas


bummer! no where to put your tweeter!


----------



## Ultimateherts

styxnpicks said:


> ears are easily fooled... thats why we have tools to measure things with other than our ears


But even when measured it might not sound as good... A system that is tuned perfectly flat across the board might well sound just that flat


----------



## chad

Ultimateherts said:


> A system that is tuned perfectly flat across the board might well sound just that flat


And generally sound like like ass to most.


----------



## Spyke

chad said:


> THEN from doing this I can then purchase a nice ass car, put it in the other garage that I built from saving money, and drive that cocksucker when I can actually enjoy it and not rack up the miles and not have to park it next to careless morons.
> 
> So, if you are in the camp that has a nice ass car because you enjoy the weekend drives, the handling, and performance, I have no issues with that whatsoever. But if you drive one because it increases your 4 popped collar douchebag status while you are slamming down 60K+ miles a year, then well sir, you have more money than sense.


Very well put sir. I'll admit to diving an M3. I put +or- 1200mi a year on mine. All spirited driving down back country roads. Garage kept and babied. Never in parking lots if I can help it. Paid for. Not trying to impress anyone. It's the most fun car I have *ever* owned and I don't give a crap what anyone thinks of me because of it.


----------



## chad

Spyke said:


> Very well put sir. I'll admit to diving an M3. I put +or- 1200mi a year on mine. All spirited driving down back country roads. Garage kept and babied. Never in parking lots if I can help it. Paid for. Not trying to impress anyone. It's the most fun car I have *ever* owned and I don't give a crap what anyone thinks of me because of it.


And *that *instills jealousy in me 

Kudos and congrats.


----------



## minbari

it makes me more jealous for someone that is in the "more money than sence" catagory. own a Porche 911 GT2 and drive the crap out of it every day, because once it wears out they will just buy a new one. lol


----------



## Spyke

minbari said:


> it makes me more jealous for someone that is in the "more money than sence" catagory. own a Porche 911 GT2 and drive the crap out of it every day, because once it wears out they will just buy a new one. lol


Tell me about it. I saw some stupid ***** in a gt2 or 3(I don't know porches too well) In rush hour traffic. It was all dinged up and she looked the the type of person who had no ****ing clue. If we had been going slower I might have gotten out to punch her.


----------



## BuickGN

I bought the TL as my commuter car for my 210 mile round trip. I got tired of spending 4 hours a day in a POS that was loud, uncomfortable, and unreliable. Having a nice car for that drive made the drive more bearable. I didn't get to work or home every day feeling beat up with a sore back and ringing ears. It was brand new, I blew through the warranty in 2.5 years but that was another nice thing, if something happened I had a loaner to drive. The car gets great freeway mpg and has been the cheapest car I've ever owned to maintain. So far it's had a headlight burn out in 108,000 miles. Can't complain about that. 

Sometimes I'll drive the GN to work for a week or two or take it on a trip out of town because it's fun. If something breaks or wears out on either car I'll fix it. Toys are made to play with and I'm not about to let it sit in the garage as my father does with his and admire it when I could be out having fun. 

I'm in the process of purchasing a Mercedes CL65AMG. With the turbo V12 going away I want to get one before the prices shoot up. I'll probably drive it everywhere. No sense in not enjoying it. More money than sense, nope. I value having fun more than car depreciation and it's a lot more fun out on the street than in a garage.

Who is anyone here to say someone has more money than sense because in their opinion they drive a certain car too much? Or commuting in a certain car is wasteful? Why does it bother some people so badly what others do with their posessions? There's a feeling of snobbery but it's not from the people with the expensive things, it's from the people with the cheap stuff. I've never felt the need to go around putting down others' $20 systems, it has never crossed my mind and I don't understand the constant need people have to constantly talk down about expensive products. Show me a Dynaudio product that's rebadged from a lower line that you can buy for 1/4 the price. Calling the 430 a tweeter was cute but last I checked, not many tweeters play 200hz very well. These kinds of comments seem to be reserved for expensive things. You never hear it about the low end junk that's seen around here.

What it comes down to is I've bought the cars I want, I drive them how I want to drive them, I absolutely love the way the system sounds and I have no debt and I know I'm not alone so I'm still scratching my head as to why anyone on a car audio board would care to comment on such things.


----------



## chad

LOL not as cute as you claiming a cone that size can play 200 Hz very well 

That's akin for a foghorn leghorn quote 

Unless of course we have different ideas of very well


----------



## thehatedguy

I never understand how people put 1200 miles on a car a year...hell it's hard for me not to put at least 12000 miles on a car a year.


----------



## chad

thehatedguy said:


> I never understand how people put 1200 miles on a car a year...hell it's hard for me not to put at least 12000 miles on a car a year.


I put less than 1200 a year on my truck... If it's not a DD then it's not too tough to keep it low.


----------



## Spyke

thehatedguy said:


> I never understand how people put 1200 miles on a car a year...hell it's hard for me not to put at least 12000 miles on a car a year.


It's a third car. Second is my truck. First is the work truck.


----------



## Spyke

BuickGN said:


> I bought the TL as my commuter car for my 210 mile round trip. I got tired of spending 4 hours a day in a POS that was loud, uncomfortable, and unreliable. Having a nice car for that drive made the drive more bearable. I didn't get to work or home every day feeling beat up with a sore back and ringing ears. It was brand new, I blew through the warranty in 2.5 years but that was another nice thing, if something happened I had a loaner to drive. The car gets great freeway mpg and has been the cheapest car I've ever owned to maintain. So far it's had a headlight burn out in 108,000 miles. Can't complain about that.
> 
> Sometimes I'll drive the GN to work for a week or two or take it on a trip out of town because it's fun. If something breaks or wears out on either car I'll fix it. Toys are made to play with and I'm not about to let it sit in the garage as my father does with his and admire it when I could be out having fun.
> 
> I'm in the process of purchasing a Mercedes CL65AMG. With the turbo V12 going away I want to get one before the prices shoot up. I'll probably drive it everywhere. No sense in not enjoying it. More money than sense, nope. I value having fun more than car depreciation and it's a lot more fun out on the street than in a garage.
> 
> Who is anyone here to say someone has more money than sense because in their opinion they drive a certain car too much? Or commuting in a certain car is wasteful? Why does it bother some people so badly what others do with their posessions? There's a feeling of snobbery but it's not from the people with the expensive things, it's from the people with the cheap stuff. I've never felt the need to go around putting down others' $20 systems, it has never crossed my mind and I don't understand the constant need people have to constantly talk down about expensive products. Show me a Dynaudio product that's rebadged from a lower line that you can buy for 1/4 the price. Calling the 430 a tweeter was cute but last I checked, not many tweeters play 200hz very well. These kinds of comments seem to be reserved for expensive things. You never hear it about the low end junk that's seen around here.
> 
> What it comes down to is I've bought the cars I want, I drive them how I want to drive them, I absolutely love the way the system sounds and I have no debt and I know I'm not alone so I'm still scratching my head as to why anyone on a car audio board would care to comment on such things.


I get your point. If it's someone elses let them do what they want to do with it. I just have trouble seeing someone with something really nice, totally abuse it and not even know anything about it. Just got it because of the label kind of thing. Kind of a waste in my mind. I don't get judgmental of people just because they can buy a $100,000 car. I like seeing those cars driving around. I don't see a ferrari and immediately say "what a douchebag". I think nice car man. If I see a ferrari in the walmart parking lot double parked I think what a douchebag.


----------



## MarkZ

I don't know enough about cars... But isn't a Ferrari a high performance car? I mean, even if it's not a good daily driver, it's supposed to be very fast, or very sleek, or something... and the differences between it and a Honda Civic should be obvious. Correct me if I'm wrong about that. If I'm not wrong, then that really makes it a bad analogy.

Why? Because that's not usually true for the design of speakers, amplifiers, and such. The people buying the boutique audio equipment are different than the Ferrari buyer because _the boutique audio equipment is usually not appreciably better than standard models_ (even if it takes a little digging to find those standard models).

I suspect the reason for this is because the barrier to entry into the car audio market is a hell of a lot lower than the automobile market. Some dude in his basement (like npdang ) can enter the car audio market with a product, but people don't enter the automobile market the same way.

This isn't necessarily a knock on Dynaudio. But it's a commentary that there are excellent no-compromise speakers and amplifiers for very reasonable prices, and so when people spend 3x, 4x, or 5x for equipment that is nominally (but inaudibly) "better" -- or sometimes even worse, it's a far different situation than someone paying extra money for improved automobile performance. Even if that performance improvement is small in comparison to the money it took to achieve it, at least it's real.


----------



## Spyke

What's car audio? We're talking about cars here. Move to a different thread please.


----------



## Spyke

I wasn't try to make an analogy btw.


----------



## Niebur3

chad said:


> LOL not as cute as you claiming a cone that size can play 200 Hz very well


As is that a function of the size of the speaker or the fact that it is a Dynaudio? If it is cone size, that is my point. Bash the 430 (because it is expensive) because it can't play 200hz well, according to you, but don't bash every other less expensive driver of the same size that has the same problem.


----------



## chad

Niebur3 said:


> As is that a function of the size of the speaker


Absolutely



Niebur3 said:


> or the fact that it is a Dynaudio?


Nope, did you see "cone that size?"



Niebur3 said:


> If it is cone size, that is my point.


On the same page, totally.



Niebur3 said:


> Bash the 430 (because it is expensive) because it can't play 200hz well, according to you, but don't bash every other less expensive driver of the same size that has the same problem.


If you come up to me and tell me that any 3.5" cone is gonna knock my socks off at high levels at 200 cycles I'm gonna have to ask you to prove it. Been in this game too long to tell you that dynaudio, Jensen, Kraco, fryanear polk, you name it, any brand any money in a sealed or vented enclosure, it's not gonna happen. Possibly at less than knock your socks off level in a properly designed horn.


----------



## BuickGN

Niebur3 said:


> As is that a function of the size of the speaker or the fact that it is a Dynaudio? If it is cone size, that is my point. Bash the 430 (because it is expensive) because it can't play 200hz well, according to you, but don't bash every other less expensive driver of the same size that has the same problem.


To add to that I have mine playing from 200-4000 right now and they sound great. I know Michael was looking for a small mid that would play that low and actually sound good so I'll probably leave it this way until the meet. Mine are in much larger enclosures than Dyn calls for and theres a fair amount of excursion but they have over 10mm one way excursion which isn't bad.


----------



## Spyke

minbari said:


> bummer! no where to put your tweeter!


Or his Vifa


----------



## chad

touche'

Well played sir.


----------



## ErinH

BuickGN said:


> To add to that I have mine playing from 200-4000 right now and they sound great. I know Michael was looking for a small mid that would play that low and actually sound good so I'll probably leave it this way until the meet. Mine are in much larger enclosures than Dyn calls for and theres a fair amount of excursion but they have over 10mm one way excursion which isn't bad.


Mechanical Xmax according to the brochure might be over 10mm one way, but klippel is only 3.5mm. Actually, Dyn rates their "linear Xmax" at 4.9mm peak to peak which comes out to less than 2.5mm one way. 
http://www.dynaudio.com/int/pdf/DYN_Automotive_Brochure_INT.pdf






Sent from my iPhone. Pardon the grammar.


----------



## thehatedguy

Going to say 10mm one way is a bit...uh, well, that's a lot. Probably too big of a number to be true, which it is.


----------



## BuickGN

Thats why I didn't say xmax. I thought the discussion was leaning toward max displacement since the small cone area and ability to play low was brought into question. Somewhere along the way the censor at work decided it did not like this thread and elaborating is painful using this pos droid.

Going back a bit, why is it that the owner of the speakers opinion is meaningless but somehow people who have never heard the speaker "know" how it sounds.

My original point is that the 430 handles 200hz just fine in a large enclosure while sounding good, no bottoming or nasty sounds while keeping up with the rest of the system just fine. I will be at the meet next weekend so people are welcome to hear it. It sounds like your typical MS8 car, worse than it did with an hour of tuning on the BitOne bit you can still get an idea of its ability to play relatively low.


----------



## BuickGN

As for klippel results, have we ever seen how quickly distortion rises past xmax?


----------



## ErinH

BuickGN said:


> As for klippel results, have we ever seen how quickly distortion rises past xmax?


Since you said you were talking Xmax mechanical earlier, which Xmax do you mean here? 


Sent from my iPhone. Pardon the grammar.


----------



## Ultimateherts

And just like in life the most attractive women get more attention. Dyn looks a lot more attractive therefore it must sound better!!! Also if celebrities only use brand "Z" and it costs 5x the price of brand "Y" it must sound better (Critical Mass)!!!


----------



## BuickGN

bikinpunk said:


> Since you said you were talking Xmax mechanical earlier, which Xmax do you mean here?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone. Pardon the grammar.


Linear. How much worse does it get from one way linear xmax to xmech? I know its speaker dependent, but was there ever a trend, did some speakers just give up quickly while others behaved well close to their mechanical limits?


----------



## Niebur3

Ultimateherts said:


> And just like in life the most attractive women get more attention. Dyn looks a lot more attractive therefore it must sound better!!! Also if celebrities only use brand "Z" and it costs 5x the price of brand "Y" it must sound better (Critical Mass)!!!


Yeah, that's it. That's why the Dynaudio 430 won a *BLIND* midrange test. Because it looked so good ! Is that what made the Scan's klippel so well, the looks?

If that is the case, then the Audison Thesis may be the best sounding speakers ever made 

Man, there is so much BS going around in this thread!


----------



## BuickGN

Ultimateherts said:


> And just like in life the most attractive women get more attention. Dyn looks a lot more attractive therefore it must sound better!!! Also if celebrities only use brand "Z" and it costs 5x the price of brand "Y" it must sound better (Critical Mass)!!!


Really, you're comparing Dynaudio to critical mass?


----------



## danno14

thehatedguy said:


> I never understand how people put 1200 miles on a car a year...hell it's hard for me not to put at least 12000 miles on a car a year.


Easy.... have more than one car


----------



## thehatedguy

Good question, I guess if someone looked at enough data some correlations could be made...maybe not. I dunno I haven't done so. It would take a lot of data from a lot of speakers...maybe could email Klippel to see if he has any insights?



BuickGN said:


> Linear. How much worse does it get from one way linear xmax to xmech? I know its speaker dependent, but was there ever a trend, did some speakers just give up quickly while others behaved well close to their mechanical limits?


----------



## ErinH

Well, klippel parameters are set at either 10% or 20% distortion with corresponding Bl/Cms values (82/75%, or 70/50%, respectively) used to find on the curve so you know the linear Xmax. You guys can get the 20% distortion values with some simple math for all the testing I've done and compare it to the 10% values given in the results. Then you have an idea of how much room is between the two parameters. You can also eyeball it on the curves. 

20% distortion is -14dB. That's very audible, based on my own testing and the results from klippel's auralization testing. 
I know it's not xmech (though, it could be depending on the driver) but I think it's more pertinent to use that parameter over mechanical excursion.

Sent from my iPhone. Pardon the grammar.


----------



## The Baron Groog

In a blind test you should be able to tell there is a difference, alotting it to one brand or another would be hard to do in our realm, where installation makes such a huge difference. Even testing one, say 4", driver against another you have to consider their different design goals, enclosure requirments and also consider that the 4" in question will have probably been designed to play with a MB below and a tweeter above it-most 4" on their own will sound ass-as would any other driver designed to be a component in a chain.

In home audio, where speaker *systems* are blind tested the outward goal of all of the speaker systems should be more/less the same-to reproduce the full musical spectrum with accuracy, so they can be evaluated more on their timbre etc and there is a much better chance of someone saying "that's a B+W and that's a KEF". 

Sighted tests will automatically scew perceptions whether we admit it or not. However, I don't doubt Buick's Dyns sound a lot better than the IDs or Massive (?) drivers he had before, to say he couldn't objectively compare them to another comp set because they cost X more is a discredit to him and pretty much everyone on this forum-96jimmyslt excluded. I'm not saying that there was no psychoacoustic influence in his comparison, but those are in the minutities of diference that the brain would "look at" in the event that his new Dyns were only a whisker different to the drivers he was replacing. I'm also sure you could "replicate" the sound of the Dyns with cheaper drivers and processing, you may not get it 100% but close enough it would pass for most listeners-however for the time and effort involved you'd be better off stumping up the money for the Dyns in the 1st place.

If we move away from speakers and, to the real psychoacoustic gold of the audio world, cables then even the manufactures cannot tell you their own cables in a blind test-one of my customers is a home audio rep and performed a blind test with 5 of his signal cable suppliers, not one could identify their cable in his test. They could all note differences between the cables, but not one ever *guessed* which was theirs.

Outside of the audio world the brain still plays tricks, I watched a documentary where wine buffs were asked to note the bouquet of a selection of red wines. All did very well, all notes on taste and smell were very close in terms of "rich berry, summer fruits, blah, blah" etc-until it was revealed that one of the wines they were tasting was actually a white and had just been dyed red with food colouring-all were gob smacked as the white would never have received the description they all went for when they thought it was a red.

To this end I take all subjective reviews with a pinch of salt, a movie I've been told is great will likely disapoint whereas one I've been told sucked may please more. Half a dozen friends have all sung praises about a local restaurant-I've been 3 times and was always disapointed-hell, it's an Italian and I didn't even finish the pizza-that's like Charlie Sheen not finishing a line! Everything is relative, if that's the best Italian they've had then the rest of the Italians they've eaten in have been ****, or they just don't know what GOOD food is-to that end I don't listen to them any more. In car audio I would respect the opinion of friends I have in the real world and some of you virtual friends too-again 96jimmyslt excluded!


----------



## MarkZ

As I said in another thread about mp3 vs. flac, simply stating on a forum that there's a difference between setups is worthless. Not only does it fail to provide any useful and reproducible information, but it also completely neglects the sources of differences, which could be very easily corrected in real world use. Identifying the _source of differences_, even if it's just conjecture, has value to the community. Unfortunately, a lot of commentary in this thread and others fails to do this.


----------



## Ultimateherts

MarkZ said:


> As I said in another thread about mp3 vs. flac, simply stating on a forum that there's a difference between setups is worthless. Not only does it fail to provide any useful and reproducible information, but it also completely neglects the sources of differences, which could be very easily corrected in real world use. Identifying the _source of differences_, even if it's just conjecture, has value to the community. Unfortunately, a lot of commentary in this thread and others fails to do this.


Not only that you would have to encode both MP3 and FLAC to the same levels.


----------



## Richv72

bikinpunk said:


> At the end of the day, emotion is tied to music. I'm fine with a purchase decision or choice rationale based on emotion. However, few will acknowledge the impact of emotion and psychoacoustics and instead default to making generic statements and conclusions to only fan the flames of those who are uniformed and gullible.
> 
> ^copied myself from another thread.
> 
> 
> The issue, IMO, is people are quick to say something actually sounded 'better' than something else. They use subjective words like "warm, dry, neutral, loud, bright, crisp, transient", etc. It's great you're happy with a purchase. The problem is that others read that and assume you really did hear a change and that in no way was your opinion at all rooted in psychoacoustics (knowing what you're hearing and/or your emotion of the purchase leading to your subjective thoughts on the product). So, then we get threads like "Class D amps are dry"... well, does the user even understand why that is? Is there a reason for it, or did they expect to hear something and therefore used the most penned term they could think of? Did you set the gains the exact same for the amp? Did you measure the speaker system's response (both left and right, individually) to understand what may have changed? These are ways you can identify if what you're hearing is real.
> Then, how about the use of those terms being interchanged easily. So, when someone says "dry", the other person relates it to what they know as "warm" and the cycle gets even crazier.
> 
> Take, for example, the car you've heard so much about. I've had instances where I expected so much, I was let down. Even though it sounded good... it just didn't blow me away. On the flip side, I've heard cars that I didn't expect to sound good blow me away... were they really that bad/good or was it my preconceived notion that influenced my opinion? Probably the latter. We do this with movies... my buddy says The Avengers is awesome... it better freaking be all that and a bag of chips because the bar has been set by his subjective opinion.
> Or another very common example is the one where people want to hide speakers so others' opinion of the system isn't influenced by them seeing either a) the location of the speaker(s) and/or b) the type of speaker(s) used. For example, people often used to say that speakers in the pillars sounded forward... so folks would hide them with cloth or something else. Some have gone so far as to make pseudo installs so that judges in competition would think the speakers were somewhere they were not, in the hopes that the common idea that (for example) speakers in the kicks sound better than speakers in the pillars.
> 
> Like I said above, I'm not really a stickler for people's subjective evaluation on a product because I already know they're being influenced by the purchase itself or the reason that led to the purchase (ie: Harry said it made his system warm so I must buy it). I just tread lightly when I read it. And, to be honest, I really don't trust anything subjective anymore because it's all a wash; put it in my car and let my car's environment plague the FR... now, how in the world can I honestly say that everyone else should hear the same thing I heard when it's really all driven by FR - and there shouldn't be any amp/dsp/headunit made today that changes FR in the least bit and I've yet to measure one that does***.
> If you can point me to data or some sort of evidence that can show me why you hear what you hear, then it's likely your brain getting in the way of your ears. We all do it. I still do. Hell, that's why I don't even bother listening to speakers anymore. I've done it enough to know what is numero-importante, besides the environment itself. Hint: frequency response.
> Distortion is one often used explanation, but let's be real: distortion really isn't an issue with any electronic component anymore. There's really no reasonable explanation for an electronics product to impart it's own sound anymore... it's mainly just people talking out of their butt. Though, there have been some tests that show some products not performing well at all and these certainly lend credence to the _possibility _that someone can hear something _different_; whatever that may be.
> 
> 
> I just look at subjective opinions based off sighted evaluations as a means to an end. If nothing else, it gets conversation going. The reader and evaluator should just take care to at least address the impact and understand how knowing what you're listening to can _absolutely _alter what you hear. It's been documented by people waaaay smarter than me. The funny thing is that the real engineers of audio understand this. The hobbyists still cling to the idea they have golden ears and can trust them over their brain. I'm not even trying to sound above it all... I'm just more or less expressing my disdain for the people who ignore it.
> 
> ***that wasn't faulty and prompted a design change.


For some reason this post makes me sad. Almost like a vicious circle, no matter what you do it wont make a difference kind of feeling.


----------



## cruzinbill

Im gonna throw in my 2 pesos here.... Im willing to bet... hell maybe even throw some cash down! that if you were to take some big name car that normally wins comps, take out their amps and replace them with super budget same power ones cea rated ones that they would place just as well. Mind you these amps would be only amplifying no xovers or anything used on them.


----------



## spl152db

cruzinbill said:


> Im gonna throw in my 2 pesos here.... Im willing to bet... hell maybe even throw some cash down! that if you were to take some big name car that normally wins comps, take out their amps and replace them with super budget same power ones cea rated ones that they would place just as well. Mind you these amps would be only amplifying no xovers or anything used on them.


 careful... Thehatedguy will threaten with ban for talking about amps....

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk


----------



## subwoofery

cruzinbill said:


> Im gonna throw in my 2 pesos here.... Im willing to bet... hell maybe even throw some cash down! that if you were to take some big name car that normally wins comps, take out their amps and replace them with super budget same power ones cea rated ones that they would place just as well. Mind you these amps would be only amplifying no xovers or anything used on them.


You would lose money doing so... In comps, there's a criteria for noise, if I were to put my friend's Pyramid rated @ 150 watts (probably 100 CAE rated) into a winning car - only to replace let's say an Arc KS300.4 (test to put out 108 watts), that winning car won't win comps because of: 
- turn on pops 
- turn off pops 
- noise floor 
- power supply sag for sustained dynamics 

Reason why 95% of forum posters don't buy the most powerful Boss, Pyramid, SSL amp in order to "mimic" the sound of more expensive brands... 

Kelvin 

PS: ... but yeah, don't talk about amps or they will ban you  
Also, please read my sig


----------



## cruzinbill

I will just leave this thread then apparently I thought I was on topic.... as for the sig... i disagree and will leave it at that.


----------



## MarkZ

subwoofery said:


> You would lose money doing so... In comps, there's a criteria for noise, if I were to put my friend's Pyramid rated @ 150 watts (probably 100 CAE rated) into a winning car - only to replace let's say an Arc KS300.4 (test to put out 108 watts), that winning car won't win comps because of:
> - turn on pops
> - turn off pops
> - noise floor
> - power supply sag for sustained dynamics
> 
> Reason why 95% of forum posters don't buy the most powerful Boss, Pyramid, SSL amp in order to "mimic" the sound of more expensive brands...
> 
> Kelvin
> 
> PS: ... but yeah, don't talk about amps or they will ban you
> Also, please read my sig


Power supply sag doesn't make any difference whatsoever if you buy appropriately sized amps. And that's a real issue sometimes. There are times where (for various reasons) people use insensitive speakers and spend a lot of money on an expensive "high end" amp to power them, and then end up clipping the amp. Usually, most people on this forum accept some amount of clipping, because a lot of time it's inaudible. But, forced to choose, I'll usually take the cheap amp at double the power with no clipping over the expensive amp clipping. Then, a lot of the issues like power supply sag and tonality when clipping become irrelevant.


----------



## Spyke

I'm glad I just do this as a hobby. I will agree that there is a difference in amps. It's the difference between cheap guts and expensive ones.


----------



## MarkZ

Also, regarding your signature, some of us who have been around here for a while know exactly what lycan's position was on the topic. I think your quote is taking him out of context.

Edit:

The full quote from your link is:



lycan said:


> I'll repeat it for the miliionth time : All amps do NOT sound the same. I can pull two amps from the same damn production line, and set their gains or crossovers different, and i promise they WILL sound different. It's astonishing to me that nobody understands this.


I think it's kinda disingenuous to yank the part out of your signature about "set[ting] their gains or crossovers different", leaving people to interpret the quote as if there are intrinsic factors in the amplifier proper that contribute to differences in sound. There may be, there may not be. But lycan wasn't saying there was.


----------



## chad

Sustained dynamics...............


----------



## thehatedguy

What Jeff would say regarding amps...if they measured exactly the same, then they will sound exactly the same. But it might take more than just setting levels to do this...could be pretty complicated as referenced in the "Carver Amp Challenge." Which is pretty good reading especially considering it was done in Stereophile magazine.


----------



## chad

I must have missed the carver amp challenge, dunno how, because I work in an industry that traditionally hates carver amps... Except unless Clair Brothers "modified" them then they loved them


----------



## thehatedguy

The Carver article was really an eye opener for me...and it wouldn't have made it to print in the last decade of Stereophile.

Speaking of Clair Brothers...there is a few of their Lake processors floating around on eBay but I can't find out anything about them.


----------



## thehatedguy

Carver Stereophile Amp Challenge link:

http://carvermk2.com/docs/Carver Stereophile Challenge.pdf


----------



## chad

thehatedguy said:


> Speaking of Clair Brothers...there is a few of their Lake processors floating around on eBay but I can't find out anything about them.


****ing badass units, FIR filters, you draw the line.

I'm a huge lake fan these days.


----------



## thehatedguy

Can they be converted to 12 volt easily?


----------



## subwoofery

chad said:


> Sustained dynamics...............


lol, yep... English is not my _forte_ 

Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery

MarkZ said:


> Also, regarding your signature, some of us who have been around here for a while know exactly what lycan's position was on the topic. I think your quote is taking him out of context.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> The full quote from your link is:
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's kinda disingenuous to yank the part out of your signature about "set[ting] their gains or crossovers different", leaving people to interpret the quote as if there are intrinsic factors in the amplifier proper that contribute to differences in sound. There may be, there may not be. But lycan wasn't saying there was.


I know that the rest of the quote is also important but I just wanted to let people know that amps DO sound different. And it's not because you can set levels within 0.1dB that it will make a Pyramid sound like a Milbert. 
I agree that amps that measure the same sound the same <-- that therefore means that all amps DO NOT sound the same. 
Also want to point out that a car audio DSP (BitOne, DSP6, 6to8, H800) won't make one amp sound like another one. 

Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery

thehatedguy said:


> What Jeff would say regarding amps...if they measured exactly the same, then they will sound exactly the same. But it might take more than just setting levels to do this...could be pretty complicated as referenced in the "Carver Amp Challenge." Which is pretty good reading especially considering it was done in Stereophile magazine.


Oups... Jason beat me to it  

Kelvin


----------



## MarkZ

subwoofery said:


> I agree that amps that measure the same sound the same <-- that therefore means that all amps DO NOT sound the same.


That's not at all what that means. Amps might measure differently -- to an appreciable extent where the differences would be audible -- but that doesn't follow logically from lycan's statement. His statement doesn't get at whether or not amps measure differently enough to be perceived by our ears.

His statement is an age-old commentary about subjectivism vs. objectivism. One of the things that subjectivists believe is that amps that measure the same can sound different. Lycan, evidently, rejects that idea.

I think you're misrepresenting his stance by presenting his quote the way you have.


----------



## subwoofery

MarkZ said:


> That's not at all what that means. Amps might measure differently -- to an appreciable extent where the differences would be audible -- but that doesn't follow logically from lycan's statement. His statement doesn't get at whether or not amps measure differently enough to be perceived by our ears.
> 
> His statement is an age-old commentary about subjectivism vs. objectivism. One of the things that subjectivists believe is that amps that measure the same can sound different. Lycan, evidently, rejects that idea.
> 
> I think you're misrepresenting his stance by presenting his quote the way you have.


Knew I should have re-read what I wrote... Was clear in my mind but translating is a different story  
What I wanted to say is that 2 amps that measure the same, sound the same. An amp that doesn't measure the same as another but is made to measure the same, will sound the same. 
I have a few tests that shows amps from different brands that doesn't measure the same distortion wise... are we able to hear the difference is a different story - I believe we can but that is subjective... 

Kelvin


----------



## chad

thehatedguy said:


> Can they be converted to 12 volt easily?


Never had to take one apart.... Which is a good thing.. 

Easy or not. Worth it.


----------



## MarkZ

subwoofery said:


> Knew I should have re-read what I wrote... Was clear in my mind but translating is a different story
> What I wanted to say is that 2 amps that measure the same, sound the same. An amp that doesn't measure the same as another but is made to measure the same, will sound the same.
> I have a few tests that shows amps from different brands that doesn't measure the same distortion wise... are we able to hear the difference is a different story - I believe we can but that is subjective...
> 
> Kelvin


Yeah, maybe we can, maybe we can't. That's where the blind testing comes in.


----------



## Ultimateherts

I wanted to bump this because more and more we are blasted with articles online about how when a product gets a bad review the company immediately says that the test that was used was not a true blind test!!!


----------



## nyvan

i truly believe it is based on a bell curve for the majority of the people. it reaches a point where the improvement is minimal.


----------



## Ultimateherts

I still believe my first post. 

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk


----------

