The biggest debate in the history of humankind -Tannoy crossovers original vs new.

[Marco]

You'll never convince the staunch subjectivist that hi-fi is 99 percent engineering and science and just a little bit of what you fancy. They just don't see it that way.

And you'll never convince the staunch objectivist that EARS are much more important than they think! 99%.. Lol, that's laughable! If only test equipment were that accurate!!

So how much more 'tit for tat' would you like to indulge in?

Marco.

[Pharos]

I wouldn't take any form of audio equipment 'on trust' from anyone, least of all a pair of speakers, no matter how 'well-endorsed' by a so-called 'expert'! I would ALWAYS need to hear them FIRST, in the context of my system and room, and crucially, with my own MUSIC.

In terms of the bit in bold, yes I agree, but the point is for someone with such a (seemingly) measurement-based, objectivist outlook as you to hi-fi, how can you rely on someone else's ears, no matter how "well trained", if they're still fallible? And those at ATC won't necessarily be any more "well trained" than yours or mine.


Marco.

The first point about choice was 'If I had to'.

I can reply on the ears of manufacturers like KEF, ATC, and Revel, because, especially with the latter they have gone to great lengths to use groups of people with trained and untrained ears to validate designs with the ear.

Revel has found a very good correlation between a good measured forward and power response to subjective preference.

[Marco]

"One thing that helps in that area is having confidence in the efficacy of your senses, when making judgements, and not believing that 'experts' will *always* know better!"

But Marco, we must constantly question what we are doing.

Why? That's the fastest way to madness!! Would you like the key to your padded cell now?

You question things to an EXTENT, then simply trust the God-given senses and level of judgement that you were born with, whilst accepting that they (and you) are part of an imperfect world. At least that's what normal people do.

Unfortunately, 'cravers of certainly' are destined to a life, not only of great discomfort, but gross disappointment!

Marco.

[Macca]

And you'll never convince the staunch objectivist that EARS are much more important than they think! 99%.. Lol, that's laughable! If only test equipment were that accurate!!

So how much more 'tit for tat' would you like to indulge in?

Marco.

About another 5%

[Marco]

The first point about choice was 'If I had to'.

I can reply on the ears of manufacturers like KEF, ATC, and Revel, because, especially with the latter they have gone to great lengths to use groups of people with trained and untrained ears to validate designs with the ear.

Revel has found a very good correlation between a good measured forward and power response to subjective preference.

Dennis, we're simply going to have to agree to disagree, as our respective mindsets in this matter will never be compatible. So I'll let you have the last word, as no offence, I've had mine, in terms of replying to you on this thread

Marco.

[Marco]

About another 5%

Marco.

[Macca]

Marco.

Seriously though, see that review I posted of the 'designed by ears' speakers. They have all the issues you'd expect a speaker that was designed by ear to have. Listening is important, of course it is, but rely too much on it to design equipment and you're in for a disappointment. Or at best a very inconsistent experience.

[Marco]

Yes, I completely agree. As ever, neither life, nor hi-fi is best served by absolutes!

Marco.

[Mr. C]

The use of test equipment is IMO a pre-requisite in the process of design in order to verify and validate, and avoid error.

I would agree in principle here Dennis, however a guideline for making progressive measurements thought the design process helps though you, though you could end up with products like Devialet, the Hypex modules (which ever amplifier make their are in and what ever op amp you wish to put in front of the Ncore module), most class 'a' solid state from the 90's onwards their are few exceptions but not many and pretty much 85% of ALL speakers on the market could also fall into the vanilla category including many expensive brands as well.

A lot of really well measuring equipment is just soulless, emotionless and 'nice' sounding staple that emanates from many so called high end manufacturers as well as the run of the mill brands.

Looking at just the usual 20hz-20Khz band is all very well, however you really need to further up the frequency ranges as these high Fq's can influence a lot of the surrounding i/c's counters/clocks/regulators/functions controllers with FPGA arrays really throwing out boat loads of RF all over and inside the case work.

Easy to measure and put in place temporary counter measures, the rerun a tight spectrum analysis plot to check you are achieving the desired results, then retest on a AP 555 or R&S UPV.

For example the current ASR gushing best measuring latest dac's the SMSL and Topping D90 et al, while they do sound good, so much more actually been suppressed in side and its true potential no where near released.

Just because careful use of EMC control, circuit board layout, and filtration etc was negated for banging it out there, CE anyone?

Perhaps that is something that Hifi magazines should really state at the beginning of the review that the product(s) is fully certified to the correct EU directives if we leave with no deal there is a UK equivalent in place.

Back when Tannoy designed the distortion induced, phase incoherent fugly boxes of world class inner ear wax removal this side of Chord 1400E power amps and Wilson Benesch speakers. Pretty sure having all of the boxes ticked in relation to the modelling of the x/overs was possibly not top of their list of priorities. If it was then.................F__K a duck sideways with a can of Swarfega orange

These days we can actually measure the full impedance pathway from the amplifier through the cabling, the x/cover and back the amplifier via TDR.
De-embedding the cable, x/over and amplifier are all integral to finalising the true end result. This is also possible up to 40m in total length, also remember the circuit board also acts as an interconnect, this is also measured and removed form the equation for individual study.

Ok TDR is not everyday ASR staple due the constraints of the owners front room and the equipment his does not own yet unless he receives a wonderful acquisition price from the producers of said equipment The rest of us manufacturers had to purchase our test gear

Measurements enable you to see which way not to proceed if you like, they help a lot, but the end result is a mixture of first principles, measurements and experience of the designer and what type/style of sound they are wishing to produce.

Though they are one of two pieces of exceptional audio that never saw anything other than a multi meter during their construction yet sound blissfully musical and engaging.

[Pharos]

Just like you then

"...Ensuring that their thought processes are objectively verifiable".

Bloody hell.... Are you a human being, capable of rational self-thought, or a computer, programmed to obey a predetermined form of logic? So who decides what's "erroneous"?

I think we live on different planets, Dennis.

Marco.

Firstly I welcome any criticism of my thinking processes, scrutiny is very useful for growth.

I think we decide what is erroneous by constant self scrutiny, that is if we are prepared to take responsibility for the work involved in doing so. We can find inconsistencies in our thought processes, and ignore them, rationalise them, (by this I refer to the psychological meaning of rationalise - a lie to oneself which is an attempt at 'justification').

You infer that we live in different worlds, and I assume you mean that we view the world very differently, at least in regard to perception of reality.

I have a friend of some 45 years who when I met him had Berkleys with HPDs, I had Lancs with Golds, both were 15".

Over the years he and I have gone through numerous iterations of equipment, particularly speakers.

He went through loads of BBC originations, Rogers, Spendor, Harbeth Kans, ATC 100s and 20s, JBLs, eventually having a high end JBL costing about £30k.

I have ahd Lowther, Tannoys, ESSs, four sets of ATCs, the last, 100ASLs I spent a month rebuilding, and then submitted a write-up to Bill Woodman. I then back To ESSs with my own design work, and finally on to my ADAM Tensor betas.

In discussion with him I asked whether he thought we had moved on from the hazy days of the 70s with Tannoys, and his response was that I would be shocked at the massive improvement in sound quality over that time.

I was young then, enjoying hedonism and loud music, (10+10 amp) and the music was great and refreshingly informative during an exciting period. Now my life is much more forensic, and less hedonistic