Do distortion 's affect enjoyment of speaker?


Hoping for a concensus.
ptss

Showing 4 responses by bifwynne

Agree with Viridian and Al. Their views are more balanced. Too many variables in play.

I've often read that reviewers measure specs that are not relevant or important, and fail to measure specs that are. To a certain extent, at best, as Al said, specs may be useful to eliminate "bad choice" candidates, but not assure that a particular component will be a winner.

@Melbguy1 -- I've had my ears (pun) on the Magico S3s or S5s, for many of the reasons you just mentioned. And in time, I may wind up there. But right now, I'm obsessing over a type of distortion that many do not speak about or understand ... time coherence.

About 2 years ago, I've auditioned a pair of Vandies and IMO they did not do it for me. The response from some Vandy fans was that the dealer didn't know how to set them up. Or, the dealer used the wrong speaker cables. Or, my listening chair was in the wrong position. Or, the dealer used the wrong head vice. And so forth and so on.

Vandy buddies ... these explanations do not resonate (pun) with me.

Some time coherent speaker naysayers add that using 1st order x-overs requires the drivers to operate out of their "happy" zone. Or, the sloped baffles place a premium on proper placement and listening position. Or, the whole approach is at best a rough justice solution to a complicated problem.

So here is where I am holding. Rather than throw the baby out with the bath water ... I am holding onto my speakers for a while longer. I am going to test the time coherence waters with a DEQX device.

Trying to set up an in-home audition next week or the week after. For those not familiar with DEQX products, take a look at the DEQX website. I do not expect that the DEQX time coherence and room EQ solution will be a panacea.

Actually, I'm not sure what to expect.

But I'll report back.

Cheers,

BIF
@Melbguy1 ... actually, I think Bombaywalla is clutching something more than straws... its gonads. I put the question directly to Magico's US sales folks. Here is their response:

"[T]his really required a response from our CTO, Yair Tamman. See below response to your questions. You will have to excuse his expressions, being that he is from Tel Aviv, some things don't translate easily to English. That said, I've left his response in the raw form.

"'Phase coherence is one of the most discussed issue in our industry.

"I don't disagree with the fact our speaker can't be phase coherent.

"Yet, it was never prove (sic) in controlled listening test as audible (many tried - all didn't achieve the wanted result).

"Yet using high order crossover has proven advantages. Like low distortion, controled (Sic) directivity , drivers linearity and many many more proven advantages

"There is also a very big difference in the drivers you can use.'"

So there you have it. Here's an interesting experiment. Magico speakers corrected with DEQX.

Hopefully, next week, I'll be able to check out the DEQX on my Paradigm S8s.
Melbguy1 ... hey man I'm on your side. I think Magicos are industrial art -- not speakers. I think Magico does a heck of a job controlling a lot of speaker design variables that make other speakers mid-fi. But as part of design trade-offs which all designer have to make, Magico elected to use high order x-overs because of the design pluses that it sought to achieve. See Yair Tamman's response above.

But having said all that, and tipping my hat for the Magicos doesn't answer the Q of whether its speakers are time coherent. Phase coherent at the x-overs, .... no doubt. Time coherent. Highly unlikely. Take a look at John Atkinsons's time delay test of the Q5's in Fig. 4 here

http://www.stereophile.com/content/magico-q5-loudspeaker-measurements

Do you see how in the time domain the tweeter leads, followed by the mid drivers, and then the slow poke woofers. What this means is that when the sound output from each driver sums, the wave form MUST be distorted over some portions of the frequency spectrum. Roy Johnson's articles do a good job of explaining why this happens and what it means.

In short ... there is time coherence distortion that results in the summed waved form not being completely true to the electrical signal generated by the amp.

Does it sound bad?? Can we detect it? Very controversial issues. My DEQX audition might provide some enlightenment. And I'll report back.

Does this mean that one shouldn't touch Magicos or Revels or Wilsons. Absolutely NOT!! What it might mean is that some really great speakers just may need a little help.

I'll be back.

Cheers.

BIF

P.S. Just a tongue-in-cheek observation. IMO, Wilsons look like 1970s era Dr. Who Dileks. I'd be compelled to take a sonic screw driver to them. OTOH, better to look like a Dilek than a GMA Praying Mantis. LOL
Bombaywalla ... let's be kind to Melbguy1 ... he agrees that Wilsons look like Dr. Who Dileks. Melbguy1, do you agree with me that GMA speakers look like Praying Mantis bugs, minus the antennae and eyes?

Hey guys ... I will try and tee up that DEQX audition next week. I'll report back with my subjective reactions.

Al and Ralph Karsten (Atmasphere) have said this more times than I can recall .... gear design involves trade-offs. As regards speakers, that may mean give up time coherence, but gain "X" with the view that what comes out of the speakers sounds really good ... not perfect, but really good. Heck, I am not even sure what perfect is.

Stay posted.