JA Perspecitve Stereophile review


Just read the review and am scratching my head a bit so wondering what you guys think. Although Atkinson recommends them in the end it comes with some big caveats in terms of less than stellar bass and a boost in the presence range that he termed "hot." Looking at the frequency response graph it does show a boost in that region on the graph and relative to a couple other speakers, but I've listened to many JA speakers in many settings -- including the Perspectives -- and "hot" is not a word I would attribute to any of them so I find this very curious (nor can I recall any other review of a JA speaker where they're called hot or bright sounding). I know it's relative and personal preferences, etc., but still. Also, not too much said about imaging/disappearing, which I've always found to be a competitive strength particularly with JA speakers so surprised that wasn't more of a standout although he does generally find imaging to be a positive.

Also curious is that Atkinson is usually pretty good at providing direct product comparisons and given he just had the Vandersteen Treos in house I find it strange he didn't compare the two or compare anything else to the Perspectives directly (although I guess we could infer the Treos or maybe the Giya G3, but I'd find direct comparisons much more useful here). What's more, he mentions stiff competition from several other speakers he lists in the conclusion section (including the Treos) and all of them are 30% to 60% cheaper than the Perspectives. Taking all this together and reading between the lines as we must do when reading these reviews, I can't help but view this as a backhanded slap against the Perspectives.

Lastly, I have to say while I generally respect Atkinson I sometimes wonder if his measurements sometimes bias his findings. Don't get me wrong, I think he's probably writing what he hears, but you can almost look at his graphs and predict a good bit of what he'll find upon listening. Obviously measurements matter but the skeptical side of me just finds the correlation a bit too tight.

Anyway, I just found the review a bit surprising and disappointing given my past experience and just looking for some other, er, perspectives on this. And no I don't own JA speakers (although I'd love to) and no affiliation with JA whatsoever.
soix

Showing 9 responses by erik_squires

I should also point out, treble balance can be affected by room acoustics. including what’s on the floor between and behind the speakers. Most audiophiles are into first reflections, but try throwing some blankets around. :) 

Between the drivers, crossover and room is where most of this balance is achieved.

Best,

E
Yep, the tweeter level and even the shape of it's output is controlled by the crossover, and ultimately the speaker designer. I could easily adjust that on any of the 3 different models I listen to at home. 

The overall balance also matters a great deal. It's not just what the tweeter is doing but what the bass is doing, as well as the crossover point and therefore radiation pattern, so it is important to hear speakers for yourself, in an environment similar to your own. 

This may have been JA's failing in the case of the Diamond's. He set them up with poor bass, and he attributed it to excess mid/treble energy. 

Best,

E
@markalarsen 

"But this is just one example of JA's biases." You are referring to John Atkinson, not Joseph Audio, correct?

Hah! Sorry for the confusion! :) Yes. 
prof:

Well I wouldn't make too much out of this as reviewers tastes and ears change over time. 

JA sure didn't mind a rising response in the B&W or Golden Ear speakers, which are not only rising, but ragged, and wow, can I hear it! And it is this raggedness which JA seems to most like. 

Ultimately speaker designers have to guess how their users will ultimately listen to their speakers. Make a speaker ideal for moderate listening with family around and you make them too bright at live levels. Another speaker I might put into a similar tonal balance are the Magico S1 Mk II. Also, glass smooth response. 

Why did Atkinson call the Perspectives as having a "rising treble" but complain about the Minissimo Diamonds having a "tailored treble?" They were perfectly neutral. 

In large part though, I want to point out that these differences are often dealt with a single part, a resistor. It's a real shame audiophiles have to end up trading amplifiers, cables and speakers to get the tonal balance they want. Making your own speaker or allowing for external adjustment can solve all these problems. I think the top of the line Wilson's deal with this by allowing you to use external resistor networks. Pretty progressive thinking say I. 

Best,

E
By the way, I don’t mind anyone in particular having any particular bias. I think that’s fine. I’m only objecting to JA shilling really non-neutral speakers as being neutral or the golden standard. He likes what he likes and that in my mind is pretty artificially sweetened to appear more revealing.

Also, in my mind, neutral is not necessarily best. You should buy what you like because it gives you pleasure and enhances your life. Not based on what JA or I like. Neutral, accurate or low distortion are measurements. They aren't values. Buy and promote what you like! 

Best,


E
Forgot about this, I was so bent out of shape that I did a full write-up on the Stereophile review for the Crystal Cable Minissimo Diamond.

https://speakermakersjourney.blogspot.com/2016/09/stereophile-slanders-crystal-cable.html

But this is just one example of JA's biases. It just all came together in this particular review. Mind you, I'm not saying you should like those speakers. I'm just saying this was a hatchet job.

Best,

E
JA is among my least favorite reviewers. He has a particular "high end" sound he likes, and calls speakers which are neutral colored.

Just about all his biases and lack of care showed up in the review for the Crystal Cable Minissimo Diamonds. Mind you, those are ridiculously expensive speakers, but he gave them half the words, admitted he didn’t listen to them in their preferred location, and then tried to call them artificially colored in the treble. Had he known anything about speaker design, he’d have realized they were going to underperform in the bass from his location from his own measurements. His own measurements of the treble and speaker impedance completely belie his claims that they were artificially altered, unlike some of his favorites.

He has built his brand on pushing a particular high end sound which is far from neutral, and his discussions of speakers and crossovers often leaves me wondering if he has any idea what he is talking about.

If you happen to hear things the way JA does, then he's the right reviewer for you to follow, but you will never convince me the man A- Is as talented as he wants to claim or B- Doesn't grind an axe or display strong biases which are not supported by his own data or writing.

Best,

E
If you can bi-amp them, use a DSP on the bass to reel it in. Best of all worlds.

I won't do a full-range speaker unless I can EQ the bass section separately anymore.