ErinsAudioCorner

[KaiserSoze]

Ha, I watched "The Office" all the time when it ran, but I didn't remember that. But when Tom Cruise used that corny line on Renee Zellweger in "Jerry Maguire", the earth rumbled from the effect of everyone falling out of their chairs laughing.

 

[hardisj]

I got a reply back from my contact at Harman who sent my data to their engineers:

I just heard back from the HARMAN team and they said all the results are as expected.

yay! I normally publish my data without having anyone look at it first but since a) this speaker was sent to me from Harman directly and b) this was by far the most challenging speaker I’ve yet to measure, I wanted to have their team look it over to make sure nothing stood out.

Now that I have gotten confirmation my results are good to go, I’ll start working on the review. I hope to have it up within a week. Just depends on what I feel like doing first since I have 4 Monoprice subwoofers I need to create reviews for as well as an audio meet this weekend.

 

[hardisj]

Happy Halloween! Time to refresh my ears on some Harman Luxury Line goodness.

Wish I didn’t have to send it all back.

 

[KaiserSoze]

Happy Halloween! Time to refresh my ears on some Harman Luxury Line goodness.

Wish I didn’t have to send it all back.


View attachment 86700

I know you won't believe this, but while I was looking at this picture, the skeleton man reached over and patted the dog on the head. I'm hoping that this is a GIF or some other kind of animation, because otherwise...

By the way, if I were you I would try real hard to figure out a way to keep that amplifier.

 

[ctrl]

Happy Halloween!

Reminds me to play Stephen Lynch's Halloween song

 

[hardisj]

By the way, if I were you I would try real hard to figure out a way to keep that amplifier.

I wish!

 

[hardisj]

Reminds me to play Stephen Lynch's Halloween song

 

[MZKM]

Happy Halloween! Time to refresh my ears on some Harman Luxury Line goodness.

Wish I didn’t have to send it all back.


View attachment 86700

/s​

 

[richard12511]

Reminds me to play Stephen Lynch's Halloween song

Love that song!

 

[hardisj]

Here's a little teaser of the F226Be results...

 

[ctrl]

Here's a little teaser of the F226Be results...

That looks quite promising!

One question, is it possible to display the spectrograms with stepped colors?
Usually these graphics are displayed in 3dB steps, more rarely in 1dB steps.
The graphics with "flowing colors" are extremely difficult to interpret.

 

[hardisj]

One question, is it possible to display the spectrograms with stepped colors?
Usually these graphics are displayed in 3dB steps, more rarely in 1dB steps.
The graphics with "flowing colors" are extremely difficult to interpret.

LOL ... Man, I can't win.

I switched specifically from what you have asked to what I have now because people here and in other threads asked me to provide it without the steps. Go figure, right?

I won't switch back again and I really don't want to provide two graphics of the same thing. But I do have the normalized plots still provided in steps. So, you at least have that.

 

[richard12511]

That looks quite promising!

One question, is it possible to display the spectrograms with stepped colors?
Usually these graphics are displayed in 3dB steps, more rarely in 1dB steps.
The graphics with "flowing colors" are extremely difficult to interpret.

Yeah the graphs without steps are basically impossible for me to interpret/compare for anything other than huge differences in directivity.

The "beamwidth" graphs that Amir has started posting with recent reviews was a huge upgrade over the old spectograms. One of the best changes he's made to the reviews, imo.

 

[andreasmaaan]

@hardisj if I could also offer a suggestion: the decibel scale on the polar plots is very wide. We are looking at nothing but different shades of red for a full 15dB from 78 to 93dB, and the off-axis cancellations are therefore tiny pinpoints. It would be more illuminating if the scale were narrower by a factor of 2 (at least).

 

[hardisj]

Wow! That looks great and seems to be the best Revel reviewed thus far in terms of V.D. I am so ready for someone to calculate the preference score for these!!! The sales person I talked to said these are one of the most popular Revels they sell. I am thinking more and more that, if you have subs, these are the way to go.

I have to say that my personal experience corresponds to this. I have been pleasantly surprised by the stable sound I get from them both when I am sitting up to do critical listening and when I am slouched over ten minutes later because I am one comfy bum!

CANNOT WAIT FOR MORE.

How I provide my reviews... My subjective evaluation is really different than many others'.

Many will use all these pretty words for wonderful speakers. And for the lesser speakers, they use less pretty words. I'm the opposite. It's easy for me to find the faults but when a speaker is awesome, it's hard for me to convey that in words.

Which means I have had a really tough go at trying to write out my subjective opinion on these F226Be's. What I want to say is "These things kick ass. If you have the means, buy them.". But I know that's not good enough.

 

[hardisj]

@hardisj if I could also offer a suggestion: the decibel scale on the polar plots is very wide. We are looking at nothing but different shades of red for a full 15dB from 78 to 93dB, and the off-axis cancellations are therefore tiny pinpoints. It would be more illuminating if the scale were narrower by a factor of 2 (at least).

Again, this is something that I have gotten to because of others specifically asking for me to present it this way.

You guys should've piped up months ago. Slackers. lol


*PS: If I sound annoyed, I'm not. I'm literally half-laughing as I'm typing this up. I just find it kind of funny that I spent months going back and forth, doing what others ask, and now I post one graphic and I feel like I'm experiencing deja vu. All good, though.

And just to reiterate again: the other version of the spectrograms I always provide (the normalized ones) use stepped colors in 3dB increments. Which was the "compromise" I made between the differing requests/opinions.



Alright. That's it on my end about the subject. I don't wanna keep going OT about the plots. I understand the requests. But there's a reason why I provide what I provide and that's based on previous discussions.

 

[ctrl]

I switched specifically from what you have asked to what I have now because people here and in other threads asked me to provide it without the steps. Go figure, right?

I won't switch back again and I really don't want to provide two graphics of the same thing. But I do have the normalized plots still provided in steps. So, you at least have that.

What a pity to hear this, I somehow didn't get this discussion.
I really wonder who can read out information about the directivity of a loudspeaker using spectrograms without stepped color - there is more concealed than really shown:

In any case I am sure I did not vote for it

 

[hardisj]

What a pity to hear this, I somehow didn't get this discussion.
I really wonder who can read out information about the directivity of a loudspeaker using spectrograms without stepped color - there is more concealed than really shown:
View attachment 86897

In any case I am sure I did not vote for it

That’s a normalized graphic (notice the bar is referenced to 0).
As I said in my quoted reply, I provide the same thing.

Here is an example:

 

[richard12511]

Again, this is something that I have gotten to because of others specifically asking for me to present it this way.

You guys should've piped up months ago. Slackers. lol


*PS: If I sound annoyed, I'm not. I'm literally half-laughing as I'm typing this up. I just find it kind of funny that I spent months going back and forth, doing what others ask, and now I post one graphic and I feel like I'm experiencing deja vu. All good, though.

And just to reiterate again: the other version of the spectrograms I always provide (the normalized ones) use stepped colors in 3dB increments. Which was the "compromise" I made between the differing requests/opinions.



Alright. That's it on my end about the subject. I don't wanna keep going OT about the plots. I understand the requests. But there's a reason why I provide what I provide and that's based on previous discussions.

Damn, I missed that discussion, but I understand your position.

 

[hardisj]

Damn, I missed that discussion, but I understand your position.

Check the above. Turns out, I provide what you guys are asking for. Have been for a while. Just a misunderstanding.

I give two spects (for both horizontal and vertical):
1) Absolute SPL (no steps)
2) Normalized against on-axis (3dB steps)

Since ctrl asked about me providing steps in reply to my absolute SPL spect, I thought he wanted me to make that one in steps which was something others requested I not do back when I was asking for input. And I decided to provide the two versions above.


Now, can we get this car back on the road?