Treker
Super Member
This is my second posting from my archive of Consumer Reports magazines from the Golden Age of Audio, the late '60's, '70's, and early '80's. My first posting was from the May 1970 Loudspeaker Report and Rankings. If you are interested in reading that first posting and its attached PDF of the original CR article, click on the following link:
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=484524
Below are a few selected quotes from this latest article, but just like last time I would recommend reading the complete article in order to put the comments in their full and proper context. A PDF copy of the full article can be found at the end of this post. And now to the article...
Medium-Priced Loudspeakers
“With any loudspeakers, horns will blare and drums will roll and the human voice may soar. But how accurately that do so depends on the choice of the right speaker. That choice is broad- the large, floor-standing speakers that were standard about two decades ago have long since been supplemented by a host of compact models.”
“For home audio systems, loudspeakers priced at $100 or so and measuring roughly a foot square by two feet high seem to be the most popular on today's market. You can get smaller ones, and for less money. But you give up something with those models. Having, as a rule, smaller components, they're apt to produce bass tones that are less deep and strong than those of larger speakers, and play music less loudly without distortion of the sound or damage to the speaker.
The 20 loudspeakers tested for this report range in list price from about $85 to $120. Cabinets of all the speakers have a walnut finish; typical dimensions are close to 2 x 1 x 1 feet, with some notable exceptions: the EPI, the AR-6 and the Rectilinear are substantially smaller, and the Advent and the Lafayette, which are a bit bigger than most.”
How well they reproduced
“Ideally, loudspeakers should respond to the entire spectrum of musical sound, from the deep bass of organ or tuba to the treble of triangle or cymbal. That span represents a musical range ascending from about 30 Hz (cycles per second) to some 15,000 Hz, within which most instruments produce their fundamental tones and overtones. We looked for speakers that would reproduce that broad range of sound smoothly and uniformly, without emphasizing or slighting any part of the range-or, in technical terms, for speakers with “flat response.” An engineer's plotting of flat response looks like a plateau. There are no peaks or depressions (the exaggeration or suppression of certain sounds) or roll-off (diminution of all output beyond certain frequencies). In short, a loudspeaker should not color the sound it reproduces-though coloring that does no violence to the music may be agreeable to some listeners.
Loudspeakers with those characteristics have high accuracy: the desirable ability to change an electrical input signal into sound that corresponds exactly to it. And, since differences in musical taste make it hard for audiophiles to agree how a good speaker should sound, accuracy, carefully defined, is one of the few objective standards by which to judge speakers.”
“By and large, the quality of these speakers proved to be high indeed. At their best, all did a satisfactory job of reproducing the segment of the musical spectrum that is most critical to listening enjoyment: from below the vital, mid-frequency range, which determines most instruments' basic character, to highs of about 10,000 Hz or so. Best of the lot were the EPI and Fairfax, with accuracy scores of 89 per cent-just 11 per cent short of perfect. Moreover, the Scott S10B and the ADC 303B managed to combine high accuracy with a low price ($85).”
“As we've said, a high-accuracy speaker, by definition, adds little coloring to the music it reproduces. Differences between high- and medium-accuracy speakers might be likened to differences between two panes of transparent glass-one perfectly clear, and the other slightly tinted. You can hear through the 'tint' of a medium-accuracy speaker well enough, though things sound just a little different-and perhaps better to you-than through an 'untinted' speaker. So it's possible you might like the sound quality of even the Altec and the least accurate of the tested speakers, the Lafayette; none of the listeners on CU's panel was of the opinion that the coloration introduced by them was either unmusical or undesirable.
Be that as it may, high-accuracy speakers offered an objectively better combination of wide sound range and smooth response than models with a lower accuracy score. That's not to say that any of the tested models sounded exactly alike-not even units with identical scores for accuracy, since their deviations from accurate reproduction did not occur at identical points in the audio spectrum.”
“The bigger a speaker or the more internal elements is has, the better should be its ability to handle the sound spectrum. But don't bet on it. The Fairfax earned top marks for accuracy with just two elements, while the six-element Lafayette was the least accurate of the tested speakers.”
“If you could listen to all the speakers CU tested, you'd almost certainly prefer some models to others-even among those scored as equal in accuracy. The best way to learn whether a loudspeaker's sound suits your particular taste is to audition the speaker in the room where you'd install it. Some audio shops may let you take the speakers home for a brief try-out. But chances are you'll have to decide on the basis of less-than-perfect conditions in a showroom, so look for a dealer whose listening room is insulated from the noise of traffic and the buzzing of shoppers. Look for a rooms whose listening arrangements allow almost instant switching from one speaker to the other; direct comparison is indispensable, since auditory memory is notoriously short. And never compare more than two speakers at a time.”
The listening tests
“The ear responds chiefly to variations in sound pressure present at the eardrum. That pressure, which varies with frequency, represents a complex interaction of the ear, the acoustic environment (the listening room) and the sound power radiated by the loudspeaker. So it was important to learn whether listeners would hear the differences between speakers that our laboratory tests pointed to. Had we found clear contradictions between the laboratory measurements and the judgments of a listening panel, we would have reassessed our test methods.”
“Did CU's measurements of power response permit predicting, with reasonable success, how our panel of listeners would judge loudspeaker accuracy? We think so.”
RATINGS OF MEDIUM-PRICED LOUDSPEAKERS
Listed in order of ability to reproduce sound accurately; models of equal accuracy are listed alphabetically. Differences of about 8% or less in accuracy scores are not likely to be detected by ear (see story); regardless of scores, no two speakers sounded exactly alike. Prices are list, rounded to the nearest dollar, for single speakers with walnut-finish cabinets; discounts are generally available.
ACCEPTABLE
EPI 100 - accuracy 89%
FAIRFAX FX 300 - accuracy 89%
MARANTZ IMPERIAL 5G - accuracy 88%
SCOTT S15 - accuracy 87%
ADVENT - accuracy 85%
REALISTIC OPTIMUS 5 - accuracy 85%
DYNACO A35 - accuracy 84%
SCOTT S10B - accuracy 84%
ADC 303B - accuracy 83%
JENSEN 4 - accuracy 83%
AR-6 - accuracy 82%
JVC VS5322 - accuracy 81%
FISHER XP65B - accuracy 80%
PIONEER CSR300 - accuracy 80%
ADC 3O3AX - accuracy 79%
RECTILINEAR MINI III - accuracy 78%
BOZAK SONORA B201 - accuracy 77%
KLH THRITY-THREE - accuracy 77%
ALTEC CORONA 893B - accuracy 75%
LAFAYETTE CRITERION VI - accuracy 71%
I hope that you have found this article interesting. I, for one, will now be keeping my eyes wide open for a pair of Fairfax FX 300 speakers, as well as pair of EPI 100's, which I know are fairly well thought of already here on the AK forums. As luck would have it, I picked up a pair of Marantz Imperial 5G's at a local thrift a while back. I think they are moving up in my project list and are going to get a cabinet refurb and a new set of caps pretty soon. I am very interested to see how they compare sound wise to my much loved Dynaco A25's.
The link to the PDF for this full article is below.
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=484524
Below are a few selected quotes from this latest article, but just like last time I would recommend reading the complete article in order to put the comments in their full and proper context. A PDF copy of the full article can be found at the end of this post. And now to the article...
Medium-Priced Loudspeakers
“With any loudspeakers, horns will blare and drums will roll and the human voice may soar. But how accurately that do so depends on the choice of the right speaker. That choice is broad- the large, floor-standing speakers that were standard about two decades ago have long since been supplemented by a host of compact models.”
“For home audio systems, loudspeakers priced at $100 or so and measuring roughly a foot square by two feet high seem to be the most popular on today's market. You can get smaller ones, and for less money. But you give up something with those models. Having, as a rule, smaller components, they're apt to produce bass tones that are less deep and strong than those of larger speakers, and play music less loudly without distortion of the sound or damage to the speaker.
The 20 loudspeakers tested for this report range in list price from about $85 to $120. Cabinets of all the speakers have a walnut finish; typical dimensions are close to 2 x 1 x 1 feet, with some notable exceptions: the EPI, the AR-6 and the Rectilinear are substantially smaller, and the Advent and the Lafayette, which are a bit bigger than most.”
How well they reproduced
“Ideally, loudspeakers should respond to the entire spectrum of musical sound, from the deep bass of organ or tuba to the treble of triangle or cymbal. That span represents a musical range ascending from about 30 Hz (cycles per second) to some 15,000 Hz, within which most instruments produce their fundamental tones and overtones. We looked for speakers that would reproduce that broad range of sound smoothly and uniformly, without emphasizing or slighting any part of the range-or, in technical terms, for speakers with “flat response.” An engineer's plotting of flat response looks like a plateau. There are no peaks or depressions (the exaggeration or suppression of certain sounds) or roll-off (diminution of all output beyond certain frequencies). In short, a loudspeaker should not color the sound it reproduces-though coloring that does no violence to the music may be agreeable to some listeners.
Loudspeakers with those characteristics have high accuracy: the desirable ability to change an electrical input signal into sound that corresponds exactly to it. And, since differences in musical taste make it hard for audiophiles to agree how a good speaker should sound, accuracy, carefully defined, is one of the few objective standards by which to judge speakers.”
“By and large, the quality of these speakers proved to be high indeed. At their best, all did a satisfactory job of reproducing the segment of the musical spectrum that is most critical to listening enjoyment: from below the vital, mid-frequency range, which determines most instruments' basic character, to highs of about 10,000 Hz or so. Best of the lot were the EPI and Fairfax, with accuracy scores of 89 per cent-just 11 per cent short of perfect. Moreover, the Scott S10B and the ADC 303B managed to combine high accuracy with a low price ($85).”
“As we've said, a high-accuracy speaker, by definition, adds little coloring to the music it reproduces. Differences between high- and medium-accuracy speakers might be likened to differences between two panes of transparent glass-one perfectly clear, and the other slightly tinted. You can hear through the 'tint' of a medium-accuracy speaker well enough, though things sound just a little different-and perhaps better to you-than through an 'untinted' speaker. So it's possible you might like the sound quality of even the Altec and the least accurate of the tested speakers, the Lafayette; none of the listeners on CU's panel was of the opinion that the coloration introduced by them was either unmusical or undesirable.
Be that as it may, high-accuracy speakers offered an objectively better combination of wide sound range and smooth response than models with a lower accuracy score. That's not to say that any of the tested models sounded exactly alike-not even units with identical scores for accuracy, since their deviations from accurate reproduction did not occur at identical points in the audio spectrum.”
“The bigger a speaker or the more internal elements is has, the better should be its ability to handle the sound spectrum. But don't bet on it. The Fairfax earned top marks for accuracy with just two elements, while the six-element Lafayette was the least accurate of the tested speakers.”
“If you could listen to all the speakers CU tested, you'd almost certainly prefer some models to others-even among those scored as equal in accuracy. The best way to learn whether a loudspeaker's sound suits your particular taste is to audition the speaker in the room where you'd install it. Some audio shops may let you take the speakers home for a brief try-out. But chances are you'll have to decide on the basis of less-than-perfect conditions in a showroom, so look for a dealer whose listening room is insulated from the noise of traffic and the buzzing of shoppers. Look for a rooms whose listening arrangements allow almost instant switching from one speaker to the other; direct comparison is indispensable, since auditory memory is notoriously short. And never compare more than two speakers at a time.”
The listening tests
“The ear responds chiefly to variations in sound pressure present at the eardrum. That pressure, which varies with frequency, represents a complex interaction of the ear, the acoustic environment (the listening room) and the sound power radiated by the loudspeaker. So it was important to learn whether listeners would hear the differences between speakers that our laboratory tests pointed to. Had we found clear contradictions between the laboratory measurements and the judgments of a listening panel, we would have reassessed our test methods.”
“Did CU's measurements of power response permit predicting, with reasonable success, how our panel of listeners would judge loudspeaker accuracy? We think so.”
RATINGS OF MEDIUM-PRICED LOUDSPEAKERS
Listed in order of ability to reproduce sound accurately; models of equal accuracy are listed alphabetically. Differences of about 8% or less in accuracy scores are not likely to be detected by ear (see story); regardless of scores, no two speakers sounded exactly alike. Prices are list, rounded to the nearest dollar, for single speakers with walnut-finish cabinets; discounts are generally available.
ACCEPTABLE
EPI 100 - accuracy 89%
FAIRFAX FX 300 - accuracy 89%
MARANTZ IMPERIAL 5G - accuracy 88%
SCOTT S15 - accuracy 87%
ADVENT - accuracy 85%
REALISTIC OPTIMUS 5 - accuracy 85%
DYNACO A35 - accuracy 84%
SCOTT S10B - accuracy 84%
ADC 303B - accuracy 83%
JENSEN 4 - accuracy 83%
AR-6 - accuracy 82%
JVC VS5322 - accuracy 81%
FISHER XP65B - accuracy 80%
PIONEER CSR300 - accuracy 80%
ADC 3O3AX - accuracy 79%
RECTILINEAR MINI III - accuracy 78%
BOZAK SONORA B201 - accuracy 77%
KLH THRITY-THREE - accuracy 77%
ALTEC CORONA 893B - accuracy 75%
LAFAYETTE CRITERION VI - accuracy 71%
I hope that you have found this article interesting. I, for one, will now be keeping my eyes wide open for a pair of Fairfax FX 300 speakers, as well as pair of EPI 100's, which I know are fairly well thought of already here on the AK forums. As luck would have it, I picked up a pair of Marantz Imperial 5G's at a local thrift a while back. I think they are moving up in my project list and are going to get a cabinet refurb and a new set of caps pretty soon. I am very interested to see how they compare sound wise to my much loved Dynaco A25's.
The link to the PDF for this full article is below.
