Videos from ML

[User211]

.....Rich?

 

[tsv_1]

.....Rich?

"pleasant ambience"....

 

[Rich]

.....Rich?

I've been told that if I can't say anything positive, then I shouldn't say anything at all.

 

[MOON]

Hi Justin,

Why can't you add room correction and also make the subwoofer a kick ass sub as you mentioned? A lot of us run 2 channel with subs.You have lost a lot of sales to JL Audio due to those subs having the room correction and sonically kick ass subs as well.

I will be buying two subs this year. ML subs without the room correction are holding me back from going that route.

JL Audio, SVS, Paradigmn, Velodyn all have some form of built room correction software. I think if you incorporated it, your sales would be substancially boosted.

I would be in line for them. Keep us posted.

Cheers, Greg

 

[twich54]

Greg, your sub argument is really 'half-hearted' for if one likes the M/L subs for their lower octave capabilities all he needs to do is add an outbourd Velodyne (or other equivelent) EQ processing / correction piece. Granted it would be nice for M/L to incorporate this but 'you can have your cake and eat it to' !

 

[RUR]

.....Rich?

Even acousticians agree that early reflections add spaciousness. Unfortunately, those early reflections also add a degree of image blurring and shifting - see Olive and Toole's work. If one wishes to add spaciousness which isn't in the recording and is willing to accept less-than-ideal imaging, a ~6-7' reflective path is least problematic (or really long reflective paths, at which point SPL is sufficiently attenuated). If one believes that the recording should be the source of spatial cues and/or wants best imaging, absorption is desired.

There's no hard right or wrong, or difference of informed opinion on this, Justin. You love your setup without room treatments. Enjoy it.:music:

 

[stuwee]

Nice however, comma, the sound must meet the graghs (sp) my ears don't follow a graph or syn wave, thanks, I see what your sayin', I think.....stu

 

[MOON]

Hi Twitch,

Yes, you could buy a room correction ubit from another company, why bother when the 4 company's I mentioned have it.If you look at the sub threads the JL Audio subs keep getting the top spot.

There are many, many on this site theat use the JL Audio subs as you can read in the threads.Even if you read magazine reviews of the ML subs, they say the negatives are no room correction which most companies offer.Personally, I love the looks of the ML subs, they have character, not just a square box.

Sales sure wouldn't go down if the correction was offered, only up.

 

[Len44]

I've been told that if I can't say anything positive, then I shouldn't say anything at all.

Or, "If you can't say something nice about someone, don't say anything at all. And, boy, can I keep quiet about some people!" :ROFL:

 

[Rich]

There's no hard right or wrong, or difference of informed opinion on this, Justin.

Ultimately, this is true. Some feel the benefits of an added "spaciousness" make the sound livelier and are worth the tradeoffs. Others feel the comb filtering and other effects of reflective sound are too harmful to the accurate reproduction of the stereophonic image created by the source. It really is a question of taste with no right or wrong answer.

What baffles me is how ML brags about the accuracy of their speakers, and how so many people strive for accuracy in their systems, and then they promote a method of using the back wave of the speakers to create a false "ambiance" that is not contained in the source and is in no way accurate to the original recording. Either you want a system that is true to the source or you don't. People that would scoff at the idea of added ambiance created by digital surround receiver modes say they just can't live without the added sense of "liveliness" and "spaciousness" created by the reflection of the back wave of a dipole speaker.


Likewise, either ML wants to educate their consumers to get the most accurate reproduction of the source, or they don't. What concerns me is that in a video like this they don't educate their consumers about the harmful effects of the backwave and the reasons consumers might want to damp that wave to achieve a more accurate reproduction of the source, without any false "ambiance" from added reverberation. They only present one side of the story and act as if the facts don't exist to support the other side, which is clearly supported by scientific evidence. Some consumers may prefer the ambiance, some may prefer a more accurate portrayal of the source. But ML should be presenting both options and their relative merits, rather than pretend the colored presentation is the only one people should consider.

In their graphic, they show only reflections from point source speakers color the listener's perception of the front wave, and that is false. Reflections of the back wave of a dipole speaker off the front and then side walls also cause comb filtering and color the sound in other ways (hence the creation of a false sense of spaciousness to the sound). So ultimately, the material presented in this video contains a falsehood in comparing ML speakers to point source speakers.

 

[Audioseduction]

i've been told that if i can't say anything positive, then i shouldn't say anything at all.

lmao! :rofl:

 

[User211]

There's no hard right or wrong, or difference of informed opinion on this, Justin. You love your setup without room treatments. Enjoy it.:music:

Actually I have plenty of room treatments. Guitars hanging of the walls (actually this is bad, and I do remove them for serious listening. Hanging acoustics on the side wall really do resonate away to the deteriment.), a Cornford Harlequin guitar amp - also probably bad news, extremely thick Mulberry curtains damping the rear wave, underlayed carpet throughout and a thick rug over most of that. Oh - and a double radiator that probably rings a bit, but is usually off due to 211 heat output! There's also quite a big pile of vinyl and CD racks across the side walls.

However, I will have you know I very nearly ordered 3 GIK absorbers the other day... nearly, very nearly. So close. And then I thought I can't. What if Rich is right, I thought? I couldn't live with the smugness...:ROFL:

 

[Rich]

And then I thought I can't. What if Rich is right, I thought? I couldn't live with the smugness...:ROFL:

Me? Smug? Never! Perish the thought! :ROFL:

 

[Peter Soderberg]

to all of the more experienced, knowledgeble MLOers, please remember the spirit that these videos are shot in. In my 20 plus years of selling, installing MLs, I have so rarely run across customers willing to go to the extremes that acoustic treatments can take that for us to speak only to those people would scare so many away we would be in very poor shape. Yes, some additional comments where left on the cutting room floor, such as more distance the better, a fuller description of the Haas effect, the bass has it's own issues, etc, that I wish had made it, but given how many rooms I have been in with our products and the basic rightness of what is said, I will defend this and I hope it helps a newbie get a start on improving the returns of owning ML versus a box. If we can help a customer get into a panel, be it from us, Maggie, Sanders, etc, than we all win. At the recent CES, in the hell of trying to get decent sound in hotel rooms, we got lots of very favorable comments on what a $2K speaker was doing versus some of the sonic disasters I heard at ridiculous prices happening around us, I hold true to the idea that having a mediocre setup on a panel is better than a near ideal on a box. I hear quickly the different drivers, near field diffraction issues of most boxes so want to make sure even the greenest of potential owners will take a chance and not be scared away by what box competitors say about all panels (see mythbusters). All of your input is read, mostly agreed with, but all of you have already decided with your ears so don't need much more from us. I am still waiting for one of you to make fun of my fat butt crawling around the room making faces at the directors behest.

 

[Satch]

That WAS pretty funny.

 

[Rich]

All good points, Peter. I wasn't going to comment at all, but Justin (user211) twisted my arm. Honestly, I think you guys are doing a good job with the videos overall.

 

[JonFo]

...
It's actually been an internal debate while developing some new high-end subwoofers (we are only in the "talking about it" phase, no actual products or official plan yet) -- should we put money into room correction functionality, or focus on making them sonically the most kick-ass subwoofers for the money and leave the room correction to the processor or aftermarket accessory. What are your thoughts?

~J

Absolutely provide room correction. For bass, there is no greater directly measurable and audible benefit.

A decent sub with room correction sounds much better than a more capable sub without.

Just license the Audyssey Sub EQ and be done with it. It's well supported, integrates with tons of AVR and preamps already out there. Plus, they keep pushing the tech and improving the PC-based measurement system.

 

[-justin-]

Just posted our latest product video for the ElectroMotion Series, enjoy!

ElectroMotion Series Overview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rMUn1DnXto&hd=1

~Justin

 

[Audioseduction]

Nice vid Justin.

 

[-justin-]

Posted the latest video that you guys might find especially interesting on the history of ML:

The History of MartinLogan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTILeHDHI8o&hd=1

~Justin