I would like to comment on the frequency response of that speaker in the reviewer's room. How much of that horrible response was the room and how much the speaker? Is the reviewer's room that bad? Is there a room treatment or set up issue? Is it fair to vendors or the readers to have reviews done in such deplorable conditions? Isn't it incumbent upon reviewer to get their room and set up right - at least to a point where the speakers have a shot and the positive and negative results can be attributed more towards the speaker than the environment? Now I suppose one can make relative judgments with everything being equal. Meaning every speaker has to play in the same environment. But come on. That in room response especially in the low end is one of the worst I have seen in the magazine and I have been a subscriber for 15 years or so. If the speaker weren't so expensive would it have been slammed for that? When cars are tested we expect professional drivers right? We expect the performance testing to use appropriate test tracks don't we? Given your bias against A/B testing would you expect a reviewer to be able to walk in to 2 different rooms - same equipment as used in that review - one set up well and the other like the reviwer's and be able to instantly hear that difference? Isn't this a non-qualified review situation? (Funny that that chart looks like most hotel rooms sound when holding audio shows. I have been to a couple and everyone says they understand the issue and try to ignore it. It some respects that is understandable Having said that not trying to use some method - active or passive - to get those rooms as good as they can get is wrong as well)
You can always look at the anechoic graph and get an idea how good the design is...I would guess, but the problem is that is not how and where any of us live. I can understand how a reviewer is left with many problems and I would not expect them to change out the furnishing of THEIR home everytime a new speaker came into the house.
I am most interested within the confines of their room what remarks they are making upon THAT freq. response. My room will never duplicate any reviewer's room so I must take care in deciding what to buy. Those of you who care and are capable of using diffusers and panels in your room to get as flat as response as possible will always be one up on me. I am glad for you if that floats you boat.
Since I live in the south I think I could start saving up my used styrofoam egg cartons and start stapling them to the back and side walls and then I would have it. It seems to work on the old TV show Hee Haw. Shoot, I just dropped my Slim Jim in the dog's water bowl. Wait...the 5 second rule. Whew!
I would like to comment on the frequency response of that speaker in the reviewer's room. How much of that horrible response was the room and how much the speaker?
I'm sure most of the low frequency response errors you see are due to the room, but this is actually much better than most rooms that size! The reason other published graphs you see look better is because they're averaged to one third octave which hides all the detail. Most domestic size untreated rooms have half a dozen peak / null spans up to 30 dB or even more - all below 300 Hz. But you won't see that when using most test tone CDs or with averaged measurements.
I couldn't agree more to what you're into!
With a room that "bad" it's really not a fully justifying review. Top-equipment should be reviewed in "top-rooms", it's only then you can really get the true "soul" of the speaker.
I'm coming back on this one later on