Stand Loudspeaker Reviews

I agree ...... Ortofan is an 'astute' reader :-) .......

"...Imagine sound that's thin, metallic, herky-jerky, dull, and rolled off completely below about 90Hz. I repeat: rolled off completely below 90Hz..."

That, Herb, was what I heard from the Tannoy DC2000s that I stupidly bought online in 1989. Unlike your experience, they Never broke in and sounded as sh1t on Day 300 as they did on Day 1. I could never understand why a speaker with two 7-8" woofers in an IB enclosure over 1-m tall could sound so anaemic in the bass. By Day 300, I didn't care and sold them for 1/3 purchase to someone to sit aside his Sony Profeel monitor.

I kid you not when I say that I have heard loudspeakers the size of a 2lb bag of sugar with better bass-response than those Tannoys, and I eventually chalked that absence of bass and crap, shouty sound quality down to simple lack of engineering -- anyone who understood what they were doing in Tannoy is long-dead and gone. I will never buy anything from this junk brand again -- and will happily shout my experience for anyone who's thinking of putting money their way.

It might not seem like a particularly "astute" comment, but when you start a review with "...sound that's thin, metallic, herky-jerky, dull, and rolled off completely below about 90Hz. I repeat: rolled off completely below 90Hz...", it's questionable that you should finish that review with the words "Highly Recommended". This isn't 'break-in', it's Acceptance, and quote 1 mirrors my experience of the Tannoy Dual Concentric driver exactly...

The true nature of the beast.

cheers
AJ
Soundfield

Geez,

the factory is supposed to have Quality Control burning everything in, with a final test sign-off! ( one more china problem )

Keven Deal should've checked these Loudspeaker's performance before he let them out the door.

Deal and Tannoy got very lucky that this reviewer persevered , put the drivers thru a full 100 hour initial break in. I doubt that I would've had the patience of JOB like Mr.HR displayed and I doubt that buyers in today's marketplace will put up with such a defective 'First Impression'.

I can't recall ever getting a "Highly Recommend" on any product that didn't dazzle right out of the box.

I'm wondering: How long will this broken-in Loudspeaker System perform adequately before it's hidden problem re-surfaces. We need accurate, no-bs explanations from Mr.Deal ( don't we? ) and from the Tannoy people considering that Stereophile is the highest integrity Audio Journal.

Mr.JA1 described the complexity of this design and highlighted a persistent problem lurking in it's presence region.

Tony in Venice

ps. these things might sell quite well on the shelves of Best Buy, probably discounted down to some attractive 'Street Price'

Herb you work so hard to find redeeming qualities in things, ie, critical comments followed by a reason to praise; and I find this endearing. And you write like a painter (Oh yeah, you are that) I own nos tubes purchased at Upscale, a few great a few so so in my Rogue Sphinx v2 and now v3. With Kevin (and I very much enjoy his enthusiasm) everything is fabulous as if he's partaken of very high quality sacred herb just prior. I mean no offense, just saying. I am acquaintance of two very high profile recording engineer/producers who use early Tannoy Monitor Golds with custom cabinets, as studio monitors and since they can afford and obtain anything they want, these must actually be fabulous. I mean they use damn original RCA 44s on drums for crying out loud (I am actually crying) Judging by the artists they've recorded and how amazing the records sound I have no doubt in thier choice of gear. So there must be TANNOY and then tannoy Thanks Herb, I own Spinx v3 and love it whether you do or not, it is a wonderful sound in my economic reach.

It would be interesting to have measurements for both a "broken-in" speaker and one straight out of its box. If not measurements, at least listening comparisons might be worthwhile, to see how much the break-in is the speaker changing and how much is the reviewer's perception changing.

... better off by instead submitting for review the Revolution XT-8F?

Measurements accompanying the Hi-Fi World review indicate that the low frequency response peaks at about 60Hz, which would likely address HR's comments regarding a lack of output below 90Hz for the XT-6. Foam plugs for the ports are available if the low frequency output is too great. Also, the ~7-8dB peak in frequency response at about 3kHz, shown in JA1's test data, appears to be absent in the XT-8F. Note that the HFW reviewer remarked that the XT8 "had an expansive, immersive sound that encouraged me to extend listening sessions just a little bit longer."

http://www.navratilaudio.cz/pr_tannoy/Test%20Tannoy%20Revolution%20XT8F%20-%204%20str%E1nky.pdf

In another review, the XT-8F was declared a Hi-Fi Choice group test winner, besting competitors from DALI, Epos, GoldenEar, KEF and Q Acoustics.

https://www.aaaelektronika.cz/user/related_files/rs10761_revolution_xt8f_group_test_winner_-_hfc404_-_december_2015.pdf

Certainly the $2,300 XT-8F costs more than double the price of the XT-6, but perhaps that added expenditure might yield more than proportional gains in sound quality. In between, there is the $1,700 XT-6F, which received a 5-star rating from What Hi-Fi.

https://www.whathifi.com/us/tannoy/revolution-xt6f/review

... in regard to (apparently high) levels of distortion, over on this site:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/tannoy-revolution-xt-6-speaker-review.14662/

…in an relatively recent online interview, break-in should apply mainly to the woofer(s), and it should be accomplished in a matter of seconds by applying a very low frequency signal (that makes the cone and its suspension traveling in high excursions without applying too much power to the voice coil/thus less heat).

He even defends that the parameters don’t change significantly after those seconds of hard work (except for the mechanical wear and tear that time, years and/or operation will unavoidably bring along), and that a loudspeaker that isn’t used for a very long time can benefit from that process again.

I don’t have any credentials to confirm or deny statements by someone like Andrew Jones, although I can say that I’ve measured the resonant frequency and impedance curve of used drivers (woofers) that were stored for quite some time before and after that exercise mentioned by AJ, and they definitely changed.

I ended up not taking the extra steps in my measurements and go through the Thiele-Small parameters, but I’d almost bet that it would likely be different before and after that exercise (I used a sine wave around 12 Hz or so for less than a minute).

I assume that this was a pure anecdotal experience, but it does correlate with what a very respected loudspeaker and driver designer says (he doesn’t seem to have much faith in “breaking in” tweeters and other smaller drivers for a long period of time, and honestly, neither do I in my experience*).

And all of this to say that breaking-in these specific Tannoys won’t ever change one of the following facts:

• Either there was a problem on manufacturing and these units were not up to specifications, or
• This is a poorly designed loudspeaker which shouldn’t be sold by this brand at any price, let alone $1000;

None of these scenarios is positive, because one would suggest a terrible quality control at the manufacturing stage, and the other would suggest just plain wrong engineering (which doesn’t make sense in a brand with these resources).

But that FR is way too flawed to sound anything close to “right”, let alone neutral. That is a ridiculous response any way we look at it.

That “thin, metallic” sound does correlate to what JA measured, and the “rolled off completely below about 90Hz” wouldn’t be surprising if the nearfield rise in level is removed, and other room-related issues combine in a way that’s not favourable to this underachieving loudspeaker.

In the end, almost any loudspeaker can sound “ok” if a combination of factors happens at the same time (the music used for testing, the interaction with the room and partnering equipment’s, and even reviewer bias (we all have our own, whether we realize it or not).

Comparing these measurements with almost any reputable British manufacturer (as reviewed by Stereophile) paints a very clear picture, even at lower price points.

In all fairness, JA (in all its amazing diplomacy) is very clear on his final assessment, which is definitely not something worth a “Highly recommended” measured performance.

I would like to see the in-room response in the reviewer’s room at the end of the review, in order to see if we could make some sense of what made this poorly engineered loudspeaker deserve such a high accolade by the reviewer.

I cannot praise Stereophile enough for having measurements at the end of a review, because (without any disregard for the reviewers opinion at all), this is why people (myself included in the past) would buy a recommended product from an audio magazine, only to find out that the harshness (or any other problem) would never go away.

By making the “complex sum” of the reviewer words with JA’s measurements, things tend to become a lot clearer (or harsher -literally in this case).

*To be clear, my personal experience and beliefs are only mine, without any pretension to be right.

It's appalling this poorly engineered speaker earned a "highly recommended" designation. The frequency response is so awful and the woofer rings like a bell. This kind of performance shouldn't be excused on a $300/pair speaker, let alone a $1,000 pair. Pathetic.