AVI DM5

[ID.]

Lies, damned lies, and hifi specifications.

If punters are buying aurally emotive products purely on the basis of their written specifications then they are simple fools. I suspect however that they like the sound of their chosen AVI speakers, so who cares about the numbers?

There are people on this forum who constantly tell me that my system sounds wank based upon its specification. I stopped caring a long time ago.

Boys love playing their specifications top trumps games.

 

[shadders]

and that's why I'm asking you to provide evidence to support your claims.. post numbers in this thread as well as Genelec thread where Avi owners used Avi DM10 amp specs as a selling point or positively support Avi product.

Hi,

I have never stated that the specifications have been used as a selling point. That is your statement.

With regards to the posts supporting AVI products, read this thread or the Genelec thread. AVI owners have used the specification including you (in this thread). If the specifications as they are stated, are not relevant then why defend or use them? You cannot use them as a response and then claim they have no relevance (subjective experience is claimed to override). They are either accurate and well defined, or they should never be stated.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[lpv]

You stated many, many times in this thread that Avi owners used DM10 amp specs to support the product and that they did this in this very thread. Can you provide post numbers where Avi owners did what you say they did to support your claim?

 

[shadders]

You stated many, many times in this thread that Avi owners used DM10 amp specs to support the product and that they did this in this very thread. Can you provide post numbers where Avi owners did what you say they did to support your claim?

Hi,

I have stated many times regarding the use of specifications by AVI owners, as people have questioned why I am challenging the specification. So, when you see that I have stated this in many posts, this is as a direct response to others. It does not mean AVI owners have made many posts.

You have referred to the amplifier in your post in this thread - comment 118. You claim the amplifier delivers 500watts. Your comment later in that post is an example of the positive use of the specification.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[lpv]

let me tell you this: post 32, this is where YOU created the problem ( by ponting out Avi website and - in your opinion - misleading specs) NO ONE said anyhing about Avi specs till post 32..

... you keep saying the same thing 6th day.. this fact alone tells me..

Do yourself a favour and leave it... just leave it.

 

[shadders]

let me tell you this: post 32, this is where YOU created the problem ( by ponting out Avi website and - in your opinion - misleading specs) NO ONE said anyhing about Avi specs till post 32..

... you keep saying the same thing 6th day.. this fact alone tells me..

Do yourself a favour and leave it... just leave it.

Hi,

I respond to others who respond to me - that is all. That is why there are many posts by myself.

This is an open forum.

My post 32 is in response to another post. I raised the issue in agreement with another who has stated similar arguments regarding AVI owners etc.

Why does the specifications aspect annoy you so much, yet as in your post 118, you promptly stated the DM10 can deliver 500watts peak.

If, what i have stated is incorrect, then i am very happy to be corrected.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[lpv]

DM10 mid/bass is 500W peak.

I'll keep checkin when and in what circumstances you finally give up.

 

[shadders]

DM10 mid/bass is 500W peak.

I'll keep checkin when and in what circumstances you finally give up.

Hi,

This 500watts peak is contrary to another thread where it is stated 250watts peak.

As such, unless specifications are accurate and well defined, any number can be used.

In all my posts, i have tried to determine the well defined specifications which have not been publsihed. People cannot use the numbers that they want to convey a higher performance or superiority, to claim that the product, whatever it is, is better than another product.

I don't see why this should bother you.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[lpv]

( ...... ) and ( ...... ) bothers me a lot as long as I'm around them, so for these reasons I'm out *yes3*

 

[luckylion100]

sub category of this forum to be created... namely, an AVI Customers Victim Support Group for all those disgruntled and traumatised customers struggling to cope with the misdeeds of AVI and their use of misleading specs... haven't you heard, there's thousands of us out there in pain?! ;-)

 

[avole]

I doubt there's thousands. AVI sells a tiny amount of speakers in the UK let alone globally. Their own forum is also not big, under 800 members last time I looked.

 

[richardw42]

I'm not privy to their sales figures, AJ has just bought and is restoring a Porsche 356 so must be doing something right.

I guess the new owners will be looking to expand the company.

 

[techboy]

From what I know about them, AVI has sold to the tune of 5000+ pairs till date.

And I think they sell 500-1000+ pairs per year.

So their gross sales are probably around 0.5m to 2m+ British pounds per year.

 

[Morgunner]

From what I know about them, AVI has sold to the tune of 5000+ pairs till date.

And I think they sell 500-1000+ pairs per year.

So their gross sales are probably around 0.5m to 2m+ British pounds per year.

But are those figures continuos or peak? We need accuracy to determine whether Ash's Porsches (he still has the Boxter, too, doesn't he?) are up to the task of transporting him from A to B or not.

 

[luckylion100]

From what I know about them, AVI has sold to the tune of 5000+ pairs till date.

And I think they sell 500-1000+ pairs per year.

So their gross sales are probably around 0.5m to 2m+ British pounds per year.

But are those figures continuos or peak? We need accuracy to determine whether Ash's Porsches (he still has the Boxter, too, doesn't he?) are up to the task of transporting him from A to B or not.

Very funny!! ;-)

 

[nopiano]

DM10 mid/bass is 500W peak.

I'll keep checkin when and in what circumstances you finally give up.

Hi,

This 500watts peak is contrary to another thread where it is stated 250watts peak.

As such, unless specifications are accurate and well defined, any number can be used.

In all my posts, i have tried to determine the well defined specifications which have not been publsihed. People cannot use the numbers that they want to convey a higher performance or superiority, to claim that the product, whatever it is, is better than another product.

I don't see why this should bother you.

Regards,

Shadders.

That'll be because they sell pairs. And 2 x 250 = 500! Seriously, though, you've made your point, repeatedly. AVI are hardly market leaders, in fact cottage industry might be nearer the truth (and no sleight intended).

If you compare the specs on their website for the 5 with the 10, they are expressed in a very different fashion. The 10 still doesn't even show its dimensions. I wrote to AVI over a year ago for same and got a prompt reply. But they've still forgotten to include it on the website.

 

[shadders]

DM10 mid/bass is 500W peak.

I'll keep checkin when and in what circumstances you finally give up.

Hi,

This 500watts peak is contrary to another thread where it is stated 250watts peak.

As such, unless specifications are accurate and well defined, any number can be used.

In all my posts, i have tried to determine the well defined specifications which have not been publsihed. People cannot use the numbers that they want to convey a higher performance or superiority, to claim that the product, whatever it is, is better than another product.

I don't see why this should bother you.

Regards,

Shadders.

That'll be because they sell pairs. And 2 x 250 = 500! Seriously, though, you've made your point, repeatedly. AVI are hardly market leaders, in fact cottage industry might be nearer the truth (and no sleight intended).

If you compare the specs on their website for the 5 with the 10, they are expressed in a very different fashion. The 10 still doesn't even show its dimensions. I wrote to AVI over a year ago for same and got a prompt reply. But they've still forgotten to include it on the website.

Hi,

Yes, I know I have made the point repeatedly, but I do keep getting asked the same/similar comments or questions etc. I dont think it matters about the size of the company, a measurement is a measurement. It is not anti AVI, I am just challenging the engineering statements. If anyone was going to challenge any of my audio equipment I own, I could not careless. It is just a inanimate product, a piece of technical engineering. I might agree with them, I might disagree with them, but who cares. Doesn't mean the discussion shouldn't happen because a collection of people feel agrieved.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[bigboss]

Shadders, who are these newcomers you keep talking of? 

Hi,

Luckylion ??? was one - which is where i picked up on the statements of how bad passive speakers are. I will have to defer to comments by others after contributing to the Genelec thread about AVI owners - but on the Genelec thread - broken (re - passives) and power sapping crossovers - was misinforming the person looking to purchase speakers. From here - i picked up on the negativity of AVI owners to passive systems - misleading statements, and the promotion of measurements to support the AVI product positively, but rude behaviour when these measurements were challenged.

Regards,

Shadders.

Luckylion only mentioned that the DM10 was superior to his previous system. I don't recall a single post about luckylion slating all passive speakers in general. Can you quote that particular post please?

Hi,

My statement was Luckylion was a newcommer.

Regards,

Shadders.

Luckylion joined the forum in 2011.

 

[bigboss]

If I was in the market for some speakers, and if AVI stated, for example, 50w into 8 ohms, I would feel cheated, because there's no 8 ohms in it! What would you suggest for this shadders? You cannot compare passives with actives this way at all. If people compare performance between actives and passives this way, they need education as to how to compare specs, not follow their wrong path to satisfy what they're looking for.

Hi,

Quoting against 8 ohms or the actual impedance is the industry standard. That is how you can compare actives with other actives, and see if you are obtaining value for money. I never stated compare passive to actives.

Regards,

Shadders.

Is it the industry standard? Any links to support that?

 

[bigboss]

If I was in the market for some speakers, and if AVI stated, for example, 50w into 8 ohms, I would feel cheated, because there's no 8 ohms in it! What would you suggest for this shadders? You cannot compare passives with actives this way at all. If people compare performance between actives and passives this way, they need education as to how to compare specs, not follow their wrong path to satisfy what they're looking for.

I'm afraid you are incorrect. You certainly can (and should) compare active speakers with passive speakers this way.

Remember that an amplifier is an ampifier, irrespective of whether it will be fitted directly to the speaker drivers or not. It has a certain measured output into a certain load which it can sustain for long periods of time, but is also capable of sustaining short bursts of power, otherwise known as peak power. All amps are built this way.

Speaker drivers also have a maximum rated power, after which they will begin to break up. The load they present to the amplifier may be 6, 8 or 4 ohm, although in actual fact some can dip as low as 2 ohm. These loads provide degrees of difficulty for the amplifier, if you like. All passive speakers should, and generally do, give power and load ratings, for example 60W to 80W, 8 ohm. This figure is based on the speakers drivers used.

The crossover basically ensured that the individual driver works at maximum efficiency within its designed frequency range, and, amongst other things, limits the frequency each driver sees. Again, it doesn't matter whether the crossover is active or not, they all function the same way. That's a simplified picture, of course. 

Now, a continuous power rating gives an idea of the power of the amplifier. It does change according to load - 50W into 6 ohm could be 45W into 8 ohm or 90W into 4 ohm. The figure does depend on amplifier design, but you get the idea. How you measure continuous power is a bit of a minefield and it is not uncommon for some makers to state lower figures than what the amplifier can actually handle, either for safety reasons or so they look good in reviews, if you believe the cynics.

That's why the continuous power rating, flawed though it may be, does give an idea of how an amplifier will perform with a given load. It was originally introduced in the US (I think) to prevent manufacturers using peak power figures to rate their amps. These figures were highly flattering, given peak power can be 5 times higher than continuous power, but ultimately misleading. Even now some amplifier manufacturers quote continuous power into 4 ohms as the figure always looks better - one French company only gives figures for 4 ohms, so their 100W is really only about 55W into 8 ohms, and not ideal to drive speakers which require 60 - 80W into 8 ohms.

So, you should not feel cheated with the 50W into 8 ohms, as that's (and this really is an approximation) 70 W into 6 ohms or 90W into 4 ohms. However, you should ask questions if a manufacturer uses some other yardstick instead, such as peak power or half peak power. For active speakers, then, continuous power figures, however flawed, are useful as they can give an idea of what to expect. AVI could easily provide more realistic figures, but they have chosen not to do so as it's another way of selling what they want people to believe is an exclusive niche product. Whether it has been successful is a different matter, and you would expect to see changes in marketing strategy if they are taken over and move into the mainstream.

 

AVI is never ever going be given a load of 8 ohms. Never ever. Then why publish specs? Passives have to publish the specs, because you can choose which speakers to pair with.

 

[shadders]

Shadders, who are these newcomers you keep talking of?

Hi,

Luckylion ??? was one - which is where i picked up on the statements of how bad passive speakers are. I will have to defer to comments by others after contributing to the Genelec thread about AVI owners - but on the Genelec thread - broken (re - passives) and power sapping crossovers - was misinforming the person looking to purchase speakers. From here - i picked up on the negativity of AVI owners to passive systems - misleading statements, and the promotion of measurements to support the AVI product positively, but rude behaviour when these measurements were challenged.

Regards,

Shadders.

Luckylion only mentioned that the DM10 was superior to his previous system. I don't recall a single post about luckylion slating all passive speakers in general. Can you quote that particular post please?

Hi,

My statement was Luckylion was a newcommer.

Regards,

Shadders.

Luckylion joined the forum in 2011.

Hi,

This is in reference to a relative newcomer to active speaker selection - there is a thread :

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/genelec-804050b-or-avi-dm10s-my-dilema

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[shadders]

If I was in the market for some speakers, and if AVI stated, for example, 50w into 8 ohms, I would feel cheated, because there's no 8 ohms in it! What would you suggest for this shadders? You cannot compare passives with actives this way at all. If people compare performance between actives and passives this way, they need education as to how to compare specs, not follow their wrong path to satisfy what they're looking for.

Hi,

Quoting against 8 ohms or the actual impedance is the industry standard. That is how you can compare actives with other actives, and see if you are obtaining value for money. I never stated compare passive to actives.

Regards,

Shadders.

Is it the industry standard? Any links to support that?

HI,

Industry standard is where it is the norm to measure the power output of an amplifier :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_power

Does not have to be a European standard (EN) or ISO standard etc.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[Deleted member 108165]

Lies, damned lies, and hifi specifications.

If punters are buying aurally emotive products purely on the basis of their written specifications then they are simple fools. I suspect however that they like the sound of their chosen AVI speakers, so who cares about the numbers?

There are people on this forum who constantly tell me that my system sounds wank based upon its specification. I stopped caring a long time ago.

Brilliant reply Gazzip, made me giggle *biggrin*. What you say is so so true sir.

 

[WinterRacer]

AVI have published their spec. For DM10s it's: 75 WPC for the tweeters and 250 WPC for the bass drivers. That doesn't state rms vs peak or mention whether it's continous.For DM5 it's: Two Class D per channel 50 Watts I agree that isn't very precise. Ideally, I like to see more precision in specifications, but I think they want to avoid people comparing dissimilar designs and making incorrect assumptions. On this thread, I think that some people might be confusing rms and continous power. AVI have stated they've designed the amps in their active speakers to avoid clipping when playing music. That is, they can deliver instanstaneous power of 250w (let's just assume that's a peak rather than rms rating) for a second or so, but the power supplies will quickly sag and reduce power output. This is because:1. it protects the drivers from overheating2. music only required short term peaks They've explicitly not designed their amps to deliver 250w for any significant length of time. This is why they look different to standalone amps that claim 250w rms per channel continous. The fact that AVI DM10s can play loudly without any audible signs of distress is testament to their approach (IMHO).

 

[shadders]

AVI have published their spec. For DM10s it's: 75 WPC for the tweeters and 250 WPC for the bass drivers. That doesn't state rms vs peak or mention whether it's continous. For DM5 it's: Two Class D per channel 50 Watts I agree that isn't very precise. Ideally, I like to see more precision in specifications, but I think they want to avoid people comparing dissimilar designs and making incorrect assumptions.

I examined multiple active speakers - Kef X330A, PMC (possibly class D since this is used in Professional Monitors), ATC, Opal, Unity Audio Rock MkII, Genelec, and in all - they conform to either continuous power rating or if not they actually state what the power rating is. For ATC, one can see from the design that this is continuous power despite that it is not stated.

What do you mean by dissimilar designs ?. All active speakers follow the same design architecture. Input, filter, amplifier, relevant driver. Given that all manufacturers i have examined (and this includes separate amplifiers) state the continuous power, or instantaneous etc., by AVI not stating this, people assume continuous. This is misleading. People will assume they are defined as per others, where not stated to be different.

On this thread, I think that some people might be confusing rms and continous power. AVI have stated they've designed the amps in their active speakers to avoid clipping when playing music. That is, they can deliver instanstaneous power of 250w (let's just assume that's a peak rather than rms rating) for a second or so, but the power supplies will quickly sag and reduce power output. This is because: 1. it protects the drivers from overheating 2. music only required short term peaks They've explicitly not designed their amps to deliver 250w for any significant length of time. This is why they look different to standalone amps that claim 250w rms per channel continous. The fact that AVI DM10s can play loudly without any audible signs of distress is testament to their approach (IMHO).

It has been quoted in this thread that the peak power is 500watts (comment 118 i think). Also, thread below indicates 250watts peak and 100watts continuous - comment 218

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/genelec-804050b-or-avi-dm10s-my-dilema?page=14

Relying upon the power supply to sag so as to protect the driver is bad design. Would you agree ?

With regards to music only requiring short term peaks - which music is this ?. Given that some music such as thrash metal etc., can have reduced dynamic range - one should NOT base their amplifier design on a specific type of music.

The Rock MkII stated to have 100watts class A/B amplifier, but also states total power output is 100watts - this may be a typo - in that actual amplifiers are 70/30 watts for LF/HF respectively. The amplifier being class A/B and the back panel design indicate minimal heatsinking. So i would expect these figures to be continuous at best. (examine ATC and Event Electronics Opal to see heatsinking)

The Rock MkII user manual page 4 states that you must avoid listening to sustained high music levels not only to prevent hearing damage, but to prevent overheating and subsequent fire hazard.

I do not see why loudness which does not sound distressed indicates or proves a good amplifier design, if we do not know how long that operation is conducted. Not all amplifiers fail immediately when they reach a specific output power, as it may take time for the failure to occur.

Regards,

Shadders.