So who won the great bake off?

[richardw42]

If they're married they may have been told "You've spent half the weekend fannying about with hi fi, you're not spending the rest of it writing about it".

Or, still got the scars from the last thread.

 

[radiorog]

Afyer one of my auditions it tiok aboit a week for me to get round to finding time to write about it, so im hoping this is the case here. It would be a shame to not spread the word about the very valuable findings that have just occured. Most of us here will be very interested in the findings. Comments can easily be posted to help others, no need for anyone to get dragged in or sucked into arguments like before. Just ignore the silly comments, and help keep the forum relevant.

 

[chebby]

Afyer one of my auditions it tiok aboit a week for me to get round to finding time to write about it, so im hoping this is the case here. It would be a shame to not spread the word about the very valuable findings that have just occured. Most of us here will be very interested in the findings. Comments can easily be posted to help others, no need for anyone to get dragged in or sucked into arguments like before. Just ignore the silly comments, and help keep the forum relevant.

I posted Lindsay's findings on the end of the previous page.

 

[chebby]

Finally, a result ...

"Went to a bake off this afternoon.

Systems were:

1. Laptop, Hegel 360 amp, ATC 11 speakers (bought new with a discount).

2. Laptop, AVI DM10 (bought new) with £200 subwoofer

3 Denon C630 (£15) or laptop, NVA P50SA (£166), Korneff 45 clone (c£1250), EV Sentry III (£415 + c£80 in repair parts). The NVA and Korneff were replaced by a Creek CAS4040 (£99 new 1983) about half way through the bake off.

For sound quality, system 3 won. System 1 lost."

From LindsayT on the hifi subjectivist thread mentioned earlier...

clicky

 

[luckylion100]

It's only one subjective opinion...

 

[chebby]

It's only one subjective opinion...

My mistake. I thought he was reporting on the consensus view of the participants.

I guess we'll have to wait for lpv and Andrew for the facts.

 

[richardw42]

https://youtu.be/m2RZmYH9zoE

 

[lindsayt]

All 3 of us at the bake-off agreed that the EV system was the best sounding one.

We played a wide variety of music over the course of the 6 hours and every single test track sounded better on the EV's.

These were the sort of differences where the systems didn't need to be precisely level matched for the EV's to come out on top. The EV's could be played a few dbs quieter and they'd still sound better.

The most important difference between the AVI's and the EV's were in the midrange.

The EV's had better clarity. Better resolution. Better detail. Better snap, drive, impact. They sounded more realistic.

The AVI's had a smooth sound. The sort of sound that would appeal to someone who comes home from work and wants their hi-fi to sound like the aural equivalent of getting into a warm relaxing bath. Trouble is, the AVI's are over smooth. They smooth everything in the midrange. Vocals, the plucking of guitar strings, the rasp of brass instruments, the smack of Phil Collins drumstick on his tom drums, everything.

The AVI's sound as if the amplifiers are not in proper control of the speaker drivers. Or (as I would put it as a better explanation) the amplifiers send a signal to the speakers and the drivers say "Nope, we're not gonna do it. We're gonna play the music how we want and not how you want". And how the AVI drivers is a bit of lazy over smooth way.

Whereas with the EV's it sounds like the amps are saying "Give us a rasp" and the speakers say "Sure no problem". "Give us some background room acoustic echo on top of the music". "You got it!" In other words the EV's sound like they are playing the recording how the amps want and not how the speakers want.

Marks out of 10 to follow...

 

[lindsayt]

In reporting the bake-off I want to avoid over-statement and I want to avoid under-statement.

It's be easy for me to say the EV's thrashed the AVI's or the EV's kicked the AVI's butt all over the room. But that would be sensationalist hyperbole.

On the other hand there was no doubt that AVI's didn't sound as good. And that you didn't need golden ears to hear it.

Coming back to andrewjvt's marks from the first bake-off. He described the ATC's as an 8.5 and the AVI's as a 10.

At Fridays bake-off he said that the ATC's were putting up a better relative performance than at the first bake-off. My speculation is that the the ATC's had home advantage on Friday and andrewjvt clearly knows how to set up his system properly.

Anyway, I think it'd be reasonable and accurate to raise the ATC to an 8.75 for the 2nd bake-off whilst keeping the AVI's at a 10. Using that scale I would put the EV system at a Spinal Tap 11.

Actually 11 is a bit of a lazy round number and want accurate statement here.

I'd put the EV's with Korneff amplification at an 11.1 and the EV's with the Creek amplification at a 10.9.

This is the sort of marking scheme that is subjective. I could fully understand why another listener might give the EV system a 10.4 or an 11.5.

Next. A bit more on quantifying the size of the differences...

 

[chebby]

I am still a bit stunned.

My whole world-view has been turned inside-out.

I need a lie-down.

 

[luckylion100]

But would have loved to have heard Andrews take on the two similar sized speakers and how they compare...

 

[lindsayt]

If someone were to blindfold me and to play me a track I've never heard before on a random selection of either the AVI system or the EV system. Would I be able to tell which system were playing? No I'm not confident that I would. Differences that big are very rare in the world of hi-fi.

If someone were to do the same with a track that I knew well and had been listening to a lot recently, would I be able to tell which system was playing? Possibly.

If we were to do a sighted test and to play the same track (any track with music on it) at roughly the same volume (give or take 4 dbs) would I be able to say which system sounded better and why? Yes.

If someone were to take away my EV system and tell me that I'd have to use the AVI system from now on, how would I feel? I'd find myself yearning for the more realistic sound of the EV's.

Coming up. A nice description.

 

[radiorog]

All 3 of us at the bake-off agreed that the EV system was the best sounding one.

We played a wide variety of music over the course of the 6 hours and every single test track sounded better on the EV's.

These were the sort of differences where the systems didn't need to be precisely level matched for the EV's to come out on top. The EV's could be played a few dbs quieter and they'd still sound better.

The most important difference between the AVI's and the EV's were in the midrange.

The EV's had better clarity. Better resolution. Better detail. Better snap, drive, impact. They sounded more realistic.

The AVI's had a smooth sound. The sort of sound that would appeal to someone who comes home from work and wants their hi-fi to sound like the aural equivalent of getting into a warm relaxing bath. Trouble is, the AVI's are over smooth. They smooth everything in the midrange. Vocals, the plucking of guitar strings, the rasp of brass instruments, the smack of Phil Collins drumstick on his tom drums, everything.

The AVI's sound as if the amplifiers are not in proper control of the speaker drivers. Or (as I would put it as a better explanation) the amplifiers send a signal to the speakers and the drivers say "Nope, we're not gonna do it. We're gonna play the music how we want and not how you want". And how the AVI drivers is a bit of lazy over smooth way.

Whereas with the EV's it sounds like the amps are saying "Give us a rasp" and the speakers say "Sure no problem". "Give us some background room acoustic echo on top of the music". "You got it!" In other words the EV's sound like they are playing the recording how the amps want and not how the speakers want.

Marks out of 10 to follow...

Very interesting. Sounds like you have some pretty awesome speakers there, to beat the avi so significantly, which in turn beat the Hegel 360 and ATC so significantly.

 

[radiorog]

Anyway, I think it'd be reasonable and accurate to raise the ATC to an 8.75 for the 2nd bake-off whilst keeping the AVI's at a 10. Using that scale I would put the EV system at a Spinal Tap 11.

Actually 11 is a bit of a lazy round number and want accurate statement here.

I'd put the EV's with Korneff amplification at an 11.1 and the EV's with the Creek amplification at a 10.9.

This is the sort of marking scheme that is subjective. I could fully understand why another listener might give the EV system a 10.4 or an 11.5.

Next. A bit more on quantifying the size of the differences...

By this scale it doesn't feel like the sentrys were too far ahead then, just significantly so.

 

[lindsayt]

Towards the end of the bake-off andrewjvt remarked that the EV's sounded like the most modern system.

I think that's an excellent way to summarise the differences we were hearing.

The smooth / oversmooth presentation of the AVI's did sound like what many people would associate with vintage gear.

After comparing a piano piece, lpv said that EV's were able to create the big box sound of a grand piano. I'd agree with that too.

Tonal balance, bass, imaging, sound-staging...

 

[radiorog]

If someone were to blindfold me and to play me a track I've never heard before on a random selection of either the AVI system or the EV system. Would I be able to tell which system were playing? No I'm not confident that I would. Differences that big are very rare in the world of hi-fi.

That surprises me. I would have guessed by the vast size difference the sound would be easily distinguishable. A positive for the avi here.

 

[oivavoi10]

Thanks LindsayT, very interesting read! Really thankful that you take the time to share your impressions in such a balanced way.

If I may bother you with a technical question: Do you know the crossover frequency/frequencies of the EVs? The reason I'm asking, is that it'd be interesting to know whether what you're referring to as the midrange superiority of the EVs is covered by the 15-woofer or the hornloaded tweeter. Since I'm under the impression they're a two-way? Or are they actually a three-way?

 

[lindsayt]

By this scale it doesn't feel like the sentrys were too far ahead then, just significantly so.

That's a really good point.

When you get to hi-fi of the level of Hegel H360's with ATC 11's you've got yourself a reasonable system. After all, it's not total rubbish. Hegel and ATC are professional companies. They're not fools.

So from there on it becomes increasingly difficult to find improvements. Diminishing returns.

The AVI's with sub were able to do that to an impressive extent. Just look at andrewjvt's and lpv's comments from the first bake-off.

And then the EV's come along and sound better than the AVI's.

 

[hg]

All 3 of us at the bake-off agreed that the EV system was the best sounding one.

Having looked up what an EV Sentry is that would be expected. It has enough cone area to cleanly handle transients unlike the small 2 ways, the directivity looks good unlike the small 2 ways, it has good bass extension with baffle step correction unlike the small 2 ways, the online response is probably a bit more ragged than the 2 ways (response unknown) but probably not by a lot, distortion is likely to be fine although tweeters have come on quite a lot since the 70s. It looks to be a decent high fidelity speaker if performing something like it was when new which is not always the case with old speakers.

As someone mentioned earlier, perhaps more interesting questions are which of the small 2 ways is closest in sound to the EV and which sounds best? The two answers are not necessarily the same.

 

[lindsayt]

Oivavoi10, the EV Sentry crossover frequencies are 600 hz and 3500. My understanding is that they use a combination of 2nd order and 3rd order (passive) crossovers.

They are 3 ways.

If you google "EV Sentry III" you'll find a link to a pdf of the manufacturers specs for these speakers.

 

[oivavoi10]

Oivavoi10, the EV Sentry crossover frequencies are 600 hz and 3500. My understanding is that they use a combination of 2nd order and 3rd order (passive) crossovers.

They are 3 ways.

If you google "EV Sentry III" you'll find a link to a pdf of the manufacturers specs for these speakers.

Thanks. Found it already!

So following up on HG's comment above: What would be your main technical explanations as to why the EVs sounded better?

 

[lindsayt]

Tonal balance. As installed in andrewjvt's living room, the AVI's with sub had a broadly similar tonal balance to the EV's. With the AVI's with sub having a slight touch more bass.

I personally think the EV's in my room at home (at my usual listening position) and in andrejvt's room from his sofa were 2 db's shy in the bass department. The manufacturer did say that were "designed for one quarter to one half space use".

It was difficult to fully assess the left to right imaging of the various speakers because the EV's were placed on the outside. So, naturally instruments recorded hard left of hard right were further to the left or right on the EV's. In terms of imaging precision I couldn't detect any important differences between any of the speakers.

For the front to back soundstaging, the EV's were more up front than the AVI's. Instruments to the fore of the mix sounded like they were slightly in front of the EV's, whilst with the AVI's they sound slightly behind the front panel of the speakers. I think there was no right or wrong with this. Just a difference.

 

[lindsayt]

Thanks. Found it already!

So following up on HG's comment above: What would be your main technical explanations as to why the EVs sounded better?

Oivavoi10, my answer to that would probably be best left to another thread. And everything I'd say on the matter would be a repetition of things I've already said on this forum several times over the years, mostly in debates with AVI proponents.

 

[oivavoi10]

Thanks. Found it already!

So following up on HG's comment above: What would be your main technical explanations as to why the EVs sounded better?

Oivavoi10, my answer to that would probably be best left to another thread. And everything I'd say on the matter would be a repetition of things I've already said on this forum several times over the years, mostly in debates with AVI proponents.

Ok, I will do some searching, then

But if we reverse course: Do you have any short answer as to why you think the AVIs performed better than the ATCs? If you’d like to answer, of course.

I'm not trying to nag here, hope it doesn't come off that way... I'm just very interested in the technical aspects that may explain our subjective experiences of sound.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

Tonal balance. As installed in andrewjvt's living room, the AVI's with sub had a broadly similar tonal balance to the EV's. With the AVI's with sub having a slight touch more bass.

I personally think the EV's in my room at home (at my usual listening position) and in andrejvt's room from his sofa were 2 db's shy in the bass department. The manufacturer did say that were "designed for one quarter to one half space use".

It was difficult to fully assess the left to right imaging of the various speakers because the EV's were placed on the outside. So, naturally instruments recorded hard left of hard right were further to the left or right on the EV's. In terms of imaging precision I couldn't detect any important differences between any of the speakers.

For the front to back soundstaging, the EV's were more up front than the AVI's. Instruments to the fore of the mix sounded like they were slightly in front of the EV's, whilst with the AVI's they sound slightly behind the front panel of the speakers. I think there was no right or wrong with this. Just a difference.

so basically in a nut shell what one active or passive ?

As I do not no what kind of speakers EV's are

the only reason I ask is that at the time of the very first bake off thread the active fanboys where making big clams about active speakers and kind of putting down passive speakers which I do not agree with .