Big E Speakers pt 3

[Mike Arnopol]

Just to let you guys know.
I'll tell you---if you expect the best of people---that's often times what you get.

I sent Arjank a pretty serious pm being very honest about what was going on here. We've exchanged pm's and you know what?
He's a really good guy, understanding my points that there are other forums much more open to these technical discussions. He's a really sincere guy with a tremendous wealth of knowledge and experience. I invited him on the technical forum and he was welcome with open arms.

I don't mind technical discussions here---hell--it ain't my forum. I just hate fueling people with an obvious agenda (which doesn't include Arjank). Unhappy insecure people just ruin the supportive vibe that I expect to encounter here.

All speakers have their strong and weak points. If you're going to crank it in a small room the 210 Flex is not your best choice. It pressurizes the room and as Tom B. had stated in his review--if you crank it in a small room---expect to have objects falling off of your fireplace mantle. Tom and I had talked and he said (to paraphrase) "it sounds good in a small room but it really seems to open up in a larger room". I couldn't agree more. Some of my other cabs might be a better choice if you like to crank it at home. As well as some other maker's cabs. That's one of the reason I've split it into two cabs. (the Mod) More living room friendly with just the top section.

Again---Arjank and I are now good buddies and life is good.

 

[12bass]

This is a Big E thread, one which covers a relatively innovative loudspeaker design which has been associated with a lot of extraordinary performance claims. Not sure there is a specification somewhere that it must only contain subjective impressions, whilst avoiding any attempt at providing or discussing objective data on the technology.

If someone says "my Mom makes the best tasting apple pie", this is a subjective statement of personal preference, not something which can be realistically quantified or challenged. However, the reproduction of sound and, more specifically, loudspeaker design can be quantified, and there is a whole field of science (acoustics) which can be applied to verify or falsify claims about sound reproduction devices. If the MVW design really does what its designers claim, this can easily be verified or falsified by performing the appropriate measurements in a testing facility.

Frankly, I was really hoping that BGM would perform a much more thorough review, specifically by testing the various manufacturer's claims about how the MVW technology purportedly greatly surpasses existing designs. After reading, I was quite disappointed to see that only a few standard measurements were performed, measurements which appear to show no special performance benefit to the design. Nor did the statements of the designers provide any meaningful clarification regarding how the technology works.

Because of this, it seems like the BGM review represents a lost opportunity to empirically vindicate the MVW technology. It isn't that I am a naysayer. In fact, I happen to like Q-tuner pickups, from another designer who has seen a fair degree of criticism regarding the choice of language used in marketing his product. Rather than see Big E fail, I would prefer to see some hard data which can be used to support the various claims about the MVW design. Unfortunately, at the moment it appears that we will have to wait for a more thorough review before that can occur.

 

[nostatic]

Whoah, nellie.

Sorry, but playing the "do you even play/gig bass" card ain't exactly solid ground, either. (Duke doesn't, and so what if he doesn't?) And this *is* the amps section, where gear talk happens, and so does speaker design and all matters acoustic... the science of making things heard, which is what an amp does.

Correct, but presumably the cab design has an end game. For the builder, it is to sell cabinets, and with the good ones, always be looking to make the next one better. For the player, it is to play through the cabinets, and ideally, achieve a sound in their head. The process of getting to that end product is certainly of interest and up for debate. But at some point, the talk stops and the playing starts. So if a half dozen players say, "this works (or doesn't) and I hear xyz," then does the simulation data really have much weight or meaning? The software is there to aid design, not be the answer or final arbiter. And I think a few lose sight of that.

That said, if someone's passion is designing/testing cabinets, then perhaps the software/theory is the end game. But it is talkbass, not an acoustic engineering forum. No doubt some of that is relevant, but in the end, the bass is for playing. Unless you're a collector...which is a whole 'nother fish kettle that I don't really understand

 

[Mike Arnopol]

This is a Big E thread, one which covers a relatively innovative loudspeaker design which has been associated with a lot of extraordinary performance claims. Not sure there is a specification somewhere that it must only contain subjective impressions, whilst avoiding any attempt at providing or discussing objective data on the technology.

If someone says "my Mom makes the best tasting apple pie", this is a subjective statement of personal preference, not something which can be realistically quantified or challenged. However, the reproduction of sound and, more specifically, loudspeaker design can be quantified, and there is a whole field of science (acoustics) which can be applied to verify or falsify claims about sound reproduction devices. If the MVW design really does what its designers claim, this can easily be verified or falsified by performing the appropriate measurements in a testing facility.

Frankly, I was really hoping that BGM would perform a much more thorough review, specifically by testing the various manufacturer's claims about how the MVW technology purportedly greatly surpasses existing designs. After reading, I was quite disappointed to see that only a few standard measurements were performed, measurements which appear to show no special performance benefit to the design. Nor did the statements of the designers provide any meaningful clarification regarding how the technology works.

Because of this, it seems like the BGM review represents a lost opportunity to empirically vindicate the MVW technology. It isn't that I am a naysayer. In fact, I happen to like Q-tuner pickups, from another designer who has seen a fair degree of criticism regarding the choice of language used in marketing his product. Rather than see Big E fail, I would prefer to see some hard data which can be used to support the various claims about the MVW design. Unfortunately, at the moment it appears that we will have to wait for a more thorough review before that can occur.

I understand your point but I have to speak out in defense of BGM. I asked Tom to do more detailed measurements--it don't scare me none. But that's unfair. They have to maintain a level playing field and they can realistically only do so much. I would love a publication devoted to technical analysis and would gladly submit my speakers. Tom E., Steve and Leland were asked to submit a home speaker for review and analysis by one of the top technical publications in the biz. And there will be measurements.

Tom and BGM do the best job I could imagine. They can only say so much about any product. I was surprised at how much space they gave the 210Flex review and felt honored. As Duke said---that spoke volumes to me.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

Actually---while happy about the sale of the 45/110 I was kicking myself for not being pushy and forcing a 110 or 210 Flex on Nostatic! He wanted a combo with the small cab for small gigs and the sub for more oomph. I love this setup but it's very flat, hifi sort of sound with a bit of warmth in the bass. It's designed for someone that doubles on upright and electric. Like Dirt Poor Robbins. He will be getting a Flex from me--not trying to generate a sale---but just to see if it meets his tonal goals---which was one of my design objectives!

 

[12bass]

I understand your point but I have to speak out in defense of BGM. I asked Tom to do more detailed measurements--it don't scare me none. But that's unfair. They have to maintain a level playing field and they can realistically only do so much.

I strongly disagree. MVW is purportedly no ordinary bass enclosure. If a particular product is being marketed as using a revolutionary design, one which flies clearly in the face of conventional wisdom, then the testing regime should attempt to verify or falsify these extraordinary claims.

That said, I get the impression that BGM tends to shy away from reviews which might generate controversy or ill will in the industry, like publishing the real-world power output of the various Genz Benz Class D amplifiers.

 

[J.Wolf]

by that rationale, any manufacturer who claims that their product is extraordinary/innovative/game changing to their market should be entitled to a higher level of attention, evaluation and testing by a review mag than a "normal" product? That precludes the idea of a level playing field and isn't fair to manufacturers, Also it means that if manufacturers don't make that claim, they'll get shorted by the review in comparison to the others. Hopefully you can see how that is problematic, and why review mags need to set a standard for depth to follow.

If you desire a higher level of scrutiny than the standard set by a particular magazine, rather than expecting them to change their protocol, perhaps you should facilitate that level yourself. The mag is called bass gear, not myth busters: bass gear edition

I'm not affiliated with this publication, I just object on the matter of principle

 

[tombowlus]

Frankly, I was really hoping that BGM would perform a much more thorough review, specifically by testing the various manufacturer's claims about how the MVW technology purportedly greatly surpasses existing designs. After reading, I was quite disappointed to see that only a few standard measurements were performed, measurements which appear to show no special performance benefit to the design. Nor did the statements of the designers provide any meaningful clarification regarding how the technology works.

Because of this, it seems like the BGM review represents a lost opportunity to empirically vindicate the MVW technology. It isn't that I am a naysayer. In fact, I happen to like Q-tuner pickups, from another designer who has seen a fair degree of criticism regarding the choice of language used in marketing his product. Rather than see Big E fail, I would prefer to see some hard data which can be used to support the various claims about the MVW design. Unfortunately, at the moment it appears that we will have to wait for a more thorough review before that can occur.

While I certainly respect your opinion, and while it would have been interesting to go down that road, our policy at BGM is that we will not materially change our tests for one specific product in order to prove (or disprove) specific manufacturer's claims. That can be a slippery slope, and it has the potential to erode the independent nature of our bench testing.

We will, however, perform certain additional measurements (using 1w/1m) to highlight unique features of a certain cab, such as the extra charts showing the impacts of the various switches on the MAS-210Flex.

 

[KJung]

by that rationale, any manufacturer who claims that their product is extraordinary/innovative/game changing to their market should be entitled to a higher level of attention, evaluation and testing by a review mag than a "normal" product? That precludes the idea of a level playing field and isn't fair to manufacturers, Also it means that if manufacturers don't make that claim, they'll get shorted by the review in comparison to the others. Hopefully you can see how that is problematic, and why review mags need to set a standard for depth to follow.

If you desire a higher level of scrutiny than the standard set by a particular magazine, rather than expecting them to change their protocol, perhaps you should facilitate that level yourself. The mag is called bass gear, not myth busters: bass gear edition

I'm not affiliated with this publication, I just object on the matter of principle

+1 Good post. Seems to me enough people have tried these and reviewed them (mostly positively) to assure most that these cabs work for one reason or the other.

Combine that with Mike and the gang kind of pulling back a bit from all this vortex 'magic' talk, etc., and it seems like, for 99% of players, the drama should be over with these cabs.

IMO, very nice review by BGM, and my limited understanding of the plots describes pretty much what most reviews talk about.... strong but tight low end (that nice combination of superior mechanics of the woofers and a relatively tight low end voicing), and the nice variation available in the upper midrange/treble.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

+1 Good post. Seems to me enough people have tried these and reviewed them (mostly positively) to assure most that these cabs work for one reason or the other.

Combine that with Mike and the gang kind of pulling back a bit from all this vortex 'magic' talk, etc., and it seems like, for 99% of players, the drama should be over with these cabs.

IMO, very nice review by BGM, and my limited understanding of the plots describes pretty much what most reviews talk about.... strong but tight low end (that nice combination of superior mechanics of the woofers and a relatively tight low end voicing), and the nice variation available in the upper midrange/treble.

Hey Ken---great to hear from you. You're comments about the tight low end voicing is spot on.

The interesting thing for me is that in my experience I wouldn't like the woofer we use in the Flex in a reflex cab. The QTS (damping) is low (.27) which in a reflex enclosure would be too tight and dry for my taste. But in the MVW enclosures it gets a bit of warmth to offset that. So it doesn't sound dry at all to me---but it definitely is on the "tight and punhy" side.

The MAS109 uses the Eminence BP102 which I also wouldn't be thrilled with in a reflex enclosure It's QTS is .43--which is bordering on acceptable for a sealed box but--again, to my taste--can be a bit loosey-goosey in a conventional box. In the MVW it gains some low end control and punch while still maintaining it's warmth and kindof "old school" vibe. It doesn't exhibit the overhang and lack of punch.

Again--to those concerned---this wasn't a statement of superiority of my speakers---just elucidating on the previous poster's comments on low end response.

Ken---one of these days when I drive up to D.C. I'll have to throw some cabs in the back of the van and stop by---if you supply the steaks!

 

[Foz]

If you desire a higher level of scrutiny than the standard set by a particular magazine, rather than expecting them to change their protocol, perhaps you should facilitate that level yourself.

True - that aint BGM's cross to bare, but trying to put the burden of proof for extraordinary claims on the skeptical user/ potential customer / actual paid-in owner would be even more misplaced.

Manufacturers making miraculous claims for their products need to back em up. Failing to do is false advertising at the very least - fraud is perhaps a more apt term.

Combine that with Mike and the gang kind of pulling back a bit from all this vortex 'magic' talk, etc., and it seems like, for 99% of players, the drama should be over with these cabs.

Nah... "kind of pulling back a bit" is a distinction without a difference. Mike and crew have repeatedly claimed that the miracle vortex boxes they sell propagate sound in defiance of the inverse square law, will fill a room with sound without exciting reverberation modes, and make sound wrap around obstacles so as to circumvent shadowing, and diffraction. All of which is utter hogwash.

Unless and until they either prove these claims, or specifically retract and disown same, and offer full refunds to all who bought based on such, they are acting unethically and all the drama-free mush headed emotionalism and rhetorical hair splitting in the world aint gonna change a thing.

 

[GK Breivik]

I have played recorded music through my 4x5 two rooms away facing the other way. It sounds remarkably much like it does up close and on axis. I've never heard another speaker doing this.

I'm not the most technical or science savvy person, but I have 8 years of College/ University training with a Masters degree in electric bass performance among other things. I've also recorded and mixed a few albums. I make my living from playing bass.

 

[nomatic]

True - that aint BGM's cross to bare, but trying to put the burden of proof for extraordinary claims on the skeptical user/ potential customer / actual paid-in owner would be even more misplaced.

Manufacturers making miraculous claims for their products need to back em up. Failing to do is false advertising at the very least - fraud is perhaps a more apt term.



Nah... "kind of pulling back a bit" is a distinction without a difference. Mike and crew have repeatedly claimed that the miracle vortex boxes they sell propagate sound in defiance of the inverse square law, will fill a room with sound without exciting reverberation modes, and make sound wrap around obstacles so as to circumvent shadowing, and diffraction. All of which is utter hogwash.

Unless and until they either prove these claims, or specifically retract and disown same, and offer full refunds to all who bought based on such, they are acting unethically and all the drama-free mush headed emotionalism and rhetorical hair splitting in the world aint gonna change a thing.

I have designed a few recording studio's and am a mastering engineer who guest lectures on a university level on Audio. I can say with some certainty that these speakers have much less effect on room problems than conventional designs.
I don't buy snake oil and have about $6O,OOO into my critical listening rig..... I am starting to get irritated with the hidden master's of speaker design and their analysis without having a unit in hand. The folks at Big E have landed on something new and interesting with this design and I feel others feel this is a threat. It is so interesting when certain ego's are confronted with even the potential of a shift in paradigm.
many of the great innovations have come from folks confronting at a old problem from a different angle or discipline.
Very rare are true breakthroughs achieved by the sceptic.
The balanced position is a combination of discernment and open mindedness. I encourage our "experts" to try a unit on a
gig and then report back. This forum is about Bass playing!

 

[kesslari]

...All of which is utter hogwash.

Unless and until they either prove these claims, or specifically retract and disown same, and offer full refunds to all who bought based on such, they are acting unethically and all the drama-free mush headed emotionalism and rhetorical hair splitting in the world aint gonna change a thing.

 

[nostatic]

I think Mush-headed Emotionalism is playing the main stage at Coachella today.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

Unless and until they either prove these claims, or specifically retract and disown same, and offer full refunds to all who bought based on such, they are acting unethically and all the drama-free mush headed emotionalism and rhetorical hair splitting in the world aint gonna change a thing.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but there are about 80 of these cabs out there. I don't have to make any claims any more. The people that own them do it for me. Anyone that buys the cab has two weeks to send it back with full refund. I've taken one back. And that customer agreed that they did do what they claimed---he was just used to a different voicing. He called me back last week and was talking about purchasing a different cab from me.

The proof of these claims are obvious in the experiences of the people that own them. In your statement, your saying that all the claims are hogwash---that really pisses me off. You can insult me all you'd like--I can handle it. But you're insulting my customers. I can't handle that. Many are top professionals in the field. Two are top reviewers in the field. And many hobbyists and amateurs. One commonality-- virtually all of them have owned many top-quality bass loudspeakers. And have preferred mine. I'm not saying that mine are superior to others--they are to me, but there are many wonderful bass cabs out there.

Again---graphs don't represent the validation of these claims. They can point in the proper direction, but the personal experiences of ALL of the customers and reviewers can. Any one of them could have gotten full refunds if they wished.

It saddens me that there are certain manufacturers and speaker designers out there that encourage their supporters out there to create dissension, devisiveness, and a general air of negativity and criticism of anything that might be different than their personal allegiances.

I beg my supporters to never do that to any other manufacturers or designers. Or to continually try to create a negative air in other threads. That type of petty negativity hurts everyone.

The agenda of the previous poster is obvious. It's not in the spirit open discussion or the joy of playing bass.

We are working on figuring out a demo program for people to be able to try the products.

 

[J.Wolf]

I guess by mush headed emotionalism you mean guys who actually playing the gear and getting desired results. Count me in.

In contrast, it would be preferable to be somebody who is not playing the gear, has no experience with it, and has fixed and unwavering opinions about how something actually performs?

 

[J.Wolf]

I think there are lots of fantastic cabinet designers and manufacturers out there making incredible products. The difference between me and the disruptive accusatory voices in this thread is that I would never ever encourage anyone to create an opinion of various other gear without having a chance to hear them with their own ears first. Seems simple enough.

Seems pretty plain to me that the objective of some of these loud inflammatory posters is not to add to the conversation in any tangibly helpful way, but to bait Mike into an argument and get him in trouble on this forum. Classy fellas.

 

[mothra2]

...Very rare are true breakthroughs achieved by the sceptic.
The balanced position is a combination of discernment and open mindedness. I encourage our "experts" to try a unit on a
gig and then report back. This forum is about Bass playing!

+1

 

[mntngrown]

I think Mush-headed Emotionalism is playing the main stage at Coachella today.

That's what I'm talkin bout! LOL