Gregadd said: With the exception of Revel the word mid-fi seems to float around in my head. Improving products across the band is a laudable goal. The question is why do we need scientific research to achieve those gaols."...are designed to meet the same performance targets: flat on-axis frequency response, smooth off-axis response/directivity, and wide bandwidth..." We have long since discovered how to do this and verify it through scientific measurements. How would that design process differ from say David Wilson and Wilson Audio? IMO one of the most neutral designs and his attention to detail borders on anal compulsive.

To achieve the goals you put forth we don't need so much scientific advancement but motivation to excel in these areas and honest evaluation of the results.

Do you see my problem? It is entirely likely that we have different ideas about the definition of advancing the SOTA. My idea is taking the best we have and pushing it closer to the recreation of live music. Pushing the envelope as it were.

Over my many years I have owned many products that were not SOTA but wrung every ounce of performance from that design given their design parameters and price point. In fact I think I own three of those products now. Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean by "mid-fi": does it mean poor sound quality or the cost of the product? The two are often negatively correlated unless the product design is based on sound science and engineering.We make products at all price points from $30k per speaker down to $100-200. At the higher price points, there should ideally be fewer compromises in sound quality because there is more money, engineering and technology to throw at the product.At the lower price points, due to restrictions in size, form factor, etc there are ultimately compromises or tradeoffs in sound quality that have to be made. From an engineering/scientific aspect, this is actually a more challenging exercise in some ways. Deciding what the best sound quality tradeoffs are in terms of on/off axis response, bass extension, directivity, max SPL, distortion, etc is an area is an ongoing area of scientific research at Harman. Audio scientists still do not clearly understand the relationship between the perception of nonlinear distortion and its measurement. Reducing nonlinear distortion in loudspeakers at higher SPLs comes at great added cost to the speaker, and therefore, it is good to understand the psychoacoustics in order to optimize the perceptual versus cost benefits.Another area that needs scientific research is the acoustical interaction between the loudspeaker and the room. In my opinion, this is the single largest obstacle in getting more consistent and accurate recorded and reproduced sound. If we can solve the problem, we will significantly advance the SOTA for everyone.Harman or a competitor can build the world's most accurate speaker, but as soon as the customer puts it in their room all bets are off. The room dominates the quality of sounds heard below 200-300 Hz. Bass quality accounts for 30% of the listeners' preference according to our research, which is something that cannot be ignored. I believe Harman is one of the leaders in this area in terms of research and technology. We've developed our own room/loudspeaker measurement system, a room correction algorithm that works, and a multiple subwoofer bass management solution we call Sound Field Management that reduces the spatial variance in bass performance across a seating area. These technologies are currently in JBL Synthesis and Revel system packages, and will soon be in many more Harman products including professional ones used to make the art.These are just a few of the active scientific research projects at Harman that are helping to advance the SOTA at both higher and lower product price points. Our philosophy is to optimize the sound quality of the product regardless of its cost. Good sound shouldn't be exclusive to the wealthy.