Speaker Measurements for Australian Speakers

[Satanica]

8 minutes ago, Grant Slack said:

Hi Paul,

 

(since the OP mentioned Krix) I have inspected the excellent anechoic chamber at the Krix factory, plus they have a crane-mounted turntable that allows them to take pseudo-anechoic spinorama-type measurements way up in the air. So they definitely know the measurements of their (excellent) speakers.

 

I once asked them to publish the data, and they say it is not what their marketing strategists advise, so they follow that advice. Now, I know it is easy to jump to the conclusion that it must be because their speaker have bad measurements, but I know for a fact this is not true, having seen measurements first hand under NDA. Instead, my best conclusion is that it really is true that publishing measurements doesn't help sales overall, ie a few buyers really know how to correctly interpret spinoramas, but most would simply jump to wrong conclusions, or even be put off by the fact they are there.

 

cheers

Grant

 

Hi Grant, thanks for the very interesting insider knowledge.

I understand the choices made by Krix which I'm not surprised to read about.

Obviously, I'm very much in the minority in that I will not purchase without knowing what I'm getting, on paper.

Of course I'm old enough and have been doing this long enough that I wasn't always like this.

It takes to times to learn, especially if you don't have the background and sometimes I still feel like a novice.

But, it's quite amusing in that it seems like there are some here (not you) who seem to think that someone like me needs saving, from myself.

Well good luck with that!

[Guest]

Another thought from the "respectfully allow a foot in both camps" perspective ...

 

DSP has allowed for massive advancements in modern audio (and video) products. By its very nature it couldn't exist without the ability to take and interpret measurements. But even one of Australia's most awarded cinema designers (and more recently, manufacturer), David Moseley of @Wavetrain has said, and forgive my memory if I recall this incorrectly, that even after all the measurements and filters are applied (semi)-automatically in DSP, he still uses his ears for that final tweak and tune. 

 

I often referred to it as "X-factor" back when I was still reviewing, or "emotion" in music. To the best of my knowledge, there's no way to measure that, or at least even determine it from a set of other measurements. 

[Stereotech]

Thanks Grant for the video.

 

Doing some great stuff there in Adelaide.

 

Very impressive!

 

Should give us all hope that we can actually still design/engineer AND build things here in this country.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Stereotech said:

Should give us all hope that we can actually still design/engineer AND build things here in this country.

 

It's great isn't it? Australian design AND manufacturing is really starting to get traction again in our industry. I'm contacted regularly by new startups and we are offering them as much support as we can. I can say there are a few in the R&D stages now that we will be seeing pop up later this year, early next. I'm contemplating having an entire floor of the 2024 StereoNET Show (now confirmed) dedicated to Australian brands and manufacturers. Fingers crossed.

 

It's also why we're going to be featuring Australian Made more on this website and slowly building out a section for it.

[March Audio]

1 hour ago, Marc said:

Another thought from the "respectfully allow a foot in both camps" perspective ...

 

DSP has allowed for massive advancements in modern audio (and video) products. By its very nature it couldn't exist without the ability to take and interpret measurements. But even one of Australia's most awarded cinema designers (and more recently, manufacturer), David Moseley of @Wavetrain has said, and forgive my memory if I recall this incorrectly, that even after all the measurements and filters are applied (semi)-automatically in DSP, he still uses his ears for that final tweak and tune. 

 

I often referred to it as "X-factor" back when I was still reviewing, or "emotion" in music. To the best of my knowledge, there's no way to measure that, or at least even determine it from a set of other measurements. 

 

There is a very good reason for that, and its very well understood.

 

You cant correct for speaker off axis responses with DSP, only the basic on axis response.  If a speaker has wonky off axis response (therefore wonky sound power and directivity index) then getting the on axis response right wont help, it will still sound wrong.

 

"room EQ" is often misused.

 

This is why you need 360 degree spinorama (Klippel) measurements to understand what a speaker will sound like in a room.

Edited July 4, 2023 by March Audio

[Satanica]

1 hour ago, Marc said:

Another thought from the "respectfully allow a foot in both camps" perspective ...

 

DSP has allowed for massive advancements in modern audio (and video) products. By its very nature it couldn't exist without the ability to take and interpret measurements. But even one of Australia's most awarded cinema designers (and more recently, manufacturer), David Moseley of @Wavetrain has said, and forgive my memory if I recall this incorrectly, that even after all the measurements and filters are applied (semi)-automatically in DSP, he still uses his ears for that final tweak and tune.

 

Yeah sure, I do the same thing with quite regularly with Dirac Live room correction.

And that is make changes and listen to the effect and then make further changes based on listening.

There's a slide from a presentation from Floyd Toole about room measurements as below:

 

But, the OP referred to and is interested in speaker measurements and that's not the same thing.

Edited July 4, 2023 by Satanica

[Keith_W]

5 hours ago, Rockfish said:

 

You would be excluding some wonderful sounding speakers if that is your approach sadly.

 

I take a cursory glance at measurements if they are available, but I am firmly in the "sound matters" camp.  And I would never purchase a pair of high-end (as in expensive) speakers without auditioning first, no matter how they measure.

 

As a personal example, I covet a pair of high-end Audio Note AN-E speakers, and intend to treat myself when I retire.  Anyone who knows anything about these speakers know how poorly they measure - but those that have heard them know how glorious they sound.

 

I agree with you to an extent. I have said elsewhere on SNA that technical performance and taste are two different things. They are even different philosophies. There are some in our hobby whose goal is 100% undistorted reproduction of what is in the recording - if it isn't, then it is not "high fidelity". And then there are some whose goal is simply something that sounds nice - or as a friend puts it, is "emotional". 

I too am firmly in the "sound matters" camp, despite my obsession with taking measurements and tuning everything by DSP. I just think that looking at measurements is a faster and more consistent way to get there, rather than haphazardly going on an equipment merry-go-round. You get more bang for your buck by avoiding equipment that are unlikely to make a difference and spending money on what really matters. 

 

Also, what has not been said yet is that even the most talented speaker designers do not know how their designs will perform in your room. They design to an idealized target, but all that goes out the window when it's in your living room. Those measurements of the speaker under anechoic conditions or idealized conditions then have to be interpreted very carefully because only part of it (i.e. Schroder frequency, above roughly 400Hz) matters, and everything below Schroder is going to change by a LOT. And even above Schroder, the designer doesn't know what kind of misguided room treatment some people may have applied, or furnishings that may spectrally distort upper frequencies. 

This is NOT to say that measurements provided by speaker manufacturers do not matter, because they definitely do. If you understand them, you can more reliably predict how they will perform at home. Some tuning at home is still necessary, but your job will be easier if you bought a speaker that was not wonky in the first place.

 

The Audio Note AN-E is known for having weird cabinet resonances and a strange frequency response that corresponds to no known target, which was part of their design philosophy. This happens to be opposite to everyone else's philosophy of rigid construction, etc. The audible effect of those resonances are quite predictable, but the preference of the listeners isn't. For me, cabinet resonances muddy up the sound. For someone else, it might provide "richness". So yeah, I guess the best thing I can say about it is that it sounds different. Like I said, good measurements and taste are two different things. 

[Rockfish]

You make a very good point about design philosophy, particularly in relation to the Audio Notes, and something I should have expanded on earlier.  As I transition into retirement, I will likely end up with a smaller listening space than I currently have.  The Audio Notes are designed to be positioned close to the front wall and corner loaded for improved bass response, and they are typically displayed in this configuration.  This design philosophy fits my use case perfectly with respects to listening space and the way they are auditioned gives me a pretty good idea on how they will behave in my room.

 

The way I approach equipment selection is to listen to as many brands and configurations in as many different environments as possible.  I enjoy visiting multiple retailers and fellow enthusiasts to listen to music, its one of the most enjoyable aspects of this hobby to me.  I only purchase equipment that I have auditioned multiple times, and I find that approach keeps me off the merry-go-round somewhat.  Measurements will always play second fiddle to this approach for me.

 

I guess the point I was trying to make is that we all should be selecting speakers based on our own personal listening preferences, and the room always plays its part.  A design philosophy targeting a specific use case means that measurements aren't always the be all and end all, and I was attempting to use the Audio Notes as an example.

Edited July 4, 2023 by Rockfish

[March Audio]

41 minutes ago, Keith_W said:

Also, what has not been said yet is that even the most talented speaker designers do not know how their designs will perform in your room. They design to an idealized target, but all that goes out the window when it's in your living room. Those measurements of the speaker under anechoic conditions or idealized conditions then have to be interpreted very carefully because only part of it (i.e. Schroder frequency, above roughly 400Hz) matters, and everything below Schroder is going to change by a LOT. And even above Schroder, the designer doesn't know what kind of misguided room treatment some people may have applied, or furnishings that may spectrally distort upper frequencies. 

 

Whilst this is correct, speakers that have smooth on and off axis responses, smooth sound power and directivity index will sound better than those that don't.  This is regardless of the anomalies the specific room imparts.

[Cloth Ears]

4 hours ago, Marc said:

Some people like/use measurements, others prefer to listen.

[rant]See, Marc, this is where everybody seems to have it wrong. I believe your statement should read:

"Everyone likes to listen and some people also like to use measurements."

(except for some poor sods, who live out in the sticks and to whom listening before purchase might not be an option)

 

And therein lies the problem. Whereas it's lovely to think that people can be divided into two separate and completely divergent camps, this is simply not true. And any statement to the effect is another brick in the fake news wall. As far as I can see it, there's one (quite small) camp that eschews measurements in any form and seems to think that electronic equipment can be built without any sort of measurements being taken. [/rant]

 

As to the original topic, speaker measurements are the least understood of all audio technical data (with the possible exception of cables) by the layman (or woman), so publishing them would probably only confuse and put off a number of potential clients. Whereas a shiny picture or two would work wonders for getting people to come in and have a listen.

[AudioGeek]

4 hours ago, Marc said:

I'm personally of the opinion that specs (and measurements) don't tell the whole story.

 

This statement is part of the urban myth about objective perspective to audio gear.

No objectivist would think measurements, even spinorama, will tell the whole story.

 

However, without measurements its hard to know if a speaker is fit for purpose or will meet application criteria. With an appropriate shortlist we still need to audition/listen, if possible, to see which  speaker we prefer.

 

Modern speakers have benefited from proven research into what is preferred sound. Look at Kef, D&D8c, JBL, Kii3, March Audio, Buchardt, Wharfdale, Kyron etc.  They are all targeting perfection of spinorama measurements. Why? - because its proven to be the preferred sound.  Then with dsp we can adjust the sound/frequency curve for different source material quality, different genres, different listening priorities or even just mood. Only speakers that measure well on and off-axis will allow this.

 

The car analogy does not make sense to me either. I have always test driven, but only after shortlisting based on specs/measurements to identify a vehicle that fits my need. Without specs/measurements how would you know even where to start - just rock up to a dealer and start test drivinh? If I win the lotto might make an exception with a Lambo lol.

 

But equally if someone prefers to audition speakers in a showroom or at home and is not worried about measurements - more power to them, go for it. As long as the science behind it all is not being hidden from view by dismissal. I mean the OP asked why no measurements - and is being told (big generaliation) by some that they dont matter????

 

 

 

[Satanica]

15 minutes ago, Cloth Ears said:

As far as I can see it, there's one (quite small) camp that eschews measurements in any form and seems to think that electronic equipment can be built without any sort of measurements being taken.

 

And what I've noticed in this thread is what appears to be measurement phobia and anxiety.

A fear of what is unknown to them and beyond their control.

And who wants to know how one's speaker measures like, cause if the news isn't great this could lead to the dreaded FoMO!

Edited July 4, 2023 by Satanica

[March Audio]

7 hours ago, AudioGeek said:

This statement is part of the urban myth about objective perspective to audio gear.

No objectivist would think measurements, even spinorama, will tell the whole story.

 

Yes indeed.  This myth annoys the t**** off me.

 

I think its often just used as a weapon to denigrate an opposing view.  Of course people who use objective information to assess audio equipment are also subjectivists.  Why would anyone think otherwise?????

 

7 hours ago, AudioGeek said:

Modern speakers have benefited from proven research into what is preferred sound. Look at Kef, D&D8c, JBL, Kii3, March Audio, Buchardt, Wharfdale, Kyron etc.  They are all targeting perfection of spinorama measurements. Why? - because its proven to be the preferred sound.

 

The science is there.  Its proven with subjective analysis.

 

7 hours ago, AudioGeek said:

But equally if someone prefers to audition speakers in a showroom or at home and is not worried about measurements - more power to them, go for it.   As long as the science behind it all is not being hidden from view by dismissal.

 

Of course.  

 

People dismiss the science for several reasons, often because they simply dont have a deep enough understanding of it.  That shouldnt be unexpected as its a complex subject.  However, dismissing it because it doesnt tie up with any one individuals personal experience, or because they once didnt like a speaker that "measured well" according to some simplistic spec sheet, is rather closed minded.

Edited July 4, 2023 by March Audio

[Guest]

1 hour ago, AudioGeek said:

This statement is part of the urban myth about objective perspective to audio gear.

No objectivist would think measurements, even spinorama, will tell the whole story.

 

However, without measurements its hard to know if a speaker is fit for purpose or will meet application criteria. With an appropriate shortlist we still need to audition/listen, if possible, to see which  speaker we prefer.

 

You're probably right with this. Not all those with an objective perspective on hi-fi share your balanced view either though. 

I think this was the start of my argument, in that there are some that are very vocal and won't accept or even respect the subjectivist approach either (and vice-versa). I genuinely came into this thread to try and steer it towards a neutral position and subtly remind all to respect all views.

 

It's just an ongoing and tiring battle, and the threads too often have to be moved to this subforum until they eventually die out (or need to be locked). In a perfect world, every thread would be moderated by a knowledgable and impartial party, just like a proper panel of experts. We know this is not practical for a forum (particularly, of this size) in the real world. 

 

1 hour ago, AudioGeek said:

Modern speakers have benefited from proven research into what is preferred sound. Look at Kef, D&D8c, JBL, Kii3, March Audio, Buchardt, Wharfdale, Kyron etc.  They are all targeting perfection of spinorama measurements. Why? - because its proven to be the preferred sound.  Then with dsp we can adjust the sound/frequency curve for different source material quality, different genres, different listening priorities or even just mood. Only speakers that measure well on and off-axis will allow this.

 

Can't argue with that at all. I believe that was the point I was making in an earlier post. Science and listening working together for the best result.

 

1 hour ago, AudioGeek said:

The car analogy does not make sense to me either. I have always test driven, but only after shortlisting based on specs/measurements to identify a vehicle that fits my need. Without specs/measurements how would you know even where to start - just rock up to a dealer and start test drivinh? If I win the lotto might make an exception with a Lambo lol.

 

 

Maybe a poor analogy, they are my older brother's most excellent talent, not mine. 

 

1 hour ago, AudioGeek said:

But equally if someone prefers to audition speakers in a showroom or at home and is not worried about measurements - more power to them, go for it. As long as the science behind it all is not being hidden from view by dismissal. I mean the OP asked why no measurements - and is being told (big generaliation) by some that they dont matter????

 

Yes, an excellent and balanced view which I completely agree with. Not everyone is dismissing the science, but it cannot be dismissed either that the vast majority of consumers do not need (or want) them to make their purchasing decisions. Perhaps if there was a standard produced for all measurements and it led to some sort of grading system, "score" for want of a better word, and in a way that ensured "apples vs apples", then we'd all be better off for it? 

[Grant Slack]

10 minutes ago, Marc said:

Perhaps if there was a standard produced for all measurements and it led to some sort of grading system, "score" for want of a better word, and in a way that ensured "apples vs apples", then we'd all be better off for it? 

Hi Marc, very nice post (as was @AudioGeek’s)

 

According to Toole and Olive, the Spinorama is the grading system you mention above, at least as far as pure sound quality at modest SPLs is concerned.

 

Dr Olive went further and developed a single-number score for speakers, which by his own admission is imperfect but “not as bad as the people who hate it say, and not as good as the people who love it say”. 

 

cheers

Grant

 

PS that’s a paraphrase of Dr Olive above, not an exact quote.

Edited July 4, 2023 by Grant Slack

[Guest]

Perhaps what I've come to learn from this thread is that maybe we should be publishing more educational content from experts in the field on StereoNET. Topics along the lines of "How to interpret speaker measurements", "What are Spin Curves/Spinorama?", and even what standards to exist that the vast majority of consumers (and dare I say, some retailers) don't even know exist. 

[March Audio]

5 hours ago, Marc said:

Perhaps if there was a standard produced for all measurements and it led to some sort of grading system, "score" for want of a better word, and in a way that ensured "apples vs apples", then we'd all be better off for it? 

 

As Grant says, we do have that.  The data generated by  the spinorama technique, as encapsulated in the CTA2034 standard, can be used to generate a "preference score".  This all fell out of the Tool / Olive research work into the correlation of subjective preference to objective measurements.  The correlation from their work for preferred speaker sound was 0.96 for small speakers and 0.86 for large iirc.  So whilst not perfect, its very good.

 

A point that people really need to take on board is that this research work is based on peoples subjective opinions on what speaker sound they liked. I.E LISTENING! Its not some kind of abstract scientific theory, or exercise in measurebation.

 

This site has collated a shed load of spinorama measurements and shows the preference score.

 

https://www.spinorama.org/

 

https://www.spinorama.org/scores.html?quality=High

 

No-one is suggesting that the preference score is the be all and end all, there are still a number of parameters that are missing from it (compression effects is one that springs to mind).

 

By definition it is simplifying the data, but its an excellent starting point for whittling down short lists.

 

 

Edited July 4, 2023 by March Audio

[rantan]

My take from this thread is that ,just like in other areas of society and science, the vast majority of people will use various methods to discover what is is that they are seeking. AKA the sensible centre.

 

 

There are some hard liners in the extremes from feel good  only,to pure science only, but that the sensible and balanced majority, know enough about what methods are available and use these to make an informed and personal decision.

[Jakeyb77_Redux]

On 27/6/2023 at 10:29 PM, Tulsi Patel said:

Why don't Aussie speaker manufacturers publish any measurements.

 

Krix, Richter, Adelaide , Osborne speakers none of them publish measurements.

 

As an example, 

Kef R3 metas are widely measured and objectively considered good on ASR and over at Erin's Audio Corner.

 

Surely, it makes marketing sense (if nothing else) for Aussie manufacturers to measure or provide speakers to Amir or Erin to get them objectively measured. 

 

Thoughts 

 

 

 

This was the original post for the thread. 
The things was why don’t they publish them? 
Would it add to sales? (Marketing)

 

The thread now is about measurements in development. 
I don’t think anyone would argue that measurements would be essential in development.

Does publishing them (the original topic) translate to increased sales or better info for the end use?  In most cases no according to the industry that @Marc posted he polled.

 

It’s a bit like the argument from a small section of the world (audiophiles) bemused that Spotify doesn’t have a Hi Res option.

The majority of users aren’t that in depth and their sales are doing just fine being listened to on iPhones while exercising or commuting. 
 

As always spend your cash how you personally see fit. That’s what makes the World go round. 

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, March Audio said:

 

As Grant says, we do have that.  The data generated by  the spinorama technique, as encapsulated in the CTA2034 standard, can be used to generate to provide a "preference score".  This all fell out of the Tool / Olive research work into the correlation of subjective preference to objective measurements.  The correlation from their work for preferred speaker sound was 0.96 for small speakers and 0.86 for large iirc.  So whilst not perfect, its very good.

 

A point that people really need to take on board is that this research work is based on peoples subjective opinions on what speaker sound they liked. I.E LISTENING! Its not some kind of abstract scientific theory.

 

This site has collated a shed load of spinorama measurements and shows the preference score.

 

https://www.spinorama.org/

 

https://www.spinorama.org/scores.html?quality=High

 

No-one is suggesting that the preference score is the be all and end all, there are still a number of parameters that are missing from it (compression effects is one that springs to mind), but its an excellent starting point for whittling down short lists.

 

 

 

I'm aware of this, and those with a keen interest in the science are aware of this. My point is that's it's not exactly "consumer friendly" as it stands, not used at a retail level to the best of my knowledge, and not delivered in a presentable way that would be welcomed by consumers.

 

Think of the Energy Efficiency stickers on all whitegoods. OK, very (too) simple in this case, but consumers get it and research shows that it absolutely drives consumers' choices when buying. 

[March Audio]

47 minutes ago, Jakeyb77_Redux said:

The thread now is about measurements in development. 

 

It really isn't.  All that's been discussed is very relevant to the OP.

 

We are discussing directly above how measurement data would be helpful to consumers.

[March Audio]

4 hours ago, Marc said:

 

I'm aware of this, and those with a keen interest in the science are aware of this. My point is that's it's not exactly "consumer friendly" as it stands, not used at a retail level to the best of my knowledge, and not delivered in a presentable way that would be welcomed by consumers.

 

Think of the Energy Efficiency stickers on all whitegoods. OK, very (too) simple in this case, but consumers get it and research shows that it absolutely drives consumers' choices when buying. 

 

I'm not sure the wider HiFi industry would welcome that .

 

Energy sticker rating is run by the government.  Not sure who would or could run an audio quality rating system for hifi.

Edited July 4, 2023 by March Audio

[Satanica]

1 hour ago, Jakeyb77_Redux said:

As always spend your cash how you personally see fit.

I will man I will, and I might even do it in ways that others think is not too smart.

Edited July 4, 2023 by Satanica

[Addicted to music]

7 hours ago, Marc said:

I rang around a few people I know this morning - manufacturers and retailers. They echoed @Stereotech's comments above that very rarely would people even ask for measurement data

 

That is well expected and doesn’t come as a surprise.   Usually if someone is keen on a product they usually do the research before they commit themselves to an audition.   I won’t touch a product unless I see some white paper on the subject and I don’t trust what the manufactures quote on that white paper either,  so  I also search other independent sites to verify the metrics especially if I can’t get a hold of the item.   Here on SNA and about I came to trust no one, especially when it gets subjective, been there done that!  Measured data doesn’t just gives you typical FR curves even though speakers act like a tone control,  it gives you other important metrics such as impedance to matched the electronics you using to drive them:  pointless buying speakers with a max 2ohm load where most amplifiers with find it difficult to drive.  How many times I see threads started where the question is what amplifier should I use to drive these speakers in my possession because the belief is that the current electronics could be better and they have heard it sound better! 

 

8 hours ago, Marc said:

 

I just bought a new cinema camera for producing videos - I didn't look at the specs but instead consumed a couple of weeks of reviews from  professionals and prosumers. A few touched on the specs (and measurements they made themselves), but even they confess the best way to form an opinion was to simply use it in its intended application and report back (the real world performance does not always exactly reflect what's written on paper in a controlled environment). This appeals to me as I trust (most) of their opinions because they are more advanced than me in this field. They've also tested in the real world, side by side, more relevant products than anyone else. I bought without test driving. I consumed enough of the reviews to discover the shared pros/cons, and after a day playing with it discovered the reviews were all correct (even the ones that stated Sony had provided them a loaner for free).

 

 

This is standard stuff that you go through in purchasing it’s nothing new.   Not only do I look at the metrics but consideration to size and weight which is all part of the metric to tell you the loading on your hand/arm that’s holding it is vital.   Also  where  the controls are and how easy it is to access on the palm with standard 5 fingers; ergonomics is super important if you’re filming all day!   The same you apply to any other gear.

 

8 hours ago, Marc said:

 

 

I'm personally of the opinion that specs (and measurements) don't tell the whole story. Sure, horsepower is horsepower, and assuming the manufacturer hasn't lied, then it can be assumed to be correct. But the specs and measurements won't tell me the comfort of the seats (only a test drive or a reviewer can tell me that if I'm not in a position to see it IRL). Not sure there is an argument either way here though. Some people buy off one approach, some buy from the other camp, and others a combination of both. What's to argue? 

 

 

 

Specs and measurements is basically metrics on how well it’s engineered!   How big your box is and how thick your cable is doesn’t apply!   You can have all the high spec components but if it’s put together doesn’t mean it’s going to do the job well!  In terms of sound quality it’s how well it reproduce that recorded signal and keep it pure with little alternation, therefore  added THD do not apply!   Products that have high THD defeat any purpose for sound engineering.   If added THD is preferred than that’s subjective,  ultimately you do a audition for subjective decisions.   

Out of the OP scope but relevant;  in most tender process, specs and measurements and features must tick the boxes before a product is even considered!   For Government tenders they send a group out for a period of time and performed there own tests to ensure it corresponds and meets the criteria that’s quoted.  they then narrow down the preferred suppliers. The 2nd phase is to discussed servicing and SLA,  then finally pricing.    

[Hydrology]

16 hours ago, Satanica said:

 

And who wants to know how one's speaker measures like, cause if the news isn't great this could lead to the dreaded FoMO!

 

If I like what I hear, this wouldn't bother me in the slightest.

I would be more concerned if the poorly measured speaker was a health or safety issue.