$30K Budget - On the quest for my "end game" speaker

[RobL]

I have an Amazon Echo my wife uses at home…good, bad every recording sound “listenable” on it.

 

[Emlin]

I like to hear everything In the recording, warts and all. I can still enjoy it, if the music is good.

I know that Oliver Cromwell has his detractors, but he was right on that.

 

[MattHooper]

I have an Amazon Echo my wife uses at home…good, bad every recording sound “listenable” on it.

Well, there ya go! All set. What'r you even doing here then?

(Our Sonos smart speaker always sounds "listenable" but it never sounds "great.")

 

[Purité Audio]

(I'm presuming you were asking me...)

I don't know necessarily about what it "adds" but I carefully selected my speakers/amps and room set up so that dynamics are well represented, a sense of density so even "thin" recordings have some pleasing palpability and drive, and generally speaking the system presents upper midrange/highs that sound both "open/extended/airy and realistic when called for" yet "relaxed" and easy to listen to. So some of the recordings that have an "ouch" factor on other systems are still pleasing on mine, and I can crank my system higher and still relax and enjoy, vs many others where I'd be more hesitant to dial up the volume.

Ultimately though it's going to be subjective. What may "still sound good" to me may not to you, but again the point is a system on which I find music more pleasing to listen to, not necessarily others.

So it rolls off H/F?
My problem is that now every song is rolled off whether they ‘ouch’ or not.
Keith

 

[MattHooper]

So it rolls off H/F?
My problem is that now every song is rolled off whether they ‘ouch’ or not.
Keith

"generally speaking the system presents upper midrange/highs that sound both "open/extended/airy and realistic when called for"

That was there specifically to indicate it does not sound "rolled off." Recordings can sound anywhere from dull to very vivid in the high frequencies, even "bright" but not to the aggressive level I hear in plenty of other systems. So for instance cymbals or bells can suddenly "pop out" in the room in a very surprising, realistic manner, with plenty of "air" (no sense of the high frequencies cutting off), yet still sound natural and relaxed, not aggressive/electronic. I don't like "dark" or obviously rolled off sound, one reason being real life musical instruments and voices don't strike me as "dark/rolled off."

 

[Doodski]

I don't like "dark" or obviously rolled off sound, one reason being real life musical instruments and voices don't strike me as "dark/rolled off."

You have a major advantage over a person that does not get exposure to live instruments.

 

[RobL]

Well, there ya go! All set. What'r you even doing here then?

(Our Sonos smart speaker always sounds "listenable" but it never sounds "great.")

Lol, true nothing sounds great on it.
My own system sounds like it’s much simpler than yours…powered monitors from the unmentionables (hehe) and an RME Adi2. Good recordings sound like good recordings, bad recordings sound like I need to adjust the tone controls! Lol

 

[MattHooper]

You have a major advantage over a person that does not get exposure to live instruments.

I don't know if that's it really. Plenty here have lots of experience hearing real instruments (and we hear voices all day long). It's more about approach: I'm going for a "sound" and taking cues from reality to get there. Others aren't doing that; they are looking for technical accuracy first and formost, and then "it sounds like whatever it sounds like." Different approaches. (Though in practice I don't think they necessarily yield radically different sound - some level of comitment to low distortion is going to help a system sound less artifical and reproduce instruments/voices more accurately).

 

[MattHooper]

Lol, true nothing sounds great on it.
My own system sounds like it’s much simpler than yours…powered monitors from the unmentionables (hehe)

Oh they are very mentionable here! Active speakers are The In Thing.

and an RME Adi2. Good recordings sound like good recordings, bad recordings sound like I need to adjust the tone controls! Lol

I guess it still comes down to what we mean by "bad recordings" on our system. For instance I could certainly separate "bad recordings" from "good" recordings on my system, it's just that I very much enjoy the experience of listening to even "bad recordings" as well. It could be the same for you on your system.

But it's something of an audiophile cliche to feel one's system is "so ruthlessly revealing" it causes one to seek out "good recordings" at the expense of abandoning "less well recorded music." I feel that a good system will reveal the nuances of different recordings, but will also allow enjoyment of poorer recordings. I think that a system that may sound "warm" and "comfy" but that lacks good dynamics can let down poorer recordings. The poor recordings may not sound objectionably harsh in such a system, but it will sound dynamically limpid and unexiting. Even "poor recordings" often contain extremely dynamic musical performances, and that should come through even if everything else isn't top notch.

 

[MattHooper]

MKR,

As someone seeking their end-game speaker, what are your thoughts on the discussion above. Do you want warts 'n all, ready to have some recordings rendered un-listenable, or do you want to make sure you can enjoy the widest range of recordings possible, or...? Do you use "reality" as any sort of touchstone when evaluating speakers (e.g. do voices or instruments sound 'right' or natural to your ear) or are you just comparing speakers to other speakers?

 

[RobL]

Oh they are very mentionable here! Active speakers are The In Thing.

Lol, you’re not picking up what I’m putting down! You might have missed the 2-3 previous pages…

I guess it still comes down to what we mean by "bad recordings" on our system. For instance I could certainly separate "bad recordings" from "good" recordings on my system, it's just that I very much enjoy the experience of listening to even "bad recordings" as well. It could be the same for you on your system.

I do, but my wife absolutely can’t stand some, especially a lot of that bass-light 80’s stuff.
But…sometimes even live brass can sound hard and harsh, live strings can sound strident. Maybe that “bad” recording was capturing the real McCoy?

 

[Emlin]

MKR,

As someone seeking their end-game speaker, what are your thoughts on the discussion above. Do you want warts 'n all, ready to have some recordings rendered un-listenable, or do you want to make sure you can enjoy the widest range of recordings possible, or...? Do you use "reality" as any sort of touchstone when evaluating speakers (e.g. do voices or instruments sound 'right' or natural to your ear) or are you just comparing speakers to other speakers?

Who said that warts and all rendered anything unlistenable? Not me, but you got the term from my post. I said quite the opposite.

 

[MattHooper]

Who said that warts and all rendered anything unlistenable? Not me, but you got the term from my post. I said quite the opposite.

I wasn't attributing that view to you. I saw that you said you can still enjoy music in even "warts 'n all" recordings. That's one reason I responded in a post that it's subjective and someone may find a "poor recording" still enjoyable on their system.

I was making a general response to FlyingFreak saying that poor recordings such as Greenday sounded "terrible" on the KEF Blades, which I think brings up the issue of what individuals are seeking in their system. If two different audiophiles have the same impression in how the Blades rendered poor and good recordings, one may say "I want this speaker because of how great it sounds on great recordings, and I'm willing to live with poor recordings sounding awful."
The other may say "I don't want this speaker because it's going to render too much of the music/recordings I love as sounding bad."

Again, I think it's pretty subjective as to whether any speaker is making a track sound "awful" or unlistenable. And my position is certainly not that neutrality equates to "less listenable" or making you have to reject more recordings. Plenty of members here have very well dialed in systems that are quite neutral (as far as can be managed) but of course they enjoy music on their system just as someone with a much more colored system might. It's an individual thing, so the question is what is the individual seeking.

 

[Emlin]

I wasn't attributing that view to you. I saw that you said you can still enjoy music in even "warts 'n all" recordings. That's one reason I responded in a post that it's subjective and someone may find a "poor recording" still enjoyable on their system.

I was making a general response to FlyingFreak saying that poor recordings such as Greenday sounded "terrible" on the KEF Blades, which I think brings up the issue of what individuals are seeking in their system. If two different audiophiles have the same impression in how the Blades rendered poor and good recordings, one may say "I want this speaker because of how great it sounds on great recordings, and I'm willing to live with poor recordings sounding awful."
The other may say "I don't want this speaker because it's going to render too much of the music/recordings I love as sounding bad."

Again, I think it's pretty subjective as to whether any speaker is making a track sound "awful" or unlistenable. And my position is certainly not that neutrality equates to "less listenable" or making you have to reject more recordings. Plenty of members here have very well dialed in systems that are quite neutral (as far as can be managed) but of course they enjoy music on their system just as someone with a much more colored system might. It's an individual thing, so the question is what is the individual seeking.

You said 'Do you want warts 'n all, ready to have some recordings rendered unlistenable..?'

You claimed that warts and all will render some recordings unlistenable. That is simply untrue.

 

[MattHooper]

You said 'Do you want warts 'n all, ready to have some recordings rendered unlistenable..?'

You claimed that warts and all will render some recordings unlistenable. That is simply untrue.

Again: I wasn't quoting your position on this, or attributing a position to you.

Yes you used the phrase but it's a very common phrase among audiophiles to indicate the failings of a recording being exposed. To SOME this may make a recording un-listenable or "terrible" but to OTHERS it may not. I've already explained this more than once. I've stated that I can hear "bad recordings" in my system ("warts 'n all" one might call them) and still find it enjoyable. And I've said that I feel a good system (which can be a neutral system) will render even "poor recordings" listenable. Hence, you can of course still enjoy recordings in which some "warts" have been exposed.

But someone else may find a "warts 'n all" system to make some recordings sound "terrible." This is why I have said it will be up to the INDIVIDUAL as to whether a system is rendering a poor recording unlistenable or unpleasant, and therefore it's question of what an individual is seeking.

 

[Holmz]

…
The other thing is how surgically precise the blades can be...
…

I suppose they chose an evocative name.

I can picture them in a room with a lot of red.

You said 'Do you want warts 'n all, ready to have some recordings rendered unlistenable..?'

You claimed that warts and all will render some recordings unlistenable. That is simply untrue.

Well… that say that, “You have to kiss a few toads to find a prince.”

 

[Emlin]

Again: I wasn't quoting your position on this, or attributing a position to you.

Yes you used the phrase but it's a very common phrase among audiophiles to indicate the failings of a recording being exposed. To SOME this may make a recording un-listenable or "terrible" but to OTHERS it may not. I've already explained this more than once. I've stated that I can hear "bad recordings" in my system ("warts 'n all" one might call them) and still find it enjoyable. And I've said that I feel a good system (which can be a neutral system) will render even "poor recordings" listenable. Hence, you can of course still enjoy recordings in which some "warts" have been exposed.

But someone else may find a "warts 'n all" system to make some recordings sound "terrible." This is why I have said it will be up to the INDIVIDUAL as to whether a system is rendering a poor recording unlistenable or unpleasant, and therefore it's question of what an individual is seeking.

You may or may not have been referring to my post, but I gave a direct quote from you. You argue that a euphonic system is necessary to enjoy all recordings. Or that you only enjoy a certain type of sound. So you don't like the various sounds of different recordings, just the one sound of your imagining, and tune your system to provide that.

 

[MattHooper]

You may or may not have been referring to my post, but I gave a direct quote from you. You argue that a euphonic system is necessary to enjoy all recordings.

No. Yet again: that will depend on the individual. An individual may:

1. Not enjoy poor recordings on an accurate system.
2. Still enjoy poor recordings on an accuratel system.
3. Find a more "euphonically tailored" system allows him to enjoy poor recordings.

That's why I've tried to emphasize how individually tailored the question is.

Or that you only enjoy a certain type of sound. So you don't like the various sounds of different recordings, just the one sound of your imagining, and tune your system to provide that.

Nope. You are ignoring what I've written. e.g.:

(Though in practice I don't think they necessarily yield radically different sound - some level of commitment to low distortion is going to help a system sound less artificial and reproduce instruments/voices more accurately).

One of my interests is Library/Production music from the 60s to the 80's. The variety of recording styles and techniques is drastic - far wider and crazier than most of the albums you'd find in more mainstream recordings. I want all those recordings to sound different because I relish the character of the recordings as well as the music. And they all sound extremely different on my system. I think you are working from a false dichotomy. Just as you point out it's a false inference to think "poor recordings are unlistenable on an accurate system" it's a false inference to think "a system that has some euphoric aspect makes all recordings sound the same." (And I have a feeling you are imagining a far more colored sound than my system produces. I'm talking about subtle nudges in the direction I prefer, not some total make-over of recordings).

 

[MKR]

MKR,

As someone seeking their end-game speaker, what are your thoughts on the discussion above. Do you want warts 'n all, ready to have some recordings rendered un-listenable, or do you want to make sure you can enjoy the widest range of recordings possible, or...? Do you use "reality" as any sort of touchstone when evaluating speakers (e.g. do voices or instruments sound 'right' or natural to your ear) or are you just comparing speakers to other speakers?

Great question! I think in my previous posts I mentioned accuracy (flat FR) and transparency into the source as a priority. If no, well, I am certainly stating it now … I want the warts! And note those speakers for which I have subjectively given a positive report in my audition reports almost in all cases have such characteristics. But, I will say, at least as far as HF response is concerned, if I had to choose, I prefer tipped down to tipped up. Even with my aging ears I am very sensitive to HF and any amount of distortion/harshness in the HF bands I pick up very quickly. Hence the reason speakers like B&W are literally unlistenable to me.

 

[MattHooper]

Great question! I think in my previous posts I mentioned accuracy (flat FR) and transparency into the source as a priority. If no, well, I am certainly stating it now … I want the warts! And note those speakers for which I have subjectively given a positive report in my audition reports almost in all cases have such characteristics. But, I will say, at least as far as HF response is concerned, if I had to choose, I prefer tipped down to tipped up. Even with my aging ears I am very sensitive to HF and any amount of distortion/harshness in the HF bands I pick up very quickly. Hence the reason speakers like B&W are literally unlistenable to me.

Thanks.

I understand about sensitivity to high frequencies. I have tinnitus and sometimes bouts of hyperacusis, so aggressive high frequencies are a no-go for me.

At the same time I don't like a speaker that sounds rolled off or "dark" - such a speaker can never remind me of the real thing and will miss some important timbral information. So I like the highs to sound extended and airy, not shelved off. That combination of vivid/smooth/realistic high frequencies with a simultaneously "relaxed" (and to me, more "natural") presentation is a real balancing act and not that easy to find. But that's generally what I end up with in my systems, because that's what I like.

As I have mentioned before, having listened fairly recently to the B&W D series speakers, Paradigm Persona and Founder speakers, I couldn't live with how "tipped up" they sounded. (Though the B&W are a fun listen for a while!)