kyuu
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2024
- Messages
- 1,599
- Likes
- 2,467
Okay now you've gone too far.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
A Broad Discussion of Speakers with Major Audio Luminaries
- Thread starter Floyd Toole
- Start date
Our memory of sound is short lived and the sound of speakers is heavily influenced by the room they play in. Did you listen to the speakers in anywhere close to a direct comparison?^^ This is why I am happy to not be swayed by such opinions.
I liked ‘em much better than the Kii’s you used to sell as well. Sorry.
(now I’m gonna go order some pineapple on pizza too…)
Also, I condone, nay I even support, more or less all pizza crimes. It's my duty as a swede.
Dare I ask what a swedish pizza crime might be?
I really enjoy our banana curry pizzas. Especially the ones with chicken rather than ham. Most popular pizza here would be the kebab pizza though.
MarkS
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,357
- Likes
- 1,967
I think my current speakers ($1400/pair slim towers, of a brand not favored here, plus a subwoofer, plus Lyngdorf room correction) sound great.
Suppose I go to a dealer and listen to some putatively better speakers; let's say the Revel F328Be ($13,600/pair, Crutchfield sale price).
Suppose I listen to them and decide that they do sound better: maybe a little clearer through the midrange.
Can I trust that opinion, or not?
Suppose I go to a dealer and listen to some putatively better speakers; let's say the Revel F328Be ($13,600/pair, Crutchfield sale price).
Suppose I listen to them and decide that they do sound better: maybe a little clearer through the midrange.
Can I trust that opinion, or not?
There's a stereotype that Swedish food (like most northern European food) is dreadful. I just can't imagine how it got that reputation. Total mystery. Puzzling.
a4eaudio
Senior Member
Come on guys, this is getting out of hand!! First you suggest speakers that don't measure as good as another can sound better and now this crazy pizza stuff!! Where are the Mods!! Shut this down!! Bring in the marines!
Busy eating pizza.
no.
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,255
- Likes
- 17,717
There’s obviously some truth in that, but I also find the liabilities can be a bit exaggerated. I’ve heard many of the same loudspeakers in different rooms and they maintained the same essential sonic character. And also the same character that I remembered from the last time I heard them.
For instance, I auditioned the Devores a number of times in a smaller/average sized room and later had a chance to listen to them set up in a very large “ small warehouse” type space, and… they were the same speakers. All the same attributes.
Likewise the Joseph speakers sounded essentially the same in my room as they sounded in the audio store in which I auditioned them many times.
Not to mention, I have usually owned multiple pairs of speakers that I switch in and out of my system. I might have one pair in for maybe a couple months, maybe six months or a year, and then set up another pair for a while. Despite the time gaps, it’s not like I’m ever surprised by how any of my speakers sound. They sound exactly like how I remembered them. That’s why I like all of them.
As to the Revel / Devore comparison as I remember that was within something like a week of each audition.
I eventually narrowed down my decision to Devore O/96 vs Joseph Audio Perspective speakers, and a couple times I listened to both on the same day.
I’m sorry to have even brought the divisive issue up again, but it’s good to have someone on my side
MarkS
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,357
- Likes
- 1,967
Great, then I never have to consider buying better speakers, since the difference is inaudible without them being side-by-side.
My experience of listening to many loudspeakers at my local HiFi store and at home is similar to yours. While the rooms are definitely a big part of the overall equation, the main sound characteristics of a loudspeaker remains from room to room.
As an objectivist dyed in the wool, I could argue against this. They say you didn't hear the same speakers, you saw the same speakers. You knew it from the start, didn't you?
The thing is, when you listen to an unknown recording, you don't know what to expect. So you're comparing something unexpected with something you don't even know how you remember it. As I already asked, what elements of a sound do you remember? What are the characteristics of a sound that make it unique and memorable? From German there is the loanword 'gestalt', which means you don't know what it is, at least you can't describe it inter-subjectively, but it seems recognizable.
Basically, you are sneaking around this problem. The philosophers call it the 'qualia' problem. There have recently been some fresh results on this from neural research.
In any case, when I listen to music through loudspeakers, I forget the sound of the loudspeakers if it doesn't impose itself on me. Otherwise I simply don't enjoy it. Is it different for you, always in critical mode, I don't really like it?
The majority of them had a degree in recording engineering or equivalent, typically with several decades of experience as balance engineers, bringing their own recordings for comparison tests.
Regarding the post I just made. That's what I call good training. The producers agree on what is good and right, even if it is within the limits of good taste. These people should evaluate, certify and recommend speakers for purchase. They should always be (self-)critical, and as producers they set the standards that matter, namely the finished recording. How else is that supposed to work? Well, and then some producer comes along and says, oh, the loudspeaker has been good enough for me for a long time, my recording comes across just fine! Well, and then the potato boxes' spins aren't so good. There's something rottten in the state of Denmark, what a drama!
Very good point, @Arindal!
While I agree that their judgment is useful and they are very good in identifying and describing aspects of sound quality, particularly when using their own recordings as a reference, I am not sure if their choice will always be helpful for the consumer. They almost certainly have the typical room properties of a studio control room in mind, ignoring home conditions, and many have a different philosophy of what a studio monitor should deliver under which conditions, in terms of translating the signal to the ears of the listener. I mean particularly those preferring very low monitoring SPL and expecting a ´more-detailed-than-life´ resolution, if that makes sense.
MaxwellsEq
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2020
- Messages
- 3,048
- Likes
- 5,196
Regarding training people to listen or to see unwanted artefacts (in the case of visual impacts, e.g. in video codecs).
Much of it involves being trained over and over on the impact of deliberately applied corruption of sound or images. This is annoying once you've been trained, because from that point on, you see and hear artefacts even if you are just trying to enjoy a programme!
This is not normally the same as being professionally trained to record music or video to very high standards.
Much of it involves being trained over and over on the impact of deliberately applied corruption of sound or images. This is annoying once you've been trained, because from that point on, you see and hear artefacts even if you are just trying to enjoy a programme!
This is not normally the same as being professionally trained to record music or video to very high standards.
Training for recording music or working as a balance engineer for broadcast, might focus on being sensitive to different artifacts compared to developing speakers, but recording engineers are usually as good in identifying the flaws you have mentioned.
Ja, they know about their sensory system, having gained supernatural ( -human insight- ) consciousness on some aspects, and they are pretty much able to communicate on the topic of audio recording in theory and practice. That's why they are the authorities on recorded sounds, our heros ;-)
That's the circle of confusion, A thinks that B thinks that A thinks ... just let's have a standard. We have. How could sound engineers not agree?! If they can't, the standard isn't of any use. Namely, the speaker's properties addressed by the standard would not be the right ones. (Including the proposal to evaluate in mono, especially.)
MaxwellsEq
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2020
- Messages
- 3,048
- Likes
- 5,196
Recording engineers are not as good as people specifically trained to seek out artefacts.
Recording engineers are not trained specifically on artefact identification. They pick some of it up in their training and experience on the job, but not all of it. Their knowledge and experience is focused on the artefacts created during media capture. These are important, but there are a whole bunch of artefacts they never have to deal with such as distribution, reception, reconstruction etc.
Similar threads
- Sticky
