• 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!

Do We Want All Speakers To Sound The Same ?

Do We Want All Speakers To Sound The Same?

The thread title may seem a tad hyperbolic

It may be cutting the cone at a rather steep angle, but my answer is, yes, I do!

If all speakers sounded the same (and at least as good as the ones I’ve got now), I’d buy the cheapest ones and – kumbayah!
 
Please let us not forget that speakers and rooms are inseparable like wind and air. The same speakers in different locations of the same room will not sound the same with regards to your listening position. We are not the same every minute of every day.

All we can hope for is that loudspeakers measure well because it inevitably translates that they will EQ well to our preference and that they will at least sound good out of the box, hopefully left and right of the pair will sound the same and that's it.

All that we want and we wish for is just a part of this beautiful hobby. I also want the weather to be nice but I still understand that there are too many variables at stake. When it comes to loudspeakers I've chosen the DIY path because all the variables were ever so slightly more dependent of... me. :facepalm:
 
Last edited:
All we can hope for is that loudspeakers measure well because it inevitably translates that they will EQ well to our preference and that they will at least sound good out of the box, hopefully left and right of the pair will sound the same and that's it.

I think that’s a realistic end game. A perfectly matched pair of stereo speakers with no obvious flaws in FR, dynamics and radiation pattern. The rest will be taken care of by DSP software.

Sounds like a plan but is never going to happen. Instead, the audio world will go off on opposite tangents – single golfball-sized speakers with faux spatial envelopment on one extreme and 100+ speakers in a room on the other.
 
Do We Want All Speakers To Sound The Same?

The thread title may seem a tad hyperbolic, and clearly there will be plenty of nuance involved in replying to such a question.

The question arises first of all because I've seen some criticize Amir and ASR along these lines "That place is boring, they want all speakers to sound the same!"

That strikes me as a caricature. After all, I know members have owned all sorts of different speakers over their audiophile career, and it seems there is some nice variety in member's current speaker set ups.

On the other hand...might there be, in some sense, some element of truth in the proposal "we want all speakers to sound the same?"

After all, any effort to evaluate something like speakers, based on an engineering (and sometimes science) heavy approach will tend to arrive at some sort of "best practices" for speaker design, upon which speakers will be evaluated. It would seem that the general characteristics arrived at from research from Floyd Toole and others have provided such standards for this forum - so ones that are neutral (with the proper off axis response) are selected as "good" and those departing as "poor" to one degree or another.

And since an underlying goal for many ASR members seems to be "accuracy" the logical extension of this would seem to be that the more speakers tend to meet that goal, the more alike they will sound. Which at least implies that if all speaker manufacturers adopted these same goals "ideally" speakers (for any given frequency response) would sound closer to indistinguishable.

It's my impression that some (many?) on ASR would in a sense prefer the speaker to "sound like nothing" in the same sense that a good solid state amp would "sound like nothing." No character of it's own, just neutral, so one isn't 'listening to the system' or thinking about "how the system/speaker sounds" but is simply listening to "the recording."

If much of that does indeed capture some people's goal here, it would imply that..yeah, in some sense, "Ideally, all speakers would sound the same."

I'm not writing any of that to IMPOSE this view on anyone here, only as some talking points to get off the ground. This forum isn't a monolith, it's made of individuals with varying views, so I'm interested in YOUR response to any of these questions:

Would it be THE ideal, or your ideal, that all speakers eventually sound the same, if you could wave your magic wand and send things in that direction? If so why. If not, why not? Should they sound roughly the same, like most should sound close to neutral but you are good with variation in X, Y parameters? Or are you happy with the essentially "Wild West" approach as it has been - some manufacturers striving for neutrality/Toole-approved performance, many heading off in different directions? Do you see the general approach by Amir's approach to evaluating speakers as too narrowly defined and limiting in terms of vetting "bad" from "good" - or does it match your own ideals for performance?
Amir, like all of us has made achoice in buying Genelec speakers, of course based on his measurements, but not only.
If you speak French or have good translation software, have look at this forum called The Dome Acoustique by Dominique Petoin they combine scientific measurements with subjective comments very skillfully. Good information without confrontation.
 
It may be cutting the cone at a rather steep angle, but my answer is, yes, I do!

If all speakers sounded the same (and at least as good as the ones I’ve got now), I’d buy the cheapest ones and – kumbayah!

This is dangerous territory. :) It's already questionable if acquiring and setting up sound reproduction equipment is a hobby in the general sense. If one buys the objectivist kool-aid and think that the electronics part of the equation is solved, then just about anyone can purchase and set up a complete system that is near endgame quality, in a week, for a few thousand euros/dollars, with no previous knowledge of the subject. Spend a bit more and the dealer will bring the goods and sets things up for you. If a cheap, well measuring and somewhat compact full range speaker would exist (like 500€ Dutch&Dutch 8C) there wouldn't be that much to discuss any more.
 
This is dangerous territory. :) It's already questionable if acquiring and setting up sound reproduction equipment is a hobby in the general sense. If one buys the objectivist kool-aid and think that the electronics part of the equation is solved, then just about anyone can purchase and set up a complete system that is near endgame quality, in a week, for a few thousand euros/dollars, with no previous knowledge of the subject. Spend a bit more and the dealer will bring the goods and sets things up for you. If a cheap, well measuring and somewhat compact full range speaker would exist (like 500€ Dutch&Dutch 8C) there wouldn't be that much to discuss any more.

Yes, knowledge kind of takes the religion out of it, doesn’t it?
 
Somewhat apropos of this thread:

I visited a high end audio store today - first time since 2019! - and had a nice time listening to the Kii 3 BXT system speakers. This is, as many probably know, the more extensive version of the much lauded Kii 3, with the bass extension module.

The Kii 3, in how well it measures and the way it uses the DSP boundary control to "take out the room effects" in lower frequencies, is perhaps closer to "no speaker" than most. The store, a Kii Audio dealer for years, had carefully set up the system, boundary controls etc.

I'd previously auditioned the Kii 3s in this store, and also at an audio show, but I believe this is the first time I've heard the full BXT version. I certainly don't need to "review" this speaker as there are plenty of informative reviews with actual measurements, e.g.:


..so I'm just mentioning my personal reaction, with this thread in mind. I was able to select some of my test tracks via Tidal.

The first thing is, as soon as the music came on I immediately recognized the sound. They sounded exactly like when I heard the Kii 3s at the audio show, and exactly like when I auditioned the Kii 3 a few years ago in the store. They say audio memory is unreliable...but there was zero surprise to the sound, more like re-visiting a sound I was somewhat familiar with. (If it's sighted bias, it's an awfully consistent effect).

Anyway, first impression as always is a "neato, where did the room/speakers go?" effect. I'm looking at the speakers, which were closer to the back wall than I'd normally want, so my mind was expecting some sort of obvious bass lift or bulge but...nope...for the most part it was like the 'walls' weren't there, the entire frequency range sounded very even. Stand up bass appeared near the left speaker, yet imaged like a distinct column of bass energy, detached from the speakers, with no sense of bloat or gloming in to the speakers. For electronic bass, stand up bass, synth bass, whatever - my impressions were: even, taught, solid, strong. Yet never overbearing. Bass was so clean I could really hear the tonal quality of different electric basses, and there was one track in which the bass player is plucking two notes close together at once, which so many speakers tend to blur together, making it hard to hear what is happening. The Kii 3 cleaned away any blurring of the notes and it was easy to hear the two different bass strings being plucked together.

The speakers for the most part really disappeared as sound sources, no sense of box resonance at all. There was always this very sure sense of accuracy. It came from two main characteristics: 1. The evenness of the sound. It wasn't "pear shaped" like many audiophile speakers, which might be emphasized in the bass, have scoop outs here and there in the frequency range making some sounds, e.g. percussion, trumpet, cymbals sound thin. On the Kii, no frequency sounded exaggerated or recessed (especially evident in how even piano recordings sounded), so everything was given what sounded like it's full due. Even little things like wood blocks or cow bells were not thinned out as they can be on some speakers, but had solidity and substance which helped drive the rhythm of the pieces.

Vocals revealed artifice when in the recording, but the artifice wasn't exaggerated or strident. When acoustic guitar parts popped in and out of tracks I know well, it just sounded "right" and balanced. The other thing that gave an impression of accuracy was 2. How precisely the speakers revealed information in the recording. For instance on of my test recordings starts with a vocal, cowbell, plucked guitars. The way the Kii system revealed the cowbell in a very specific space near the vocal, in a very specific reverb, the reverb having it's own little boundary around the cowbell. The same with the vocal. They sat in 3D spatial locations, but not in the exaggerated way that some speakers may spray the high end all around off walls to create spaciousness. Rather, it felt more precise by being clarified of any box or obvious speaker/room influence - simply like the speakers themselves had been removed, revealing these objects mixed exactly as they were....mixed. There really was a peering in to the studio vibe.

So, anyway, those impressions just continued through various tracks. The sound was spacious, the speakers disappeared but the sound had excellent force and solidity, which is a neat trick.

So, thinking of this thread, would I buy these speakers? No. Not personally, not for my own music listening. Despite being able to enjoy and appreciate all of the above, they didn't grab me at all and make me want to keep listening. This is because, tonally, nothing sounded "right" or natural to my ears. Wood blocks, voices, acoustic guitars, stand up bass, etc...it all sounded sort of timbrally black and white, slightly dark. I never got the feeling "That's the real sparkle of an acoustic guitar, THAT's the woodiness of a stand up bass" etc. If something doesn't click in to tonally the "right" colors in my brain, it just sounds wrong.
That's not an objective claim the Kii speakers are "wrong" in some way; it's only that I carry around my own mental image of what I'm looking for, how I like things to sound, and these speakers don't do it for me. As I've said, I find all systems sound colored in one way or another, because even the most neutral speakers can't truly reproduce the range of timbral complexity of real life. So it's all watered down, even in a system like this. So I go with the system that makes me want to stay in place listening to the music intently, rather than feel like I could get up, walk away and do other things with the music in the background.

Before I left I actually listened to a big pair of Martin Logan hybrid speakers in the same store. I'm not the biggest ML fan, but I played some of the same tracks and...boom!...the timbre had that more realistic airiness and the timbral "color" warmed up more towards what I look for. I'm sure the ML don't measure as flat as the Kiis. (I think ML tends to have a bit of upper mid emphasis if I remember). But I did percieve more of a woody timbre to string instruments, that recognizable golden sparkle to acoustic guitar. The same guitar that was very precisely described on the Kii, but never once sounded to me like the real thing, now sounded more like I could believe someone was playing guitar in front of me. It wasn't perfect, but it would have compelled me to sit and listen longer.

Hearing the Kii speakers again also reminded me why I went with the Joseph Audio speakers from that store. Whatever the prowess of the Kii, I just didn't hear that addictive utter purity/smoothness/lack of grain that I do from the Joseph speakers. The Kiis sounded "average" in that respect, more electronic, mechanical. And the Josephs also invoke all the right timbral colors in my brain.

I got home, spun a lot of the same tracks on my Thiel 2.7s which I currently have set up (powered by my CJ amps) and...."aaahhh".....there was that rich, organic, lively "really happening in front of me" quality I seek. When wood blocks or cowbells entered the mix they sounded so much like the tone of real instruments being played "right there" in the room, something I didn't get at any point listening to the Kii. And...OMG, the way the Thiels also disappear and create such incredible holographic sonic images. Blew me away even after listening to the far more expensive Kii system.

So can I see what, say, an ASR forum member sees in the Kii speakers? Abso-effing-lutely! They are amazing! But...preference being preference, I prefer other speakers. The great measurements certainly predict a lot about the speaker, but at least for me, I can't predict whether I'll "click" with a speaker unless I audition it for myself.

Oh, I have to give massive props to the Kii controller! It's a beautiful, smooth-to-the-touch volume knob with additional controls. This is JUST the type of volume control I've been pining after, as I've said in this thread:


Whoever here has the Kii speakers, you are a lucky bugger!

I watched a video review of the Kii Audio Three speakers that reminded me of my impressions above (which were the same as my impressions of my previous auditions).

To me what was fascinating is that the reviewer described the speaker is almost precisely the same as I experienced them… everything from the extremely impressive bass tonality, the precision, the evenness, disappearing, and sound staging…. All the good stuff. And yet he also describes being slightly put off by the same tonal/timbral artificial slightly bland presentation that I perceived. (Little of which I personally would’ve derived simply from the description of the speakers or measurements).

It could, of course be two people experiencing the same type of bias effect.

But for me, this is the type of thing, when somebody seems to be picking up on or hearing the sound as I seem to hear the sound, that makes me prick my ears up and want to pay a bit more attention to a reviewer’s impressions of other gear.


Video here if anyone is interested:

 
when somebody seems to be picking up on or hearing the sound as I seem to hear the sound, that makes me prick my ears up and want to pay a bit more attention to a reviewer’s impressions of other gear.
So I went to his channel, where I learned that he bought a $20,000 DAC/streamer because he thinks it sounds good ... :facepalm:
 
Yes, yes it could

Absolutely. Which is why I mentioned it.

But also maybe not.

Both of our impressions are largely consistent with the design and measurements of the speaker. But both of us ultimately came away with the subjective impression of not loving the speaker, and finding it a little bit bland in some respects, and emphasizing the recorded nature of recordings. He owns and likes Focal speakers which have a bit more emphasis and zing in the top end, and I own speakers that have a slightly elevated profile in the highs versus the Kii, so this is one reason why both of us might find the standard frequency response of the Kii to be a little bit less airy and a bit more dull than we are used to.

Plus I like to evaluate a loudspeaker as to whether I can somewhat believe I’m hearing a real voice or instrument. And I rarely ever had that impression with the Kii.

It’s possible we could be mistaken and that under blind listening the reservations we had about the sound wouldn’t hold up. But we don’t know that for sure in the absence of blind testing us with that loudspeaker.
 
So I went to his channel, where I learned that he bought a $20,000 DAC/streamer because he thinks it sounds good ... :facepalm:

Yup.

Every human being is susceptible to bias effects. Looks like he went for that one
:)

(but it would be a fallacy to assume that because somebody can fall for a bias effect that they can’t also hear and report real sonic characteristics)
 
More pseudo intellectual sophistry. No one ever said performant evidence-based speakers would sound identical. Instead let's have an ecosystem of speakers of various different radiation patterns that are psychoacoustically defensible, whether they be achieved as cone-and-dome with waveguides, 3-ways, line array, large-format horns or otherwise. If someone thinks deliberately crippled gear, selected based on arcane lay intuition, makes for a more romantic experience. So be it. But don't try and fool us all
 
i'd like speakers to be neutral by default and have switches that change the sound to several house tunings like the bbc dip or the klipsch/b&w sound for anyone into that.

Gives a good baseline for everything yet allows people to dabble in different tunings as well. Of course it kills the speaker market and you can't sell stuff costing tens of thousands of dollars so this isn't really chased by the big brands.

Same goes for directivity, wish there were a way to switch between different things but it's just not possible for this ig, i wouldnt want every speaker to sound the same just because of the directivity. Wide soundstages sound good but controlled, deep soundstages sound good as well, hard to say one is definitively better than the other. Completely down to preference and even room.

I think if everyone were able to get a full range speaker with decent distortion and compression performance then the world would be a nicer place, good audio for everyone is a nice thing i think.
 
Sound the same, probably not. It'll likely reduce choices. It's hard to do this anyway as form factor and appearance is still a big player. All those patent technologies mean that other products can't use certain layout etc and will have differences.
 
I'm thinking that the optimal speaker should have constant directivity throughout the whole range 20-20kHz so it sounds exactly the same on and off axis both horizontally and vertically (just lower volume off axis), and then we have knobs to control how wide that dispersion per axis, maybe even control the fall of it so we get wider dispersion in the low end compared to upper end or whatever you want. And of course tone control for people that wants more or less bass, sparkle, air, whatever.
This would of course be a point source speaker, but maybe with the posibility of controlling the length as well with another knob, so if one wants a floor to ceiling line array with perfect 70 degree horizontal dispersion they just dial that in.

Of course this speaker is just purely theoretical, but sometimes maybe in the future this will be possible?
 
(If it's sighted bias, it's an awfully consistent effect).

So, thinking of this thread, would I buy these speakers? No. Not personally, not for my own music listening. Despite being able to enjoy and appreciate all of the above, they didn't grab me at all and make me want to keep listening. This is because, tonally, nothing sounded "right" or natural to my ears. Wood blocks, voices, acoustic guitars, stand up bass, etc...it all sounded sort of timbrally black and white,

Two things come to mind, were the Kiis you listened to model with a white shell and black drivers? And it seems like in the new review you posted, the Kiis were also shades of grey and black.

In either case, the visual stimulus is the close. And assuming everyone knows the story behind the Kiis, the knowledge bias is also the same. It doesn't surprise me that within a hobby community, people are submitted to the same background chatter and culture, that people react similarly to visual and knowledge cues.

This is not to say that you didn't experience those things, in usual circumstances, people can only experience things through the lens of all their biases, and if knowing that it is analog and seeing that it is wood is a necessary condition to trick one's brain into hearing proper timbral accuracy, then so be it.

This is why blind testing is essential to establish the sound properties of a piece of equipment with certainty. In this case, I make a distinction between the sound properties and the auditory properties, the former being the sound produced by a piece of equipment, and the latter being that sound once it goes through the processing of our ears and brains.
 
Back
Top Bottom