Do We Want All Speakers To Sound The Same ?

[tomtoo]

So in other words, you are prepared to suppress your own subjective preference, and rather go for the speakers that are considered better by the standard set of measurements and the average person's liking?

I prever less energy in the 4k region, i see this as personal preference, no need to tell others that this is a sign of good taste. But its my taste. But the measurements tell me what i prever. Its easy give me a good measuring speaker. The rest i can do by myself, give me shit i have to deal with shit. Its like cooking, cooking with shit is hard. Maybe some wizzards can do it?

 

[Thomas_A]

Well, in this scenario I'm giving you your subjective preference is clearly not exactly the same as "average Joe's" preference. You have already preferred the speaker that goes outside that +/- 1.5 dB variable. So my question is to you: What do you do, do you go with the speaker you preferred subjectively, or do you go for the one with the best measurements and EQ that one to your liking?

I have a preference of within 1.5 dB or so with dips and peaks at the subjectively ”correct” positions. I would probably like Revel speakers for that reason.

 

[fpitas]

I prever less energy in the 4k region, i see this as personal preference, no need to tell others that this is a sign of good taste. But its my taste. But the measurements tell me what i prever. Its easy give me a good measuring speaker. The rest i can do by myself, give me shit i have to deal with shit. Its like cooking, cooking with shit is hard. Maybe some wizzards can do it?

Agreed. And no matter what we say here, some form of white van speaker will be available for those who prefer goofy FR.

 

[tuga]

To answer your question: yes, should sound the same in the particular room.

How do you make speakers with different directivity characteristics sound the same?

Is there a correct/better topology (or is it / should it be a matter of preference)?

 

[tomtoo]

Agreed. And no matter what we say here, some form of white van speaker will be available for those who prefer goofy FR.

If you look at FR, and DI you can see a lot of faults from a speaker. Faults that are often hard to EQ or not possible. So this measurements show me the quality of the design. Sure its not all, but who would buy wheels whit 16 corners? To start a good ride?

 

[Thomas_A]

Do you have a link to the Harman research that resulted in the preference score, is it freely available to read online?

No link but there are numerous threads at ASR about the Harman research.

 

[fpitas]

If you look at FR, and DI you can see a lot of faults from a speaker. Faults that are often hard to EQ or not possible. So this measurements show me the quality of the design. Sure its not all, but who would buy wheels whit 16 corners? To start a good ride?

Yes, it's easy to make a unique sounding speaker. I'm perfectly content to let others buy those.

 

[goat76]

I have a preference of within 1.5 dB or so with dips and peaks at the subjectively ”correct” positions. I would probably like Revel speakers for that reason.

So in another word, you can always hear if a speaker goes outside that 1.5 dB or say 2 dB window?

But to my initial question that everyone seems to avoid. If your preference was something else, would you still rather choose the better measuring speaker (and EQ that to your liking) over the one that already sounds the way you want it to sound?

 

[Adi777]

But to my initial question that everyone seems to avoid.

I noticed that too

 

[Thomas_A]

So in another word, you can always hear if a speaker goes outside that 1.5 dB or say 2 dB window?

But to my initial question that everyone seems to avoid. If your preference was something else, would you still rather choose the better measuring speaker (and EQ that to your liking) over the one that already sounds the way you want it to sound?

Well, always is a strong claim but varations in the 1-5 kHz range is quite audible. And I make my own speakers to my liking.

 

[ahofer]

I'm sorry I haven't read through the thread, but here's my quick thought:

We sort of do, in the sense that they should all be ready for EQ. The industry is coming around to this with auto-DSP in consumer devices. If the speaker itself exhibits flat frequency response, uniform disperson, and very low distortion at various levels, that's a good place to start. A choice of wide or narrow dispersion might be useful (I guess there's one design with variable dispersion!), and a choice of designs with different dispersion/distortion/SPL trade-offs might also be useful.

But it seems to me, with the increasing ease of DSP and pre-transducer effects, we are increasingly aiming at the same baseline capabilities.

IOW, I guess I'm saying they should all sound the same in an anechoic chamber. And this approaches the Spinorama ideal that dominates these pages.

 

[tomtoo]

So in another word, you can always hear if a speaker goes outside that 1.5 dB or say 2 dB window?

But to my initial question that everyone seems to avoid. If your preference was something else, would you still rather choose the better measuring speaker (and EQ that to your liking) over the one that already sounds the way you want it to sound?

What you try? Its answered. If you have a good anechoic measuring speaker it will change in YOU'r room. If you prefer then a different speaker, cool your choise. Would i prever out of this reason a bad measuring speaker ? NO! If you like it, if you prefer it in your room, cool, have fun. If you enjoy +6db,q1 at 150 Hz, cool have fun. But sry to say your personal impression wont have much influence on me. If the speaker meassures shit its shit. What ever your personal taste is.

 

[Digby]

What you try? Its answered. If you have a good anechoic measuring speaker it will change in YOU'r room. If you prefer then a different speaker, cool your choise. Would i prever out of this reason a bad measuring speaker ? NO! If you like it, if you prefer it in your room, cool, have fun. If you enjoy +6db,q1 at 150 Hz, cool have fun. But sry to say your personal impression wont have much influence on me. If the speaker meassures shit its shit. What ever your personal taste is.

You are taking the nuance of what he says, multiplying it by 5, then reply to the multiplication, not what was actually said.

 

[tomtoo]

You are taking the nuance of what he says, multiplying it by 5, then reply to the multiplication, not what was actually said.

Sry, maybe i didnt got it right out of the language barrier? Maybe its couse iam getting tyerd out of this it measures bad but sounds so good to ME discussions? So what we talk about? Could you tell me?

 

[Rednaxela]

But to my initial question that everyone seems to avoid. If your preference was something else, would you still rather choose the better measuring speaker (and EQ that to your liking) over the one that already sounds the way you want it to sound?

My current speakers are far from text book, which is something I’ve only recently found out.

With EQ I can improve the listening experience, but primarily in the bass region. In the mid range the FR needs to be quite off for the overall sound to be both right and pleasant to my ears.

So much so that I find it hard to imagine an ASR approved speaker to be an actual improvement in my living room. Only one way to find out of course. But yeah I may end up preferring what I have now.

 

[YSC]

So what do you guys do if you have 10 speakers at home for testing and clearly prefer one pair of speakers before the others, and afterward when you see the measurements of them all you realize the ones you preferred the most was the worst one when it comes to the measured parameters that are considered the most important ones. Do you change your mind and choose the objectively best measuring one and try to equalize it to your liking or do you go for the one you liked the most subjectively "out of the box"?

this question don't really applies.

Firstly you have to assume I actually enjoy something that measured worse, which, IME thus far, not the case, all those speakers wowed me at friend's home or demo room or such are the ones measuring pretty neutral on axis, but room and venue differs so don't bother compare one to another

secondly I would still prefer something more neutral with smooth directivity which responds to EQ better, why not "out of the box"? simple, preference changes depending on the content I play, I don't listen to same music over and over throughout the year, nor the placement of speakers with furniture never moved, for example on the test day I prefer some bumped bass, coz the genere or the actual recording on that particular playlist on that day, was bass shy, even the day is hot so the rumbling airconditioner is on, when that factor is removed the speaker would just be unbearably bass heavy.

Bass is smore or less omnidirectional so should respond to EQ well, so not that in this case but then in some genere with a bit muted highs or mids, preferring a speaker boosting mids and highs on the audition is troublesome when directivity isn't good, where you would hardly EQ it to be neutral without weird effects off axis. at home, sometimes even moving a table or some other furnitures would result in noticeable tone change, when a speaker is inherently deficient in some ways, from time to time you will find the flaws to stick out and really have a hard time to fix.

Now with a neutral speaker, great directivity and assume the listening level won't be already driving it near it's limit, one would have great margin to tune in the EQ you like depending on genere, room changes, or even hearing loss with age. so I would definitely prefer a well measuring speaker over some with obvious flaws in measurement, then pick the one wowed me for the day of audition.

now if your option is among 10 in same ball park, all well measuring with one showing some minor deficency relative to the other options, say highly but still great distortion, the FR is not +/-1.5db but like +/-2db, I would just pick which wowed me not only in sound, but also in look, finish, size, warranty and price, when the others arn't siginificantly better performing, why not buy the cheapest one with better warranty or even reliability track record

 

[YSC]

So in another word, you can always hear if a speaker goes outside that 1.5 dB or say 2 dB window?

But to my initial question that everyone seems to avoid. If your preference was something else, would you still rather choose the better measuring speaker (and EQ that to your liking) over the one that already sounds the way you want it to sound?

I would say definitely the better measuring speaker, unless both have reasonably flat anechoic response, and with good directivity, things changes from time to time, be it preference, your room, your space, your mood and the new music that you listen, a speaker responding better to EQ can adapt to all these changes, but for a worse measuring speaker that is out of the box better in my room today likely would be messed up bigger when things changes.

 

[Digby]

Firstly you have to assume I actually enjoy something that measured worse, which, IME thus far, not the case, all those speakers wowed me at friend's home or demo room or such are the ones measuring pretty neutral on axis, but room and venue differs so don't bother compare one to another

Assume we are talking about speakers that are within reasonable degrees of difference in performance. There are no outright bad speakers in this hypothetical example. What we have are speakers that measure better or worse on one aspect or another. A lot of the speakers that measure 'best' on ASR, are small and are not going to provide great volume levels or dynamism. For many situations, that may be fine, but it is a compromise.

A PA speaker has to be loud, and usually the FR is a bit more ragged because of this. However, there is a lifelike 'dynamic' presentation not available with smaller hi-fi speakers. It has exchanged one set of compromises for another.

All speakers are a selection of compromises. Which compromises suit one person best are not necessarily the same as would suit another. The preference score is a predictor of what people 'on average' would like, not what the individual, with their own tastes and circumstances, will prefer. Is an individual person the same as the averaged, hypothetical one? No. Is a speaker with the highest preference score more likely to be preferred by more people? Most likely yes, but to say it is the best among speakers that perform very similarly, is not clear cut.

Is a speaker with a preference score of 6 a worse than one with a score on 8.2? The answer is 'it depends'. The number is bigger, but the application of the score doesn't seem as clear cut as 'look for the highest score, that is the best speaker'.

 

[YSC]

Assume we are talking about speakers that are within reasonable degrees of difference in performance. There are no outright bad speakers in this hypothetical example. What we have are speakers that measure better or worse on one aspect or another. A lot of the speakers that measure 'best' on ASR, are small and are not going to provide great volume levels or dynamism. For many situations, that may be fine, but it is a compromise.

A PA speaker has to be loud, and usually the FR is a bit more ragged because of this. However, there is a lifelike 'dynamic' presentation not available with smaller hi-fi speakers. It has exchanged one set of compromises for another.

All speakers are a selection of compromises. Which compromises suit one person best are not necessarily the same as would suit another. The preference score is a predictor of what people 'on average' would like, not what the individual, with their own tastes and circumstances, will prefer. Is an individual person the same as the averaged, hypothetical one? No. Is a speaker with the highest preference score more likely to be preferred by more people? Most likely yes, but to say it is the best among speakers that perform very similarly, is not clear cut.

Is a speaker with a preference score of 6 a worse than one with a score on 8.2? The answer is 'it depends'. The number is bigger, but the application of the score doesn't seem as clear cut as 'look for the highest score, that is the best speaker'.

well in such case, it just how you read those measurement, thing is not to look at the score alone, that's a generalized point I don't really bother with, what I learnt since coming in ASR, is to read the data, and judge which parameter I need but not jumping into the highest scoring speaker.

say in a real near field, where SPL would be enough for most 4"+ woofer, I would just get flat enough speaker in FR, bass extetnsion depends on the intended use, with/without a sub and then go back to the budget and choose the one fits best with the best FR neutrality. say if you need it in a big room, after certain degree of FR flatness, sometimes in PA speakers just good enough to have a trend following neutrality where the R wiggles along, and directivity being good, you choose or the intended max SPL with low distortion.

in near field the KH80 is hard to beat, but then if you put it in a large living room hoping it to fill the room because the score is high, not reading the complete presented data on the criteria important to the usecase is just user error on the measurement.

 

[Purité Audio]

Intended application is of course important, but a better measuring loudspeaker will be more transparent independent of room/mood etc etc.
Keith