Do We Want All Speakers To Sound The Same ?

[wwenze]

I won't sue you. I just won't read your reviews. ;-)

To elaborate: If you review speakers, and only report on the sound after EQ, that would be in my mind a disservice to those who want to know about the character of the speaker as it is. Someone can always EQ it if they like. Of course, you may only wish to serve an audience comprised of people who will EQ their speakers to whatever you consider acceptable. But that would seem to be cutting away the size of your audience.

If you reported on the sound of the speaker as it is, but also include a report of how the speaker performed when EQ'd, that's a different story. That seems worthwhile, and adds value for both types of consumer: the ones who will use the speaker without EQ, and those who will EQ.

(I have a feeling you do the latter, not the former, would I be correct?)

I do both, as you have suspected. And that's what the folks with a measurement mic tend to do.

On one hand the performance of a speaker when plug-and-play is most relevant to majority of use cases

On the other hand I EQ because I do not want my personal sonic preferences to influence the grading of a speaker since another person will have another preference. I know what is my own preference curve so after EQ-ing the speakers so that I can enjoy the sound, I can focus on what EQ doesnt fix. Then the amount of required EQ, beyond the sensible range for personal preference, also contributes to the score.

The major EQ component is really just a low shelf filter to mimic the proximity effect. Since this effect is highly dependent on speaker positioning and size and personal preference, so nobody will experience the same thing in their setup anyway perhaps in our lives. So I might as well be happy while using the speaker. Since sometimes I keep using it for weeks or months out of laziness.

 

[MattHooper]

Interesting


How do you logically reconcile the realism of the drums perceived through your Devores with the fact that (presumably) the Revels measured flatter?

Do you perhaps attribute this to a non-flat frequency response in that particular recording?

Or is it perhaps more that the Devores emphasised a particular part of the sound that you really liked? (This could be enjoyable but should actually be less real).

Perfect question! Be prepared to wish you didn't ask. Short answer: I don't know. I only have hunches.

I have a general understanding of the sonic implications of some speaker measurements. But I can't perfectly predict precisely how any given speaker will sound from the measurements only. I'm not sure anyone can (even super experienced people like John Atkinson or Amir can find themselves surprised somewhat when a measurable anomaly is either surprisingly more, or less salient in the perceived sound during the listening test).

It's very hard for me to predict exactly why a speaker will just slide over to that point where I perceive it as "more organic, less mechanical, more real and present rather than recorded."

I can only say that I have constantly paid attention to the character of real sound, against reproduced sound. Aside from having played many instruments, I live in an area where live bands playing in street corners and parks are routine - an almost every day encounter in warm weather. I constantly close my eyes and take stock of the character of real sax, real trumpets, real drums, and listen for what is different vs reproduced "why does this sound real, not recorded? what's characteristics are salient in telling me 'this is real?'

Typically I hear a timbral warmth and richness, combined with a clarity and presence, a texture, that is just "there," unmediated.

It's my working hypothesis that the artificiality I hear from some neutral speakers isn't the speakers, but the recording. In most recordings, there is a collection of colorations built in, from mic choices, to mixing choices, processing etc, and then ultimately through the limitations of recording/playback...it just sounds artificial. It typically sounds reductive, harder, squeezed, harmonically less warm, no longer made of "organic stuff" but mechanical.

But...for whatever reason...I find SOME sound systems, and some speakers, make recordings sound less artificial. So for instance with the Devores, when bongos were in the mix, there was an immediate "pop out of the recording" texture to the hands hitting the skins, a very recognizable character of "live." It didn't sound glazed over and canned as through most of the other speakers. Likewise drum skin after drum skin - snares, toms etc - had that recognizable organic 'happening right there' character. Also, the Devores produced a more recognizably "live" sensation with kick drums. In many super neutral audiphile systems, drums can be dynamic, super tight. But there is often a sense of the kick drum (and bass) being "back there, holographically placed somewhere behind the speakers" in a sort of detached way. The Devores produced that "whack" of the peddle hitting the bass drum, but also had a sort of bloomy, rolling out across the floor bass warmth that I could feel with each kick drum...very recognizable from my many years sitting in front of drum sets being played in our basement.

Now, PRESUMING we are talking about audible colorations, at least conceivably, all this could be the result of some canny colorations - for instance some lower midrange or upper bass extra warmth engineered in, it could be coming from an emphasis due to some ringing in the cabinet adding "body and warmth and solidity" to the sound. Some emphasis at just the right spot in the bass. Maybe something to do with the wavelaunch using the wide baffle. Maybe there is just the right "built in EQ" in the upper mids, or maybe even a touch of roughness there, that produces that textural presence that strikes me as "right there" and less "recorded." I dunno. I can only say that the Devores FOR ME reliably produced this sensation of "more live" than some other "better measuring" speakers (including the Kii 3 I auditioned). (Devore is a drummer, and says he designs speakers to sound "right" to him, which would include reproducing the gestalt of drums. The typical ASR member would find this approach to designing speakers absurd, but to those who listen for what John listens for, care about what John cares about, the sound of Devore speakers can be just the ticket, just what they were looking for).

And I also face a problem in terms of any explanation: I've noticed that the more engineer-minded someone is, the more inclined to be highly technical in reading measurements...the LESS likely that person is to be evaluating sound in the way that I do! For instance, many here will roll their eyes at all the above as poetic fluff that they just aren't interested in. So the people who might have the knowledge to find the explanation are least inclined to do so.

So, basically, I have my own impressions of live sound, and since I'm buying a sound system for my own pleasure and goals, I go on my own impressions when listening to speakers. I also enjoy listening to neutral great measuring speakers as well! I like the variety. But for my own purchases, they have to tick off certain "it sounds right" boxes or I will not be compelled to listen.

 

[MattHooper]

I do both, as you have suspected. And that's what the folks with a measurement mic tend to do.

On one hand the performance of a speaker when plug-and-play is most relevant to majority of use cases

On the other hand I EQ because I do not want my personal sonic preferences to influence the grading of a speaker since another person will have another preference. I know what is my own preference curve so after EQ-ing the speakers so that I can enjoy the sound, I can focus on what EQ doesnt fix. Then the amount of required EQ, beyond the sensible range for personal preference, also contributes to the score.

The major EQ component is really just a low shelf filter to mimic the proximity effect. Since this effect is highly dependent on speaker positioning and size and personal preference, so nobody will experience the same thing in their setup anyway perhaps in our lives. So I might as well be happy while using the speaker. Since sometimes I keep using it for weeks or months out of laziness.

Sounds great!

For me, the perfect audio/speaker review would include measurements, a discussion of the implications of the measurements, how the speaker performs sans and with EQ, and a subjective listening report, which helps put in perspective the sonic implications, and gets across to some degree "what it sounds like."

Amir's reviews tick pretty much all those boxes.

Though I find, for my own purposes, the subjective description portion often a bit scant, partially I presume due to the general ASR allergy to subjective reviewer-speak

 

[YSC]

Perfect question! Be prepared to wish you didn't ask. Short answer: I don't know. I only have hunches.

I have a general understanding of the sonic implications of some speaker measurements. But I can't perfectly predict precisely how any given speaker will sound from the measurements only. I'm not sure anyone can (even super experienced people like John Atkinson or Amir can find themselves surprised somewhat when a measurable anomaly is either surprisingly more, or less salient in the perceived sound during the listening test).

It's very hard for me to predict exactly why a speaker will just slide over to that point where I perceive it as "more organic, less mechanical, more real and present rather than recorded."

I can only say that I have constantly paid attention to the character of real sound, against reproduced sound. Aside from having played many instruments, I live in an area where live bands playing in street corners and parks are routine - an almost every day encounter in warm weather. I constantly close my eyes and take stock of the character of real sax, real trumpets, real drums, and listen for what is different vs reproduced "why does this sound real, not recorded? what's characteristics are salient in telling me 'this is real?'

Typically I hear a timbral warmth and richness, combined with a clarity and presence, a texture, that is just "there," unmediated.

It's my working hypothesis that the artificiality I hear from some neutral speakers isn't the speakers, but the recording. In most recordings, there is a collection of colorations built in, from mic choices, to mixing choices, processing etc, and then ultimately through the limitations of recording/playback...it just sounds artificial. It typically sounds reductive, harder, squeezed, harmonically less warm, no longer made of "organic stuff" but mechanical.

But...for whatever reason...I find SOME sound systems, and some speakers, make recordings sound less artificial. So for instance with the Devores, when bongos were in the mix, there was an immediate "pop out of the recording" texture to the hands hitting the skins, a very recognizable character of "live." It didn't sound glazed over and canned as through most of the other speakers. Likewise drum skin after drum skin - snares, toms etc - had that recognizable organic 'happening right there' character. Also, the Devores produced a more recognizably "live" sensation with kick drums. In many super neutral audiphile systems, drums can be dynamic, super tight. But there is often a sense of the kick drum (and bass) being "back there, holographically placed somewhere behind the speakers" in a sort of detached way. The Devores produced that "whack" of the peddle hitting the bass drum, but also had a sort of bloomy, rolling out across the floor bass warmth that I could feel with each kick drum...very recognizable from my many years sitting in front of drum sets being played in our basement.

Now, PRESUMING we are talking about audible colorations, at least conceivably, all this could be the result of some canny colorations - for instance some lower midrange or upper bass extra warmth engineered in, it could be coming from an emphasis due to some ringing in the cabinet adding "body and warmth and solidity" to the sound. Some emphasis at just the right spot in the bass. Maybe something to do with the wavelaunch using the wide baffle. Maybe there is just the right "built in EQ" in the upper mids, or maybe even a touch of roughness there, that produces that textural presence that strikes me as "right there" and less "recorded." I dunno. I can only say that the Devores FOR ME reliably produced this sensation of "more live" than some other "better measuring" speakers (including the Kii 3 I auditioned). (Devore is a drummer, and says he designs speakers to sound "right" to him, which would include reproducing the gestalt of drums. The typical ASR member would find this approach to designing speakers absurd, but to those who listen for what John listens for, care about what John cares about, the sound of Devore speakers can be just the ticket, just what they were looking for).

And I also face a problem in terms of any explanation: I've noticed that the more engineer-minded someone is, the more inclined to be highly technical in reading measurements...the LESS likely that person is to be evaluating sound in the way that I do! For instance, many here will roll their eyes at all the above as poetic fluff that they just aren't interested in. So the people who might have the knowledge to find the explanation are least inclined to do so.

So, basically, I have my own impressions of live sound, and since I'm buying a sound system for my own pleasure and goals, I go on my own impressions when listening to speakers. I also enjoy listening to neutral great measuring speakers as well! I like the variety. But for my own purchases, they have to tick off certain "it sounds right" boxes or I will not be compelled to listen.

DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96 loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements I used DRA Labs' MLSSA system and a calibrated DPA 4006 microphone to measure the DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96's frequency response in the farfield, and an Earthworks QTC-40 for the nearfield and spatially averaged room responses.

www.stereophile.com

Fun fact, the Devore is pretty flat anechoic allu with not bad directivity in instance, my feel and exp is that when directivity is good to excellent, with enough bass extension to not make things like harmonics gone missing, it usually sounds pretty natural and not artificial, now when EQ a speaker with poor off axis response it more often goes wrong.

No reading graphs alone likely won’t get the final 1% of differences in listening feel out, but then it usually don’t go far from it either.

 

[-Matt-]

Perfect question! Be prepared to wish you didn't ask.

Not at all, I enjoyed the read!

But...for whatever reason...I find SOME sound systems, and some speakers, make recordings sound less artificial. So for instance with the Devores, when bongos were in the mix, there was an immediate "pop out of the recording" texture to the hands hitting the skins, a very recognizable character of "live." It didn't sound glazed over and canned as through most of the other speakers. Likewise drum skin after drum skin - snares, toms etc - had that recognizable organic 'happening right there' character. Also, the Devores produced a more recognizably "live" sensation with kick drums. In many super neutral audiphile systems, drums can be dynamic, super tight. But there is often a sense of the kick drum (and bass) being "back there, holographically placed somewhere behind the speakers" in a sort of detached way. The Devores produced that "whack" of the peddle hitting the bass drum, but also had a sort of bloomy, rolling out across the floor bass warmth that I could feel with each kick drum...very recognizable from my many years sitting in front of drum sets being played in our basement.

From your description they must sound great - this is the sort of sound that most of us surely want to achieve. I hope they continue to bring you great listening pleasure.

(Devore is a drummer, and says he designs speakers to sound "right" to him, which would include reproducing the gestalt of drums. The typical ASR member would find this approach to designing speakers absurd, but to those who listen for what John listens for, care about what John cares about, the sound of Devore speakers can be just the ticket, just what they were looking for).

But here I worry a little. Were your listening impressions possibly subconsciously altered by your expectation that the Devores would perform well with drums? (This could conceivably lead you to prefer the Devores over another speaker even if there was no measurable/audible difference between them).

I know that if I have read, and bought into, some marketing material (perhaps describing a technical aspect of a design) this can make me stongly prefer that option (when sighted). Also applies to many things besides speakers.

 

[rwortman]

I'm a bit confused by that statement.

I guess I should have stopped at “I don’t go to orchestra concerts”. I added the bit about un-amplified music in case someone didn’t know that orchestra halls don’t generally use PA systems. I don’t go to classical concerts and I don’t personally know anyone that does. It’s a dying form. I have been told that I should, though. A bit of a drive for me and I would have to go alone. I’m quite sure my wife would not sit through it.

 

[Gringoaudio1]

Dont think that the most worst measuring would sound the best to me. To be honest iam absolut sure it would not. So this question is at least for me useless. This it measures so bad but sounds so good, is talking about fairy tailes or strange taste. Both not my prefered soup.

I think to a lot of people who have not heard a lot of different speakers, and understand by experience the correlation between good measurements and the resulting sound, the worst measuring speakers might sound the best. That is just uneducated audio naivety.
And I understand that this comment makes me sound elitist but there is expertise to be gained in any human endeavour through experience.
But I like speakers for which I have no idea of the FR performance. So I guess I’m a hypocrite as well as a naive elitist.

 

[rwortman]

I think most people that like music recognize good sound when they hear it. I tell people to go to an audio store (preferably several if they live in a city) and listen to the best system they have just to get an idea of what’s possible. If you frame of reference is a $100 sound bar or a wave radio, you aren’t going to be hard to please. I had a friend tell me he had a bluetooth speaker that sounded like a full-on audio system but didn’t take up all that space. I told him to bring it over and we would set on the coffee table in my listening room and compare. He said, “Maybe it doesn’t really sound like a full system but it’s good enough for me. Most people just don’t care that much.

 

[MattHooper]

Fun fact, the Devore is pretty flat anechoic allu with not bad directivity in instance, my feel and exp is that when directivity is good to excellent, with enough bass extension to not make things like harmonics gone missing, it usually sounds pretty natural and not artificial, now when EQ a speaker with poor off axis response it more often goes wrong.

Yes, compared to the on-axis of any number of usual suspect high end speakers (I'm looking at you Wilson!), the on-axis is pretty neutral. But not exactly textbook off axis and all around. Plus some possibly significant resonance as pointed out by JA.

From your description they must sound great - this is the sort of sound that most of us surely want to achieve. I hope they continue to bring you great listening pleasure.

I didn't buy them. I bought the Joseph Audio speakers instead. Various reasons. One being they are wide which presents some issues for my room (I have a projection screen behind my stereo speakers, can't block it). They also need at least 8 feet listening distance to cohere. I'm forced to sit closer, usually, in my room. Also, I wasn't sure if I would tire of their character over time.

But I think this discussion fits in with the theme of "wanting all speakers to sound/measure the same" or not....so....

But here I worry a little. Were your listening impressions possibly subconsciously altered by your expectation that the Devores would perform well with drums? (This could conceivably lead you to prefer the Devores over another speaker even if there was no measurable/audible difference between them).

That's always a possibility.

However, the characteristics I describe were cited over and over by other reviewers, and many other listeners. One major characteristic often cited for the O/96 is a weightiness, richness and sense of large scale for their size. Some point to the wide baffle and the way it aims/launches the sound toward the listener vis a skinny-slim floor standing speaker. I don't know. Among the possible technical explanations, in the measurements JA identified some fairly heavy nodes/resonance and wrote:

"These modes might have lent the speaker the richness on voices noted by AD."

I also heard vocals sound bigger, richer, more "chesty" on the Devores than other speakers.

Art D in that review also noted: "Led Zeppelin's drummer, the late John Bonham, sounded awesome: The O/96 communicated the force of his playing better than any non-horn loudspeaker with a 1" tweeter and a high-Q woofer has a right to. Bonham's entrance in Led Zep's "In My Time of Dying," from Physical Graffiti (LP, Swan Song/Classic SS 2 200 1198), was especially impactful"

I had similar experiences. I've used Talk Talk's Happiness Is Easy as a test track for years, through every speaker audition. I never had quite the sensation of those drums sounding like "real drums" in front of me, as much as on the Devores. (I often close my eyes listening).

And quotes like these from Art: "Among the performance characteristics that are as difficult to describe as to quantify—and that, coincidentally, rise above others in distinguishing vintage from contemporary products—is a loudspeaker's ability to convey the substance of musical sound, rather than suggesting a pale if attractively pellucid sonic outline. The DeVore O/96 hit the latter goal more handily than most modern loudspeakers I've heard,"

"...the O/96s played it with an exceptional sense of sonic flesh and blood. Just as remarkably, the Orangutans did that while conveying far more of the recording space around and behind the instruments than other speakers no less substantial. That, I think, will be heard by some as the O/96's unique strength.

These put in to words beautifully just the character I heard from those speakers. I've always sought a sense of palpability and density to the sound in an audio system. It's not just image focus in the sense of precisely locating the positions of instruments in the "soundstage," but the sense that the instruments are solid, have body and weight, are palpably moving air, not just see-through holograms. The Devores consistently delivered that "flesh and blood" sense of body and density and palpability, yet also sounded "open and airy" so that there was a sense of acoustic space around the instruments. It all came together to tweak the "it's closer to real" thing in my brain. On many speakers, when I'd play recordings of piano, the impression was often of detached piano keys floating around in space. On the Devores, I had more of the sense that the keys were attached to an actual, big, resonating sound board/piano body. Something that twigged that memory of so many years sitting at my piano. (This, again, is why I still find usefulness in certain subjective reviews. If I note a reviewer is paying attention to the things I pay attention to, doing a good job of putting sound in to words, evoking a sonic picture for me, and if he has also seemed accurate with other speakers I've had experience with...then for me it can be worth seeking out the gear in that review).

 

[MattHooper]

Just to add, some more comments from other reviews of the Devore O-speakers:

"You wouldn’t expect from their size, that theses apes would sound so big......They move a lot of air and the performance sounds real. If you listen in the dark or with your eyes closed, with the right recordings you may think and feel the music is coming from musicians and not speakers.

The O/96s allow you to feel waves of music flow over your body in a tangible way"


A different review: "but it’s the way that DeVore’s speakers do it that is so captivating to my ears. It’s the honesty of those electron translations being carried out: A snare drum skin sounds exactly like a real snare drum skin. A cymbal crashes, splashes, sparkles, and has airborne sonic decay as if a drum kit is being played in front of me. A singer’s voice has chest resonance – not just throat vibration – which signals my brain to believe that vocal emanation is being projected by an organic, physical mass, just like a real singer standing in the room would sound."

I could have written that word-for-word, after hearing the Devores for myself; it so perfectly matches the subjective impressions I had listening. On a strictly technical level given more narrow technical goals, these speakers would likely be written off "save your money for something that measures better." But a good review (IMO) gives me insight on the sonic consequences of the design - the "how it sounds" and it's consequences for what music sounds like through such a speaker. What may be brushed away by someone looking at how the measurements don't fit their technical goal may be championed by someone else, elucidating certain characteristics some audiophiles really cares about. It's one reason I'm glad there isn't currently only one approach to designing speakers, or one goal being aimed at by everyone. Nice to have a variety out there for those who like 'em.

 

[YSC]

Yes, compared to the on-axis of any number of usual suspect high end speakers (I'm looking at you Wilson!), the on-axis is pretty neutral. But not exactly textbook off axis and all around. Plus some possibly significant resonance as pointed out by JA.



I didn't buy them. I bought the Joseph Audio speakers instead. Various reasons. One being they are wide which presents some issues for my room (I have a projection screen behind my stereo speakers, can't block it). They also need at least 8 feet listening distance to cohere. I'm forced to sit closer, usually, in my room. Also, I wasn't sure if I would tire of their character over time.

But I think this discussion fits in with the theme of "wanting all speakers to sound/measure the same" or not....so....



That's always a possibility.

However, the characteristics I describe were cited over and over by other reviewers, and many other listeners. One major characteristic often cited for the O/96 is a weightiness, richness and sense of large scale for their size. Some point to the wide baffle and the way it aims/launches the sound toward the listener vis a skinny-slim floor standing speaker. I don't know. Among the possible technical explanations, in the measurements JA identified some fairly heavy nodes/resonance and wrote:

"These modes might have lent the speaker the richness on voices noted by AD."

I also heard vocals sound bigger, richer, more "chesty" on the Devores than other speakers.

Art D in that review also noted: "Led Zeppelin's drummer, the late John Bonham, sounded awesome: The O/96 communicated the force of his playing better than any non-horn loudspeaker with a 1" tweeter and a high-Q woofer has a right to. Bonham's entrance in Led Zep's "In My Time of Dying," from Physical Graffiti (LP, Swan Song/Classic SS 2 200 1198), was especially impactful"

I had similar experiences. I've used Talk Talk's Happiness Is Easy as a test track for years, through every speaker audition. I never had quite the sensation of those drums sounding like "real drums" in front of me, as much as on the Devores. (I often close my eyes listening).

And quotes like these from Art: "Among the performance characteristics that are as difficult to describe as to quantify—and that, coincidentally, rise above others in distinguishing vintage from contemporary products—is a loudspeaker's ability to convey the substance of musical sound, rather than suggesting a pale if attractively pellucid sonic outline. The DeVore O/96 hit the latter goal more handily than most modern loudspeakers I've heard,"

"...the O/96s played it with an exceptional sense of sonic flesh and blood. Just as remarkably, the Orangutans did that while conveying far more of the recording space around and behind the instruments than other speakers no less substantial. That, I think, will be heard by some as the O/96's unique strength.

These put in to words beautifully just the character I heard from those speakers. I've always sought a sense of palpability and density to the sound in an audio system. It's not just image focus in the sense of precisely locating the positions of instruments in the "soundstage," but the sense that the instruments are solid, have body and weight, are palpably moving air, not just see-through holograms. The Devores consistently delivered that "flesh and blood" sense of body and density and palpability, yet also sounded "open and airy" so that there was a sense of acoustic space around the instruments. It all came together to tweak the "it's closer to real" thing in my brain. On many speakers, when I'd play recordings of piano, the impression was often of detached piano keys floating around in space. On the Devores, I had more of the sense that the keys were attached to an actual, big, resonating sound board/piano body. Something that twigged that memory of so many years sitting at my piano. (This, again, is why I still find usefulness in certain subjective reviews. If I note a reviewer is paying attention to the things I pay attention to, doing a good job of putting sound in to words, evoking a sonic picture for me, and if he has also seemed accurate with other speakers I've had experience with...then for me it can be worth seeking out the gear in that review).

For the not textbook perfect I agree, yet it’s not far, combined with normal room variation I bet it’s won’t stand out from the textbook counterparts. On that plot it seems up to 30-45 degrees the directivity is good also and I lean on that’s the reason why it sounded natural to you, likely also combined with sighted bias,

Also and that’s what I precisely think why the closer to textbook perfect the speaker is, the better, quite some offerings are close enough for the room to make the majority of colouration, that’s the point I would aim at for short listing, and when purchasing, go for the other factors past that line to get the one you like all round.

Aka don’t mess up the sound by poor design, and then go for the brand, look, size etc. to satisfy yourself.

 

[Ilkless]

A lot of sophistry to legitimise conflating non-auditory stimuli and auditory stimuli, to rationalise fetishising esoteric cottage industry designs, and in irrational fear of engineering informed by (psycho)acoustics disrupting this fetishisation and status signalling of one as a connoisseur belonging to a special few. It seems utterly bizarre to me to see someone tie themselves up in making loudspeakers seem much more arcane than in actuality with some pseudo-intellectual tract.

 

[birdog1960]

I'd like to compare 2 front main speakers with "phantom center" to my current L/C/R setup for movies. How does one produce "phantom center" with a Denon x3###? Do you just turn off (set center to "none") and then rerun odyssey 32? Will all center output then go to mains?

 

[loafeye]

...I'm not expecting or attempting pure realism...

When I play my acoustic guitar, it evokes in my mind very specific images, tonal "colors," which happen to be a sort of "warm/golden" tone... that is my perception. When I use recordings I've made of my guitar to test speakers, if I don't hear that tone...or something close to it...then for me the whole timbre of the presentation will wound "off." Something either makes me brain say "That's it! I recognize that beautiful timbral color" or it doesn't. And I find there is an over all "gestalt" to the sound of real acoustic guitars that, once again, either strikes my brain as "correct" or not in a sound system... I at least want to get some basic "tone" right, where most things will "sound right enough." If that's not there I find I have zero interest in staying to listen to a system.

But...that's me.. It's different from the attitude "I just want demonstrated technical accuracy to the recording, and then the sound is whatever it is."

[loafeye said:
My contention is that listeners only "prefer" some speakers because they haven't experienced speakers that measure better.]


That's probably true in some cases but I doubt all.

I've seen plenty of audiophiles who have heard better measuring speakers, but who chose less ASR-approved speakers nonetheless.

In my case, I doubt my Thiel or Joseph speakers measure as superbly (by ASR-criteria) as some revel speakers. And yet, even after having auditioned the Revel Performa F228be (measures great!) more than once, I found I preferred (and bought) the Joseph speakers, or my Thiels.

In fact, I auditioned the Performa's twice, in two different locations, in between auditioning the Devore O/96 speakers. The Devores blew me away because, eyes closed, I'd rarely heard drums sound so "real" in terms of the timbre and character of live drums. When I put on one drum solo track I use, it was as close to sitting right next to real cymbals splashing and drum skins being hit, than I'd experienced through other speakers. The same tracks through the Performas sounded excellent, but did not produce the same "THAT's what real drums sound like" impression, whether eyes open or closed.

It is so rare for me to encounter systems that produce sensations of the real thing that when I hear it, it makes a big impression. It may be due to some built in colorations in the Devores, which don't measure as textbook as the Revel, but if so they were very cannily done and very sympathetic to...at least my memory...of the real thing. (And I only have to please my own memory!)

It's OK with me, especially in that you actually read my post, so thank you, but you took the one statement out of my post, and replied to it out of context with the rest of my post. It was only a part of my reply to the question "Do we want all speakers to sound the same?" So the single statement wasn't intended to stand on its own. That said, you could be educated to prefer A, since A is a truer representation of the original sound than your preference for B, as you note both in your discussion of your guitar tone and the drum solo. And if A is all that exists, because the answer provided is that we want them to all sound the same, then only A exists, and you won't know the difference, because B won't exist as a choice.

I'm not able to get my head around your discussion of the speakers, though. You know that the Devore's don't measure as well as the Performa F228be, but you didn't buy either of them, you bought Thiels and Josephs, but you don't know how they measure compared to the two you mention auditioning, so how do you know that you don't actually prefer the better measuring speaker?
In any event, if we want all speakers to sound the same, what criteria will "we" (who?) use? Scientific measurement? Which measures? Who decides? Does a final decision on the speaker specs rule out incremental improvements over time? If not, voila, we have at least two speakers, A and B, and they don't sound the same. Now what?

 

[changer]

When I play my acoustic guitar, it evokes in my mind very specific images, tonal "colors," which happen to be a sort of "warm/golden" tone. I have no idea what others would hear, but that is my perception. When I use recordings I've made of my guitar to test speakers, if I don't hear that tone...or something close to it...then for me the whole timbre of the presentation will wound "off." Something either makes me brain say "That's it! I recognize that beautiful timbral color" or it doesn't. And I find there is an over all "gestalt" to the sound of real acoustic guitars that, once again, either strikes my brain as "correct" or not in a sound system. Same for sax, trumpet, woodwinds, drums, orchestral instruments voices. All sound systems to me are almost mono-chromatic vs the harmonic richness of real instruments, but I at least want to get some basic "tone" right, where most things will "sound right enough." If that's not there I find I have zero
interest in staying to listen to a system.

Please name a few commercially available recordings, acoustic guitar, sax, trumpet ... that have this special "gestalt" for the readers to listen to and evaluate on their own system. I prefer anything that is available on Deezer.

 

[YSC]

When I play my acoustic guitar, it evokes in my mind very specific images, tonal "colors," which happen to be a sort of "warm/golden" tone. I have no idea what others would hear, but that is my perception. When I use recordings I've made of my guitar to test speakers, if I don't hear that tone...or something close to it...then for me the whole timbre of the presentation will wound "off." Something either makes me brain say "That's it! I recognize that beautiful timbral color" or it doesn't. And I find there is an over all "gestalt" to the sound of real acoustic guitars that, once again, either strikes my brain as "correct" or not in a sound system. Same for sax, trumpet, woodwinds, drums, orchestral instruments voices. All sound systems to me are almost mono-chromatic vs the harmonic richness of real instruments, but I at least want to get some basic "tone" right, where most things will "sound right enough." If that's not there I find I have zero
interest in staying to listen to a system.

But...that's me, not everyone of course. It's different from the attitude "I just want demonstrated technical accuracy to the recording, and then the sound is whatever it is."

Also be reminded your own recordings using X mic and Y system can be acoustically coloured, so this could be the non-transparent source

 

[changer]

The Devores offer a LOT of presence and a lean, hence "fast" bass.



"Fast" bass and +5 dB, Q=2 at fc=1000 Hz will definitely create an interesting experience. Try it at home. I added it to my room EQ and it surely does sound special. Like a red wine with lotsof tannin, that makes you feel all your palatine folds, it is as if everything has deep rifts. Music now sounds like this:



But it was a result of EQ, that is: linear distortion. The Devores have it as a build-in feature. I higly doubt all the attributions to their "special" construction properties you have made hold true at all. This is an underestimation of linear distortion. Maybe instead of searching for arcane speaker building secrets, it would be worthwile to first test many different effects of frequency linear distortion via room EQ. I know from my experience that it makes all the difference.

 

[Plcamp]

I am struck with Amir’s (early post) comment that you need eq to deal with bass properly.

Given you have got eq, it’s perhaps advantageous (but not terribly important) that unequalized on axis response is completely flat, and what would matter more are things like distortion vs spl and off axis response?

 

[changer]

The Devores offer a LOT of presence and a lean, hence "fast" bass.

View attachment 246608

"Fast" bass and +5 dB, Q=2 at fc=1000 Hz will definitely create an interesting experience. Try it at home. I added it to my room EQ and it surely does sound special. Like a red wine with lotsof tannin, that makes you feel all your palatine folds, it is as if everything has deep rifts. Music now sounds like this:

View attachment 246617

But it was a result of EQ, that is: linear distortion. The Devores have it as a build-in feature. I higly doubt all the attributions to their "special" construction properties you have made hold true at all. This is an underestimation of linear distortion. Maybe instead of searching for arcane speaker building secrets, it would be worthwile to first test many different effects of frequency linear distortion via room EQ. I know from my experience that it makes all the difference.

Wow, my speaker sounds so boring after removing this SFX. It will take while until my brain accepts the other sound again. Frequency linear distorting is so powerful.

 

[birdog1960]

Please name a few commercially available recordings, acoustic guitar, sax, trumpet ... that have this special "gestalt" for the readers to listen to and evaluate on their own system. I prefer anything that is available on Deezer.

I've posted this before but it seems most appropriate here: https://www.fretboardjournal.com/fe...es-of-guitar-tone-with-pacific-rim-tonewoods/. While not currently commercially available, the tech is there to record and playback guitars to the point where experts can identify tonewoods used for fretboards from guitars. To me, this level of accuracy/precision is the ultimate goal.