• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

How would you answer these questions? (Acoustics Insider Darko Interview)

Trdat

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
982
Likes
402
Location
Yerevan "Sydney Born"
There are, of course, incomplete measurements. But one cannot simply assume that the failure to connect intuition (what you hear as you intepret it) to measurements is always a measurement problem.
This was very funny and very true.....

The way I see it, is that the worlds best scientists and sound engineers have come together and devised a system(measurements) to help figure out, or potentially more than help, to tell us exactly which loudspeaker will sound good and this gentleman who admits he is not a loudspeaker designer and cannot answer tehcnical questions is here to teach us more than the scientists and is over confident about it. That in itself tells everything.....
 

Curvature

Major Contributor
Joined
May 20, 2022
Messages
1,170
Likes
1,534
For example, I can easily hear that a speaker is "dynamic" in that it transients have attack and sound clean, but what measurement does this correlate to? I am VERY confident that this is a real subjective phenomenon. I thought it might have something to do with the sharpness of the step response, but I was wrong. I have since found that you need to measure loudspeaker compression and plot the input against the output - e.g. for every 5dB increase in volume my DAC outputs, I should measure a corresponding linear increase in loudspeaker volume. At some point the loudspeaker will compress and distort. At what volume this happens and by how much is part of the explanation. Other measurements which might explain the subjective impression are early reflections in the ETC, ringing which might smear the transient, and so on.
For this specific phenomena, I have many doubts. I wonder how much I am personally predisposed to equating dynamics with hornspeakers. I haven't had a chance to do side-by-side comparisons, so I am wary of my memory.

In other words, I don't know if I could I identify a speaker as dynamic easily, under blind circumstances.

We know horns, generally, have (1) narrow directivity, are (2) less likely to compress because of sensitivity and efficiency and (3) many designs have issues like uneven frequency response and directivity because of the difficulty of horn design, or, more practically, size constraints, with many horn systems featured only for the tweeter, with the midrange and bass being commonly taken over with dynamic drivers.

We also know, generally, how hearing works: (a) below 1.5kHz, phase locking, (b) around 1.5kHz, a transition region, (c) above 1.5kHz, direct sound dominated.

We further know that room geometry and materials determine (i) modal effects in the bass region, (ii) significant interference effects in the transition region, (iii) have limited relevance for direct sound in the statistical region, but very significant for reflections.

So I would always try to look for the answer for what I heard in 1, 2, 3 and a, b, c and i, ii, iii. Theorizing is necessary because we don't have all the data. Most listening prevents that, and most listening is uncontrolled. That doesn't prevent us from trying to understand the phenomenon (i.e., the "subjective experience"), but it should prevent us from jumping to conclusions (let's call that "uncontrolled theorizing", as a correlate to "uncontrolled listening").

In your example, I would agree that compression behavior is an important aspect of understanding perceived dynamics because, beyond level, there is a strong impact to frequency response. Your approach to measurement is reasonable and has many variants (e.g., Meyer Sound is proposing M-noise as a signal with a known crest factor, so the measurement would take into account the impact of RMS vs. peak levels at different SPLs).

I would disagree with respect to ETC because ETC is based on a linear calculation that puts too much weight on higher frequencies (or, putting it differently, it is most useful for evaluating high frequency decay--if you want to evaluate this for yourself without a lot of trouble, look at waveforms in a music player or DAW, those are also based on linear frequency weights; high hats and snares have no right showing up the way they do given how much relative energy they contain). "Smearing" occurs in rooms in and around the transitional region, which is fairly low down in frequency.

Long way of me saying that the mostly likely answer for understanding "dynamics" is to do with frequency response of direct sound primarily, speaker directivity secondly, and compression as a less-probable third.

I think if there is anything I value at ASR, it is "controlled theorizing".:)
 

Ron Texas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
6,449
Likes
9,660
Some time ago when I saw Darko's ranking of DAC's I gave up on him.
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,914
Likes
4,902
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
14:50: "What characteristics of engineering that goes into a speaker that most affects the sound stage, and what do you look for in a speaker to get excellent imaging?"

Generally not just sound stage and imaging (which are also included). Speakers how good, or bad they sound, in descending order of importance:
1. FR on and off axes
2. Directivity/ Dispersion
3. Distortion (and noise)

I think most people agree on that, as long as the distortion/noise does not become incomparably audible. Or what do you think?
Point 2 is also largely a matter of taste, at least regarding dispersion. Then for example regarding how wide sound stage you want (possibly then at the expense then of degraded imaging).

Time alignment, if we are talking placement of the tweeter-bass which is like this:
pi60lack4.jpg

Compared to drivers on the same planar baffle:
QRS-500-56867 (4).jpeg
Does it make any difference? In a listening room where the sound bounces around. I have a hard time believing that. If this is the type of time alignment that Darko is referring to?
NOTE different speakers in the pictures so they cannot be compared, only to illustrate the principle.

However, c-c distance bass- tweeter or bass-mid -tweeter (or in any other combination with different drivers such as BMTM , BBMT and so on)i is another matter. Coax drivers or broadband drivers in relation to c-c distance thus have their advantages. There MAY however be disadvantages with coax drivers or broadband drivers.
 
Last edited:

Elder

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2023
Messages
81
Likes
97
Oh wow, 2x of my questions made it in! (3&4)

I thought the answers were totally fair, wasn't expecting anything highly technical. I liked that he answered the questions from his own experiences and didn't pretend to be an expert on things that he is not.

Very different type of content for Jesco, I really enjoy his channel.
 

goat76

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2021
Messages
1,420
Likes
1,606
I saw both videos in this Q and A interview, and I think all the answers felt both honest and well thought out by Darko. He is very open with his approach which is to give his opinions on how he thinks different speakers and audio gear sound and that he's not an expert when it comes to the technicalities of speakers and gears. I think there is room for that type of review as even so-called "neutral speakers" from different manufacturers don't sound the same to each other. As they say in one of the videos, you "pick your poison" even when it comes to your choice of "neutral speakers" which is also a subjective choice in the end, as all speakers are colored in one way or another.

As Jesco in the video says, the most important thing for an audio engineer is that his choice of neutral studio monitors have "the colored sound" that is suited to his taste, otherwise, he will probably constantly fight the speakers in a way that will likely bend the result to something that will not translate as well as using a pair of speakers that sounds right to him. I think the same thing should go for someone who's just using his speakers for the pleasure of listening to music.
 

kemmler3D

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 25, 2022
Messages
3,878
Likes
7,869
Location
San Francisco
Coaxial speakers tend to give better imaging and soundstage. I don't understand why.
:facepalm:

How can you not have thoughts on that and still consider yourself an authority on speakers? He just said he thinks time alignment is important to imaging! That might be less correct than it sounds, but at least it would be self-consistent.

For example, I reviewed two speakers, one went down to 54Hz, the other to 64Hz, but the 64Hz speaker sounded like it had more bass. It's a loose guide for consumers, it's a shortcut. Life is more nuanced than measurements.

Jeez, too bad we can't look at the FR curves and figure this one out. :facepalm:

What I'm gathering here is that lack of knowledge wouldn't stop most of us from being top Youtube audiophiles.
 

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,640
Likes
12,923
Part 2 of the Darko interview video is out now.

There's a portion in which Darko is discussing why he likes powered speakers, you don't have to worry about finding the right amp fit for the speakers, and that otherwise you have audiophiles playing the find the right amp to fit the speakers game, which he opines is practically a crap shoot. He says maybe there is some scientific reason one amp will sound good with a pair of speakers, but "it's hard to know" because audio components are measured in isolation! Which "doesn't factor in what THAT amp would do with THAT speaker load." You might get a great result, but no measurements are going to tell you that because the speakers and amps are measured in isolation. He ends saying you'd be the smartest audiophile on the planet if you could look at both the amp and speaker measurements and understand how it will sound.

Yeesh. :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

I'm not sure how Darko has managed to go this long and remain that ignorant on such things. Has he ever wondered why the measurements are taken in the first place, on what basis the relevance of amp or speaker measurements are derived? The whole point of course is that specific amplifier measurements arose DUE to the correlation found between the measurements and how they predictably interact with speakers! That's why certain measurements became important in the first place! They aren't just utterly unconnected ideas from speaker measurements! What does he think John Atkinson is doing when measuring speakers and explaining what type of amplification will be required in order to not affect the frequency response? I'm frankly a numbskull in terms of electronic theory, but even I know that if you have measured a speaker in all the relevant ways, then you understand what type of amplification they will require to produce the sound the speaker was designed to produce. And that if you have two different amplifiers which measure in ways sufficient to drive that speaker load, then you can predict the sound from the speakers using either amp will be identical. It's not a crap shoot. You don't have to be the smartest audiophile on the planet to grasp this; you just have to pay *some* attention to how things work, rather than relying solely on Golden Ear interpretations.
 

kemmler3D

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 25, 2022
Messages
3,878
Likes
7,869
Location
San Francisco
I'm not sure how Darko has managed to go this long and remain that ignorant on such things.
The subjectivist audiophile culture is predicated on the notion that the way music is reproduced and why it sounds like it does (but not any other electrical signal) is either unknowable or deeply arcane and accessible only through decades of correlating anecdotes from sighted listening.

Basically he's signed up for the alchemy course, and that set of beliefs, while chemistry 101 is right over here. I think this has the effect of discouraging one from seeking or even acknowledging scientific explanations for things.

Maybe less harshly... it's possible to get pretty far in the audio world without knowing a lot. I got a minor in music technology (more about DSP and software than hardware, but still) and spent years working for an audio company without really appreciating the full importance of dispersion patterns, because it never really came up, we weren't building true hi-fi stuff and the compromises we made were of an even coarser nature than that. Now imagine how little I'd know if I never even worked in the industry. :)
 
Last edited:

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,640
Likes
12,923
The subjectivist audiophile culture is predicated on the notion that the way music is reproduced and why it sounds like it does (but not any other electrical signal) is either unknowable or deeply arcane and accessible only through decades of correlating anecdotes from sighted listening.

Basically he's signed up for the alchemy course, and that set of beliefs, while chemistry 101 is right over here. I think this has the effect of discouraging one from seeking or even acknowledging scientific explanations for things.

Maybe less harshly... it's possible to get pretty far in the audio world without knowing a lot. I got a minor in music technology (more about DSP and software than hardware, but still) and spent years working for an audio company without really appreciating the full importance of dispersion patterns, because it never really came up, we weren't building true hi-fi stuff and the compromises we made were of an even coarser nature than that. Now imagine how little I'd know if I never even worked in the industry. :)

As deservedly harsh as we are being on Darko for some of his statements.....I know some on ASR puzzle "if Darko is found spouting nonsense on something, why bother watching him at all? Why not just see this as a reason to dismiss anything he says or produces?" I understand why many take that route. As I've said, I don't. I still find plenty of interest in his videos, both for entertainment, gear peeking, some of his insights in comparing gear, what it's like to operate and live with it, etc. I feel I can wend my way through things he says I don't agree with, to agree with or enjoy other aspects of his content.

As for the ignorance I criticized, it's not without some level of empathy. I mean, I've been in this hobby for years and I still feel like a numb-nut on plenty of stuff. My brain just doesn't seem to "do" math and the technical/electrical aspects of gear very well. So even my ability to explain how amps work will be very limited. Also, I'm living in a bit of a glass house because I once did some reviewing of speakers for an on-line rag many years ago. And I was no more learned then about the level of technical info many here can explain. In my defence, I didn't seek the gig so much as was asked to do it based on my descriptions of loudspeaker auditions and owning gear on some audio forums. I hesitated wondering what I could possibly offer, given I'm not going to be educating people about the technical aspects and plenty of reviewers could do that. So I simply approached it as a dude who had listened to tons of loudspeakers, could perhaps put what I hear in to language fairly well, here's some of the cool speakers I heard and why they seemed to stick out to me from the pack (and I get to hear them in my home). I figured it's up to the reader if that's the type of thing they'd find entertaining or useful, just like swapping impressions on an audio forum. I stayed in my lane, didn't profess to know more than I did, and wouldn't review any tweaky stuff like cables. (I ended up getting nice feedback that my sonic descriptions fit well with what people were hearing when they encountered or owned the same loudspeakers, which was nice).

So back to the point: I think Darko mainly presents himself this way: as a guy who has a Jones for audio gear and music, he'll get a hold of gear, do his best to explain the features, live with it enough to give some of the ins and outs, pluses and minuses of the gear, compare the gear, such as speaker comparisons, to let you know how things sounded to him. That's good enough for some listeners..in fact, entertaining and often informative. Of course, Darko also ends up giving some dicey or ignorant opinions, e.g. the above example. And to that degree one would hope he'd do more due diligence in educating himself. But on the whole, I can look past some of his gaffs, or naff takes, to the content I think is useful or entertaining.
 

kemmler3D

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 25, 2022
Messages
3,878
Likes
7,869
Location
San Francisco
As deservedly harsh as we are being on Darko for some of his statements.....I know some on ASR puzzle "if Darko is found spouting nonsense on something, why bother watching him at all? Why not just see this as a reason to dismiss anything he says or produces?" I understand why many take that route. As I've said, I don't. I still find plenty of interest in his videos, both for entertainment, gear peeking, some of his insights in comparing gear, what it's like to operate and live with it, etc. I feel I can wend my way through things he says I don't agree with, to agree with or enjoy other aspects of his content.

As for the ignorance I criticized, it's not without some level of empathy. I mean, I've been in this hobby for years and I still feel like a numb-nut on plenty of stuff. My brain just doesn't seem to "do" math and the technical/electrical aspects of gear very well. So even my ability to explain how amps work will be very limited. Also, I'm living in a bit of a glass house because I once did some reviewing of speakers for an on-line rag many years ago. And I was no more learned then about the level of technical info many here can explain. In my defence, I didn't seek the gig so much as was asked to do it based on my descriptions of loudspeaker auditions and owning gear on some audio forums. I hesitated wondering what I could possibly offer, given I'm not going to be educating people about the technical aspects and plenty of reviewers could do that. So I simply approached it as a dude who had listened to tons of loudspeakers, could perhaps put what I hear in to language fairly well, here's some of the cool speakers I heard and why they seemed to stick out to me from the pack (and I get to hear them in my home). I figured it's up to the reader if that's the type of thing they'd find entertaining or useful, just like swapping impressions on an audio forum. I stayed in my lane, didn't profess to know more than I did, and wouldn't review any tweaky stuff like cables. (I ended up getting nice feedback that my sonic descriptions fit well with what people were hearing when they encountered or owned the same loudspeakers, which was nice).

So back to the point: I think Darko mainly presents himself this way: as a guy who has a Jones for audio gear and music, he'll get a hold of gear, do his best to explain the features, live with it enough to give some of the ins and outs, pluses and minuses of the gear, compare the gear, such as speaker comparisons, to let you know how things sounded to him. That's good enough for some listeners..in fact, entertaining and often informative. Of course, Darko also ends up giving some dicey or ignorant opinions, e.g. the above example. And to that degree one would hope he'd do more due diligence in educating himself. But on the whole, I can look past some of his gaffs, or naff takes, to the content I think is useful or entertaining.
I think all that's fair. I'm not saying nothing he says is valuable or at least interesting, but it is sort of striking how prominent someone can be and have pretty surprising gaps in their knowledge.

But again, on the other hand - if the standard for "being able to talk about speakers on YouTube" was having a professional-level understanding of speaker design, there would be precious few people talking about speakers on Youtube. Or anywhere else. Some speaker designers wouldn't even qualify. :)
 
Last edited:
OP
Keith_W

Keith_W

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 26, 2016
Messages
2,833
Likes
6,529
Location
Melbourne, Australia
:facepalm:

How can you not have thoughts on that and still consider yourself an authority on speakers? He just said he thinks time alignment is important to imaging! That might be less correct than it sounds, but at least it would be self-consistent.



Jeez, too bad we can't look at the FR curves and figure this one out. :facepalm:

What I'm gathering here is that lack of knowledge wouldn't stop most of us from being top Youtube audiophiles.

Ummm, Darko said all those things, not me :) I hope that casual ASR readers realize that the post you were quoting is me paraphrasing Darko. I have no wish to be associated with his ramblings!

As for being a top Youtube audiophile reviewer, what is required IMO is not knowledge but relatability. Any of us can go out there and say DAC's mostly sound the same, and if they don't, the differences are exceedingly difficult to hear. That is not relatable, because average audiophiles don't want to know. You would get a lot of dislikes and the Youtube algorithm will hide your video to oblivion. That is the sad reality of the situation! If you want a lot of clicks, likes, and subscribes, you give the audience what they want, not what is real.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,645
Likes
4,525
Acoustics Insider is a pro audio channel that is usually science based. They decided to interview ... Johnny Darko. They got their membership base to put together some questions which were given to Darko. IMO the questions were really very good. Darko's answers ... not so much.

Since Darko failed so badly, I thought I would throw the questions open to ASR members...

6:09: "What is one thing mixing engineers should know about audiophiles,
That they really are appreciative when you prioritise sound quality and assume an attentive listener.
and what is one thing audiophiles should know about mixing engineers?"
That, if they really are audio engineers and not a home based musician with a DAW and a dream, then incompetence is truly rare and they are doing their best to satisfy conflicting demands.
Darko: Not all audiophiles are the same. Audiophiles can be pretty painful, of a certain demographic. My passion for audio gear was started by my passion for music. Other audiophiles are obsessed with sound and listen to a limited range of music. Being an audiophile is a broad church. People like me are rare (i.e. "music first audiophiles"). Engineers think audiophiles are gear obsessed, they need to know that people like me exist. They also think of loudspeakers as a tool, and must think that audiophiles are nuts - they overspend on speakers and put them in rooms that sound like a bathroom.
14:50: "What characteristics of engineering that goes into a speaker that most affects the sound stage, and what do you look for in a speaker to get excellent imaging?"
On what planet is Darko the right person to answer that question? Except the "what do you look for" is just asking about him personally...but it would be like asking me what do I look for in a musical score to get excellent emotion, ie, I am not qualified to answer, and if I tried, I would look a fool. And look what happened!
Darko: Lower distortion and better time alignment. Coaxial speakers tend to give better imaging and soundstage. I don't understand why.
Comment: No, Darko. Imaging/soundstage is a function of ITD, ILD, and a few others, so it is the interaction of the speaker and the room that produces the soundstage. If we focus on the speaker only, it is its directivity characteristics, smoothness of off-axis response, and how close to a point source ideal we get. Also you could have said something about the importance of reflections which you are actively trying to kill with your acoustic treatment.
16:40: "As you appreciate the importance of both objective measurements and subjective impressions, how accurately do you think we can predict the sound of a loudspeaker based on measurements?"
One might do well to direct the audience to the work of Toole and Olive, and add a comment about the concept of preference, and its predictability.
Darko: I am fascinated by measurements. I read Stereophile's section on measurements and read how Atkinson correlates measurements to his subjective impression. There is no 100% objective analysis of a loudspeaker because you have to interpret the results, and that is by definition a subjective process. I don't buy into this dichotomy of subjectivity vs. objectivity. I don't think there is a 1:1 mapping of "if we measure this we hear this". It's not a solved problem. It can help speaker engineers understand if they've made a mistake, but every speaker engineer i've spoken to says that we measure up to a point then we sit down and listen....

19:00: "Do you feel there are aspects of a subjective experience that are not portrayed in measurements?"
Cognitive biases born of sighted listening, of course.
Darko: Imaging. You could see a low distortion figure and think that will image well but that's not a guarantee. For example, I reviewed two speakers, one went down to 54Hz, the other to 64Hz, but the 64Hz speaker sounded like it had more bass. It's a loose guide for consumers, it's a shortcut. Life is more nuanced than measurements....

21:47: "Some music sounds good on most speakers, but other music will sound good on some speakers but terrible on others. Which audio recording / processing qualities ensure good sound on most speakers?"
Number of channels. Getting above 2* will get away from specific 2-channel limitations that make speaker-sound highly dependent on things like room placement and centre imaging, and height channels would also be a boon if built into recordings.

*or, something like BACCH 2-channel if integrated end-to-end (recording and playback)...but let's ignore that until there are signs of it actually happening.
Darko: Everything comes down to the recording and mastering quality. There is a whole genre of "audiophile music", artists nobody has ever heard of. These sell well because gear obsessed audiophiles are into the sound of those recordings. I'm not. I don't know what goes into it. But dynamic range compression definitely affects quality. It is important to maintain the dynamic range.

31:32: "At what level of treatment are we able to hear real differences in speakers? For example, do we need a certain RT60 value? What do we aim for?"
I assume Darko fed the interviewer this question so he could boast about his latest home acoustic installation, because it would be such an odd question for a pro audio channel to ask of a non-expert 'talking head' like Darko.

If the question were put to me, I might mention that a strong psychoacoustics background is needed in order to answer that question competently, but that the little I have seen suggests that (1) there is no one right answer because the number of channels of playback probably changes the answer, (2) the right answer for a mixing engineer's workplace probably has more treatment than the optimum for the best home experience, and (3) RT60 is believed by many specialists in the subject to be unimportant or irrelevant to domestic sized rooms, ref: Toole, 2006, p63. Sorry Johnny!
Darko: I didn't do it in an incremental way. I went from a room with 0.7-0.8 milliseconds (sic) to have flat, roughly 0.3. I don't know what the tipping point is. I'm guessing the tipping point may be 400-500ms? It's not only the value, but the stability of the value, it can't be 0.5, 0.3, 0.5, 0.3. It needs to be flat across the board.
Interviewer interjects: the more you treat the room and the closer you get to an anechoic chamber, the more of the speakers you will hear.
Darko: People in your world are different. You need to have a treated room. Audiophiles won't do it because they have to balance home life with sound.
Comment: Well, at least he measured and he's in the right ballpark with his recommended values. I would say look up the DIN 18041 standard because the target is different depending on the size of your room and your intention.

I skipped some of the Q&A because they were a bit boring.
You did well to listen to Darko for so long!

cheers
 
Last edited:

kemmler3D

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 25, 2022
Messages
3,878
Likes
7,869
Location
San Francisco
Ummm, Darko said all those things, not me :) I hope that casual ASR readers realize that the post you were quoting is me paraphrasing Darko. I have no wish to be associated with his ramblings!

As for being a top Youtube audiophile reviewer, what is required IMO is not knowledge but relatability. Any of us can go out there and say DAC's mostly sound the same, and if they don't, the differences are exceedingly difficult to hear. That is not relatable, because average audiophiles don't want to know. You would get a lot of dislikes and the Youtube algorithm will hide your video to oblivion. That is the sad reality of the situation! If you want a lot of clicks, likes, and subscribes, you give the audience what they want, not what is real.
Sorry if I quoted from your post in a way that made you sound like Darko! Of course his words are his own. :)

I certainly agree with what you're saying about what it takes to succeed on Youtube. First and foremost the algorithm has to agree with you. For that, random Youtube viewers have to agree with you, or at least sit through your videos and subscribe to your channel. And for that, maybe you have to accommodate whatever preconceptions they might have.

I don't know that you have to be a total woo-woo type to succeed on Youtube, though. Erin isn't exactly going to displace Mr. Beast anytime soon, and I doubt he makes serious money from them his videos, but he seems to get decent activity. At least, I don't see haters brigading his videos or anything.
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,914
Likes
4,902
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
Part 2 of the Darko interview video is out now.

There's a portion in which Darko is discussing why he likes powered speakers, you don't have to worry about finding the right amp fit for the speakers, and that otherwise you have audiophiles playing the find the right amp to fit the speakers game, which he opines is practically a crap shoot. He says maybe there is some scientific reason one amp will sound good with a pair of speakers, but "it's hard to know" because audio components are measured in isolation! Which "doesn't factor in what THAT amp would do with THAT speaker load." You might get a great result, but no measurements are going to tell you that because the speakers and amps are measured in isolation. He ends saying you'd be the smartest audiophile on the planet if you could look at both the amp and speaker measurements and understand how it will sound.

Yeesh. :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

I'm not sure how Darko has managed to go this long and remain that ignorant on such things. Has he ever wondered why the measurements are taken in the first place, on what basis the relevance of amp or speaker measurements are derived? The whole point of course is that specific amplifier measurements arose DUE to the correlation found between the measurements and how they predictably interact with speakers! That's why certain measurements became important in the first place! They aren't just utterly unconnected ideas from speaker measurements! What does he think John Atkinson is doing when measuring speakers and explaining what type of amplification will be required in order to not affect the frequency response? I'm frankly a numbskull in terms of electronic theory, but even I know that if you have measured a speaker in all the relevant ways, then you understand what type of amplification they will require to produce the sound the speaker was designed to produce. And that if you have two different amplifiers which measure in ways sufficient to drive that speaker load, then you can predict the sound from the speakers using either amp will be identical. It's not a crap shoot. You don't have to be the smartest audiophile on the planet to grasp this; you just have to pay *some* attention to how things work, rather than relying solely on Golden Ear interpretations.
I haven't seen the video, but doesn't he even mention amp power?

These otherwise good speakers with 81 dB sensitivity together with a single tube amp of a few watts. It will hardly be a loud dance party then. The amplifier will be almost immediately driven into clipping and then the party is over::oops:


Edit:
Why do tube dude lovers get so excited if they find high-sensitivity speakers with smooth impedance curves that don't dip below 8 Ohms (or better yet higher than that) if there's no way to predict what kind of speakers will pair well with such an amp?
 
Last edited:

goat76

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2021
Messages
1,420
Likes
1,606
What Darko has is extensive experience in listening to a lot of different speakers, and can therefore give us his subjective opinions on how he thinks they compare in a similar setting and room. If he happens to describe the sound of a speaker that we have our own experience with, we may be able to pick up on his subjective description of that speaker in a way that corresponds to our subjective take on the sound of that same speaker. The more we watch his reviews the more we will know what his taste in loudspeakers is, which may or may not gel with our taste in sound, but we will likely know where he is coming from in his taste so that we will be able to get a fair idea if the next speaker he reviews may or may not suit our taste in sound.

Similarly, I'm sure many of us have a friend we trust when he or she describes the sound of a certain speaker. The reason for that is that we over time have learned their taste in audio, and can therefore have a pretty accurate idea if a certain speaker will suit their taste even if it doesn't completely suit our own taste in sound. That's where well-thought-out and detailed subjective impressions of sound can come in handy, and that's where someone like Darko has something to offer as he had the privilege of listening to a lot of different speakers in an environment he is fully acclimated to.

In the end, it's mostly entertainment about something most of us are interested in, so I think there is room for both strict objective reviews focused on measurements, and at the same time, reviews focused on subjective descriptions of how the sound is perceived by the listener. Both can be informative in one way or another. :)
 

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,553
Likes
13,174
Location
London
Why not just look at the measurements of the speakers?
Why would you believe Darko who is effectively a shill for the products he advertises.
Keith
 

goat76

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2021
Messages
1,420
Likes
1,606
Why not just look at the measurements of the speakers?
Why would you believe Darko who is effectively a shill for the products he advertises.
Keith

I have heard good measuring speakers which I didn't like the sound of, so the best thing is to listen to the speakers myself. I look at measurements and read subjective reviews and combine all the information I can get hold of, and everything helps me get an idea if a certain loudspeaker may suit my taste or not. I don't put all my eggs in one basket and just "believe" what Darko says, I speak in general and gather all the information I can get my hands on if I'm interested in audio gear.

Why do you think your client went for the Genelecs over your beloved D&D 8Cs?
That's simple, the Genelecs simply suited his taste better which is when the subjective part of things comes into play, and besides listening to the speaker himself, it could also help a fair bit to gather all the subjective impressions he could find in advance to get an idea if the speakers would suit his taste or not. Just looking at the measurement would maybe lead him to think the two speakers would sound more similar to each other than what they actually do, even if both of them are considered neutral-sounding speakers. It all comes down to taste in the end.
 

Mart68

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 22, 2021
Messages
2,809
Likes
5,333
Location
England
Why not just look at the measurements of the speakers?
Why would you believe Darko who is effectively a shill for the products he advertises.
Keith
And doesn't seem to know his arse from his elbow...

Don't know why but I was quite surprised to read above that he thinks amplifier-speaker matching is a mysterious world. Hasn't he been doing this for a decade now?

Also he rarely reviews a speaker that isn't a fairly cheap little two-way effort. I suppose his catchment is young enthusiasts on a budget so he has to play to that, but I would not rate him as highly experienced with loudspeakers.
 
Top Bottom