Frankly its pretty hard not to build a speaker with decent engineering now that at least extends down to 100Hz or even 80Hz, unless its volumetrically constrained stuff that's at least -10dB shelved below 2KHz like a smartphone speaker.
Which is why listening tests, not graphs, are what matter in that realm.
It seems to me that things sound good when they are played at a higher volume (without audible distortion)--hence the importance of level matching when one compares systems. I've always believed that the mark of a high quality system is one that sounds good when played at relatively low volume levels. Perhaps I am oversimplifying, but to me, anyway, the rest is gibberish.
I agree with this statement 100%. Over the past few months I converted my 7.1 system to all Revel F206 speakers and a Rythmik sub. I noticed two striking differences: (1) it sounds superb whether listening at very soft levels or what I consider to be full volume and anywhere inbetween (2) when I listen at what is my maximum - around 70-75 dB - the system does not sound "loud" it just sounds good.
I now only listen to music with the 7.1 system. I do use Airpods Pro2 when exercising, mostly to listen to a podcast or watch a TV show. I cannot listen to music with earbuds or anything else other than the main system. I prefer to wait until I can use the main system and otherwise forgo listening to music, it is too painful. They all sound mediocre in comparison.
Just for grins I ripped a couple of CD tracks [one I engineered and another fav I didn't] into four files: WAV, WMA 9.2 and AAC 250 and 500 Variable Bit Rates.
It took about four or five passes to be able to reliably determine which encoder was used as they all process with differences.
Once determined, I had someone else randomly choose the tracks which I got right about 75% of the time. Slightly better odds on the uncompressed track.
In all cases the compressed files change the perspective and cause something like a shaker or other atonal / asymmetric instruments problems in that they lose focus and smear. This may or not be audible on all systems and was tolerable for the most part for casual listening.
I guess people want to see some ABX test results (20 attempts) before they will believe you and have the files uploaded so they can be scrutinized.Just for grins I ripped a couple of CD tracks [one I engineered and another fav I didn't] into four files: WAV, WMA 9.2 and AAC 250 and 500 Variable Bit Rates.
It took about four or five passes to be able to reliably determine which encoder was used as they all process with differences.
Once determined, I had someone else randomly choose the tracks which I got right about 75% of the time. Slightly better odds on the uncompressed track.
In all cases the compressed files change the perspective and cause something like a shaker or other atonal / asymmetric instruments problems in that they lose focus and smear. This may or not be audible on all systems and was tolerable for the most part for casual listening.
My home stereo is pretty good - good enough for my purposes. My car stereo is not good, but I don't really think - gawd, this sounds bad! - even when the program material cries out for better reproduction (like my symphonic recordings). I'm a "music-first" audiophile, I really like good sound reproduction but don't require it. A lot of my recordings are pre-high fidelity, but it takes very little time for my ear to adjust.Hey!
Ok, so this is something I experience, and I never seem to hear anyone else talk about it the way I feel it. So I just wondered if you guys every go/went through something like that.
In a way, unless the music is coming from a really poor device, I never spontaneously think "damn, that sounds bad". I have to pay attention to realize it doesn't sound great. But then, if I hear the music on a proper system, I spontaneously think "damn! that sounds good". I don't have to focus to realize it. You know?
When I use my bluetooth headphones in the street, sometimes my mind goes "damn that sounds good! did you really need to spend money on a better headphone for home?" and then I get home, put on my headphone and I'm like "oh ok, no, THAT sounds great".
It's like I only spontaneously experience the upgrade in quality.
And so it's like: every time I turn on my system, I'm (happily) surprised. Every single time. I'm always like a "woaw I didn't know that type of quality was possible!" type of a reaction. But I rarely catch myself thinking the other way around. You know what I'm saying?
Is it the same for you? Or, if you happen to be at a friend's who's not so much into audio, and one of your beloved tracks is played, you can't help yourself but think "arf... this is a poor reproduction"?
I wonder if it's not just the enthusiasm for the music itself that masks the flaws...
I guess people want to see some ABX test results (20 attempts) before they will believe you and have the files uploaded so they can be scrutinized.
yes, that's what I was implying by "really poor devices"To the OP - what about when you play music through a phone's internal speaker? Does that sound bad?