Lack of high-end speaker reviews

[Sokel]

I think of stereo vs mono much simpler than that:
How do the source was intended to be playback?What was the mix?

I suppose the sound engineers,etc aimed to a goal more or less when creating the mix and I also suppose that each way is done differently,so...

 

[sigbergaudio]

I think of stereo vs mono much simpler than that:
How do the source was intended to be playback?What was the mix?

I suppose the sound engineers,etc aimed to a goal more or less when creating the mix and I also suppose that each way is done differently,so...

Yes, some recordings does very little to utilize the ability of stereo speakers to portray a big soundstage, some records do a lot.

There is also the interesting fact that some people (like myself) find great imaging and soundstage to be one of the very key qualities in a loudspeaker, and there are other people who hardly understand the concept, and do not care about it at all. So there's a clear difference in preference here as well. Whether this is tied to what kind of music one typically listens to (and as such is part of the first point), or if there is some inherent personal preference, or a combination, I am not sure.

 

[Blumlein 88]

What attributes make a speaker better in stereo than mono?

 

[Sokel]

What attributes make a speaker better in stereo than mono?

Music,in classical you hear about half of the stuff

 

[sigbergaudio]

What attributes make a speaker better in stereo than mono?

Can you elaborate on the question? Not sure I understand what you mean.

 

[mcdn]

Yes, some recordings does very little to utilize the ability of stereo speakers to portray a big soundstage, some records do a lot.

There is also the interesting fact that some people (like myself) find great imaging and soundstage to be one of the very key qualities in a loudspeaker, and there are other people who hardly understand the concept, and do not care about it at all. So there's a clear difference in preference here as well. Whether this is tied to what kind of music one typically listens to (and as such is part of the first point), or if there is some inherent personal preference, or a combination, I am not sure.

I’m one of those people who doesn’t really care about “stereo”. I do like a “big” sound with a lot of scale, but I’m really not too fussed about cute left/right effects.

Nor do I find much of those effects to be important in great live venues. Cadogan Hall for example has quite a reverberant sound and with eyes closed I really couldn’t point to the location of the first violin.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Can you elaborate on the question? Not sure I understand what you mean.

Were you designing a speaker how would you design differently for knowing it would be used for stereo vs mono? If you cannot elaborate you have no basis for claiming the best speaker characteristics for one differ from the other.

 

[Sokel]

I’m one of those people who doesn’t really care about “stereo”. I do like a “big” sound with a lot of scale, but I’m really not too fussed about cute left/right effects.

Nor do I find much of those effects to be important in great live venues. Cadogan Hall for example has quite a reverberant sound and with eyes closed I really couldn’t point to the location of the first violin.

Listen to the first violin (at about the best Scheherazade ever) at about 00.40,it's almost hard panned to the left,same for a bunch of instruments down the road:

 

[mcdn]

Listen to the first violin (at about the best Scheherazade ever) at about 00.40,it's almost hard panned to the left,same for a bunch of instruments down the road:

Of course I can hear that, I just don’t think it adds much. I remember a wonderful performance of Scheherazade at the Royal Festival Hall, must be 20 years ago now. I could not have cared less for any “stereo” effect, nor was one created in the hall, even for solo violin. It was breathtakingly beautiful though.

 

[Sokel]

Of course I can hear that, I just don’t think it adds much. I remember a wonderful performance of Scheherazade at the Royal Festival Hall, must be 20 years ago now. I could not have cared less for any “stereo” effect, nor was one created in the hall, even for solo violin. It was breathtakingly beautiful though.

I think it does add,it creates an illusion of depth (along with the low level) as all this recording does along with an extended stage (i know that's mostly the room but changing it changes the whole thing)
I just tried it in mono (through the foobar plug-in) and the whole thing became flat and claustrophobic (the fun part doing it in real time were the result is as audible as it gets).

 

[mcdn]

I think it does add,it creates an illusion of depth (along with the low level) as all this recording does along with an extended stage (i know that's mostly the room but changing it changes the whole thing)
I just tried it in mono (through the foobar plug-in) and the whole thing became flat and claustrophobic (the fun part doing it in real time were the result is as audible as it gets).

I’m not arguing for mono playback, especially not of stereo recordings! I’m just saying that the “imaging” thing some people like is not important for others. I’m also saying that live experience in most venues doesn’t have the “imaging” thing, so while it may be fun it’s not really accurate

 

[fpitas]

It looks like an awesome vintage lamp
But no doubt it's cool
Probably the most unique looking speakers
View attachment 340882

Like a gas discharge lamp.

 

[Sokel]

I’m not arguing for mono playback, especially not of stereo recordings! I’m just saying that the “imaging” thing some people like is not important for others. I’m also saying that live experience in most venues doesn’t have the “imaging” thing, so while it may be fun it’s not really accurate

I agree on that 100%,live event is a very different thing,instruments radiate sound very differently than a speaker.

What I'm trying to say though,is that sound engineers must take advantage and use the channels in a way that's mend to be heard and altering this changes the whole goal.
Same for mono recordings of course,it's a joke to alter them with some effects that emerge from time to time.

 

[fpitas]

That's it. To hell with science. My old Sequel 2s were great and I am going to die on that hill.

I almost think the rules are somewhat different for unusual speakers. Electrostats, open baffle, omni etc. Obviously, some people still like them.

 

[mcdn]

I agree on that 100%,live event is a very different thing,instruments radiate sound very differently than a speaker.

What I'm trying to say though,is that sound engineers must take advantage and use the channels in a way that's mend to be heard and altering this changes the whole goal.
Same for mono recordings of course,it's a joke to alter them with some effects that emerge from time to time.

My main speakers are dipole/cardiod (Linkwitz LXStudio), and give great scale and sense of space. They do sacrifice a bit of stereo precision/imaging though. I don’t think that’s a bad trade, nor do I think it’s against the intent of the sound engineer. I’m with @sigbergaudio on the dipole thing.

 

[sigbergaudio]

I’m one of those people who doesn’t really care about “stereo”. I do like a “big” sound with a lot of scale, but I’m really not too fussed about cute left/right effects.

Nor do I find much of those effects to be important in great live venues. Cadogan Hall for example has quite a reverberant sound and with eyes closed I really couldn’t point to the location of the first violin.

That is of course fair, and you are perhaps lucky that do not have to chase this elusive quality.

To me the main point isn't "cute effects", but rather the sense of scale, sense of space and the ability to perceive that there is a three dimensionality to the overall sound, that it does not all come from one place, but rather are just "there" or present in the room. The sounds is not coming from the speakers, and the sound appears to be larger than the system itself.

 

[mcdn]

That is of course fair, and you are perhaps lucky that do not have to chase this elusive quality.

To me the main point isn't "cute effects", but rather the sense of scale, sense of space and the ability to perceive that there is a three dimensionality to the overall sound, that it does not all come from one place, but rather are just "there" or present in the room. The sounds is not coming from the speakers, and the sound appears to be larger than the system itself.

You describe it perfectly!

 

[sigbergaudio]

Were you designing a speaker how would you design differently for knowing it would be used for stereo vs mono? If you cannot elaborate you have no basis for claiming the best speaker characteristics for one differ from the other.

I have never and would never consider the idea of designing a speaker for use a a mono source.

But as you are forcing me to to consider the idea, I would agree that many of the same design parameters would probably be beneficial for both, you would just not be able to hear the full benefit of it from a mono setup. And you would also not be able to detect the lack of these qualities when listening in mono.

I have listened to speakers that objectively appear to measure better than the Mantas but to me sound inferior with regards to the qualities discussed here. Since it's not immediately apparent in the measurements what is going on, we are in the realms of speculation when trying to understand what is happening. I do not think it is a single parameter that enables this, but a combination of several things, including the room.

We already have a long thread on this topic here:

Properties of speakers that creates a large and precise soundstage

There are some similar threads about what imaging and soundstaging even is, and some threads about how to measure it (we're not great at that). In this thread I thought it would be interesting to have a look what properties is likely to enable a speaker to be good at this. My (!) definition of...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I suggested the following as possibly beneficial properties (pasted from the opening post of the thread above):

1. Point source. I don't think this is controversial, and I think this is almost a prerequisite. Coaxial drivers are of course the easy approach to this. There are speakers with traditional drivers that sound big too, but interestingly it's often 2-way speakers with relatively small drivers and/or with at least the midrange and tweeter placed pretty close to each other. Exactly why this elevates the quality of soundstage and imaging I'm not sure.
2. Even off-axis response / controlled directivity, so that reflections feel like a natural addition to the direct sound as opposed to being perceived as a distraction or noise.
3. Linear phase crossover between the tweeter and midrange.
4. Less late reflections. So a well damped room, speakers not too far away, and/or cardioid speakers.
5. Enough level and capacity in both the deep bass and the midbass. This I think is another relatively well known thing, that well defined, deep bass can often add to the sensation of space.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I have never and would never consider the idea of designing a speaker for use a a mono source.

But as you are forcing me to to consider the idea, I would agree that many of the same design parameters would probably be beneficial for both, you would just not be able to hear the full benefit of it from a mono setup. And you would also not be able to detect the lack of these qualities when listening in mono.

I have listened to speakers that objectively appear to measure better than the Mantas but to me sound inferior with regards to the qualities discussed here. Since it's not immediately apparent in the measurements what is going on, we are in the realms of speculation when trying to understand what is happening. I do not think it is a single parameter that enables this, but a combination of several things, including the room.

We already have a long thread on this topic here:

Properties of speakers that creates a large and precise soundstage

There are some similar threads about what imaging and soundstaging even is, and some threads about how to measure it (we're not great at that). In this thread I thought it would be interesting to have a look what properties is likely to enable a speaker to be good at this. My (!) definition of...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I suggested the following as possibly beneficial properties (pasted from the opening post of the thread above):

1. Point source. I don't think this is controversial, and I think this is almost a prerequisite. Coaxial drivers are of course the easy approach to this. There are speakers with traditional drivers that sound big too, but interestingly it's often 2-way speakers with relatively small drivers and/or with at least the midrange and tweeter placed pretty close to each other. Exactly why this elevates the quality of soundstage and imaging I'm not sure.
2. Even off-axis response / controlled directivity, so that reflections feel like a natural addition to the direct sound as opposed to being perceived as a distraction or noise.
3. Linear phase crossover between the tweeter and midrange.
4. Less late reflections. So a well damped room, speakers not too far away, and/or cardioid speakers.
5. Enough level and capacity in both the deep bass and the midbass. This I think is another relatively well known thing, that well defined, deep bass can often add to the sensation of space.

Does anything approach this better than the quasi point source Quad esl 63?

I don't find 2 ways better. It's the myth, but not the reality.

 

[Sokel]

My main speakers are dipole/cardiod (Linkwitz LXStudio), and give great scale and sense of space. They do sacrifice a bit of stereo precision/imaging though. I don’t think that’s a bad trade, nor do I think it’s against the intent of the sound engineer. I’m with @sigbergaudio on the dipole thing.

Haven't licensed those but I have licensed 521 in a symmetrical room and were really nice,I found nothing to complain about (i usually do,if pronounced highs or thin mid bass)
I think it would be nice to see those *or dipoles,etc,generally different approaches ) measured here,not as much as what their accuracy and the rest is but about what differentiates them from traditional ones on the chart.

(even the extremes,like Gaia)