Lack of high-end speaker reviews

[Blumlein 88]

At the risk of trying to walk the middle of the road [invoking Karate Kid "squish just like a grape" imagery]...

My (obviously amateur, obviously biased) observation is that a really good speaker must do two things: First, it must do something so well as to enable the listener to suspend disbelief and get lost in the music. That "something" can be natural timbre, dynamics, inner detail, imaging, coherence, sense of scale, sense of immersion, whatever. But a really good speaker will do something (and ideally multiple somethings) well enough that the listener is "mesmerized and [can't] wait to hear the next track". This is the easy part.

The hard part is, the speaker must not then do anything so poorly that it distracts from the illusion just created. Great long-term enjoyment and satisfaction is reserved for "well designed, competent" loudspeakers which are free from audibly significant colorations and anomalies. @Floyd Toole said it best: "The highest rated loudspeaker is the least flawed, not the most virtuous."

But imo a really good speaker will have at least one mesmerizing virtue.

I know the feeling for sure and gave you a like for the comment. A number of times an unbalanced speaker has a mesmerizing virtue. Something to be said for that. However, they are usually imbalanced and over time you'd find yourself fighting everything else about it. It still might be mesmerizing. The original Martin Logan CLS comes to mind. Or on the other end of the scale the Klipsch K-horns or somewhere in between LS3/5a's. If I were hugely wealthy I would keep such around in a 2nd system for now and again use. And sometimes I did. Ultimately experience with other good speakers would use up my patience with that. I'm not saying those who remained faithful to such a speaker were wrong. If they were enchanted long enough they probably were more satisfied than I. Over time and experience I ended up where it sounds like Kal did. Such an outsized virtue made me suspicious. The main reason being that a virtue so mesmerizing also means it is deficient elsewhere or even worse covering up some of the musical goodness somewhere else.

 

[MaxBuck]

Horses for courses.

I'm happy to have a hobby that can still thrill and "mesmerize" me, even after many decades. I sit down in front of my system (or another good system) and just experience "wow!"

If the passion wasn't about the performance of audio gear and the type of presentation that can be achieved over poorer made gear, and if we did not appreciate how excellent audio gear brings out the sensuousness of Good Sound, I suspect few of us would be on an audio gear forum. No one would care about "great SINAD numbers" in DAC or amps, or "Harman Curve" or "ASR Recommended" speakers in order to enjoy and thrill to music. We'd be just music lovers, most of whom are deeply moved by music on far cheaper, less accurate gear.

I understand what you're saying, but I've drawn the distinction elsewhere between listening to music and listening to equipment. My interest is purely in the former, though I don't claim this to be superior to the alternative approach. But even focusing on listening to music requires me nonetheless to have an excellent reproduction system, which thanks to ASR I've been able to secure.

 

[MarkS]

You of all people.. ...should know that an experiment needs to be specifically designed to test a specific hypothesis.

This is false. If it was true, obsevational sciences such as astronomy could not exist. It is totally within the bounds of science to analyze existing data to test hypotheses other than the design hypothesis (if there was a design hypothesis at all).

Has it ever crossed your mind that Toole, Olive, and so many other audio science researchers, would be delighted if your assertion were true, and speaker preference ratings were the same in blind vs sighted tests?

I never said that. I said they were correlated, which they are.

 

[MattHooper]

At the risk of trying to walk the middle of the road [invoking Karate Kid "squish just like a grape" imagery]...

My (obviously amateur, obviously biased) observation is that a really good speaker must do two things: First, it must do something so well as to enable the listener to suspend disbelief and get lost in the music. That "something" can be natural timbre, dynamics, inner detail, imaging, coherence, sense of scale, sense of immersion, whatever. But a really good speaker will do something (and ideally multiple somethings) well enough that the listener is "mesmerized and [can't] wait to hear the next track". This is the easy part.

The hard part is, the speaker must not then do anything so poorly that it distracts from the illusion just created. Great long-term enjoyment and satisfaction is reserved for "well designed, competent" loudspeakers which are free from audibly significant colorations and anomalies. @Floyd Toole said it best: "The highest rated loudspeaker is the least flawed, not the most virtuous."

But imo a really good speaker will have at least one mesmerizing virtue.

Very good post, much agreement.

Again, to my use of "mesmerizing" as I tried to make clear, this does not always or necessarily entail some large sonic difference between speakers. For me the difference between "mesmerizing" in the sense of can't stop listening, and not mesmerizing, can be quite subtle. Just like I'm very picky about which orange juice I want to drink, where my wife isn't picky at all. So it can be a subtle timbral thing.

Like I mentioned, the Revel speakers sounded more like my Thiels than anything else I heard, but I had my system dialed in at home just right to my preferences. Whether I would have been as happy with the Revels...I don't know. Possible I guess, but I wouldn't take the chance over speakers I already liked better. But in keeping with your, Blumlein's and Toole's views, I have the same experience that a well balanced speaker is what I seek, not something that just sticks out with one property and is too wanting in others. It was the overall balanced presentation of the Thiels in my room, I could find no real faults to complain about, that made them so incredibly hard to replace (but I replaced them since they were visually a little too big for the room).

 

[zhabotinsky]

Regarding the experiment discussed earlier in this thread, I revisited the original paper (Toole, F.E., and Olive, S.E. (1994) "Hearing Is Believing vs. Believing Is Hearing: Blind vs. Sighted Listening Tests and Other Interesting Things" (97th Convention, Audio Eng. Soc., Preprint 3894) to examine the statistics. The key result is the significance of the Speaker (A, B, C, D) * Method (sighted vs. blind) interaction (F = 4.624, p = .0320). This indicates that assessments of the speakers exhibit a significant and systematic variation between the two methods employed, or in the authors' own words, "seeing the products had a strong influence on ratings of the loudspeakers." The hypothesis is supported. The paper does contain other intriguing results (and, importantly, sound conceptual explanations for them), although it would have been beneficial if they had presented a more meticulous statistical analysis, including all means and the key planned and post-hoc simple effects and contrasts responsible for driving the significant interactions.

 

[Ze Frog]

Now is the time to fix that with the $375K Magico M7View attachment 340139

Am I alone here, in the sense even if I was a millionaire, I could never spend that much on a speaker?

I'd be embarrassed, imagine having guests and they ask what they are, then they ask how much and you proceed to tell them they are the price of a halfway decent house.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Am I alone here, in the sense even if I was a millionaire, I could never spend that much on a speaker?

I'd be embarrassed, imagine having guests and they ask what they are, then they ask how much and you proceed to tell them they are the price of a halfway decent house.

Some people like it ...
Personally even if I was rich I and could afford them
I'd still buy an active speaker over a passive one (probably a Genelec )

 

[mj30250]

Am I alone here, in the sense even if I was a millionaire, I could never spend that much on a speaker?

I'd be embarrassed, imagine having guests and they ask what they are, then they ask how much and you proceed to tell them they are the price of a halfway decent house.

I'm sure my thought processes on a lot of things would change in unexpected ways if I had millions of dollars of completely disposable income available, but no, even if I could afford a new Ferrari for every day of the year, I can't imagine dropping even $100,000 on a single pair of speakers. The price of my current mains is 1.3% of the MSRP of the M7s. I also wouldn't be at all surprised if they sounded just as good, if not better in most ways.

 

[Pearljam5000]

The M7 feels like a bargain now

 

[Ze Frog]

I'm sure my thought processes on a lot of things would change in unexpected ways if I had millions of dollars of completely disposable income available, but no, even if I could afford a new Ferrari for every day of the year, I can't imagine dropping even $100,000 on a single pair of speakers. The price of my current mains is 1.3% of the MSRP of the M7s. I also wouldn't be at all surprised if they sounded just as good, if not better in most ways.

Yeah, I often wonder if winning the Euromillions would change me, not going to happen though as I don't do the Euromillions just because it's too much money. I would be in constant fear with that much cash, would be terrified of family trying to off me or kids being held ransom. I think a lot of it with me is I'm naturally not massively materialistic, came from humble beginnings.

The car I always dreamed of is kind of silly money though, Alfa Romeo GTA-R by Alfaholics, probably about the only grandiose thing I would purchase.

 

[Ze Frog]

The M7 feels like a bargain now View attachment 344304

Lol, absolute bargain.

There's a reason we'll likely never see spin data, imagine buying these and finding out they measure worse than a $100 pair of bookshelves from Amazon. I think when someone spends this much they would rather not know. Although saying that, I think these are largely a statement piece, sound quality is probably a secondary concern.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Yeah, I often wonder if winning the Euromillions would change me, not going to happen though as I don't do the Euromillions just because it's too much money. I would be in constant fear with that much cash, would be terrified of family trying to off me or kids being held ransom. I think a lot of it with me is I'm naturally not massively materialistic, came from humble beginnings.

The car I always dreamed of is kind of silly money though, Alfa Romeo GTA-R by Alfaholics, probably about the only grandiose thing I would purchase.

You can be rich without anyone knowing...that's the best way to do it.

 

[Sokel]

Yeah, I often wonder if winning the Euromillions would change me, not going to happen though as I don't do the Euromillions just because it's too much money. I would be in constant fear with that much cash, would be terrified of family trying to off me or kids being held ransom. I think a lot of it with me is I'm naturally not massively materialistic, came from humble beginnings.

The car I always dreamed of is kind of silly money though, Alfa Romeo GTA-R by Alfaholics, probably about the only grandiose thing I would purchase.

1971 Giulia was the car which I learned who to drive (and how to make the other stuff as it's tail needed nothing to drift).
I then got a vintage 1963 Giulia spider too.
I'll always be in love with that car,it's tied to my youth.

 

[Ze Frog]

You can be rich without anyone knowing...that's the best way to do it.

Money definitely isn't happiness, that's for sure. I've never been financially rich, but some of my best memories are back from times where financially I was in a far weaker position. What you say is a great point, although sadly lost on many in today's world I imagine.

Funny thing is, imagine if you grew up in a mansion, those speakers in every room etc etc, I guess it just becomes normal and these people don't feel rich, just because it's just living to them. I did some work a few years ago for a guy with a massive country estate, 2 Bentley's etc etc. Raining one day really bad and he gives me a lift back home in hi G-Wagon, this thing was worth more than my house but on the journey back he was telling me about money issues. He'd been to another friends estate who was a well known UK politician and felt poor in comparison. Needless to say, after working all day in the cold wind and rain for £12 per hour I was actually pretty astounded and was a real struggle to be sympathetic. Was one of those moments in life where you almost wonder if it's really happening.

He didn't even have a sound system in that massive country house, which to me was like 'how?' If he had of done, I've no doubt they likely would have been something pretty grand like the magico's.

 

[Ze Frog]

1971 Giulia was the car which I learned who to drive (and how to make the other stuff as it's tail needed nothing to drift).
I then got a vintage 1963 Giulia spider too.
I'll always be in love with that car,it's tied to my youth.

They are really something special, can't beat a classic Alfa. Never been into supercars like Ferrari or whatever. Can remember as a kid going to friends house's and they would have the customary posters of Lamborghini Countach's and the like. And when they came to mine I'd have pictures of things like an Austin Metro from a magazine as posters of those weren't very common really. But I really loved real more attainable stuff, I was really an odd kid I guess.

 

[ocinn]

Someone needs to attend this "NAMM" conference in CA next week. I wonder if any of these speakers are here on ASR that could report on the efficacy of Genelec's soundfield steering with that 8381A speaker:

Just heard them, around 2 hours ago.

Unfortunately they are only running demos with atmos surround, with them crossed over to an LFE sub. Playing cinema sounds tracks, at quite low levels. Around a 5:1 ratio of bragging about working with Christopher nolan:actually playing music.

So really, really difficult to judge. From what I heard I was impressed, directivity is hilarious. They really do shoot a laser beam out. You walk outside of the pattern, and the entire spectrum falls off smoothly.

I wish they were running some stereo, ~95db(a) demos because that’s where these would shine, is dynamics.

I will say I was absolutely blown away by the Alcons M-Series monitors. Like jaw droppingly good. And a very very reasonable price point ($14k each if I recall). Top 5 listening experiences in my life, easily. That tweeter is just on a different level. The klippel data they showed corroborated this.

 

[MattHooper]

Lol, absolute bargain.

There's a reason we'll likely never see spin data, imagine buying these and finding out they measure worse than a $100 pair of bookshelves from Amazon. I think when someone spends this much they would rather not know. Although saying that, I think these are largely a statement piece, sound quality is probably a secondary concern.

Well that would likely very much be a case where measuring “better” on some metrics don’t capture the differences in the listening experiences. Perhaps a cheaper Amazon stand mounted speaker would measure more flat or a better “spin” but wouldn’t be able to provide anything like the scale and dynamics of that SF system. There would be all sorts of aspects of sound, live sound, that such a system would be able to recreate more accurately than a small speaker with a flat response.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Just heard them, around 2 hours ago.

Unfortunately they are only running demos with atmos surround, with them crossed over to an LFE sub. Playing cinema sounds tracks, at quite low levels. Around a 5:1 ratio of bragging about working with Christopher nolan:actually playing music.

So really, really difficult to judge. From what I heard I was impressed, directivity is hilarious. They really do shoot a laser beam out. You walk outside of the pattern, and the entire spectrum falls off smoothly.

I wish they were running some stereo, ~95db(a) demos because that’s where these would shine, is dynamics.

I will say I was absolutely blown away by the Alcons M-Series monitors. Like jaw droppingly good. And a very very reasonable price point ($14k each if I recall). Top 5 listening experiences in my life, easily. That tweeter is just on a different level. The klippel data they showed corroborated this.

View attachment 345589

You should have asked them they would have played in stereo for you I'm sure

 

[ocinn]

You should have asked them they would have played in stereo for you I'm sure

I did!

Unfortunately, even with the company that happened to be below my name on my show pass, they didn’t budge.

The guy told me they were only demoing Genelec’s integration with Atmos renderer (if you look at the show desc on their website it’s extremely clear).

An acquaintance of mine told me they were ordering a pair for their mastering studio so if that works out I’ll have free reign to play with them. I really want to hear them next to Danley Hyperion as that is their only real competitor.

 

[cavedriver]

I will say I was absolutely blown away by the Alcons M-Series monitors. Like jaw droppingly good. And a very very reasonable price point ($14k each if I recall). Top 5 listening experiences in my life, easily. That tweeter is just on a different level. The klippel data they showed corroborated this.

Bummer about the demo, hopefully your friend gets them.

I'm puzzled by the waterfall plot of the compression driver for the Alcons. Looks like a terrible mess, or is this considered "good" for a compression driver, or do I just now know how to read a waterfall plot: