A couple days ago I wondered into a audio store while driving through Denver just to poke around. Auditioned a $65,000 pair of Rockports, easily the most revealing speakers I’ve ever heard but so revealing many good pieces of music didn’t sound good anymore. My question is can a revealing speaker be too revealing? The salesman claimed the speakers (hooked up to a Boulder amplifier that was most likely brought in with a forklift) reproduce music exactly as it was recorded, but is music intended to be reproduced exactly as recorded?
-
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!
Speaker too revealing
- Thread starter TankTop
- Start date
In my book music should be reproduced as it was recorded -- as that is the only approximation of the real life event that I have.
As to your impression of excessive clarity (i.e. a bump between 5-10kHz in the FR??)-- it might not be the speakers' fault. It could just as well be the amp, &/ or the pre, &? or the source...
DSJR
Major Contributor
Too revealing - a domestic confection (with passive crossover?) rather than a traditional pro monitor designed for the purpose of revealing faults in the program material?
I'll never hear the Rockports, but I suspect in the room you heard them in, that certain areas of the frequency range were hyped up to give the *illusion* of 'detail' and maybe offering an unbalanced result? I've not heard modern top line Revels, but the older Salon models could sound a bit 'intense' for general listening to me, probably because my ears were more atuned to the gentle crossover frequency recess that so many UK domestic speakers had back then (all bets are off these days with makers chasing a dwindling market).
Just a couple of thoughts above. Can you try to find a pro audio store with some form of dem facilities and see if you can get a listen to some of them? Would be interesting to see if you feel the same with these undeniably cheaper alternatives...
Passively driven speakers at these exalted prices MUST be losing something or not blending the drivers they way they could be. A lively room can make higher frequencies too much as well.
Can you try to listen to some alternatives recommended here and come back with your findings please?
P.S. We're by and large domestic listeners here aren't we, with a few with toes or feet in the professional side. What do we want our domestic listening systems to do? Do we buy them for relaxation and enjoyment, or do we want the 'studio control room forensic analysis of the mix' instead? I found a pro(sumer) brand able to kind of do both and loved my time with one of their upper middle-sized monitors, but I have to say so many high end domestic systems tend to shout high frequencies at the listener and even with my hearing as it is now, it's not pleasant... My current speaker/room interface is too much the other way - always 'nice' and 'warm' toned and in this room it's boring and annoying (herself has decreed I keep with the speakers until after we've moved before deciding as it's not all the speaker's fault)
I'll never hear the Rockports, but I suspect in the room you heard them in, that certain areas of the frequency range were hyped up to give the *illusion* of 'detail' and maybe offering an unbalanced result? I've not heard modern top line Revels, but the older Salon models could sound a bit 'intense' for general listening to me, probably because my ears were more atuned to the gentle crossover frequency recess that so many UK domestic speakers had back then (all bets are off these days with makers chasing a dwindling market).
Just a couple of thoughts above. Can you try to find a pro audio store with some form of dem facilities and see if you can get a listen to some of them? Would be interesting to see if you feel the same with these undeniably cheaper alternatives...
Passively driven speakers at these exalted prices MUST be losing something or not blending the drivers they way they could be. A lively room can make higher frequencies too much as well.
Can you try to listen to some alternatives recommended here and come back with your findings please?
P.S. We're by and large domestic listeners here aren't we, with a few with toes or feet in the professional side. What do we want our domestic listening systems to do? Do we buy them for relaxation and enjoyment, or do we want the 'studio control room forensic analysis of the mix' instead? I found a pro(sumer) brand able to kind of do both and loved my time with one of their upper middle-sized monitors, but I have to say so many high end domestic systems tend to shout high frequencies at the listener and even with my hearing as it is now, it's not pleasant... My current speaker/room interface is too much the other way - always 'nice' and 'warm' toned and in this room it's boring and annoying (herself has decreed I keep with the speakers until after we've moved before deciding as it's not all the speaker's fault)
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #4
David Gilmour’s voice in Money was very flat and the whole song sounded similar to 1940’s jazz recording. The salesman did say they prefer a completely flat reproduction over a Harmon curve.
Marc v E
Major Contributor
@TankTop No, my experience is that this is not the case. This system probably had a weakness that was painfully evident. When a system is truely transparent you just hear it as it is. And that is ime always enjoyable, even with old recordings.
I heard some systems in the past that were like you describe, but in hindsight the systems were not that good.
I heard some systems in the past that were like you describe, but in hindsight the systems were not that good.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #6
I don’t know if there’s anything much better than Guitar Center in Colorado Springs but next time I’m in Denver I’ll see what I can do. Thanks for the recommendation, I think I should have done that years ago.
DSJR's point is that "too revealing" might not be more revealing at all, but may give the impression of crisper highs because of particular spectral response and maybe even distortion. I'm not suggesting those speakers suffer from that, but the most "revealing" speakers of my experience sounded more crispy-fried than revealing. What they were revealing wasn't actually the recording, but rather yet another distorted interpretation of the recording. And many stores design their high-end listening rooms to emphasize the "clarity" frequencies.
As to the Harman curve, as I read it that's the outcome of flat on-axis response combined with smooth and wide directivity in typical rooms. As the highs diminish off-axis, the reflections end up with diminished highs that impose an overall downward tilt in typical listening spaces when mixed with the on-axis response. Harman (Toole and Olive) did find that people prefer good bass, but any given room may not present that downward tilt, and it's not a "target". They also found that smooth and flat on-axis response was generally preferred. Spectral tilt is a matter of preference, but it's easy to hear and will definitely change your impression of speakers.
Rick "who prefers realistic acoustic instrument timbre, which means flat spectral tilt and minimal harmonic distortion" Denney
As to the Harman curve, as I read it that's the outcome of flat on-axis response combined with smooth and wide directivity in typical rooms. As the highs diminish off-axis, the reflections end up with diminished highs that impose an overall downward tilt in typical listening spaces when mixed with the on-axis response. Harman (Toole and Olive) did find that people prefer good bass, but any given room may not present that downward tilt, and it's not a "target". They also found that smooth and flat on-axis response was generally preferred. Spectral tilt is a matter of preference, but it's easy to hear and will definitely change your impression of speakers.
Rick "who prefers realistic acoustic instrument timbre, which means flat spectral tilt and minimal harmonic distortion" Denney
DVDdoug
Major Contributor
- Joined
- May 27, 2021
- Messages
- 3,013
- Likes
- 3,960
That's possibly not true and I'd even say likely not true. And "revealing" may not be a synonym for "accurate".
I've never been in a real recording/mixing/mastering studio but I'd expect the recording to sound darn good! ...Maybe not some modern over-compressed pop or rock, but a good recording that I like (like Money) should sound awesome!
Well.... yes, or "as produced". The goal of "high fidelity" is to accurately reproduce the performance or the recording. With certain classical or acoustic recordings reproducing the performance is the ideal but with modern studio recordings there isn't necessarily a "performance".
On the other hand, not everybody wants perfect accuracy. Music is for your enjoyment and some people like to boost the bass, etc. Personally, I like to use one of the Dolby soundfield settings for some reverb in the rear channels. I think most people prefer a little more "room sound" than you get in a "dead" recording studio.
It would be silly to spend an obscene amount of money on speakers if you don't enjoy the sound. And If I had an unlimited budget I can't imagine spending that kind of money on speakers.
Too revealing is like saying "the glass windows were too clean." There is no such thing.
Many times speakers have treble peaks that seem to make them more "detailed" but that is coloration and not how the music was mixed.
Many times speakers have treble peaks that seem to make them more "detailed" but that is coloration and not how the music was mixed.
Katji
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2017
- Messages
- 2,990
- Likes
- 2,273
High fidelity. There is no such thing as reproduction being too faithful to the recording / the program material. Faithful as in accurately reproducing it.
Hi-fi [equipment, products] is the result of the development of science and technology for increased accuracy in reproduction.
Hi-fi [equipment, products] is the result of the development of science and technology for increased accuracy in reproduction.
Robin L
Master Contributor
"Too revealing" means "too much treble" to me. If you can hear everything, nothing "sticks out", or becomes overexposed. If it is, look to a frequency response bump. I was using Stax earspeakers for decades, now have Drop 6XX attached to Topping E/L30 DAC/Amp. While the Stax sound was more "revealing", in the sense that some sounds were pushed forward in what seemed a realistic manner, the Drop/Topping combo presented more musical events without making any stick out unnaturally.
DSJR
Major Contributor
'Too revealing' to me now is a hyped lower kHz and upper hundred Hertz region - the 'glare' frequencies if taken to excess*. A rising tweeter a la PMC domestic range or many B&W's may well give a flatter in-room response once reflections and furnishings have had their say in the proceedings, but neither of these passive speaker party tricks can make up for the general lack of *dynamics* in typical domestic audio systems with passive speakers. The Active three way ATC's I once owned when single could, in the smallish room I had, reproduce a well recorded drum kit at not far off realistic levels if I asked them to (deafening with 115dB mean as measured on a sound pressure meter). Not sure any passive domestic speaker at any price would be quite as unfettered as that, especially with rinky-dink drivers no matter how well made. I subsequently heard just how constricted the ATC 100A's were when compared to the 200A of the time (no idea how well or badly they measured - the SL driver mods reduced 3rd harmonic distortion for example), but if the 200A's were this good (the Soffit version with side-by-side bass drivers), I can only imagine what the 300A's could do with their 15" drivers. Apologies for the digression, but unfettered dynamic range is something I'd love to experience again and it's something most domestic grade stereo sets just can't do properly, no matter how lavish the clothes they wear... The Kii Threes I spent a little time with (not long enough sadly and without the BXT bass module/stands) were supremely 'detailed' at lower volume but I found the sound so delicate, unforced and almost sweet to my ears - lovely - and it changed my pre-conceptions about Class D amps too as I hadn't found this site at tat point (I haven't heard the obvious modern competition though and not near enough to Keith at Purite to cadge a dem )
*Think Yamaha NS10 for an extreme case...
)*Think Yamaha NS10 for an extreme case...
charleski
Major Contributor
No thanks.
The single most important difference is volume. I like rock music, but have no interest in recreating a classic Grateful Dead concert in my living room. The neighbours would break down my door. The same goes for most symphonies and operas. If you want realism for anything other than a piano sonata (though pianos can get pretty loud if pushed) then you need a load of undistorted SPL which is simply impractical for a domestic setting.
As several people have already noted, "revealing" is usually just hifi sales-speak for unbalanced high frequencies.
High-end audio is a market fraught with lies like "too revealing". Do yourself a favour, listen to a pair of Genelec or ATC speakers in a treated room with 2 subwoofers. You will never believe another audio salesman again.
Another company I respect greatly is KEF, they publish brief white papers which gives some insight into the level of engineering focus.
Another company I respect greatly is KEF, they publish brief white papers which gives some insight into the level of engineering focus.
to be honest I have never witnessed a piece of mainstream music that was technically bad, the industry is SO COMPETITIVE that no piece of music ever reaches mainstream success without going through tens of experts in every field.
'revealing speakers' are usually just bad speakers, Good speakers with no sub-bass, or good speakers with good low frequency extension but no room correction.
'revealing speakers' are usually just bad speakers, Good speakers with no sub-bass, or good speakers with good low frequency extension but no room correction.
Totally agree, I never really 'approved' my setup till I added two subwoofers. It takes an unbelievable amount of effort to get sound with speakers, but once you're there, you realize that technically wrong recordings are very very little in mainstream media.
Is not the goal of a studio monitor to be revealing?
tuga
Major Contributor
Music listening is meant to be an enjoyable experience.
If "too revealing" doesn't sound good to you then there are many alternatives.
Accurate reproduction makes all the sense with well recorded music. If your favourite genres are not well recorded then by all means put together a system that can provide listening enjoyment.
Vict0r
Addicted to Fun and Learning
I think it might have been "too bright" instead of "too revealing".
The Rockport’s measurements are extraordinary. But poor room setup or some of those expensive cables could be detrimental to the final sound.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/rockport-technologies-avior-ii-loudspeaker-measurements
https://www.stereophile.com/content/rockport-technologies-avior-ii-loudspeaker-measurements
Similar threads
