Speakers Are The Enemy

[mhardy6647]

That's a lot of equipment.

Are you running a vintage audio business as a side gig?

My wife more or less subtly encourages me so to do.

Nah -- I am more like those people (I'll reckon some of you know one) who take in strays. Stray animals, in their case. Stray electronics, in mine.
I have, after more than a half-century of fiddling around with audio hardware, slowly come to understand what I like in terms of reproduced music -- appearances to the contrary.

 

[MattHooper]

My wife more or less subtly encourages me so to do.

Nah -- I am more like those people (I'll reckon some of you know one) who take in strays. Stray animals, in their case. Stray electronics, in mine.
I have, after more than a half-century of fiddling around with audio hardware, slowly come to understand what I like in terms of reproduced music -- appearances to the contrary.

I always enjoy seeing photos of your amazing collection!

 

[alankila]

I think the statement “speakers are the enemy” describes the frustration of the HiFi enthusiast, knowing that the “perfect” speaker is forever just out of reach. This can mean either an ongoing quest to narrow the gap or a capitulation in the form of accepting that you’ve found something that is good enough based on your circumstances.

I personally think marketing and product differentiation for sake of having unique talking points are the enemies, but part of the blame also falls on the customers. Ultimately, companies tend to end up at least in part in the snake oil selling business, because it is strategically useful to lie. At risk of sounding sexist, men seem to be especially susceptible to certain types of sales technobabble. It isn't unique to audio -- I happen to bike as a hobby and it's chock full of the exact same kind of crap.

The technology of transducer seems good enough to me -- certainly with respect to things like harmonic distortion, flatness in the passband of the drivers. I'm sure someone can still try to improve on these century old designs, and materials could become marginally better still, but my conclusion is that great sound has existed for something like half century by this point -- you can be entirely happy in front of many of these vintage systems, I reckon. Active speakers with class D amplification and DSP control are my poison, though. A single box does the entire sound and there's almost nothing a consumer can mess up when as much choice is taken away as possible, and spinorama measurements will simply guarantee a baseline performance without any user input or adjustment needed.

 

[Bleib]

Well, we need computer chips in our heads and direct file sending to it.
I've never heard the perfect speaker either

 

[OCA]

I have very little info on how drivers work but I feel it's a bit questionable why nobody tries to use AC direct drive active voice coils in woofers in this day and age of super fast micro controllers.

 

[Mart68]

I have very little info on how drivers work but I feel it's a bit questionable why nobody tries to use AC direct drive active voice coils in woofers in this day and age of super fast micro controllers.

There are some fairly recent speakers using active voice coils. I had a listen to some a few years ago, can't recall the brand. They were terrible.

 

[Audionaut]

a 1khz crossover. It's something many are aware they should strive for, but few even attempt to go below 1500hz in a 2-way dome tweeter design.

1kHz is actually a very poor range of separation. It is in the middle of the range of formants and the human voice.
It would be ideal to have a single driver transmit from 150Hz to 5khz.
In practice, 300 - 3000 Hz is appropriate for a three-way design.

 

[Oddball]

I don't view speakers as an enemy, but my problem with them is that they are still very expensive in the upper range of performance. Lucky are the ones that stick to 2 channels and perhaps a sub or two.

Budget for great 9.4.6 HT is scary. Even budget for good 5.1.4 system is probably the reason why people don't do them so the at the end the whole HT market is shrinking, if not to say dying.

 

[AdrianusG]

I always enjoy seeing photos of your amazing collection!

Yes me too, i'm absolutely drooling over his collection of vintage receivers and amps (The Yamaha stuff)

 

[livinon2wheels]

I don't view speakers as an enemy, but my problem with them is that they are still very expensive in the upper range of performance. Lucky are the ones that stick to 2 channels and perhaps a sub or two.

Budget for great 9.4.6 HT is scary. Even budget for good 5.1.4 system is probably the reason why people don't do them so the at the end the whole HT market is shrinking, if not to say dying.

When you look at what a decent basic 5.2.4 system costs its scary. I am talking about having speakers that will extract the goodness from the likes of a Marantz C40 used in preamp mode with external class D amplication and decent subwoofers like SVS 17" super subs. You could easily be knocking on the door of 40-50k for just a basic system with a streamer and good quality display. The realities of this are exactly what I am wrestling with as I try to figure out how best to rebuild a system I was happy with before our house burned. I am somewhat overwhelmed by prices that are several orders of magnitude higher than they were when I bought the previous equipment. And sadly, in some cases the quality is not there, not at all. And customer service from these companies is at an all time low. Ohm loudspeakers, a company that has been around for 50 years...took nearly six months to get replacement drivers for a pair of speakers I bought last year. The customer service experience was so dreadful they lost me as a customer, no matter how much I might like their speakers. Same goes for Emotiva...no way I would buy anything from Emotiva again.

 

[prasanth.nath]

I'm... I'm rather fond of mine.




View attachment 451281

I'm... I'm rather fond of mine.




View attachment 451281

That is easily the 8th wonder of the world. Literally, I can sense my mouth watering. Wow!

 

[dlaloum]

In the '60s the rule of thumb was, "Spend half your budget on speaker and cartridge." Later, speakers and cartridge.

Transducers are the enemy - the least perfect component in our systems!

 

[Keith_W]

Rooms are the enemy. Speakers can be designed to be close to perfect, but rooms always mess it up. Your speakers would probably sound closer to the measured performance if you put your speakers in your backyard. And that brings up an important point: room with no speakers = no music. Speakers with no room = music.

Have I made my case?

 

[Bleib]

Close to be perfect? Linear, no dynamic compression, superb dispersion, low distorsion? Nah, they don't exist. Full of compromises
Audio files can easily be 20-20.000hz perfection, but very few speakers can replicate this properly

 

[Hear Here]

The perfect speaker is what the mastering engineer used.

That will most faithfully reproduce the recording as intended

But in practice, mastering studio speakers are unsuitable as domestic speakers, or at least are far from ideal. As one mastering engineer quipped "hi-fi speakers are meant to sound good ...., while studio monitors are meant to sound bad". He goes on to explain this alarming observation.

See more about the differences here, although the pro audio press has published other articles along similar lines

Studio Monitors Vs Speakers, What’s the Difference? - Andertons Blog

Studio monitors, regular speakers – what’s the difference? Find out what’s best for you and why studio monitors are perfect for mixing.

blog.andertons.co.uk

 

[Hear Here]

Rooms are the enemy. Speakers can be designed to be close to perfect, but rooms always mess it up. Your speakers would probably sound closer to the measured performance if you put your speakers in your backyard. And that brings up an important point: room with no speakers = no music. Speakers with no room = music.

Have I made my case?

No - music, whether from instruments or via speakers, sounds dire if played in an open field. Music needs an enclosed or partially enclosed space to sound realistic. Outdoor events, festivals, etc always put the performers on a stage with a reflective wall behind them.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

But in practice, mastering studio speakers are unsuitable as domestic speakers, or at least are far from ideal. As one mastering engineer quipped "hi-fi speakers are meant to sound good ...., while studio monitors are meant to sound bad". He goes on to explain this alarming observation.

I couldn't more strenuously disagree with this, and my money's where my mouth is: my primary speakers are widely used as studio and mastering monitors. And they sound awesome in my home.

 

[Mart68]

But in practice, mastering studio speakers are unsuitable as domestic speakers, or at least are far from ideal. As one mastering engineer quipped "hi-fi speakers are meant to sound good ...., while studio monitors are meant to sound bad". He goes on to explain this alarming observation.

See more about the differences here, although the pro audio press has published other articles along similar lines

Studio Monitors Vs Speakers, What’s the Difference? - Andertons Blog

Studio monitors, regular speakers – what’s the difference? Find out what’s best for you and why studio monitors are perfect for mixing.

blog.andertons.co.uk

World's most stupid article - he makes a number of statements that are false:

This, for example:

Standard hi-fi speakers could be considered far-field, as they’re designed to sound good in any room and from any direction (within reason).

How do you design a speaker to sound good in any room and from any direction? You can't.

Then he says

but studio monitors are designed to have a flat, precise sound for nearfield use. This means they don’t emphasise any one frequency, giving you the most accurate impression of your mix so you can easily pick out imperfections

Whether you listen near field, mid field or far field has no connection to the speaker having a flat frequency response. Research shows the flatter the frequency response of the speaker, the more people preferred it in blind preference testing. It is the most important of all measurable parameters for getting good sound from a speaker.

And his example of the 'bad sounding studio monitor'? The Yamaha NS10 and NS10M - neither of which has anything close to a flat FR.

Can only conclude he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

 

[Hear Here]

I couldn't more strenuously disagree with this, and my money's where my mouth is: my primary speakers are widely used as studio and mastering monitors. And they sound awesome in my home.

Could ask what studio speakers you are using? For years I hankered after ATC speakers and eventually bought a pair of Active 50s. I didn't like them at all. I regretted selling my previous excellent KEF Reference 107s and after selling the ATCs was overjoyed to buy (after reading the very thorough Stereophile review) a pair of Avantgarde Unos. What a breath of fresh air compared with the oppressive ATCs.

Some ATCs, including the 40) are designed primarily for domestic use and I believe they are excellent, but the 50 up are essentially studio monitors. Now I've moved to a larger home, I'd be interestred to try one of ATC's bigger speakers, perhaps their SCM200 in its "consumer" tower version.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

Could ask what studio speakers you are using?

Dutch & Dutch 8c. I wouldn't call them "studio speakers" (in fact I reject that dichotomy entirely), but they are quite popular in studios, including mastering applications