What is going on with Paradigm?

[Purité Audio]

An awful lot of loudspeaker manufacturers are choosing to make poor product.
Keith

 

[murraycamp]

To read Herb, I really need to have a toke first.

Word.

 

[tvrgeek]

OK, maybe Paradigm did screw up. This thread lead me to look at their current offerings out of curiosity. I then noticed their comment on ARC Genesis. Well, I run an old Anthem 310 AVR which is supported. I had been toying with maybe a newer unit that had a more flexible DSP controls. Well, Genesis has the improvements. No need for a new AVR. Curious, it does not have you input the distances any more. The big thing is yo can adjust the target. The Series II target was way too bass heavy for me and week in the top octave.

 

[tvrgeek]

An awful lot of loudspeaker manufacturers are choosing to make poor product.
Keith

Price sensitive and stupid customers. Some manufactures care about sound and love what they do, but eventually the bank says you have to turn a profit. Besides, the typical consumer has to save enough money by buying crap speakers to afford the magic cables.

 

[tvrgeek]

Tentative assumption is they've gone with something that "stands out" in the average auditioning room.

Ah yes, the JBL concept. Or as better known, Just Bloody Loud speakers.

 

[richard12511]

Ah yes, the JBL concept. Or as better known, Just Bloody Loud speakers.

JBL speakers generally measure(and sound) excellent. Seems like an outdated concept.

 

[MattHooper]

An awful lot of loudspeaker manufacturers are choosing to make poor product.
Keith

Meh. "Poor product" is ultimately your own value judgement. (And yes, I understand you are appealing to objective measurements, but that appeal is itself also a value judgement).

What you may judge "poor" many other people may really like, and if a speaker manufacturer engineering for a particular sound is serving a niche with happy customers, then it's actually a "good" product by those lights.

 

[Sonny1]

It’s great to know the fine folks at Paradigm know how to design great measuring speakers. They just choose NOT to do so. It’s a free country, Canada, and I support their right to design speakers that measure poorly. Just as I support the consumer’s right to not purchase these speakers.

 

[Purité Audio]

The hi-fi industry excels at marketing poor design as desirable, has any salesman ever said to you, yes they are really poor but you might like them?
Keith

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

The hi-fi industry excels at marketing poor design as desirable, has any salesman ever said to you, yes they are really poor but you might like them?
Keith

That's never happened to me, but you have to define 'poor design'. Many might look at my 2.5 watt single ended triode amplifier and scream that it is a poor design because it doesn't measure as well as some solid state amplifier. This of course totally misses the point - personally, I make my buying (or building) decisions after careful consideration to what's important to me, and what tradeoffs I'm willing to accept to achieve my overall goal.

That's not to say that some consumers might be deceived by some marketing BS and separated from their money unfairly, but that happens even when hiring something like a plumber who's less than honest.

 

[Purité Audio]

You enjoy listening to effects, that’s fine, I prefer high fidelity.
Keith

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

You enjoy listening to effects, that’s fine, I prefer high fidelity.
Keith

Geez, please be constructive, cuz pretentious doesn't work very well, and certainly doesn't make a valid point.

 

[Purité Audio]

If you are altering to taste then you are listening to an effect, which is fine, just not high-fidelity.
Keith

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

If you are altering to taste then you are listening to an effect, which is fine, just not high-fidelity.
Keith

Well then, please define the highly subjective reality of listening preference as regards to 'high fidelity', since in reality the purist goal is unachievable.

To use your own words:

By far the largest sources of distortion are electro-mechanical, loudspeakers and analogue replay at the front and rear end of the reproduction chain...

....so, if there must be distortion (coloration if you will), doesn't that disqualify high fidelity right from the start - isn't it a tacit acknologment that by your own standards, high fidelity cannot exist?

 

[watchnerd]

What you may judge "poor" many other people may really

I don't recall the exact number, but aren't the Harman findings the preference of the majority (like 83-87%) of the listeners, but not all of them?

That leaves an approximate quintile who like something different and can be catered to.

That doesn't mean they're "wrong".

People on ASR seem to sometimes forget that the consensus preference doesn't apply to all buyers.

 

[murraycamp]

People on ASR seem sometimes forget that the consensus preference doesn't apply to all buyers.

I agree. I value - very highly - this site and its focus on measurements. My goal is to assemble an electronic signal chain that is audibly transparent (to me), with the feature set I need, for as little scratch as possible. Where is seems to break down for me is transducers. The more speakers and cans I audition, the more I lean into the conclusion that I probably do not sit within the Harman curve for whatever reason. Perhaps being over 50 with one rock concert too many. I wonder if the Harman data was broken down by age group – I don’t recall.

When discussing a larger group – like a consumer market – making meaningful and widely applicable conclusions about what a specific individual within that group will prefer seems a bit unstable. I suppose looking at it in terms of probabilities makes more sense (i.e. 68% chance you will prefer a flat freq. response or whatever).

At the end of the day, I am choosing my sonic preference of transducers regardless of if or how much it deviates from any particular preference curve. I do not, however, claim that my preference will be anyone else’s,’ or that it's better, more accurate, or adheres more closely to some recognized ideal. I recognize my own limitations, which are profligate.

Just convert the bits to voltage accurately, amplify it cleanly, and I’ll have fun with the rest. But that’s just my opinion. YMMV, etc.

 

[watchnerd]

If you are altering to taste then you are listening to an effect, which is fine, just not high-fidelity.
Keith

I used to think high fidelity was the most important thing to me when it came to audio.

Now, I'm not so sure.

There are plenty of recordings I own where I prefer the lower fidelity version because I enjoy the performance more.

Conversely, I have some recordings that are a good "ooh, ahh" demo because they reproduce instruments well in my living room, but I never listen to because they're musically boring.

So, in the grand scheme of things, is the highest fidelity really all that important?

Or is "good enough" just fine for musical enjoyment?

I find myself asking this more as I get older and I'm losing my top octave, as many of us do; perhaps high fidelity was more important to me when I was younger because I could hear better.

I still think I'm a decently trained lister given the mixing I do and, given I also play an instrument (bass), perhaps more musically attuned than average, but I have the hearing tests to show my ears aren't what they used to be.

 

[ahofer]

I’m another one who may not prefer the idealized Harman curve. But I’m pretty sure most of the artifacts I may prefer are in the speaker and room interaction (and the recording), as opposed to the electronics and wires.

 

[MattHooper]

The hi-fi industry excels at marketing poor design as desirable, has any salesman ever said to you, yes they are really poor but you might like them?
Keith

Again, you are simply assuming your own value in to the description "poor design."

It's like a car or motorcycle enthusiast making a blanket statement that Harley's are a "poor design." Well, if you have a certain goal for the motorcycle you are aiming for, sure it could fall well short of that. But if someone LIKES the idea of the Harley heritage, and LIKES the design and feel of the bike and LIKES the (obnoxious-to-me) teeth rattling sound of the things, then the Harley is the RIGHT design goal for manufacturer and customer. And any number of different motorcycles that may measure differently in mileage and other parameters, would be a "bad" design for the intended goal.

 

[mhardy6647]

de gustibus -- as they say -- non est disputandum.