What makes a speaker boring or exciting ? and can it be measured?

[terryforsythe]

do we have any examples of two speakers in the same room, one ~everyone agrees is boring, and one ~everyone agrees is exciting

I doubt everyone would agree. People have different tastes in what they like, or find exciting.

In other words, have we started to narrow down the possible causes of boring sound at all?

No. There are only opinions. I have shared mine, but I certainly don't believe my opinion would be shared by all. Some, maybe, but probably not by most.

30+ years ago Bose and Cerwin Vega speakers were popular. I found them to be boring and did not care for their sound, but some people loved them and found them to be exciting to listen to.

 

[kemmler3D]

I doubt everyone would agree. People have different tastes in what they like, or find exciting.


No. There are only opinions. I have shared mine, but I certainly don't believe my opinion would be shared by all. Some, maybe, but probably not by most.

30+ years ago Bose and Cerwin Vega speakers were popular. I found them to be boring and did not care for their sound, but some people loved them and found them to be exciting to listen to.

You'll definitely never get 10/10 of audiophiles to agree on a speaker, but if we're going to propose how to measure boringness we at least need some agreed-upon examples of the phenomenon.

I think if we can't even get that far, we can just punt and say boring sound is primarily caused by underconsumption of psychoactive substances. Since we're just sharing opinions.

 

[kemmler3D]

I find it interesting how different our experiences can be. Over the 4 decades I've been into this hobby, in the early years I was seduced more than once by equipment (mainly speakers) that sounded "exciting". After spending more time in daily listening over weeks and months, they turned out to sound artificial and fatiguing. Not unlike how monitors are set up in showrooms, with contrast & saturation maxed out. If I try to watch a movie that way it hurts my eyes. I ended up selling and replacing that equipment; eventually I learned to be more careful. I use the plural here because it took a few times for me to learn the lesson.


One example is Grado headphones. Their uneven and excessively bright frequency response (as well as distortion levels so high they are easily audible) definitely makes them sound "exciting" to many people. Another common one is headphones with grossly exaggerated bass response (e.g. "Beats"). And we get to recordings. I wish I had a nickel for every time some audiophile said how great or "exciting" some Diana Krall recording was. Most have artificially emphasized treble and sibilance and sound totally unnatural. I suspect this is intentional, the producer or engineer considered it an "artistic" rendition of the performance - but it is neither natural or lifelike, not "high fidelity" in the literal sense of the word. I don't mean to pick on Diana Krall, there are plenty of other examples.

In an unscientific mood I'll totally agree, "boring" just means flat or lower treble and/or bass and/or compressed dynamics.

But this is ASR and so i hold out hope someone will show up with evidence of some kind.

 

[terryforsythe]

but if we're going to propose how to measure boringness we at least need some agreed-upon examples of the phenomenon.

"Boring" is too subjective of a term. It is going to be tough getting agreement as to what makes a speaker boring. I can say the most important issues are weak bass and lack of dynamic headroom, but that explains some speakers (e.g., planar magnetics) that some people really like and don't find boring.

 

[Madlop26]

boring or exciting? ambiguous terms should be avoided, nothing good is coming from it.

 

[Pearljam5000]

boring or exciting? ambiguous terms should be avoided

I wouldn't necessarily define it as ambiguous because many audiophiles desceibe the sound of speakers that way so it's not something completely amorphic
And I assume it has some scientific explanation

 

[kemmler3D]

it's not something completely amorphic
And I assume it has some scientific explanation

If we take one individual and one speaker, we can probably figure out what sonic characteristics make them say "boring".

However, a lot of people have a lot of different opinions, but might use the same word to describe different things.

This is why I say we should at least find a speaker that many (most if possible) people agree is boring. Without that, we don't even have the beginning of a useful definition of "boring".

 

[Heinrich]

I wouldn't necessarily define it as ambiguous because many audiophiles desceibe the sound of speakers that way so it's not something completely amorphic
And I assume it has some scientific explanation

If we are to believe Dr. Olive's research, then there is simply no point in asking people for the reason - i.e. the description of their “preference”. For example, because not only they but also the white coats lack the vocabulary to communicate with confidence. In a nutshell, all that would come out is babbling.

To want to oppose this and examine a superficial YT video for any suspicion of meaning is nonsense. You make yourself vulnerable and common with the somewhat weak use of language. You can explain that it might not be due to the wiring in order to take the conversation to a technical level.

But I think it would be better to ask why people don't just want to be happy with their stereo when they have the speakers in front of them that were used to mix their beloved test recordings. They prefer to be bored, why is that? There is equally sophisticated science to this question.

 

[hex168]

I'll shoot you a message; I'd rather not post the specifics on a public forum.

Darn! Sounds fascinating.

 

[MattHooper]

I find it interesting how different our experiences can be. Over the 4 decades I've been into this hobby, in the early years I was seduced more than once by equipment (mainly speakers) that sounded "exciting". After spending more time in daily listening over weeks and months, they turned out to sound artificial and fatiguing.

You certainly aren’t alone in that. I know others have shared your experience as well.

I think I’ve owned down the years when I like in loudspeakers and so I recognize it pretty quickly. Also, I do a very thorough auditioning process so I’m not surprised when I get the speakers home.

But in terms of exciting, I’m still thinking of in terms of “ what excites me or stands out” in a loudspeaker. So for instance Harbeth loudspeakers aren’t known generally as exciting speakers. In fact, some people to ride them as “ pipe and slippers” old school British sound. But I was really grabbed by the sound of some Harbeths when I heard some incredibly natural vocals coming out of them. The whole point is that they were not hyped up sounding… it was the smooth natural and the amazing human quality that came through that made me really excited to hear music through those speakers. So they weren’t “ exciting” in the sense of a hyped frequency, response or dynamics, but they just did something that excited me.

On the other hand, the first time I heard MBL omnis I was mesmerized, and they stood out from anything I had heard before.
It took me years to chase down a pair that I could afford, and when I did the exact exciting nature of their presentation is what kept me mesmerized for the 10 years that I owned them. I only sold them because I needed money for a newer speaker purchase, one that was a better fit for my listening room scenario.

 

[MRC01]

In an unscientific mood I'll totally agree, "boring" just means flat or lower treble and/or bass and/or compressed dynamics.

That is one definition. But "boring" isn't always bad. I've heard systems that sounded boring at first, but on further listening turned out to be excellent. Near perfectly flat response, low distortion, linear dynamics. Portraying each recording as it is without "coloring" it may seem boring at first but that kind of boring is something I can live with for years of daily listening.

 

[MRC01]

"Boring" is too subjective of a term. It is going to be tough getting agreement as to what makes a speaker boring. I can say the most important issues are weak bass and lack of dynamic headroom, but that explains some speakers (e.g., planar magnetics) that some people really like and don't find boring.

Some of those people who really like planar magnetics listen to big ones having linear bass and use sufficient amplification to accommodate their low voltage sensitivity.

 

[Jim Taylor]

I’ve never ever had it [be] the case that [a] speaker that didn’t grab me the first time I auditioned it somehow sounded better as time went on.

As difficult as it is to believe, I think you and I are different. If anything, my experiences are the diametric opposite of yours.

 

[krabapple]

Ah, another thread guaranteed to concentrate dubious subjectivity in the guise of collective wisdom.

 

[MattHooper]

As difficult as it is to believe, I think you and I are different. If anything, my experiences are the diametric opposite of yours.

Totally! I have friends who have had new speakers in their house, which they had first, we weren’t so fond of, but which grew on the overtime. That’s never happened to me.

But to be clear, I’m not saying that I don’t experience liking a loudspeaker more and more over time. I think most of us experience that, because overtime we we dial in our loud speakers positioning or whatever and so the sound does get better. And of course, we discover overtime more wonderful qualities the speaker brings to different music.

I’m just saying that a speaker has to grab me out of the gate to some significant degree.
That I’ve never had a loudspeaker that I reacted negatively at first, but which I grew to really enjoy over time. (with the exception of maybe once or twice when a loudspeaker was first set up really poorly.)

 

[MattHooper]

Ah, another thread guaranteed to concentrate dubious subjectivity in the guise of collective wisdom.

Loudspeakers create subjective experiences.

It’s OK to discuss subjective experiences as part of the discussion IMO. And I agree with you the framing of the question does tend to invite a level of subjectivity. Also I agree it would be cool if someone proposed a cogent objective theory.

But at the same time, this place isn’t hydrogen audio. Fortunately.

 

[krabapple]

The instrument has not been invented that can measure how unsurprised I am that you are the first respondent to my post.

 

[MattHooper]

The instrument has not been invented that can measure how unsurprised I am that you are the first respondent to my post.

Given the current state of the world… I hope you can appreciate at least one thing that is reliable

Sleep tight.

 

[boxerfan88]

It's the same story with Genelec an Neumann
Both measure extremely well but Genelecs are known for their exciting sound, and after owning the KH120 I must admit there was something a little boring about their sound

Have you sold away your KH120A? If yes, what did you replace it with?

JFYI… before I bought my current Neumann, I managed to compare KH120A vs KH150 in a shop. The KH150 was stock with no MA1 adj. Not A/B testing because of the need to unplug/plug cables.

Man, I was blown away by the KH150. Imaging, tonality, speed. The KH120A performance was some distance away (imaging wasn’t that pinpoint, tonality was ok, sounded a little lazy - drums/rimshot)

That listening session allowed me to make up my mind to buy it’s bigger brother “blind” because there were none available for demo. The decision turned out to be a good one, so happy with the 310A.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Have you sold away your KH120A? If yes, what did you replace it with?

JFYI… before I bought my current Neumann, I managed to compare KH120A vs KH150 in a shop. The KH150 was stock with no MA1 adj. Not A/B testing because of the need to unplug/plug cables.

Man, I was blown away by the KH150. Imaging, tonality, speed. The KH120A performance was some distance away (imaging wasn’t that pinpoint, tonality was ok, sounded a little lazy - drums/rimshot)

That listening session allowed me to make up my mind to buy it’s bigger brother “blind” because there were none available for demo. The decision turned out to be a good one, so happy with the 310A.

Yes I sold it
Haven't replaced it yet
Thinking about KH150 or obviously Genelec
KH310 is too expensive for me