What role should listening play in speaker design

[pablolie]

Watch your tone. My comment may apply to AJ, but also to any one individual. One sample does not make a trend.

As for hearing up to 8-10 kHz, many instrument harmonics are above that. So, not a convincing claim that is only ONE octave.

My objection is that I wouldn't want to outsource my long established listening preferences even to someone as qualified as AJ, sorry. Listening I can do myself, and I can establish whether I enjoy something or not. But to do that, I need to establish if it's worth investing my time in listenin to something - and published measurements are what makes me consider whether that's a good investment of my time.

 

[RickS]

My objection is that I wouldn't want to outsource my long established listening preferences even to someone as qualified as AJ, sorry. Listening I can do myself, and I can establish whether I enjoy something or not. But to do that, I need to establish if it's worth investing my time in listening to something - and published measurements are what makes me consider whether that's a good investment of my time.

Agree, although not sure I trust my aging hearing entirely either.

Have always been open to acknowledging individual personal preference but it is just that (one person's opinion).

 

[Sokel]

Aside from ideal responses, etc, if the internal data of the marketing department (through their research, etc) decide that the target market is 50 year olds to 80 year olds, wouldn't it make sense to design with the known average hearing loss in mind?

Or do we forget that all these stuff is business and at the end of the day, designed for targeted markets?
Specially nice ones, with higher SPL ability destined for bigger rooms which tend to be more expensive and, as the world runs lately, younger crowds may not be interested or can't afford them?

There are so many variables that becomes chaotic sometimes.

 

[pablolie]

Agree, although not sure I trust my aging hearing entirely either.

It's what we have, it's what we use, it's ultimately what matters. Would I own an audio system if I was deaf? I could not care less what others hear, honestly. I can hear for myself to the point that seems to make a difference to me. But I don't enjoy critical listening exercises, trying to discern minimal differences (because that's what it is when gear measures well, in my experience). So I shall not spend time ever listening to something that doesn't look solid from a measurement point of view. I want to listen to music, not review gear, clearly.

Have always been open to acknowledging individual personal preference but it is just that (one person's opinion).

Oh me too. My best friend happens to love to listen to Chopin and has a syste tailored to that. Sounds great with Chopin, sounds awful for other stuff IMO (and he is proud of it). There's a thin line between the sound preference you may have and the music preference you have. I know I can't trust the listening impressions of anyone that doesn't like my reference music.

 

[a4eaudio]

Aside from ideal responses, etc, if the internal data of the marketing department (through their research, etc) decide that the target market is 50 year olds to 80 year olds, wouldn't it make sense to design with the known average hearing loss in mind?

I do know some older DIYers who have chosen to accept compromised designs because of their own diminished hearing.

The reason that I would not do that personally, is that there is a good chance that I will end up giving away my DIY speakers to a friend or family member that is much younger. Similarly for the commercial speaker company, while they may decide their target market is 50-80 year olds, they can't prevent other people from getting ahold of the speakers. And if it is well designed past 8kHz, that won't negatively affect the older person that can't hear that high.

 

[Sokel]

I do know some older DIYers who have chosen to accept compromised designs because of their own diminished hearing.

The reason that I would not do that personally, is that there is a good chance that I will end up giving away my DIY speakers to a friend or family member that is much younger. Similarly for the commercial speaker company, while they may decide their target market is 50-80 year olds, they can't prevent other people from getting ahold of the speakers. And if it is well designed past 8kHz, that won't negatively affect the older person that can't hear that high.

It goes the other way around as well.

Budget speakers (or not so budget) with pronounced (coupled of dB do the trick) 2kHz-6kHz for example, which make most think "more detail" (my personal nightmare, instant round headache) who make things worst for older people as they throw the balance, making the already harder to hear upper response even harder to hear.

 

[DRNNOO]

Once measurement confirms you are in the ballpark - the remainder is meaningless because nearly all people will not be able to meaningfully discern the difference. So AJ is free to add any seasoning he likes and ensure that those that like his brand will buy his brand with the confidence that they are getting something special. ASR obsessives will however continue to argue over largely meaningless though measurable differences. Did I get this right? :-D

Exactly my thoughts. Thats why the discussion isn't really going anywhere, it was inspired by half truths from a source with no intentions of reaching the full truth which you just laid out.

My only issue I have is that:

1. "You don't know what source is supposed to be." that's nonsense. The source is the source, whether the source was compromised or not, the source is the starting point and is the truth in sound reproduction. If you are going to question the source material and then try to compensate for what you believe is right, that is by definition the circle of confusion. Which is why every control room should have a linear in room response such that creating the source material is mixed and mastered in one standard and the playback is also in the same standard. So this is absolutely nonsense what AJ is saying.
2. He can't trust the measurements because of the inherited flaws due to the complexity, then why not just do a better job with the measurements? If it's costs, that's fair. Unfortunately, starting a new business is not cheap and for those companies who invested upfront, they get to reap the benefits.

Its not hard to keep track of the transfer functions involved. You can assume you are near enough with the loudspeakers and you and you can assume you are near enough by following standard studio acoustical practices at home...

For the last 10-15%?.... "the remainder is meaningless because nearly all people will not be able to meaningfully discern the difference."

 

[RickS]

Aside from ideal responses, etc, if the internal data of the marketing department (through their research, etc) decide that the target market is 50 year olds to 80 year olds, wouldn't it make sense to design with the known average hearing loss in mind?

Or do we forget that all these stuff is business and at the end of the day, designed for targeted markets?
Specially nice ones, with higher SPL ability destined for bigger rooms which tend to be more expensive and, as the world runs lately, younger crowds may not be interested or can't afford them?

There are so many variables that becomes chaotic sometimes.

Ok, but seems that the 20 year old listener should not trust the subjective review from a 50+ old reviewer in that case. Not always clear how old the reviewer is though…

In the end, better off with a well-measuring speaker that can be eq’d. That way you can tune it to your hearing, your music and to your room. That way it does not matter if some regarded designer was involved or not. Is my way to reduce the variables.

 

[DRNNOO]

Which step is 'voicing'? That was the controversy.

Was it??? Voicing is done in situ. You can do all sorts of voicing with XO, just less stuff for me to clean up later possibly. The majority will have to fine tune the FR at the listening position(s). Even if you are simply realigning the system with the factory voicing.

 

[RickS]

? 10-20kHz, which is what would be "missing", is literally one octave.

That octave still contains key harmonics that help us differentiate between instruments (at the very least). The fact remains that our hearing is diminished as we age. Not sure why anyone should trust someone with likely diminished hearing loss just because they are an experienced designer. If you want to, it is your choice.

 

[MattHooper]

I find it bizarre that in audio we still accept that some leading designers still act/work/design as craftsmen that defend obsolete design trends and refuse to fully accept thorough measuring as a *mandatory* design tool. Audio reproduction is about repeatabilty, not about magically crafting a one off Stradivarius once a year.

I’m not sure that this speaks directly to your point but….

Well, I very much appreciate the direction to cutting edge speaker designs of the type that many hair would find “ best practice,” there’s a whole lot of audiophiles with different interests and niches to serve. That may be audiophiles and speaker designers who who have some app appreciation for certain old school designs, or various idiosyncratic approaches. I’m glad that there are still products that don’t simply hew to “sounding like another neumann or whatever. I’ve appreciated plenty of such imperfect designs.

If I went to an audio show and every room featured yet another Neumann or Dutch and Dutch, Genelec or whatever, every room sounding roughly the same, I understand that might be some people’s ideal but I would find it very boring. I love seeing gear that also expresses the individuality of a designer and that might be off that beaten path.

 

[MattHooper]

That octave still contains key harmonics that help us differentiate between instruments (at the very least). The fact remains that our hearing is diminished as we age. Not sure why anyone should trust anyone with likely diminished hearing loss just because they are an experience designer. If you want to, it is your choice.

I absolutely understand your point. Biology is biology.

However, as I understand, putting aside certain types of hearing damage/hearing wear (of the type pro sound professionals might experience through loud sound exposure over the years), ageing ears can still generally be fairly good at identifying the main characteristics and colorations of loudspeakers (so long as those aren’t mainly in the frequencies beyond somebody’s current hearing range).

I’ve always been quite amazed at how well some older people can accurately describe the sound of loudspeakers. At one point, I took a look at a whole bunch of reviews of some older Stereophile reviewers and their descriptions seemed pretty accurate with JA’s measurements.

More anecdotally, when an old Fogey like Herb Reichert writes about the differences he hears between two speakers that I’m very familiar with, I find his description bang on.

I am 62 now. Last time I checked, I could still hear up to 14 K but it’s been a while since I tested myself. My friend reviews audio gear is the same age as me. We converge quite highly on our impressions of the loudspeaker he gets in for review. And many of them are sent for measurements after we listen, and they generally seem to confirm fairly well with what we heard and usually there’s not any huge “ wow we sure missed that!” in a frequency response. I’m not talking perfection, but just a general trend.

 

[Sokel]

In the end, better off with a well-measuring speaker that can be eq’d.

Agreed to that, with a key discriminator, EQ as Dr Toole suggests, as with a broad freq tone control for example, or base to the anechoic data, etc.

But there's another aspect to it as well, elaborate EQ adds complexity, adds gear if analog sources are involved, and the EQ itself (the home made generation of filters, applied without a whole set of acoustic and, importantly, electrical measurements) is not exactly trivial and can hide nasty surprises.

Of course there's are the automated ways as well, but I'm 100% with Dr Toole to this, smells to me like a band-aid, no matter how elaborate.

No surprise that formally educated people do not share about EQ, and how to properly stack (with a VERY few exceptions here, like j_j ) and anyone else who does usually goes after a (totally justifiable, education is not cheap) profit.

Same with internal studies companies made, like the Buchardt Audio one mentioned earlier which likely uses their target demographic as subjects, so more relevant to them. We rarely hear about them as they are trade secrets.

Again these are companies, their target are segments, specially at niche hobbies like this, and if they stay alive for long it stands as an excuse to them.

 

[Flaesh]

A 'Guru' is someone who asks you to have faith in his

This is some mediocre, insecure, inadequate guru. A user of a quality guru should trust him immediately and without doubts..

 

[PristineSound]

This conversation has been very captivating to engage.

It would be very interesting if there was a poll on this thread on what people's positions are when it comes to speaker design decisions based on measurements vs. listening.

I'm just glad that there are people who take measurements such as our host here and spinaroma.org for us to decide for ourselves, compared to the decades past, it's like a veil being lifted (subjectivists pun intended )

 

[NTK]

I absolutely understand your point. Biology is biology.

However, as I understand, putting aside certain types of hearing damage/hearing wear (of the type pro sound professionals might experience through loud sound exposure over the years), ageing ears can still generally be fairly good at identifying the main characteristics and colorations of loudspeakers (so long as those aren’t mainly in the frequencies beyond somebody’s current hearing range).

I’ve always been quite amazed at how well some older people can accurately describe the sound of loudspeakers. At one point, I took a look at a whole bunch of reviews of some older Stereophile reviewers and their descriptions seemed pretty accurate with JA’s measurements.

More anecdotally, when an old Fogey like Herb Reichert writes about the differences he hears between two speakers that I’m very familiar with, I find his description bang on.

I am 62 now. Last time I checked, I could still hear up to 14 K but it’s been a while since I tested myself. My friend reviews audio gear is the same age as me. We converge quite highly on our impressions of the loudspeaker he gets in for review. And many of them are sent for measurements after we listen, and they generally seem to confirm fairly well with what we heard and usually there’s not any huge “ wow we sure missed that!” in a frequency response. I’m not talking perfection, but just a general trend.

Per Dr Toole, hearing loss also manifests as inconsistent judgements, not just unable to hearing high frequencies, which makes their opinions unreliable.

I would add only that the problem with non-neutral loudspeakers is that they add the same monotonous coloration to absolutely everything that is played through them. One can adapt to this to some extent, but in my experience, when something more neutral is heard it is obvious, and preferred. Most people never get to experience a valid, blind, equal loudness comparison test. As Newman said, hearing loss is a factor in preference, but it shows up not only as a fixed bias in preference but also as rating inconsistencies in repeated auditions of exactly the same sound - love it in the morning, hate it in the afternoon has been observed.

Quote from his book:

I was a perceptive and reliable listener for decades but realized in my mid-60s that I was having more difficulty making judgments, and increased variability in my ratings showed that it was time to retire from the listening panel. ...... Those of us in this situation still enjoy music and movies, but our opinions are our own, distinctive, not for sharing.​

 

[RexrothPigeon]

With respect, I'm always a bit baffled by people who readily throws critique about how others in a subject or industry that is not their own does their job.

This is to be expected in an industry that has systematically lied to its own consumers for decades, selling us snake oil and fairy tales. Obviously there are honest people in the industry, but the (attentive faction of the) consumer base has been trained by the industry itself to be jaded and cynical. After all, if we're not, well, the industry will prey on us and sell us as much bullshit as we can afford.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

he probably listens to them using well-known reference material, songs that he has heard on many great loudspeakers over the years, and therefore has a pretty good sense of whether it sounds overly bright, too dense, lacks body, is recessed, or sounds too way forward. Things like that.

He's at least 70 years old, so no, he doesn't have a good sense of how anything sounds

 

[Pearljam5000]

Theoretically, what would happen if a speaker was designed without being listened to at all?

 

[a4eaudio]

Theoretically, what would happen if a speaker was designed without being listened to at all?

It could turn out fine. It could be crap.

What would happen if someone lined themselves up perfectly with a dart board, leveled there arm to the perfect angle, and threw a dart, without looking at all?