Who would buy a speaker without listening to it?

[Adi777]

I listened to the Dutch & Dutch 8c, Kii Three and Grimm Audio LS1be with dedicated subwoofers. I think I could live with any of them, but I also think it's not exactly "my sound".

 

[RobL]

I see, so you are going all in on the theory, as a guinea pig for the forum.

Guinea pig? No, judging by this thread this “experiment” has been performed many times here before me.
I have heard enough speakers that have valid measurements available that I am confident I can predict the new ones won’t disappoint.

 

[ahofer]

My own synthesis: I will not bother to audition a speaker with highly uneven dispersion or severely erratic frequency response. I value fidelity in the abstract, and I’ve listened to enough speakers to know these characteristics correlate pretty well with what I like.

After that you should try to listen/have the ability to return them. If nothing else, it will help you feel good about your purchase.

In fairness, my speakers (Harbeth SHL5+) will not win the dispersion award, although they are quite linear in the range I can hear. Along with the KEF reference 5, they were the speakers I liked best in my last round of auditioning (compromised as it was by different showrooms and nattering salespeople distracting me with audio myths).

I like Erin’s compression and distortion testing as well. It’s surprising how much speakers differ in these tests.

 

[Digby]

If the listener wants a certain inaccuracy that is attractive, then I daresay a speaker that measures great would be disappointing.

Accuracy to what though, to stereo recording, is stereo recording accurate in capturing the signal of unamplified music/sound. The answer is no. Once one admits that stereo is very limited in providing accuracy, then much more is on the table.

Furthermore, nobody has yet spoken about how discern which, between a group of excellent speakers (Revel Salon 2, Genelec 8361, D&D 8c), is the most excellent. Isn't that where subjectivity is allowed some free reign?

 

[Triliza]

Accuracy to what though, to stereo recording, is stereo recording accurate in capturing the signal of unamplified music/sound. The answer is no. Once one admits that stereo is very limited in providing accuracy, then much more is on the table.

Furthermore, nobody has yet spoken about how discern which, between a group of excellent speakers (Revel Salon 2, Genelec 8361, D&D 8c), is the most excellent. Isn't that where subjectivity is allowed some free reign?

I don't know if you have seen this, but what do you think most participant in a blind test would prefer, Revel Salon2 or JBL M2 Master Reference Monitor, what do you think you'd prefer? A blind test with a large and diverse pool of participant would answer your question about the speakers you mention.

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/sp...and-well-reviewed-speakers-ever-made.2907816/

 

[Snarfie]

I only buy a speaker if i can auditioning it at home. Regarding a DAC not much can go wrong i bought a topping D10 after reading the test on ASR. Choices regarding speakers are imo based on local roommodes ( if room correction is not applied) an because of that a delicate personal choice.

 

[YSC]

Accuracy to what though, to stereo recording, is stereo recording accurate in capturing the signal of unamplified music/sound. The answer is no. Once one admits that stereo is very limited in providing accuracy, then much more is on the table.

Furthermore, nobody has yet spoken about how discern which, between a group of excellent speakers (Revel Salon 2, Genelec 8361, D&D 8c), is the most excellent. Isn't that where subjectivity is allowed some free reign?

stereo recording is inaccurate, so a pair of theoratical perfectly accurate speaker will produce less than 100% accurate sound, sure, but then a speaker with it's irregularity in accuracy will make things worse, imagine if recording in stereo is 50% of the original sound, the best reproduction system will give you... 50% of original of sound, if the reproduction system have accuracy of 70%, your final sound will be 70% of 50% = 35%, not 60% as it's impossible to design a specific target to counter the inaccuracy in recording, as it is a chain of variables which can't be countered in the reproduction chain, only minimize the loss.

subjectivity is allowed, of course to some degree for an excellent speaker as preference in dispersion, room acoustics and even look, so there isn't a No.1 champ in all aspect speaker. But the built in effect of a far from accurate speaker is definitely not among the best, it's just like food, our taste are all different, eating what the good chef prepared is guranteed it would taste good to some degree but one would like to add sauces or a bit of flavour like table salt is fine, but imagine I go to restaurant A and liked to add some salt to the steak, if I go to every other restaurant and add the same amount of salt, it's almost guaranteed the overall outcome will be inferior to just don't add anything

 

[Digby]

A blind test with a large and diverse pool of participant would answer your question about the speakers you mention.

I think you might be missing my point, perhaps I am not making it very clearly. You have two excellent speakers, as per your example, who decides, on the individual level, which is the better of the two?

Surely it is, and can only be, the individual.

A group blind test only provides an average, it doesn't say, without question, what you or I may prefer.

I think a more interesting test would be a blind test, where people know which speakers are to be tested in advance, and rank them as per what they expect to prefer, then after the blind test we see what correlation there is between presumption and actual preference in test. Has anyone done anything like this?

I'd love to know the rate at which people who say they can pick a favourite from measurements identify the same speaker as their favourite in a blind test.

It is up to the insight and discipline of the person exercising it to use it properly.

How does one use subjectivity properly?

 

[sergeauckland]

I think you might be missing my point, perhaps I am not making it very clearly. You have two excellent speakers, as per your example, who decides, on the individual level, which is the better of the two?

Surely it is, and can only be, the individual.

A group blind test only provides an average, it doesn't say, without question, what you or I may prefer.

I think a more interesting test would be a blind test, where people know which speakers are to be tested in advance, and rank them as per what they expect to prefer, then after the blind test we see what correlation there is between presumption and actual preference in test. Has anyone done anything like this?

I'd love to know the rate at which people who say they can pick a favourite from measurements identify the same speaker as their favourite in a blind test.


How does one use subjectivity properly?

Why does one have to be better than the other? They can just be different (slightly) but of equal merit. So how does one choose which to buy? Whichever looks nicer and/or is cheaper and/or better supported, depending on one's priorities. The final choice is subjective of course, but based on there not being a bad decision to be made.

S.

 

[goat76]

That depends on the listener's agenda.
If the listener wants accuracy, then a speaker that measures great will sound great.
If the listener wants a certain inaccuracy that is attractive, then I daresay a speaker that measures great would be disappointing.

You pay your money, you take your pick.

Jim

But why would someone want something they don't find sounds good to them, isn't the end goal for a music-listening consumer to be satisfied with how the music sounds to them? Accuracy has no real meaning if it's not a measuring contest.

 

[Digby]

Why does one have to be better than the other?

If the measurements are different, then it should be possible to decide which is closer to the source material. That would be the objective approach.

If they sound different, then personal preference could dictate which is better, subjective approach.

I don't agree that speakers, even the highest quality ones, are much of a muchness. If they are different then, logically, it should be possible to rank them as closer or further from accuracy to source, using measurements alone.

Subjectivity is an internal quality; it applies only to the person using it. That is quite proper use of it. To evangelize it and push it on to other people is not the proper use of it.

There is such a thing as group subjectivity, no? Perhaps an example of this might be that 'anyone should be happy with a speaker which measures well enough, if not then they are fault/should adapt'. This is a subjective opinion that holds some sway here, for instance.

I feel like the discussion is becoming a bit circular though and I'm at risk of repeating myself.

 

[Adi777]

I don't know if you have seen this, but what do you think most participant in a blind test would prefer, Revel Salon2 or JBL M2 Master Reference Monitor, what do you think you'd prefer? A blind test with a large and diverse pool of participant would answer your question about the speakers you mention.

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/sp...and-well-reviewed-speakers-ever-made.2907816/

Speaker Shootout - two of the most accurate and well reviewed speakers ever made.
Ever made? Have they tested every loudspeaker in audio history?
Somehow it's hard for me to imagine ...

 

[goat76]

Accuracy to what though, to stereo recording, is stereo recording accurate in capturing the signal of unamplified music/sound. The answer is no. Once one admits that stereo is very limited in providing accuracy, then much more is on the table.

Furthermore, nobody has yet spoken about how discern which, between a group of excellent speakers (Revel Salon 2, Genelec 8361, D&D 8c), is the most excellent. Isn't that where subjectivity is allowed some free reign?

Yes, and I think that window for what can be considered good speakers is fairly large. There is no such thing as the perfect speaker and a certain aspect can be more important to a particular listener than others. The most obvious one, like a linear response, doesn't have to be the most important aspect for everyone. I for one think most speakers are lacking when it comes to dynamic capability, I don't see much talk about that when people compare measurements.

 

[rgpit]

I think there needs to be a 5th option.

Yes, if recommended by another known and respected audio enthusiast

 

[Digby]

The most obvious one, like a linear response, doesn't have to be the most important aspect for everyone. I for one think most speakers are lacking when it comes to dynamic capability, I don't see much talk about that when people compare measurements.

Dare I say it... Yes, I will. Could it be there is a bias towards a certain type of speaker here at ASR? Usually relatively small speakers, which are easy to ship to Amir and save his poor back from loading them up on the Klippel stand.

Now, let me be clear, I am not accusing Amir/ASR of anything devious, but everywhere has a bias. The bias here would probably be toward linear response on and off access, and, quelle surprise, well engineered, small monitors are perfectly capable of doing this. You might even say it was their forte.

What isn't their forte? Well, as you say, dynamic capability.

Everything with speakers is a case of pick your poison. What you gain on the swings you lose on the roundabouts. There is no one speaker to rule them all, there are just too many factors at play.

One person's set of good measurements, might not be another's. You might like horns, I might prefer coaxial speakers. Narrow directivity is great for you, not so much for me, and so on. These are the kind of things that one often cannot determine from measurements alone.

You can get excellent speakers in such divergent designs as the JBL M2, Genelec 8361 and Revel Salon 2. Who can say which is best for you, only you and you alone.

I'd love to know the rate at which people who say they can pick a favourite from measurements identify the same speaker as their favourite in a blind test.

Sorry to quote myself, but this is what I'd really like to know. I'm willing to bet it isn't as strong a correlation as some would like to believe.

 

[ahofer]

Accuracy to what though, to stereo recording, is stereo recording accurate in capturing the signal of unamplified music/sound. The answer is no. Once one admits that stereo is very limited in providing accuracy, then much more is on the table.

Furthermore, nobody has yet spoken about how discern which, between a group of excellent speakers (Revel Salon 2, Genelec 8361, D&D 8c), is the most excellent. Isn't that where subjectivity is allowed some free reign?

We had *that* rather abstract debate in another thread, I forget where. Not that it is resolved. But for me, simply not enhancing or distorting the frequency balance of the signal presented is a desirable part of ‘accuracy’.

As for the second comment, I’m going to admit that….there are likely many great speakers I could be happy with. Not that I can’t tell the difference, because I think I can in many cases, but I suspect I could be long-term happy with either of those. Perhaps there are differences in my listening spaces that would dictate the choice. Sometimes this pursuit of THE BEST gets a little silly, and we split hairs for the sake of some kind of ordinal ranking.

I think a more interesting test would be a blind test, where people know which speakers are to be tested in advance, and rank them as per what they expect to prefer, then after the blind test we see what correlation there is between presumption and actual preference in test. Has anyone done anything like this?

I'd love to know the rate at which people who say they can pick a favourite from measurements identify the same speaker as their favourite in a blind test.

Indeed.

 

[Ricardus]

I bought some Dayton Audio MK442T's based on the strength of a few reviews including Gene from Audioholics.

 

[theyellowspecial]

I think the only proper audition can be had inside your listening space. I feel auditioning speakers outside the listening environment is similar to sitting inside a car at an autoshow.

 

[pseudoid]

You can have a number of excellent speakers (see quote below), measurement wise, that sound quite different to each other, for various reasons, so how do 'measurements only' people square that circle?
Peluvius said: And I mean Revel Salon 2, Genelec 8361, D&D 8c excellent.
They are all excellent, but likely they sound quite different from one another, probably different enough that they could be distinguished from each other in blind testing. If they are all excellent, but sound different from each, then which one is most excellent.[?]

Agreed!
But an answer to your question becomes even further complicated when the speakers purchased may require the addition of subs, surrounds and active EQ!
I threw in the towel long ago and prefer just two "decent' sounding floor-standing (~full range) speakers and ask no such simplistic questions anymore.

 

[Pearljam5000]

I would buy any Genelec without hearing them
They nailed the tonality for me so I like the sound regardless of the model