Who would buy a speaker without listening to it?

[Gregss]

Hello,

As I build my own speakers with plans from some quite highly regarded people on the web, yes I have bought without hearing them.
If you have enough reviews from others who seem to have good knowledge of the issues enough to design them, to do extensive testing and using good quality components, it isn't much of a risk. Also, lots of good reviews from others who have built them helps make sure they are at least decent. And yes, need to keep in mind that the quality of the crossover network is very important to the final result. So far they have turned out quite good enough that if I didn't like something about them, I could have sold them for what I paid for them.

FWIW,
Greg

 

[srrxr71]

I try to understand why someone would think that when they listen to Genelecs (and I would imagine D&D, Neuman and similar excellent actives). Maybe there is some individual and unique physiology at play? This would lend credence towards always listening before buying also. Curious to me.

Perhaps too accurate. I add about 2dB to 0-200Hz and then it sounds “moist”.

I think there is a happy medium between 100% accurate and the Hi-Fi sound we grew up with. Good thing digital pEq has made its way into the speakers.

 

[Peluvius]

As I said before; it depends on the individual agenda. Each person has their own end goal. Some people concentrate on accuracy, some do not. Your (or my) viewpoint of the matter may not be applicable to other people.

I firmly believe that it is not for us to pressure other "seekers" into acceptance of our personal goals and methods, but to give them the mental tools (and the electronic tools) they need to find out what their agenda truly is, and also how to satisfy that agenda. I believe accuracy is the basis and foundation of music reproduction, that it comes first and foremost before other learning considerations, and it is the bole from which other branches are derived.

To that end, I have never said which speakers I have now, which strengths and weaknesses I believe they have, how they are arranged, which amp and preamp I have and what my sources are. I believe a word here or there would amount to endorsement, and I believe it's not appropriate to endorse, even by insinuation.

I believe the education I received was intended to enable me to stand on my own two feet and make my own decisions. I've made those decisions, both in my career and my hobbies. Music played on my system sounds good .... to me. I wouldn't expect anyone else to agree.

Jim

Some of my very finest memories have been with my line in the water. So much more rewarding that walking around the fish markets....

 

[tim916]

I bought the Revel M105 without hearing them, though I already owned the M16. However, if I had the money and the space I would even buy the 328be unheard because I trust Revel's engineering principles, the measurements, and reviews on this site and others.

 

[Shadrach]

I'd prefer to be like that, I really would, but it is not so much listening for faults, but things making themselves apparent. I don't agree that, with no real effort, a person who can hear a difference between one good speaker and another are 'pissing around' though.

If that was true, there would be one perfect speaker and that would be the end of it. Most people agree there is no such beast.

There are an awful lot of factors that could influence what one considered to be the perfect speaker when trying to make a judgement by listening.
A few of these are:
listening space
speaker positioning
recorded material
mood
memory
price
How many speakers would one have to listen to and under what conditions before one arrived at a definite conclusion?

The advantage of measurements (assuming they are reasonably accurate) is they don't change, while my perception changes all the time. It's not even a case of my senses being unreliable. It's more that today they may tell me one thing and tomorrow another.

 

[Burgunder]

I bought Kef R100 without listening to them, since they were cheap, and I could always sell them or give them to one of my 5 children if I didn't like the sound.
Now they are my main speakers waiting for some subs. But subs are rather expensive here in Denmark.

 

[Mnyb]

Hmm my thougth is that a goal like "end goal for a music-listening consumer to be satisfied with how the music sounds to them?" is logically impossible to get in a single pair of speakers with no tone controlls and no EQ ? Try as you might, welcome to the endless upgrade circus

Every videophile accepts that a TV and projector might need some kind of calibration re white balance black levels and other minutia and does not expect even the best projector to produce the desired picture without tuning ?

Should we really expect any pair of speakers to sound "just rigth" without any kind of tuning/adaption to local variations? I'm not so sure anymore?
Can a speaker be seen as a kind of "acoustical projector" instead of musical instrument? I'll try that approach next upgrade?

 

[SDC]

My Genelec Revel JBL KEF never listened before I bought them. I believed official measurements they give. (Not blindly but still it worth more than a listening session to me)

 

[DavidEdwinAston]

Well, I'm strongly considering Sierra LX's on the sole basis of sweetchaos passive speaker listing, plus very good contact from Ascend Acousrics!

 

[Somafunk]

Ive bought every speaker/item of hifi throughout my life without hearing it first as i live in a very rural area of Scotland, admittedly I’ve owned very few such items as once I buy then that’s good enough for myself. Tannoy 605 (early 90’s) Alesis monitors (early 2000’s) KRK monitors (2010/2018) and recently Dynaudio Lyd 48’s + Dynaudio 18s sub.

Been very happy with all. I have to admit I’ve never actually set foot in a hifi store in my life

 

[thegeton]

I bought the Revel M105 without hearing them, though I already owned the M16. However, if I had the money and the space I would even buy the 328be unheard because I trust Revel's engineering principles, the measurements, and reviews on this site and others.

I bought a pair of Revel M16s from another ASR member without hear them, based upon the same premise as yours. Totally satisfied with this purchase.

 

[MattHooper]

Me
Listening loudspeakers before buying them is just a waste of time and energy as they always interfere with the listening room (for better or worse). I believe it is easier to select them according to some criteria like objective measurement/budget/look etc.
Then you can EQ your brand new loudspeakers to your own listening room and taste.

I can see why that approach works for some people!

In my case I've always found in-store auditions to be very informative and helpful in my speaker searches. It's certainly true that the room affects the sound. But for one thing, as Floyd Toole has often pointed out, we are actually good at "hearing through" the effects of a room to the direct sound and character of a speaker, above a certain frequency range. Secondly, when I audition speakers I can usually play with speaker and listener positioning, getting it close to how I'd set them up at home. Additionally, I listen from all sorts of angles - below axis (crouching/slouched) above axis (or standing), off-axis, more distant seating position, close seating position. I even walk around the room listening to how the speakers sound from all angles and how it's interacting with the room. By the end I have a very good "picture" of the general character of that speaker. And I've never been surprised by the sound of a speaker in my room, that I originally auditioned in a store.

YMMV of course, and we all have our methods.

 

[MattHooper]

I can understand why some folks here "don't trust their sighted listening" as they would measurements. And therefore you can look to measurements to identify speakers that have designed via blinded research to sound good to most people. Sighted bias may mean your ears may lie in the store, so instead depend on the science.

But there's an interesting conundrum hiding in there.

If we take our hearing as so unreliable to perceive real characteristics of a speaker in sighted conditions, then what does it matter how they scored in blinded conditions? You will be listening sighted, and the sound you "hear" that way will be the sound you "hear." It doesn't matter if a speaker has a great blind listening score IF your sighted listening will distort what you perceive that badly! That goes for if you care about "accuracy/neutrality" as well, since what use is a neutral-measuring speaker if your sighted perception can never be "neutral" and will skew what you hear?

One can say "Well, my sighted listening may be unreliable for auditioning speakers, but a well-measuring speaker will prove to be more satisfying over time because it doesn't have the flaws that may attract me to a speaker in sighted auditions."

But that again assumes that you CAN rely on your sighted listening to actually, even if eventually, accurately apprehend the character of a speaker. Because if you couldn't, then predicting any satisfaction from the measurements - short or long term - would be impossible and meaningless.

This is one reason why I have argued sighted listening for speakers can still be valid. I care about measurements to a degree, but ultimately want to hear speakers for myself. The measurements can be useful because they CAN predict to a degree what I will hear...and that is only possible if I'm capable of identifying the sonic characteristics in sighted listening. So I can actually skip the measurements if I choose and just rely on what I hear to tell me if I'll like the speaker under the sighted conditions I'll be using them.

 

[Madlop26]

I can understand why some folks here "don't trust their sighted listening" as they would measurements. And therefore you can look to measurements to identify speakers that have designed via blinded research to sound good to most people. Sighted bias may mean your ears may lie in the store, so instead depend on the science.

But there's an interesting conundrum hiding in there.

If we take our hearing as so unreliable to perceive real characteristics of a speaker in sighted conditions, then what does it matter how they scored in blinded conditions? You will be listening sighted, and the sound you "hear" that way will be the sound you "hear." It doesn't matter if a speaker has a great blind listening score IF your sighted listening will distort what you perceive that badly! That goes for if you care about "accuracy/neutrality" as well, since what use is a neutral-measuring speaker if your sighted perception can never be "neutral" and will skew what you hear?

One can say "Well, my sighted listening may be unreliable for auditioning speakers, but a well-measuring speaker will prove to be more satisfying over time because it doesn't have the flaws that may attract me to a speaker in sighted auditions."

But that again assumes that you CAN rely on your sighted listening to actually, even if eventually, accurately apprehend the character of a speaker. Because if you couldn't, then predicting any satisfaction from the measurements - short or long term - would be impossible and meaningless.

This is one reason why I have argued sighted listening for speakers can still be valid. I care about measurements to a degree, but ultimately want to hear speakers for myself. The measurements can be useful because they CAN predict to a degree what I will hear...and that is only possible if I'm capable of identifying the sonic characteristics in sighted listening. So I can actually skip the measurements if I choose and just rely on what I hear to tell me if I'll like the speaker under the sighted conditions I'll be using them.

The problem of sighted listening bias is highly correlated with low sample size in my opinion; in the reality of the difficulty doing a proper blind testing.
I bought the SVS ultras few years ago, sounded great to me but Amir measured them, they did well, but he noticed something weird in the highs, to me they sound sounded just great so I kept them, One year ago I got the Revel M16, Put them as B speakers and Ultras as A speaker, able to switch them with one click, initially yes the ultras had more highs but I thought still sound good to me, so I kept both, switching them frequently when listening music, over months and months doing this I noticed I was listening the Revels more and more, then learned about the Harman song used for speaker tonality research, after a more methodic AB testing, yes there is something wrong with ultra highs and in one of this songs it was just not pleasant , but the Revels were so great. So after a quit big sample size of AB testing, I found out with great certainty I like the Revel better, I can tell you I could not reach that conclusion with a single audition, in statics sample size matter and in these matter may be important too. But probably with more experience listeners they need quit less sample size than me. The question is now; how much sample each of us need for reliable results...

 

[Blumlein 88]

I can understand why some folks here "don't trust their sighted listening" as they would measurements. And therefore you can look to measurements to identify speakers that have designed via blinded research to sound good to most people. Sighted bias may mean your ears may lie in the store, so instead depend on the science.

But there's an interesting conundrum hiding in there.

If we take our hearing as so unreliable to perceive real characteristics of a speaker in sighted conditions, then what does it matter how they scored in blinded conditions? You will be listening sighted, and the sound you "hear" that way will be the sound you "hear." It doesn't matter if a speaker has a great blind listening score IF your sighted listening will distort what you perceive that badly! That goes for if you care about "accuracy/neutrality" as well, since what use is a neutral-measuring speaker if your sighted perception can never be "neutral" and will skew what you hear?

One can say "Well, my sighted listening may be unreliable for auditioning speakers, but a well-measuring speaker will prove to be more satisfying over time because it doesn't have the flaws that may attract me to a speaker in sighted auditions."

But that again assumes that you CAN rely on your sighted listening to actually, even if eventually, accurately apprehend the character of a speaker. Because if you couldn't, then predicting any satisfaction from the measurements - short or long term - would be impossible and meaningless.

This is one reason why I have argued sighted listening for speakers can still be valid. I care about measurements to a degree, but ultimately want to hear speakers for myself. The measurements can be useful because they CAN predict to a degree what I will hear...and that is only possible if I'm capable of identifying the sonic characteristics in sighted listening. So I can actually skip the measurements if I choose and just rely on what I hear to tell me if I'll like the speaker under the sighted conditions I'll be using them.

Circle of confusion. You can break it.

Anybody here go thru lots of speakers and find they like one for this kind of thing and another for another kind of thing, but keep finding others and switching out pretty often? Did you eventually even sighted and no other info than listening and owning them finally find some you could settle down with? Some you didn't swap out so quickly? That was my experience and what I observed with others I knew.

I don't know how it is now. I think we were more social in the past as in actually went and spent time with friends. I have had several audiophile friends and other acquaintances which let me visit them or they me and hear lots of different gear. Part of it initially when I was a young adult was economic. Later as I could put more into it, it became more about getting all the various good things I had heard. I didn't ever get the perfect speaker, but I managed to find some lacking character that irritated me and also had some of the character I was looking to find. I still went thru a few that I loved at first, but they didn't wear well over time. I remember one of my friends saying something about some expensive renowned speakers he finally acquired. He said, "2nd happiest day of my life was when I got those home. Happiest day of my life is when someone bought them and took them away."

I think quick switch blind listening can point to what the best speakers are. I do think deficiencies wear on people over time. Something we don't have data on. I don't find I ever became dissatisfied with a speaker because it was too good at something. It has always been deficiencies that eventually either cause me dissatisfaction or I recognized even if I learned to work around or live with them.

Even now speakers sound different. I find the well designed ones may be deficient in a more narrow context and usually in ways you can do something about. Minor FR differences even in Harman designs sound a little different. We also have DSP based correction that can narrow that difference significantly. I also get how a clean, flat speaker might sound less exciting in some ways. Usually that excitement also can become too much. Now I like panels. Even with their problems. They look cool to me in a way no boxes do. I like when someone never having seen or heard them ask, "are those speakers, is that where the sound is coming from, how does that work?"

 

[krabapple]

'Auditioning' speakers outside their intended room is basically superstition. Auditioning them in your room without 'room EQ' (physical or electronic) and hoping they will just happen to interact really well is a game of chance.

Solution: buy speakers that measure decently in a Klippel or anaechoic chamber, and apply 'room EQ' as needed. And use a subwoofer or two.

 

[Purité Audio]

Insist on home evaluation, really it is the least your dealer should do, measure EQ etc etc.
Otherwise what is the point of them.
Keith

 

[MattHooper]

'Auditioning' speakers outside their intended room is basically superstition.

I don't know what "superstition" means in that context. Certainly an in-home audition is ideal, but often not possible.

In practice (rather than superstitious theory) for me, auditioning speakers in show rooms has always worked out well for my purchases. YMMV.

Solution: buy speakers that measure decently in a Klippel or anaechoic chamber, and apply 'room EQ' as needed. And use a subwoofer or two.

Indeed. That is a good solution for some people.

 

[MattHooper]

I believe the problem with auditions is not the problem of sighted bias. I believe there two other problems.

1) Is the salesman honest? Has he tweaked the setup? Did he add anything to (just for instance) enhance the bass? I have heard many people ... and I mean MANY people ..... say the same thing: "They sure don't sound anything like they did in the showroom!" Is it all due to sighted bias and room acoustics? Each and every instance?

2) And talking about room acoustics ......... even if the salesman is honest, that doesn't mean that the speaker will produce the same sound in your home as it did in the showroom. Some rooms might produce results that are slightly different, and some rooms might produce results that are a great deal different.

So for me, the problem is not sighted vs. unsighted listening. Jim

I can certainly understand those concerns.

I think perhaps, then, it may have to do with the efforts of the individual - to what degree you take things in to your own hands when listening to speakers at a store.

Yes, if you just walk in and the salesman has set up the speakers in a specific spot, and the listening chair in a specific spot, and you don't really know what else is going on with sources or whatever, I can definitely see the vulnerability.

But as I've mentioned I've always taken a more active role. For speakers that I'm truly serious about possibly buying, I will have the speakers placed out a similar distance from the back wall as I use in my room set up. I will place them in the same arrangement in terms of width and my seating distance. I will fiddle with these parameters as necessary, and also check the sound from a variety of angles.

I've done this with a long list of speakers (both that I owned and reviewed) which includes all sorts of different types of speakers - Electrostatics, omnis, big and medium floor standing, stand mounted etc - and not once did a speaker sound substantially different once I had it in my room afterwards. The essential characteristics I heard in the showroom were all there. Just took some more tweaking around of positioning etc once in my room.

(Actually I can think of a single example now: The Harbeth SuperHL5 plus speakers. I auditioned them in the store in an absolutely gigantic whare-house like room. At home in my far smaller room they sounded exactly the same in every way, except I was never satisfied with the relative lack of image depth vs my other speakers. I don't really remember if I noticed that 'problem' in the store though).

 

[pablolie]

The only speaker I have every bought without auditioning it was the original LS50. And that worked very well.

However, the other 5 speaker pairs I have owned were always auditioned. Either at my Dad's (I "borrowed" a pair of speakers to set up my system in my university studio) or in a good shop with a decent listening room. But it was always important to have the right to return the equipment. Which I have only done with one pair of speakers, by the way.