AudioNervosa
Systemic Development => Speakers => Topic started by: canyoneagle on January 18, 2007, 09:12:42 PM
-
Like many here, I've played with countless speakers (in the proper context of synergistic systems). Everything from apparently perfect 'specs' to speakers that defy the specs with the experience they provide.
A good illustration of this contrast (IMO) would be Quad versus B&W.
Personally, I've done extended at-home demo with B&W Nautilus(and similar statistically optimal products) and felt that the experience was not even close to what I've experienced with other (not so 'perfect') speakers. Granted, the 'spec jocks' sounded very nice. They just didn't involve me. I felt like they coldly presented the source material for my analysis.
I can appreciate that precision.
However, that is not the reason I listen to music. I listen from an experiental perspective, and find connection to other realms as a result. It is sort of like the difference between analyzing a water sample in a test tube versus the deep nourishment that can only be experienced by drinking the water itself.
In the Audiophile realm this makes me a 'music lover'.
If anyone else here has seen the youtube video on the Athens audiophile club, it seems apparent that at some point, this is the experience we all seek, regardless of the path.l
Any thoughts?
Warmly,
-
I did see that Athens Audiophile piece and enjoyed it. I was happy to see the gents seems to know the extent of their preoccupation. It was also nice to see the passion, humor and obession. I saw pieces of myself in them. I must say when the one gent. clicked the (pepper grinder) anti-static gizmo over his turntable I almost lost it though. I mean it was truly like he was preparing an aural feast, all the labor and attention to detail, and that pepper shaker was there last hint of flavor. I laugh every time I think about that. Only a music lover could understand that, if my wife saw me do that I doubt she'd ever look at me with a straight face again.
I always envisioned having two systems.
System 1: The Forest
System 2: The Trees...
-
Loudspeaker systems fall victim to many things. The room, amplification and source material for the most part.
With source material, the mixing and mastering processes and the loudspeakers being used during these events (and rooms) have a significant bearing on the presentation of the recorded and assembled art.
This variable alone is very noteworthy.
If loudspeaker manufacturers choose to voice their loudspeakers using program material that is sonically inferior then you have another 'can of worms' involved in the fray.
Universal testing methods have not been universally established.
With loudspeakers..the "pick your own poison" method applies.
In the 70's, the JBL 4310/11 control monitor was the dominant device for making artistic judgments of the presentation. the translation of this loudspeaker DID cause many manufacturers to design "loudspeakers which would work well" with recordings from that era. The same thing is happening now.
The inverse curve of the mastering/recording facility is the result in a production. If the mixing monitors have too much bottom, the engineer will compensate for that and you end up with a universally "thin" sounding production. as is the inverse of that.
I personally "dont care for" the presentation of music projected through most of the B&W loudspeaker line..(myself) but this does not mean that the industry will quit using such loudspeakers in the professional realm.
it is a pity that some loudspeaker manufacturers are using inferior productions as a gauge to voice their loudspeakers. Who knows WHAT productions are truly "good enough" to use for loudspeaker voicing?
You will find many conflicting answers..all of which may be "correct" for the person doing the answering.
-
Great post! Two of my personal examples:
Stereophile review of the Yamamoto A-08 SET amplifier. I own the successor, the A-08s. The subjective reviewer loved it, JA trashed it, I think he even speculated whether it was broken. BTW, I LOVE mine.
45 minutes in a dedicated room with my music on Wilson Alexandrias and $100k worth of "perfect" Halcro, etc. electronics. My buddy and I just walked out shaking our heads. BTW, we heard three pairs of speakers that day and agreed the DeVore Super 8's were the best. I've heard them two other times and those are really nice speakers.
Can measurements define the space created by a system? How about the 2nd and 3rd harmonics that give body and life to an instrument? Do they measure soundstaging/imaging properties? (the latter are "false" qualities, IMO, the province of systems/listeners who have not discovered the first two)
I've heard systems with measured "flat" response that sounded dead. I'd speculate one way to achieve flatness is to pad everything down to the lowest denominator. Of course, this makes for boring listening but measures great!
I think this inquiry is at the heart of our obsession. While solid engineering and expertise is absolutely needed to build the great gear we need, there is an element of art that creates the special magic separating greatness from the also-rans.
The lesson here is that when you find a really special piece, try not to sell it. You never know when it might be needed again.
-
I state a nice example, concerning the watt /Puppies./
Lets fall back to 1995. During that time, engineering in a full scale production facility. Main loudsepakers were the Westlake BBSM10's. the mixdown i was working on contained 41 channels and the translation I was getting between the Westlakes, the meter bridge monitors and my home system was very consistant. At that time I had MG20 Mags.
I was very concerned of one channel, sub bass, the producer (French) called the channel "graves" and most of the info was 16 to 25Hz on that channel. Watching cones, listening to the Westlakes and even the car audio system, I obtained a level balanced between the 'graves bass' and the regular electric bass guitar track. All systems displayed the extra weight and even the fundamentals (mainly) of this 'graves' bass line.
A local dealer had Martin-Logan, Wilson, Krell, Meridian, you know..typically higher end gear. He also had a recording facility in his back room. The name Don Turnipseed was the proprietor.
(you can look up "Turnipseed music" on the web.)
With DAT master in hand, we preceded to listen to the Krell/Meridian/Watt-puppy system.
Ill defined and wrong is what I heard. The Wilsons simply could not reproduce the lower end with any kind of authority. Not even proper in the 'weight' perspective. The top end sounded small and the midrange was 'closed in and boxy" and this was a nice room. We moved the speakers around. They just could not "track" the performance that was on the DAT.
Sorry for writing a mini novel here but if this does not tell you...from direct production to listening room if a problem is happening or not, I don't know what is.
NOW, if I had of mixed this production on the Watt/pups, then it would have sounded great on them and everything else would have sounded out of balance.
I take issue with the fact that some mastering engineers use the B&W speakers as the "holy grail" and well, look at the state of many modern productions. Only if you have the B&W's are you to be "close" but they are far from level as it compares to the last 40 years of high fidelity productions. they (engineers and speaker systems) are manipulating the art in a direction away from established balances.
-
I take issue with the fact that some mastering engineers use the B&W speakers as the "holy grail" and well, look at the state of many modern productions. Only if you have the B&W's are you to be "close" but they are far from level as it compares to the last 40 years of high fidelity productions. they (engineers and speaker systems) are manipulating the art in a direction away from established balances.
I have listened to the B&W 805s (fatiguing treble) and 802D (very nice treble but vocal and piano were not natural). I was dissappointed.
-
Hey, I'll be the first to bash anything recent from B&W... but I thought most studios used special studio speakers... which no one uses in hi-fi. I had the EXACT same reaction as you to the Watt-Puppy's... I think that's just their character.... it sounded like that on everything. However, there was a guy that LOVED them sitting right next to me at a huge hi-fi shop in NJ. I was speechless.... I don't know if he bought them but I left so I didn't have to see that train wreck. ;)
I get the feeling that many 'masters' at production houses put little more thought into the process other than whether they've put all the ducks in rows or not by some formula. The best analogy I can think of is Human Resources puts a check next to every skill you have.... and if those checks = job 123, you are qualified for job 123. To take it a step further, I would wager there are execs at the top saying, make this one REALLY LOUD! IT'S GOING TO THE YOUNGER DEMOGRAPHIC... or there's someone pulling the strings that doesn't know crap about music quality but has industry wisdom to make money, the heart of the music 'business'... not the music 'art' that we appreciate.
We live in the gray as audiophiles, constantly analyzing and questioning our choices to reach the pinnacle of enjoyment... Many of us find the journey as fun as the destination.
I like finding the nuggets of art in the music world that someone decided to craft carefully. Having a great hifi helps me appreciate it even more... and that's where I get a lot of enjoyment.
-C
-
Can measurements define the space created by a system? How about the 2nd and 3rd harmonics that give body and life to an instrument? Do they measure soundstaging/imaging properties? (the latter are "false" qualities, IMO, the province of systems/listeners who have not discovered the first two)
I've heard systems with measured "flat" response that sounded dead. I'd speculate one way to achieve flatness is to pad everything down to the lowest denominator. Of course, this makes for boring listening but measures great!
In part, I think you've just described what I believe makes my system so satisfying to my wife and I.
My approach to achieving satisfaction in my system begins and ends w/ the speakers. IMO, if I'm to learn anything about what I'm hearing from the rest of my equipment, the speakers must be as absolutely neutral and measure as flat as possible. IOW, they must be truest form of transducer, uncolored to the extreme.
I believe I have about as uncolored a speaker as I've ever heard in the SP Technology Timepieces... at least at anything approaching their price point. But since they are so uncolored, and since they are so revealing, they will produce the most heinous sound imaginable if paired w/ the wrong equipment. Similar results are wrought even if paired w/ the right equipment if listening to poorly mixed/mastered/recorded material.
And here's where your points come into play...
My Butler Monad monoblocks were designed so that very pure 2nd order harmonics are intentionally produced. Sure, other distortion is present as well - due in part to the use of the BK Butler-spec'd 300B on the output stage - but I believe the 2nd order harmonics do most of the important stuff. The auditory result of the Monads + Timepieces (or any of the SP Tech line, actually) is dumbfounding... and I mean that in the best possible way. :wink:
I can hear so deeply into the music, be made aware of every detail of everything recorded, and have it presented to me in a way that is so musical, so real, so satisfyingly organic that I can't wait to hear the next movement, song, or CD.
That said, nothing is w/o trade-offs, and my system is no different. If the recording is average or worse, my ears pay the price. That really sucks when the song or CD is something I really like to listen to in the car or on the radio, but such is life. I'd rather have the ability to get lost in the depth and breadth of a good or better recording than have everything sound just OK. Given how good some of my favorite material sounds, it's a trade-off I'm more than willing to make.
-Jim
-
Well said! I'd love to hear the Monads sometime. I have a funny feeling they will be reknowned classics, as they are spoken of in hushed tones - a REAL tube amp, but with massive muscle.
And, I've heard nothing but good about the Timepieces with the caviat that proper amplification is an absolute must.
Hmmm . . .
Nice work.
-
Hi Jim,
I agree with all you said...except.. :lol: ......
...bad recordings are gonna sound bad no matter what.
WEEZ
-
Well said! I'd love to hear the Monads sometime. I have a funny feeling they will be reknowned classics, as they are spoken of in hushed tones - a REAL tube amp, but with massive muscle.
And, I've heard nothing but good about the Timepieces with the caviat that proper amplification is an absolute must.
Hmmm . . .
Nice work.
Thanks, Mike. If you ever find yourself in the unfortunate position of being in Mississippi, look me up and we'll see about getting you that Monad audition.
Hi Jim,I agree with all you said...except.. :lol: ......
...bad recordings are gonna sound bad no matter what.
WEEZ
How ya doin', my friend? Hope your father's still doing well.
While I am in general agreement with your point, I will say that the difference between how a "bad" recording sounds via the Daedalus DA-1s (great speakers in their own right) and the SP Technology Timepieces is startling. IOW, there's bad, and then there's BAAAAAAAAAAD! :wink:
BTW, I'm heading up to TN this weekend to see Dad (recently deemed terminal :() and engage the ex- in a little court action.
All in all, a fun-filled 4 days I'm thinking. :roll:
Take care, all.
-Jim
-
Jim,
Sorry to hear about your dad :cry: .
As for mine...still in remission and doing well.
As for recordings...did you ever notice that some of the older rock stuff when played back on a high resolution system....every thing sounds splashy?...like only the tweeter is working? :shock:
Zip me an e-mail if you have time to stop in Cookeville...
-
As for recordings...did you ever notice that some of the older rock stuff when played back on a high resolution system....every thing sounds splashy?...like only the tweeter is working? :shock:
That is one of the reasons I like having a sub (that I can choose to use or not) that is easily adjustable.
Most of the time this means having a separate remote controlled preamp just for the subwoofer.
Not exactly less is more, but I like it.
Lin :D
-
Lin,
I've come to the conclusion that some recordings just have no bass. :?
I've been buying some older stuff on CD that I either used to have on LP and lost at a beer party years ago; or simply never bought at the time 'cause there was too much to choose from back then. :-({|=
I mean, some of these recordings really suck :-&
I try to listen past it though....
WEEZ
-
Lin,
I've come to the conclusion that some recordings just have no bass. :?
I've been buying some older stuff on CD that I either used to have on LP and lost at a beer party years ago; or simply never bought at the time 'cause there was too much to choose from back then. :-({|=
I mean, some of these recordings really suck :-&
I try to listen past it though....
WEEZ
I agree, maybe the albums were mixed using Yamaha NS10Ms? (the ones with the white cones and NO bass, not sure when they first appeared) and the engineers didn't even know there was supposed to be bass in the mix. :lol:
I guess the upside is you can use almost fullrange single driver speakers and not miss anything. :roll:
Lin :D
-
Jim.....Sorry to hear about you Dad....
Chris
-
Jim,
Sorry to hear about your dad :cry: .
As for mine...still in remission and doing well.
I'm really happy to hear that. I'll continue to keep you both in my thoughts and prayers.
As for recordings...did you ever notice that some of the older rock stuff when played back on a high resolution system....every thing sounds splashy?...like only the tweeter is working? :shock:
Yep, and like you, I've come to the conclusion that some recordings are simply absent bass. Goodness knows the Timepieces will tell me all about it if it's there. :wink:
Speaking of which, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention how amazed I am by the Timepieces' improvement since Bob's last...what?...adjustments? Whatever they are, EVERYTHING is better. The only real issue I had w/ them before - the highs - is solved in spades, and the midrange and bass are as good as any I've heard this side of the Revelations.
I really hope you make it down my way sometime so I can have someone other than my wife confirm what I'm hearing. :wink: Good music, good company, and Kandy is an amazing cook. At least 2lbs gained per meal, guaranteed! What's not to like? :lol:
Zip me an e-mail if you have time to stop in Cookeville...
Not this time, my friend. We went through Chattanooga, K-ville and straight up to Kingsport on the way up, and Tuesday we'll be leaving immediately after my court date with the female anti-Christ so we can be back at work Wednesday.
Will DCI be coming to MTSU this summer? If so, that'd be a GREAT time to get together. Otherwise I'll let you know next time I/we visit my sis in Murfressboro.
Jim.....Sorry to hear about you Dad....
Chris
Thanks, Chris. It breaks my heart seeing him in his current state, but he's my Dad, and I'll take every opportunity to be with him while it still matters.
-Jim
-
Jim,
I'll let you know if there's a DCI event in Murfreesboro...most likely there will be. Those are kick-ass shows.
Good luck buddy.
Lin,
Yup. Bad mixing...OR...using crummy microphones in the first place. But in the end, there's still some good music and you just have to let your imagination fill in the missing information.
WEEZ!