Todays Speakers vs Vintage Speakers

But one doesn't have to spend that much to get very high quality new speakers with today's technological advancements. There are a host of new speakers in the $2,000 to 10,000 price range which sound wonderful.

I don't doubt that 2-10k dollar range retail can yield some good speakers.

However I still am not convinced that I can buy a new pair of speakers for $400 that will do more for me then my HPM100 or L110 speakers. Not even close.
 
Nope.

My point is that user reviews for speakers are not of much use and are flawed for a variety of reasons.

They are not something to use as a guide. You are going on and on about reviews and review methods. Why? No matter what, they will never be fully usefull.
Agreed unless the reviewer provides detailed test results starting with frequency response on axes and then provide off axes response up to 60 degrees off center, linearity responses at low and high volumes to see how they handle dynamic swings, to name a few.
 
Agreed unless the reviewer provides detailed test results starting with frequency response on axes and then provide off axes response up to 60 degrees off center, linearity responses at low and high volumes to see how they handle dynamic swings, to name a few.

I tend to look for 1watt, 1meter, full space. At what frequency is it down by 3db?

Power handeling specs....min, program, peak.

Cabinet construction. What materials are used? How thick? Weight? Finish? Bracing?

Materials used in driver construction. Driver technology used.

Cut and dry. Objective.

If the above checks out as per what I am wanting, I give it some consideration.

Spec sheets are good enough.

No need for "user reviews".
 
I tend to look for 1watt, 1meter, full space. At what frequency is it down by 3db?

Power handeling specs....min, program, peak.

Cabinet construction. What materials are used? How thick? Weight? Finish? Bracing?

Materials used in driver construction. Driver technology used.

Cut and dry. Objective.

If the above checks out as per what I am wanting, I give it some consideration.

Spec sheets are good enough.

No need for "user reviews".

It's always nice to have the opinion of someone who has never heard a speaker rate its capability. Keeps all that pesky subjective listening stuff out of the way of an informed buy or pass decision. Wish I had such talent.
 
Well, a bit. But not as much as it seems. $3000 today is equivalent to $450 in 1970. A pair of JBL L101 listed for $792 in 1970, that's $5200 in 2018 dollars. The JBL L120 listed for $1266 in 1974, that's $6800 today. The Klipschorn in oiled walnut were $2080 in 1974, that's $11,200. So while not as pricey as TOTL today, some of the vintage speakers were pricey in their day.
Well, just a skosh;)
skosh.jpg
 
My point is that user reviews for speakers are not of much use and are flawed for a variety of reasons. They are not something to use as a guide. You are going on and on about reviews and review methods. Why? No matter what, they will never be fully usefull.

Which isn't true.

DBT testing for cables is certainly fully useful. DBT testing for speaker sound is certainly useful when it says, this new thing doesn't sound any better than this older thing.

A tuner's sensitivity in an urban market with lots of multipath is something a reviewer can discuss which has value. How well a speaker converges in a small room can be meaningfully discussed.

This issue is varying shades of gray, with many overlapping Venn diagrams.
 
Well, a bit. But not as much as it seems. $3000 today is equivalent to $450 in 1970. A pair of JBL L101 listed for $792 in 1970, that's $5200 in 2018 dollars. The JBL L120 listed for $1266 in 1974, that's $6800 today. The Klipschorn in oiled walnut were $2080 in 1974, that's $11,200. So while not as pricey as TOTL today, some of the vintage speakers were pricey in their day.

Which is what is usually forgotten. The dollars must be scaled, factor of 20 for 1960, factor of 10 for 1970. Housing has risen many times the rate of inflation, so it isn't just good and services which are factored in.

In consequence, as Tom notes, those vintage speakers are being purchased at a steep discount. Yes, the manufacturing had a lot of handwork, so the price was higher than mass-produced items of today. But the fact is we can buy an awful lot of work for a fraction of the original cost.

That doesn't mean, of course, that old, wheezy speakers with poor sound are the best chioce. But it does mean that speakers which still sound great contain a lot of expensive engineering and manufacturing and we're essentially buying units at fire-sale prices.
 
I tend to look for 1watt, 1meter, full space. At what frequency is it down by 3db?
Power handeling specs....min, program, peak.
Cabinet construction. What materials are used? How thick? Weight? Finish? Bracing?
Materials used in driver construction. Driver technology used.
Cut and dry. Objective.
If the above checks out as per what I am wanting, I give it some consideration.
Spec sheets are good enough.

Honestly, none of those mean very much in the typical user space either.
What does a thick versus thin cabinet tell you about how it's going to sound in your living room? How does it's weight mean anything with the materials readily available today?
Does Kevlar have a different sound overall than coated poly? Does one sound more like a human voice than another?
Can you really tell the difference between aluminum and titanium dome tweeters?

I can't fathom why one thing means more than another. They both have their place. I really don't know why you would take one and not at least try the other. I like subjective reviews. And I like measurements. I find Stereophile (etc all) reviews entertaining and I enjoy paying for their magazines.
 
That doesn't mean, of course, that old, wheezy speakers with poor sound are the best chioce. But it does mean that speakers which still sound great contain a lot of expensive engineering and manufacturing and we're essentially buying units at fire-sale prices.

A very true statement.

I think in there are some really good vintage pieces that stand the test of time. The rest are just "nostalgia", and that's ok too.
 
Which is what is usually forgotten. The dollars must be scaled, factor of 20 for 1960, factor of 10 for 1970. Housing has risen many times the rate of inflation, so it isn't just good and services which are factored in.

In consequence, as Tom notes, those vintage speakers are being purchased at a steep discount. Yes, the manufacturing had a lot of handwork, so the price was higher than mass-produced items of today. But the fact is we can buy an awful lot of work for a fraction of the original cost.

That doesn't mean, of course, that old, wheezy speakers with poor sound are the best chioce. But it does mean that speakers which still sound great contain a lot of expensive engineering and manufacturing and we're essentially buying units at fire-sale prices.
Thank goodness for the 20-30%'ers buying habits back when, although today's 1%'ers probably have less mundane things to do than to critically listen to music.
Not to say they can't or shouldn't whip out the Bank of Dubai Royale credit card for a set of MBLs;)
 
What does a thick versus thin cabinet tell you about how it's going to sound in your living room? How does it's weight mean anything with the materials readily available today?

Uh, ever hear of cabinet resonance?

Cabinets with resonance issues higher up sound worse than ones which resonant at lower frequencies. This is basic audio engineering.

The materials available today are the same ones available back then: MDF and plywood. Yeah, sure, some exotics are used, but nearly all speakers are MDF or plywood.

Does Kevlar have a different sound overall than coated poly? Does one sound more like a human voice than another? Can you really tell the difference between aluminum and titanium dome tweeters?

If you can't, some boys with a white van have the perfect speakers for you. Left over from an installation. Price is cheeeeap. You'll discover that an ABS tweeter, ok, really just a rattlecan cap flipped around with a silver spot in the center is every bit as good as an actual soft dome.

I find Stereophile (etc all) reviews entertaining and I enjoy paying for their magazines.

Ummm, ok. Those magazines should be shipped in a plain brown wrapper so that nobody knows you're getting it.
 
Honestly, none of those mean very much in the typical user space either.
What does a thick versus thin cabinet tell you about how it's going to sound in your living room? How does it's weight mean anything with the materials readily available today?
Does Kevlar have a different sound overall than coated poly? Does one sound more like a human voice than another?
Can you really tell the difference between aluminum and titanium dome tweeters?.

The things I mentioned mean more to me than how a speaker sounds in a space other than mine with gear other than mine and listening habits other than mine.
 
A spec sheet is 20times more usefull if you know how to read it and understand it.

Dude, I'm an electrical engineer. I know how to read those things. The problem is that specifications for speakers aren't really useful because real music isn't a sine wave of increasing frequency and the spec sheets conceal a lot of shortcuts and bad design factors. Every speaker is rated 20 to 20k, but that doesn't mean it really is linear across that range or actually hits the targets.

Many speakers lack impedance compensation and poorly reproduce music but the frequency response chart looks sort of ok because it's been re-jiggered for that. Change the scale and all that.

Then there are the issues of cored inductors vs. air core, and electrolytics vs. film. Or bypassed film vs. unbypassed film. Not present on the chart.

Or a reversed midrange because someone didn't understand the difference between phase shift and polarity. (Yeah, who but an engineer would understand that. Ok, maybe someone with ears that worked?) Again, not present on the chart, but certainly audible.

Plus cabinet resonance.

The biggest issue is phase shifts and group delay from higher-order crossovers and poorly designed baffles. Doesn't show up on the chart, but this is audible. Higher-order crossovers have more phase shift than Elvis doing his shimmy on The Dorsey Brothers Stage Show.

None of that shows up in the printed specifications. Which is a problem. Because it makes the speakers sound bad.

Ok, it doesn't show up in the reviews either, because the reviewers are cargo cultists who probably couldn't tell any the difference between the speakers being reviewed and a pair of ear buds.
 
Uh, ever hear of cabinet resonance?

Cabinets with resonance issues higher up sound worse than ones which resonant at lower frequencies. This is basic audio engineering.

You missed the qualifier. But that's ok. I know reading is hard.
 
The things I mentioned mean more to me than how a speaker sounds in a space other than mine with gear other than mine and listening habits other than mine.

And has been proven over and over again that many speakers sound identical to the human ear in an anechoic chamber, which many of those readings come from, which tells you exactly nothing about how they will sound in your space.

The specs also won't tell you how they sound with your equipment, nor anything about how they will sound listening to your music.
 
Back
Top Bottom