Shouldn´t all Good Speakers Sound Similar?

Judas Priest

Super Member
If speakers have a similar measured frequency response (in room), shouldn´t they sound basically the same?

Is the voicing of some speakers, which their fans like, a boost or cut in certain frequencies?
 
That would be saying that each top-of-the-line instrument a musician plays will sound the same - not so! There are far too many variables that makes it impossible.

Isn't that great, though? This means that we all have lots of choices for our own preferences!

Cheers,

David
 
First off, define "similar". Many speakers have a +/- 5 dB variation. Also, measured frequency sweeps are static tests. One freq. is outputted, a reading is taken, then it moves to the next freq, stops and takes a reading, and so on and so on. So it's really a lot of individual frequency readings that are graphically strung together to make a composite that you can read. But dynamically, the world changes. "In room" response is dependent on the room itself. If the room has say, a 180 Hz standing wave, some speakers will excite that freq, while others that might have a dip in it's response, won't excite it. That will make a difference.
So my answer is no. The only true way to tell is to measure it in an anechoic chamber, which negates the room response.
 
Frequency response is but one measure of a speaker’s performance. What I find equally important is its directivity - the uniformity by which it delivers those frequencies.

At one end of the spectrum, you have horrible examples like the JBL L100/4311 where both the woofer and midrange are driven beyond their optimum range causing a “shrinking” of perspective at the top of their respective ranges - only to mate with the next driver that is sitting in its sweet spot exhibiting vast contrast. Very much like the effect of a “fun mirror” where certain frequency bands deliver a different width than others.

I discovered as a teenager that I was particularly sensitive to this fundamental aspect of coherency. Which is why I’ve chosen full range electrostats for over forty years.

One pebble in the pond. Getting a colllection of drivers to radiate identically is a challenge.
 
Frequency response is but one measure of a speaker’s performance. What I find equally important is its directivity - the uniformity by which it delivers those frequencies.

At one end of the spectrum, you have horrible examples like the JBL L100/4311 where both the woofer and midrange are driven beyond their optimum range causing a “shrinking” of perspective at the top of their respective ranges - only to mate with the next driver that is sitting in its sweet spot exhibiting vast contrast. Very much like the effect of a “fun mirror” where certain frequency bands deliver a different width than others.

I discovered as a teenager that I was particularly sensitive to this fundamental aspect of coherency. Which is why I’ve chosen full range electrostats for over forty years.



One pebble in the pond. Getting a colllection of drivers to radiate identically is a challenge.


I think this may be one of the factors that often lead to my preference for two-way bookshelf speakers over larger multiway models in small rooms, where one must sit nearby.
 
Frequency response is but one measure of a speaker’s performance. What I find equally important is its directivity - the uniformity by which it delivers those frequencies.

At one end of the spectrum, you have horrible examples like the JBL L100/4311 where both the woofer and midrange are driven beyond their optimum range causing a “shrinking” of perspective at the top of their respective ranges - only to mate with the next driver that is sitting in its sweet spot exhibiting vast contrast. Very much like the effect of a “fun mirror” where certain frequency bands deliver a different width than others.

I have to take umbrage with this statement. I have always found that JBL (true) studio monitors to be the most accurate speakers out there. I used a pair of 4311's in a recording studio for three years and after many LP's and singles were cut from them, I got many fine compliments about the balance of the mixes. If the speakers were "horrible examples", the mixes wouldn't have translated so well to other systems. A producer from the Power Station in NYC once commented that he thought it was a 'Pro' 2", 24 track recording, yet it was only a semi-pro 1/2" 8 trk. recording. "Further to impale thought", I use JBL 4208's at work, the "pot belly" ones. They do look silly but sound so perfect with flat EQ and proper volume.
 
I have to take umbrage with this statement. I have always found that JBL (true) studio monitors to be the most accurate speakers out there.
Sorry to hear that.

II used a pair of 4311's in a recording studio for three years and after many LP's and singles were cut from them, I got many fine compliments about the balance of the mixes. If the speakers were "horrible examples", the mixes wouldn't have translated so well to other systems.
Asking a 5" midrange to radiate a 2.26" wavelength will result in a decidedly pinched polar response at that frequency.

While not part of my main objection, they are also quite colored in their response. Boom sizzle. A faithful reproducer would not exhibit overt peaks at 50 hz and 6 kHz. Although I would agree there are many who find those colorations *entertaining*. The "mixes" represent the frequency balance, and fortunately not in compromised directivity and imaging of the consumer's experience.

I am aware that a number of rock recordings were mastered by them in the 70s. Perhaps that explains why so many sound thin in the bass when using speakers with neutral, aka “accurate” response.

Fortunately, in the age of smarter guys like Floyd Toole, you find that JBL corrected its overt mistakes with the current crop of monitors. Using virtually the same size drivers, the LSR6332 crosses the 12" woofer at 250 hz (not 1.5 kHz) and the 5" midrange at 2.2 kHz (not 6 kHz) where both drivers are operating in their optimum ranges. Do the math!!

This is basic speaker design understanding.
 
Last edited:
I think this may be one of the factors that often lead to my preference for two-way bookshelf speakers over larger multiway models in small rooms, where one must sit nearby.
I post on another website and got to know a retired engineer who is quite an Advent fan who also had a pair of JBL L110s - the neutral sounding sibling to the colored L100. Business took me to his city a number of years ago and he graciously invited me to spend an evening with him. My only regret was that I couldn't spend enough time enjoying his company and sharing our experience. I stayed until about 2:00 AM and had an appointment only six hours later!

We first listened to a couple of tracks with his highly modified Advents. Sounded quite familiar and coherent. We then switched over to the JBLs. They were both more neutral sounding in the midrange and the tweeter had superior extension at the top. But what struck me immediately was its bizarre imaging. Instruments that spanned both the midrage and tweeter took on the "fun house" mirror character I mentioned previously. Total lack of coherence in a very critical region that took my attention away from the music.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom