Isn't everything really subjective as far as speakers?

I'm only a Lemmy fan because of Hawkwind and the participation of a favorite sci-fi writer, Michael Moorcock.
I started a book of his. Something about a prince with white skin, sorta like a Vlad type, but not....hell, I cannot remember the title.

Wasn't bad. And yet I never got around to finishing it. Same with "The Vampire Lestat" but I digress.
 
There's nothing wrong with that, but just realize that the guys that spend big bucks on gear that has great specs and such do so knowing that sitting in that sweet spot is where you really get to see what a nice stereo setup can do. Things like stereo imaging, soundstage, depth, and instrument seperation(just to name a few) on a well recorded track is when the music really comes alive. I guess my point is that most of the benefits one gets by using nice, properly set up gear is all for not if you aren't using it as designed.

And I appreciate the guys that are able and willing to spend the big bucks. I envy their ear for sound. But I am stuck with my own ears and can only go by my own experiences. Which is why I mentioned color blindness. Can you describe to me the color red and how you see it? Definitely not. As I have looked through my eyes all my life, it is impossible for me to describe how I see the world. Now, describe to me how you hear sound........
 
Things are subjective to a point but I scratch my head when I encounter old men with a house or several filled with speakers but their hearing is so shot the can’t even hear a conversation in a totally quiet room

And then they come here with strong opinions about this speaker versus this speaker
 
My bottom line....Is anyone really an authority on the best sounding speaker for someone else's taste, experience and, most importantly, ability?

Couldn’t have said it any better!

For example, I’ve always liked my highs a bit subdued, I think it brings out so much more midrange and midbass detail that is otherwise obscured by excessive cymbals, etc. Most here (and other places) like a lot of highs, and very sharp tweeters. Not me. Don’t get me wrong, I like them accurate, just not overpowering.

Joe
 
To paraphrase Yogi Berra -

Speaker appreciation is ninety percent subjective and the other half is just what you like. ;)

In the golden days everybody had stereos. Big box stereo stores, department stores, appliance stores, Fedco, Gemco, PX’s, etc. You could by LoFi to MidFi on every corner. Then there were the Audio Salons for the upmarket gear. You’d have to go out of your way to not be exposed to tons of speakers. Now not so much and specs won’t get the uninitiated very far.
 
My bottom line....Is anyone really an authority on the best sounding speaker for someone else's taste, experience and, most importantly, ability?
This is a question most often asked by those who already know the answer in the back of their mind and just can't quite meet it face to face for whatever reason.

Of course, the answer is "yes".

He's called an engineer, whether a mastering engineer, recording engineer, or FOH(front of house) engineer his job is based largely around ensuring the quality of what everybody else hears.

Here's a recording/mastering engineer some of you should immediately recognize. His name appears, not on one, not on a dozen, but rather on 100's of gold and platinum albums, some of which are right in your own collection.

20170222bobby.jpg


Certainly in the consumer world of wankery and heartfelt sentiment, subjectivity rules. This would include a large portion of the AK membership. That's neither a bad or good thing, it just is.

A competent audio engineer knows precisely the sound that the majority of us will prefer, it's what he gets paid those big bucks for.

In the real world of professional audio, the standards are much different. Subjectivity is replaced by math, physics, and quantitative analysis. A professional engineer, his clients, and even an informed segment of their audience knows how it's going to sound before the music ever starts.
 
Last edited:
. Most here (and other places) like a lot of highs, and very sharp tweeters.
Joe
And this highlights another aspect. The input you get depends on who sees and wants to reply. This is not the impression I get at all. Joe's description on how he likes his highs is the impression I get from the site., His impression of the site I see as the minority.
 
Compressed answer, subjectively objective, or objectively subjective:idea:...take yer pick.

Mitigating variables: budget in mind, size/type of room, main genre listened to, type/power of sound source, vint or non-vint and of course the SO's opinion, if you have one.

Q
 
It also depends on what you put all your stock into as well. If it's all about the music for you, you may not be too worried about how good it sounds. (Thus 99% of the millennials)
And you don't miss what you've never known to be.
 
Speaker Designers and manufacturers can only strive to create the best speaker. Many have been moving that bar higher for decades as more and more is understood and becomes measurable and as materials and processes improve.

The goal is accurate, although there are tradeoffs in the designs and each Designer / Engineer makes his choices. Cost is of course one of them and most (successful) businesses look to Marketing to decide the performance and cost targets for the Engineers.

Most of these designs strive to be as flat and perfect as can be in an anechoic environment. Others take into account the imperfect environment and are tuned to take advantage of that variable.

I have a brother who's made a living designing pro equipment into professional environments. He is making scalpels, not butter-knives.

Scalpels are not very good at spreading butter, you might like spreading butter.

So then you get into why people might like a vintage AR or KLH more than a new JBL monitor. First, it isn't being set up professionally, second it is not going into an optimized space, third it isn't for critical monitoring, it's for musical enjoyment.

I spent much of my life spreading butter with scalpels, every time a better scalpel came out I had to try it. Speakers, amplifiers, even sources are completely subjective in a home environment, we like what we like. If you like the warmth of tubes, fried-egg tweeters, vinyl, that is what's best for you. If you want a system that is perfectly accurate in every way, you will need a completely different system.

So to me the answer is both. You need objective data to get a baseline, without it the world would be only white-van speakers. We can compare speaker specifications (if we understand them) and make some choices based on what we feel will match our systems, our spaces, our expectations, our budgets, and our tastes. From that point we go back to the subjective, audition them and decide what we like.
 
I don't care much about a "sweet spot". Just not a sit still person but I respect and admire those that can simply sit back and enjoy the end result. I'm way too adhd for that.

Not even while you're listening to 2112? (Avatar reference)
 
Not surprised by the OP's line of thought.
When a speaker discussion starts with; Music is background and My hearing isn't great, then I get it; specs and detailed testing are totally unimportant to speaker selection.
 
Budget is definitely a factor. I COULD afford a moderately expensive system but would not be able to justify it considering my ability and listening habits. Many people who have lost most of their hearing have their brains fill in the missing parts and, therefore, are able to enjoy music they are familiar with while new, unheard compositions sound awful.

As I stated before, God bless those that have "super hearing" and the budget to fulfill their demands.

Someone else mentioned data and that may be the only true reference when comparing equipment. It really depends on the end user. Kind of like our tastes in music. I'm heavy metal/70s hard rock, blues and pop, whereas a person that enjoys smooth jazz or contemporary hip hop would find it to be just noise even if it is played on a 20k system.
 
Your speakers, use what you like. DONE. It isn't a debate.

What I like, you may not.

Bravo. I would say this applies to all components, but it certainly applies to speakers.

Random thoughts:

- In the 80s I read an article in Audio or Stereo Review, about how Japanese made speakers were some of the flattest, most accurate speakers from a spec standpoint. (Feel free to argue with this, I'm only relaying what someone else wrote.) The article also said that many people found these speakers to be unsatisfying and... flat sounding - uninspiring. It went on to basically say that the "imperfections" in speaker curves are often what give speakers character and we end up enjoying these more because they allow us to experience the music the way we would like to experience it. I suppose EQs would be another example of this. I'm guessing if purity of the recorded information was what people really wanted, EQs of any kind wouldn't be necessary.

- I still enjoy/require that certain radio listening be done on a small radio with terrible fidelity. Listening to the ballgame or background music while I'm in the kitchen are two examples. In these settings the low-fi sound just seems right. I don't always desire everything I hear to be hi-fi. Sometimes it's better when it isn't. - There's that subjectivity again.

- Speakers are the voice of our systems. While we want everything else to be as accurate as possible, some people are moved by Gladys Knight. Some by Pavorotti.

It's all good.
 
Back
Top Bottom