Lets not forget about your speaker cable choices as well......
I'm still waiting for someone to suggest a song that everyone will like! That should be easy after finding the perfect speaker! :lmao:
-
Feeling lucky? Check out the AK 24th Anniversary Giveaway thread and join in the fun!
Hard to swallow, sorta
- Thread starter roadie1
- Start date
I'm still waiting for someone to suggest a song that everyone will like! That should be easy after finding the perfect speaker! :lmao:
cableguy
In Twang We Trust
ozmoid
Lunatic Member
There you go, Bill! Nice to see you!
(And BTW, those Fraziers SUCK based on the output parameters and objective testing. You should let me dispose of them for you before you irretrievably damage your subjectivity.
)
cableguy
In Twang We Trust
There you go, Bill! Nice to see you!
(And BTW, those Fraziers SUCK based on the output parameters and objective testing. You should let me dispose of them for you before you irretrievably damage your subjectivity.
:lmao:
Naw, all I'm saying is the merit and value of preference or opinion must, by definition, be contingent upon the objective evidence it summarizes when the subjective is presumed to be inherently different for different observers.
If the objective is to ascertain which is better or worse in any sense, absolute or relative, then personal taste cannot have a role in that determination.
Alternatively, if taste rules absolutely, as some here posit, and there is, therefore, no better or worse, what of substance is there to discuss?
ozmoid
Lunatic Member
I bet you write a mean corporate memo.
Without taste, we would all be listening to APEX gear. I've often thought the best way to determine your speaker choice is to have your hearing plotted, then find a speaker that defeats your natural imperfections.
cableguy
In Twang We Trust
Zilch I respect your knowledge and obvious command and understanding of the technical aspects of speaker measurements and stuff.....But, music is as much or more about feelings and emotions and we are all moved by the many different facets regarding music. For me it is too difficult to quantify my emotions regarding how the music that I hear moves me. There is just no data sheet that can contain that much information....That and I'm completely deaf in one ear to boot.....As I said, I appreciate your opinions and flat out understanding of all that which I do not grasp, but I gotta go with sounds good to me. At the end of the day what else is there?
Peace,
Bill
This is simple, really. It's not about whether we like the artist, and not about whether we like the song. Neither is it about whether we like the system or the speaker, or how we or anybody else thinks it sounds, even. It certainly cannot be if we believe it sounds different to everyone.JimJ[VT];1272183 said:
Instead, it's about how accurately the performance as presented from the source is reproduced, and that, comprising the definition of "High Fidelity," is in large part, if not entirely, amenable to objective determination.
Read up, be pissed if you like (not at me, of course
,) then think about it, maybe:http://www.zaphaudio.com/evaluation.html
The fact that you can even ask this question proves my point entirely. If there is no "objective standard" that can correctly predict with 100% certainty what speaker everyone will enjoy (and there isn't), you're dealing with a subjective situation. Believe it or not, there is a "better and worse", but it's a personal judgement, and no two people arrive at audio nervana exactly the same. You can set up straw men, like the "what's better an edison reel or a hi-fi setup?", but you still can't make a speaker to fit everyone's tastes. What of substance is there to discuss? Look about and I'm sure you'll see plenty around you.
ozmoid
Lunatic Member
AH - we're talking about two different things, no wonder I'm confused.
I can listen to the crappy car radio and enjoy it, if I like the song - high fidelity can go fly at that point, I'm just enjoying whatever I hear on a visceral level.
I can appreciate better quality reproduction of the music, and in fact I LIKE better quality reproduction of the music... but I don't see a universal acceptance of certain speakers/systems based on their "High Fidelity" specifications. I read too many threads here both trashing and loving the same speakers in the same system. Bound to be something going on there that an spl meter can't read.
Exactly. That's not about the speakers, rather, the listeners. We only pretend it's about speakers.
If you want to know about the speaker, you look elsewhere, beyond opinion, because anybody else's opinion, unless it's a qualified or expert opinion (even then, dubious,) is in large part irrelevant.
And ultimately, we might also each look to our OWN opinions and preferences in the same light, and appreciate that what we subjectively perceive to be good or even best today may very well be erroneous in a larger and more absolute view, and there's a high likelihood that we'll be of different mind another time, as soon as tomorrow morning, perhaps.
I'm saying there's value to accrue in being more open to the "elsewhere" available to all of us, fact in lieu of opinion.... :yes:
alexkerhead
To High For Infinity
I think the word quantify has been used more times in this thread than all together on AK.
To be honest, I used to enjoy stacked JBL L100s and speakers stacked all over each other(I used to be an SPL Junkie), then zilch recommended some things that really opened my eyes.
I am not saying he knows the holy grail of audio, but he DOES know what he is talking about, and most of us would be doing ourselves an injustice to ignore his recommendations.
However, if one feels his/her stereo system is perfect, then don't worry about zilch's recommendations, you do NOT actually have to consider them. I tend to consider them however.
First step to an accurate system capable of reproducing emotion from the vocalists and musicians is to have as flat of a response as possible.
The first time I actually heard(the way it was supposed to be heard) 1812 overture was when I took zilch's recommendation to disable my mids and tweets in my L100s, stuff the ports, and use compression drivers with horns on top crossed over at 1500Hz.
I actually started to get teary eyed, something I never did when I was using my L100s, Large Advents, etc.
Thank you Zilch.
Music never sounded so good to me, I finally experienced REAL sound stage and imaging. Now, with zilch's and powerman's assistance, I am working on a set of really nice speakers(in my price range of course).
To be honest, I used to enjoy stacked JBL L100s and speakers stacked all over each other(I used to be an SPL Junkie), then zilch recommended some things that really opened my eyes.
I am not saying he knows the holy grail of audio, but he DOES know what he is talking about, and most of us would be doing ourselves an injustice to ignore his recommendations.
However, if one feels his/her stereo system is perfect, then don't worry about zilch's recommendations, you do NOT actually have to consider them. I tend to consider them however.
First step to an accurate system capable of reproducing emotion from the vocalists and musicians is to have as flat of a response as possible.
The first time I actually heard(the way it was supposed to be heard) 1812 overture was when I took zilch's recommendation to disable my mids and tweets in my L100s, stuff the ports, and use compression drivers with horns on top crossed over at 1500Hz.
I actually started to get teary eyed, something I never did when I was using my L100s, Large Advents, etc.
Thank you Zilch.
Music never sounded so good to me, I finally experienced REAL sound stage and imaging. Now, with zilch's and powerman's assistance, I am working on a set of really nice speakers(in my price range of course).
Here is a case in point that might be food for thought on this subject.
My Altec horns have 802-8G HF drivers on them. I like these very much as do many others.
We recently had a big discussion over in the LH forum about tweeking the Altec Valencia speaker system that many feel is lacking in HF extention.
Zilch offered to do the testing with his gear and publish the results.
I sent a pair of freshly rebuilt 802-8Gs and Zilch did the testing and published the results.
To my surprise, my 802-8Gs did not fair as well as I thought they would.
Gee, so many of us love them and spend big bucks on them and they don't cut the mustard quite as well as some other less expensive drivers!
The BMS 4550 certainly goes well above that which an 802-8G can produce and does it quite nicely for around $300 a pair.
One would think all they need to do is get a pair and your speakers will sound better.
I think this is a fair statement yet I still have my 802-8Gs installed and loving them and I have not bought the BMS's YET.
What the BMS's do much better is they go way higher in the HF band and remain quite stable long after the 802s have fallen off. Add some numbers here Zilch!
Now lets talk about the ears attached to my noggin. At 55 and having been around loud noises for most of my life and having a good deal of hearing loss,
I can't hear much beyond where the 802-8Gs fall off. Others certainly can and could benefit from the BMS drivers but for me or at least to me, it is a moot issue. Sure, my speakers could sound better but I can't hear the difference or added highs so why bother-----FOR ME?
My wife on the other hand has excellent hearing and would probably appreciate the new drivers and be able to hear the added HF and so would many others.
Right now my speakers work fine for me but they could be better for others by virtue of the testing that clearly proves the point.
To me, it's like blowing on a silent dog whistle. The dog goes whacky yet we can't hear a thing!
I think the object and what is being said here is speakers should be able to cover the full spectrum of sound that anyone can hear and do it accurately.
Just because my speakers sound good to me does not mean they are the end all, just that I am satisfied with how they sound.
If I ever build another set of speakers, I am pretty sure I would do it with the BMS drivers simply because I know they go higher and remain more stable and this would be perceived by others as sounding better.
BTW Roadie, Sorry if this thread has morphed a bit but it is a great discussion.
Gary
My Altec horns have 802-8G HF drivers on them. I like these very much as do many others.
We recently had a big discussion over in the LH forum about tweeking the Altec Valencia speaker system that many feel is lacking in HF extention.
Zilch offered to do the testing with his gear and publish the results.
I sent a pair of freshly rebuilt 802-8Gs and Zilch did the testing and published the results.
To my surprise, my 802-8Gs did not fair as well as I thought they would.
Gee, so many of us love them and spend big bucks on them and they don't cut the mustard quite as well as some other less expensive drivers!
The BMS 4550 certainly goes well above that which an 802-8G can produce and does it quite nicely for around $300 a pair.
One would think all they need to do is get a pair and your speakers will sound better.
I think this is a fair statement yet I still have my 802-8Gs installed and loving them and I have not bought the BMS's YET.
What the BMS's do much better is they go way higher in the HF band and remain quite stable long after the 802s have fallen off. Add some numbers here Zilch!
Now lets talk about the ears attached to my noggin. At 55 and having been around loud noises for most of my life and having a good deal of hearing loss,
I can't hear much beyond where the 802-8Gs fall off. Others certainly can and could benefit from the BMS drivers but for me or at least to me, it is a moot issue. Sure, my speakers could sound better but I can't hear the difference or added highs so why bother-----FOR ME?
My wife on the other hand has excellent hearing and would probably appreciate the new drivers and be able to hear the added HF and so would many others.
Right now my speakers work fine for me but they could be better for others by virtue of the testing that clearly proves the point.
To me, it's like blowing on a silent dog whistle. The dog goes whacky yet we can't hear a thing!
I think the object and what is being said here is speakers should be able to cover the full spectrum of sound that anyone can hear and do it accurately.
Just because my speakers sound good to me does not mean they are the end all, just that I am satisfied with how they sound.
If I ever build another set of speakers, I am pretty sure I would do it with the BMS drivers simply because I know they go higher and remain more stable and this would be perceived by others as sounding better.
BTW Roadie, Sorry if this thread has morphed a bit but it is a great discussion.
Gary
orionkc
Smooth
The first time I [I said:
So are there any speakers out there that meet the paramaters that are described above without having to take a second morgtage out on my house? :scratch2:
I currently have AR3, AR4X, Dynaco A-25, Canton Karat 60, Infinity RS3000, KLH-17, and some EPI-100W that need woofers and caps.
cableguy
In Twang We Trust
It has been a great discussion.....
um....what was the original topic?
With my age and apparent hearing deficiencies I am in that same boat. In spite of that I do remember that I found the sound of my 806 16ohm drivers to be extremely accurate, with amazing presence but fatiguing as well...once again that's how I heard them. I much prefer, especially over extended listening periods the Frazier Mark V's. I would be curious to find out what the data on their sonics is....:scratch2: This is not an attempt to dis the 806 driver and horn compliments, simply my experience....
And that is what this is all about....you found something that worked for you, and are now with the help of fellow Aker's pursuing that sound. :thmbsp:
I have been there...it was a lot of work and I usually ended my day dissatisfied with my results. No matter what I tried it was always just that much off and I was still having listeners fatigue. I finally decided that I was tired of all of the Voodoo and simply wanted to come home, turn on the rig and enjoy the sounds with out all of the fuss. I have been much more satisfied with my gear and my music ever since. My story is not intended to sway anyone one way or the other, simply it's what I found worked best for me....
I'm sure that answer is forthcoming...there a whole lot of great speakers choices and just as many stories and opinions within this forum...
Bill
Spoken like a true acolyte! Let me know when you've found the perfect speaker! :lmao:
In all seriousness tho, it's one thing to say "my goal is to make a speaker with ruler flat frequency response", it's another to say "this stack of data means speaker A sounds better than speaker B" when A and B are both very good speakers with their own followings. If there was a "right answer" and this hobby was strictly objective, contrary to what Zilch believes, THEN we'd have nothing to talk about (or, at the very least, that pesky "taste" component could be taken out of the equasion).
Hats off to Zilch and Powerman for helping Alex get a better stereo system. :thmbsp:
dnewma04
The Healer
I can relate to both sides in this thread to some degree but I tend to fall into the objective side of things because of my speaker building background. I enjoy reading Zilch's threads sometimes because despite being all about objectivity, he is not so secretly one of the single most biased posters I have read comments from. His love for JBL rivals that of Brennan's for Altec Lansing. He provides great measurements and most of the time valuable suggestions, but at the same time, I haven't heard the outcome of his work so I couldn't recommend his work to anyone at this point. Were I to build something similar to what he did, I may consult with him to get his input, but thats about as far as it would go. In fact, on a couple of occasions, I have done just that. What I do find interesting is that it has been often cited by JBL fans how Harman has the biggest and best research facilities and equipment in the world, yet their various groups have wildly different approaches to high end speaker design. The top notch JBL speakers use horns/large diameter drivers and the revel group, which is their extreme high-end home audio company share the same resources yet came up with very different approaches to building their no holds barred/cost is no object speaker. The Revel guys said that with an unlimited budget, they couldn't improve upon their TOTL speakers. JBL probably would claim the same. It just goes to show that there are always going to be different approaches to good sound. Even the Bose example has merit. They could give a flying **** about flat response, they claim that they make their speakers produce a sound that is appealing to the most people. Based on their sales, can you argue that they don't have the right formula?
Same goes for single full range driver zealots, despite having measurements that are often times all over the map with little bass, they feel they have reached their sonic nirvana with something that to me is compromised to the extent that I know I have a natural bias against most. Is there some merit to having crososver points in the middle of a speakers freq response, they'd certainly claim so.
Measurements with a mic and some cheap test equipment only tell part of the story, understanding the effects of the sound from a psychoacoustical side of thing will tell the rest. You can have speakers that measure 20-20khz +/- .5 dB in an anechoic chamber that will sound like utter hell in a room if placement forces them to be near a wall and they have wide dispersion. In that case, a heavily compromised horn system might just work out better in the room because of the dispersion characteristics.
What I am getting at is with the best equipment in the world, (quasi-)anechoic speaker response only tells a fraction of the story and without understanding human hearing/perception, it's impossible to predict if a speaker that measures flat will sound good. Even if the suggestion is that people don't understand what "good" is.
Same goes for single full range driver zealots, despite having measurements that are often times all over the map with little bass, they feel they have reached their sonic nirvana with something that to me is compromised to the extent that I know I have a natural bias against most. Is there some merit to having crososver points in the middle of a speakers freq response, they'd certainly claim so.
Measurements with a mic and some cheap test equipment only tell part of the story, understanding the effects of the sound from a psychoacoustical side of thing will tell the rest. You can have speakers that measure 20-20khz +/- .5 dB in an anechoic chamber that will sound like utter hell in a room if placement forces them to be near a wall and they have wide dispersion. In that case, a heavily compromised horn system might just work out better in the room because of the dispersion characteristics.
What I am getting at is with the best equipment in the world, (quasi-)anechoic speaker response only tells a fraction of the story and without understanding human hearing/perception, it's impossible to predict if a speaker that measures flat will sound good. Even if the suggestion is that people don't understand what "good" is.