Keldog
Active Member
You win best analogy .
Okay...you got me. I admit to centering myself for 21 minutes with my eyes closed.
Isn't everything really subjective as far as speakers?
- Thread starter Keldog
- Start date
You win best analogy .
Okay...you got me. I admit to centering myself for 21 minutes with my eyes closed.
hbucker
Well-Known Member
Don't know about you, but I've heard some very realistic sounding speakers when playing recordings of unamplified music.
Tiver
Enjoy the music
I guess no one can decidedly tell another what speakers sound best, but I can tell you I have heard speakers that sound really good to me. I expect they would sound really good to a lot of listeners.
Someone mentioned comparing site and sound. SpecificalIy color. I am not sure that's a good comparison. Site has other attributes that are subjective and one can describe.....dark, light, intense, fuzzy, surreal....subjective because they require an experience to compare against. The assumption that comes with the description is that another has some experience of their own and can come to some subjective understanding based on their experience.
Sound has the same experience based subjectivity. Terms like sound stage, depth, separation, speed, control, forward, bright, muddy,.....they are all attempts to convey the listener's experience in a way another listener might have some baseline for comparison. Sometimes it's nice to get something more than, "Man those sound good." Other times the gobbledygook just gets in the way.
Someone mentioned comparing site and sound. SpecificalIy color. I am not sure that's a good comparison. Site has other attributes that are subjective and one can describe.....dark, light, intense, fuzzy, surreal....subjective because they require an experience to compare against. The assumption that comes with the description is that another has some experience of their own and can come to some subjective understanding based on their experience.
Sound has the same experience based subjectivity. Terms like sound stage, depth, separation, speed, control, forward, bright, muddy,.....they are all attempts to convey the listener's experience in a way another listener might have some baseline for comparison. Sometimes it's nice to get something more than, "Man those sound good." Other times the gobbledygook just gets in the way.
When we come across a set of speakers somewhere we have never heard, we post and ask for opinions. Regardless of anyone’s hearing, you look for a overall positive or negative response, which helps you make the buying decision.
Everyone knows we all hear differently, the environments, amplification sources bla bla can make a big difference. But, I want to know if a specific speaker is well regarded and has a large positive following or not. That barometer is just as important in the buying decision.
Everyone knows we all hear differently, the environments, amplification sources bla bla can make a big difference. But, I want to know if a specific speaker is well regarded and has a large positive following or not. That barometer is just as important in the buying decision.
invaderzim
Super Member
One day my wife made the mistake of leaving me in the speaker room at a Magnolia HiFi while she used the restroom. The salesman left me mostly alone so I just ran the switcher and listened to every single speaker they had and I only liked one out of the entire bunch. I would have to imagine that plenty of people that go in there like many of the other speakers better.
musichal
poet emeritus
I recall someone who did not want to read a single subjective opinion about a speaker's sound, further claiming that all he required was the standard spec list and would know just from that exactly how a speaker sounds. Pretty neat trick, I say. I'm not that good.
Perhaps facts get in my way. Like the -3db low frequency extension, for instance. Say one speaker has a spec of 32hz and another 37hz. Some guys look at those figures and think the lower one will also sound deeper, but many of us are wondering about things like the crossover slopes, or comparing the woofer sizes, or cabinet sizes, or speaker type, whether ported, sealed, or other. We wonder whether both can play 40hz with the same authority, and low distortion. Does one of them have a tendency to boom without a lot of space behind them?
Or perhaps we are looking at top end extension. Does the speaker that reaches further always sound better? Where do I find an indication of slightly exaggerated sibilance in those specs? What type of dispersion pattern did the designer use as his paradigm - a controlled dispersion (a la Klipsch), or a wide one (like my Brystons, designed with smooth polar response as a priority)?
Same type of issues for the mid/woofer in a three-way.
I want to see the specs, certainly. But I just as certainly don't claim that I can hear the specs. I also want to read the opinions of a variety of experienced listeners. I absolutely know that I can provide more useful subjective comments now, than I could when I was 20, even though my hearing was more acute then. I've had the opportunity to listen to a variety of damn good speakers over the years, but there are other guys aboard AK with even wider experience than mine. I value such input.
When selecting speakers - as I have recently done - then I want to see the specs, of course. Even more, I want to read the subjective comments of as many experienced listeners as I can find. I was not able to demo my last two major speaker purchases, making speaker reviews essential for my speaker selection process.
No, everything is not subjective, but there are a lot of subjective factors involved.
Perhaps facts get in my way. Like the -3db low frequency extension, for instance. Say one speaker has a spec of 32hz and another 37hz. Some guys look at those figures and think the lower one will also sound deeper, but many of us are wondering about things like the crossover slopes, or comparing the woofer sizes, or cabinet sizes, or speaker type, whether ported, sealed, or other. We wonder whether both can play 40hz with the same authority, and low distortion. Does one of them have a tendency to boom without a lot of space behind them?
Or perhaps we are looking at top end extension. Does the speaker that reaches further always sound better? Where do I find an indication of slightly exaggerated sibilance in those specs? What type of dispersion pattern did the designer use as his paradigm - a controlled dispersion (a la Klipsch), or a wide one (like my Brystons, designed with smooth polar response as a priority)?
Same type of issues for the mid/woofer in a three-way.
I want to see the specs, certainly. But I just as certainly don't claim that I can hear the specs. I also want to read the opinions of a variety of experienced listeners. I absolutely know that I can provide more useful subjective comments now, than I could when I was 20, even though my hearing was more acute then. I've had the opportunity to listen to a variety of damn good speakers over the years, but there are other guys aboard AK with even wider experience than mine. I value such input.
When selecting speakers - as I have recently done - then I want to see the specs, of course. Even more, I want to read the subjective comments of as many experienced listeners as I can find. I was not able to demo my last two major speaker purchases, making speaker reviews essential for my speaker selection process.
No, everything is not subjective, but there are a lot of subjective factors involved.
Last edited:
I dunno, when I broke into your house and brought my speakers with me I thought they sounded way better than your Pioneer's. BTW, I also set the time on your VCR!
As I've gotten older something one of my mentors told me decades ago makes perfect sense to me now: Get the midrange right first.
When I was younger, I thought that was the *easy* thing to do. Years of experience, however, have proven otherwise to these ears. I enjoy the extremes, but for me the most important indicator of fidelity lies where most instruments and voice inhabit. That's part of my subjective bias!
And yet they still have their own preferences.
Bob Ludwig's Egglestons are very different speakers than those from ATC, B&W, Genelec, JBL, Neumann, etc. used by other engineers.
I'm beginning to believe that no speaker pair is going to sound alike to any 2 people, in different rooms or the same. Call it preferences, hearing deficiencies, and music tastes or a combo of all 3. Unless you are going for true realism of a live acoustic event, just go for what you like, because it is very subjective when not comparing with the concert hall performance.
Sound engineers are not, as far as I know, all that interested in accurate sound. They need to hear what is on the tape, certainly, but that can lead them to use speakers that are bright or peaky by listening standards - the Yamaha NS 10 springs to mind - and then once they have whatever mix they want, they are famous for adjusting that mix to sound good on Auratones or other speakers that give some sense of what the final mix will sound like in a car.
Bugetnirvana
Active Member
^^^^ Decibles, distortion, frequency response, etc. have nothing to do with subjectivity. It's either there or it isnt.
This hobby is really weird in that it's built on scientific theory and advanced engineering, but peddles it's products to a crowd with a broad cross section who are either ignorant of the science or actively rebel against the process and value of measurements. How exactly do you pair a speaker to an amp if you don't comprehend the measurements? You're guessing. Badly.
As for speakers in a room, speakers are typically designed to be in a generic space. They're not intended to behave as the anechoic measurements published suggest. A speaker that's -6dB at 32Hz is going to be flat to that in the intended size room with typical placement.
I listen in a somewhat odd shapes space, but I've taken measures to minimize the effects of the asymmetrical space fairly well. Rooms do need to be tailored to the speakers. I don't think my acoustic issues are an engineer's problem, nor should they be. I don't think a speaker should be designed to sound good in a lousy room because it will sound lousy in a well sorted room.
As for speakers in a room, speakers are typically designed to be in a generic space. They're not intended to behave as the anechoic measurements published suggest. A speaker that's -6dB at 32Hz is going to be flat to that in the intended size room with typical placement.
I listen in a somewhat odd shapes space, but I've taken measures to minimize the effects of the asymmetrical space fairly well. Rooms do need to be tailored to the speakers. I don't think my acoustic issues are an engineer's problem, nor should they be. I don't think a speaker should be designed to sound good in a lousy room because it will sound lousy in a well sorted room.
Keldog
Active Member
I disagree. This hobby is built on the love of music and the delivery of it to our ears. The vast majority of people just like pretty lights and lots of buttons. The relatively few that seem to enjoy science and engineering more than the music.
Last edited:
Grenadeslio
Lunatic Member
I know of no-one more ADHD than I, I feel sorry for you that you're unable to reap the benefits to your condition in chilling to some righteous tunes, maybe firing up a fatty would help lol.
Grenadeslio
Lunatic Member
Well when it comes to music, by sitting in the sweet spot lol.
