WIW you cannot say you care about tone but do not care
about frequency response. >>
I care much more about tone than frequency response. I can say this and I do say this!
DHT I'm guessing is double heater triode, fair enough, but not typical for most.>>
No, it's directly heated triode. Directly heated tubes, especially with tungsten filaments, have a special vividness and detail. The difference is audible enough to prefer using only these for amplification. You're quite right to say it's not typical - it's very unusual, even though it has a fanatic following. On the other hand it's commonplace to prefer directly heated triodes like the 300b. The art is to also use the smaller DHTs like 26, 10Y etc.
It seems you want things described in your terms, but they
are relatively imprecise, there is no bias in using other terms.>>
No, I'm being very precise here. I want the tone of acoustic instruments to sound as lifelike as possible. That's an objective reference.
FWIW the worst hifi i've ever heard in my life was owned
by a talented musician>>>
That's an old argument, which doesn't mean much at all. Professional musicians play constantly in real life musical situations, and practice and rehearse hours every day. They don't need much recorded music, and anyway a lot of the music is in their heads anyway. I think many are resigned to the idea that recorded sound won't sound like live music so there's not much point in pretending. They can happily listen to the radio in the kitchen, knowing that in a few hours they'll be onstage with real music. On the other hand, orchestral musicians who hear really lifelike systems can be quite thrilled by them.
It may help to differentiate the ESSENCE of life from the REPRODUCTION of life. If you take 36 portraits of the same person they will all be accurate, but only four or five will clearly capture the essence of the person. Even a cartoon, which looks nowhere like the person's actual features, may be truer to the essence of a person than a photograph. As an engineer you may be used to talking in terms of faithful reproduction - a cartoon is no use for a passport for instance. But as a performer I'm talking and thinking in terms of essence.
As for speakers, I prefer panels. I also had stacked quads and they were thrilling. I've had Maggies and Apogees. All good. Right now I don't have the space so I'm downsizing, but if not I'd drive panels with an all-DHT system. I might be tempted to get some Quad 57s again though I really don't have the space. I'm reasonably happy with Jordan JX92s - full range drivers are clean and organic sounding at their best. Open baffle would be nice, but again don't have the space. So I'm going to try a 2-way build, simpler the better. Looking at Scanspeak 7" speakers or maybe MTM. I once swore I'd only listen to panels and in an ideal world and a big room with good acoustics - which has already been mentioned as a priority and I agree - but looks like I need plan B. I'm surprised to find out that for me amplification is more important then the speakers. It's only recently I'd make that statement and I'm quite surprised at it.
andy
about frequency response. >>
I care much more about tone than frequency response. I can say this and I do say this!
DHT I'm guessing is double heater triode, fair enough, but not typical for most.>>
No, it's directly heated triode. Directly heated tubes, especially with tungsten filaments, have a special vividness and detail. The difference is audible enough to prefer using only these for amplification. You're quite right to say it's not typical - it's very unusual, even though it has a fanatic following. On the other hand it's commonplace to prefer directly heated triodes like the 300b. The art is to also use the smaller DHTs like 26, 10Y etc.
It seems you want things described in your terms, but they
are relatively imprecise, there is no bias in using other terms.>>
No, I'm being very precise here. I want the tone of acoustic instruments to sound as lifelike as possible. That's an objective reference.
FWIW the worst hifi i've ever heard in my life was owned
by a talented musician>>>
That's an old argument, which doesn't mean much at all. Professional musicians play constantly in real life musical situations, and practice and rehearse hours every day. They don't need much recorded music, and anyway a lot of the music is in their heads anyway. I think many are resigned to the idea that recorded sound won't sound like live music so there's not much point in pretending. They can happily listen to the radio in the kitchen, knowing that in a few hours they'll be onstage with real music. On the other hand, orchestral musicians who hear really lifelike systems can be quite thrilled by them.
It may help to differentiate the ESSENCE of life from the REPRODUCTION of life. If you take 36 portraits of the same person they will all be accurate, but only four or five will clearly capture the essence of the person. Even a cartoon, which looks nowhere like the person's actual features, may be truer to the essence of a person than a photograph. As an engineer you may be used to talking in terms of faithful reproduction - a cartoon is no use for a passport for instance. But as a performer I'm talking and thinking in terms of essence.
As for speakers, I prefer panels. I also had stacked quads and they were thrilling. I've had Maggies and Apogees. All good. Right now I don't have the space so I'm downsizing, but if not I'd drive panels with an all-DHT system. I might be tempted to get some Quad 57s again though I really don't have the space. I'm reasonably happy with Jordan JX92s - full range drivers are clean and organic sounding at their best. Open baffle would be nice, but again don't have the space. So I'm going to try a 2-way build, simpler the better. Looking at Scanspeak 7" speakers or maybe MTM. I once swore I'd only listen to panels and in an ideal world and a big room with good acoustics - which has already been mentioned as a priority and I agree - but looks like I need plan B. I'm surprised to find out that for me amplification is more important then the speakers. It's only recently I'd make that statement and I'm quite surprised at it.
andy
Actually, one is a trained Muscian and has a degree in Music (among several others), besides owning a SOTA recording/mastering studio.
Another one owns perhaps the finest Audiophile grade CD Label in the World and was a very widely known Music and Equipment reviewer in Asia for several decades before coming to the United States.
Another is a regular writer for Positive Feedback and has, IMHO, perhaps the greatest auditory memory of anyone I've ever met. He also spends many hours a day listening to music.
The last has a Ph.d in Math and Physics, is retired from a certain software company in Redmond, Washington and is a lifelong lover of music, as was his father before him. He has a great depth of knowledge and understanding of music, and is interested mostly in Jazz and Classical music.
All of them own excellent equipment and are fanatics for the best reproduction of music.
As a trained musician, perhaps you could point out which labels you've recorded on and how many were sold of your solo recordings. I'm assuming from your attitude that you must be in a rather elite group.
BTW: The next time you see YoYo Ma, will you say hi for me?
Best Regards,
TerryO
I don't think we need to be fanatical about who is or isn't a musician. Many people are musical but don't play. Others play but aren't musical. Also, there are some great musicians who work entirely with electronic music, and aren't interested in what a bassoon sounds like.
My own preferences for timbre and tone come from many years of playing almost entirely acoustic music - it's just that my ears are very tuned to acoustic instruments. Doesn't mean I'm a better or worse musician for that. Orchestral players are highly attuned to timbre - it's their living.
If your preference happens to be for acoustic music I think there's a lot to be said for constantly hearing music live. It actually doesn't sound like "hifi" very much. In many ways it's very bland - no added excitement or "presence". What it does have is a very clean and relaxed sound, and of course the natural tone of the instruments.
andy
My own preferences for timbre and tone come from many years of playing almost entirely acoustic music - it's just that my ears are very tuned to acoustic instruments. Doesn't mean I'm a better or worse musician for that. Orchestral players are highly attuned to timbre - it's their living.
If your preference happens to be for acoustic music I think there's a lot to be said for constantly hearing music live. It actually doesn't sound like "hifi" very much. In many ways it's very bland - no added excitement or "presence". What it does have is a very clean and relaxed sound, and of course the natural tone of the instruments.
andy
well fair enough Terry O if thats the case then please let me know who the winners were as their designs might help me. I was obviously getting a little bit a head of myself there with my comments.
No I am not a musician
Yes i do believe i am in an elite group, and this thread has clearly helped highlight this. Otherwise we would all be singing from the same hymn sheet and by now i would have been given a shed load of ideas, and there would have been numerous manufacturers capturing the essence of music with their designs.
Unfortunately, this thread has shed very little light except for Andy's amplifier suggestion, which is rather intriguing.
No I am not a musician
Yes i do believe i am in an elite group, and this thread has clearly helped highlight this. Otherwise we would all be singing from the same hymn sheet and by now i would have been given a shed load of ideas, and there would have been numerous manufacturers capturing the essence of music with their designs.
Unfortunately, this thread has shed very little light except for Andy's amplifier suggestion, which is rather intriguing.
Last edited:
Hi,
I'm not a trained musician, painfully self taught and not that good.
Flat for the sake of flat is not flat, its what sounds best, not what measures
best, but it usually measures fairly flat. I do not what light you would like
shedding. You think there are shed loads of ideas related to what you are
talking about, but you've barely defined what that is, and your implication
that most manafacturers cannot "capture the essence of music" is contrary
to what you posted earlier listing those you claim that can.
You seem to want lots of exotic conjecture as the path to nirvana.
rgds, sreten.
I'm not a trained musician, painfully self taught and not that good.
Flat for the sake of flat is not flat, its what sounds best, not what measures
best, but it usually measures fairly flat. I do not what light you would like
shedding. You think there are shed loads of ideas related to what you are
talking about, but you've barely defined what that is, and your implication
that most manafacturers cannot "capture the essence of music" is contrary
to what you posted earlier listing those you claim that can.
You seem to want lots of exotic conjecture as the path to nirvana.
rgds, sreten.
Hello Audiojoy
To make a good speaker takes hard work. You get out what you put in. Aside from the obvious like a well engineered overall system design it takes attention to detail and above all else the drive to keep going until you get it right. There are no shortcuts, the Magic is in your head. Building your own speakers or finding a pair that is just right to make it "real" for you takes commitment.
I don't define speakers themselves as being musical. That's all in the musicians performances in my mind. What I want is a speaker that is invisible and doesn't distract me from listening and enjoying the music. That is really hard to do and any speaker that lets me connect with the music is what I am looking for. Not to sure our definitions of what makes a good speaker are the same but the goal is.
Rob🙂
This is a very interesting thread!
Some members have already mentioned a few very important aspects.
My thoughts are:
1. There are a few brands known of reproducing music in a very special way. I'm quite familiar with Naim Audio equipment, for example. I do not like Naim preamps though, but if you take one of the Naim cd players (preferably one with the Philips TDA1541 converter) and a Naim power amp of the older series (Nap 110, 140, 160, 180, 250), simply with a quality 10k pot in between, you might get a good deal of a musical, involving presentation that delivers the heart and soul of the musicians (and the thoughts and emotions while playing!).
This is not only about PRAT, it's also about fluidity and coherence of the performance.
Regarding speakers I own a pair of Reference 3a Midi Master (an early version of the current model DeCapo i). These speakers use a 8" carbon fibre mid-bass that is build and designed to not require any kind of crossover. It runs fullrange in a smallish vented enclosure and it delivers the most accurate, fast and direct sound I ever heard. In all of my attempts to build a good sounding speaker (and I did this lots of times) I always searched for a mid-bass driver that doesn't need crossover components, or at least only an inductor, but not more. I think to avoid as many crossover components as possible is one key of designing a very direct and real sounding speaker.
2. The matter of system synergy. It's not the cd player, the amp or the speaker that matters most, it's the right combination of these components. In the past I tried many combinations of different components, while always listening to the same speakers, and the results where very different. One has to take serveral components (sometimes just a few, sometimes many) and fiddle around with them to get a system up and running that is capable of reproducing the very main aspect of reproducing music: a performance that is emotionally involving, live-like and real, one that makes you think the musicians are in your room to play just for you tonight!
Regards!
Martin
Some members have already mentioned a few very important aspects.
My thoughts are:
1. There are a few brands known of reproducing music in a very special way. I'm quite familiar with Naim Audio equipment, for example. I do not like Naim preamps though, but if you take one of the Naim cd players (preferably one with the Philips TDA1541 converter) and a Naim power amp of the older series (Nap 110, 140, 160, 180, 250), simply with a quality 10k pot in between, you might get a good deal of a musical, involving presentation that delivers the heart and soul of the musicians (and the thoughts and emotions while playing!).
This is not only about PRAT, it's also about fluidity and coherence of the performance.
Regarding speakers I own a pair of Reference 3a Midi Master (an early version of the current model DeCapo i). These speakers use a 8" carbon fibre mid-bass that is build and designed to not require any kind of crossover. It runs fullrange in a smallish vented enclosure and it delivers the most accurate, fast and direct sound I ever heard. In all of my attempts to build a good sounding speaker (and I did this lots of times) I always searched for a mid-bass driver that doesn't need crossover components, or at least only an inductor, but not more. I think to avoid as many crossover components as possible is one key of designing a very direct and real sounding speaker.
2. The matter of system synergy. It's not the cd player, the amp or the speaker that matters most, it's the right combination of these components. In the past I tried many combinations of different components, while always listening to the same speakers, and the results where very different. One has to take serveral components (sometimes just a few, sometimes many) and fiddle around with them to get a system up and running that is capable of reproducing the very main aspect of reproducing music: a performance that is emotionally involving, live-like and real, one that makes you think the musicians are in your room to play just for you tonight!
Regards!
Martin
Thanks Martin and Rob that was very helpful indeed.
I appreciate what you put in is what you get out of the project, i was hoping to be lazy and get some ready made answers.
My last project has exhausted me, and I was about to throw in the towel.
Perhaps i should just consider trying a De Capo
Thanks Again
I appreciate what you put in is what you get out of the project, i was hoping to be lazy and get some ready made answers.
My last project has exhausted me, and I was about to throw in the towel.
Perhaps i should just consider trying a De Capo
Thanks Again
sreton
I have only mentioned a handfull of manufacturers, there are literally hundreds out there. Think proportionately.
I have only mentioned a handfull of manufacturers, there are literally hundreds out there. Think proportionately.
sreton
i kinda hoped someone could tell me out of those manufacturers i listed whether there was a theme within the design concepts of their speakers. be it enclosure material, no crossover etc. Let me help you get started. The first thing I notice is that most of those manufacturers tend to build mostly small sized speakers. Indeed the last musical sounding speaker suggested by Martin, the de capo, is again a small stand mount two way crossoverless design.
i kinda hoped someone could tell me out of those manufacturers i listed whether there was a theme within the design concepts of their speakers. be it enclosure material, no crossover etc. Let me help you get started. The first thing I notice is that most of those manufacturers tend to build mostly small sized speakers. Indeed the last musical sounding speaker suggested by Martin, the de capo, is again a small stand mount two way crossoverless design.
Beyond PRAT ,there's WAF (or BAF or SAP..or GAP 🙄)and all the words spent about compromise,engineering,etc. would lend to a product specialized in converting electrical current into air pressure.Considering the fact that we are talking about in-home reproduction , those pressure waves don't need to be high in amplitude ,also it could be an issue . Standards in hi-fi have been
uplifted during the years ...also in telephone I see that a HD standard is gonna come, so bandwidth isn't going to be a problem .
uplifted during the years ...also in telephone I see that a HD standard is gonna come, so bandwidth isn't going to be a problem .
Hi,
Its a lot easier to build a small high qualiity hifi speaker for a given budget
than a large one, this has been known for years, consider controlling cabinet
colouration, why make your job harder for high quality with bigger cabinets ?
I do not need "any help to get started" in understanding the trade-offs
for loudspeakers. Crossoverless just shows you do not understand the
technical terminology, foir a two way that is not possible, there is
always an acoustic crossover point, in this case with electrical
1st order on the tweeter, (it will end up with a third order roll off).
(A "crossoverless" approach exemplified by the budget AR18's).
Stereophile: Reference MM de Capo i loudspeaker
They may suit you but for others for $2.3K (in 2003) they are a joke.
The above clearly shows they have issues from 500Hz upwards to 1kHz,
and at the the top end of that range something very odd is happening.
(Very likely not good cone edge / surround termination matching.)
If you think they sound better as is than a version that does not have
these problems then we can part company because I simply will not
have it, its not musical, its wrong, I've seen many examples of this.
That is, because its expensive it must be right, not at all IMO.
The reviewers opinion that they can do low B's is utterly refuted
by the measurements, they simply cannot, even if they coud or
do cope with sub port frequencies better than most.
I would not give them the time of day.
rgds, sreten.
Last edited:
Hello sreten,
I'd just like to borrow your expertise for a moment to ask you if you would build a 2 way with a single 6" or 7" bass-mid, or a 2-way MTM with 5" or 6" bass-mids? Much as I hate to do so, I have to leave panels behind and build a pair of smallish speakers. I was actually thinking of thin floorstanders. What do you think?
Best, Andy
I'd just like to borrow your expertise for a moment to ask you if you would build a 2 way with a single 6" or 7" bass-mid, or a 2-way MTM with 5" or 6" bass-mids? Much as I hate to do so, I have to leave panels behind and build a pair of smallish speakers. I was actually thinking of thin floorstanders. What do you think?
Best, Andy
I have never heard the speaker, but it measures terribly. May sound ok, but certainly can not be accurate.
Hi,
It is a complete aside, and as your in the UK your diriver choice is limited.
To answer : IMO :
One b/m is better than two cheaper b/m's for midrange quailty if well chosen
but may not go as loud in the bass as the doubled up drivers. Related to this
is if you want 4 or 8 ohm speakers to maximise volume, personally I'd go for
best quaility over maximum levels, but if you like bass, and I do, then two
units have advantages, though I far prefer the MMT arrangement over MTM,
i.e. a 2.5 way MMT over a 2 way MTM.
This really should be a seperate thread, and best IMO if moved to one.
rgds, sreten.
Musical sounding speakers? The idea is an elitist affectation and the phrase is a misuse of language. What do you mean by musical? I very much doubt that you can provide a coherent and meaningful explanation.
Settle down and ask a question which is likely to receive a common interpretation instead of stirring up a furore of pointless disagreement.
w
Settle down and ask a question which is likely to receive a common interpretation instead of stirring up a furore of pointless disagreement.
w
Herer are some interesting extracts
this is from stereotimes Paul szabady
'High resolution, detail, and fleetness of foot do not always guarantee musical communication however. It is the ability to organize the sound into comprehensible and meaningful patterns that is the gist of successful music making, both in actual live performance and in audio reproduction. Punctuation, emphasis and de-emphasis, and the organization of time are crucial here. This area has been the province of British products in general, and Rega products in particular, almost exclusively for most of the last 30 years: the R1 continues Rega’s noble tradition. It makes musical sense of a wide variety of types of music, leading quickly to an immersion into the music rather than to a distracting awareness of the sound of the speaker. This is as it should be, and is part of Rega’s long-standing design philosophy: Listen to the music. Quit obsessing about the sound!
I have always been more impressed by inexpensive speakers that deliver the music than I have by cost-no-object designs. It takes far more design intelligence and a deeper awareness of the demands of music to produce a coherent budget design. It seems, in fact, that the more expensive the dynamic-driver speaker, the less likely it is get the basics of music right. Forget rubato, forget revealing “in the pocket’’ drumming, or articulating polyrhythms: most of the over-priced dynamic-driver speaker monstrosities can’t even lay out a simple 4/4 beat. They too often play as if they were musical illiterates. That inexpensive speakers can get the basics of timing, phrasing and punctuation right creates a difficult existential crisis for mega-buck speakers that can’t'
this one is from six moons audio
'Listening to the Harbeth, it's hard not to think that many modern loudspeakers forgot something along their path toward maximum resolution, wide frequency response etc. They forgot about the basic raison d'être any audio devices should cultivate in general, not just loudspeakers: communicativeness. Not that I would praise backwardness. I am sure many companies are going the right direction trying to truthfully reproduce what's on the disc (vinyl, silver or hard). Still, listening to loudspeakers like the Super HL5 shows that we cannot forget how in the end, audio is a means to a joyous end and not just about stress-related flaw finding - with the music carrier, the equipment, our hearing and the universe at large. Those are all important matters, not on their own but as markers that point towards exceptional resolution, true timbre etc. But, they cannot stand alone without everything else losing context and sense. Something has to accompany those things, some added value. And these Harbeth are fully loaded with that added value to make us forget about the mechanical nature of what we hear.
In that context I think it most important to show the mechanism whereby this kind of reproduction is accomplished. An important role is played by elements that differ markedly from transparent loudspeakers like my Harpia Acoustics Dobermann, the Wilson Audio Duette and others. I think that our British loudspeakers here have only average resolution, with staging that does not exceed the competition. But those are elements integral to any reproduction and not something I wish to bash. For a long time I pondered the essence of the Harbeth phenomenon. I meant to understand why I enjoyed listening to them so much, why so many people would cross hell claiming this the best sound in the world'
this is from stereotimes Paul szabady
'High resolution, detail, and fleetness of foot do not always guarantee musical communication however. It is the ability to organize the sound into comprehensible and meaningful patterns that is the gist of successful music making, both in actual live performance and in audio reproduction. Punctuation, emphasis and de-emphasis, and the organization of time are crucial here. This area has been the province of British products in general, and Rega products in particular, almost exclusively for most of the last 30 years: the R1 continues Rega’s noble tradition. It makes musical sense of a wide variety of types of music, leading quickly to an immersion into the music rather than to a distracting awareness of the sound of the speaker. This is as it should be, and is part of Rega’s long-standing design philosophy: Listen to the music. Quit obsessing about the sound!
I have always been more impressed by inexpensive speakers that deliver the music than I have by cost-no-object designs. It takes far more design intelligence and a deeper awareness of the demands of music to produce a coherent budget design. It seems, in fact, that the more expensive the dynamic-driver speaker, the less likely it is get the basics of music right. Forget rubato, forget revealing “in the pocket’’ drumming, or articulating polyrhythms: most of the over-priced dynamic-driver speaker monstrosities can’t even lay out a simple 4/4 beat. They too often play as if they were musical illiterates. That inexpensive speakers can get the basics of timing, phrasing and punctuation right creates a difficult existential crisis for mega-buck speakers that can’t'
this one is from six moons audio
'Listening to the Harbeth, it's hard not to think that many modern loudspeakers forgot something along their path toward maximum resolution, wide frequency response etc. They forgot about the basic raison d'être any audio devices should cultivate in general, not just loudspeakers: communicativeness. Not that I would praise backwardness. I am sure many companies are going the right direction trying to truthfully reproduce what's on the disc (vinyl, silver or hard). Still, listening to loudspeakers like the Super HL5 shows that we cannot forget how in the end, audio is a means to a joyous end and not just about stress-related flaw finding - with the music carrier, the equipment, our hearing and the universe at large. Those are all important matters, not on their own but as markers that point towards exceptional resolution, true timbre etc. But, they cannot stand alone without everything else losing context and sense. Something has to accompany those things, some added value. And these Harbeth are fully loaded with that added value to make us forget about the mechanical nature of what we hear.
In that context I think it most important to show the mechanism whereby this kind of reproduction is accomplished. An important role is played by elements that differ markedly from transparent loudspeakers like my Harpia Acoustics Dobermann, the Wilson Audio Duette and others. I think that our British loudspeakers here have only average resolution, with staging that does not exceed the competition. But those are elements integral to any reproduction and not something I wish to bash. For a long time I pondered the essence of the Harbeth phenomenon. I meant to understand why I enjoyed listening to them so much, why so many people would cross hell claiming this the best sound in the world'
Respect each other. In this vein the thread is in danger of being put to sleep. 
P.S. Paintball posts removed.
P.S. Paintball posts removed.
Respect each other. In this vein the thread is in danger of being put to sleep.
P.S. Paintball posts removed.
hi,
True because the question simply wants answers to
agree with the OP's perspective, that is not a question.
rgds, sreten.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.