There are at least two reasons for this.gedlee said:
1. The review clearly expresses what is better and what certain shortcommings are, having also listed to equipment described by the same reviewer, I have a good feeling what to expect.
2. If I don't like them in the end, I can just stack them away easily and don't have to pass them on with feeling guilty giving something I don't like to someone else. I can't do the same with speakers because they take up too much space.
Aren't we all getting old?
Well, when people listen to the dirty looking cables and look at it twice just to make sure they know what they are listening to, I trust they hear the difference. As a matter of fact, playback through speakers with wave guides actually made the difference more dramatic. But since this is a Waveguide thread, let's not get too deep into this.Chris8sirhC said:
winslow said:
I've done a couple of waveguides for cars as custom client projects. With more than 20 years experience in car audio I'd have to say that they do make sense. I can get a much more uniform HF distribution from a compression driver on a waveguide than I could ever do with a tweeter in the door or on the dash. I still have the molds for these waveguides. If it were worth my time I would sell them.
JLH said:
Yes, I am absolutely serious, but your phrasing of what I said is not correct. I never said to "disregard our own personal impressions". If you can audition the speakers then by all means do so. But if you can't resolve why a poorer measuring loudspeaker might sound beter to you than a better measuring one then something is wrong somewhere, right? Personally, I am completely comfortable with my ability to assess a loudspeakers performance based only on objective data. The data that I need to do this is of course NOT the data that anyone ever provides - thats the problem. Manufacturers deliberatly don't publish meaningful data that can be compared to another manufacturer in a meaningful way. It behoves them to keep the purchasing decision in the hands of marketing.
But the real point that I was trying to make is the cost to the consumer of this situation. As I said, double (or more) the price of my speakers if you want me to sell in the conventional manner - where you get to audition them at your local Hi-Fi store. That situation is out-dated since it just does not make good business sense. This situation is the reason that the Hi-End Hi-Fi store is going (gone?) away and all that is available are the plane-Jane, dirt cheap, two-way loudspeakers at Best-Buy, etc. They have to be dirt cheap because the mark-up is about 60% by the time they reach the floor and they have to be completely commodity to sell in the volumes required to be on the floor at stores like this. There is no place in a retail outlet for high priced quality.
What WILL replace this, I am guessing here, is internet sales of loudspeakers where you have no choice but to buy them without auditioning them (because they can be sold at 1/2 the price where a decent business model can be achieved). In that scenario it makes the most sense to find a set of measurements that does correlate well to the subjective impression (globally or personally) and use those as guidlines for your purchase. You will have a far better choice of products at far lower prices - whats not to like?
gedlee said:
The increase in gas prices might have some benefit in this scenario. Some companies offer a "try before you buy" model where you can return the speakers you buy online if you're not satisfied. If the cost of shipping them back was $400 instead of $100, it would discourage people from abusing such a policy. Back in the 90s I worked in I.T. for Sears, and Sears would routinely see people purchase $3000 televisions, only to return them after a big football game or pay-per-view event.
Cheapskates!
This is interesting. What an what an awful lot of (MOST?) DIY builders do is buy their speakers unheard.
My thinking is that the buyer has to be informed about the worth of some data.
For instance, I really want to use speakers that generate the kind of polar response graphs Earl's do. But that in itself isn't quite enough. Other objective data would be impulse response, type of waveguide, the enclosure design, materials used in its build, drivers, electronic components. The designer's research, theoretical and professional activities are also objective data.
I think data posted by Earl for his speakers is extremely worthwhile because I can infer from it they will produce the kind of sound I want.
FrankWW said:
But if you hadn't previously been in this/related hobby, how would you know what kind of sound you want if you'd never been able to extensively listen to anything beforehand because it's no longer possible? Imagine being born today, and getting into this hobby 20 years or so from now, taking into consideration what's been previously said. I don't think one can argue that things would be little different, and perhaps quite a bit more difficult?
I suspect that as gas gets ever more expensive people will not go very far to buy things. Used to be that we would drive long distances just to "see" something that interested us as a purchase or just to experince. That won't happen at $10 a gallon. But it will still be reasonable to shop on-line and have products sent to your home, because even with very expensive gas, delivery to you home is cost effective since large numbers of products can be delivered with one truck to multiple residences. So it seems to me that virtually all shopping will be done on-line, except for those products that everyone uses (food) and multiple outlets can be located quite close to the living areas. But unique products will not see the inside of a retail store, as this model will no longer make sense. Even with gas the way it is now I buy many of my more unique items on-line.
BHTX said:
You may see this as a problem, but I don't. All we need to do is give up on the idea that different people will like different loudspeakers, that loudspeakers are a "personal thing". This is what marketing people at the large companies want you to believe, just as they want you to believe that the car you drive is an extension "of you". Then they make you feel bad if you don't drive their car. Its the classic manipulation of the marketplace and its success in the audio marketplace has been the downfall of audio. Because if there is no "quality" or "Hi-Fi" then a personal system like an Ipod is just as good as a pair of Summas if you think that it is.
If we replace this marketing driven scam with the concept that "accurate reproduction" is quality, then this house of cards falls apart fast and one can ***** sound quality based solely on valid objective data. Its only in a world that believes that "it's what you like that counts" even if its not an accurate reproduction that one has the need to "audition" loudspeakers.