Who said that's the point? No, the point is to make the listener happy. This doesn't necessary have much to do with "accuracy". And probably even less with electronic or acoustic design and design principles.
You are again trying to reconcilliate friendship and sex.
"Where are you living? Are you here? Are you on this planet? It's impossible. It can't be done. Thousands of years people have been trying to have their cake and eat it too. So all of a sudden the two of you are going to come along and do it. Where do you get the ego? No one can do it. It can't be done."
- George Costanza, to Jerry Seinfeld, in "The Deal"
Last edited:
To all who commented about my speakers, you'd better listen to them before commenting. They sound the closest to ideal speakers I've ever heard. When music is played, it's as if there are no speakers and no audio setup, it is like musician are playing live in my living room. Before listening to them the first time at my friend's, I didn't believe reproduced music can sound so good, so natural and live.
I read the design philosophy of those speakers. Very interesting. And I would love to audition them. Maybe I should come visit you in Israel. Never been there.
Well, I agree that their marketing is pretty smart. It starts right at the first sentence:
"The basic acoustic principle for any instrument is such: Without resonance, there can not be lifelike sound. Bösendorfer loudspeakers are instruments in themselves. They reproduce essential resonances, allowing the sounds to unfold in all their spectacular, natural beauty."
The statement is correct but quite misleading, as if the speaker needs resonances to reproduce lifelike sound. Most of us of course are aware that the resonances are an integral part of the music on the CD or LP or whatever, so the task before the speaker is to reproduce faithfully those resonances, and not to add some arbitrary resonances of its own - if you want to accurately listen to your source. Of course, if you are happy that some guy in NY or whereever decides how your music should sound, hey, more power to you.
But probably they sound great, and if you like their sound, why not. It's just that in this whole discussion for accuracy, to the point where 0.0001% of 7th harmonic is discussed, it's quite surprising to find out that speakers that are deliberately engineered to alter the sound are used to judge all this.
jd
You are welcome, the coffee is on me. Those speakers are worth listening to.
The fact is that those speakers reproduce lifelike sound, more so than any other speakers I've heard.
I think those type of speakers work great for Jazz and Classical music. Rock, Pop and/or electronic music probably won't. Then again...If you only listen to Jazz and Classical music....
The "classic" components must have something that makes people think that they allow them to get closer to the sound of live music, moreso than others or else they would have faded from view long ago: Just a few of the best known are the ARC SP10 preamp, Krell KSA 100, KMA 100 and KMA 200 amplifiers. Rarely seen on the used market and always hold great value.
Accuracy is what serious listeners try to achieve with unamplified music as their reference. The listed components did it better than a great many others attempted to do, but failed, hence their desirability even today.
Many people attempt to meet their "reference" thru DIY also. It is far from easy, but I am quite sure that many here and else where achieve their idea of nirvana in their systems thru DIY. Do you know what true accuracy sounds like? It is different for every person, as their ears and brain do mot meet an "idealized" formula.
How could anyone say that any of these people are wrong in what they want, provided that their reference is music that is unamplified. Now that is not to say that people that like the sound of their systems based upon the types of music that they prefer are less accurate either. It meets their expectations for their specific needs. No one has yet built a perfect beast. It is simply a means to an end. Some work harder to maximize their systems, some simply enjoy. There is no right or wrong, just as design is not a black and white issue.
Last edited:
That's a very strong statement. I can think of several other reasons why these amps are popular.
Like saying that antique cars must be so wanted because they have such a great road handling. I don't think such a position is tenable.
jd
This is the nub of the problem - there are many ways of defining it in differing terms. Whilst this situation exists the varied arguments supporting the extreme ends of the measurement v. perception / hearing debate cannot but be futile and a complete waste of time. From this and other threads it is clear where the protagonists stand.
The speakers which Joshua has bought - bearing in mind that Bossendorfer market them - will clearly be designed to reproduce piano as perfectly as possible whereas the company will have no interest the market sector which listens mainly to heavy rock or amplified music and heavy use of sound effects. UK reviewers have been fair to them by drawing attention to this distinction of usage limitation.
All of us will pick for ourselves speakers which best portray the style/s of music to which we listen. Few real music lovers will choose out and out studio monitors for home listening.
For me the 'glaring' 7th IS a problem when it is present in everything I hear and it does in my experience seem to be most obvious when using very accurate raw voiced studio monitors.
This is, to me, like preaching anarchy as the ultimate solution. No laws, no rules, no bounds, nu metrics, no absolute references.
I couldn't live in such a world, but then again, perhaps it's just me.
Though I hear mostly classical music and jazz, I hear also rock and other types of music. The speakers sound great in all types of music.
Funny when said without hearing the said speakers.
That is correct. My setup sounds now as close to live performance with acoustic instruments and human voices. Of course, live performance as my ear-brain remembers.
Indeed, there's no perfect setup It's all about the degree a setup may be close, or far off, the ideal, or perfect.
Those speakers, designed by Hans Deutsch, were first produced by Bossendorfer. Bossendorfer were bought by a Japanese company who decided to concentrate on pianos making and let go of loudspeakers making. So, together with Hans Deutsch they relayed the speakers' production to Joseph Brodmann pianos making company.
Not only piano sounds very much lifelike on those speakers, all acoustic musical instruments and human voices do.
When it comes to music and music appreciation, nothing can substitute the human ear-brain-mind mechanism. Science doesn't have comprehensive enough answers yet.
This is why sound reproducing gear designed by measurements alone, without taking into account psychoacoustics, isn't appreciated by audiophiles and people with refined listening.
No references? I base my opinions on live acoustic music (chamber groups, guitar, etc). I am sure that the equipment that i own and have had the opportunity in my lifetime to hear and enjoy followed very strict rules of engineering. The designers also knew what their topology choices sounded like and followed those paths to reach sonic excellence
I love audio for how it sounds, not how it measures. That is the difference between us.
Every owner of any of those components that I listed, and have meet, owned them for one reason, their truth with music. There was and is fancier equipment to own. They are nothing special as a antique car or antique radio set with period styling might be to own and show off. I can think of no other ARC product, except maybe the D-79 that has this type of enduring value. The D79 is not a sonic gem like the SP10, but it was a gorgeous looking amp in its day.
The first Krell's that I listed were the best amplifiers that Dan ever made.
Last edited:
Does physics today have any real rules? It would appear that 'rules' are just guidelines for the masses. ;-)
Amen to that.
Most music was composed also for the human emotions and soul, not only for the logical thinking brain.
Science seems to fail to measure emotions, or to prove the existence of human soul, hence, those are being ignored by those who adhere to science religiously. However, this isn't the case with some of the greatest 20th century physicists.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.