Yea, Wilsons are UGLY. But then so are Vandersteins, and I would rather have a pair of them. In the mean time, I am testing finishes on several exotic woods to build new cabinets for my very nice, if I do say so myself, Seas based monitors currently in painted MDF. Living room and WAF is important.
As noted, money and taste are frequently not linked. Our tastes may run to different styles, but style aside, some just have poor taste.
That's about the only real show we have isn't it? Can mere consumers/DIY folk attend, or is it like CES where you have to pretend you are a buyer for a local shop?
This reflects my experience in setting up home sound systems for people. Back in the day graphic equalizers sometimes came with a microphone and SPL meter. (Is this still in vogue? I have no idea.) I would set up their system for flat response according to the measuring equipment, and not a single person liked it. Everybody wanted some tonal coloration dialed in.
I often hear the ghetto blasters on wheels. We all know the type; they produce only one bass tone and it's very loud and very annoying. But to the doofus driving the hooptie it's the bomb shizzle. The rest of us have to listen to BOOOOOOM BOOOOOOOM BOOOOOOOM and the trunk lid vibrating and buzzing.
My personal bias is to have a "balanced" frequency response (if the low frequencies extend way down into the last octave then the treble must also extend into the highest octave). I am also annoyed by excessive dynamic compression, whether it is the type introduced into FM broadcasts (it just sounds "canned" to me) or it is introduced by speakers at high volume. Ruler flat response doesn't do much for me and in fact I prefer a little bass boost.
It's all subjective.
OK, to build a technical or subjective, "HI-Fidelity" loudspeaker is not easy or cheap. Development takes time, and you have to move from the $10 drivers to the $30 drivers (OEM bulk, for DIY that means $100 and up) So, this means you are not selling at a $500 a pair price point, but a $1000 price point to stay in business. For a grand, one expects more than a bit of faux woodgrain plastic. So, this means you have to do a nice cabinet and that means the $1000 good sounding speaker now has to retail over $2500. (The $1000 a pair are just $200 a pair in nice wood).
Now, as we are in the DIY forum, here is where we have an advantage. Our time is free. We can buy the good drivers. We can take months to do a prototype, we can spend months doing a French Polish on Rosewood, and we can tune them to the actual room and position where they will be used. So, we can build that $5000 a pair for only $1000 and they will sound better if we did our job correctly. Or, leave them in spray-can MDF and for $500 have speakers that sound as nice as the $5000 pretty ones. It's a HOBBY.
Now, as we are in the DIY forum, here is where we have an advantage. Our time is free. We can buy the good drivers. We can take months to do a prototype, we can spend months doing a French Polish on Rosewood, and we can tune them to the actual room and position where they will be used. So, we can build that $5000 a pair for only $1000 and they will sound better if we did our job correctly. Or, leave them in spray-can MDF and for $500 have speakers that sound as nice as the $5000 pretty ones. It's a HOBBY.
I believe it is also what our eyes tell our brain to expect. If I did not have to work for a living, I would love to do many of the traditional psycho-acoustic tests with blind and sighted people. Does the visual of a room cause a preconceived notion what the balance should be? If the room looks hard and bright, does our brain expect it and if we had flat response, we would think it dull? Is the inverse true? What expectations does the ambient sound in a room before music is played change our perception?
Instead of graphic eq's, mic, and 10 band "analyzers" with pink noise we get a computer. Well, Audyssey sounds like garbage to me. Proof that to err is human, to really screw things up requires a computer. Yet some swear by these tools.
Most people want a little hump in the 50-60 or so range. I don't, but that is my taste. I tend to like them a tad brighter than measured anechoc flat. I like them quite flat 200 to 5K. I don't mind 20 - 40 to trail off a tad. Many bookshelf speakers have a hump in the mid bass as they have no deep bass, so this is to balance the flat-ish treble. Warfdale excelled at this. Otherwise you could never sell them. Of course, when a sub is added for full range, you then need to suppress the boost.
Great show, fucused mostly on two channel stereo. HT was hardly visible.
Anyone can attend. Just register and pay the VERY reasonable fee. For me, a senior, it was $12 for three days. Visit www.audiofest.net for more info. Drool over the pics from previous shows and watch some of the very interesting videos taken of the seminars.
I found this year's DSD seminar quite interesting. There is a video available now of last year's seminar on the same subject*. It seems to be the new, coming thing for audiophiles. IIRC, the term bandied about during the seminar was 'studio master tape quality for home listening'.
* I presume videos taken during this year's seminars will be posted sometime in the (hopefully) near future.
Why dont you keep the speakers flat? speakers shouldnt alter the response. If you want a certain curve, that is the job of the recording engineer. If the speakers are not flat, everything will sound coloured. Why should that be preferable?
In what way would "accuracy" compromise transients and dynamics? If they were "compromised" then they wouldn't be "accurate" 😕
++ What the good Dr. just said. Pay attention to those who do this for a living. The rest of us be but humble amateurs.
I wonder if midrange is talking about the sound of a wet blanket that automated computerized tools built into AVRs make while trying to force out room reflections and smooth the overall noise-measured average frequency response?
lilun,
My room is not the same as the engineers room. My hearing is not the same as the engineers hearing. (less trained but probably in better shape). Now, you have totally missed what I said about why OEM speakers tend to add weight to the mid-bass to compensate for a flatter top end. In the same vain, speakers with no top end, Bose comes to mind, will cut back the mid bass to again, provide an overall sense of balance. This is called "engineering". I may start with as flat as I can get it on a 12 foot pole in my back yard, gated MLS at 1M, but then as a DIY-er, I can bring it into the real room and work out the balance there.
I wonder if midrange is talking about the sound of a wet blanket that automated computerized tools built into AVRs make while trying to force out room reflections and smooth the overall noise-measured average frequency response?
lilun,
My room is not the same as the engineers room. My hearing is not the same as the engineers hearing. (less trained but probably in better shape). Now, you have totally missed what I said about why OEM speakers tend to add weight to the mid-bass to compensate for a flatter top end. In the same vain, speakers with no top end, Bose comes to mind, will cut back the mid bass to again, provide an overall sense of balance. This is called "engineering". I may start with as flat as I can get it on a 12 foot pole in my back yard, gated MLS at 1M, but then as a DIY-er, I can bring it into the real room and work out the balance there.
I think gedlee is referring to accurate frequency response.
There's no free lunch when designing loudspeakers. Change one parameter and you usually change all parameters. Increase complexity in pursuit of the "holy grail" of (insert your favorite parameter here) and you introduce more bugaboos.
So decide what you really want and build it. Pick your poison.
well its not the way to get a flat response. If your room isnt flat you cant EQ it anyway. Its best to have everything flat to start with. Hearing is the only exception to that.
reproduction of music is in the exigences of the listener. So the word accuracy can not be used IMHO. Which seem accurate when experience grows can be tomorrow not acurate enough (= no acurate at the end) or not accurate at all.
There is no universal speaker, because there is no universal listener...many people explain that very well before.
The market with hifi is the same as cars. You don't buy only a car to go to A to B point : you buy pleasure, ego, many more things than a simple car. There are too many goods to taste all and when you have the money you don't have enough rooms. What is the Best : Ferrari, Bugatti, Porsche, Lada Niva, 2 Cv, Lotus Seven. All are good in the eyes of their owners but are not the same ! Where is the accuracy here ?
Many people agree themselves here that the hifi is a trade off and they disagree most of time about good speakers cause they are agree about the worses and have not the same tastes and priorities about the good ones.
But there are many good speakers and you can't own all of them. The best is to listen many things, try to understand the roles of electronics, room, own taste... long and expensive way, empiric. Sometimes you lost yoursel with the goal which is listen to music !
You don't make or buy a unit meter which is "one meter" (but take care with heat, humidity...it could be 1,000001 meter ! 😱).
All the people here have more exigences than lambda buyers, that's why they DIY : for hobby, for money, sometimes it can cost more...but they learn about their own exigence and make their cultural better with hifi.
Acuracy mean nothing : what give you more pleasure : a photograph (which is never accurate), a Neo classic painting, parietal painting (for color), futurism painting (for fast impression) : the same with hifi, it's cultural, choose your style and try to choose the best between two painting to have the best of the two ...for you. After you will want another one, cause your exigences grow.
So Focus your exigence on : pleasure... it's not a very acurate and universal method but maybe the better to have the best moment of listening. And don't forget : the more you are looking for the less you find it...it's a graal...
If you know anything, focus on some short lists of famous speakers (don't read audioreviews too much and go for famous second hand) and listen to them, after do DIY while in the same time you listen to music... two cents advise.
There is no universal speaker, because there is no universal listener...many people explain that very well before.
The market with hifi is the same as cars. You don't buy only a car to go to A to B point : you buy pleasure, ego, many more things than a simple car. There are too many goods to taste all and when you have the money you don't have enough rooms. What is the Best : Ferrari, Bugatti, Porsche, Lada Niva, 2 Cv, Lotus Seven. All are good in the eyes of their owners but are not the same ! Where is the accuracy here ?
Many people agree themselves here that the hifi is a trade off and they disagree most of time about good speakers cause they are agree about the worses and have not the same tastes and priorities about the good ones.
But there are many good speakers and you can't own all of them. The best is to listen many things, try to understand the roles of electronics, room, own taste... long and expensive way, empiric. Sometimes you lost yoursel with the goal which is listen to music !
You don't make or buy a unit meter which is "one meter" (but take care with heat, humidity...it could be 1,000001 meter ! 😱).
All the people here have more exigences than lambda buyers, that's why they DIY : for hobby, for money, sometimes it can cost more...but they learn about their own exigence and make their cultural better with hifi.
Acuracy mean nothing : what give you more pleasure : a photograph (which is never accurate), a Neo classic painting, parietal painting (for color), futurism painting (for fast impression) : the same with hifi, it's cultural, choose your style and try to choose the best between two painting to have the best of the two ...for you. After you will want another one, cause your exigences grow.
So Focus your exigence on : pleasure... it's not a very acurate and universal method but maybe the better to have the best moment of listening. And don't forget : the more you are looking for the less you find it...it's a graal...
If you know anything, focus on some short lists of famous speakers (don't read audioreviews too much and go for famous second hand) and listen to them, after do DIY while in the same time you listen to music... two cents advise.
Last edited:
No.
Nothing. 🙂
The price or value of a good quality DIY loudspeaker, let's say a bill of materials about $1000 USD (pair) if you go looking in the commercial stores and catalogs, having the same referenced specs in mind (sound) and when they are achieved -- many commercial loudspeakers are not measured, do not measure well or parameters are not published -- is between (+/-) $5000 and $50000 USD.
Video of expensive DIY project made with Accuton drivers. Is this "expensive audiophile brand speakers"?! Have fun.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obNMUhVq5wI
Last edited:
why cant we agree
Actually I think it is Midrange referring to accurate frequency response.
I thought Eldam's input (52) is spot on. Pleasure is what should be striven for, not accuracy.
I was in a radio museum in London many years ago, with a roomful of visitors, when a high quality wind up 78 player with a large horn (more than a metre across the mouth) was played. You could almost hear the jaws hitting the floor. The unanimous view was that it sounded so real. This is extraordinary, in that the sound was distorted, had no bass, and a far from even FR; and yet everyone was spellbound with Caruso "in the room".
Actually I think it is Midrange referring to accurate frequency response.
I thought Eldam's input (52) is spot on. Pleasure is what should be striven for, not accuracy.
I was in a radio museum in London many years ago, with a roomful of visitors, when a high quality wind up 78 player with a large horn (more than a metre across the mouth) was played. You could almost hear the jaws hitting the floor. The unanimous view was that it sounded so real. This is extraordinary, in that the sound was distorted, had no bass, and a far from even FR; and yet everyone was spellbound with Caruso "in the room".
That's a simplistic view of the subject. First you have to define "Bad Recording" - if there is a simple definition. That's just the beginning.
We will just have to disagree on this. I guess my 35 or so years building speakers and tuning rooms provided me with different experience than yours.
It is easy to say "flat room". Have you ever built one? I have never been in one. I know of only a couple in the US. One in Canada. They are called an anechoic chamber. Quite unsettling to be in I understand. Some people get queezy in them. I deal with real speakers in real rooms real people live in. Have you ever built a totally flat speaker? I have not done that yet either. I can get within a couple of dB from 100 to 15K, but I find forcing the issue more than that never sounds quite right.
Pano
Yes, it is simplistic. It seems like that is what it takes in these kinds of arguments to make a point.
Would you have me refer to Fourier Transform relationships proving that Frequency response and time responses are equivalent? Or how about discussing theories of hearing? Do those kinds of arguments get any traction?
Of course I know that this comment is way over simplified and that there will always be areas of "preference", but those areas are very small these days. Great speakers are converging and at some point they will all become quite similar. But preferences will never converge on the whole and there will always be outliers. People who will just not give up on their quest to "be the sound engineer".
You and I favor very similar sound quality. We might even agree exactly in blind tests.
Yes, it is simplistic. It seems like that is what it takes in these kinds of arguments to make a point.
Would you have me refer to Fourier Transform relationships proving that Frequency response and time responses are equivalent? Or how about discussing theories of hearing? Do those kinds of arguments get any traction?
Of course I know that this comment is way over simplified and that there will always be areas of "preference", but those areas are very small these days. Great speakers are converging and at some point they will all become quite similar. But preferences will never converge on the whole and there will always be outliers. People who will just not give up on their quest to "be the sound engineer".
You and I favor very similar sound quality. We might even agree exactly in blind tests.
Both right! Different goals. If you are in the business of making the best transducers you can (Earl), then accuracy is paramount. If you are looking for artificial musicality, then Pano is correct. I don't subscribe to it, but the glass bottle crowd is all about adding distortion to create a warmer rich sound. Each approach is correct for each goal.
I have a definition for bad recordings: All of them. Some are just worse than others. We don't have a stinking clue how to record a piano, or even a solo guitar. Ironic how much time is spent on snake oil when we should really be focused on developing better recordings.
Some are pretty good. I really enjoy the old Shefield's. Coincident mic, direct to disk. I wish we had high speed digital recording back then.
Ibidem
Best designers try to master all the increasing 100 years speakers knowledge to do the best they can.
It's difficult to have all the qualities because some not match together and here the cultural preferences beginn in the choice of several good speakers.
You want pristine, you don't have long term listening confort and suffer with most of the bad recording...
you want acuracy, which one : tonal ? details ? bass which can mask the trebles the 3D, accuracy of mid bass where the music is enjoyable for most of listener ?
You want confort : wich one ? against distorsion ? warm tonal color ? how to master the heigth row of distorsion... how is the amp and the source qualities: all the sources change the final rendering (curve, distorsion...can we speak about an alone pair of speakers?)?
At the end you must choose between the best designs and most of the time you can love two different speakers, cause trade off highlight different qualities : for me it's a Kef 104/2 ref and a Boston Lynfield 400L. Never found the two qualities in a unique speaker, maybe it exist but money is one of the trade off. talking about brands It will be something between Hansen The Prince V2, Maggies 3.7 or Martin logan.
I try with the help of many here to improve the feeling pleasure of the Lynfield 400L cause I found the tweeter too brighty for my taste...that some younger ears don't find with the incredible details!
You have too choose, the best designers don't master all because they choose themselves between different trade off and set up on demand is the futur with DSP and room EQ (that's not save a bad speaker).
A good point to choose is the Pleasure/price. And between two very good speakers, one will have a little something more that please you. It's hard for a designer to match all the drivers with different load, make hundred of prototype. At the end it's physical sensation and cultural. Maybe in the price of the best brand you have to include research, adds, money management to survive more than few years and investors !
But it's more easy to talk about a good speaker than 50 years ago on the technical side: because we know, helped with some of gentle fellows, how to increase the way to talk about that : polar response, time alignement, storage of energy, distorsion, patati patata... It can begin with the Fournier transform for the simplier discussion : flat or not...and for me it will be an iso curve with a deeping curve after 1500 hz... but it is just a small factor and most of them are unknown to me. the cultural side doesn't dissaeper at the end. Listen an old JBL Paragon...🙄
So the OP question has sense but too simple. that's why so many brands : save money or time? Buy a TAD speakers or a little BBC monitors. Will tou have enough pleasure if spending little money (the shortcuts between money and ears are known by marketing people...). Go with the second and begin to increase your experience will give you a lot of pleasure. buy the TAD for the pleasure to talk about "her" with your friends and for solitary pleasure too. In the middle there are many things but no flat curve(I have to increase my english speaking to write shorter)
Best designers try to master all the increasing 100 years speakers knowledge to do the best they can.
It's difficult to have all the qualities because some not match together and here the cultural preferences beginn in the choice of several good speakers.
You want pristine, you don't have long term listening confort and suffer with most of the bad recording...
you want acuracy, which one : tonal ? details ? bass which can mask the trebles the 3D, accuracy of mid bass where the music is enjoyable for most of listener ?
You want confort : wich one ? against distorsion ? warm tonal color ? how to master the heigth row of distorsion... how is the amp and the source qualities: all the sources change the final rendering (curve, distorsion...can we speak about an alone pair of speakers?)?
At the end you must choose between the best designs and most of the time you can love two different speakers, cause trade off highlight different qualities : for me it's a Kef 104/2 ref and a Boston Lynfield 400L. Never found the two qualities in a unique speaker, maybe it exist but money is one of the trade off. talking about brands It will be something between Hansen The Prince V2, Maggies 3.7 or Martin logan.
I try with the help of many here to improve the feeling pleasure of the Lynfield 400L cause I found the tweeter too brighty for my taste...that some younger ears don't find with the incredible details!
You have too choose, the best designers don't master all because they choose themselves between different trade off and set up on demand is the futur with DSP and room EQ (that's not save a bad speaker).
A good point to choose is the Pleasure/price. And between two very good speakers, one will have a little something more that please you. It's hard for a designer to match all the drivers with different load, make hundred of prototype. At the end it's physical sensation and cultural. Maybe in the price of the best brand you have to include research, adds, money management to survive more than few years and investors !
But it's more easy to talk about a good speaker than 50 years ago on the technical side: because we know, helped with some of gentle fellows, how to increase the way to talk about that : polar response, time alignement, storage of energy, distorsion, patati patata... It can begin with the Fournier transform for the simplier discussion : flat or not...and for me it will be an iso curve with a deeping curve after 1500 hz... but it is just a small factor and most of them are unknown to me. the cultural side doesn't dissaeper at the end. Listen an old JBL Paragon...🙄
So the OP question has sense but too simple. that's why so many brands : save money or time? Buy a TAD speakers or a little BBC monitors. Will tou have enough pleasure if spending little money (the shortcuts between money and ears are known by marketing people...). Go with the second and begin to increase your experience will give you a lot of pleasure. buy the TAD for the pleasure to talk about "her" with your friends and for solitary pleasure too. In the middle there are many things but no flat curve(I have to increase my english speaking to write shorter
)
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.