Looking back

[rmk]

Feeling a little philosophical this AM so I thought I’d opinionate a bit. I have only been enjoying this hobby for 5 years now and came to the game relatively late in life and actually, that is both good and bad. Good in the sense that I had the disposable income to indulge myself with only the most outrageously priced components being out of reach. Bad in the sense that this allowed for changes to happen based upon whim rather than necessity. The net result is that I have a fantastic sounding system that may only be marginally better than a much less expensive one that is well thought out and executed.

When I think back to my original Denon AVR, Monitor Audio Silver, Velo SPL sub system, it really sounded great. How it would sound as compared to my current system is unknown but my guess is that while the difference would be audible, the sound quality would be only marginally better in the same space.

I believe that AV appreciation is subjective. Many hobbyists use measurements and performance statistics to evaluate products and determine choices. While these base line numbers can be interesting, what we actually hear is based upon our instruments (ears) and our subjective opinion as to what sounds good. My hearing at 55 is different than it was at 25, yet some 25 year olds can’t hear what I can in terms of FR. I may like a very accurate sounding speaker while others may prefer a more engineered less revealing sound (there is a reason why Bose is popular and it isn’t all marketing).

What this comes down to for me is a well balanced great sounding system needn’t be expensive, but it does require balanced components from the source material and device, to processing, amplification and finally loudspeakers. Of course the elephant in the room is the room itself. No matter how good your system is, if the room isn’t capable of letting the equipment to do its job you are wasting time and money in pursuit of an unreachable goal. In fact, you may be better off with that Bose system as it might actually sound better in a poor acoustic space.

 

[Adam]

Ahhh, sometimes it's nice to sit down and wax poetic on a slow Sunday morning. Very nicely put, rmk.

Now, if you'll indulge me, I'll say a few things myself. Measurements and studies are one thing, and they are fine. Nothing wrong with studying the science behind it in order to progress the field and to debunk the myths. My hat is off to those that pursue this.

However, I (and I know others here) believe that there's more to the overall experience than just the sound. For one thing, there's the visual aspects of it. My room is almost certainly not optimal for sound, but I just don't want to put up 4" thick panels all around. When I shop for speakers, I definitely also look at them. I won't buy a speaker that looks gorgeous but sounds horrible, but I'm also not going to buy a speaker that sounds great but looks horrible.

Your system looks great. The panels work well in your room, and you've put together a very nice overall package. So, perhaps you spent more than you would need to for a comparably sounding system...but dang, man, your system is tight. I say kudos for having the disposable income!

 

[mazersteven]

if the room isn’t capable of letting the equipment to do its job you are wasting time and money in pursuit of an unreachable goal. In fact, you may be better off with that Bose system as it might actually sound better in a poor acoustic space.

First I would like to say that it's awesome to read how your current system has met, or exceeded your expectations in performance, and sound quality.

But I have to somewhat disagree with you on your statement. Yes the room can cause a bunch of problems as stated by Ethan Winer. "Echoes and excess ambience, too much or too little bass, poor stereo imaging and localization, unclear movie dialog, and generally muddy sound."

But IMO if you don't have the perfect room, doesn't mean you shouldn't purchase good speakers. Yes maybe you will not get all you can out of the speakers. A good set of speakers is still a good set of speakers.

 

[rmk]

Thanks Adam,

However, I (and I know others here) believe that there's more to the overall experience than just the sound. For one thing, there's the visual aspects of it. My room is almost certainly not optimal for sound, but I just don't want to put up 4" thick panels all around. When I shop for speakers, I definitely also look at them. I won't buy a speaker that looks gorgeous but sounds horrible, but I'm also not going to buy a speaker that sounds great but looks horrible.

I agree and had the same aesthetics issues in my old space. I was trying to fit all of my AV gear into the primary living space in the house and had four large tower speakers, two subs (semi hidden under some end tables), A projection screen on a wall (hidden by a custom soffit) and a large entertainment cabinet chock full o gear.

One day we had some people over and I could see the wives dagger looks at the husbands who were thinking and saying, hey I'd like to do this to our family room. Acoustic issues aside, there is a point where it is no longer possible to aesthetically blend audio gear into a multi-purpose living space without serious disguise. That can mean in wall speakers (or the B word) and hidden components and treatments.

Frankly, in my home that would have been a more expensive proposition than simply adding the dedicated space and I didn't have to make any aesthetic compromises (well almost none ). That is why all of you guy with basements are very lucky. The space is there and only needs the building out. I just found a unique way to do the same thing out of essentially air space in a large tall room.

 

[rmk]

But IMO if you don't have the perfect room, doesn't mean you shouldn't purchase good speakers. Yes maybe you will not get all you can out of the speakers. A good set of speakers is still a good set of speakers.

True but, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

 

[The Dukester]

Nice post, rmk. I would have to agree with you on most every item. I think the problem with many people is that they are never satisfied. They come to forums, look in the stores, read magazines, etc, and see something they think is better than what they have and just have to have it, even if it's expensive (be it relative to one's budget or just flat out expensive) and may provide only an incremental improvement. I find myself wrapped up in this at times.

At those times, it pays to sit back and weigh just what you are doing before you spend and not make impulse purchases. Even if you have the disposeable income, it may be that you are better off holding on to it and using it for something else. Doing your homework, taking your time and buying good equipment that works well together will always be the best option.

 

[mazersteven]

I think the problem with many people is that they are never satisfied. They come to forums, look in the stores, read magazines, etc, and see something they think is better than what they have and just have to have it, even if it's expensive (be it relative to one's budget or just flat out expensive) and may provide only an incremental improvement. I find myself wrapped up in this at times.

I was going to mention something like this in my post. For the last few years I have been frequenting these audio forums reading about new electronic purchases. Speaker auditioning and purchases. Tweaking. Forum posting. It's like an obsession for some.

Have we ever just taken the time to listen to how good our systems really sound?

 

[rmk]

That brings up an interesting point. Me, I’m kind of a gear head in that I like well made and technologically advanced equipment, tweaking it and learning about the science of Audio. I also like movies and music so having a nice HT room is easily justified and is something that I use nearly every day.

I have found that you can get very good performance for a reasonable price if you do your homework. You could spend a small fraction of what I have and end up with a very good sounding system. In fact many here have.

To illustrate the point, my projector and screen cost about $2K combined for a nice 1080P PJ and a powered tab tensioned screen. This is chump change to most videophiles but how much better do their expensive screens and high end projectors actually look?

 

[fmw]

The comment I'll add to yours is that we don't just hear with our ears. We hear with our brains with all the experiences, biases and preferences that entails. You're right of course. I put together a very expensive audio system about a dozen years ago and to this day I regret having done it. I won't get into all the details but I'll just that it was a real waste of money if the purpose was to simply enjoy recorded music. And that was my purpose.

Personally, I'm not sure that high end audio is a good place for music lovers. It is a great place for gear heads, of course. I think I'll have dinner, go upstairs and make some music and record it. I promise not to overcompress it.

 

[jostenmeat]

But IMO if you don't have the perfect room, doesn't mean you shouldn't purchase good speakers. Yes maybe you will not get all you can out of the speakers. A good set of speakers is still a good set of speakers.

I appreciate this thought, but I suppose it "depends" really on how limiting the room is acoustically, and the flexibility of various factors in any such room. Perhaps I am too new to this stuff, and just have not owned enough speakers in enough rooms. For me, this hobby is just two years old. Nevertheless, I believe the room really is, by far and away, the most limiting factor in most setups.

What I also mean by the "room" is not just its own acoustical characteristics, but the available space to optimize speaker and listener positioning. Let alone the ability to treat it.

Far too often do I see speakers placed too close to the rear boundary. Too close to the side boundary. Wall mounted. Ceiling mounted. A monstrous AV rack between. A puny MTM center speaker shoved in a cabinet with reflections galore. Listener against the back wall. Treatments? Meh.

Now, stuff like this is often unavoidable, particularly in modest rooms in modest residences. But even when this stuff could be avoided . . . it often isn't.

So, I gave my friend a nice gift of $250 MA BR2 speakers to my friend last night. I had them for the afternoon, and got to playing around. Even if I played with speaker positioning for only a modest amount of time, I got them to decently image a nice soundstage, with GREAT depth, and balance (not heavy on either left or right). I bluntly told my happy friend that they won't sound as good in his room. His speakers will be closer to the rear boundary, the side boundaries, in an untreated room. The recordings he listens to simply are not mastered as well as my extensive classical collection. Nor the treatments for front wall, and asymmetrical sidewall. His audio will not have the depth, width, or balance since he does not have the luxury of placement options. I do not own a "TV", and do not have a monstrous AV rack in between the speakers in my very acoustically challenged living room. I had close to 4 ft from the front wall to these speakers, and the listening chair is about 5-6 ft away from the rear wall. Given more time, I would have experimented with pulling the speakers even further away from each other for something closer to an equilateral triangle.

After all that blabbering, the point I want to make is that the willingness to maximize placement options is huge. I think this is, overall, the single biggest improvement that most people could make. Provided there is decent space, this greatest tweak of all doesn't cost a red cent either. Placement = setup = education? . . . = experience? Well, I can say it sure doesn't = money.

Even people who know better . . . still don't look like they've tried. It usually looks like placement options were a total non-consideration. Or, maybe they don't know any better, and I give them too much credit. And so jostenmeat's rants endlessly continue . . .

To illustrate the point, my projector and screen cost about $2K combined for a nice 1080P PJ and a powered tab tensioned screen. This is chump change to most videophiles but how much better do their expensive screens and high end projectors actually look?

I think nice PJs do look a lot nicer. Our eyes are very sensitive. I read that we can detect a difference of 3 photons. Just with color accuracy or black detail alone could the difference be worth it. You can say the same thing about speakers, its simply a personal call on value.

The comment I'll add to yours is that we don't just hear with our ears. We hear with our brains with all the experiences, biases and preferences that entails. You're right of course. I put together a very expensive audio system about a dozen years ago and to this day I regret having done it. I won't get into all the details but I'll just that it was a real waste of money if the purpose was to simply enjoy recorded music. And that was my purpose.

Personally, I'm not sure that high end audio is a good place for music lovers. It is a great place for gear heads, of course. I think I'll have dinner, go upstairs and make some music and record it. I promise not to overcompress it.

You might be right. But, we listened to the first 2 mvmts of Beethoven's 9th, Couperin's 1st & 3rd Lecons de Tenebre, and some Krause/Union Station live. We thoroughly enjoyed it.

 

[cbraver]

I think another aspect of this hobby, is the aspect of the equipment itself. It's cool to have a nice looking set of speakers, a equipment stand full of "stuff," blinking lights and well (or not so well) managed cables. I've seen some systems that might not be setup in a acoustically ideal way, but looked great in a living room. That's cool too. Sometimes its just fun to tool around with the stuff.

A lot of people here seem to love searching for the deal of all deals. I think for them, that's part of the hobby too. While it is always smart to price shop, we have members that go out of their way and spend massive amounts of time trying to latest bargain. In reality, for what they are worth doing something else it probably doesn't pay off, but with a hobby the only payoff you need is some enjoyment. For this niche of the audio world, it's the searching, the ordering, the installing, the reporting, the discussing. And that's cool!

One thing is for sure, while it may seem to be a money pit to a lot of us, for the most part, this can be a fairly inexpensive hobby and its one that seems to surround itself with some, sometimes quirky, but extremely nice people and genuinely enjoy sharing their experience and advice with others.

We could do a lot worse for ourselves, that's for sure.

 

[3db]

First I would like to say that it's awesome to read how your current system has met, or exceeded your expectations in performance, and sound quality.

But I have to somewhat disagree with you on your statement. Yes the room can cause a bunch of problems as stated by Ethan Winer. "Echoes and excess ambience, too much or too little bass, poor stereo imaging and localization, unclear movie dialog, and generally muddy sound."

But IMO if you don't have the perfect room, doesn't mean you shouldn't purchase good speakers. Yes maybe you will not get all you can out of the speakers. A good set of speakers is still a good set of speakers.

The sound of those B&Ws in a room with bad acoustics will still suck and maybe even sound worse than a decent pair of speakers (costing much less then teh B&Ws; ie PSB, Paradigms, MA, Ascends, etc) in a properly setup acoutic environment. I do agree that one should by quality speakers but I wonder which should be done 1st, clean up the room acoutics or purchase the better speakers.

 

[mazersteven]

The sound of those B&Ws in a room with bad acoustics will still suck and maybe even sound worse than a decent pair of speakers (costing much less then teh B&Ws; ie PSB, Paradigms, MA, Ascends, etc)

I totally disagree. It's just my opinion from having a bad room in my own house. Most likely the worst room on the planet. And hearing speaker of that caliper in other bad rooms.

Again this is just my thoughts on the subject, and might not be the general consensus of the audio population.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The sound of those B&Ws in a room with bad acoustics will still suck and maybe even sound worse than a decent pair of speakers (costing much less then teh B&Ws; ie PSB, Paradigms, MA, Ascends, etc) in a properly setup acoutic environment. I do agree that one should by quality speakers but I wonder which should be done 1st, clean up the room acoutics or purchase the better speakers.

I agree with that because I have experience it. In a bad room, those nice looking B&W speakers sounded muddy and unclear. There is no way it should have sounded that bad.

But even if I had a bad room, I would still buy the best speakers that I could afford and try to fix the acoustics later.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

I have bought a huge number of speakers in my pursuit of that elusive "something". I have rarely gotten back more than a small fraction of what I paid. If I had saved that money instead, I could buy practically any speakers I wanted by now. What a waste!

 

[avaserfi]

I actually purchased my first air of speakers, not for music, but for movies and games. Now, this was not because I don't/didn't like music, but rather because I had never heard a pair of loudspeakers that could present it in a realistic manner as far as I was concerned [think a live unamplified concert]. After I purchased my speakers I eventually made it to a high end shop that had B&W 802Ds in a reasonably treated room. I brought some demo material as, but as normal I was expecting disappointment.

The exact opposite occurred and I actually listened to all four CDs I brought with me in entirety (the seating was exceptional BTW). I didn't know exactly what I heard at the time, as this was what caused my interest in loudspeaker design, but I knew it was something special. At the same time I did listen to a few other speakers considered high end, but was typically unimpressed.

Due to this experience I had to find out what caused my vast preference for the 802Ds. I started talking to some speaker designers and was pointed in a few directions eventually towards the Audio Engineering Society along with some other readings. Partly because of my strong scientific background as well as the strict methods employed the AES resonated with me and I started studying more and more until I eventually I was confident enough to start building and designing myself. While I continue to educate myself everyday I happen to have specific goals for my designs, room acoustics and equipment for each application (the simplified version of the goal is creation of loudspeakers that fulfill the requirements of a properly designed speaker as shown by correlation of human perception and measurement). Once these goals are met I am extremely happy and done as far as that project is concerned. Of course these goals are ridiculous as most are concerned: My current build will weigh about 130lb a piece (full range towers) and be powered by at least 1200 watts RMS per channel. These will be used as near field monitor computer speakers once completed .

 

[rmk]

I actually purchased my first air of speakers, not for music, but for movies and games. Now, this was not because I don't/didn't like music, but rather because I had never heard a pair of loudspeakers that could present it in a realistic manner as far as I was concerned [think a live unamplified concert]. After I purchased my speakers I eventually made it to a high end shop that had B&W 802Ds in a reasonably treated room. I brought some demo material as, but as normal I was expecting disappointment.

The exact opposite occurred and I actually listened to all four CDs I brought with me in entirety (the seating was exceptional BTW). I didn't know exactly what I heard at the time, as this was what caused my interest in loudspeaker design, but I knew it was something special. At the same time I did listen to a few other speakers considered high end, but was typically unimpressed.

Due to this experience I had to find out what caused my vast preference for the 802Ds. I started talking to some speaker designers and was pointed in a few directions eventually towards the Audio Engineering Society along with some other readings. Partly because of my strong scientific background as well as the strict methods employed the AES resonated with me and I started studying more and more until I eventually I was confident enough to start building and designing myself. While I continue to educate myself everyday I happen to have specific goals for my designs, room acoustics and equipment for each application (the simplified version of the goal is creation of loudspeakers that fulfill the requirements of a properly designed speaker as shown by correlation of human perception and measurement). Once these goals are met I am extremely happy and done as far as that project is concerned. Of course these goals are ridiculous as most are concerned: My current build will weigh about 130lb a piece (full range towers) and be powered by at least 1200 watts RMS per channel. These will be used as near field monitor computer speakers once completed .

Wow, 130 lb near field, computer speakers. That's something you don't see every day.

It would really be fun to do something like this and you are to be commended for your efforts.

Re the 802's, I auditioned them a couple of times and was impressed. I ended up with the Revel Ultima Studio2's. Ultimately the decision was based upon aesthetics and price rather than any significant performance delta.

 

[jamie2112]

RMK very good thoughtful piece. Thanks

 

[avaserfi]

Wow, 130 lb near field, computer speakers. That's something you don't see every day.

These units would do fine for most people in a mid/far field situation, but for me not so much. The only loudspeakers I see as suitable for that are properly designed omnipolar units then again such a setup would require some really ugly room treatments...

Besides its hard to make a light cabinet when one of the woofers alone weighs in at 45lbs!

Re the 802's, I auditioned them a couple of times and was impressed. I ended up with the Revel Ultima Studio2's. Ultimately the decision was based upon aesthetics and price rather than any significant performance delta.

The Studio2's have a couple areas where they are superior to the 802s and one major area where they aren't. The Revel happens to be more linear and have superior dispersion (both horizontal and vertical) characteristics compared to the 802D, but is more resonant (hard to beat the audibly inert 802D). While the Studio2 has audible resonance these resonances are far lower than found in most loudspeakers. This coupled with its relatively superior polar response would have me recommend at least trying to leave first reflection points untreated with such a loudspeaker. Do note, this is only a good idea if you can place the Revel speakers 2-4' from the side walls in as symmetrical positioning as possible. It has been shown that such use of first reflection points actually increase timbre information from both the source (good) and the loudspeaker (bad due to audible resonances). This increased audibility of resonances might be worth the added musical information for you though.

As far as looks go, I can't argue too much the 802D is very unique and requires a special decor while the Revel is more typical (not necessarily bad).

 

[rmk]

The Studio2's have a couple areas where they are superior to the 802s and one major area where they aren't. The Revel happens to be more linear and have superior dispersion (both horizontal and vertical) characteristics compared to the 802D, but is more resonant (hard to beat the audibly inert 802D). While the Studio2 has audible resonance these resonances are far lower than found in most loudspeakers. This coupled with its relatively superior polar response would have me recommend at least trying to leave first reflection points untreated with such a loudspeaker. Do note, this is only a good idea if you can place the Revel speakers 2-4' from the side walls in as symmetrical positioning as possible. It has been shown that such use of first reflection points actually increase timbre information from both the source (good) and the loudspeaker (bad due to audible resonances). This increased audibility of resonances might be worth the added musical information for you though.

As far as looks go, I can't argue too much the 802D is very unique and requires a special decor while the Revel is more typical (not necessarily bad).

Interesting comment on the first reflection (where were you a year ago). But seriously, your comments on the first reflection point are similar to what Keith Yates told me and he knows a thing to two about a thing or two.

BTW, I have 30" to the right side wall and considerably more on the left due to the room entry. Symmetrical it isn't.