Speakers are all subjective!

[gus6464]

I have now had my Dali Ikon 2 for over a month now and have been enjoying every minute of it so this weekend my friend and I decided to do a little comparative listening between the the Ikon 2 and his B&W 685 and the Polk RTi6 thrown in for fun. We had already done some comparisons between the Dali and the Epos ELS-3 they replaced a while back but it wasn't much of a contest. Now you would think the Dali Ikon 2 with an MSRP of $1250 would mop the floor with the $650 B&W 685 but that was not the case .

Electronics used was a Yamaha HTR-5960 (RX-V659) and an ipod nano with music in uncompressed wav, aiff, and apple lossless. Music comprised of Coldplay, Radiohead, Muse, Damien Rice, Laura Pausini, Arcade Fire and Rage Against the Machine. We switched back and forth between the speakers using the built-in switch of the Yamaha and no blind testing was done since we were just curious about the characteristics of each speaker.

So we started out with Coldplay "What If" and immediately we noticed the forward nature of the B&W compared to the Dali. The 685 just threw Chris Martin's voice at our face with everything else taking a back seat. While the Dali's put him in the same plane as the rest of the music the 685 just made him too overpowering and we missed the laid back nature of the Dali. This was the same case with Radiohead "Let Down". While the 685 still exhibited good detail in the highs when compared to the Dali we had to concentrate harder to hear it because of the forward midrange. Because of this overemphasized midrange the 685 seemed as if they were putting out more bass than the Dali but this was not the case because we used a test tone cd with different frequencies and the Dali put out a 30Hz tone while in the B&W it was nonexistent. First thing we noticed was that the 685 were exhibiting a lot of the characteristics of the Epos so we realized that whole British sound characteristic really exists.

So next up we decide to throw up some female vocals so we play some Laura Pausini "Cinco Dias" and "Mi Libre Cancion". The forward nature of the B&W was still there but it made her voice have a fuller presentation which we actually enjoyed more. Highs were still more detailed with the Dali but I was enjoying her voice a lot more with the B&W. The song "Cinco Dias" has her doing a duet with Juanes so it was a good comparison for male and female vocals. This was funny because every time she sang I was enjoying her more on the B&W and when he sang I was liking the Dali more.

Now it was time to test some faster music so we threw up some Muse "Supermassive Black Hole". Now this song has a lot of stuff going on so it's perfect to test separation and detail. In this test the Dali was preferred but I am sure it was because the forward nature of the B&W was hurting the highs in terms of detail. With the Dali it was very easy to point out the different instruments and bass was tighter and more controlled. Someone else might have thought that the 685 were sounding "boomy" but we realized this was not the case at all and it was just the emphasized and forward mid-bass which was causing this.

Finally we decided to throw in the Polk RTi6 which my friend had in his bedroom just to compared an American speaker. The Polk were exhibiting the same forward nature of the 685 but not as much. Where one could clearly hear the difference in classes between the Polk and the other two was in the highs. The Polk tweeter just couldn't keep up with the detail in the highs with the other two but midrange was very close to the B&W which made me enjoy Laura Pausini more on them than the Dali.

Now while the Dali do more things better than the B&W it still wasn't a knockout. Are the Dali twice as good as the B&W given they are double the price? Absolutely not. Would I trade in my Dali for the B&W? No, but I would love to have both and switch back and forth depending on what kind of music I wanted to listen to . Although I will say that if you listen to music that has a lot of instruments like classical you will enjoy the great amount of separation the Ikon 2 offers. They will definitely made you feel like you are in front of an orchestra. Which one sounds more like the recording was meant to sound like? Who cares and just enjoy the music!

 

[Exit]

Mama says, "Subjective is as Subjective Does"

Everyone pretty much agrees that you have to listen to speakers to find what you like. Each person's hearing is a little diferent and what sounds good to one person may not sound good to another. Speaker reviews can be interesting, at least subwoofers, because you can determine bass response easier than by ear. If speakers were totally subjective then there wouldn't be a need for speaker reviews.

 

[fmw]

If speakers were totally subjective then there wouldn't be a need for speaker reviews.

For me there is no need for speaker reviews. Speakers are dependent on room acoustics for their sound. Unless the review was done in your room it doesn't have much meaning. I pay not attention at all to reports of subjective speaker listening tests. Specifications are more important to me.

 

[bandphan]

i agree with subjective mostly. I would tend to use different music and source for my comparrision though. Accoustic instruments and as u did female vocalist, would always be my first choice for the fact that we know what they should sond like and what the reproduction should sound like. Testing the speakers full range of the audio spectrum, then i would be able to judge the speakers soundfields better. Accurate reproduction is hard to determine without proper equipment. You sparked and interest in me that im gonna pull out some old master dats pulled off some soundboard recordings from dave grissman and the swedish national symphony with a pit mic and play around a bit. Maybe tls guy or others can shed some light as to comparing the masters wav file to its play back through the speaker systems.

 

[fredk]

Nice review. I wish more people could/would post comparisons.

While personal preference is very subjective, speaker differences are not. The difference in detail between the B&W and the Dali are there, the question is, for the money, do you personally care?

I think with some personal listening to decide what speaker characteristics you like. Comparisons like the one in this thread can then help to identify other speakers you should listen to before you make your final choice.

Fred

 

[Davemcc]

I would say that the enjoyment of speakers is subjective, not the speakers themselves. Speakers are quantifiable, enjoyment is not. WmAx and others make perfect sense with reference to perceptual research and the need to start off with speakers that show particular specs. If one were to take their advice and start with good, neutral speakers with good specs and a DSP, one could tailor the sound to their own subjective preference rather than simply enjoying the compromise or coloring of any particular set of speakers.

Having said that, I don't have the time, money, equipment or knowledge to pursue that path, like most others in the hobby. Given my awareness of the issues above, I try to limit my comments on speakers to the purely subjective and identify them as such. i.e. I liked this... or I heard this... It has to be my goal to live with speakers that have flaws that I enjoy knowing full well that others may not share my preferences.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Specifications are more important to me.

I have to agree with you there.

But everyone gets on my case for it.

I agree that speakers are extremely subjective.

Some people like "warm" sound.

Some like "detail or open-in-your-face" sound.

Some like more bass and some like less bass.

So just because a few people think that certain speakers are the "best" does not mean they are the best for anyone else.

 

[20Glove]

The funny thing is there have been speakers in my life that sounded GREAT at the store and I got home and they sounded plain BAD. So I agree that room acoustics are very important!!

Also, and some people might disagree but to my ear some receivers make the speakers as well. That is why I try to listen at the store to the speakers using a receiver that I use so I can better compare the sound.

Normally I buy speakers at a store that will return the speakers without a restocking fee... Though I finally took a dip in the Craigslist pool and found that I really like the Infinity Interlude series. Luckily I had someone near me sell me my towers so I got to listen to music that I had brought over and my receiver that I took out of the rack for this listening test as well. It worked out... I love the towers, they sound Excellent to me.

I have not written this yet, but I will be more extensive latter when I post the comparison between, Inifinity Interlude Series, Canton, and Sapphire (When I get some more time, spent a lot of time on Sapphire thread yesterday, right Bandphan), but I also took home a pair of open box Canton's to compare sound once I bought the IL40's on craigslist.

Out of all the speakers that I listened to that were new, the Canton to me was the best, (Martin Logan, JBL, Mirage, Vienna Acoustics, Def Tech, Klipsch Reference, Snell, Focal, B&W, Thiel, and newer models of Inifinity), Canton was the best to my ear (in my price range), of course Snell, Thiel (the best sounding speakers I ever heard!!), and Martin Logan were good, but a little expensive as well. I could have fit ML's in my budget... but I liked Canton better, and would have chosen Canton over ML.

But comparing the Canton's, Sapphire's, and Interludes there were differences... and like the OP said, wish I could own all these speakers and be able to go to the speakers that sound best with that type of music.

So in conclusions, speaker depend on the environment, the receiver, the set up, the music, the movie, and most importantly individual tastes- - - If it sounds good to you... then you have the right speaker... someone told me that here not in those words but something like that... bandphan, perhaps?!?!? Anyway, I love this obsession that I have with electronics... keep the posts coming!

Happy easter everyone that celebrates easter to those who do not ... happy sunday!

 

[avaserfi]

The most common myth in audio....

The myth that there is a large amount of subjectivity within speaker choice is a long standing myth of audio that has been discounted numerous times by the credible research as presented in the JAES. As previously mentioned within this thread there is a certain amount of subjectivity in regards to specific frequency characteristics that are found to be pleasant within a loudspeaker e.g., a slightly accentuated mid-bass or perhaps a high frequency roll-off. These sound signature characteristics are secondary to proper design of a speaker such that, while interacting ideally with its environment, will produce sound in such a way that it would be rated more highly than other speakers in blind ABx comparison tests.

There are a large variety of factors that correlate with a high rating as shown by this peer reviewed perceptual research. Minimizing coloration due to cabinet resonance, minimal driver decay, smooth axial frequency response with a off-axis response with similar magnitude* are all examples of design characteristics that have been shown to increase loudspeaker rating. Furthermore, in a properly treated room it has been shown that an omni-polar speaker will receive higher listener ratings in a controlled circumstance than a mono-polar loudspeaker with similar characteristics.

*This is assuming a properly treated room. In a highly reverberant room a more 'directive' speaker would be ideal due accentuated reflections.

Again, as mentioned previously using credible third party measurements can be a superior way to choose a loudspeaker with the proper tools. Simply looking at on and even off-axis frequency response measurements is not enough. For example examining the F3 point and a linearity such as 20-20Khz +/-3dB is pointless as much could be concealed within this typical specification not to mention the fact that large amounts of other extremely important data is being ignored. As such a variety of other measurements would be needed along with the ability to correlate human perception of a loudspeaker with these measurements. This end requires quite a bit of work and dedication that is often beyond most people for a variety of reasons. If one does wish to begin such a learning experience I strongly recommend by reading all of the work published in AES that has been written by Floyd Toole as this would be a good starting place in both terms of acoustics and loudspeaker perception.

 

[fredk]

While it may be true that in blind controlled tests, the majority of people will choose a sound with certain characteristics, that is a far cry from what happens when someone chooses speakers.

Peer values, company reputation, bragging rights, loyalty and many other human characteristics come into play. Why do we see posts saying you can't go wrong with brand x (yes, marketing really works)? Why does Bos sell so many speakers (yes, spin marketing really works too)? Why do people post "brand a is bad and brand b is the ultimate? Why do people post "I didn't like the sound of this speaker but I really liked that one"?

Testing in a controlled environment should not be confused with decision making in the real world.

Fred

 

[avaserfi]

Peer values, company reputation, bragging rights, loyalty and many other human characteristics come into play. Why do we see posts saying you can't go wrong with brand x (yes, marketing really works)? Why does Bos sell so many speakers (yes, spin marketing really works too)? Why do people post "brand a is bad and brand b is the ultimate? Why do people post "I didn't like the sound of this speaker but I really liked that one"?

All symptoms of an uneducated consumer. If one chooses to stick with a brand out of loyalty or some other illogical reason they get what they purchase. If one chooses a path of actual research and rigor which requires far more discipline than greater rewards can be held. It is not my position to force either side, but I do have the ability to make speaker recommendations based on a rigorous understanding of mentioned materials.

No amount of education can help chosen ignorance or plain stupidity. One must actively take steps to remove bias and introduce logic with the methodology I recommend and adhere to.

Testing in a controlled environment should not be confused with decision making in the real world.

From your statements it would seem you are unfamiliar with the research and its ability to be generalized to actual, real life, situations. I will try and clarify the situation, but it is not possible to summarize any of the research I have alluded to simply thus I will touch on its relation to the real world. If you wish to gain an actual understanding rather than making baseless assumptions take my previous suggestions and read the research.

The goal of scientific inquiry is the generalization of a controlled situation to others. Those who do understand this research have been successful in purchasing and/or building speakers with regard to this research. Also, there has been much success in terms of room design/treatment in reference to the credible research offered.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Furthermore, in a properly treated room it has been shown that an omni-polar speaker will receive higher listener ratings in a controlled circumstance than a mono-polar loudspeaker with similar characteristics.

Would bi-polar fall in the omni-polar camp?

 

[jonnythan]

Sure, speakers are subjective.

But some are unquestionably better than others.

Anyone want to argue?




OK, all Audioholics who would rather own a Bose Acoustimass system than an RBH Signature system raise your hands.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Sure, speakers are subjective.

But some are unquestionably better than others.

Anyone want to argue?

OK, all Audioholics who would rather own a Bose Acoustimass system than an RBH Signature system raise your hands.

If we compare 2 speakers in the same price range or quality, it would be harder to pick the winner, don't you think?

Like comparing the RBH Signature to a Linn Komri $40,000/pr or a KEF $20,000/pr?

 

[jonnythan]

If we compare 2 speakers in the same price range or quality, it would be harder to pick the winner, don't you think?

Absolutely!

But there's a big difference between "speakers are all subjective!" and "speakers within the same price/quality range are all subjective!"

But, since you mentioned it....


Everyone who would rather have a Bose Acoustimass 16 Series II instead of an SVS SBS-01 system, raise your hands

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Absolutely!

But there's a big difference between "speakers are all subjective!" and "speakers within the same price/quality range are all subjective!"

Okay, you so got me with the wordings there.
What are you a lawyer or something?

Everyone who would rather have a Bose Acoustimass 16 Series II instead of an SVS SBS-01 system, raise your hands

Are you kidding?

I don't want to be banned from Audioholics!

 

[jonnythan]

Are you kidding?

I don't want to be banned from Audioholics!

Hah!

 

[fredk]

Actually Andrew, you and I are not that different. I don't actually disagree with your position that you can come to a better decision using your methods and information.

I am suggesting that human nature being what it is, what we hear is colored by many things and how we decide is influenced by many things.

Acoustic memory being as short as it is, makes us even more open to influence.

If we wern't, there would not be nearly as many speaker companies out there. Either that or all speakers would sound the same.

Fred

 

[mtrycrafts]

...But everyone gets on my case for it.

That would meant that I am part of 'everyone' but I don't think that is the case

...
I agree that speakers are extremely subjective.
Some people like "warm" sound.
Some like "detail or open-in-your-face" sound.
Some like more bass and some like less bass.
So just because a few people think that certain speakers are the "best" does not mean they are the best for anyone else.

Well, research tells us a different picture though, when bias is stripped from the equation

• Ian Paisley and Andrew Welker are the designers of Mirage speakers.
• Ian was involved in the famous National Research Council speaker tests.
• These tests determined that the characteristics that people preferred in speakers were:
- Low Distortion
- Flat Response and wide bandwidth
- Wide Dispersion



The NRC has a research facility in Canada where they have been researching acoustics and speakers for a long time. Dr. Toole was there as well for 20+ years.
People tend to like the same sound characteristics. Certainly not a 100% of people but large enough of a margin to matter.

 

[mtrycrafts]

... Each person's hearing is a little diferent and what sounds good to one person may not sound good to another. ..

Until you close the curtains and cannot see the product