TLS Guy -vs- Studio 100's

[highfigh]

You're confusing me with the good Dr.

I like this old Charlie Ventura album.

... but maybe I'm biased because of the Mickey Spillane album cover and that New Orleans feeling I get hearing When the Saints Go Marching In. Maybe I like this album because I bought it from a 70 year old Jewish Golfer who likes to wear white belts. I just like it.

You're right- it wasn't quoted using the button, so I saw it as coming from him. My apolgies to both of you.

 

[JerryLove]

The live concert can't be recreated at home. The acoustical space isn't the same, the sound isn't coming from the same places and a live gig is a combination of the direct sound from the instruments/amps and the PA.

So what? Direction is primarily determined by delay (in sight it's referred to as "parallax"). As long as the same volumes hit my ear drums at the same times the sound will be the same.

That's all a stereo recording does, in theory at least. It puts a pair of fake ears where you would be to record all those sound waves hitting from wherever they come. They are then reproduced (hopefully accurately). There might be some differences related to how the shape of your ears deals with sound angles vs how the mikes did: but it would be minor.

Also, producing music isn't the same as re-producing it.

Of course. No one cares if the sound that comes out of the guitar amp sounds like the guitar did originally or not.

But that's irrelevant.

Knowing about any variations form normal in hearing can explain why a speaker's sound is perceived to lack something. For someone who had their ears blown out by hunting, serving in the military, playing in a band or working as a carpenter, the range where they have a deficiency can be somewhat compensated for by either using proper EQ or finding speakers that compliment their ears, if they don't want to add to their signal chain or systems' complexity.

Fine, but then live would lack the exact same thing for the exact same reasons.

 

[highfigh]

I would've thought that a great speaker is a great speaker, regardless of the type of music being played. I like all kinds of music, but I think classical (or any other acoustical performance) is the most revealing when it comes to judging a speakers performance. Since the sound of electronic/electric instruments is "artificial", for lack of a better word, it's harder to judge the quality of the reproduction of its sound, as delivered from one loudspeaker to another loudspeaker.

Plus, lets face it, how much rock/pop music in the digital age has been recorded/mastered for SQ? Much of the distortion heard, is by design. So, start with a poor recording and hope that a loudspeaker will magically transform it?

So no, I don't buy the different speakers for different music argument.

I'd rather have a speaker that can reproduce anyrecording accurately. That is, if WAF would allow that kind of expenditure and the accompanying room treatments...

My point is that a person who never listens to a particular genre of music in daily life can't use that when shopping for speakers. They don't know how it's supposed to sound and they aren't familiar with it. If the selected music was made using electric instruments, a speaker that only shines when playing acoustic instruments is exactly wrong for the application. Electronically produced music is a completely different animal from using mics, placed properly to capture the acoustic space and breath of the acoustic instruments. Any ambience is added electronically and is just illusion. Triggers on drums and direct input from the rest of the instruments can provide total isolation from the other instruments and give the recording engineers complete control over the process and how everything sounds. It can sound great, but it's far from real. Stand near a good drummer while they play and think about how drums sound on most recordings- not even close.

Have you ever talked with or read interviews with well-known recording engineers and producers? Recording quality is at the top of their list of priorities, second only to getting a particular "signature sound". Phil Spector had his "Wall of sound", George Martin has his, Brian Eno has his and the other major engineers and producers all want their sound to be recognizable. They all prefer something different and they don't all use the same monitors, but in order to get "their sound" across to more people, they have to listen to the songs with several speakers because of the differences.

"So no, I don't buy the different speakers for different music argument."

Take a pair of ADS speakers and play Classical or Jazz, then Heavy Metal through them. You will decide that they don't sound good for both. Take one disc that you're very familiar to you and listen to several speakers- you WILL find some that just don't sound right with that music, but do with something else. Different styles aren't recorded to sound the same- why should they sound good on all speakers when the monitors used for mixing are so different?

 

[highfigh]

So what? Direction is primarily determined by delay (in sight it's referred to as "parallax"). As long as the same volumes hit my ear drums at the same times the sound will be the same.

That's all a stereo recording does, in theory at least. It puts a pair of fake ears where you would be to record all those sound waves hitting from wherever they come. They are then reproduced (hopefully accurately). There might be some differences related to how the shape of your ears deals with sound angles vs how the mikes did: but it would be minor.

But that's irrelevant.

Fine, but then live would lack the exact same thing for the exact same reasons.

A small room can't possibly cause the same delays as a large one. It can't be accurately recreated, either because the sources of the reflections aren't the same. Using 5 or 7 speakers to recreate what's happening in a place that's many times larger can only approximate what it sounded like when the performance occurred.

Mic placement is absolutely critical to how a recording or live gig will sound. You don't get the same sound from an overhead mic that you do from close mic-ing. The mic's proximity effect (dynamic mics) makes that impossible

"Of course. No one cares if the sound that comes out of the guitar amp sounds like the guitar did originally or not."

Sometimes, but only if they can get a particular sound by doing it. Live isn't where the sound form a particular guitar stands out. The person who played on the recording won't like it if the engineer or producer "messes with their sound". The effects can make most sound very similar but in the studio, those differences can be huge. One example, whether you like this one or not, is Led Zepplin. Jimmy Page often used Silvertone guitars his Telecaster through a Magnatone amp on the first few albums to get what are considered to be "classic Zepplin guitar" sounds. Live, he used Marshall stacks and Les Pauls, with the occasional Tele. A Silver Face Fender sounds completely different from a Tweed Fender because of the speakers and the fact that the circuits are very different. People who play these care a lot about how they sound. The example Mark used about a musician commenting about how their instrument sounds is no different when it's electric. I have some recordings that used amplifiers that are the same model and vintage as mine and when I play these at a realistic level, the sound is awfully close to the way my amp sounds.

 

[GO-NAD!]

My point is that a person who never listens to a particular genre of music in daily life can't use that when shopping for speakers. They don't know how it's supposed to sound and they aren't familiar with it. If the selected music was made using electric instruments, a speaker that only shines when playing acoustic instruments is exactly wrong for the application. Electronically produced music is a completely different animal from using mics, placed properly to capture the acoustic space and breath of the acoustic instruments. Any ambience is added electronically and is just illusion. Triggers on drums and direct input from the rest of the instruments can provide total isolation from the other instruments and give the recording engineers complete control over the process and how everything sounds. It can sound great, but it's far from real. Stand near a good drummer while they play and think about how drums sound on most recordings- not even close.

Have you ever talked with or read interviews with well-known recording engineers and producers? Recording quality is at the top of their list of priorities, second only to getting a particular "signature sound". Phil Spector had his "Wall of sound", George Martin has his, Brian Eno has his and the other major engineers and producers all want their sound to be recognizable. They all prefer something different and they don't all use the same monitors, but in order to get "their sound" across to more people, they have to listen to the songs with several speakers because of the differences.

"So no, I don't buy the different speakers for different music argument."

Take a pair of ADS speakers and play Classical or Jazz, then Heavy Metal through them. You will decide that they don't sound good for both. Take one disc that you're very familiar to you and listen to several speakers- you WILL find some that just don't sound right with that music, but do with something else. Different styles aren't recorded to sound the same- why should they sound good on all speakers when the monitors used for mixing are so different?

Sorry, not convinced. The ultimate goal of a speaker design should be to reproduce a recording as accurately as possible and IMHO, that includes a flat FR. Of course, that goes out the window as soon as you put it in a room. Yes, the producers you mentioned all have their signature sound, as you put it - all of them different. If one has any hope of hearing any of their recordings with any accuracy, you need that elusive flat FR, don't you? Since they have already engineered the sound they want, any effort to play it back on speakers to match, would simply compound the effects, would it not?

 

[highfigh]

Sorry, not convinced. The ultimate goal of a speaker design should be to reproduce a recording as accurately as possible and IMHO, that includes a flat FR. Of course, that goes out the window as soon as you put it in a room. Yes, the producers you mentioned all have their signature sound, as you put it - all of them different. If one has any hope of hearing any of their recordings with any accuracy, you need that elusive flat FR, don't you? Since they have already engineered the sound they want, any effort to play it back on speakers to match, would simply compound the effects, would it not?

Then, why does the sound of speakers vary so much from brand to brand if the goal is the same?

No, you don't need the frequency response to be flat in order to hear it the same way they did. You need everything, and I mean everything, to be the same in the reproduction system and the room it's in, down to the last detail. You and I won't hear it the same as the engineer or producer, ever. We hear it the way our ears allow us to. How we perceive it is up to us, individually and sometimes, as a group. Yeah, this is in detail that's probably too fine to be realistic but IMO, nothing is perfect. The cool part is when we hear something that makes us smile or raises the hair on our neck or arms.

Also, flat response can't be achieved in a room that has absolutely no acoustical treatment, unless it's a fluke.

The fact that we debate all of these details says that we hear things differently and are picking up different details from the "general public", although that can be a major curse. Hearing more detail just makes the bad things more glaring. I like Emmylou Harris but I have a hard time listening to a lot of what she sang on recently because her intonation can be off. It's not far off, but it's far enough that I can't listen to her. Do most people hear the same thing? Probably not, but I know my brother hears it and he was adopted, so genetics can't be a factor. OTOH, Mom sang fine but couldn't whistle in tune to save her life.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Then, why does the sound of speakers vary so much from brand to brand if the goal is the same?

Because the makers couldn't acheive their goal within a given budget? Just a guess...

No, you don't need the frequency response to be flat in order to hear it the same way they did. You need everything, and I mean everything, to be the same in the reproduction system and the room it's in, down to the last detail. You and I won't hear it the same as the engineer or producer, ever.

I understand that, but if we are to eliminate as much as possible, the variations that affect the sound in our rooms, then an accurate speaker is required, isn't it? I realize that we can't reproduce what is heard in the studio, but if FR isn't important, why has this thread gotten so long?

Also, flat response can't be achieved in a room that has absolutely no acoustical treatment, unless it's a fluke.

You don't have to tell me. I'm dealing with that now!

 

[Alex2507]

... if FR isn't important, why has this thread gotten so long?

Because the guy who created it is a genius.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Because the guy who created it is a genius.

Shouldn't you be out throwing poo at somebody...?

 

[fredk]

Plus, lets face it, how much rock/pop music in the digital age has been recorded/mastered for SQ? Much of the distortion heard, is by design. So, start with a poor recording and hope that a loudspeaker will magically transform it?

Well, some musicians, like Mark Knopfler or Peter Gabriel, do care and it comes out in spades in their recordings.

 

[fredk]

This has been an interesting thread and could keep a pedant like me going for years.

As far as the original topic, reading TLS guy's response, it seems clear to me that he has a much higher level of expectation than most of us when it comes to music reproduction. He also has dedicated a lot of years to getting that sound and his friend has the cash to buy it.

Clearly there are issues with the Studio 100, just like there are issues with all other speakers in that price range. For the money, they sound pretty darn good. For most of us its about getting the best sound we can from a commercial speaker given budget or WAF constraints.

I'm staying far far away from any speaker that has 800 in its name.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Well, some musicians, like Mark Knopfler or Peter Gabriel, do care and it comes out in spades in their recordings.

Yes, no argument, but the present day trend for recordings amongst the majority of rock musicians is not of that level of quality, IMO.

 

[GO-NAD!]

This has been an interesting thread and could keep a pedant like me going for years.

As far as the original topic, reading TLS guy's response, it seems clear to me that he has a much higher level of expectation than most of us when it comes to music reproduction. He also has dedicated a lot of years to getting that sound and his friend has the cash to buy it.

Clearly there are issues with the Studio 100, just like there are issues with all other speakers in that price range. For the money, they sound pretty darn good. For most of us its about getting the best sound we can from a commercial speaker given budget or WAF constraints.

I'm staying far far away from any speaker that has 800 in its name.

Good advice. Nothing good could come out of it, only heartache.

 

[lsiberian]

This has been an interesting thread and could keep a pedant like me going for years.

As far as the original topic, reading TLS guy's response, it seems clear to me that he has a much higher level of expectation than most of us when it comes to music reproduction. He also has dedicated a lot of years to getting that sound and his friend has the cash to buy it.

Clearly there are issues with the Studio 100, just like there are issues with all other speakers in that price range. For the money, they sound pretty darn good. For most of us its about getting the best sound we can from a commercial speaker given budget or WAF constraints.

I'm staying far far away from any speaker that has 800 in its name.

Why not treat yourself? I do it all the time. No need to have it. Just ask yourself if it's really worth it. Would you rather have a fancy sports car or a pair of B&Ws. Give me the car. I love sound, but I'll get far more enjoyment going 0-60 in 6 seconds whenever I enter the highway.

 

[Alex2507]

I'm staying far far away from any speaker that has 800 in its name.

I figure that for me the fine recording work on Brothers in Arms is now beyond my means to enjoy. I must hear that recording on the finest speakers this world has to offer. I'm very familiar with tracks 1 and 7. Track 6 is sort of opening it's doors for me and there are still a few others that I enjoy. Today I found a B&W dealer and the listing said something about calling for an appointment. You think he's going to know something is up when I pull up in my Y2K Focus?

I don't think I want to corrupt any of my other favorites like that though.

 

[jostenmeat]

I'm starting to think that music and speakers are like bullets and guns. You never should have tried to play that piece on those speakers. As has been mentioned earlier I bought a copy of the Hilliard Ensemble's Lassus based on jostenmeat's recommendation. I finally got around to playing it on my main system as I was trying to figure out my next step with tuning my EQ. I quickly realized that while I was okay with exploring this music on other (lesser) systems, I could not tolerate another minute of it on my living room system. It was making me nuts. Maybe it's the state of my EQ but trying to define where those four singerfellas were was brutally grating.

This is interesting to me. I never find this music to be offensive on lesser speakers. My issue is that this music can be soooo much more appreciated on a good pair, but really just for the transparency of multiple moving vocal lines, intensely contrapuntal, perfectly in pitch. For that reason, I thought you just ought to wait for the new speakers; not because I expected them to be offensive on your system, just that I wanted you to appreciate this performance of this kind of music better.

Have you spent any time with PSB speakers ? Paul Barton is a classical violinist. I find his speaker lines to be more consistent. Especially compared to Paradigms newer lines of speakers which tend to be noticeably brighter. PSB's tend to be more neutral to my ears.

I'm sorry, I have never had a chance to hear a speaker from PSB.

PSB has recently introduced new lines, after some were getting long in the tooth, and I've heard none of the latest. Specifically the Synchrony, Imagine, and new Image lines. The best speakers I've heard of their's (and maybe they're still the best) is the Platinum line. The largest tower, the T8, I gave a thorough audition and I think they have a chance of appeasing TLS.

Now, at the time of audition, I was much less versed in acoustics (not that's saying much), but the bass was to me a bit overwhelming, boomy at times, and most particularly on tympani I recall. I brought that up once at another forum, and an extremely opinionated salesman (who is quite knowledgeable, but invariably defensive of the products he sold, so take with salt) said he actually owned them in his home, and what I was saying could not be true. Otherwise, these were very good for the price I could have landed for them. The finish is definitely wanting IMO considering the price. The speakers were in a very large untreated, undedicated space. However, the boominess seemed to persist even with differing listening positions.

Also, I should note that if I had to choose one evil over another, I'll take lean, wanting bass over boomy, overwhelming bass every day of the week, and I feel the same with instruments as well; give me balance first.

edit: ok, if the boominess is for real, then no they won't appease TLS. If the perception was due to the particular setup only, then otherwise, yes I do think they could appease him.

 

[ParadigmDawg]

I hear that you can trade 10 Y2K Focus (is it Foci when you have more than one?) in for a pair of Dynaudio Consequence. I am certain you will be happy with them.

I figure that for me the fine recording work on Brothers in Arms is now beyond my means to enjoy. I must hear that recording on the finest speakers this world has to offer. I'm very familiar with tracks 1 and 7. Track 6 is sort of opening it's doors for me and there are still a few others that I enjoy. Today I found a B&W dealer and the listing said something about calling for an appointment. You think he's going to know something is up when I pull up in my Y2K Focus?

I don't think I want to corrupt any of my other favorites like that though.

 

[njedpx3]

... Give me the car. I love sound, but I'll get far more enjoyment going 0-60 in 6 seconds whenever I enter the highway.

How about an S2000 with an Invidia exhaust 0-60 in 5.4 and beautiful exhaust sound. ..That is my toy

 

[Alex2507]

I hear that you can trade 10 Y2K Focus (is it Foci when you have more than one?) in for a pair of Dynaudio Consequence. I am certain you will be happy with them.

I think it might take closer to 35 Foci. I only have one though. I'll see if my girl is willing to trade in her '08 Malibu for a lowly pair of 802D's. We'll get by with the Focus and '93 F150. Oh, that's no good. We're paying on the Malibu.

http://www.examiner.com/x-8310-Trendy-Living-Examiner~y2009m8d21-Humongous-Dynaudio-Consequence-speakers-70000-Gallery

Edit: Oh snap! I just now got a load of the pic. Oh my ...

 

[TLS Guy]

Very eloquently put Doc, thanks very much. You've convinced me. However, it does beg the question - what are the 95% of the population who can't afford any model from the B&W 800 series to do? Listen to crap speakers for the rest of our lives, or win a lottery?

If the crossovers in the Studios are such a problem and it was quite apparent to you, why would a supposedly competent company like Paradigm make such errors/compromises? I wouldn't have thought that correctly implementing the crossovers would be any more costly. It also contradicts the almost universal praise the Studios receive in this forum. Does it mean that fans are talking out their butts? Or, for the price, are they great speakers? The B&Ws were almost twice the price of the Paradigms. Were they twice as good? That may not be a fair question, as it's all down to the laws of diminishing returns.

Regular folk are forced to make compromises when it comes to speaker selection. Price and availability in one's local market (ID, which has its own disadvantages, notwithstanding) are probably the first two factors in filtering out possible candidates. That's the easy part. Those decisions are pretty much made for you.

Then comes the hard part...

You have to decide whether the reviews, which are invariably gushing with praise (Audioholics excepted!), are to be trusted. However, we are forced to rely, at least somewhat, on "expert" reviews, because the reviewers are supposed to have vast experience and expertise in the field. "Customer" reviews are pretty much useless which, to Audioholics, should be obvious. I can post that the speakers I bought are wonderful. But, who am I and what makes me an expert? Then there are the possible candidates that never get professionally reviewed. How is one to regard those models?

Run the gauntlet of dealers pushing their products and lambasting their competitors.

Listen to different speakers, in different listening rooms, at different times. I'm pretty certain that no normal person can accurately compare speakers in such a manner. I know I can't.

In home trials? Who has time (or space!) to compare 3 or 4 different pairs of speakers in their living rooms (how many of us have dedicated listening rooms?) at the same time? (I've done it and still isn't very easy to decide). Then, return all the losers to the dealers and get their deposits back.

Decide if you can justify paying a bit more for something that's a bit better. It's agonizing, I tells ya!

Then, you make your decision, show off your new pride and joy, then somebody says: "Those are crap speakers!" It sometimes happens in this forum.

I think most people understand that they have to make compromises when it comes to purchasing speakers. They just want to know that, for the money, they are unlikely to find much better. In the end, it all boils down to money. Knowing what the best speaker is in absolute terms, is not of great value to the vast majority of us. We want to get the absolute best speaker we can afford.

Wow! Monitoring this thread could become a full time occupation. After fall cleanup today, I'm getting ready to hibernate until about April. Only one more job left; getting up the Christmas lights before it freezes your fingers off. I should get that done this weekend.

Go-NAD you have asked some very valid questions.

I'm going to take your question, what are 95% of the population who can't afford the B & W 800 series supposed to do? Well my first piece of advice, for those with not a lot of cash to spend on speakers, is to avoid three ways like the plague. They just can't be done on the cheap. A mid range driver with enough bandwidth for a decent three way is a very expensive proposition at this time in the art. On a budget two things happen, the low crossover and to top it off a crossover right in the speech discrimination range. So you have lost the advantage of a three way right away, and added a lot of complication and opportunities to add problems, which on a budget will arise.

I think you can survey speakers, try and look at a waterfall plot first. If it is a ported reflex then always try and get a look at the impedance curve. It is easy to see if the speaker is correctly tuned. Excuses for not tuning a speaker correctly just don't hold up to scrutiny in my view.

I suspect paradigm did this deliberately, to make it sound as if it had a lot of bass and to try a cover the defects higher up the range. A speaker tuned like the Pardigm, will get very tiresome over time. So check tuning. Tuning a speaker correctly adds nothing to the cost of a speaker.

Try and audition speakers first. Pick either good bookshelves or good 2.5 ways.

There are lots of speakers out there and I have only heard the tiniest fraction.

You can build good speakers for very little. I built a set of bookshelf speakers about 14 years ago for under $50 the pair. These have passed around the family over the years, and my two boys continue to fight for them. My son Andrew has them hooked up at the moment.

So there has to be deals out there.

The husband of Andrew's wife's twin sister, has just bought Aperions, I don't know which ones. I will have a chance to hear them. The bad news is, he is already tired of them, and is begging me to design some speakers for him.

Anyhow in the next month or so, I should get a chance to see if these are value for money or not.

Unfortunately implementing good crossovers is very costly especially for a three way, and if it has a low crossover very expensive. Most commercial speakers have cheap inductors with wire gauges far too small. Good crossovers are a huge amount of work to develop and you do need high quality components. The cost of the components for my three ways in the first level of our home, cost almost $500. So getting speakers that have higher crossover points reduces cost considerably. The cost of inductors and caps for three ways is so high, that I'm convinced better active speakers could now be produced cheaper.

You are right all speakers are compromises no matter what the cost. Great speakers are the sum of intelligent compromise. The lower the budget the more compromises, however intelligent and insightful choices can still produce a very pleasant speaker. You won't find them though, unless you do your own careful research and listening.

I agree you have to read reviews with a somewhat jaundiced eye. Remember if they call a spade a spade, they stand to loose advertizing revenue.

Speakers are likely to remain the most difficult and vexing choice for audio and AV enthusiasts for the foreseeable future.

And please remember that throwing a lot of money on a speaker purchase is no guarantee of success. I think about the worst speaker my friend and I have auditioned was $50,000 per pair. It had a huge 1500 Hz peak that dominated everything especially choral music, which was a truly horrid experience hearing reproduced by those speakers.