TLS Guy -vs- Studio 100's

[PENG]

My BP7000SC can crank out some serious bass that a B&W 800D cannot possibly keep up. I love it.

You think my wife won't HEAR the bass if I blind-fold her eyes?

Are you kidding? DT has more bass than 800D? I have only listened to some huge DefTech speakers once and I thought they were terrible too, a bit like TLS thought of the S100 I guess. I have since read reviews after reviews about how great those speakers are supposed to sound so one of these days I am going to give them a serious listen. Most likely the dealer did something wrong back then.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Are you kidding? DT has more bass than 800D? I have only listened to some huge DefTech speakers once and I thought they were terrible too, a bit like TLS thought of the S100 I guess. I have since read reviews after reviews about how great those speakers are supposed to sound so one of these days I am going to give them a serious listen. Most likely the dealer did something wrong back then.

I will never say that the BP7000SC is a better speaker than a B&W 800D.
I can't compare a $5,500 pr vs a $23K pr of speakers.

But I will say that the BP7000SC has A LOT more BASS than a B&W 800D. No Contest IMO.

I actually listened to the BP7000SC at the dealer before I bought them. They sounded very mediocre. Actually they kind of sucked. When I got the BP7000 home, they sounded terrible too. I had to reposition them and all that jazz so it took some effort on my part. But it paid off for me. I think they sound extremely awesome right now.

Of course, I can't compare myself to TLS Guy. He might think my speakers suck too. **hee**hee

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Ouch! Paradigm is taking quite the beating in this thread, though I don't find this thread as interesting as bashing Definitive Technology.

Def Tech Sucks, man!

Who the heck wants to own Def Techs?

They must be CRAZY.

 

[highfigh]

No doubt there is variation and there are outliers, but, if we remove all sources of bias people pretty much prefer the same sound.

That's just incorrect. If testing is done by an audiologist, it's to find out what people hear, not what they prefer. If people prefer the same sound, how do you explain those who consider a system's sound to be bad unless it produces bass that could knock the fillings out of someone's teeth, screaming treble or sheer decibel levels? Most people who don't know how to correctly adjust a graphic equalizer will set it to "Happy Face" because it makes the system sound like there's MORE, not because it's correct. When more is preferred over correct, it's a preference based on their ignorance of the true purpose of equalization and that applies to how speakers sound, too.

The Fletcher-Munson (and subsequent re-analysis/modifications) show the average hearing acuity but if you compare the actual data, it's not the same for every person. It was meant to show the average, nothing more.

 

[highfigh]

I will never say that the BP7000SC is a better speaker than a B&W 800D.
I can't compare a $5,500 pr vs a $23K pr of speakers.

But I will say that the BP7000SC has A LOT more BASS than a B&W 800D. No Contest IMO.

I actually listened to the BP7000SC at the dealer before I bought them. They sounded very mediocre. Actually they kind of sucked. When I got the BP7000 home, they sounded terrible too. I had to reposition them and all that jazz so it took some effort on my part. But it paid off for me. I think they sound extremely awesome right now.

Of course, I can't compare myself to TLS Guy. He might think my speakers suck too. **hee**hee

"But I will say that the BP7000SC has A LOT more BASS than a B&W 800D. No Contest IMO." and comments like it shoots holes in the theory that most people prefer the same sound. People buy speakers because they prefer that sound, if they know how to define that. If they don't, they read reviews and comments from others who own whatever they're considering. It boils down to buying what sounds best, whether others agree, or not.

I have to ask- why would you buy speakers that you considered mediocre when you listened to them?

 

[ParadigmDawg]

Naw man, it's just a bunch of goof-balls talking specs. I welcome any of them to come over, listen to my set up and see what they have to say after that.

Maybe mine is different since it is crossed over to an awesome sub or maybe they just like my room. Who knows but it sounds pretty darn good at my house.

Ouch! Paradigm is taking quite the beating in this thread, though I don't find this thread as interesting as bashing Definitive Technology.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I have to ask- why would you buy speakers that you considered mediocre when you listened to them?

For one thing, every single speaker in the store sounded either mediocre to just plain BAD to me.

And since they allowed a 30-day return policy, I thought I would give it a true audition based on the outstanding reviews I've read.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

A Sequel?

I know Halloween is over, but does this thread have a sequel like TLS Guy -vs- BP7000SC?

 

[bandphan]

But I will say that the BP7000SC has A LOT more BASS than a B&W 800D. No Contest IMO.

I must concur

 

[billy p]

I know Halloween is over, but does this thread have a sequel like TLS Guy -vs- BP7000SC?

Hehe...why should this one be any different....
BTW..what a Striper....

 

[highfigh]

For one thing, every single speaker in the store sounded either mediocre to just plain BAD to me.

And since they allowed a 30-day return policy, I thought I would give it a true audition based on the outstanding reviews I've read.

It appears that the dealer needs a crash course on A) how to make it possible for speakers to sound best and B), how to operate a retail business in a way that minimizes returns, especially if nothing was said about the fact that the speakers will sound different once they're in the place where they'll be used.

How anyone can think that allowing speakers to sound bad in a demo room will result in good sales volume is beyond me.

 

[highfigh]

I was thinking of the Super Bass-O-Matic '76.

"That's great bass, Dan!"

 

[Alex2507]

Having an audiologist check your hearing is somewhat different than the scientific research Dr. Floyd E. Toole did. Now I'm sure nobody expects me to be able to cough up the paper that I read but my take away message was that 'most' being ~75% of the people out there preferred the same speakers. They are also fairly consistent in picking out that prefered speaker repeatedly. That remaining 25% leaves a lot of people to be exceptions to the rule. Now those 75% who do prefer the same speaker start changing their stories if they can in fact see the speakers or if they know the price of the speakers etc. That makes the statement that 'most' people prefer the same speaker in an unbiased test true. It also allows for the statement that different people like different things to be true also.

Another take away message for me was that people with hearing damage like myself do not fall in line with that 75% nor are they consistent in their preferences as the 75% is.

The fact that sighted bias is real is important to speaker companies as well. Lots of speakers look better than they sound and their owners love them, swear by them, recommend them and buy them for their kids. I don't get the arguing back and forth when scientific method has shown that both statements are true and has quantified to what extent each statement is valid.

 

[fredk]

My BP7000SC can crank out some serious bass that a B&W 800D cannot possibly keep up. I love it.

Given how neutral the 800D is, I would say that you like your bass hot. Like the monkey said, most people does not imply everybody.

Read my sig line.

Consider also that the brain is probably the most powerful and complex processor going. As an analogy, I did some diving in OZ a few years ago. At 60' down the corals and fish looked incredibly colourful and vibrant: like colours on a sunny summer day. When I looked at the pictures I took you could clearly see the blue shift due to what 60' of water filtered out. The difference? My awesome processor.

The brain will also process audio to correct it to what you should be hearing.

You can believe what you want, but until somebody else comes along and does the work, Dr. Toole's work is the standard.

TLS Guy. I won't argue with your last post as a: I agree with the comments about the $/quality correlation and b: I have not heard the speakers in question. I expect you can find issues with any speaker if you choose to. I do not know of anyone that has invented the perfect transducer.

 

[fredk]

Lots of speakers look better than they sound and their owners love them, swear by them, recommend them and buy them for their kids.

Put a big set of hooters next to them and they sound even better! Could be diffraction effects.

 

[Sheep]

Consider also that the brain is probably the most powerful and complex processor going. As an analogy, I did some diving in OZ a few years ago. At 60' down the corals and fish looked incredibly colourful and vibrant: like colours on a sunny summer day. When I looked at the pictures I took you could clearly see the blue shift due to what 60' of water filtered out. The difference? My awesome processor.

That, or you didn't setup your camera correctly.

Or, the face that human eye has a larger dynamic range and resolution then the camera you used (it doesn't matter what camera it was, either).

SheepStar

 

[fredk]

Nope. Water absorbs different wavelengths at different rates resulting in blue shift. At 90' the effect is quite noticable real time.

 

[fredk]

Since the thread has drifted to hearing and preference, here's a bit of trivia. Did you know that there is an unusual condition that shows up most often in musicians and sound engineers where hearing is shifted up in the spectrum?

I ran into a post by a guy (sound engineer) who found out that he could not hear below 1150Hz, but had perfect hearing up to almost 27KHz!

Bet he had different taste in speakers.

 

[jostenmeat]

I ran into a post by a guy (sound engineer) who found out that he could not hear below 1150Hz, but had perfect hearing up to almost 27KHz!

Bet he had different taste in speakers.

I've never heard of that before. You realize that if what that guy said was true, he could not hear the fundamental tone of any normal guitar. Not even the very highest note. Ok, on some 24 fret electric guitar, he could probably hear the fundamental tone of the top few frets. (I think the 22nd fret is about 1173 hz, using perfect intervals starting from "A").

I just got back from string quartet rehearsal. Someone jokingly asked if we wanted to tune to A=442 like the LA Phil. I rolled my eyes. We listened to a Haydn mvmt on his Ascends, to get an interpretative idea on something specific, and they were playing about a half tone lower (must have been some period tuning I'm guessing).

Anyways, if that guy can't hear below 1150hz, he doesn't have any business working as a sound engineer. Or maybe he does, and perhaps there is something I'm missing here . . . maybe he specializes in spaceship laser effects, because, well . . .

 

[fredk]

You had me scratching my head until I realized my typo. He could not hear below 150Hz. Too many ones.