Discussion on loudspeaker measurements as they relate - or don't - to sound

[English210]

The differing instruments are irrelevant. The problem is that if your speakers are colored they will apply those same colorations to every recording, regardless of what the original instruments or conditions were. The colorations will produce a "sameness" to the reproduced performances, and that is audible by its relative *absence* on more neutral speakers.

can we as consumers use that to our advantage, and compensate for inadequacies/over emphasis in our listening environment? If so, is that quantifiable in some way for the layman to use the measurements for?

 

[English210]

ALL speakers are colored because by definition they are a reproducing device. The goal would be "least colored". That coloration of the sound however, is part of the preference that individuals have for certain speakers.

Valid point. Isn't the same true for the recording equipment used? Or is recording equipment more accurate than reproducing equipment? I know less about recording than reproducing, yes, that really is possible

 

[ski2xblack]

But how do we know what the actual original recording was in PERSON?

Which piano, violin, guitar did they use?

Maybe they included that info in the liner notes?

Will the instruments sound differently if you sit 3 ft away vs 6 ft away vs 12 ft away vs 24 ft away?

SPL will diminish per inverse square law, but will be mitigated somewhat by room gain. They shouldn't sound much different, with increasing influence of the acoustic space, less direct and more reflected sound.

Will the instruments sound differently depending on the venues?

The difference is not in their basic characteristics but that of the acoustic environment they're placed in, and how much the recording captures that space. Different recording techniques can capture the acoustics of the primary (recording) venue, others decidedly won't.

 

[English210]

I have only heard the 802D and the 800D, so I can't comment on all B&W speakers. For these two models that I have heard, IMO they demonstrate a classic emphasis in the upper midrange and the bass that makes them sound more exciting in a dealer demo. They appear "voiced" to sound exciting, rather than completely neutral, and I seem to be particularly sensitive to it. I have a friend who owns 802Ds, and he thinks the Salon2s I use sound too reticent and unexciting for his tastes.

It is no surprise that speaker buyers have taste-related preferences. The same is true for musical instruments. Pianos sound different, for example, and people have preferences for how they think a piano should sound. Some people like a brighter, more forward sound, while others tend to like richer-sounding pianos with more bass emphasis. For years people have noticed that German Steinways sound brighter than American Steinways. No one considers one Steinway better than another, it is simply a matter of taste.

The problem with speakers is that they are not supposed to have a character of their own, and "voicing" is another word for coloration. The impression of coloration is the primary issue I have with the 802D and the 800D. (I also find their imaging to be less than competitive at their price levels, but that could be room-dependent.) In my extensive experience, recordings sound "more different" from one another on the Revels (and the KEF 207/2 and the Sound Labs and the YGs I've heard) than they do on the B&Ws, which is my unscientific indicator I use during auditioning. If someone likes the B&Ws better than other speakers I completely understand it, but if neutrality is the goal then the 800D and 802D seem a notch lower on the quality scale than the others I've listed.

In my current setup, on some recordings, pianos sound nothing like pianos, especially in the higher frequencies, although on other recordings they sound ok - I am not a pianist, and couldn't care less if it's a Steinway or Yamaha. I could find it interesting that a system resolves the details sufficiently to determine the brand of piano or saxophone, or the color of the musician's hair, but isn't music ultimately an emotional experience....wait, it is for me, but maybe not for all here...have to watch that subjective thing. I'm trying to learn more about objective comparisons...

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

ALL speakers are colored because by definition they are a reproducing device. The goal would be "least colored". That coloration of the sound however, is part of the preference that individuals have for certain speakers.

I can agree with that. Ultimately goes back to preference.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

All irrelevant because at that point, all we can do is play the recording. A recording is a point in time best acoustic capture possible. We are powerless to change the recording. But if I don't like the sound of teh recording coming form the speaker and I want to add more bass, midrange or treble or take some away, its easier done on speaker that is neutral than having one of those factors emphasized.

I can agree with that.

What I'm wondering is, if we did not have any kind of measurements, if all we did were listen by ear, would we be so judgmental about what is neutral or not? Could we easily tell by ear? Would we be listening the music or to the speakers?

Do I sound anti-audiophile?

Too liberal?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Maybe they included that info in the liner notes?

They are not going to tell you the exact serial numbers of every instrument.

Not only does every instrument sound differently, but every MUSICIAN will play it differently.

My point is, there are way too many variables. Just relax and enjoy the music.

My 802D2 sound as great as 201/2 & Salon2 in 2.1 mode (XO 80Hz). The 201/2 & Salon2 obviously measure more accurately and neutral. My point is, so what if I think they all sound great? In the end, I am listening to the music, not the 802D2, 201/2, or Salon2.

 

[English210]

I can agree with that.

What I'm wondering is, if we did not have any kind of measurements, if all we did were listen by ear, would we be so judgmental about what is neutral or not? Could we easily tell by ear? Would we be listening the music or to the speakers?

Do I sound anti-audiophile?

Too liberal?

Here we go

A rabbit trail of 'why do we listen'? To be emotionally moved by the music? Rock concert vs. Symphony concert? How does 'accuracy' come in to play there??

 

[Irvrobinson]

They are not going to tell you the exact serial numbers of every instrument.

Not only does every instrument sound differently, but every MUSICIAN will play it differently.

My point is, there are way too many variables. Just relax and enjoy the music.

My 802D2 sound as great as 201/2 & Salon2 in 2.1 mode (XO 80Hz). The 201/2 & Salon2 obviously measure more accurately and neutral. My point is, so what if I think they all sound great? In the end, I am listening to the music, not the 802D2, 201/2, or Salon2.

I knew it! I knew I smelled that 802D axe grinding. If you like the 802D, why do you need the rest of us to admit neutrality is irrelevant?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Here we go

A rabbit trail of 'why do we listen'? To be emotionally moved by the music? Rock concert vs. Symphony concert? How does 'accuracy' come in to play there??

Well, I listen to Yo-Yo Ma Plays Ennio Morricone on Bluetooth/iPhone all day long at work. Definitely not the most neutral or accurate, but I enjoy the hell out of it nonetheless.

My preference for home audio is simple: crystal clear midrange/treble and tight powerful punchy bass.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I knew it! I knew I smelled that 802D axe grinding. If you like the 802D, why do you need the rest us to admit neutrality is irrelevant?

Actually, the teacher made me take the opposing stand, remember? It hated that when I was in high school. I had to work twice as hard. Not fair.

I have to argue that speakers that measure "poorly" sound just as good. That's my task. You have the easy side of the coin.

But I have to say that thus far, I'm not convinced by your debate rebuttals.

We should take an OBJECTIVE vote right now.

 

[ski2xblack]

Here we go

A rabbit trail of 'why do we listen'? To be emotionally moved by the music? Rock concert vs. Symphony concert? How does 'accuracy' come in to play there??

Science in the service of art. Enjoying music is purely subjective, but music reproduction is a reductive affair.

 

[3db]

I can agree with that.

What I'm wondering is, if we did not have any kind of measurements, if all we did were listen by ear, would we be so judgmental about what is neutral or not? Could we easily tell by ear? Would we be listening the music or to the speakers?

Do I sound anti-audiophile?

Too liberal?

The expression, one man's meat is another man's poison applies here. Its not right or wrong to have a preference for a neutral speaker or a colored speaker. If you like the speaker and it does not cause you listener fatigue, to hell with everybody else's opinion. Enjoy it.

Now to really mess with your mind...

What if a colored speaker is such that it fits your hearing contour to make it come across as a neutral speaker in your listening environment. Is it flat or colored? If a tree falls to the ground, does it make a sound? I think this is where the subjective tsunami comes in and I point back to the one man's meat expression.

 

[English210]

Bluetooth/iPhone? From what I've read you could get all that has to offer in SQ from Bose Accoustimas


OK, doesn't that cover most of our preferences? You didn't say 'accuracy', though...

 

[English210]

The expression, one man's meat is another man's poison applies here. Its not right or wrong to have a preference for a neutral speaker or a colored speaker. If you like the speaker and it does not cause you listener fatigue, to hell with everybody else's opinion. Enjoy it.

Now to really mess with your mind...

What if a colored speaker is such that it fits your hearing contour to make it come across as a neutral speaker in your listening environment. Is it flat or colored? If a tree falls to the ground, does it make a sound? I think this is where the subjective tsunami comes in and I point back to the one man's meat expression.

Now we're getting somewhere!! Is there anything that can be determined from measurements to predict that kind of effect - or more applicably (given that the room measurements would have to be known and usually aren't) can general speaker types perhaps be excluded from a prospective buyer's search based on their design philosophy's tendencies in certain rooms.

Music is a subjective thing, and our response to it is a stirring of emotions. Do we want our equipment to replicate the live event, OR the emotional response to that live event?

 

[English210]

Science in the service of art. Enjoying music is purely subjective, but music reproduction is a reductive affair.

The more accurately it is reproduced (required total objectivity and science to replicate the live event), the more likely it is to generate the subjective emotional response?

 

[ski2xblack]

For many, yes.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Do we want our equipment to replicate the live event, OR the emotional response to that live event?

IMO, these aren't the right questions. How about this one - Do you want equipment that as faithfully as possible reproduces what's on the recording, or do you want equipment that adds some random and occasionally fortuitous, but normally detrimental, coloration to every recording?

 

[GranteedEV]

Music is a subjective thing, and our response to it is a stirring of emotions. Do we want our equipment to replicate the live event, OR the emotional response to that live event?

The latter is a function of the former. They are not mutually independant. Either way, neither is a goal. The goal of the equipment is to play back the source material. By playing back the source material accurately, you can best appreciate the source material, rather than enjoy the equipment.

The video side of this seems to be pretty clear on what calibrations are necessary for this goal. The audio side is too dependant on selling an illusion.

 

[JerryLove]

IMO, these aren't the right questions. How about this one - Do you want equipment that as faithfully as possible reproduces what's on the recording, or do you want equipment that adds some random and occasionally fortuitous, but normally detrimental, coloration to every recording?

I think this is dead on... and underscored the basic problem with non-selectable coloration (selectable would be a DSP or EQ).

What happens when the recording artist agrees with your preference and decides to put it in his recording? Now you've doubled down.
The errors happen to match your room? What happens when your room changes?
The errors happen to match your hearing? What about when your hearing changes?

From recording to reproduction, there are only two (and sometimes only one) thing that I *want* to color the response. The mix (and then not always) and EQ/DSP I've chosen to run.