Lossless Audio vs MP3 and Accurate Speakers vs Inaccurate speakers

[tonmeister]

.. Rather ironically, some of the speakers I have liked have had less good specifications than some of the competition that I liked less well. For example, when the Ohm Walsh 2 speaker came out, I liked it very much for a speaker at its price point (which was about $750 in the early 1980's, if my memory is right). But as I recall, their frequency response specification was with a worse tolerance than usual (+/-4dB), and even so, they did not go out to 20kHz (not that there is much musically at such a high frequency, even if one is able to hear that high). The Ohm website lists the frequency response as 42 - 17,000 Hz, but without a tolerance specified (which, again, if my memory is correct, was originally specified +/-4dB). But I have not seen comprehensive tests of this speaker, nor have I seen anything for off-axis response (which, for frequencies below the crossover point for the tweeter, should be identical to on-axis response, until one gets behind or nearly behind them, given the Walsh driver and the blocking of the sound to the rear).

.

I think it has been well-established that the standard loudspeaker industry specifications are pretty useless in terms of indicating the sound quality of the loudspeaker. As Floyd Toole has said, there is better information on the side of a tire to indicate its performance than what is shown on a loudspeaker specification ( see http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/01/what-loudspeaker-specifications-are.html).

Your experience above only confirms that. You need the entire set of curves to know how it sounds, and, even more, if you want to understand its dynamic performance.

 

[tonmeister]

How were the HS students screened for their ability to decide what sounds better or worse? In my experience, having been in A/V sales for a long time, the younger kids think that loud=good. That being the case, the Martin Logans would be considered worse than some of the others because of that deep V in the 3KHz range, where human hearing is generally most sensitive. However, the way some people listen, I'm not sure their ears are actually sensitive in ANY frequency range.

The students were not screened based on any criteria, although the completed a questionnaire/survey to determine their listening habits,etc.

The playback levels were what I would call comfortable or average, and the relative loudness of the speakers were matched. So, relative loudness differences among the speakers should not have been a factor in these tests.