"If you don't have a $200k [speaker]..."

[JackD201]

Remember Auratones? Aka Horror Tones? They were very popular with engineers in the old days to see how a recording will sound in a worst case scenario. I'm pretty sure these were not used to evaluate levels of musicianship OR recording quality. There would be maybe a couple of different monitors on the meter bridge for that The large monitors are for the clients and the final mastering stage uses a system to assess the final sound prior to mass production and again samples of the mass produce media prior to release. Again these professionals do their work on whatever is handed to them. It's their jobs. No cherry picking of performances.

 

[PeterA]

This is in my own case, yes.

No, I am not speaking for "every case and everybody." (In almost no field, except in fields like physics and engineering and math, let alone in a subjective field like this hobby, would it make sense to claim that a theory speaks for "every case and everybody." I do think the correlation underlying my theory is statistically significant. No, I cannot prove this.)

This is in your case, too. (With more auditioning experience you -- an aficionado primarily of classical music and jazz music -- eventually moved to horn loudspeakers.)

One of your primary philosophies is that musical genre drives loudspeaker preference. The way you keep stating this, it seemed to me that you think it is the case for other people as well as you. I’m glad to now know it is only in your opinion and you are only saying it about yourself.

You are wrong about genre leading me to my current system. The silly emoji makes no difference. You are still wrong. The actual sound of instruments and voices lead me to prefer my system over my former one.

And I don’t think of “loudspeaker preference“. For me, it is about everything, the entire system including format. I didn’t move to “horns“. I moved to an entirely different system and presentation.

 

[JackD201]

One of your primary philosophies is that musical genre drives loudspeaker preference. The way you keep stating this, it seemed to me that you think it is the case for other people as well as you. I’m glad to now know it is only in your opinion and you are only saying it about yourself.

You are wrong about genre leading me to my current system. The silly emoji makes no difference. You are still wrong. The actual sound of instruments and voices let me to prefer my system over my former one.

And I don’t think of “loudspeaker preference“. For me, it is about everything, the entire system including format. I didn’t move to “horns“. I moved to an entirely different system.

What happens when you play "non-natural" musical pieces. By that I mean those with amplified instruments, sampled instruments and synthesized instruments? Maybe The Stones or Pink FLoyd?

 

[Robh3606]

I tend to be drawn to speakers that do voices well.

As far as judging a system using the recording quality it's the differences between different recordings that I use the judge the system. You listen to a later Beatles album and no two songs are the same WRT sense of space, stereo presentation, and some of the dubs change whole feel because of how the dubs were recorded take them out and it changes back.

A good system should make it easy hear these differences. The easier you hear the differences even from song to song on the same album the better I believe it is. If it all sounds the same that's not good you should be able to hear those changes.

The idea of just using good performances doesn't make sense to me as it could be ether or WRT recording quaility.

Rob

 

[PeterA]

What happens when you play "non-natural" musical pieces. By that I mean those with amplified instruments, sampled instruments and synthesized instruments? Maybe The Stones or Pink FLoyd?

Those sound better too. I listen to a fair amount of classic rock. I now hear nuances and subtleties and sheer impact and rawness that I was not aware of before with my High powered solid-state amplification driving inefficient sealed box speakers.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Ahhh, here we go again with the dripping superiority.

You know it's possible to just state your opinion and keep the thoughts about how much better you are to yourself, right?

Audiophilia is just for the elites these days lol just like all the good things.
The peasants are again left with nothing .

 

[PeterA]

Audiophilia is just for the elites these days lol just like all the good things.
The peasants are again left with nothing .

Who uses words like “audiophilia”? Surely not we deplorables. Good sound does not depend on fancy wires or $200,000 speakers.

 

[bonzo75]

I tend to be drawn to speakers that do voices well.

I doubt anyone likes speakers that are not good at voices. But midrange is easiest to get right. Electrostats, ribbons, old tannoys, various horns, some cones, all do voices well. Sure some don’t either. Beryllium horn drivers sound quite like electrostats with voices, with more nuance.

But doing voices well does not necessarily mean they can also do other things well, which require more cross frequency integration. Voice is just the starting, basic

 

[ScottK]

Stop complaining . $200k is "chump change.?
A 24-year-old finance YouTuber told his followers they should be able to easily afford a $200,000 car: 'Literally pocket change' (msn.com)

Now back to the original question. I have a mixed view of extreme consumerism. First if someone can afford a $200,000 car or speaker more power to them. However, I don't think this will necessarily not get them where we all want to be which is happy in life. Stereos and cars at at any level will always leave us wanting more. In the end it's just stuff. It's those more intangible items that are often free that will ultimately lead us to that "happy place". Hmmm ....I wonder if a new $$$ amp will make my system better?

 

[microstrip]

Those sound better too. I listen to a fair amount of classic rock. I now hear nuances and subtleties and sheer impact and rawness that I was not aware of before with my High powered solid-state amplification driving inefficient sealed box speakers.

IMO this only shows your previous system was poor or contrary to usual, your hearing is improving with age.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Now back to the original question. I have a mixed view of extreme consumerism. First if someone can afford a $200,000 car or speaker more power to them. However, I don't think this will necessarily get them where we all want to be which is happy in life. Stereos and cars at at any level will always leave us wanting more. In the end it's just stuff. It's those more intangible items that are often free that will ultimately lead us to that "happy place". Hmmm ....I wonder if a new $$$ amp will make my system better?

The american magazines are like wall street .

 

[mtemur]

I doubt anyone likes speakers that are not good at voices. But midrange is easiest to get right. Electrostats, ribbons, old tannoys, various horns, some cones, all do voices well. Sure some don’t either. Beryllium horn drivers sound quite like electrostats with voices, with more nuance.

But doing voices well does not necessarily mean they can also do other things well, which require more cross frequency integration. Voice is just the starting, basic

I agree.

For example Rogers LS 3/5 does voices well. It’s a great sounding dynamic speaker down to around 90Hz and cost 1-2K used. If you willing to use them inside 2 meters and don’t bother with lack of bass you’re all set. But adding bass down to 30Hz with more SPL is very hard and costs a lot. The hassle is adding bass and high SPL with low distortion cause making a small speaker that do voices well is not hard. You can always check 16” M1 macbook pro or a good TV doing voices. You may be surprised. This is all regarding dynamic speakers not panels or other variants.

 

[microstrip]

Who uses words like “audiophilia”? Surely not we deplorables.

Victimization coming from people owning 50k preamplifiers and over 100k turntables ...

Good sound does not depend on fancy wires or $200,000 speakers.

Can you point me someone in WBF who has told that "Good sound depends on fancy wires or $200,000 speakers?

 

[Ron Resnick]

How would you know.

Because I know how I think, and I know how I respond to different sonic stimuli in this hobby.

If I knew that's all I would ever listen to, it might have inclined me not to purchase any loudspeakers at all. But it would not have steered me in a different loudspeaker direction.

Would compressed Vs not compressed recordings change your preference?

I don't know what compression here you're talking about. What is a "V"?

 

[microstrip]

One of your primary philosophies is that musical genre drives loudspeaker preference. (...)

I would be careful with such statement. IMO it drives loudspeaker choice, not preference - two very different things.

For example, for rock my preference goes to JBL DD66000 or German Physics Gaudi, but as I listen little to rock I choose other type of speakers.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron, are you unable to relax and concentrate when listening to digital?

No; I am not unable to relax and concentrate when listening to digital.

 

[bonzo75]

Because I know how I think, and I know how I respond to different sonic stimuli in this hobby.

If I knew that's all I would ever listen to, it might have inclined me not to purchase any loudspeakers at all. But it would not have steered me in a different loudspeaker direction.


I don't know what compression here you're talking about. What is a "V"?

Vs means versus, like Ms means missus

 

[microstrip]

No; I am not unable to relax and concentrate when listening to digital.

Although I can't understand what Peter means exactly by "concentrate", I will ask: Even with a known Jennifer Warmes recording?

 

[Ron Resnick]

well where the ERC is Bad sounding I wouldn’t use it to judge a system.

on some of these amateur tapes, I would not use them either. They have great sound, but poor performances plus recorded very close in room unlike a real concert hall. The ambience (lack of) feels weird too

You have lost me, here, too. I think you have backed yourself into a corner that does not make sense. How can great recordings of even poor performances not be useful in judging systems?

I "liked" Tim's Post #651, until I read at the end his unqualified condemnation of "audiophile vinyl."

By "amateur tapes" what do you mean?

Jonathan Horwich's tapes are, I believe, recorded close in room. The sound quality is stunning, even if you do not care for the performances. Because of the sound quality I can use these tapes to judge systems according to the criteria I care about, namely emotional engagement and suspension of disbelief. I can use these tapes for that purpose precisely because of their sound quality.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Although I can't understand what Peter means exactly by "concentrate", I will ask: Even with a known Jennifer Warmes recording?

Without the double negative: I am able to relax and concentrate when listening to digital.