Robert Harley on "How to Choose Loudspeakers"

[DetroitVinylRob]

Commenting (or actually, asking if others find value and utility in it) on someone else’s logic and recommended approach within a science or industry, if handled with due respect, which I believe Ron did, is most appropriate.

Who else but a highly knowledgeable person within the hobby or the industry would be better to comment on or ask questions about someone’s proposed methodology?

Would it be best left alone? Or only whispered about in closed circles? Or would it be better approached by someone outside the hobby and outside the industry?

I don’t think so.

If an idea can’t be held up in daylight for public debate and scrutinized, how valid is that idea?

 

[Another Johnson]

Would it be best left alone? Or only whispered about in closed circles? Or would it be better approached by someone outside the hobby and outside the industry?

if you’re not giggling as you post something like this, I’m shaking my head. How does one come up with such options?

This is a hobby with every level participant, from entry to the so-called end game. Discretionary money is spent.

This is not a secret issue to be danced around, like “the heartbreak of psoriasis.”

If you form a secret committee and tell RH he’s wrong, do you expect him to thank them and rewrite his approach, adding them as co-authors?

If left to their own devices, most people will figure out how to buy speakers that THEY LIKE, with or without guidelines from RH or RR.

 

[ssfas]

In the UK it was easy. You started relatively poor and bought a pair of BBC derivative speakers. In my case Jim Rogers JR149's. You were then in the front door, read a few What HiFi's over the years, visited an audio dealer or two and learned a bit.

In my first 28 years of audio I only had 3 pairs of speakers, JR149, Epos ES14 and Dynaudio Contour 1.1. They were all classics, you can still get JR149, Epos has been relaunched and the Contour 1.1 were recently reissued in an ungraded Heritage Special.

 

[DetroitVinylRob]

if you’re not giggling as you post something like this, I’m shaking my head. How does one come up with such options?

This is a hobby with every level participant, from entry to the so-called end game. Discretionary money is spent.

This is not a secret issue to be danced around, like “the heartbreak of psoriasis.”

If you form a secret committee and tell RH he’s wrong, do you expect him to thank them and rewrite his approach, adding them as co-authors?

If left to their own devices, most people will figure out how to buy speakers that THEY LIKE, with or without guidelines from RH or RR.

I feel you misunderstood where I was serious and where I was kidding. I’m half kidding in what I suggest because I believe nothing is off limits when talking openly about how we spend our hard earned money on a hobby we all share love for. But if I understood what was suggested earlier in this thread was that Ron’s questioning was inappropriate of RH’s ideas in the article by some dictate of decorum? Some conflict of interests? Which perhaps I am too naive to capture? I’m guessing. That is why I said what I said. I feel it is perfectly fine for Robert and or Ron, or anyone to suggest a way to approach a venture in our beloved pass time.

 

[ScottK]

IMO the most important criteria for selecting a loudspeaker is “learning” to hear first. That would be my first suggestion to a novice entering this hobby. That takes time and experience. And with all learning we often make mistakes. The other thing I’d offer is to take all reviews or advice with a grain of salt regardless of the source. Healthy skepticism in this hobby is essential. Read and hear from a variety of sources and then draw your own conclusions. Finally choices are rarely perfect and technology is constantly evolving as are our musical tastes. That’s part of the fun in this hobby.

 

[Sampajanna]

Ron, I did not feel you were disrespectful in either thread. I think these topics are worth discussing. Keep it up!

As to the issue: reading, learning and listening are all important. With friends, dealers, shows—as much as possible. If you are buying budget speakers, I agree that not having audiophiles or dealers nearby can be an issue, but if you are spending tens of thousands on speakers, a few hundreds or thousands on some flights to hear them is probably worth it.

I don‘t mind the suggestion that one read and research to make a shortlist before listening. I mostly disagree with the “trustworthy” part of RH’s statement. I wouldn’t trust these magazines at all. Read them for entertainment or to spark interest in some new product. They aren’t worth anything beyond that. I read the authors I enjoy reading, regardless of content. I like Fremer and Herb as well because I like the way they write and the music they talk about, not because I am turning to them for advice on what to buy….

Exhibit A: The lists these magazines put out every year are laughable in all ways: their ranks, the things they include, the obvious financial biases and also the things they leave out….

 

[Sampajanna]

Exhibit B: Read any audio forum and see how nitpicky audiophiles are, with disagreements on every single detail of everything. And yet, all you find in the big magazines are glowing reviews of everything. Everything is “marvelous,” front to back, top to bottom. The latest models are always “removing the veil.” Obviously, the audiophiles writing this stuff are either very different from every one I have ever met or they are being directed by an editorial department that is being directed by the advertising department…. I subscribed to one British magazine for a year until I realized that like 75% of the reviews were written by one dude, and all in a cookie-cutter format that was the same for every product. He obviously wasn’t spending adequate time with these products or with the notepad/computer in the writing process…. A cursory survey of forums, or five minutes with friends would reveal the differences in taste, how quick we are to point out faults and how quickly we make comparisons to other different or better products…. Like all media, agendas abound and the onus is on the reader to be smart, critical and develop experience and wisdom based on multiple points of view, including one’s own….

 

[treitz3]

Robert Harley aside and not considered into the equation....

(I know, not part of the topic of this thread). That said, here is my audio journey and how I decided to choose a loudspeaker.

I traveled. A lot! I learned. I experienced every loudspeaker I could get my ears on. No holds barred. I literally listened to EVERYTHING I could get my ears on.

After my travels, (and during) I researched online to find out as much as possible about the very tweeter I listened too, that really sparked my interest.

To me? The tweeter is THE most important part of a loudspeaker. This is what makes or breaks the entire sound. Yes, that magical mid-range is oh, so important as well, but without the tweeter? It's useless IMO.

This is just me and my sole opinion. Stone me if you will, laugh at me, I do not care. This is how I chose my loudspeaker and I have not one iota of disgrace about said decision. This decision was made close to 2 decades ago and with all of the advancements in audio that I have heard of to date? I still stand by my decision, and my ears still thank me for it daily.

Tom

 

[Another Johnson]

This is just me and my sole opinion. Stone me if you will, laugh at me, I do not care. This is how I chose my loudspeaker and I have not one iota of disgrace about said decision. This decision was made close to 2 decades ago and with all of the advancements in audio that I have heard of to date? I still stand by my decision, and my ears still thank me for it daily.

It is a shame that we feel the need to defend our individual approaches. Especially when they lead to a personal Audio Nirvana.

I think is wonderful when our path leads to an extended period of system stability.

I found my first perfect speakers with Thiel, and was happy for two decades. Unfortunately, an amp event destroyed them after Jim died, and I had to re-enter the quest. My path led through Martin Logan, Bowers & Wilkins, Revel, and finally to Wilson. I have been very happy at many points along the way, but the more speakers I’ve heard since going the Wilson route tell me that I’m at a new stable place and, although I don’t believe in the concept of an end game, I have no incentives to continue the quest at this point. I came back from another multi day round of high end demos yesterday, and I’m happier still that I have what I have. I hope Ron will continue to love the product of his own hard work. He has good reason to.

 

[treitz3]

Hello AJ (I hope you do not mind me referring to you as that) and good evening to you, sir. Please understand that I was not defending myself or my approach.....but when re-reading my own response, it sure does seem like it. DOH! I was simply explaining how I went about finding my own audio nirvana. This worked well (extremely well) for me.

To each, their own. Everyone has their own path along their journey.

Tom

 

[Another Johnson]

Hello AJ (I hope you do not mind me referring to you as that) and good evening to you, sir. Please understand that I was not defending myself or my approach.....but when re-reading my own response, it sure does seem like it. DOH! I was simply explaining how I went about finding my own audio nirvana. This worked well (extremely well) for me.

To each, their own. Everyone has their own path along their journey.

Tom

AJ is fine shorthand. Big Dog RJ gave me that alias several years back.

Obviously I agree with your approach. The proof is in the satisfaction. Keep up the good work.

FWIW, I picked Another Johnson as an homage to WZJ, Lew, and so many other Johnsons that have been sucked into the high end. It’s a dangerous moniker.

 

[Tangram]

The only way to pick a speaker is to listen in your room in your system, and even then, without hours and hours of listening, positioning, and tweaking, you won’t be completely sure it’s right for you. Now, that said, some knowledge can get you a long way without having the luxury of an in-home audition. I purchased four sets of speakers, and learned what didn’t work, before rolling the dice and buying direct from the manufacturer without ever hearing my current speakers. As luck would have it, my gamble paid off.

1) Learn how to listen critically and prioritize what sound characteristics are most important to you, given that compromises are almost impossible to avoid.
2) Read all the reviews, especially the ones by owners, not reviewers.
3) Talk to owners of speakers that interest you.
4) Develop a relationship with a dealer that carries brands of interest, with the goal of gaining enough trust for an in-home audition.
5) Get your room treated to a point that you CAN critically audition speakers. Many, many audiophiles skip this step, which makes picking a speaker a fool’s errand.

 

[Gregm]

The only way to pick a speaker is to listen in your room in your system, and even then, without hours and hours of listening, positioning, and tweaking, you won’t be completely sure it’s right for you. Now, that said, some knowledge can get you a long way without having the luxury of an in-home audition. (...)

1) Learn how to listen critically and prioritize what sound characteristics are most important to you, given that compromises are almost impossible to avoid.
(...)
5) Get your room treated to a point that you CAN critically audition speakers. (...)

Let me add,
6. Discover the optimum listening position(s) in your room. This is critical to getting good low end sound -- as good as your speakers of choice allow...
Regards

 

[Jägerst.]

Robert advises:

The place to start loudspeaker shopping, therefore, is in the pages of a reputable magazine with high standards for what constitutes good loudspeaker performance. After you’ve read lots of loudspeaker reviews, make up your short list of products to audition from the crème de la crème. There are several criteria to apply in making this short list to ensure that you get the best loudspeaker for your individual needs. As you apply each criterion described, the list of candidate loudspeakers will get shorter and shorter, thus easing your decision-making process. If you find yourself with too few choices at the end of the process, go back and revise your criteria.

How to Choose Loudspeakers — the absolute sound

Choosing just the right loudspeaker for your system, tastes, and home is much more challenging than picking, say, a power amplifier. Loudspeakers come in a wider range of sonic “flavors” than do other components; they must be matched electrically to your power amplifier for the best performance...

apple.news

What?!?!

You select a loudspeaker by reading a lot of reviews, and then you make up a "short list" of audition candidates based on other criteria you read about?

When do you walk into a high-end audio store and listen to a speaker? Auditioning is the last step before you write a check?

No, no, no, Robert! I want people to learn about loudspeakers by walking into high-end audio stores and listening to everything in the store and learning about different types of speakers and beginning to figure out the kind of sound one likes and beginning to understand how their favorite recordings sound different when played back on different types of speakers!

I'm in absolute agreement with you on this, @Ron Resnick. That is, my only contention, in effect, is limiting your field of criteria to "high-end audio stores;" if one is really on a mission to find out about the sound one likes, then he or she should open up that field to really not be about any "field" or category at all, but rather lean into a more exploratory approach on sound reproduction in broader, more essential terms, and completely (or as much as possible) severed from the expectations and consensus of the community and industry here.

It follows that to me "high-end audio" is not as much, or necessarily about the pinnacle of sound reproduction than it is a genre, paradigm, status, school or thought or business model even - and not least a very expensive one that ties slavishly into the saying that "you get what you pay for" (a rather capitalist mindset). We've been there before in the audiophile milieu, right? "Oh, he's just a poor sap who can't afford the expensive, really good stuff, so he doesn't know any better," and yet the monetary stance has become such a blinding factor that to many the cheaper alternative (and one that in other terms doesn't fit the audiophile narrative) on principle isn't even a consideration any longer; it's simply outruled, because if you can afford the more expensive option with the proper branding and acceptance in audiophilia, then it's also necessarily the more desirable product.

Perhaps that's taking it a bit too far, but in its extreme you're not too far off Mr. Harley's stance here, the vital difference though being that you're advocating making up your own mind based on your own findings/aural perceptions, and not adhering to the paternalistic mindset of taking the words of others as the truth. And really that's what is worrisome here: that the industry of audiophilia/high-end audio/reviewing community has come to the arrogant, closed-around-itself mentality to disregard the basic outset of the individual and his/her impressions and findings, instead promoting their own business and agenda.

 

[dcathro]

Exhibit B: Read any audio forum and see how nitpicky audiophiles are, with disagreements on every single detail of everything. And yet, all you find in the big magazines are glowing reviews of everything. Everything is “marvelous,” front to back, top to bottom. The latest models are always “removing the veil.” Obviously, the audiophiles writing this stuff are either very different from every one I have ever met or they are being directed by an editorial department that is being directed by the advertising department…. I subscribed to one British magazine for a year until I realized that like 75% of the reviews were written by one dude, and all in a cookie-cutter format that was the same for every product. He obviously wasn’t spending adequate time with these products or with the notepad/computer in the writing process…. A cursory survey of forums, or five minutes with friends would reveal the differences in taste, how quick we are to point out faults and how quickly we make comparisons to other different or better products…. Like all media, agendas abound and the onus is on the reader to be smart, critical and develop experience and wisdom based on multiple points of view, including one’s own….

Well said!

Yes it is hard to imagine how one person could review and write so much!

Notice how reviewers never criticise a product until the replacement comes out and then they dramatize the improvements to entice everybody to rush out and upgrade.

 

[Pokey77]

It is a shame that we feel the need to defend our individual approaches. Especially when they lead to a personal Audio Nirvana.

For sure.

 

[AudioHR]

I'm in absolute agreement with you on this, @Ron Resnick. That is, my only contention, in effect, is limiting your field of criteria to "high-end audio stores;" if one is really on a mission to find out about the sound one likes, then he or she should open up that field to really not be about any "field" or category at all, but rather lean into a more exploratory approach on sound reproduction in broader, more essential terms, and completely (or as much as possible) severed from the expectations and consensus of the community and industry here.

It follows that to me "high-end audio" is not as much, or necessarily about the pinnacle of sound reproduction than it is a genre, paradigm, status, school or thought or business model even - and not least a very expensive one that ties slavishly into the saying that "you get what you pay for" (a rather capitalist mindset). We've been there before in the audiophile milieu, right? "Oh, he's just a poor sap who can't afford the expensive, really good stuff, so he doesn't know any better," and yet the monetary stance has become such a blinding factor that to many the cheaper alternative (and one that in other terms doesn't fit the audiophile narrative) on principle isn't even a consideration any longer; it's simply outruled, because if you can afford the more expensive option with the proper branding and acceptance in audiophilia, then it's also necessarily the more desirable product.

Perhaps that's taking it a bit too far, but in its extreme you're not too far off Mr. Harley's stance here, the vital difference though being that you're advocating making up your own mind based on your own findings/aural perceptions, and not adhering to the paternalistic mindset of taking the words of others as the truth. And really that's what is worrisome here: that the industry of audiophilia/high-end audio/reviewing community has come to the arrogant, closed-around-itself mentality to disregard the basic outset of the individual and his/her impressions and findings, instead promoting their own business and agenda.

I think I would agree with you!

 

[godofwealth]

Robert advises:

The place to start loudspeaker shopping, therefore, is in the pages of a reputable magazine with high standards for what constitutes good loudspeaker performance. After you’ve read lots of loudspeaker reviews, make up your short list of products to audition from the crème de la crème. There are several criteria to apply in making this short list to ensure that you get the best loudspeaker for your individual needs. As you apply each criterion described, the list of candidate loudspeakers will get shorter and shorter, thus easing your decision-making process. If you find yourself with too few choices at the end of the process, go back and revise your criteria.

How to Choose Loudspeakers — the absolute sound

Choosing just the right loudspeaker for your system, tastes, and home is much more challenging than picking, say, a power amplifier. Loudspeakers come in a wider range of sonic “flavors” than do other components; they must be matched electrically to your power amplifier for the best performance...

apple.news

What?!?!

You select a loudspeaker by reading a lot of reviews, and then you make up a "short list" of audition candidates based on other criteria you read about?

When do you walk into a high-end audio store and listen to a speaker? Auditioning is the last step before you write a check?

No, no, no, Robert! I want people to learn about loudspeakers by walking into high-end audio stores and listening to everything in the store and learning about different types of speakers and beginning to figure out the kind of sound one likes and beginning to understand how their favorite recordings sound different when played back on different types of speakers!

His job is to sell his magazine and attract more readers, so they can boost their revenues from advertising. TAS and Stereophile are largely driven by advertising. I don’t read them anymore. In the good old days, 30 years ago, TAS was enjoyable largely due to the wit of Harry Pearson and the hugely informative record reviews (Sid Marks’ legendary analyses of the RCA Living Stereo series called “Marks Barks”). Advertising was minimal. The production quality was austere, mostly black and white, but it oozed much wisdom. HPs famous Super Disc list drove up prices of select LPs, but the music lovers who went rummaging through used record stores found plenty of other great vinyl. Stereophile had J. Gordon Holt, and his famous quotes (the quality of a recording is inversely proportional to its musical quality). Both have become glitzy vehicles for advertisers. The passion in the writing is gone.

 

[AudioHR]

His job is to sell his magazine and attract more readers, so they can boost their revenues from advertising. TAS and Stereophile are largely driven by advertising. I don’t read them anymore. In the good old days, 30 years ago, TAS was enjoyable largely due to the wit of Harry Pearson and the hugely informative record reviews (Sid Marks’ legendary analyses of the RCA Living Stereo series called “Marks Barks”). Advertising was minimal. The production quality was austere, mostly black and white, but it oozed much wisdom. HPs famous Super Disc list drove up prices of select LPs, but the music lovers who went rummaging through used record stores found plenty of other great vinyl. Stereophile had J. Gordon Holt, and his famous quotes (the quality of a recording is inversely proportional to its musical quality). Both have become glitzy vehicles for advertisers. The passion in the writing is gone.

Nice synopsis and basically I have to agree with you. There are still some interesting and I sense passionate writers but at the end of the day they are an advertising vehicles for the industry. I am not sure that this is all bad as it still creates continued interest in audio but their words should never be considered as gospel.

For those of us that were around at their beginning it is a sad end for two magazines that created an audiophile culture!

 

[Gregm]

In the good old days, 30 years ago, TAS was enjoyable largely due to the wit of Harry Pearson and the hugely informative record reviews (Sid Marks’ legendary analyses of the RCA Living Stereo series called “Marks Barks”).

And we have our very own "MarkusBarkus" right here at WBF...