State of the industry - Roy Gregory Editorial

[morricab]

i would think it is obvious that this forum is not really a place to learn, it is a place to convince everyone else your opinions are "right" by repetitively stating them in slightly different ways. Nevertheless, here are some links relating only to auditory acuity, not perception. Difference in processing sensory inputs is most extensively studied in people with autism; even with better awareness today of high-functioning autistics, most adults now in middle age who might qualify are not identified as such.

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/47/23753

Extended high-frequency audiometry in healthy adults with different age groups - Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery

Background It was well-documented that extended high-frequency (EHF, above 8 kHz) hearing test could be more sensitive comparing with the conventional measurement on frequency below 8 kHz, regarding the early prediction of auditory damage in certain population. However, hardly any age-specific...

journalotohns.biomedcentral.com

https://pub.dega-akustik.de/ICA2019/data/articles/000295.pdf

Benefits of Extended High-Frequency Audiometry for Everyone : The Hearing Journal

An abstract is unavailable.

journals.lww.com

(PDF) Functional Changes in the Human Auditory Cortex in Ageing

PDF | Hearing loss, presbycusis, is one of the most common sensory declines in the ageing population. Presbycusis is characterised by a deterioration in... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

www.researchgate.net

Ah, ok so your articles don't have anything to do with perception of normal people and listening preference? A bit OT then but I will still read them to see what is interesting.

BTW, you are wrong about this forum and there are many of us who are here to learn when useful information is presented....granted a lot of biased opinions but that's fun for a different reason.

 

[MarcelNL]

I was re-reading the articles to see if I missed something...apparently not.
Compensation mechanisms exist throughout the human body, listen in the dark and your hearing acuity increases, go figure ;-)

 

[Al M.]

*Separately, for audiophiles who like subjectively the sonic artifacts of "black backgrounds" and "pinpoint imaging" and a "fast sound" I think the use in dynamic driver loudspeaker cabinets of advanced materials to achieve heroic inertness and damping is desirable for these folks. Audiophiles who like this type of sound will view technological advancements in materials as sonic improvements. Audiophiles who do not like this type of sound will not view technological advancements in materials as sonic improvements.

No, I like neither "black backgrounds" nor "pinpoint imaging". I want calm backgrounds instead, and more realistic imaging.

I do want cabinet inertness for timbral accuracy, micro-detail and separation of instruments.

The main difference between my current Reference 3A Reflector speakers and my previous MM DeCapo BE monitors from the same speaker company is just that, inertness of cabinet. It is a much more important distinction between the speakers than the slightly different drivers.

So I can easily hear the difference that an inert cabinet makes, and it's all positive in the attributes listed above. Hey, the inert cabinet even allows for better dynamics in this case.

 

[Elliot G.]

After following this discussion at a distance it seems to me that again these are semantics discussions.
Audio is IMO much more of an evolutionarily discussion than a revolutionary one. IMO there have been a few revolutional things that have happened in the last 50 years but for the most part not what people talk about. Technology has changed but that is not necessarily the same thing as a revolution. In my lifetime we have the digital era, this was new technology and I consider a revolutionary change. We have the internet which IMO is the biggest change of all the things that have changed and affected this Industry, We have Forums, Audiogon, Worldwide exchange of information and ideas, online sales, and of course Streaming. These are new and revolutionary.
Making a beryllium tweeter may be very cool but its still a tweeter, not a revolution but evolution.
So all you vintage guys aren't wrong and all you technology guys aren't right . A speaker is still a speaker albeit with different materials, magnets, cabinets etc. We have advanced manufacture, new magnets, new materials, new testing etc, but at the end its still a speaker, This is also true for most other products so again these all are evolutionary steps.
I think some of the young members are trying to hard to convince others that all this technology has dramatically altered the DNA. It hasn't and that is not to say that things today aren't better but the opinions of all those who post here shows that not everyone can agree on what sounds good, looks goods, is built well or what these gizmo's should actually cost.
To me this is the same discussion over and over and over. It's tiresome, its like tube versus transistor , analog vs digital or which came first the chicken or the egg. One is never going to convince the other tribe that one is right and the other is wrong. Welcome to the world today.
When every forum breaks down to this tribalism nothing is accomplished.
I would love to learn more about stuff I don't know or have not experienced but I can't when it is just black/white discussions. If it is not a horn it sucks, if its transistor it sucks, its digital it sucks. It makes me turn off
Just one man's view.

 

[rbbert]

I was re-reading the articles to see if I missed something...apparently not.
Compensation mechanisms exist throughout the human body, listen in the dark and your hearing acuity increases, go figure ;-)

Really? so the huge variation in auditory acuity as people age means nothing?? to say nothing of the variation in acuity at any age?

As I said, perception is a different issue, but there is enough information on how creative, innovative and often highly intelligent people process sensory information (touch, taste, seeing, hearing) in different ways that I can leave that to anyone else to learn further.

Relative to our interest here

Amusia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[rbbert]

Ah, ok so your articles don't have anything to do with perception of normal people and listening preference? A bit OT then but I will still read them to see what is interesting.

BTW, you are wrong about this forum and there are many of us who are here to learn when useful information is presented....granted a lot of biased opinions but that's fun for a different reason.

I have been reading posts at this forum for over 10 years and have "learned" very little from it (Gary Koh's discussion about speaker coupling vs. decoupling being a notable exception, but that was a decade ago). It is interesting and informative to read of some posters' experiences of their journey toward more satisfying home audio reproduction, but that is different from what I consider "learning". In the past couple of years, though, most threads that start out interesting are soon hijacked by the horns/SET/system videos crew.

 

[rbbert]

...This is also true for most other products so again these all are evolutionary steps.
I think some of the young members are trying to hard to convince others that all this technology has dramatically altered the DNA. It hasn't and that is not to say that things today aren't better but the opinions of all those who post here shows that not everyone can agree on what sounds good, looks goods, is built well or what these gizmo's should actually cost.
To me this is the same discussion over and over and over. It's tiresome, its like tube versus transistor , analog vs digital or which came first the chicken or the egg. One is never going to convince the other tribe that one is right and the other is wrong. Welcome to the world today.
When every forum breaks down to this tribalism nothing is accomplished...

+1

 

[MarcelNL]

it doesn't mean nothing (mind the double negative ;-) ), it is a given exacly like the difference in taste perception between people however; it does not speak to the state of the industry or the fact that different people like different gear...it's not as if all/most >65 prefer the latest and greatest OR vintage gear BECAUSE of a certain loss of HF acuity.
Personally I think there is more of an answer in how people listen, and that there is a certain 'learning curve' in listening such as it does exist with many other senses.

 

[Elliot G.]

it doesn't mean nothing (mind the double negative ;-) ), it is a given exacly like the difference in taste perception between people however; it does not speak to the state of the industry or the fact that different people like different gear...it's not as if all/most >65 prefer the latest and greatest OR vintage gear BECAUSE of a certain loss of HF acuity.
Personally I think there is more of an answer in how people listen, and that there is a certain 'learning curve' in listening such as it does exist with many other senses.

I agree that there is a very big difference in hearing and listening. Most can ask their partners that LOL. One can learn how to listen,. It does certainly exist with other senses as well. Our palates become different as we are exposed to different foods and drinks and so listening is also a skill that can be improved.
If you read the reactions for example to the show it is amusing to me that the same thing can be so differently discussed. It can't have the best and the worst bass, it can't have the best and worst imaging. it can't have the best and the worst dynamics but yet at every show this is written about. As an exhibitor I have to let it roll of our backs and have realized this is the reality of audio.
I see at the show such different reactions and so much misinformation it makes me realize that the skill has not been learned by everyone. One does not have to hate x to like y!

 

[rbbert]

it doesn't mean nothing (mind the double negative ;-) ), it is a given exacly like the difference in taste perception between people however; it does not speak to the state of the industry or the fact that different people like different gear...it's not as if all/most >65 prefer the latest and greatest OR vintage gear BECAUSE of a certain loss of HF acuity.
Personally I think there is more of an answer in how people listen, and that there is a certain 'learning curve' in listening such as it does exist with many other senses.

I added an additional reference since you posted this. I hate to use anecdotes but sometimes they are useful. My father had amusia but (perhaps as compensation) was very sensitive to rhythm and enjoyed music like Stan Kenton's; he could only rarely recognize even his own childrens' voices over the telephone. OTOH my mother (and her mother) played piano at concert level, and even when both her hearing and cognitive abilities were disappearing she always immediately recognized voices over the telephone.

 

[morricab]

i would think it is obvious that this forum is not really a place to learn, it is a place to convince everyone else your opinions are "right" by repetitively stating them in slightly different ways. Nevertheless, here are some links relating only to auditory acuity, not perception. Difference in processing sensory inputs is most extensively studied in people with autism; even with better awareness today of high-functioning autistics, most adults now in middle age who might qualify are not identified as such.

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/47/23753

Extended high-frequency audiometry in healthy adults with different age groups - Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery

Background It was well-documented that extended high-frequency (EHF, above 8 kHz) hearing test could be more sensitive comparing with the conventional measurement on frequency below 8 kHz, regarding the early prediction of auditory damage in certain population. However, hardly any age-specific...

journalotohns.biomedcentral.com

https://pub.dega-akustik.de/ICA2019/data/articles/000295.pdf

Benefits of Extended High-Frequency Audiometry for Everyone : The Hearing Journal

An abstract is unavailable.

journals.lww.com

(PDF) Functional Changes in the Human Auditory Cortex in Ageing

PDF | Hearing loss, presbycusis, is one of the most common sensory declines in the ageing population. Presbycusis is characterised by a deterioration in... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

www.researchgate.net

I will return the favor with papers that address perception and not hearing itself per se.

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/The%20Perception%20of%20Distortion.pdf

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Distortion_AES_I.pdf

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Distortion_AES_II.pdf

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Comments%20on%20howard.pdf

https://next-tube.com/articles/Cheever/cheever.pdf

https://www.pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/02_PEARL_Arch/Vol_02/Sec_14/466_AES_Amp_Defects_Not_in_Specs.pdf

There are even older works by D.E.L Shorter from the BBC where he attempted to come up with a metric for correlating measured distortion with sound quality

Euphonic Distortion: Naughty but Nice?

In 1977, just as I was about to take my first faltering steps in hi-fi journalism, the UK's Hi-Fi News ran two articles, translated from French originals by Jean Hiraga, that seemed to me and many others to turn the audio world we knew upside down. The second of them, "Can We Hear Connecting...

www.stereophile.com

 

[morricab]

Really? so the huge variation in auditory acuity as people age means nothing?? to say nothing of the variation in acuity at any age?

As I said, perception is a different issue, but there is enough information on how creative, innovative and often highly intelligent people process sensory information (touch, taste, seeing, hearing) in different ways that I can leave that to anyone else to learn further.

Relative to our interest here

Amusia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Your brain also compensates with ageing so don't forget the primary importance of that. Highly intelligent people do perceive things differently...so when you encounter one in audio it is often not a bad idea to listen to what they think is important.

 

[wil]

I have been reading posts at this forum for over 10 years and have "learned" very little from it (Gary Koh's discussion about speaker coupling vs. decoupling being a notable exception, but that was a decade ago). It is interesting and informative to read of some posters' experiences of their journey toward more satisfying home audio reproduction, but that is different from what I consider "learning". In the past couple of years, though, most threads that start out interesting are soon hijacked by the horns/SET/system videos crew.

I agree that this forum (and probably all fora populated by competitive men) devolves repeatedly and predictably into a proving ground for showing that "I" am have chosen the right path, "I" have seen the light and that those who do not follow a similar path are likely deluded. It's tribal, bordering on religious. And their Audio religion must be reaffirmed over and over and over lest perhaps one begins to doubt their own faith?

But it's still a great forum and I appreciate many of the people with much more knowledgable than myself. Emile Bok, Ralph Karsten, Tima, Mike Lavigne just to name a few off the top of my head.

 

[andromedaaudio]

It's tribal, bordering on religious

Its a cult .
The main guru lives in a cave shaped like a horn up high in the Himalayas.
But luckily as a true guru , he has taken the vow of silence .

 

[jespera]

I don't understand this reply. You seem to be answering a different question.

I merely was providing examples of loudspeakers made today using advanced materials which are not "mainly air inside."

Now, onto your post, please tell us the systems, associated components and contexts in which you have auditioned the Rockport Lyra and the Wilson Audio XVX and the Zellaton Statement. I would like to understand clearly and specifically why you don't consider any of these three current production loudspeakers "suitable for music production."

Im not in the witness stand. Im merely exercising my opinion, which is: despite all this expensive so-called “technology”, nearly all modern speakers are uninvolving to listen to. Compressed, detail focussed, bass that hangs a mile after the music, poor tone, etc . There are some very good and extreme examples in the list you provide.

For example:

Anyone Understand Design Approach of Stenheim? What are they doing differently from Magico, YG, Wilson, etc., to have High Sensitivity?

Stenheim seems to be a new, breakout brand and is uniquely positioned to appeal to those who want modern audiophile sound in a handsome box AND to those audiophiles who want the "emotion of tubes", especially SETs, due to their high sensitivity. Anyone understand what Stenheim is doing...

www.whatsbestforum.com

I havent listened to all models from all the brands you mention. Neither have you or anyone else.

In fairness, i hadnt even heard about zellaton. But the other brands i have experienced and theyve left me cold or worse. I’ll spare you the details.

Also that saves you from giving me long lessons about how i should use more watts, other cables, different feet, and so forth.

Instead of continuing the sh!te list let me provide a (short) list of modern speaker brands i could possibly live with:

audio note uk, zu, devore, harbeth, oswald mills audio, martin logan, magnepan, some jbl’s, living voice, von langa, quad stats,

And probably more — i just havent heard them yet.

 

[Al M.]

Also that saves you from giving me long lessons about how i should use more watts, other cables, different feet, and so forth.

Instead of continuing the sh!te list let me provide a (short) list of modern speaker brands i could possibly live with:

audio note uk, zu, devore, harbeth, oswald mills audio, martin logan, magneplanar, some jbl’s, living voice, von langa, quad stats,

And probably more — i just havent heard them yet.

You don't want to use more watts? Reference 3A monitors are easily drivable with 15W/ch to great dynamics and liveliness.

 

[rando]

Pardon me Rando but I'm not clear about what you are saying, or I don't understand your point. We may be on different wavelengths.

My point about 'great leaps in digital' observed that change has largely been a function of changing file formats. Different ways to present and organize ones and zeroes. Compared to going from analog to digital, which is certainly a great leap (maybe or maybe not forward), the reading of data from a disc versus reading data transmitted from a server may be a change, but is it a great leap? Yes it is a change in delivery and mechanism, but does it offer radically improved sonics? I do not consider such a profound change that makes us re-think. ymmv

I was thinking more on the notion of what is a 'great leap' and what counts as one. I suppose that is a relative assessment. Without thinking about it much, I will say a great leap may be found with a paradigm shift, such as the Copernican Revolution - where present day theories cannot explain what needs explaining, so a wholly new theory is proposed. (Cf. Thomas Kune's 'The Structure of Scientifc Revolution'.)

As Ralph Karsten has observed, technological upheavel is often signaled by the replacement of one thing with another. The older goes away. Transportation by car versus by horse and buggy; In the case of analog and digital that has not happened.

WRT cell phones I see their impact largely as social.

edit: grammar

None of us have heard every component or experienced more than a fraction of the larger audio markets products. Especially the constantly changing programming related to digital. Sticky subject that. Lots of boats tied into a flotilla hoping to avoid being washed over. Not much leaping off waves going on if you catch my drift. HWSNBN still casts a large shadow over here.

In short I think you missed leaping into the digital boat that would've allowed breathing in a particular day's wind at speed. It did wash over you informing a few elegant stories of yachting journeys. Clearly you enjoy getting up on foil when opportunity allows. Which makes me confused how you could think powerboats were meant to outright replace sailing for pleasure. Seeing different wavelengths at similar speeds must be it.

In any case I enjoy your visions of seamanship.

 

[PeterA]

Thanks. What do you mean by this?
"The term “resolving“ generally means the ability to provide more information."

What is "more information"? About what? Timbral micro-detail, separation of instruments, dynamics, ambience? Something else?

Al, again, I don't really know what you are trying to get at. The recording has information. We want our systems to retrieve it. I want my system to retrieve as much of it as possible, presented as naturally as possible. More information is very simply more information. In this case, it tells us more of what is captured on the recording and it makes the listening experience more like what we hear live. I want to hear the information, all of it. The more you hear, the better, as long as it sounds right, not enhanced or corrupted by the system or set up or something else. We had this discussion many times here. I assume the information is delivered with low levels of distortion, but let us not go there again in this thread, please.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Im not in the witness stand. Im merely exercising my opinion, which is: despite all this expensive so-called “technology”, nearly all modern speakers are uninvolving to listen to. Compressed, detail focussed, bass that hangs a mile after the music, poor tone, etc . There are some very good and extreme examples in the list you provide.

For example:

Anyone Understand Design Approach of Stenheim? What are they doing differently from Magico, YG, Wilson, etc., to have High Sensitivity?

Stenheim seems to be a new, breakout brand and is uniquely positioned to appeal to those who want modern audiophile sound in a handsome box AND to those audiophiles who want the "emotion of tubes", especially SETs, due to their high sensitivity. Anyone understand what Stenheim is doing...

www.whatsbestforum.com

I havent listened to all models from all the brands you mention. Neither have you or anyone else.

In fairness, i hadnt even heard about zellaton. But the other brands i have experienced and theyve left me cold or worse. I’ll spare you the details.

Also that saves you from giving me long lessons about how i should use more watts, other cables, different feet, and so forth.

Instead of continuing the sh!te list let me provide a (short) list of modern speaker brands i could possibly live with:

audio note uk, zu, devore, harbeth, oswald mills audio, martin logan, magnepan, some jbl’s, living voice, von langa, quad stats,

And probably more — i just havent heard them yet.

Look at www.treehausaudiolab.com as well.
+1on Zu, natch'.

 

[rbbert]

I will return the favor with papers that address perception and not hearing itself per se.

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/The%20Perception%20of%20Distortion.pdf

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Distortion_AES_I.pdf

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Distortion_AES_II.pdf

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Comments%20on%20howard.pdf

https://next-tube.com/articles/Cheever/cheever.pdf

https://www.pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/02_PEARL_Arch/Vol_02/Sec_14/466_AES_Amp_Defects_Not_in_Specs.pdf

There are even older works by D.E.L Shorter from the BBC where he attempted to come up with a metric for correlating measured distortion with sound quality

Euphonic Distortion: Naughty but Nice?

In 1977, just as I was about to take my first faltering steps in hi-fi journalism, the UK's Hi-Fi News ran two articles, translated from French originals by Jean Hiraga, that seemed to me and many others to turn the audio world we knew upside down. The second of them, "Can We Hear Connecting...

www.stereophile.com

I don't think "distortion" (except in the sense of any change in the original signal) is the measurable property most important in audio reproduction, and the anti-distortion competition in audio electronics through the 1970's should be ample evidence of that. More, haven't Geddes and Lee manufactured speakers for sale? What has been the consumer acceptance of those speakers?