what's best sounding speaker you have ever heard?

[Lee]

Exactly, The dogmatic absolutism as if this were an "objective" hobby with a "universal truth" is what we criticize.

Look, if someone is happy with their approach and thinks for them it's the best in the world, fine. But let others be happy with theirs too, without denigrating them as "they would choose differently if they knew better and had more experience" -- while forgetting that this is a subjective hobby, and more exposure may not yield the same outcome with each individual.

Or saying -- or strongly implying -- that you can achieve "Natural Sound" only with certain SET and certain high-efficiency components. If it's your preferred "Natural Sound", that's fine, but it may not be others' "natural sound".

Very well said.

 

[Tim Link]

I have a special fondness for a particular speaker driver - the Eton 4-300-25 Hex. Everything I ever built with those made a sound that I loved. Even the bare drivers without an enclosure or anything can have a captivating effect on me with their vocal rendition. The two I had got ruined in storage. It looks the 4-212 is the current equivalent. I may just have to buy some and see if they still work their magic on me.

 

[Elliot G.]

Let me welcome you all to "let's argue Forum" the subject doesnt matter, The thread doesnt matter, the field doesnt matter, its just the place to argue 24/7/365.
OH by the way the freeking best speaker on the planet today and by a long shot is the Divin Majestic> Go hear it in Germany and bring your checkbooks. LMAO The room, the set up the gear meaningless crap but the speaker that's the ticket!!!!

I all in on a Letterman style top ten contrarians list.
Who's first?

 

[Tim Link]

Let me welcome you all to "let's argue Forum" the subject doesnt matter, The thread doesnt matter, the field doesnt matter, its just the place to argue 24/7/365.
OH by the way the freeking best speaker on the planet today and by a long shot is the Divin Majestic> Go hear it in Germany and bring your checkbooks. LMAO The room, the set up the gear meaningless crap but the speaker that's the ticket!!!!

I all in on a Letterman style top ten contrarians list.
Who's first?

As a nihilist, nothing really matters to me. But that's neither here nor there.

 

[Elliot G.]

nothing really matters to me

got a song there I think Freddy would like that

 

[Tim Link]

got a song there I think Freddy would like that

Darn, he beat me to it. It doesn't matter. But that doesn't mean I don't care.

 

[Elliot G.]

Darn, he beat me to it. It doesn't matter. But that doesn't mean I don't care.

 

[Elliot G.]

too late on that one as well HAHA

 

[tima]

Exactly, The dogmatic absolutism as if this were an "objective" hobby with a "universal truth" is what we criticize.

Look, if someone is happy with their approach and thinks for them it's the best in the world, fine. But let others be happy with theirs too, without denigrating them as "they would choose differently if they knew better and had more experience" -- while forgetting that this is a subjective hobby, and more exposure may not yield the same outcome with each individual.

Or saying -- or strongly implying -- that you can achieve "Natural Sound" only with certain SET and certain high-efficiency components. If it's your preferred "Natural Sound", that's fine, but it may not be others' "natural sound".

you forgot, "in my opinion" as a preface.

 

[PeterA]

Exactly, The dogmatic absolutism as if this were an "objective" hobby with a "universal truth" is what we criticize.

……

Or saying -- or strongly implying -- that you can achieve "Natural Sound" only with certain SET and certain high-efficiency components. If it's your preferred "Natural Sound", that's fine, but it may not be others' "natural sound".

I responded in my system thread. In my opinion, this discussion is off topic here.

 

[Al M.]

Perhaps you should change the forum name to 'what's best according to me'

Not necessarily. For any reasonable person it should be clear that this is a very subjective hobby, and that any "best" in this hobby is a "subjective best".

Unfortunately, ego and self-absorption often gets in the way of reasonable thought on this forum.

 

[surfing_dude]

It would probably be - The Analog Domain - The Argus. Amazing speakers! the real thing!

But I'll take Vivid audio - Any model, Any day - the most enjoyable speakers on planet earth!

 

[Al M.]

Al, stating an opinion is one thing. Please point to where anyone stated that “natural sound” can only be achieved with certain SET and certain high-efficiency components? Name for us the claim for specific SET amplifiers and specific high-efficiency components, by which you likely mean speakers. I’ve heard very natural sounding systems with cone and panel speakers, digital, and solid-state. Of course there are preferences and opinions.

If it is only strongly implied, that implication resides in your imagination, not in any posted claim.

The premise that discussions about natural sound are presented as fact rather than someone’s opinion is a faulty one. You cannot build up your argument on a faulty premise.

We have just established in this thread about “best“ speakers that we are really talking about someone’s favorite. And that too is only an opinion, not a fact, and it is not dogmatic.

Peter, the "strongly implied" apparently lies not just in my imagination. I had summarized my thoughts in this post (#2973), and based on the reception it resonated with a number of posters who seem to feel the same.

 

[Ron Resnick]

If it is only strongly implied, that implication resides in your imagination, not in any posted claim.

Peter, you may want to rethink this one. (If you don't get yourself out of this one I think it is "checkmate" on your protestation that Natural Sound is not indelibly a component-exclusionary concept.) You are effectively eliminating the concept of implicit.

A statement can have an implication without that implication being merely the imagination of the reader. This is not my personal, subjective opinion -- this is the way the English language works.

It is incorrect to suggest that unless an assertion is explicit it is incapable of being implicit. In other words, you are saying there's no such thing as an implication (an implication which is objectively present in a statement, and not merely the imagination of the reader).

The Natural Sound crowd's inability to see, or intellectually dishonest refusal to acknowledge, that whittling from the universe of high-end components all of those components which fail the Natural Sound test such that only high-efficiency speakers, pro audio cables and Lamm electronics remain I believe is precisely the implication to which Al is referring.

That is the implication. Writing that "Only high-efficiency speakers, pro audio cables and Lamm electronics are capable of achieving Natural Sound" would be an explication -- which I agree you have not written. But the fact that you have not made it explicit, does not, by itself, mean that you have not made it implicit.

 

[PeterA]

Peter, you may want to rethink this one. (If you don't get yourself out of this one I think it is "checkmate" on your protestation that Natural Sound is not indelibly a component-exclusionary concept.) You are effectively eliminating the concept of implicit.

A statement can have an implication without that implication being merely the imagination of the reader. This is not my personal, subjective opinion -- this is the way the English language works.

It is incorrect to suggest that unless an assertion is explicit it is incapable of being implicit. In other words, you are saying there's no such thing as an implication (an implication which is objectively present in a statement, and not merely the imagination of the reader).

The Natural Sound crowd's inability to see, or intellectually dishonest refusal to acknowledge, that whittling from the universe of high-end components all of those components which fail the Natural Sound test such that only high-efficiency speakers, pro audio cables and Lamm electronics remain I believe is precisely the implication to which Al is referring.

That is the implication. Writing that "Only high-efficiency speakers, pro audio cables and Lamm electronics are capable of achieving Natural Sound" would be an explication -- which I agree you have not written. But the fact that you have not made it explicit, does not, by itself, mean that you have not made it implicit.

I responded in my system thread. In my opinion, this discussion is off topic here.

 

[dbeau]

In my opinion, this discussion is off topic here.

 

[PeterA]

Sorry to disappoint you dbeau. I am trying to be more selective about what and where I post.

IMO, the "best" versus "favorite" back and forth was fine in this thread about speakers and preference, but who here wants to read Al M. and Ron argue with me about the implications of natural sound and chessgames? I did that for years in my system thread, and the discussion is still active over there. I see no need to do it here too.

 

[Argonaut]

I responded in my system thread. In my opinion, this discussion is off topic here.

Let me translate … I wish to run away this somewhat difficult question to *My* personal system thread where I can hide and if things turn ugly play the *This Is My System Thread * card, your posts are not welcome on my personal thread , always with the option of activating tima bot to counter such difficulties with its “Its common courtesy not to … blah blah ” diatribe

 

[PeterA]

Let me translate … I want to run this difficult question away to *My* personal system thread where I can hide and if things turn ugly play the *This Is My System Thread * card, your posts are not welcome on my personal thread , with the option of activating tima bot to counter such difficulties with his “Its common courtesy not to blah blah ” diatribe

Nonesense.

Argonaut, Could you please explain why such an argument is appropriate here in a thread about speaker preferences? Al M. actually posted a link to my system thread in his response above. He directed people to my thread called Natural Sound. I decided that I would post my responses to Al and to Ron over there, following Al's lead. What is your argument for keeping it here? Who is interested?

I have no fear about discussions getting ugly. I hide from nothing here. I do not seek refuge in my system thread. Ron said "Check". I moved my piece in the other thread so this thread can get back on topic.

 

[Argonaut]

Nonesense.

Argonaut, Could you please explain why such an argument is appropriate here in a thread about speaker preferences? Al M. actually posted a link to my system thread in his response above. He directed people to my thread called Natural Sound. I decided that I would post my responses to Al and to Ron over there, following Al's lead. What is your argument for keeping it here? Who is interested?

I have no fear about discussions getting ugly. I hide from nothing here. I do not seek refuge in my system thread. Ron said "Check". I moved my piece in the other thread so this thread can get back on topic.

Why not simply respond to the points that Ron has raised upon the thread where his query was posed ? …. As I thought