I always wondered why I liked NEAT loudspeakers - now I know EXACTLY why!

[Marco]

http://www.neat.co.uk/p_pages/aboutus.php

From the website:

Neat's unusual take on the art of loudspeaker design involves the process of listening to many different types of music and allowing the music to govern the tuning and voicing of the loudspeaker - to the exclusion of almost all other criteria. In a world where most hifi equipment is designed by computer in order to conform to a set of widely accepted parameters, Neat's approach is very refreshing.

Indeed it is. The bit in bold is exactly what I've always said!

And:

The development of a NEAT loudspeaker invariably involves hundreds of hours of listening tests. The Neat listening room is the starting point, though a new design must prove its worth in a variety of different rooms and systems before it is signed off for production. Here the designers can be found making small incremental changes to all elements of the design until it is 'just right'.

Respect! And I've also always said that the best, usually bespoke, equipment is always fine-tuned by ear. That's exactly how ALL audio equipment should be made!!

I've also said that designing genuinely musically realistic hi-fi equipment, and building a system from components which qualify as such, was more of an art than it is a science (hence why this forum is called 'The Art of Sound'), although one needs both an artistic and scientific approach when building the best audio equipment, and it seems that certain respected (specialist) audio manufacturers are also on my wavelength....!

Here's something to ponder:

Musicians, based on the experience of their trained ears, instinctively *know* when music reproduced by hi-fi equipment sounds real.

In the same way, so do *some* knowledgeable audio enthusiasts, designers and music lovers, based on their extensive experience of listening to live music, amplified and un-amplified, and having assembled and listened to countless different systems over the years; and so this invaluable experience forms the benchmark from which they can accurately judge all things of a subjective nature in audio.

No test equipment can measure the judgement criteria of the trained ears of experienced and discerning musicians, who love superb sound as much as they do great music, and so hi-fi equipment which is built without its sonic performance scrutinised at length and fine-tuned by ear, as NEAT have done, will always be arguably inferior.

<Discuss>

Marco.

[Lodgesound]

As an aside to this but not entirely off-topic when Ray Dolby designed A-Type noise reduction he did extensive research into Human hearing and discovered that there are certain frequencies that we almost all universally have audible blind spots to.

The frequency bands at which Dolby A works upon divide at the frequencies discovered in this research hence on properly set up machinery you cannot hear Dolby A actually working unlike many other types of noise reduction systems which nearly always manifest audible side effects. Empirical research and real life testing should go hand in glove with all technical design and development.

[hifi_dave]

IMO, it is usually the smaller companies (or one man bands) which design and voice their products in this way. They have the passion and expertise to make good products which you either love or don't as the case may be.

The larger companies tend to design and develop by committee or (worse) by theory and computer. Sometimes, the larger companies don't listen to the products until they are on the market.

And yes, Neat make great speakers. They are beautifully put together, look elegant and most of all, sound good..

[colinB]

The philosophy appeals to me. Bunch of musicians running a hifi shop decide to make their own speaker. I think they look geat to.
Unfortunatly ive never heard a pair mores the pity.

[colinB]

The Motive 3 in oak finish

[AlexM]

Marco,

Nothing to disagree with at all in your post, but surely it is a false dichotomy in that I would be very suprised if the basic parameters of any succesful speaker design aren't arrived at through calculation and measurement initially and then tuned through subjective evaluation?.

Colouration IS measurable and part of the design and development process is to minimise this if you have accurate reproduction as a goal. For me, neutrality is important as I like to listen to a wide variety of music, and I don't want a 'classical', 'jazz' or a 'rock' preference dictated by the system - it should be possible to make a good fist of ALL of it without compromise. Again, I'd hope that the programme material used for the subjective evaluation covered all the bases to ensure this even-handedness.

I'm sure noone takes issue with validation/correlation of measured results with the subjective impression from the listener as part of the development process. Neither subjective or objective evaluation approaches is likely to work well in isolation IMHO, or at least combining the benefits of both are likely to work better, faster and cost less than trial and error alone.

Cheers,
Alex

[Reid Malenfant]

<snip> I would be very suprised if the basic parameters of any succesful speaker design aren't arrived at through calculation and measurement initially and then tuned through subjective evaluation?.

Of course they will be, they have to make a profit after all

I have no doubt that the final voicing may well be done by ear though. Looking at some of the bigger designs there is no way that a hell of a lot of number crunching hasn't been done

As a for instance, try designing the crossover for this without a computer

[DSJR]

I prefer the hundreds of hours of listening spent on the likes of Harbeths and current big Tannoys I must admit. I've long gone past the stage where a peaked up treble and limited bass is "impressive, "fast" and detailed..."

[jandl100]

Just to play devil's advocate ... ...

IMO, it is usually the smaller companies (or one man bands) which design and voice their products in this way. They have the passion and expertise to make good products which you either love or don't as the case may be.

They also don't have the £££££ to spend on a well set up anechoic chamber and measuring equipment ... much cheaper to just tweak a component by ear.

But, no, wot? Seriously now ... yes, listening should be a crucial part of the design process.
But you do end up with a particular version of The Truth that tallies with what the designer wants or prefers to hear - their own set of compromises to meet the intended price point. You may or may not agree with that particular musical balancing act. But if many companies do that you at least you get a varied range of product to choose from to meet your particular musical preferences.

[DSJR]

In fairness Jerry, I believe software is available for not too much dosh to basically check what your speakers are doing and anechoic chambers aren't always needed if you set the test up right..