View Full Version : Should Loudspeakers Grab You?
Demmed my Akai speakers at the last NEBO, which was fun, and one opinion was: 'They are very 'Seventies. Typical Japanese 'Seventies speakers. Very pleasant sounding but they don't grab you. Okay for background music.'
Which is, to a fair extent, a good summation, although as with anything you dem somewhere else it never sounds as good as at home.
But should loudspeakers 'grab' you? Or are loudspeakers that don't grab you more neutral? Better for long-term listening? Give a more even presentation over a wide variety of material rather than sound really good with some and a bit too hard/edgy/in your face with 'the wrong' music?
Harmon do a lot of speaker research and they reckon that the most widely appreciated speakers are those with as flat a response in room as possible, even if you are listening outside the sweet spot. But they are selling to a mass market so they are not necessarily looking for the best solution, but a solution the majority will buy.
As for me I am looking for a 'final' set of speakers that will tick all my boxes and it isn't easy. So this question has been on my mind.
What say you?
Virtual-Symmetry
15-06-2016, 17:17
Never ever listerned to loudspeakers loud, always been back ground music. However i have heard some real nasty in your face speakers that people seem to think is normal! Ive always been a vintage Castle man at heart cos these play very well at very low volume, something a lot of speakers cannot do.
I've had more grief from 'laid-back' than from 'reach out and grab you' loudspeakers, probably due in part to the room they were used in (large, high ceilings, heavily furnished). A 'brighter' balance helped in that I no longer fall asleep halfway through an album.
Firebottle
15-06-2016, 17:26
Yes I think they do need to 'grab you' in some way.
However I think that the 'grab way' can vary from person to person, depending on their tastes (dub bass and no treble just as an example) and previous experience of music systems.
I guess a good percentage on here want a wide frequency response not highlighted in any particular spot. Then of course there is the room response to factor in :doh:
Good question but with such variance of response, hearing, tastes and room factors I would hazard there isn't going to be an ideal 'grab' factor.
It depends on a lot of things Martin, including sources used and music played (dynamics). For the most part, the speakers shouldn't draw too much attention to themselves in a boom-tizz type "hifi fireworks" type of impression. That's best left to the hii shows for the run of the mill boxes voiced to impress on first brief listen, the sort that are moved on within a few months of purchase! Things should imho sound "natural" and unforced with a good wide frequency response from a true 40Hz minimum (preferably lower) to over 15KHz before any roll off ( preferably higher) as we have to consider polar response and not just on-axis. They should also have a very smooth off axis response (polar response again) with no obvious waist or steps that cause phase-shifts and alterations to sound-stage. Such speakers are surprisingly few and far between.
I would take issue with having a "flat" in-room response as in truth, that would really sound quite fatiguing as it discounts absorption by soft furnishings in the upper HF region. Instead, the more naturally voiced speakers will have a gently sloped response with a slight tilt from bass to HF. However, the reality is that this is really only critical in the most sensitive of hearing ranges (say between 200 Hz to around 5KHz) and indeed, as one gets older, some lift from 6 or 7 KHz upwards is no bad thing.
All of this though is meaningless unless a threshold is established since the F-M effect will alter perceived response with SPL, so you must choose a design which works well and have the tailored response at the sort of SPL that you would normally listen at. Pointless having a flat response at 50dBA then making your ears bleed with a very lifted HF (and bass) response at say 80dB.
I voice my designs to have the tailored response between 75 and 80dB which allows a semblance of balance for a reasonable range of around 60 to 85 dB, the sort of level most of us listen between. This doesn't account for peaks in dynamic range which for a programme level of say 75dB can be up around 100dB.
The last point is important because you want a speaker that is well able to deliver clean peaks in transient response of over 100dB for realism. Its undesirable to have these peaks lifted too much above that for domestic purposes since we don't want our ears, or windows blown out. That's one of the reasons that mastering engineers apply compression. A lot is dependant upon the mastering but the above assumes good technique and a decent recording.
If it sounds right, and sounds natural and effortless with a good deep sound-stage and good off axis performance, chances are it is right and you'll enjoy them no-matter what the music. Get any of the above badly wrong and you wont.
the above is an over-simplification as there are a myriad of other things to consider including phase response, box colouration, spectral decay etc etc. The best sounding, more than usually, also measure that way. Your ears only confirm the soundness of the design.
So what are you using then Joe? My room is also large, high ceilings (well 9.5 feet so higher than a modern house) and heavily furnished.
So what are you using then Joe? My room is also large, high ceilings (well 9.5 feet so higher than a modern house) and heavily furnished.
I'm currently using Spendor D7s in the main system (the upstairs room has entirely different acoustics so isn't relevant in this context). The 'problem' speakers, ironically in view of Andre's comment above, were Castle Chesters. Nothing I used could wake them up, so I ended up listening via headphones a lot of the time.
All of this though is meaningless unless a threshold is established since the F-M effect will alter perceived response with SPL, so you must choose a design which works well and have the tailored response at the sort of SPL that you would normally listen at. Pointless having a flat response at 50dBA then making your ears bleed with a very lifted HF (and bass) response at say 80dB.
I voice my designs to have the tailored response between 75 and 80dB which allows a semblance of balance for a reasonable range of around 60 to 85 dB, the sort of level most of us listen between. This doesn't account for peaks in dynamic range which for a programme level of say 75dB can be up around 100dB.
.
That is something I hadn't really considered before. I guess this would be why all systems tend to have a sweet spot on the volume where it all comes together and a pint further on, possibly not much further, where it falls apart? Assuming it isn't the amp clipping that is.
Rothchild
15-06-2016, 18:05
In my studio I calibrate the volume in the room to a set level (using the K metering system ie. a -20dBFS test tone generates 83dB(C) SPL at the listening position) and this really helps to ensure there's consistency in my mixing, it also helps, if I'm listening in there, to determine how (over)mastered a recording is. A loudness war record makes it painful to bring the monitor controller much past half way but a nicely mastered recording could get turned very nearly all the way up (generally the dial only goes all the way up when I'm recording and mixing)
I only mention this as it sort of works as a corollary to Paul's observations about Fletcher Munson etc.
I think it's probably also valid to point out that a room with a flat frequency response is not necessarily a flat room as it's also about having an even decay time across the spectrum, which is very difficult to achieve.
As to whether speakers should 'grab you' I think not, but looking at my preferences against many members here it does seem that I like my hifi much more 'laid back' than many.
Speakers should never 'grab you' - the music should do that.
Speakers that 'grab you' are often described as 'impressive'. Another term of opprobium, as one quickly tires when listening to 'impressive' speakers.
(As a point of information, I use Quad 57 ESLs. Have done for forty years.)
In my studio I calibrate the volume in the room to a set level (using the K metering system ie. a -20dBFS test tone generates 83dB(C) SPL at the listening position) and this really helps to ensure there's consistency in my mixing, it also helps, if I'm listening in there, to determine how (over)mastered a recording is. A loudness war record makes it painful to bring the monitor controller much past half way but a nicely mastered recording could get turned very nearly all the way up (generally the dial only goes all the way up when I'm recording and mixing)
I only mention this as it sort of works as a corollary to Paul's observations about Fletcher Munson etc.
I think it's probably also valid to point out that a room with a flat frequency response is not necessarily a flat room as it's also about having an even decay time across the spectrum, which is very difficult to achieve.
As to whether speakers should 'grab you' I think not, but looking at my preferences against many members here it does seem that I like my hifi much more 'laid back' than many.
That's a very valid point Marc. For practical purposes, its nigh on impossible to have that even decay in most living rooms as 1) they're not purpose designed (unless you're really lucky!) and 2) It'd take some significant investment in treatment even if the dimensions were suitable.
In practice, achieving a smooth room power response at the listening position, with a gentle down tilt on-axis if well furnished achieves a reasonable compromise. No use having a perfect room either if the boxes themselves don't exhibit either very low levels of resonance amplitude or otherwise get rid of stored energy very very quickly (as in a well designed thin wall design). I prefer the former...to break up resonance such that sub panels on cabinets have different harmonics, then stiffen/damp them to the extent that the frequencies are shifted up out of the sensitive region and also that the amplitude falls at least 45dB below programme. I call this "constrained panel design" but others use different phrases to describve the same thing. This aspect of design is all about controlling resonance and decay, be that the room or the cabinets themselves.
Also worth saying that having the best speakers in the world wont help your enjoyment of the room is awful. Most rooms benefit from some treatment and thought into reducing reflections.
walpurgis
15-06-2016, 18:29
Speakers should never 'grab you' - the music should do that.
Speakers that 'grab you' are often described as 'impressive'. Another term of opprobium, as one quickly tires when listening to 'impressive' speakers.
Totally agree. That applies to any piece of Hi-Fi equipment, not just speakers. An amp or cartridge for instance, that makes a spectacular impression on first listening, may not prove to be too great to live with in the end.
walpurgis
15-06-2016, 18:45
Mine creep up on you
I don't hear mine. I just hear through them into the music.
paulf-2007
15-06-2016, 19:05
Totally agree. That applies to any piece of Hi-Fi equipment, not just speakers. An amp or cartridge for instance, that makes a spectacular impression on first listening, may not prove to be too great to live with in the end.yes indeed the Denon DL 110 did just that, initially wow, then just irritatingly bright. To be fair though it may not have been matched to my phonostage st that time in my journey.
As for speakers I prefer a more in my face presentation but not to the point of harsh, distorted, shouty or boomy. Laid back speakers and carts like IO's don't do it for me. There are compromises along the way or you are just kidding yourselves. As for that final pair......there's no such thing. My room is treated with absorption panels at first reflection points on the walls and ceiling and back wall and without that I believe it's a lottery to find something to live with long term.
Haselsh1
15-06-2016, 19:11
I kind of think that the whole system configuration should grab you but not necessarily the loudspeakers on their own.
I don't hear mine. I just hear through them into the music.
I dont have that ability alas. they are there, I here music thus I here them ;)
Can a loudspeaker be too explicit? Not sure if that is the right word but I prefer it to 'revealing'.
All tooo confusing.
I try and attend as many Live performances as possible.
My only care is on getting my Audio 'stuff' to sound as similar to what I heard live.. as realistically as practical.
A hit 'n miss exercise without doubt.
Happily, a few more hits than misses.. recently.
Virtual-Symmetry
15-06-2016, 20:17
There should be no brightness, Silly forced detail & general edge of the seat listerning imho..We aint bats at the end of the day.
;)
fatmarley
15-06-2016, 22:05
Can a loudspeaker be too explicit? Not sure if that is the right word but I prefer it to 'revealing'.
I think a revealing speaker can be a problem because it's an open window to everything that feeds it. The problem is knowing if the speaker is revealing, or just distorting the signal in some way.
fatmarley
15-06-2016, 22:13
All tooo confusing.
I try and attend as many Live performances as possible.
My only care is on getting my Audio 'stuff' to sound as similar to what I heard live.. as realistically as practical.
A hit 'n miss exercise without doubt.
Happily, a few more hits than misses.. recently.
I suppose it's all a matter of taste at the end of the day. Some people want that live sound (me included) and some want a relaxing, smooth sound. Actually what I'm aiming for at the moment is a smooth sound that sounds like thunder and lightning when the music calls for it.
walpurgis
15-06-2016, 23:08
I think a revealing speaker can be a problem because it's an open window to everything that feeds it. The problem is knowing if the speaker is revealing, or just distorting the signal in some way.
Revealing speakers should not be confused speakers having a forward presentation. Spendor and Harbeth speakers are revealing, but relaxed and smooth in presentation. Shortcomings in the system preceding the speakers will undoubtedly be shown up by good speakers. That just means attention is needed elsewhere.
walpurgis
15-06-2016, 23:24
Actually what I'm aiming for at the moment is a smooth sound that sounds like thunder and lightning when the music calls for it.
That would be a pair of big vintage Apogee ribbon speakers then.
Trouble is a fine set will cost you an arm and a leg. But not as much as a good amp that can actually drive them!
I reckon Avantegarde Trios could offer a similarly satisfying experience. But unfortunately, even though they are less amp demanding they cost a bomb.
CornishPasty
16-06-2016, 03:22
I've had my IMF TLS80s for so long now I can't imagine life without them. Yes I've heard speakers that do better thunder and more lightning but they're not for me. I'm always happy to return home to my IMFs. We understand each other :)
fatmarley
16-06-2016, 06:21
That would be a pair of big vintage Apogee ribbon speakers then.
Trouble is a fine set will cost you an arm and a leg. But not as much as a good amp that can actually drive them!
I reckon Avantegarde Trios could offer a similarly satisfying experience. But unfortunately, even though they are less amp demanding they cost a bomb.
I design my own, so I can only hope that's what my next pair will sound like. I'm trying to break the laws of physics (Small box, easy to drive, simple crossover and big sound) and so far, it's looking good on paper.
Some speakers are much better in their transient response (ability to start and stop quickly) and ability to critically damp the drivers (make sure the drivers don't start to ring). This is what drives the subjective feel of 'grabbing the music'.
Originally Posted by Macca View Post
'Can a loudspeaker be too explicit? Not sure if that is the right word but I prefer it to 'revealing'.
When I acquired a pair of Yamaha NS1000 speakers I had to throw out some cd's because the yams revealed the shoddiness of the recordings, and rendered them unplayable. I wouldn't say they were too revealing/explicit as the flip side is revealing the nuances of great recording.
I think if the speakers are conspicious in that they "grab you" then to me somethings not right.
Ideally, for me at least, you shouldn't be drawn to one piece of equipment but the music that comes from your system as a whole.
In fact, going one step further (again ideally) the system should get out of the way completely.
Let the music do the talking, not the kit.
walpurgis
16-06-2016, 09:17
I'm trying to break the laws of physics (Small box, easy to drive, simple crossover and big sound) and so far, it's looking good on paper.
Linn tried that with the Sara. It was not that easy to drive though. :)
Loudspeakers should serve the music rather than impart their own signature, but then that's true of all parts of audio reproduction. Speakers that make everything easy to listen to are just as inaccurate and coloured as ones that make everything sound 'edge of the seat', it's just that they are coloured in different ways. If the music is soothing and relaxed then that is how the speakers should convey it and if it's more of the 'grab you' type then that is how the speakers should deliver it.
Pretty much my thinking too, Mark. But it is a lot harder to get the speakers to sound neutral than it is with the rest of the equipment.
There then follows a school of thought that says because speakers will always be coloured it doesn't matter if the rest of the kit is, providing it 'sounds good'. My problem with that is that it can't then sound good with all types of music, the colourations will make some things sound wrong. Then the recording quality gets blamed, wrongly in my view.
Arkless Electronics
16-06-2016, 15:00
Loudspeakers should serve the music rather than impart their own signature, but then that's true of all parts of audio reproduction. Speakers that make everything easy to listen to are just as inaccurate and coloured as ones that make everything sound 'edge of the seat', it's just that they are coloured in different ways. If the music is soothing and relaxed then that is how the speakers should convey it and if it's more of the 'grab you' type then that is how the speakers should deliver it.
Yup that's how I see it.
Pretty much my thinking too, Mark. But it is a lot harder to get the speakers to sound neutral than it is with the rest of the equipment.
Yes, I agree - or at least it is if you also take in to account the interaction with the room.
There then follows a school of thought that says because speakers will always be coloured it doesn't matter if the rest of the kit is, providing it 'sounds good'. My problem with that is that it can't then sound good with all types of music, the colourations will make some things sound wrong. Then the recording quality gets blamed, wrongly in my view.
For me, two wrongs don't make a right - just because one element has a colouration doesn't mean to hell with it and ignore the issue altogether. As you say, the problem with colouration is that it is effectively an unplanned for effect laid over the music; some music it may favour but other stuff definitely not. Linn Kans are a good example - quite magical on the right material, super quick, agile and vivid - on the wrong material they sound dynamically strangled, short on extension and dynamic range (orchestral music is simply dire IMO).
Arkless Electronics
16-06-2016, 15:33
The room is of course super important! I've heard budget systems that happen to integrate near perfectly with a pretty ideal room sound so good it has left me going :scratch: and very expensive systems sound lousy due to poor room acoustics and speaker placement!
I think unless the room is terrible or the 'speakers totally unsuitable the importance of the room is not as much of a deal-breaker as some suggest. That's not to say you can't improve the sound by improving the listening environment but it won't make silk purse from a sow's ear.
Although I may just be spoiled by having a good room for the past 18 years.
Arkless Electronics
16-06-2016, 15:42
I think unless the room is terrible or the 'speakers totally unsuitable the importance of the room is not as much of a deal-breaker as some suggest. That's not to say you can't improve the sound by improving the listening environment but it won't make silk purse from a sow's ear.
Although I may just be spoiled by having a good room for the past 18 years.
A true example. A friend of mine had a system which consisted of a Planar 3, a phono stage he built to one of my designs, modded Quad 405 and B & W DM4's which sounded really good... better than one may even expect. He moved house and had a completely different shaped room with concrete floor. When carefully set up in his new room it sounded awful! Much faffing about got it considerably better but still nowhere near the sound he once had in his old room ;)
Audio Advent
16-06-2016, 16:48
It depends on what you are used to !
If you're used to speakers that sound poor then ones which sound great will grab you with how great they sound.
Spend years listening to speakers with lots of box colouration and then suddenly hear a pair with no box colouration and the difference will grab you.
Spend years listening to the perfect, mythical speaker and one that sounds dull and bassy will "grab you", just not in a positive way.
It is only the difference between what you normally hear and the speakers that will grab you, it will not tell you whether they are better or not in every way, only different.
A true example. A friend of mine had a system which consisted of a Planar 3, a phono stage he built to one of my designs, modded Quad 405 and B & W DM4's which sounded really good... better than one may even expect. He moved house and had a completely different shaped room with concrete floor. When carefully set up in his new room it sounded awful! Much faffing about got it considerably better but still nowhere near the sound he once had in his old room ;)
Yes I've had the same issues more than once as used to move house a lot. What I'm saying is room improvements won't cure a rough sounding mid or a distorted top end. If the boxes are not working right together to begin with it won't matter what you do to the room.
Audio Advent
16-06-2016, 17:17
All tooo confusing.
I try and attend as many Live performances as possible.
My only care is on getting my Audio 'stuff' to sound as similar to what I heard live.. as realistically as practical.
A hit 'n miss exercise without doubt.
Happily, a few more hits than misses.. recently.
I don't think you have to go to live performances - live sound happens all around you every second of the day to judge on the speed of attack of every day sounds, timbre etc. You just have to choose your test tracks appropriately so that they are ones you can compare with real life easily.
Also live music is often not what is being recorded unless one listens only to either live acoustic recordings or bootlegs from gigs (even then, it will often be from the mics on stage off the desk). 90% of studio recordings are definately not related to the sound of live performances either where the mics are placed immediately next to guitar cabs or directly above a brass section etc etc. Directly recorded instruments like synths are a completely different matter too.
If you try to get a studio recording sound like a live performance you've experienced then you'll likely end up trying to colour, to twist the sound to fit expectation.
Think there needs to be a holistic approach to finding the best speaker but then again personal preference should take precendent over true accuracy.
But should loudspeakers 'grab' you? Or are loudspeakers that don't grab you more neutral? Better for long-term listening? Give a more even presentation over a wide variety of material rather than sound really good with some and a bit too hard/edgy/in your face with 'the wrong' music?
What say you?
For my part, one of the best pair of loudspeakers (http://www.jeanmaurerhifi.ch/high-end/enceinte-acoustique-passive-jm-370e/)I've ever listened to, just disappeared. So, I guess, I prefer not to be grabbed by a loudspeaker ;)
icehockeyboy
18-06-2016, 08:37
It depends on what you are used to !
If you're used to speakers that sound poor then ones which sound great will grab you with how great they sound.
Spend years listening to speakers with lots of box colouration and then suddenly hear a pair with no box colouration and the difference will grab you.
Spend years listening to the perfect, mythical speaker and one that sounds dull and bassy will "grab you", just not in a positive way.
It is only the difference between what you normally hear and the speakers that will grab you, it will not tell you whether they are better or not in every way, only different.
There's that old saying again, 'better, or different'
I don't believe I've ever thought to myself " oh, those loudspeakers grab me" but I have thought, " wow, these speakers are better than the ones I've just replaced"
Whatever puts a ( long term) smile on your face works for me, just like my Ushers, can't see them going anywhere, except when I need to downsize.
Clive197
18-06-2016, 09:06
About 44-45 years ago, I found myself in Studio 99 in Swiss Cottage having a demo of some cheap speakers for my bedroom. While listening another customer came into the room and asked if he could listen to the 'new' Spendor BC1's. The assistant asked if I would mind and he pressed a button on his 'comparator' (remember those) and the 3 of us listened. I was 'grabbed', not because the music was forward and bright but because I'd never heard anything so smooth and detailed, neutral even. I vowed to own a pair one day when I was a little more affluent. 35 years later I bought my 1st pair of Spendors (S6), I'm now on my 3rd pair (D7). I think it's fair to say that the speakers grabbed me and never let go.
walpurgis
18-06-2016, 09:46
For my part, one of the best pair of loudspeakers (http://www.jeanmaurerhifi.ch/high-end/enceinte-acoustique-passive-jm-370e/)I've ever listened to, just disappeared. So, I guess, I prefer not to be grabbed by a loudspeaker ;)
Yes. The French have a knack with speakers. I heard a pair of JMR (Jean Marie Reynaud) Offrande speakers some years ago and was struck by the sheer quality of the sound. They were beautiful to listen to.
Yes. The French have a knack with speakers. I heard a pair of JMR (Jean Marie Reynaud) Offrande speakers some years ago and was struck by the sheer quality of the sound. They were beautiful to listen to.
These are actually "Jean-Mauer". I get them mixed up as well. Its a (very) local Swiss brand. Hand build from A-Z by Mr. Maurer & Co. They have auditions on Thursdays. They are located in Aubonne (40 or so minutes from GVA airport). if any of you are over for a visit to Switzerland this summer it would maybe be worth while dropping in there, of course, all whilst doing a tour through the "La Côte" vineyards :) (nice wine, Malakoff cheese balls, Fondue (even in Summer), Festivals and so on...)
I had a pair of JM220 two way speakers which I sold off a couple of years ago after having had them for 30 odd years. A big mistake. I see now, that JM also build their amplifiers.
https://www.google.ch/maps/dir/''/jean+maurer+aubonne/@46.4946526,6.3222063,12z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x478c48791f7d b6e1:0xbf6f601bd5c1232e!2m2!1d6.392246!2d46.494674
http://www.jeanmaurerhifi.ch/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/image_showroom_aubonne.jpg
Had a set of Focal/ JM Labs French speakers... Excellent they were too.
There doesn't seem to be any consensus then as to whether speakers should grab you or not, or even as to what it actually is that does the grabbing.
It is said that some manufacturers will engineer in a bit of HF lift so the speaker will stand out in a showroom comparison. Not sure if it really is that simple, though.
I'm sure some speakers do that, but I'm also sure it's something that would not only 'grab' my attention, but would annoy the hell out of me.
Much like the current fashion for the 'upward trailing interogative' in speech nowadays (an Australianism that seems to have infected current speech whereby every sentence sounds like a question).
There doesn't seem to be any consensus then as to whether speakers should grab you or not, or even as to what it actually is that does the grabbing.
It is said that some manufacturers will engineer in a bit of HF lift so the speaker will stand out in a showroom comparison. Not sure if it really is that simple, though.
maybe it is the "grab" word ?
maybe it is the "grab" word ?
Maybe so! But that was the word used.
Perhaps if the question was phrased the other way round. What attributes of a speaker will make it sound bland? Assuming the rest of the system is fine.
I don't think we need get bogged down with semantics. To say that a speaker "grabs you", is the same as saying the speaker draws attention to itself. Any aspect of a speaker's performance that gets in the way of the music, or imparts it's own character on the music, is a bad thing IMO.
ALL SPEAKERS ARE FLAWED - you have to choose one whose flaws present less of an imposition to your musical enjoyment.
As I commented previously, an 'impressive' speaker will likely have characteristics that are initially beguiling, but will become tiresome with time. On the other hand, a neutral speaker possessing few characteristics may initially sound boring, but will with time be seen (or heard) to the the better for it, due to it's lack of character.
Clive197
18-06-2016, 13:29
I don't think we need get bogged down with semantics. To say that a speaker "grabs you", is the same as saying the speaker draws attention to itself. Any aspect of a speaker's performance that gets in the way of the music, or imparts it's own character on the music, is a bad thing IMO.
ALL SPEAKERS ARE FLAWED - you have to choose one whose flaws present less of an imposition to your musical enjoyment.
As I commented previously, an 'impressive' speaker will likely have characteristics that are initially beguiling, but will become tiresome with time. On the other hand, a neutral speaker possessing few characteristics may initially sound boring, but will with time be seen (or heard) to the the better for it, due to it's lack of character.
I agree with your comment that all speakers are flawed but I'm going to beg to differ on your other comments which are the total opposite of my own experience.
Demmed my Akai speakers at the last NEBO, which was fun, and one opinion was: 'They are very 'Seventies. Typical Japanese 'Seventies speakers. Very pleasant sounding but they don't grab you. Okay for background music.'
Which is, to a fair extent, a good summation, although as with anything you dem somewhere else it never sounds as good as at home.
But should loudspeakers 'grab' you? Or are loudspeakers that don't grab you more neutral? Better for long-term listening? Give a more even presentation over a wide variety of material rather than sound really good with some and a bit too hard/edgy/in your face with 'the wrong' music?
Harmon do a lot of speaker research and they reckon that the most widely appreciated speakers are those with as flat a response in room as possible, even if you are listening outside the sweet spot. But they are selling to a mass market so they are not necessarily looking for the best solution, but a solution the majority will buy.
As for me I am looking for a 'final' set of speakers that will tick all my boxes and it isn't easy. So this question has been on my mind.
What say you?
What is your criteria of a "perfect" sounding speaker (boxes to tick) ? :)
Mine are perfect.. Dont really impress for some time, if ever...now that is impressive ... My new ones might be impressively worse, or is that better:scratch:
I agree with your comment that all speakers are flawed but I'm going to beg to differ on your other comments which are the total opposite of my own experience.
That's OK, your experiences are not the same as mine, nor would I expect them to be.
In a previous post you say you were 'grabbed' by the Spendor BC1s, for their smoothness and neutrality. They were designed by Spencer Hughes who formerly worked for the BBC Research and Design Department. Based on his experience there, the Spendor designs follow the BBC philosophy of using neutral sounding speakers with as few characteristics as possible, and depending on the environment in which they are used, they may be designed to have curtailed frequency response.
I do however find it difficult to understand how one could be 'grabbed' by a largely neutral sounding speaker, anymore than one could be 'grabbed' by say the original Quad ESLs.
Clive197
18-06-2016, 14:22
That's OK, your experiences are not the same as mine, nor would I expect them to be.
In a previous post you say you were 'grabbed' by the Spendor BC1s, for their smoothness and neutrality. They were designed by Spencer Hughes who formerly worked for the BBC Research and Design Department. Based on his experience there, the Spendor designs follow the BBC philosophy of using neutral sounding speakers with as few characteristics as possible, and depending on the environment in which they are used, they may be designed to have curtailed frequency response.
I do however find it difficult to understand how one could be 'grabbed' by a largely neutral sounding speaker, anymore than one could be 'grabbed' by say the original Quad ESLs.
As a young man in my early twenties I had never heard the type of speaker that you are citing. The BC1's were a completely new experience to me (and to many others at the time). Very different from the commercially available cheaper speakers that most of my contemperies would be listening to. I'll stick to my grabbed comment.
Well whatever your impressions were at the time Clive, you made a good decision. :)
There seems to be little consensus on this topic, and a fair few generalisations floating about too!
It is perfectly possible for a loudspeaker to "grab" your attention without being flawed in some outstanding respect, insofar as it portrays music in say a realistic fashion that others amongst its peers do not.
That doesn't mean that it uses "Smiley face" tuning or some other play on frequency response. Indeed FR is only one part of what makes a loudspeaker sound the way it does.
Lets look at a few examples, then ask yourself whether these could be good examples of whether a 'speaker system "grabbing" you is in a positive manner:
You hear a classical symphony which may or may not be to your taste played through a set of loudspeakers that have the ability to swing the dynamic contrasts over, lets say, programme plus 40dBA. In other words, you have a speaker system capable of portraying a very lightly compressed recording with a very high dynamic range of say a total 90dBA. Bear with the figures as they're only serving to highlight a point. You have heard a live concert and even at the back, you know just how staggering these dynamic contrasts are in reality. You are impressed that speaker system "A" (lets say) provided a good stab at this but listen to 'speaker system "B" which was incapable of providing that clean dynamic swing even though the FR of both was identical.
You are aware that it is not beneficial to have the true dynamic contrast replayed at home in a domestic setting as the dynamic range is simply too high to be good for your hearing, the structural integrity of your home and your neighbours! It is one of the good reasons for a degree of audio compression at the mastering stage.
You then pit 'speaker "A" up against 'Speaker "C" which has the same dynamic range BUT whose crossover and driver arrangement offers far better polar response (off axis) allowing the speakers to "disappear" better and which give a much wider sweet spot. Again these have the same FR as all the others you audition. This polar response allows in your room (for arguments' sake) a smoother room power response overall too. Remember it still has the exact same on-axis FR as all the others.
It's not hard to see that you don't have to dig too hard into valuable traits of good loudspeaker design to see that irrespective of on-axis frequency response or sensitivity just how different one loudspeaker design can sound from another. To my mind, the one that would grab my attention is the one that allowed the speakers to do the disappearing trick best and which portrayed the most realistic timbre for voices and instruments and which was capable of genuine bass extension and good dynamic range. This has much more to it than simple frequency response.
To achieve anything like accurate musical timbre, we need to consider things like box colouration which is linked to things like rigidity, energy stored and released (spectral decay), and phase relationships between the drive units and indeed from how the internal surfaces are treated. The phase relationships are influenced massively by crossover design and implementation as well as cabinet design. Timbrel accuracy also depends on how the frequency extremes integrate wrt to reality, eg decay and tone of bass notes for example, which is a function not only of the drive unit selected but also the tuning method and things like group delay. In spite of a lot of rot spoken on forums about ported designs, done properly, they can still deliver superb bass results, just as an infinite baffle done badly can deliver shockingly bad results. Clear your minds of generalisations and consider fundamentals and little details of design as these all come together to form the finished loudspeaker.
You can see from the above that so many variables start to rear their heads before we even get to what makes a marketable and profitable 'speaker (as mass produced speakers must be both priced to sell and for the company that makes them to survive) and you can see that from the outset, compromises must be made which is one reason that loudspeakers within certain budgets haven't really moved on in decades, never mind years. It is possible to make a good budget loudspeaker. It just isn't possible to make a great budget loudspeaker.
A dull speaker will always remain a dull speaker and if what you're hearing isn't tugging at the heart strings for an emotive piece of music, walk away as it's not going to get any better. Personally, if a speaker "grabs" you for all the wrong reasons, it's a wrong 'un no-matter whose name is on the badge. If is "grabs" you for the right reasons (musical integrity and the way it portrays that music) then it also stands out as being "head and shoulders above" but for all the right reasons. A majority of pretty decent speakers these days fall largely in between these extremes.
....
It's not hard to see that you don't have to dig too hard into valuable traits of good loudspeaker design to see that irrespective of on-axis frequency response or sensitivity just how different one loudspeaker design can sound from another. To my mind, the one that would grab my attention is the one that allowed the speakers to do the disappearing trick best and which portrayed the most realistic timbre for voices and instruments and which was capable of genuine bass extension and good dynamic range. This has much more to it than simple frequency response.
To achieve anything like accurate musical timbre, we need to consider things like box colouration which is linked to things like rigidity, energy stored and released (spectral decay), and phase relationships between the drive units and indeed from how the internal surfaces are treated. The phase relationships are influenced massively by crossover design and implementation as well as cabinet design. Timbrel accuracy also depends on how the frequency extremes integrate wrt to reality, eg decay and tone of bass notes for example, which is a function not only of the drive unit selected but also the tuning method and things like group delay. In spite of a lot of rot spoken on forums about ported designs, done properly, they can still deliver superb bass results, just as an infinite baffle done badly can deliver shockingly bad results. Clear your minds of generalisations and consider fundamentals and little details of design as these all come together to form the finished loudspeaker.
You can see from the above that so many variables start to rear their heads before we even get to what makes a marketable and profitable 'speaker (as mass produced speakers must be both priced to sell and for the company that makes them to survive) and you can see that from the outset, compromises must be made which is one reason that loudspeakers within certain budgets haven't really moved on in decades, never mind years. It is possible to make a good budget loudspeaker. It just isn't possible to make a great budget loudspeaker.
A dull speaker will always remain a dull speaker and if what you're hearing isn't tugging at the heart strings for an emotive piece of music, walk away as it's not going to get any better. Personally, if a speaker "grabs" you for all the wrong reasons, it's a wrong 'un no-matter whose name is on the badge. If is "grabs" you for the right reasons (musical integrity and the way it portrays that music) then it also stands out as being "head and shoulders above" but for all the right reasons. A majority of pretty decent speakers these days fall largely in between these extremes.
I absolutely agree .. and that resumes the sensation I got when I auditioned the speakers mentioned above. They just vanished and gave way for the musicians to somehow magically appear in there in the room which at first was almost spooky.
What is your criteria of a "perfect" sounding speaker (boxes to tick) ? :)
What Paul said here:
'To my mind, the one that would grab my attention is the one that allowed the speakers to do the disappearing trick best and which portrayed the most realistic timbre for voices and instruments and which was capable of genuine bass extension and good dynamic range'
I think most competent loudspeakers will 'disappear' providing they are large enough to sound unforced and the set up in the room is not too flawed. Bass extension needs to be flat - or close - in room down to 40Hz - hardly any speakers do this despite what they claim. I'd be happy to get close to that. I suspect the IMFs I have manage it but with some loss of fidelity - bass sounds like bass rather than an actual bass guitar.
With other speakers I have and have had you get far more of the tone of the instrument - so a bassist might be able to tell you which bass was being used. Still, the amount of weight they produce in the bass does surprise with those 'never realised how much bass there is on that recording' moments.
The bass thing is impossible without going fridge-freezer large, with real quality drivers, I suspect.
I absolutely agree .. and that resumes the sensation I got when I auditioned the speakers mentioned above. They just vanished and gave way for the musicians to somehow magically appear in there in the room which at first was almost spooky.
All good speakers should do that - not draw attention to themselves, and by definition not have any intrusive character; so do not grab your attention.
It's more a matter of "Hey listen to this!", not "Hey listen to me!".
It's the MUSIC that should draw attention to itself, not the speakers! ;)
The speakers should 'disappear', and simply showcase the music in all its glory..... A great test for any system is precisely that: how much does the MUSIC go 'Hey, listen to me', so here's what to do:
Play one of your favourite tracks or albums, at a reasonable volume, and sit down and relax. Then open up one of your favourite books, or an interesting magazine, so that both the book or magazine, and the MUSIC, is vying for your attention...
If despite trying, you just can't concentrate on reading, because the MUSIC sounds so mesmerising and captivating, forcing you to put down your book or magazine and sit up and listen, then *that' is when you know that you system is genuinely doing the business! :exactly:
Marco.
Firebottle
19-06-2016, 07:20
It's more a matter of "Hey listen to this!", not "Hey listen to me!".
Like that Barry :thumbsup:
That was the point my interlocutor was making at NEBO (see my original post).
The system there was Stello CD transport into unknown DAC into passive pre into Dynaco valve amp into the Akai speakers.
Obviously this was a lash up but he blamed the speakers for not being explicit enough to hold that level of attention. I suspect he may be right. Some on this thread have interpreted 'grab you' as meaning a speaker with 'character' to the sound but I think he just meant a level of explicitness where the speaker does not muffle (for want of a better word) the sound.
Having owned the speakers for a couple of years now and experimented with a fair few combos of kit upstream I'm half-inclined to agree with him. What puzzles me is 'why'? Why are they not as explicit as some other speakers? What aspect of the design is causing that?
The plus side is that I can play any sort of music or standard of recording and it sounds sweet and easy on the ear with plenty of sparkle, good crash and decay on cymbals and so forth. But a friend of mine heard them and said it sounded like we were listening to an FM transmission, even though it was a quality recording on CD. I sort of knew what he was getting at.
Yet with a fairly sparse, well recorded piece, such as used at shows to demo hugely expensive systems, they are good enough to captivate. I noticed at NEBO when I played Joni Mitchell's 'The Last Time I Saw Richard' even those talking loudly at the back shut up for a minute ;)
I couldn't get the SPL I wanted because the Dynaco was starting to struggle, but it isn't a question of not playing loudly enough. This is more fundamental, I think.
Clive197
19-06-2016, 08:17
My love of Spendor speakers has nothing to do with the looks as they can only be best described as plain Jane. What 'grabbed' me about them was what they do to music. They still have that familiar BBC sound of neutrality, they don't shout 'look at me'. They do make my feet tap to the beat as they did all those years ago.
To answer the original question of can speakers grab you, the answer is yes, but for the right reasons of making music that can get the hair on the back of your neck to stand up.
I think folks should try the 'attention test' I described before, and report back the results... What won: your system and music, or the book/magazine? :)
Marco.
Martin, I can tell you right now for a fact that your speakers fundamentally do not lack 'explicitness', and are voiced to sound neutral, natural and realistic :)
The reason you received those comments at NEBO were simply because the speakers were situated too low down, in terms of the room and seating arrangements, for anyone to properly hear the midrange (presence region) of the Akais! It's as simple as that.
Trust me, properly set up, in the right room, those Akais would sound fab, and indeed do so, even in your room, where the set up is still less than optimal, so don't be tempted to buy brighter sounding, superficially more 'impressive'/grab-your-attention-style speakers, as that would be a retrograde step, almost akin to introducing a tone control effect, which would be completely unnecessary if the issue is instead fixed 'at source'.
If those Akais were mine, the first thing I'd do is have some stands custom-made to fit their dimensions, and get them up off the floor just enough to ensure that the tweeters and midrange units were at ear height at your usual listening position - and then after that, depending on the results obtained, I'd *possibly* have the crossovers recapped with the best modern alternatives.
Massive advances have been made in component technology, such as with capacitors and resistors, since when your speakers were made, so I'm virtually certain what's in them now can be considerably bettered.
That done, I promise that you'd no longer be worrying about your speakers sounding 'bland' or un-interesting, or seeking to make them sound more 'artificially impressive! ;)
Marco.
Yes fair points but I am going to be getting some new speakers that are more suited to my room - just don't want to lose the things I like about the Akais.
However I didn't really start this thread asking for advice, I was more interested in what people thought about loudspeakers in general, really, since that comment at NEBO got me thinking.
Problem is I have my own ideas about speakers having built a few in the past (well, someone competent actually built them , I just 'designed' them). There seems to be absolutely nothing on the market that conforms to my ideas, at least not under about £5K.
I think a decent pair of speakers should absolutely have you in complete awe, especially with the wick turned up.
With other speakers I have and have had you get far more of the tone of the instrument - so a bassist might be able to tell you which bass was being used. Still, the amount of weight they produce in the bass does surprise with those 'never realised how much bass there is on that recording' moments.
The bass thing is impossible without going fridge-freezer large, with real quality drivers, I suspect.
Martin, I have to agree, though I don't confess to know much about speakers. I play a bit of bass myself and I encountered what you're talking about the first time I played a familiar Waylon Jennings track through my Lockwood Acadamys with 15" HPD Tannoys. I could always tell it was a Fender Precision with a rosewood board played with a heavy pick and kinda guessed they would be flatwound strings because they were a bit dead sounding but through the Lockwoods after the first two notes I immediately subconsciously registered "flatwounds" and when he hit the next couple of notes harder you could clearly hear a valve head going into slight overdrive. Nice!
Most bass guitars are played through 12, 15 or even 18 inch speakers, hence no surprises that a good big drive unit in a good big box should give a good big approximation ;)
Thank God someone else knows what I'm talking about!
Yep, Lockies can do tone and weight, no question about it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.