What is the most musical speaker..........?

[bkrop]

Johnny Cash

[orrb_05]

THE Chorus II

[edwinr]

Small speaker = BBC LS3/5a. Mid size speaker = ATC SCM50ASL. Large speaker = Klipschorn.

[ClaudeJ1]

'Most musical' is relevant only to the listener and not a comparable term in my opinion but Mark sparked a thought with his "Turn it DOWN!" comment. I've sat in front of many systems over the years and on several occasions, I've asked the fella demonstrating his system if he could turn it down a bit. Sometimes its because its just TOO LOUD as I have to yell my request but sometimes I only have to raise my voice a little to communicate. Some folks feel 'the louder, the better' and I can appreciate that but in some systems, a less than adequate setup or piece of gear will emphasize distortions or increase stridency which irritates me at higher volumes. With better sounding systems, I have experienced just the opposite where I'm very comfortable with the SPLs and its only when I turn to my friend to comment that I realize how loud the music actually is. I start to say something like "...sounds good!" and only then realize that he can't hear a word I'm saying. I've experienced this phenomenon with forward-sounding and laid back systems, horns and otherwise but it seems that those systems (usually built around efficient speakers) with good soundstage and imaging and lower or more pleasant distortion can be turned up quite a bit without any discomfort. It may be that I've become conditioned as a result of listening to low-wattage systems so long but this phenomenon seems to coincide with the better setups I've heard.

Interesting observation. I have the most efficient/powerful system I have ever owned (all horns more efficient than Khorns). Because of the ridiculously low distortion from large format drivers and horns, I play music at about 80 db and still get more satisfaction that I used to get in my youth "cranking it." The micro details from Steely Dan and Bob James recordings are magical

[ClaudeJ1]

'Most musical' is relevant only to the listener and not a comparable term in my opinion but Mark sparked a thought with his "Turn it DOWN!" comment. I've sat in front of many systems over the years and on several occasions, I've asked the fella demonstrating his system if he could turn it down a bit. Sometimes its because its just TOO LOUD as I have to yell my request but sometimes I only have to raise my voice a little to communicate. Some folks feel 'the louder, the better' and I can appreciate that but in some systems, a less than adequate setup or piece of gear will emphasize distortions or increase stridency which irritates me at higher volumes. With better sounding systems, I have experienced just the opposite where I'm very comfortable with the SPLs and its only when I turn to my friend to comment that I realize how loud the music actually is. I start to say something like "...sounds good!" and only then realize that he can't hear a word I'm saying. I've experienced this phenomenon with forward-sounding and laid back systems, horns and otherwise but it seems that those systems (usually built around efficient speakers) with good soundstage and imaging and lower or more pleasant distortion can be turned up quite a bit without any discomfort. It may be that I've become conditioned as a result of listening to low-wattage systems so long but this phenomenon seems to coincide with the better setups I've heard.

Interesting observation. I have the most efficient/powerful system I have ever owned (all horns more efficient than Khorns). Because of the ridiculously low distortion from large format drivers and horns, I play music at about 80 db and still get more satisfaction that I used to get in my youth "cranking it." The micro details from Steely Dan and Bob James recordings are magical

[pauln]

" I play music at about 80 db and still get more satisfaction..."

Most folks get the idea of dynamics in the louder direction. When your speakers reveal the dynamics in the softer direction...very satisfying indeed.

[Mallette]

" I play music at about 80 db and still get more satisfaction..."

Most folks get the idea of dynamics in the louder direction. When your speakers reveal the dynamics in the softer direction...very satisfying indeed.

Fully agree. This was what I first noticed about acoustic suspension and other low efficency designs. Wonderful at high levels, but the more you turn them down the more the music seems to retreat into the distance.

While, as I mentioned, I prefer to listen at "realistic" levels for serious listening there are times when I want to turn it down a bit and not have it just fade behind a veil. The K'horns do this beautifully...as do othe Klipsch and Frazier high efficiency designs.

Dave

[sunnysal]

Dave & Sunnysal--

I'm just making a simple observation that evaluating stereos is a subjective exercise, not an objective one. The word "accurate" is most commonly used, and properly so, to refer to an objective direct measure. When you make a claim of accuracy, a normal technical person will want to ask, "compared to what standard?" Stereos have no standard. Why make the language about stereos more confusing? I fail to see the purpose.

People are free of course to make any claim they like. But a claim of accuracy is meaningless without a standard. It just adds to the hyperbole. I think in the last 45 years I've been in the hobby, I've probably heard 1,000 so-called "accurate" components, and yet the best stereo I have ever heardis like someone holding up a picture Paris and trying to tell me it's "just like being there, huh?"

No wonder people think the industry is full of hype!

Mark, well said and I agree fully. I just want to reiterate that IMHO the measurements and standards used now to judge the accuracy of a speaker do not necessarily assure the most accurate reproduction of a given piece of music. I hold the belief that we have yet to refine current measurement methiods to assure said accurate reproduction. meanwhile I reserve the right to make subjective comparisons which, IMHO sometimes outperform what technical measurements can achieve for my end purpose. Warm regards, tony

[SSnyder]

Evryone gets has more and more hearig damage as old age creeps p inevatabily

older you get lessor reliabilt judge-ment on all thigs audio

loud music hurts me waa waah >>>>>>> damaige to ears allready set in perminint

deniars are fleeding and alluing the truth

[garyrc]

And instead conveys 'musical' qualities, if & when it is present in the signal being fed to it

Is it true that most control rooms have monitor speakers that are more forgiving, perhaps more veiling in some ways, and present more "musical" (the pleasing harmonious qualities thing) than ours, resulting in the mixers not realizing when the pickup is getting a little too harsh, when there might be a touch of diaphram crashing, clipping capacitor mic electronics, or just bad placement, etc.? A long time ago, when I compared B&W 801s to Klipschorns side by side for several hours, I noticed that a lot of certain kinds of detail -- both pleasant and unpleasant -- came through the K-horns, even though the B&Ws sounded beautifully balanced and "musical." I ended up with the K-horns, mostly because they sounded more like the orchestras I used to plqy in. B&Ws of various vintages are used in many control rooms.

[Mallette]

Is it true that most control rooms have monitor speakers that are more forgiving,

Not sure what control rooms you are talking about, but when I was in radio the monitors where EV Sentrys, JBL's, Altec-Lansing and the like that generally sported accenturated mids and were anything but "forgiving."

"California sound" we called it. Never did care for it, but if you could get something to sound good there it certainly worked on the radio and I suppose that was the reasoning.

Dave

[dtel]

While, as I mentioned, I prefer to listen at "realistic" levels for serious listening there are times when I want to turn it down a bit and not have it just fade behind a veil. The K'horns do this beautifully...as do othe Klipsch and Frazier high efficiency designs.

This is what kind of led me into commercial designs, I found the bigger throat size of a horn the more open it sounded, especially at lower volumes which is where I listen 90% of the time. People see or comment on these 2 Ch speakers we use and think and say they could be loud or we must listen loud, not at all.

If I had to guess we listen 80-90 percent of the time well under 50 Db, I will have to check it out one day. At lower volume I have yet to hear anything better and I do have other new design Klipsch here C lll and RB- 75, and Forte ll and F-1 plus Heresy's, none can even come close to the sound at lower volumes.

You don't need speakers this big to get volume, a pair of Heresy's can run you out of a room !

I have never been able to listen to Classical music and enjoy it, but with the bigger more open sound (to me) I can now listen to classical. It now does not sound like a whole orchestra is coming out a little area, it just sounds much bigger which helps with trying to reproduce the sound of a whole stage full of people playing.

Realistic, convincing, lifelike, musical, accurate, I don't know what it is, I would say my best guess would my first two choices best describes it to me ?

We do get to hear a fair amount of live music, acoustic and other and I would be the first to say nothing can come close to a live performance in sound quality, not that I have not heard terrible live music which is for the most part pushed to loud.

[pauln]

I remember the Altec magazine ad from the early 70's...

JBL had discovered that more recording studios were using JBLs than anything else and had been repeating this every chance in every ad. The implication was that they were fine stuff and you should remember that when buying your own HiFi speakers, "What better to hear music in your home than the same ones prefered when making music in the studio"...etc.

Altec sent someone to check it out, and sure enough they found JBL everywhere. Rather than just chalk it up to tough luck, the guy asked the studio people why they preferred the JBLs. They said they really liked the sound of them. They went on to elaborate that when you sit in a studio for hour after hour listing to the same tracks over and over while making little adjustments, you really need a speaker with a lot of coloration to exagerate the changes.

The Altec add quoted the studio folks' reasoning about why the JBL was so popular for use as a studio monitor.

[garyrc]

Not sure what control rooms you are talking about, but when I was in radio the monitors where EV Sentrys, JBL's, Altec-Lansing and the like that generally sported accenturated mids and were anything but "forgiving."

True, when I visited most of the recording studios in San Francisco and Marin County in 1974, they were using unforgiving speakers such as Altec 604Es (Wally Heider), modified JBL horns (The Record Plant, which later went to Klipsch), and others with horn mids and tweets. Both before and after, though, some places used forgiving speakers such as all cone designs like the RCA DuCones (for some of the Living Stereo series), JBL --what was the little all cone three-way one -- 4210 ?? (Different Fur Trading Co.), and then in the last decades, I believe EMI used B&Ws, including 801s.