Keith G wrote:

If you were not present at the original recording session, with good
memory, how can you judge the accuracy of the reproduction?
You can't.

I mean, I can tell that Spendor, Proac, and Dynaudio are sounding
different, but don't I need to be familiar with the actual original
sound to judge which one is accurate or uncolored?
Yes, of course, how else will you know?

However, many critics and audiophiles audition speakers and pronounce
one to be accurate or not, colored or uncolored, including in this
forum.

I was wondering what such assessments are about? Is it in the end a
different, if somewhat misleading, was of saying you simply like or
don't like a particular speaker?

In article , Keith G
wrote:

"RPS" wrote in message
...
This is inspired by the recent discussion on possible replacement for
my Spendor BC1's (thanks for all the comments in that thread):

Many of you have commented on a speaker being more or less
neutral/accurate than others.

If you were not present at the original recording session, with good
memory, how can you judge the accuracy of the reproduction?


You can't.

I would put that slightly differently. :-)

I'd say that you can make judgements upon the accuracy or neutrality of the
reproduction, but have to accept that such judgements may not always be
reliable. :-)

My experience is that some speakers give me a sound that seems to me much
more like the sound I hear when I go to concerts. I am talking here of
'classical' music, listened to in various venues, on a number of occasions,
over many years.

This does not necessarily mean, of course, that the speakers *are* more
accurate, just that they sound more accurate to me, using my own
experience. Since I want a sound that seems to me close to what I think I
hear when at a real concert, or when listening to real human voices, this
seems to me to be a reasonably adequate method for my purposes.


I mean, I can tell that Spendor, Proac, and Dynaudio are sounding
different, but don't I need to be familiar with the actual original
sound to judge which one is accurate or uncolored?


Yes, of course, how else will you know?

Well, you need to have some familiarity with the types of sounds involved.
However this may not mean you had to be present for that specific concert.
Just work on a statistical basis, having visted that venue many times and
grown accustomed to how it tends to sound when people play the works you
are listening to. Then extend that to a number of venues. If the speakers
give a 'convincing impression' for many venues and items of music you have
some familiarity with, that seems a fair approach to me.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In article , Keith G
wrote:

"RPS" wrote in message
...
This is inspired by the recent discussion on possible replacement for
my Spendor BC1's (thanks for all the comments in that thread):

Many of you have commented on a speaker being more or less
neutral/accurate than others.

If you were not present at the original recording session, with good
memory, how can you judge the accuracy of the reproduction?


You can't.

I would put that slightly differently. :-)

I'd say that you can make judgements upon the accuracy or neutrality of the
reproduction, but have to accept that such judgements may not always be
reliable. :-)

My experience is that some speakers give me a sound that seems to me much
more like the sound I hear when I go to concerts. I am talking here of
'classical' music, listened to in various venues, on a number of occasions,
over many years.

This does not necessarily mean, of course, that the speakers *are* more
accurate, just that they sound more accurate to me, using my own
experience. Since I want a sound that seems to me close to what I think I
hear when at a real concert, or when listening to real human voices, this
seems to me to be a reasonably adequate method for my purposes.


I mean, I can tell that Spendor, Proac, and Dynaudio are sounding
different, but don't I need to be familiar with the actual original
sound to judge which one is accurate or uncolored?


Yes, of course, how else will you know?

Well, you need to have some familiarity with the types of sounds involved.
However this may not mean you had to be present for that specific concert.
Just work on a statistical basis, having visted that venue many times and
grown accustomed to how it tends to sound when people play the works you
are listening to. Then extend that to a number of venues. If the speakers
give a 'convincing impression' for many venues and items of music you have
some familiarity with, that seems a fair approach to me.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

"RPS" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

If you were not present at the original recording session, with good
memory, how can you judge the accuracy of the reproduction?
You can't.

I mean, I can tell that Spendor, Proac, and Dynaudio are sounding
different, but don't I need to be familiar with the actual original
sound to judge which one is accurate or uncolored?
Yes, of course, how else will you know?

However, many critics and audiophiles audition speakers and pronounce
one to be accurate or not, colored or uncolored, including in this
forum.


So they do. (It's no bad thing - when people stop criticising stuff we'll
get fobbed off with any old crap on a 'take it or leave it' basis.)



I was wondering what such assessments are about? Is it in the end a
different, if somewhat misleading, was of saying you simply like or
don't like a particular speaker?


Yes. In the end, as listeners, they are only expressing their own opinions.

When a speaker is designed and manufactured it will be made to sound as
close as possible to that particular manufacturers 'house sound' either to
create sales on a large scale or (unusually) a sound which they think is
superior whether the mass markets are likely to take to it or not.

The amusing thing is, that by the time many people have bought and upgraded
a number of pairs of speakers (probably getting more and more expensive as
they go along) searching for 'perfection' they could probably have had a
pair tailored to their very own requirements by a capable builder for less
money! (If not rolled up their sleeves and built their own, which is not
easy however......!)

The trick with speakers is to stop listening to them and just keep chucking
the music on. Do that for long enough and any old pair of dogs will become
your 'reference'. Start with a pair of attractive and well-built speakers of
the right size (a glance will tell you) from a Name you respect and just
stick with them. Bear the following in mind and you won't go far wrong:


Little speakers can be very good until bigger speakers come along. (Size
*always* matters....)

Wood veneer sounds much better than vinyl wrap.

Floorstanders sound much better than standmounters or bookshelf jobbies.

Light wood veneer sounds better than dark wood veneer.

Silver grille cloth sounds better than black.

English speakers sound better than those from any other country.

Biwirable speakers are much better than non-biwirable ones.


That's about it AFAIK - did I miss anything obvious?

"RPS" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

If you were not present at the original recording session, with good
memory, how can you judge the accuracy of the reproduction?
You can't.

I mean, I can tell that Spendor, Proac, and Dynaudio are sounding
different, but don't I need to be familiar with the actual original
sound to judge which one is accurate or uncolored?
Yes, of course, how else will you know?

However, many critics and audiophiles audition speakers and pronounce
one to be accurate or not, colored or uncolored, including in this
forum.


So they do. (It's no bad thing - when people stop criticising stuff we'll
get fobbed off with any old crap on a 'take it or leave it' basis.)



I was wondering what such assessments are about? Is it in the end a
different, if somewhat misleading, was of saying you simply like or
don't like a particular speaker?


Yes. In the end, as listeners, they are only expressing their own opinions.

When a speaker is designed and manufactured it will be made to sound as
close as possible to that particular manufacturers 'house sound' either to
create sales on a large scale or (unusually) a sound which they think is
superior whether the mass markets are likely to take to it or not.

The amusing thing is, that by the time many people have bought and upgraded
a number of pairs of speakers (probably getting more and more expensive as
they go along) searching for 'perfection' they could probably have had a
pair tailored to their very own requirements by a capable builder for less
money! (If not rolled up their sleeves and built their own, which is not
easy however......!)

The trick with speakers is to stop listening to them and just keep chucking
the music on. Do that for long enough and any old pair of dogs will become
your 'reference'. Start with a pair of attractive and well-built speakers of
the right size (a glance will tell you) from a Name you respect and just
stick with them. Bear the following in mind and you won't go far wrong:


Little speakers can be very good until bigger speakers come along. (Size
*always* matters....)

Wood veneer sounds much better than vinyl wrap.

Floorstanders sound much better than standmounters or bookshelf jobbies.

Light wood veneer sounds better than dark wood veneer.

Silver grille cloth sounds better than black.

English speakers sound better than those from any other country.

Biwirable speakers are much better than non-biwirable ones.


That's about it AFAIK - did I miss anything obvious?

In article , Don Pearce
wrote:


The main thing when auditioning a new speaker is this - if on first
hearing, you say "wow, that sounds great" then walk on by. That is not a
neutral speaker.

I remember my first hearing of a Quad electrostatic. I had been
expecting great things and I was frankly disappointed, it didn't really
seem to be much of anything. No booming bass, no fizzing highs. But on
further listening I realised that all that stuff was there, just not
overstated. It was clean.

In general, I'd tend to agree. However I must admit that my first chance to
hear the Quad 63's caused me to be stunned by just how good they were in
the space of just the first few minutes! :-) To me at that time, their
quality was immediately apparent in terms of sheer clarity and
'naturalness'. I was no longer listening to loudspeakers, I was listening
to the music. :-)

Above said, though, I had already spent many years listeing to the 57's,
and various other speakers, and already loved the 57's. So I was already
probably 'primed' to hear/identify the relevant differences. In addition,
at the time I'd just been having to listen to Linn Isobaraks (which I do
not like at all) for an hour, so the 63 came like a breath of fresh air
after that! ;-

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In article , Don Pearce
wrote:


The main thing when auditioning a new speaker is this - if on first
hearing, you say "wow, that sounds great" then walk on by. That is not a
neutral speaker.

I remember my first hearing of a Quad electrostatic. I had been
expecting great things and I was frankly disappointed, it didn't really
seem to be much of anything. No booming bass, no fizzing highs. But on
further listening I realised that all that stuff was there, just not
overstated. It was clean.

In general, I'd tend to agree. However I must admit that my first chance to
hear the Quad 63's caused me to be stunned by just how good they were in
the space of just the first few minutes! :-) To me at that time, their
quality was immediately apparent in terms of sheer clarity and
'naturalness'. I was no longer listening to loudspeakers, I was listening
to the music. :-)

Above said, though, I had already spent many years listeing to the 57's,
and various other speakers, and already loved the 57's. So I was already
probably 'primed' to hear/identify the relevant differences. In addition,
at the time I'd just been having to listen to Linn Isobaraks (which I do
not like at all) for an hour, so the 63 came like a breath of fresh air
after that! ;-

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Keith G wrote:

...
The trick with speakers is to stop listening to them and just keep chucking
the music on. Do that for long enough and any old pair of dogs will become
your 'reference'. Start with a pair of attractive and well-built speakers of
the right size (a glance will tell you) from a Name you respect and just
stick with them. Bear the following in mind and you won't go far wrong:

Little speakers can be very good until bigger speakers come along. (Size
*always* matters....)

Wood veneer sounds much better than vinyl wrap.

Floorstanders sound much better than standmounters or bookshelf jobbies.

Light wood veneer sounds better than dark wood veneer.

Silver grille cloth sounds better than black.

English speakers sound better than those from any other country.

I think this is true, especially at my budget. I have heard great
American speakers but nothing I could think of buying. However, some of
my formerly English-camp friends have switched to Dynaudio.

Biwirable speakers are much better than non-biwirable ones.

Interesting you don't say "biwired" but just "biwirable". Presumably
because if somebody has taken the trouble make them biwirable, they
might also have taken the trouble to do other things right??

Anyway, do you have any advice on my original query (posted in another
thread): I have a 20+ yr old Spendor BC1 pair. Have been quite happy
with it but would like to find out what would be candiates to make a
meaningful upgrade ("one" step up) and what would be the budget for
such an upgrade in today's market? My short list to audition, drwan up
from others' suggestions, includes Proac, Dynaudio as well as Spendor's
own S6 (although it is in the process of being replaced by S6e).

Raghu

Keith G wrote:

...
The trick with speakers is to stop listening to them and just keep chucking
the music on. Do that for long enough and any old pair of dogs will become
your 'reference'. Start with a pair of attractive and well-built speakers of
the right size (a glance will tell you) from a Name you respect and just
stick with them. Bear the following in mind and you won't go far wrong:

Little speakers can be very good until bigger speakers come along. (Size
*always* matters....)

Wood veneer sounds much better than vinyl wrap.

Floorstanders sound much better than standmounters or bookshelf jobbies.

Light wood veneer sounds better than dark wood veneer.

Silver grille cloth sounds better than black.

English speakers sound better than those from any other country.

I think this is true, especially at my budget. I have heard great
American speakers but nothing I could think of buying. However, some of
my formerly English-camp friends have switched to Dynaudio.

Biwirable speakers are much better than non-biwirable ones.

Interesting you don't say "biwired" but just "biwirable". Presumably
because if somebody has taken the trouble make them biwirable, they
might also have taken the trouble to do other things right??

Anyway, do you have any advice on my original query (posted in another
thread): I have a 20+ yr old Spendor BC1 pair. Have been quite happy
with it but would like to find out what would be candiates to make a
meaningful upgrade ("one" step up) and what would be the budget for
such an upgrade in today's market? My short list to audition, drwan up
from others' suggestions, includes Proac, Dynaudio as well as Spendor's
own S6 (although it is in the process of being replaced by S6e).

Raghu

"RPS" wrote


snippage


I think this is true, especially at my budget. I have heard great
American speakers but nothing I could think of buying. However, some of
my formerly English-camp friends have switched to Dynaudio.


You're American?

Don't **** about then - avail yourself of a pair of Mr Lansing's K2's.......

(Sell a kidney or rob people if you have to!)



Biwirable speakers are much better than non-biwirable ones.

Interesting you don't say "biwired" but just "biwirable". Presumably
because if somebody has taken the trouble make them biwirable, they
might also have taken the trouble to do other things right??


Good thinking (well spotted on the grammar, btw) - the same goes for a real
wood veneer. Not a guarantee, of course......


Anyway, do you have any advice on my original query (posted in another
thread): I have a 20+ yr old Spendor BC1 pair. Have been quite happy
with it but would like to find out what would be candiates to make a
meaningful upgrade ("one" step up) and what would be the budget for
such an upgrade in today's market? My short list to audition, drwan up
from others' suggestions, includes Proac, Dynaudio as well as Spendor's
own S6 (although it is in the process of being replaced by S6e).


Dynaudio? - They would be perfect if they had Focal drivers! ;-)

Can't comment on the Spendors as I have no experience, but follow the other
posters advice and get a selection of candidates HOME to try them out -
nowhere else will do. (If you want Brit speakers that have most of my
criteria covered add Bowers & Wilkins to your list and climb as far up their
tree as funds will allow.....)