Philosophical question: Do I want speakers that are aggressive, accurate, or laid ba

[Geoffcin]

For instance if another speaker(let's call it B) is hitting the same upper frequency in a complex violin passage as speaker A), but Speaker A sounds fatiguing or has an echo or an airy noise(detail?) then what is this supposed to mean that it is revealing a fault in the recording while speaker B is not detecting it? Yet if speaker B is producing the instrument in a full extended way then what exactly is that "air" one is hearing -- "air" is not heard at any live event and it is not there when someone just plays the violin in your house. That air which is called detail is grain.

Accuracy is a pretty simple matter; How much distortion does your speaker produce at your listening level, and how well does your speaker match a frequency test. Although I've seen laughable near field measurements of my speakers (who listens to 6' tall speakers at 1 meter anyway?!), in MY room they are, at my listening position of 14' on axis, +/- 2 dB across most of the range . The THD from my speakers has been measured at less than 1% at my listening levels also. That is what I call accurate. It has nothing to do with my speakers being planar, or dipole for that matter. Many other speakers archive such measurements, and I really like those too, the Totem Mani-2 Signatures for one (incredibly flat across the meat of the midrange, like +/-1dB!), and there are others too, although the prices tend to go up from there (Yes I have heard E-Stats speakers, although not his specifically). Accuracy can't be faked, and once you know what it sounds like you can't forget it. If I was spending the $$$ that this guy wants to spend, then accuracy would mean a whole lot to me.

[kexodusc]

Accuracy is a pretty simple matter; How much distortion does your speaker produce at your listening level, and how well does your speaker match a frequency test. Although I've seen laughable near field measurements of my speakers (who listens to 6' tall speakers at 1 meter anyway?!), in MY room they are, at my listening position of 14' on axis, +/- 2 dB across most of the range . The THD from my speakers has been measured at less than 1% at my listening levels also. That is what I call accurate.

Accuracy can't be faked, and once you know what it sounds like you can't forget it. If I was spending the $$$ that this guy wants to spend, then accuracy would mean a whole lot to me.

I have to agree with Geoffcin. Sometimes the audio-world does itself a huge injustice by overcomplicating things. Whenever I'm struggling with a difficult decision, I often take a negative of the situation. That is, let's take the opposite of each option available and examine those. Do I want speakers that are NOT aggessive (laid back), INaccurate, or NOT laid back?

You can see how the choice of agressive vs. laid back is subject to a degree of personal subjectivity. But who in their right mind would shop for a speaker from scratch that can be characterized as "inaccurate"? What would the benefits of this be - other than second guessing every sound you heard, whether it was good or bad? If your speakers are inaccurate, how would you judge the music, or the gear you use with it?

The measurements don't lie. We are quite good at quantifying some very important figures. The problem is there's still a lot of traits for which we haven't yet developed measurements.

Accuracy is tough to define, however. Everyone tends to use that word just a bit differently. If you limit the definition to frequency response and THD, that's fine, but there's more to a speaker than that. It's pretty easy to get a $300 speaker to be accurate, with good THD numbers and a good, flat frequency response that doesn't stray far from the input signal. Yet most $300 speakers probably don't sound as good as most $3000 speakers. Why? You'll have to add some more measurements - transient response is one of my personal favorites, off-axis response can be EXTREMELY important IF you place a lot of value in soundstaging and imaging. Many do not. Some, speakers, such as RGA's Audio Notes might not posess perfect off-axis measurements in anechoic conditions, but it doesn't matter. AN recommends corner placement and significant toe-in for a reason. This is an integral part of the speaker design. When used as such, they perform quite well and present good imaging and soundstage characterstics. Who listens to their speakers in anechoic conditions anyway? Some measurements aren't relevant to the speaker...some are relevant to all speakers.

So now we have a few more measurements, each becoming increasingly more complex to obtain and interpret. Back down that slippery slope of trying to create that perfect measuring speaker...overcomplicating things.

Resolution is much tougher to define. I'm not aware of any universally accepted measurement for resolution. But people sure know it when they hear it. I have 2 pairs of speakers I built recently...both measure about +/- 2 dB in room at 2 meters, similar THD numbers for the most part at volumes I'd use them at, but one contains much more information than the other. It should, it cost 4 times as much. Detail, resolution, whatever you want to call it. It's not captured well by measurements on paper. Or at least the small differences you see on paper are misleading, the real sound differences are much more than the measurements imply.

Again, back at overcomplicating things...let's not go there.

Sounds to me like you're on the right track. Listen to speakers for yourself. Don't pay too much attention to the adjectives used to describe them. Do pay a bit of attention to the measurements, just to help you explain what you're hearing, not to pick the speaker. If a number stands out as being grossly inadequate, you'll probably hear it. If you start comparing to FR plots to each other to help you decide, you're probably over doing it.

I would suggest finding speakers that you do like, and then putting into words for yourself what you like about them, from both measurements, and qualitative evaluation. Then you can use that explanation as a starting point for evaluating other speakers. Often, picking speakers is just a crapshoot. People don't always hear the same speakers the same way...(the shape of ears contributes a great deal to sound perception). In the end, what you hear matters most.

[topspeed]

Really great posts so far. About the only thing I'd add is that you may want to listen to different types of speakers while on your journey. So far, everything on your list has been a dynamic speaker. Expand your horizons and audition some planar/'stats (Maggie, Martin Logan), bi-polar (DefTech, Mirage), transmission line (Von Schweikert), and even line arrays (VMPS). Every design presents specific merits and faults, it's up to you to decide which best suit your tastes.

Hope this helps.

[GMichael]

Really great posts so far. About the only thing I'd add is that you may want to listen to different types of speakers while on your journey. So far, everything on your list has been a dynamic speaker. Expand your horizons and audition some planar/'stats (Maggie, Martin Logan), bi-polar (DefTech, Mirage), transmission line (Von Schweikert), and even line arrays (VMPS). Every design presents specific merits and faults, it's up to you to decide which best suit your tastes.

Hope this helps.

Listen, listen, listen. After that, listen to more. It's a great time, and will pay off for years. There are as many oppinions as there are listeners. Pick what makes your ears sing. Everything else will take care of itself.

[JonW]

Really great posts so far. About the only thing I'd add is that you may want to listen to different types of speakers while on your journey. So far, everything on your list has been a dynamic speaker. Expand your horizons and audition some planar/'stats (Maggie, Martin Logan), bi-polar (DefTech, Mirage), transmission line (Von Schweikert), and even line arrays (VMPS). Every design presents specific merits and faults, it's up to you to decide which best suit your tastes.

Hope this helps.

Yes, great posts. People here are quite helpful.

Thanks for the list. Yes, I'll try and have a listen to those.

I wonder how long I can hold out... Listening to speakers from, say, 25 different companies...

[JonW]

I have to agree with Geoffcin. Sometimes the audio-world does itself a huge injustice by overcomplicating things. Whenever I'm struggling with a difficult decision, I often take a negative of the situation. That is, let's take the opposite of each option available and examine those. Do I want speakers that are NOT aggessive (laid back), INaccurate, or NOT laid back?

Interesting way to look at it. But I actually don't know that answer. I could forget accuracy and all that. And just go for what sounds nice now. But will I be sick of that a year from now? And want something different? Obviously no one can answer that for me, but I enjoy getting perspectives from you all.

Sounds to me like you're on the right track. Listen to speakers for yourself. Don't pay too much attention to the adjectives used to describe them. Do pay a bit of attention to the measurements, just to help you explain what you're hearing, not to pick the speaker. If a number stands out as being grossly inadequate, you'll probably hear it. If you start comparing to FR plots to each other to help you decide, you're probably over doing it.

I would suggest finding speakers that you do like, and then putting into words for yourself what you like about them, from both measurements, and qualitative evaluation. Then you can use that explanation as a starting point for evaluating other speakers. Often, picking speakers is just a crapshoot. People don't always hear the same speakers the same way...(the shape of ears contributes a great deal to sound perception). In the end, what you hear matters most.

Actually, I have been taking notes on my impressions as I listen to each speaker. What words come to mind. How it compares to the last one I heard, etc. I've had a couple sale guys tell me not to take notes- just go for what moves me. But I'm in the (pleasant) situation where I could be happy with many of the speakers I've heard. So I'm trying to figure out which one is the best for me. I am really enjoying this. Although it's becoming more difficult than I expected to find a clear winner. I didn't expect such different sound from the different brands. Some I say, right away, are not for me. But of the contenders, what I like about each is different. It's interesting.

[JonW]

Accuracy can't be faked, and once you know what it sounds like you can't forget it. If I was spending the $$$ that this guy wants to spend, then accuracy would mean a whole lot to me.

So how do I hear some accurate speakers, to know what that sound is?

And would most people agree that it's what you will want, once you know it? In other words, is an accurate speaker enjoyable to listen to?