What are the most overrated speaker brands, IYO?

[drseid]

Many of the here named speakers are true music souls and wrote history. Apogee, Magnepan, Quad, Acustat, Soundlab etc...

Those are systems for true Audiophiles, but there are not many left. Most hide and praise whitepapers and dont even know what a speaker with a soul is.

-Flo

I have nothing against any of the speakers you just mentioned...

But what exactly is a "true" audiophile exactly?

I would not presume one way or another whether one person's preferences are somehow superior to another's...

---Dave

[Florian]

I have nothing against any of the speakers you just mentioned...

But what exactly is a "true" audiophile exactly?

I would not presume one way or another whether one person's preferences are somehow superior to another's...

---Dave

I consider a person a true audiophile when he meets the following requirements.

1. Matches components based on technical aspects
2. Matches components based on the "character" of each piece.
3. Creates a pleasing Aura to the eye
4. Doesnt rate speakers based on whitepapers and showroom hearings

A true Audiophile system has a certain magical aspect of their sound and doesnt need any papers to prove its goodness..

-Flo

PS: The best speakers in the world to me, are not the ones with great whitepapers.

[kexodusc]

I consider a person a true audiophile when he meets the following requirements.

1. Matches components based on technical aspects.

Exactly which technical aspects do I have to know to match my CD player or turn-table to my pre-amp?

2. Matches components based on the "character" of each piece..

What about those of us that look for the most faithful reproduction of music possible, ie: equipment without ANY imperfect "character"?

3. Creates a pleasing Aura to the eye

Huh? I could care less how bad it looked as long as it was clean and sounded great. Do you just sit and look at your gear, or do you actually play music?

4. Doesnt rate speakers based on whitepapers and showroom hearings

I would add: pricetag, external reviews, looks, and fundamental design

I'm very disheartened to see that appreciation of music and sound has no place in your list.
My definition would at least include these aspects, and be sure to include people of all incomes. Some of us actually use this stuff to satisfy a passion for music, not as elitist centerpieces on display in our homes.

[Florian]

Well its all actually very simple. Every single piece of equipment has a character. Thats why component matching is so important. Also matching the output voltage of your pre amp to your power amp is very important. Running either fully balanced or unballanced systems are important.

The speakers that are listed here and commonly recommended are almost in all regards HIFI speakers and are far away from any neutral character. As a matter of fact, the Apogee's i recommended is about as neutral as you can get with the right electronics. B&W's have a warm sound, also does NAD, Cambridge and Rotel. The Japanse electronics have a general hard and unorganic sound. The Italian tubes sound warm, with a sometimes smeared/warm/friendly character which are great in the midrange and height but lack bass speed and dryness.

As for the looks, i was refering to the overall look of the room and the acustics. Very often the components recommend by members are HIFI equipment and pretty much never anyone recommends room tuning which is one of the most critical factors there are.
Also if the room it is in, does not look nice and friendly it will reflect on the mood you are in and the feeling of the music.

Pricetags are pointless, because everyone will buy the best he/she can afford. Audiophiles are all limited to a budget, for some its 20K and 2K for others. Pricetag is not relevant. An Audiophile will make the best out of what he has. Is it possibe to have a Audiophile system on a 2K $ budget. In my opinion, no. But i am sure i will get slammed for that opinion.

Apreciaten of music does not need to be listed, since it comes with the process of becomming a Audio Enthusiast or Audiophile.

Some of us actually use this stuff to satisfy a passion for music, not as elitist centerpieces on display in our homes

I find this quite amusing because i am properbly one of the youngest members on this site with some of the most expensive equipment too. Not to say that its the best, but since you mention prictag and income classes. I am 21 now, and have always tuned, treated my room and tried new equipment out. And actually the equipment i recommend i have usually owned.

-Flo

[JoeE SP9]

Wilson's may not be the most overrated but they certainly must the the most overpriced IMO.

[Woochifer]

As for the looks, i was refering to the overall look of the room and the acustics. Very often the components recommend by members are HIFI equipment and pretty much never anyone recommends room tuning which is one of the most critical factors there are.
Also if the room it is in, does not look nice and friendly it will reflect on the mood you are in and the feeling of the music.

Interesting that the look of the room matters so much in the enjoyment of music. Some of the best musical experiences I ever had were in dungeonlike, smoke-filled clubs surrounded by drunks in a mosh pit. In those cases, the power of the music was what mattered. I guess the music would have been a more meaningful experience if I was sitting in a pretty room by myself lisping in willowy clouds surrounded by aesthetic visual beauty.

Pricetags are pointless, because everyone will buy the best he/she can afford. Audiophiles are all limited to a budget, for some its 20K and 2K for others. Pricetag is not relevant. An Audiophile will make the best out of what he has. Is it possibe to have a Audiophile system on a 2K $ budget. In my opinion, no. But i am sure i will get slammed for that opinion.

Consider yourself slammed. You're making a mountain out of a molehill with all of the stereotypes and self-serving labels that you're throwing around. When you start narrowly defining what a "true" audiophile is (gee, and you happened to fit all of those categories, what a coincidence!), you're marginalizing everybody who takes a different approach than what you believe in.

Apreciaten of music does not need to be listed, since it comes with the process of becomming a Audio Enthusiast or Audiophile.

That's a load of BS. Over the years, I've met plenty of "audio enthusiasts" or self-proclaimed "audiophiles" who only care about what stuff sounds like, and squat about the music itself. They've bought into all of the money pit upgrades and tweaks, dumped thousands of dollars into their systems, spent more time and effort setting up their system and tweaking with the sound. Yet, for all that effort put into getting the sound to fit their preferences, they have no appreciation for the music itself. They'll buy the direct-to-disc LPs and pure DSD SACDs, not because they like the music, but because it has stellar audio quality. All you have to do to see this approach in action is look at the type of music that a lot of audio magazine reviewers listen to when they evaluate a system.

Personally, I would rather listen to a master artist like John Coltrane or other music that I like through a battery-powered transistor radio than some wannabee hack who plays crappy music that happens to be well recorded through a "true" audiophile system. Some of the most dedicated and knowledgeable music fans I know listen to their music through less than stellar sounding audio systems. Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced.

I find this quite amusing because i am properbly one of the youngest members on this site with some of the most expensive equipment too. Not to say that its the best, but since you mention prictag and income classes. I am 21 now, and have always tuned, treated my room and tried new equipment out. And actually the equipment i recommend i have usually owned.

Well congrats, so you spent more on your audio systems than any of us did. I guess that's why you're one of the chosen few "true" audiophiles in the world. The rest of us just "hide and praise whitepapers and dont even know what a speaker with a soul is."

[JoeE SP9]

Maybe an audiophile is someone with a $300K system and 6 CD's that are all "audiophile" approved. I guess I'm not the one. It's all about the music. If you loose sight of that you are wasting time and money. Most of the music those highly paid reviewers use for evaluating equipment is stuff I wouldn't listen to. I'm going to listen to some Wes now. Easy Groove on Pacific Jazz (vinyl).

[JoeE SP9]

Florian, where can you get new Apogee's? I thought they went out of business. This should not be taken as a slur on Apogee's. I seriously considered purchasing a pair of Mini Grands I heard at Soundex.

[Florian]

I consider this discussion with you at an end, for the simple reason of overreaction. You asume to much, and listen not enough. I was not putting myself into any category,i was simply stating what i think. If you cant handle another persons opinion, than i guess your in the wrong place.

-Flo

[Woochifer]

I consider this discussion with you at an end, for the simple reason of overreaction. You asume to much, and listen not enough. I was not putting myself into any category,i was simply stating what i think. If you cant handle another persons opinion, than i guess your in the wrong place.

-Flo

For someone who's been painting the world with such broad strokes on this thread ("true" audiophiles are this, Italian tubes are that, Japanese electronics are something else, all box speakers except these six brands are overrated, those who are not "true" audiophiles "hide and praise whitepapers and dont even know what a speaker with a soul is"), it's quite a statement for you to tell someone that they're overreacting.

I can handle other opinions and disagreement just fine. My contentions with your posts are about these presumptions that you make about other peoples' motivations and preferences. You don't share their preferences and priorities, so why would you have any insight as to whether whitepapers influence those preferences or how they don't know what "a speaker with a soul is"? In all my years in the audio hobby, I've never met a single person who bought a speaker based on reading a whitepaper.

I stated on this thread that I've never been bowled over by the Apogees I've heard, so your reaction is to tell me that I'm "the first person to describe the Apogee's in that way that, ever." How do you know that? Have you polled every person who's ever listened to them? Ever talk to the sales rep at that store where my friend worked who shared my opinion of the Apogees, or two of my friends who had similar reactions during their listenings?

And when you start saying stuff like "every single person that has heard the Scintilla or owned one that you can read about state that it is closest to the real thing that is possible" how truthful is that? What if somebody heard the Scintilla and proclaimed a different speaker as the "closest to the real thing"? Does that make them a liar since the universal proclamation of "every single person" would no longer apply? Or are you hereby proclaiming that it's impossible to have a different opinion? Like I said, it's not the opinion, it's the presumption that's at issue here.

[theaudiohobby]

Interesting that the look of the room matters so much in the enjoyment of music. Some of the best musical experiences I ever had were in dungeonlike, smoke-filled clubs surrounded by drunks in a mosh pit. In those cases, the power of the music was what mattered. I guess the music would have been a more meaningful experience if I was sitting in a pretty room by myself lisping in willowy clouds surrounded by aesthetic visual beauty.

Speaking personally "dungeonlike, smoke filled club surrounded drunks in mosh pit" ruins the experience for me. I will rather enjoy my music in a more condusive atmosphere if it can be helped.

Personally, I would rather listen to a master artist like John Coltrane or other music that I like through a battery-powered transistor radio than some wannabee hack who plays crappy music that happens to be well recorded through a "true" audiophile system. Some of the most dedicated and knowledgeable music fans I know listen to their music through less than stellar sounding audio systems. Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced.

I will rather enjoy John Coltrane, or any great musicianship for that matter, on the best available sonic medium where available, that is why I am in this hobby to listen to great musicianship at the highest fidelity possible. There is a finite amount of money I am willing to invest new music and I will rather invest it on good music with excellent sonic quality. I listen to a lot of excellent music on radio and satellite but when I want to invest my money in a piece of music, sonic quality is one of the qualities alongside musical talent I consider when making purchasing decisions.

** Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced. **

This comment is an oxymoron in this hobby, if it were not, we will not bother with investing in quality music production software or hardware at all, afterall we should appreciate good music "regardless of how it get reproduced". I can appreciate good music with poor sonic quality, but I will appreciate it much more with excellent sonic quality. Some music fans indeed enjoy great music on less than optimal setups, however audiophiles make a concious decision to invest in above bar quality music reproduction to enjoy excellent sonic quality as an additional benefit to great musicianship, so ** "regardless of how it get reproduced". ** is overreaching in this instance.

[kexodusc]

Speaking personally "dungeonlike, smoke filled club surrounded drunks in mosh pit" ruins the experience for me. I will rather enjoy my music in a more condusive atmosphere if it can be helped.

That's great, but I think the point which you've completey missed was, would you rather better sound at the expense of looks, or vice-versa if the choices are mutually exclusive...looks are nice, and WAF is important, but it's a far distant second to sound in my books...

I will rather enjoy John Coltrane, or any great musicianship for that matter, on the best available sonic medium where available, that is why I am in this hobby to listen to great musicianship at the highest fidelity possible. There is a finite amount of money I am willing to invest new music and I will rather invest it on good music with excellent sonic quality. I listen to a lot of excellent music on radio and satellite but when I want to invest my money in a piece of music, sonic quality is one of the qualities alongside musical talent I consider when making purchasing decisions.

Again, we'd all rather have the best stuff, but when the dream ends and we wake up in the morning to our mere mortal systems, can we not still enjoy some pleasure from playing John Coltrane? Or how about with a clock radio? I have clock radio in my office right now that I use quite a bit...if it was so unbearable and gave me no satisfaction, I wouldn't be able to tolerate it..Are you implying that if we enjoy music on lesser systems, we're not audiophiles? If so, please specify which systems, so we can determine if we're audiophiles or not.
If given the choice of a world with music and bad systems, or no music at all, I think most of us would still prefer to have music...

** Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced. **
This comment is an oxymoron in this hobby, if it were not, we will not bother with investing in quality music production software or hardware at all, afterall we should appreciate good music "regardless of how it get reproduced". I can appreciate good music with poor sonic quality, but I will appreciate it much more with excellent sonic quality. Some music fans indeed enjoy great music on less than optimal setups, however audiophiles make a concious decision to invest in above bar quality music reproduction to enjoy excellent sonic quality as an additional benefit to great musicianship, so ** "regardless of how it get reproduced". ** is overreaching in this instance.

I think "overreaching" is a bit excessive. Wooch is quite right...there's people who for some reason buy music they don't particularly like just because it has received excellent studio treatment. These are the people who are just listening to the system. These aren't audiophiles...they're technophiles. They show off to others and themselves the ability of the system, but they don't enjoy the music. The delivery of the sound is more important than the artistic qualities of the music itself.
That's fine, I don't hold anything against these people. But they have a much different goal than you and I.

[Woochifer]

Speaking personally "dungeonlike, smoke filled club surrounded drunks in mosh pit" ruins the experience for me. I will rather enjoy my music in a more condusive atmosphere if it can be helped.

For punk, alternative, and the various derivatives thereof, that just adds to the experience.

I will rather enjoy John Coltrane, or any great musicianship for that matter, on the best available sonic medium where available, that is why I am in this hobby to listen to great musicianship at the highest fidelity possible. There is a finite amount of money I am willing to invest new music and I will rather invest it on good music with excellent sonic quality. I listen to a lot of excellent music on radio and satellite but when I want to invest my money in a piece of music, sonic quality is one of the qualities alongside musical talent I consider when making purchasing decisions.

Sure, I don't disagree with the idea of putting the best foot forward possible for the music that we enjoy. However, I do not make most of my music buying decisions based on the audio quality. For example, I listen to a lot of electronica, but unfortunately most of it is poorly recorded and based on sampled loops. But, the audio quality does not detract from how I personally react to the music. If I enjoy the music, I'm not going to suddenly stop listening to it just because it's not recorded well. This isn't like classical music either where you got multiple interpretations of the same piece. If I want my mind to drift to Sasha's Xpander, I have to go with the original version because there's no one out there doing a remake using DSD streaming.

When given an option, in plenty of cases I'll opt for the best possible audio quality. That's why I have half-speed mastered LPs, 96/24 DADs, and various remastered CDs in my collection. But, I'm not going to go the extra step of buying albums that sound great at the expense of the music itself (exceptions being a few demo discs that I've bought over the years such as The Sheffield Track Record).

** Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced. **

This comment is an oxymoron in this hobby, if it were not, we will not bother with investing in quality music production software or hardware at all, afterall we should appreciate good music "regardless of how it get reproduced". I can appreciate good music with poor sonic quality, but I will appreciate it much more with excellent sonic quality. Some music fans indeed enjoy great music on less than optimal setups, however audiophiles make a concious decision to invest in above bar quality music reproduction to enjoy excellent sonic quality as an additional benefit to great musicianship, so ** "regardless of how it get reproduced". ** is overreaching in this instance.

It's not an oxymoron because to me great music is still great whether I hear it through a cheap boombox or through a million dollar reference system. Besides I was primarily responding to Florian's contention that music appreciation comes with being an audio enthusiast or audiophile, and I simply don't agree that the two go hand in hand.

Sure, I'd prefer to hear it through a decent system, but I'm not going to shut something off just because the playback system is less than ideal. I don't think it's "overreaching" to say that "appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced." Some friends of mine who are big time music buffs (these guys have an overwhelming knowledge of music from all genres, and a genuine passion for it) enjoy it on what most audiophiles would regard as substandard music systems. But, how does their choice of audio systems make them any less appreciative of music in general than somebody who invested more than them on the hardware side?

At home, I've built a system that for my preferences represents the best audio quality within my budget. Listening through that system and other decent quality systems of course adds to the enjoyment. For the past couple of years, I've lived with a less than ideal turntable cartridge. Now that I've replaced it with a better cartridge, I have been listening to my LPs more than before, but it's not like my vinyl collection sat idle before either. Conversely, if the playback is music that I can't stand to listen to, the sound quality won't matter one bit.

The main point that I was making was that appreciation of music and appreciation of sound quality/audio reproduction are not a one-to-one correlation. As I mentioned, I know plenty of music enthusiasts who are passionate about the music, but are less than passionate about how it sounds. Conversely, there are others I've met who obsess about the sound quality, without having any appreciation for the music itself.

[kexodusc]

Well its all actually very simple. Every single piece of equipment has a character. Thats why component matching is so important. Also matching the output voltage of your pre amp to your power amp is very important. Running either fully balanced or unballanced systems are important.

I guess it comes down to semantics, but to me, neutral gear has no "character", unless neutral is a character.
Florian, I just don't accept that people who put less time into chosing their gear, or understand less about their systems can't be considered audiophiles. I know of many systems that were knowingly built on compromises, but the owners enjoy the systems nonetheless...they put a lot of effort into maximizing the performance of what they do have.
They share an appreciation for the art that all this is made for in the first place - music.
Regardless of their systems costs, the brand name, etc, if they share the desire and enthusiasm, I would consider them audiophiles, perhaps with different priorities than others, but audiophiles.

The Japanse electronics have a general hard and unorganic sound

That's funny, a sentence earlier you named a few manufacturers heavy on the Japanese electronics and described them as warm...I think at one point in history your simple stereotyping of electronics was better applied. Today it might be the case in a few components, but it's no longer that simple. More and more manufacturers have product lines where the sonic character differs from model to model.

Pricetags are pointless, because everyone will buy the best he/she can afford. Audiophiles are all limited to a budget, for some its 20K and 2K for others. Pricetag is not relevant. An Audiophile will make the best out of what he has. Is it possibe to have a Audiophile system on a 2K $ budget. In my opinion, no. But i am sure i will get slammed for that opinion.

There are many ways to build an audiophile system...some $2K systems sound better than $20K systems. And vice versa. But you seem to imply that having a so-called "audiophile system" is a necessary component of "being" an audiophile. I couldn't disagree more.

Apreciaten of music does not need to be listed, since it comes with the process of becomming a Audio Enthusiast or Audiophile.

In my case, it long preceded the process of becoming an Audiophile.

I find this quite amusing because i am properbly one of the youngest members on this site with some of the most expensive equipment too. Not to say that its the best, but since you mention prictag and income classes. I am 21 now, and have always tuned, treated my room and tried new equipment out. And actually the equipment i recommend i have usually owned.
-Flo

Not sure why you posted this...but I guess if spending more money than others on gear makes you happy then that's fine. Personally I enjoy spending less money than others on gear while simultaneously arriving at a better sounding system...

One last thing...Can you please explaing "HIFI" to me, I'm not sure I'm understanding it the way you're using it.

[drseid]

I consider a person a true audiophile when he meets the following requirements.

1. Matches components based on technical aspects
2. Matches components based on the "character" of each piece.
3. Creates a pleasing Aura to the eye
4. Doesnt rate speakers based on whitepapers and showroom hearings

A true Audiophile system has a certain magical aspect of their sound and doesnt need any papers to prove its goodness..

-Flo

PS: The best speakers in the world to me, are not the ones with great whitepapers.

I appreciate your reply to a tough question Florian...

That said, I think you may be overthinking things to some extent with such specifics as to what makes a "true" audiophile...

In my case, I actually prefer the term "audio enthusiast" to "audiophile"...

I think of an audio enthusiast as one who wants to enjoy their music as much as possible, and actively works to achieve that goal. I don't really give much thought to what "character" my equipment has, or what white papers say (or don't say). Isn't it all about just trying to enjoy the music...? At the end of the day, when it all comes together and you can't wipe that broad smile on your face away when listening to your favorite tunes, you know you have your system matched the way you want and it makes it all worthwhile. Just my 2 cents for what their worth.

---Dave

[abstracta]

But what exactly is a "true" audiophile exactly?

From my experience, an 'audiophile' = somebody who spends $3000+ on a pair of two way speakers, $1000 on cables/interconnects, or, thinks a speaker that dives like a shot shot duck below 45hz is "full range".

My nominees for the topic at hand:

Snell - The brand name even sounds like it would appeal to audio snobs. Although Snell has fallen out of the spotlight the past several years, they were among the masters at 'big box / little driver' speaker design, and knew how to market them. While I've laughed at salesmen pushing Cerwin Vega's using such revered technical jargon as "da Bomb" and "balz", at least the Cerwin's didn't make me yawn like a pair of Snell B minors did.

Definitive Technology - I heard a pair of BP-20's back in the 90's when they first hit the scene, and was amazed by them. Neutral, dynamic, and that awesome soundstage only rivaled by planars. Regretfully, current DT designs suffer from 'boom truck' bass quality, and horribly choppy frequency response likely the result of low end drivers and crossovers. It's a real shame what has happened to DT. I believe this leaves only Mirage in that genre', and I find their sonic quality only marginally better.

Martin Logon - nuff said.

Honorable mention - Any two way conventional cone speaker bigger than two feet tall. I don't care who makes them.

[RGA]

Well I can't argue with the Snell B Minor or most any Snell after Snell died -- The B-minor was a boring speaker and considering the side firing subwoofer (12inch) and multi way design and the size of the speaker -- you would think it would be better --- after all it was a highly touted Stereohhile Class B rated full range speaker