• 11-10-2004, 03:09 PM
    thedace
    What is your type of sound
    While reading through the forums on this site i have noticed that different countries have diffrent tastes in speakers / components etc.... Do diffrent nationalities prefer diffrennt sounds? ie. Americans seem to like B&W from England. I live in the U.K and own JM lab speakers (french). I am interested what speakers and types of sound are big in different places. Any comments would be appreciated.
  • 11-10-2004, 03:45 PM
    RGA
    I don't think you can generalize - B&W has shifted to the pomps and pyrotechnics the boom and sizzle sound of Canadian made loudspeakers - the classic Britsh sopund can still be obtained from the likes of Castle.

    Home theater has an influence IMO that speakers are getting far less dynamic with far less bass depth less tuneful and timbrally correct for the trade for image and funnelling sound to the center in a hollow kind of sound - but that gets you to buy a center channel surround and subs to fix up the poor two channel performance.

    Listen to the B&W 705 against some of those British/Danish two channel speaker makers and you'll laugh at how truly outclassed the 705 will sound. And some here actually think it's a good speaker. So the Bose marketing has been copied very well.
  • 11-10-2004, 05:06 PM
    46minaudio
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thedace
    While reading through the forums on this site i have noticed that different countries have diffrent tastes in speakers / components etc.... Do diffrent nationalities prefer diffrennt sounds? ie. Americans seem to like B&W from England. I live in the U.K and own JM lab speakers (french). I am interested what speakers and types of sound are big in different places. Any comments would be appreciated.

    My guess is that no matter where we come from we prefer what we here the most..Let's face it, we "as in everybody" don't walkaround with earmuffs that color sound.IMO in blind test most would prefer speakers that sound as close to real life as posible (flat). Just my opinion...
  • 11-10-2004, 08:08 PM
    Mr Peabody
    I'm an American and I am a diehard Dynaudio fan. Dyn's are Danish. I have not heard all speakers in the world but of the many I have heard none can compare to the Dyn's dynamic response, neutrality and bass response. I personally do not care for B&W. I've heard worse but I think B&W is overrated and over priced for what they are. My second choice in speakers would be Martin Logan, American electrostats. Entirely different presentation than Dyn's but enjoyable nonetheless, especially when driven by a good tube system.

    I prefer American amps, being a Krell owner myself, but I have heard some T+A, German, gear that bang for the buck is actually better. T+A is still on the expensive side but their $2 or 3k stuff will compare or some may even prefer it over Krell or Levinson costing several times that.
  • 11-10-2004, 08:31 PM
    RGA
    Dynaudio is consistantly impressive - they have grown on me over the years. Focussed and not bright.
  • 11-10-2004, 09:05 PM
    PAT.P
    Type of sound
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thedace
    While reading through the forums on this site i have noticed that different countries have diffrent tastes in speakers / components etc.... Do diffrent nationalities prefer diffrennt sounds? ie. Americans seem to like B&W from England. I live in the U.K and own JM lab speakers (french). I am interested what speakers and types of sound are big in different places. Any comments would be appreciated.

    Live in Canada my speaker are Dahlquist (new generation) Paradigm,Axiom JBL.,Energy > Receiver Surround are Sony ,Sherwood, Technics > Receiver 2 chanel are Marantz,Pioneer, Sansui ...Pat.P
  • 11-10-2004, 09:28 PM
    Mr Peabody
    Pat, you need to get out more :) Most of the receivers you mentioned I'd consider entry level and Technics has been eliminated and put under the Panasonic name. Sherwood used to definitely be bargain basement but I have seen now they have mated with someone, maybe Newcastle, so they could be better. Phillips was able to turn Marantz around for the better after they made a bad turn. Is there any new Sansui? I haven't seen any around in years. Check out Onkyo or Harmon Kardon for receivers and some integrated amps for 2 channel. Maybe Arcam or Creek.
  • 11-10-2004, 10:28 PM
    PAT.P
    Type of sound
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    Pat, you need to get out more :) Most of the receivers you mentioned I'd consider entry level and Technics has been eliminated and put under the Panasonic name. Sherwood used to definitely be bargain basement but I have seen now they have mated with someone, maybe Newcastle, so they could be better. Phillips was able to turn Marantz around for the better after they made a bad turn. Is there any new Sansui? I haven't seen any around in years. Check out Onkyo or Harmon Kardon for receivers and some integrated amps for 2 channel. Maybe Arcam or Creek.

    The Sherwood is for my 7 year old son. The Marantz is in basement .Sony is in living room for now.I am going to buy another receiver its between the Yamaha and Harmon Kardon.Most of the other receiver are going to family member.Spouse just lost her job and we have two house to pay .If I go out to pay for a receiver at this time she would kill me! Pat.P
  • 11-11-2004, 05:00 AM
    PAT.P
    what type of sound
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    Pat, you need to get out more :) Most of the receivers you mentioned I'd consider entry level and Technics has been eliminated and put under the Panasonic name. Sherwood used to definitely be bargain basement but I have seen now they have mated with someone, maybe Newcastle, so they could be better. Phillips was able to turn Marantz around for the better after they made a bad turn. Is there any new Sansui? I haven't seen any around in years. Check out Onkyo or Harmon Kardon for receivers and some integrated amps for 2 channel. Maybe Arcam or Creek.

    Just for a thought consider without the old technology of some of these receiver at the time build the RND of today would not exist!Same goes for speaker companies they learn from old and improved the sound of the new .Pat.P :D
  • 11-11-2004, 05:34 AM
    C Bennett
    I like my Mirage Omni 60's. Nice sound! Don't know what "kind" of sound it is since its the omnipolar technology. Sounds nice to me though!
  • 11-11-2004, 04:02 PM
    Woochifer
    I haven't visited enough places to tell you one way or another whether people who live in different areas prefer different types of sounds. Just looking on this board, I don't think you can make any generalizations on te types of sounds that people prefer, and the majority of posters here live in the U.S.

    As far as geographic distinctions that differentiate the types of sounds that you get from speakers, at one time that was much more prevalent than it is now. At least from how it's been generalized from the U.S. perspective, most of this traces back to the 70s when you had groupings that were generally known as the "west coast," "New England," and "British" sounds. The west coast speakers were led by JBL and Cerwin Vega, and those were occasionally referred to as the "boom and sizzle" speakers. (I notice that RGA refers to Canadian speakers in those terms; that's far from an appropriate description, given that the newer Canadian speakers are a lot more accurate with less extreme variations in the tonal characteristics than the vintage west coast speakers) Those speakers were very punchy and forward sounding with a lot of imbalances throughout the frequency range.

    The New England speakers were typically from the likes of AR, Advent, and KLH. Their sound was a lot more balanced and subdued than their west coast competitors. These speakers definitely had more versatility and worked better with acoustic instruments. Later on, companies like Boston Acoustics and Polk refined the New England sound and made it punchier with a more extended frequency response. The British sound came from companies like B&W, Mission, and KEF. My impression of the vintage British speakers was that they tended to elevate the midrange and roll off the highs, which works well with the characteristics of a lot of acoustic music fans but IMO sucked the life out of rock music and hip hop.

    Nowadays, you don't have these clear cut geographic distinctions anymore. They still exist to some degree, but they're not as obvious as they were before. For example, the current JBLs are not nearly as brash sounding as their 70s counterparts, and the current B&Ws sound a lot livelier than the models that they made 20 years ago. The market has gone more towards speakers that have more linear tonal characteristics with fewer extreme variations. Overall, this means that you don't have as many immediately identifiable signature sounds. But, on the other hand, you don't have too many truly bad sounding speakers either, unlike 20 years ago when extremely inaccurate speakers were a lot more common.
  • 11-11-2004, 04:13 PM
    Woochifer
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RGA
    Home theater has an influence IMO that speakers are getting far less dynamic with far less bass depth less tuneful and timbrally correct for the trade for image and funnelling sound to the center in a hollow kind of sound - but that gets you to buy a center channel surround and subs to fix up the poor two channel performance.

    How would buying a "center channel sound and subs" fix "poor two channel performance"? I thought that people bought center and surround channel speakers in order to use them with MULTICHANNEL soundtracks. I know that's the reason why I filled out my system the way that I did -- y'know using a 5.1 speaker setup in order to properly play back a 5.1 soundtrack! Whenever I listen to two-channel music, the center and surround channels are turned OFF -- no funneling effect or lack of tunefulness or timbral correctness that I need to use those center and surround channels to correct. If you're going to presume what home theater purchasers are thinking, at least be logical about it.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RGA
    Listen to the B&W 705 against some of those British/Danish two channel speaker makers and you'll laugh at how truly outclassed the 705 will sound. And some here actually think it's a good speaker. So the Bose marketing has been copied very well.

    Oh really? You're presuming that everybody would have the same impression of the 705s that you did, and prefer the British/Danish two channel speaker makers like you do? And what if someone thinks that the 705 is a good speaker? I thought that someone's assessment of a good speaker came down to personal preference. Are you presuming that you know more about people's personal preferences than they do? Think about that before you start using phrases like "truly outclassed" and presume that people will share your laughter at certain things.
  • 11-11-2004, 08:26 PM
    spacedeckman
    There is too much over-generalization going on here, I say...
    too much.

    You need to divide people into two different camps. You have the listeners and the followers. The listeners buy for sound, the followers buy things because they look nice or someone else told them they were good. Often they don't feel qualified to make a good choice.

    I'm an American who thinks B&Ws sound awful, lean towards the Scandinavians, think Paradigm is the "new" JBL (I'll agree with RGA on that one, but not on API product...Energy/Mirage), except for some of the high end bizzaro stuff, American speakers tend to not be very good, the French stuff tends to be quite good (JMLabs, Triangle, Cabasse), the Italians as well (Opera...I love the new Callas), but the Brits...who's really left? I've got a pair of old Castles that I love dearly. I generally like Pro-ac stuff, and much of the Acoustic Energy product, Epos, Harbeth, among others.

    Who else is there out there? There are still speakers out there to hear.
  • 11-12-2004, 11:34 AM
    topspeed
    This is an impossible question to answer. Nationality or geographic location has nothing to do with it. I'm a American on the west coast and have varying taste for speakers. I've got B&W's and Von Schweikerts in two different rigs and can state unequivocally that they don't sound anything alike...yet I wouldn't part with either. What does that make me? Bipolar? Maybe schizophrenic...No, I'm Not! YES, I AM!

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by spacedeckman
    except for some of the high end bizzaro stuff, American speakers tend to not be very good

    Owners of Maggies, Theil, Martin Logan, Wilson, Avalon, NOLA, Green Mountain, and Von Schweikert may tend not to agree with you on this...
  • 11-12-2004, 12:12 PM
    thedace
    Thanks for all the comments guys. One of the reasons i asked the question is because on my CD player there is a small badge on the facia stating that the product is "UK sound tuned". I still aint sure what UK sound is!

    In magazines in this country things are discribe as having say an american sound (big and bold) or a japaneese sound (articulate i think).

    Here is a thought...


    Does marketing have much to do with how popular a speaker/component is in certain areas. For example Wharfedale are marketed to death in this country and are very popular because of it even though the sound can be bettered for the money IN MY OPINION.
    Is it a matter of the HIFI companies and marketing people deciding what people should have. I know that anybody who has been into HIFI for a while will always demo equiptment before buying but i am talking mainly about people just getting into the hobby.

    Also people only realy talked about speakers. Are Japaneese home cinema receivers generally the best? And do American Amps sound powerful?