Where do Totem speakers rank with other high end speakers?

[RGA]

I recently came across some ads boasting about 3D sound? Does such thing exist or just a marketing ploy? I am not aware of any good speaker manufacturers coming out with 3D sound and this makes me suspicious of the claim. If 3D sound does truly exist, how does it sound different compared to the conventional sound? What does it take to make 3D sound, if it is true? If 3D sound is"invented" some day, does that mean all existing speakers, including high-end ones are obsolete? Thanks for all comments.

No I am no engineer (or as I call them failed scientists - this is a reference to the Big Bang Thery Show so please don't take offense resident engineers).

3D sound is what is heard in the room. Until it is heard you don't really know what is missing and very little out there IME has done it. I didn't hear it for the first 15 years of auditioning gear. I also think many audiophiles and many reviewers have yet to really experience it. So reviewers feebly attempt to create words on page to try and describe what it is we're hearing and we use words like organic, 3 dimensional, whole, right. The problem is that these words get whored out and thrown around for stereos and products that are not doing these things. Many speakers/systems will create a wall of sound pretty much regardless of the music or recording played. You could make the case that this should be called soundstage depth or front to back staging rather than side to side staging. But I think it has more to do with dynamics, micro, midi, macrodynamics.

Fred Crowder of dagogo uses the following to describe what I describe as pressurization of instruments for a speaker to "create pressure gradients within the listening room which were noted as density changes in the air of the room." He notes that very few even large systems that he has heard have the ability to do this. And to me that is what creates a sense of 3 dimensionality to what we're hearing - the actual presence of an instrument that is standing right in front of you so that "live" and in the room.

This is different than "air" around instruments which IMO is an artifcat generate by the equipment - usually tweeters I suspect and it to me is a form of grain because in real life listening to real acoustic bands/symphonies there is no "air around the instruments."

It is also somewhat disc related because even those systems can't do it all the time, but they can do it some of the time with the recordings. Most systems never do regardless of the quality of recording. I have not heard many systems do it and they tend to cost quite a bit of money. There are so many attributes of sound and in the end what I most prize is a system that can differentiate recording qualities and ancillary gear, that doesn't sound fatiguing that covers most of the frequency spectrum, sounds very balanced not overdoing any one trait while also allowing you to sit back in the chair and let the music wash over you and be completely relaxed for say 5-6 hours day in and day out without drawing attention away from the listening to notice treble, midrange or bass issues. Many speakers tend to sound terrific in short auditions but after about 3 months they often get tiresome. The one that stands out from the crowd on the wall-o-speakers may end up being the most irritating down the line.

[JoeE SP9]

Sorry RGA. You can have a soundstage (3D) with little or no dynamics, macro micro or (sic) "maestro".

A soundsatage is not related to or dependant on dynamics. Good dynamics, macro and micro will enhance a soundstage but neither is necessary.

A well recorded version of Pachelbel's Cannon is a perfect example. This piece has virtually no dynamics macro or micro. Nevertheless, a good recording of it demonstrates a good soundstage.

Of course all three together will provide a better listening experience.

[RGA]

Sorry RGA. You can have a soundstage (3D) with little or no dynamics, macro micro or (sic) "maestro".

A soundsatage is not related to or dependant on dynamics. Good dynamics, macro and micro will enhance a soundstage but neither is necessary.

Of course all three together will provide a better listening experience.

This is the problems with the words they're limited to definitions on a page. And relating an experience to the word is not easy to do. Some speakers will get the left to right thing down great. Others may get the layering front to back thing down but the "live" factor is a difficult one to express in words. Fred tried to relate it and it's not bad articulation but I'll have to continue to try and isolate what is and how to express it.

[Feanor]

...
Fred Crowder of dagogo uses the following to describe what I describe as pressurization of instruments for a speaker to "create pressure gradients within the listening room which were noted as density changes in the air of the room." He notes that very few even large systems that he has heard have the ability to do this. And to me that is what creates a sense of 3 dimensionality to what we're hearing - the actual presence of an instrument that is standing right in front of you so that "live" and in the room.

This "pressure gradiaents" stuff as the source of "3D: sound like BS. How ridiculously loud to you have to play to get pressure gradients? How come some "large systems" can do it and others not? I think this is a crock.

...
This is different than "air" around instruments which IMO is an artifcat generate by the equipment - usually tweeters I suspect and it to me is a form of grain because in real life listening to real acoustic bands/symphonies there is no "air around the instruments."
...

"Air" around the instruments is mainly just good resolution, not an artifact. Also, you need a good speaker certainly, but differences in "air" vary very much with the amplfier.

[RGA]

This "pressure gradiaents" stuff as the source of "3D: sound like BS. How ridiculously loud to you have to play to get pressure gradients? How come some "large systems" can do it and others not? I think this is a crock.

No it's not at loud levels - it's there regardless of level.

"Air" around the instruments is mainly just good resolution, not an artifact. Also, you need a good speaker certainly, but differences in "air" vary very much with the amplfier.

I believe it's an artificat of many systems - it's not heard in any live music and with high resolution systems that signature isn't present yet everything else is - it's seamless. The best argument Ihave read for this originated in Positive Feedback...

"Many listeners speak of a playback system's resolving power in terms of its ability to articulate detail, i.e. previous unnoticed phenomena [noticing more air for example]. However, it is more likely that what these listeners are responding to when they say such-and-such has more "detail" is: unconnected micro-events in the frequency and time domains. (These are events that, if they were properly connected, would have realized the correct presentation of harmonic structure, attack, and legato.)

Because these events are of incredibly short duration and because there is absolutely no analog to such events in the natural world and are now being revealed to them by the sheer excellence of their audio, these listeners believe that they are hearing something for the first time, which they are! And largely because of this, they are more easily misled into a belief that what they are hearing is relevant and correct. The matter is aided and abetted by the apparentness of the perception. These "details" are undeniably there; it is only their meaning which has become subverted. The truth is that we only perceive such "detail" from an audio playback system; but never in a live musical performance.../...Grain creates the perception of more events, particularly in the treble region, because they are made to stand out from the musical texture in an unnaturally highlighted form. In true high-resolution audio systems, grain disappears and is replaced by a seamless flow of connected musical happenings. [cf. "As Time Goes By" Positive Feedback Magazine, Vol. 4, No. 4-5, Fall '93]."

And I think you can see where this is in the market. Many speaker makers have have several lines. Not to pick on B&W but their entry speakers with Tweeter on top have a similar/same design as the next model up - but I remember readin their literature where it would talk about the superior tube tapering to reduce ringing. In other words if you buy the more expensive model it will reduce the ringing (which is tweeter induced grain). Reduced not cured I might add. So you keep going up the lines. Then in a few years there will be another fix with an entirely different technology that will be fixable from one line to the next. I don't know if that's how they still word things but it was there and it explained much to me. I would rather a tweeter design that doesn't create ringing in the first place. Why creat a problem and then a solution to fix the problem when it's not better than most of the plain jane silk dome. They have "air" as well. and that goes away in their upper models with better electronics. The micro events are less detached. So I agree with the above quotes for the most part.