Speakers are least important

[Rexp]

36 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 There is far more to the performance of a speaker than 128kbps is capable of revealing.

  Not all speakers are created equal in all areas either. We don't even know if the speakers are set up optimally in the room either.

 

 I didn't say anything about them sounding alike, as I couldn't be bothered even listening to such poor source material from unknown quality recordings,  to even attempt to judge the quality of ANY piece of equipment.

 

 

If you can't be bothered to listen, best not waste our time. 

[sandyk]

7 minutes ago, STC said:

But there are other members who are young and with undamaged hearing. You are criticizing something based on your weakness which didn’t reflect the actual position of the 128 bitrate. 

 

 You are likely to find that the majority of the members are 50 or over, as most younger people aren't into HiFi as such these days.

 To audition speakers properly you need to do that in a well set up Audio dealer's show room, not that there are too many like that left these days. You may as well forget Demos at most Audio shows too, due to the noise level and the size of the typical room which is often just a hotel type room conscripted for the event.

[STC]

4 minutes ago, sandyk said:

To audition speakers properly you need to do that in a well set up Audio dealer's show room,

 

To properly evaluate speakers, set them up in your listening space. 

[sandyk]

7 minutes ago, STC said:

 

To properly evaluate speakers, set them up in your listening space. 

 

 You should only do that after narrowing down your choices, and not all dealers will let you do what you are suggesting unless the speakers are quite expensive.

 In fact, not all cities and towns even have Audio Dealers these days.

[esldude]

Aren't these still done with a camera which has a microphone which has Automatic Level Control?

 

We've had this discussion before.  Microphones pick up early room reflections that if you were there in person your ear/brain would fully or partly ignore.  So recording at or near the LP is never going to sound like it would in person.  Playing back those same reflections your hearing will not process them out.  You hear way more room and that interfere's with knowing what the speaker is doing.  

 

Can you tell anything about setups like this?  Yeah, somewhat.  But it is a foolish murky way to try and learn something.  Of all the ways you'd want to attempt this, it is being done in a most sub-standard near useless manner.  

 

And if you think these are sufficient to support the idea speakers are not very important, well, I wish I had some of whatever you are smoking to celebrate the 4th of July just past.  

[Paul R]

1 hour ago, STC said:

You hear not only the speakers but also the room. So why can’t videos show the difference? I am suspecting there are many couldn’t distinguish room acoustics and the direct sound in the recording. A recording is a recording. It doesn’t matter if the person is singing live or speakers reproduction. 

 

Generally, in a good system, the sound will be okay but in a bad room the recording would reveal how bad they actually sound. 

 

 

Play the videos with just the sound, no visual cues. 

 

Alex is quite right here, videos  like this are not valid ways to judge a speaker system - especially when the sound is being reproduced over a third speaker system, which just colors the heck out of the video anyway. You buy speakers off a video of those speakers playing something, and I need to talk to you about this little bridge that is up for sale...  Only driven on by a little old lady from Pasadena on Sunday afternoons after church. Cheap!

[STC]

Just now, sandyk said:

 

 You should only do that after narrowing down your choices, and not all dealers will let you do what you are suggesting unless the speakers are quite expensive.

 

What better way you could do that before visiting the dealer?  Watch the pictures of the speakers? Read a third party opinion of the speakers sound. Listening to the speakers themselves?  

 

The Youtube is not the final arbiter of the SQ. It is just a small starting point and those who cared about reproduction by now would realize that room acoustics play a bigger part in the sound quality than the speakers themselves. 

[STC]

6 minutes ago, esldude said:

Can you tell anything about setups like this?  Yeah, somewhat.  But it is a foolish murky way to try and learn something.  Of all the ways you'd want to attempt this, it is being done in a most sub-standard near useless manner.  

 

And if you think these are sufficient to support the idea speakers are not very important, well, I wish I had some of whatever you are smoking to celebrate the 4th of July just past.

 

Be very afraid to post the recordings of your system. If it didn’t sound better than a cheap systems sound you have to come up with an explanation. It is still the same no matter what you smoke. 

 

So the best excuse is criticizing others who dare to do instead of posting your own systems sound. 

 

And again I repeat, your understanding of reproduction of reverbs is flawed. I discovered that what are saying is somewhat similar as in the reference text book on recordings. 

 

[esldude]

14 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Be very afraid to post the recordings of your system. If it didn’t sound better than a cheap systems sound you have to come up with an explanation. It is still the same no matter what you smoke. 

 

So the best excuse is criticizing others who dare to do instead of posting your own systems sound. 

 

And again I repeat, your understanding of reproduction of reverbs is flawed. I discovered that what are saying is somewhat similar as in the reference text book on recordings. 

 

I've posted recordings before.  Done at several locations and with various miking methods to illustrate the problem.  So I'm not afraid.  It is no excuse. 

 

Imagine being asked to take a good camera, unfocus it, smear a little vaseline across the lens, get a few other people to do the same, and then all take pictures of something different to evaluate which camera is better.  Oh, and then declare the lens is the least important thing in photography.  Should one be critical of such an approach to photographic evaluation? 

[sandyk]

48 minutes ago, STC said:

 

What better way you could do that before visiting the dealer?  Watch the pictures of the speakers? Read a third party opinion of the speakers sound. Listening to the speakers themselves?  

 

The Youtube is not the final arbiter of the SQ. It is just a small starting point and those who cared about reproduction by now would realize that room acoustics play a bigger part in the sound quality than the speakers themselves. 

 

Rubbish. The room acoustics do play an important part, but the quality and positioning of the speakers is more important.

[Paul R]

37 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Be very afraid to post the recordings of your system. If it didn’t sound better than a cheap systems sound you have to come up with an explanation. It is still the same no matter what you smoke. 

 

So the best excuse is criticizing others who dare to do instead of posting your own systems sound. 

 

And again I repeat, your understanding of reproduction of reverbs is flawed. I discovered that what are saying is somewhat similar as in the reference text book on recordings. 

 

 

Or, more simply, video recordings of systems done in living rooms and such are just pretty useless, since they are all pretty much going to sound the same. (shrug)

 

That isn't to say that the speakers or systems sound the same, just the most often low quality poorly recorded video. 

 

-Paul 

 

[lucretius]

I list the order of importance by what equipment is likely to be retained the longest (I'm ignoring room treatments, stands, cables, power supplies/conditioners, etc.):

1. Speakers/headphones
2. Turntable (if applicable)
3. Analog amp/preamp/integrated
4. Analog headphone amp (if applicable)
5. Phono preamp (if applicable)
6. Phono cartridge (if applicable)
7. Disk player
8. Digital amp (if applicable)
9. DAC (plain)
10. DAC (combination -- headphone amp and/or preamp and/or streamer)
11. Network streamer (if applicable)

[sandyk]

8 minutes ago, lucretius said:

I list the order of importance by what equipment is likely to be retained the longest (I'm ignoring room treatments, stands, cables, power supplies/conditioners, etc.):

1. Speakers/Headphones
2. Turntable (if applicable)
3. Phono preamp (if applicable)
4. Analog amp/preamp/integrated
5. Analog headphone amp (if applicable)
6. Disk Player
7. Digital amp (if applicable)
8. DAC (plain)
9. DAC (combination -- headphone amp and/or preamp and/or streamer)
10. Network Streamer (if applicable)

 Looks like the digital area of your system could do with an upgrade

 However, I do agree that Speakers/Headphones are most important.

[lucretius]

4 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 Looks like the digital area of your system could do with an upgrade

 However, I do agree that Speakers/Headphones are most important.

 

I am mindful of the fact that technological improvements/changes are much more likely in the digital area.

[STC]

49 minutes ago, esldude said:

I've posted recordings before.  Done at several locations and with various miking methods to illustrate the problem.  So I'm not afraid.  It is no excuse. 

 

Unless digital got use by date or it changes with time, there is no harm to share them again unless it just doesn't sound as good as it sounds in your room. 

 

 

49 minutes ago, esldude said:

 

Imagine being asked to take a good camera, unfocus it, smear a little vaseline across the lens, get a few other people to do the same, and then all take pictures of something different to evaluate which camera is better.  Oh, and then declare the lens is the least important thing in photography.  Should one be critical of such an approach to photographic evaluation? 

 

Imagine asking to take a same object in your room using different cameras. 

 

Imagine all the audiophiles, record using similar microphones without any processing and share them here. 

Quote

We've had this discussion before.  Microphones pick up early room reflections that if you were there in person your ear/brain would fully or partly ignore.  So recording at or near the LP is never going to sound like it would in person.  Playing back those same reflections your hearing will not process them out.  You hear way more room and that interfere's with knowing what the speaker is doing. 

 

 

It is the direction, a playback do not produce them from the correct direction because microphone do not capture direction but the differential in time and level between the channels.  The playback requires proper direction like how the orginal sound reached the microphone. Otherwise, if you place your speakers even from the back the playback would still create a front sound stage. This will not happen because recording playback requires to place the speakers to reflect where the original sound located in the actual performance.

[STC]

44 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

Rubbish. The room acoustics do play an important part, but the quality and positioning of the speakers is more important.

 

Rearranged the words:-

 

Rubbish. The quality and positioning of the speakers do play an important part, but the room acoustics is more important.

[sandyk]

Just now, STC said:

 

Rearranged the words:-

 

Rubbish. The quality and positioning of the speakers do play an important part, but the room acoustics is more important.

 

 You are starting to sound like a member from the Lower Blue Mountains near Sydney.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry Frank, I couldn't resist temptation

[lucretius]

On 7/5/2019 at 1:49 AM, Rexp said:

Contrary to some members thinking, speakers are actually the least important part of an average hi-end system ($30k). Take a listen to David Bowie's Lazarus track on these two videos, one system speakers cost double the other. Which performance do you prefer? 

7.40 in:

 

1.40 in:

 

 

 

I prefer the first one (the second one hurt my ears).  However, I don't think this is a fair comparison, since the sound ends up funneled through an ADC/windows driver/my DAC/my speakers/my room. Further, importance (to me) doesn't necessarily correspond to an absolute dollar value ranking. 

[STC]

1 hour ago, Paul R said:

 

 

Play the videos with just the sound, no visual cues. 

 

Alex is quite right here, videos  like this are not valid ways to judge a speaker system - especially when the sound is being reproduced over a third speaker system, which just colors the heck out of the video anyway. You buy speakers off a video of those speakers playing something, and I need to talk to you about this little bridge that is up for sale...  Only driven on by a little old lady from Pasadena on Sunday afternoons after church. Cheap!

 

Get some sleep as you are saying things which I didn’t. 

[STC]

12 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 You are starting to sound like a member from the Lower Blue Mountains near Sydney.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry Frank, I couldn't resist temptation

 

How is that so?  He never believed in room acoustics. 

[fas42]

Indeed true. I believe in system integrity, and that the weakest links determine the signature of the sound - I have never yet heard the "magic" of special speakers, and room acoustics, overcome deficiencies in these areas ... .

 

No point in listening to those clips on the hauled in Dell laptop I'm currently using - they sound like a blubbering mess, on the kneecapped sound system it has; not unlike some ambitious rigs I've come across over the years, .

[Paul R]

31 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Get some sleep as you are saying things which I didn’t. 

 

Stop being insulting and think. Do as I asked and report back if you still are able to tell the differences, or whatever. 

 

[PeterSt]

2 hours ago, Paul R said:

Or, more simply, video recordings of systems done in living rooms and such are just pretty useless, since they are all pretty much going to sound the same. (shrug)

 

Not true at all. I your theories that would be. But try it (in a no smoking area). 

[STC]

36 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

Stop being insulting and think. Do as I asked and report back if you still are able to tell the differences, or whatever. 

 

 

What is there to report when I already stated the obvious. Go and read the thread. Stop confusing yourself as usual. The difference is obvious. 

[STC]

6 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Not true at all. I your theories that would be. But try it (in a no smoking area). 

 

It is now getting clear that some couldn’t distinguish the direct and ambiance in both videos. 

 

In fact, now I am wondering if anyone could even hear the difference in my video.