Speakers are least important

[Rexp]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

Paul

 To me at least, they actually were glaringly obvious , but I don't agree with the premise that you can properly evaluate speaker or room differences using 128kbps .aac audio.

 

Regards

Alex

Yes the difference is obvious, don't think Paul has listened. Did you have a prefernce?

[STC]

12 hours ago, 4est said:

Hearing a quality change via youtube is different than making a quality assessment via youtube.

 

Did you even read https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/56709-speakers-are-least-important/?do=findComment&comment=970507 ?

 

If going by the YouTube video, then one would say the $100 Sharp speakers is enough. I kept emphasising the system. It is how a system performance in a given setup. I was addressing the pitfalls of wrongly relying on YouTube videos if you do not the microphone and making wrong judgment by dismissing the SQ of the sound in the bigger room just because it contains more reverbs than the sound in the other video.

 

I repeat what I said in post #6, again "while it is impossible to judge from the videos of the speakers or other equipment quality but it is always possible to roughly know how well the overall sound of the system is." . 

 

Unless, you have a room measurement, most audiophiles space is either too dead or too reflective. The only way to know the difference is to do the measurement -which is complicated to address - or make recordings like this and do instantaneous AB comparison. In long run, you will learn more about recordings, what is reverbs, what is direct sound, how what sounded good to your ears hearing in situ is different in the recording.

 

If you can have a rough idea of the recording quality based on YouTube videos of the album you want to buy, why is it so difficult to put a little effort to make some form of recordings as you reference when you change cables or speakers or amps. Again, I remind the quote: - it is impossible to judge from the videos of the speakers or other equipment quality ...

 

 

[sandyk]

30 minutes ago, Rexp said:

Yes the difference is obvious, don't think Paul has listened. Did you have a prefernce?

 

 I would need to listen to them both right through again to make worthwhile comments, but yes one did sound markedly more normal sounding.

Currently I am heavily involved in the creation of some comparisons with supposedly " impossible" differences if you want to try them OTR, as they are only a work in progress at the moment.

[PeterSt]

51 minutes ago, Rexp said:

Did you have a prefernce?

 

Through a phone with the lousiest audio performance :

 

The first one is bland all over and without punch in the (I suppose) snare while the second one is forward where forward should be; more emphasized mid. 

 

Do notice that I could do the very same with a USB cable. Really the same (from the perception of this phone). 

 

[sandyk]

21 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

The first one is bland all over and without punch in the (I suppose) snare while the second one is forward where forward should be; more emphasized mid. 

 

Agreed, but the sibilance in his voice annoyed me with the second one.

[acg]

Second one sounds like pus on my computer monitor speakers...first one much better, though nowhere near ideal.  The second videos utter lack of texture in bass or mids means it would never make my 'audition list'.  It sounds to me like a space with lots of hard reflective surfaces... 

[sandyk]

4 minutes ago, acg said:

Second one sounds like pus on my computer monitor speakers...first one much better, though nowhere near ideal.  The second videos utter lack of texture in bass or mids means it would never make my 'audition list'.  It sounds to me like a space with lots of hard reflective surfaces... 

Anthony

 I would probably have liked the first one way more due to the lack of annoying voice sibilance if it hadn't been saved as crappy 128kbps .aac which made it sound dull and boring to me,  as the second one had excessive HF detail/rubbish and I didn't like it either.

 

Regards

Alex

[acg]

Sure Alex, I reckon I could work with the first room to get the sound I like...not sure about the second room.

[sandyk]

37 minutes ago, acg said:

Sure Alex, I reckon I could work with the first room to get the sound I like...not sure about the second room.

 I once had a room like that in a rented house.

 I had to use soft 50mm thick and 1M high foam directly behind each of the speakers and along the side walls.

 It had the benefit of also reducing the noise so the neighbours couldn't complain to the Estate Agents.

 

 Anyway, get back to that damn test bench, but don't race it  !

 

[Rexp]

2 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

Agreed, but the sibilance in his voice annoyed me with the second one.

Agreed the tonal balance of the 2nd is tipped up but it rocks. I much prefer it to the 1st which is probably suffering from a poorly set up turntable and is dull. 

[esldude]

1 hour ago, Rexp said:

Agreed the tonal balance of the 2nd is tipped up but it rocks. I much prefer it to the 1st which is probably suffering from a poorly set up turntable and is dull. 

Oh yes, let us judge turntable setup intricacies via compressed youtube video and audio done from a hand held camera.  Care to suggest VTA adjustments from your listening?  The idea is rubbish. 

[STC]

Here are some lossless files for comparisons. AFAIK, Peter records them using a Sony microphone and then add them to the video. Even Stereophile recordings of the AV show was done similarly. Now let's see how much difference are there going to be in the YT sound when comparing these sound.

 

Unlike other videos of mine, these were processed with noise reduction and normalized. They were not level matched. Guess which audio sample that can be matched with the speakers?RoomC.wavRoomA.wavRoomB.wav

 

Room 1

 

Room 2

 

 

Room 3

 

 

 

Or can you even guess the TT sound?

 

 

[Rexp]

1 hour ago, esldude said:

Oh yes, let us judge turntable setup intricacies via compressed youtube video and audio done from a hand held camera.  Care to suggest VTA adjustments from your listening?  The idea is rubbish. 

Haha yes definately the VTA, what do you suggest the problem with system 1 is, needs better speakers? 

[Rexp]

1 hour ago, STC said:

Here are some lossless files for comparisons. AFAIK, Peter records them using a Sony microphone and then add them to the video. Even Stereophile recordings of the AV show was done similarly. Now let's see how much difference are there going to be in the YT sound when comparing these sound.

 

Unlike other videos of mine, these were processed with noise reduction and normalized. They were not level matched. Guess which audio sample that can be matched with the speakers?RoomC.wavRoomA.wavRoomB.wav

 

Room 1

 

Room 2

 

 

Room 3

 

 

 

Or can you even guess the TT sound?

 

 

A=2

B=1

C=3

[Summit]

I don’t know about least imported, it depends on many things and where you starting from, but without doubts the most important is the music.

[STC]

19 minutes ago, Rexp said:

A=2

B=1

C=3

 

Maybe, I should have added more videos. Any preference?  Do you have one system better than the other for different genre ?

[STC]

23 minutes ago, Rexp said:

C

 

Did you use headphones ?  

[Rexp]

2 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Did you use headphones ?  

Yeah i am out so listen on my phone, so not even close? 

[esldude]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/z036htn381eoynh/Recording A.zip?dl=0

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8h6hbjlwuviglnt/Recording C.zip?dl=0

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/yxk7kzro4p2stp9/Marianne Thorsen Mozart Violin concerto 4.zip?dl=0

 

Here are some recordings of stereo speakers playing you can download and listen to them.  Each zip file will open into a few files of the same bit of music recorded in various ways.  Recording A and C were with the same speakers.  Marianne Thorsen was with different speakers.  All in the same room.  Since speakers are least important I probably shouldn't have bothered mentioning it. 

 

 

 

 

[STC]

13 minutes ago, Rexp said:

Yeah i am out so listen on my phone, so not even close? 

 

I am surprised with the speed and I am not telling you were wrong. Give it a try with headphones and external speakers and see if you change your mind. 

[4est]

9 hours ago, STC said:

 

Did you even read https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/56709-speakers-are-least-important/?do=findComment&comment=970507 ?

 

If going by the YouTube video, then one would say the $100 Sharp speakers is enough. I kept emphasising the system. It is how a system performance in a given setup. I was addressing the pitfalls of wrongly relying on YouTube videos if you do not the microphone and making wrong judgment by dismissing the SQ of the sound in the bigger room just because it contains more reverbs than the sound in the other video.

 

I repeat what I said in post #6, again "while it is impossible to judge from the videos of the speakers or other equipment quality but it is always possible to roughly know how well the overall sound of the system is." . 

 

Unless, you have a room measurement, most audiophiles space is either too dead or too reflective. The only way to know the difference is to do the measurement -which is complicated to address - or make recordings like this and do instantaneous AB comparison. In long run, you will learn more about recordings, what is reverbs, what is direct sound, how what sounded good to your ears hearing in situ is different in the recording.

 

If you can have a rough idea of the recording quality based on YouTube videos of the album you want to buy, why is it so difficult to put a little effort to make some form of recordings as you reference when you change cables or speakers or amps. Again, I remind the quote: - it is impossible to judge from the videos of the speakers or other equipment quality ...

 

 

Yes I read that, and your "did you even read" implies that you think there is some self evident truth in it. I do not see this as that simple.

[Paul R]

On 7/6/2019 at 8:10 PM, Rexp said:

Yes the difference is obvious, don't think Paul has listened. Did you have a prefernce?

 

Well, lets just consider the recordings at say, 10:29 for the top one, and 3:49 (or roughly thereabouts) for the bottom one.  Besides having vastly different levels, different rooms, different electronics, and different speakers, exactly what conclusions would you expect to draw from these recordings? Would you expect to be able to decide which system to go and review based upon the sound you heard?  

 

Umm- my own personal opinion. While both systems are interesting, the audio on the recordings is simply lousy and that audio to draw conclusions about what either system sounds like is a fool's errand indeed. There are things you can learn from the recordings - for example you can decide if you like the look of both systems. But being able to pin down and say how the speakers sound radically different? No. 

 

Just bebopping through the recordings Dennis uploaded is a lot more fun to me.  

 

Apologies to the recordist, I was not commenting on your work, merely the audio reproduction possible from those recordings. Try level matching them as closely as possible then listening to them with the video not being visible. Its a trick someone here taught me years and years ago. It can really be a fun exercise!

[Rexp]

25 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

Well, lets just consider the recordings at say, 10:29 for the top one, and 3:49 (or roughly thereabouts) for the bottom one.  Besides having vastly different levels, different rooms, different electronics, and different speakers, exactly what conclusions would you expect to draw from these recordings? Would you expect to be able to decide which system to go and review based upon the sound you heard?  

 

Umm- my own personal opinion. While both systems are interesting, the audio on the recordings is simply lousy and that audio to draw conclusions about what either system sounds like is a fool's errand indeed. There are things you can learn from the recordings - for example you can decide if you like the look of both systems. But being able to pin down and say how the speakers sound radically different? No. 

 

Just bebopping through the recordings Dennis uploaded is a lot more fun to me.  

 

Apologies to the recordist, I was not commenting on your work, merely the audio reproduction possible from those recordings. Try level matching them as closely as possible then listening to them with the video not being visible. Its a trick someone here taught me years and years ago. It can really be a fun exercise!

So you personaly couldn't draw any worthwhile conclusions from the comparison. You don't need to advise others on what they hear. 

[Paul R]

32 minutes ago, Rexp said:

So you personaly couldn't draw any worthwhile conclusions from the comparison. You don't need to advise others on what they hear. 

 

Not what I said.

 

I said that reasonable conclusions as to how those speakers sound can not be drawn from the videos. In specific conclusions used to make purchasing decisions.  I gave reasons why that is so. I did not tell anyone what they hear. If you don't agree, don't try to make out I am bullying anyone by vague comments like that. At least I am not trying to lead them down a path to bankruptcy.

 

That is my opinion yes, but one based upon years of audio research and listening. You can heed it or not, just as you will. But it is at least as valid as your opinion, and much more likely to avoid someone missing out on a speaker system they may really like or worse, buying one they think they will like but is really not to their taste at all. 

 

You are welcome to hear what you hear, and spend your money how you see fit. My Mom used to say that a fool and his money were soon parted. That saying would probably prove out true for someone who makes expensive speaker purchasing decisions based upon a you tube video like those two.  And yes, that is *also* my opinion. 

[semente]

On 7/6/2019 at 5:18 AM, Rexp said:

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

 

You are spreading delusion... Don't.