[catluck]

I've read descriptions of the M3 Sapphires, which I proudly own, as "world class" speakers.  What does it mean for a speaker to be characterized as "world class?"  I've been in this hobby or, perhaps more accurately, passionate pursuit, for 40 years. OUCH! Interested to see the diversity of opinion on what constitutes a world class speaker.  In the end, whether the M3's would garner a consensus as such, I'm so grateful to be able to listen to them every morning,... I'm just wondering what "world class" means in practice.  Thoughts?

[Audiosaurusrex]

I haven’t read that but I own them as well. It’s a very non-descript term IMO. Probably best in performance to price ratio. Other terms like stunning, outstanding, real, transparent, holographic, engaging, etc come to mind for me.

[abomwell]

I think Linkwitz sums it up well below:

"The best one can hope for with 2-channel sound reproduction is the illusion of listening into the recording venue. Physics does not allow the accurate reproduction of the original sound field with only two speakers.

Since sound reproduction is about creating an illusion it becomes very important to avoid or minimize any clues that would detract from the illusion. Such clues come from linear-distortions, such as frequency and polar response, and from non-linear distortions with their generation of tones and sounds that were not in the original."

A speaker that best achieves that criterea is what I would think of as world class.

Al

[Tyson]

To me a world class speaker is one that does most things as well as any other speaker on the planet, and at least one (or more) things better than anything else.

[catluck]

Gentlemen,
Thank you for responding. I think I agree with all comments.  Price/performance ratio, as good or better than other speaks in some particular aspect, etc. In the end, I haven't yet sussed out a performance deficit in the M3's.  Perhaps I will but, maybe, these are just a better mousetrap.  Again, thanks for weighing in. I am gratified to learn that others find the nomenclature more a marketing contrivance than a useful descriptor.

[jjss49]

means nothing

its drivel

its a very good speaker among a sea of very good speakers

[RonN5]

The idea of "best in the world" when it comes to audio probably only applies to measurements and not so much to sound since sound is more of a personal preference thing.

Therefore, when I hear the words "world class" with respect to audio, it makes me think that a lot of people seem to really like a particular product.  That doesn't mean that I will like it but it may deserve my consideration if I'm in the market for the product and can afford it.

I've heard the Spatial Audio M3 triode masters and the M3 Sapphires.  My takeaway; Spatial Audio should be on your listening shortlist...no guarantee they will be your favorites but they are good enough to warrant hearing first hand.

[Mr. Big]

Folks who love box speakers, don't care for Electrostatics, panels, or OB speakers, because they are used to the sound of the box speakers and all the over-blown bottom end that is consistent on the most recording played back due to woofer room integration issues. Where the above non-box speakers are more even and recordings where the bottom end is lacking they will sound that way, where mid-bass is lacking they will sound that way thus making the speakers sound thinner in comparison where in fact they are hearing the recording as mastered. I love tube gear because it can add some warmth and color to the presentation, I know it may not be right but I like a more weighted sound. I used solid-state though because I no longer wanted to hassle tubes and their replacement with modern tubes that can sound iffy at best. When I chose my SS Solid State gear I looked for the gear that gave me weight, color, and tone to the presentation, I wanted to close my eyes and believe there was a performer in my room. Quad speakers gave me that in spades, Dynaudio Confidence 5's could at times, and the Spatial Audio M3's Sapphires can do it in spades also, so in that case, I guess you have to say they our world-class speakers, but perhaps don't to everyone tastes and many who knocked OB speakers have never heard Clayton speakers, like those who putdown class D amps, they never heard a current one their system, only from the passed on myth from the past that class D sucks. Unless we stay open-minded and try something new can we ever say it is not our cup of tea? 

[jriggy]

Unless we stay open-minded and try something new can we ever say it is not our cup of tea?

BINGO!
Ok, so maybe not completely related to Spatial here but how are we supposed to learn what’s what, what we like, what we don’t like, if we don’t try things. Even “the next best thing” is getting its attention for some reasons. So why not try some stuff along the way. Its a hobby!  Dont let the know-it-all naysayers kill your fun!

[529proaudio]

...where in fact they are hearing the recording as mastered.

Not sure I would fully agree with this as 99.99999% of mastering engineers use box speakers when mastering.  I'm not even aware of an OB option that is even available in the pro audio market.  Also, part of the ME's job is to ensure the mix translates across a variety of playback systems, e.g. earbuds, loudspeakers, cars, etc...

Best,
Chris

   

[Mr. Big]

Record producers have no audiophile in mind when they record music, we are 0.5% of the market, they understand on what systems their recordings will be listened to, in the old days it was for car radio which was where we all listened to music, now streaming, digital radio, XM/Sirus and the others.  This is why compression on recordings has soared, they sound good on the media most listen to. Compression was also used on LPs highly so needles could safely track the groves, in the 70's it really was used, which was why many rock recordings sounded so muddy vs. how recordings sounded in the '50s and early '60s.

[Desertpilot]

Record producers have no audiophile in mind when they record music, we are 0.5% of the market, they understand on what systems their recordings will be listened to, in the old days it was for car radio which was where we all listened to music, now streaming, digital radio, XM/Sirus and the others.  This is why compression on recordings has soared, they sound good on the media most listen to. Compression was also used on LPs highly so needles could safely track the groves, in the 70's it really was used, which was why many rock recordings sounded so muddy vs. how recordings sounded in the '50s and early '60s.

Not so for classical.  There are several classical music recording engineers who take great care recording/mixing music, especially, stereo and multichannel, in DSD and DXD.  Mark Donahue at Soundmirror from Boston, many albums in the Reference Recordings label (https://soundmirror.com/about/), Jared Sacks at Channel Classics, many recordings of Budapest Festival Orchestra, Ivan Fischer (https://www.channelclassics.com/about-channel-classics/), Jonathan Stokes at Classic Sound Ltd., producing many albums for the London Symphony Orchestra (https://classicsound.com/).  Check out Native DSD and the many labels they offer as high resolution downloads (https://www.nativedsd.com/labels/).

These producers take great care in their recordings.  They fully disclose all the equipment and software used to record the performance (typically located in album liner notes).  It is true that classical music is a small (but vibrant) market.  We are blessed with plenty of new releases in SACD or for download.  HR Audio is a review site I trust for informative and accurate reviews.  https://www.hraudio.net/.

All of these recordings will work your spatial audio lab speakers with clarity that is as close to faithful reproduction as technology allows today!

Marcus

[Mr. Big]

Your right but these are small Audiophile labels, not the major players. Same back in the days of Sheffield Labs, Nautilus, M & K Real-Time Label and of course Telarc Records out of Cleveland Ohio, and few others, and one of the 1sst to take current recordings back then and re-eq'ing them Mobile Fidelity. I am talking about current days over the past 25 years. yes, they are still recording companies who, care for high fidelity. but they are mostly classical which have a hard time getting labels to sign them and recorded them, Cleveland Orch records for several labels nowadays. With digital suites nowadays folks don't even have to be in the same room or for that matter to lay down their tracks and for a producer to put the parts together as he sees fits, that is night and day different from years past. There are small audiophile labels but they never will have mass sales where people even know about those recordings, It's just the way it is and has been over my 40 years in this hobby. Vinyl pressing was so bad by the late 80's I had to but and return LPs to find one not warp, or finding debris that mixed in with the vinyl at times, not to mention vinyl so thin you could shake it back and forth and make a wobbling sound and don't even get me going on reissues that sound like a transistor radio, on some, it was where is the bass, I don't know what generation of tape they used but they sounded like a bad CD could sound in the early days due to no care taken to find 1st generation master tapes, and lack of care which give the early CD a black eye on sound quality, except for the companies that took the time and did it right and they sound good today, garbage in garbage out. So many recordings I own and I always say why did they not take the time to do it right, but I was never in their thoughts. Even SACD'DSD could not make a poor recording sound any better unless they took the time to totally remix it and eq it but then it would not be the same recording would it, but yes it might sound better.

[Desertpilot]

Your right but these are small Audiophile labels, not the major players.

I agree.  But, we are fortunate these labels and sound engineers exist.  Spatial Audio Lab speakers, world class they may be, are a niche market as well.  My three sons love my system when they visit.  When they leave, it's back to Pandora and ear buds.

Even SACD'DSD could not make a poor recording sound any better unless they took the time to totally remix it and eq it but then it would not be the same recording would it, but yes it might sound better.

SACD and DSD are just containers.  Garbage in is garbage out.  I track the sound engineers for almost all of my albums.  I know the ones I trust to do the job correctly.  Your point is valid, however.  If you buy top rated gear you want excellent recordings to take full advantage of your gear.  Finding well engineered jazz and pop recordings is difficult if not impossible.  The quality of remastering old music has also become a hotly debated topic.

Marcus

[sumoking]

I agree.  But, we are fortunate these labels and sound engineers exist.  Spatial Audio Lab speakers, world class they may be, are a niche market as well.  My three sons love my system when they visit.  When they leave, it's back to Pandora and ear buds.

Marcus

Nice exchange.

The silver lining is that through the quest to find the musical holy grail of pristine sound, the journey leads you to wonderful music that is isolated from the mainstream world. Even my friends who are very much into music  have never heard of some of the artists I listen to.  My challenge now a days with work and being a good husband and father is I can’t seem to find the time to find new music to listen to. Maybe a new circle for picking out stand out music and recordings is a good idea. We have something close on this site, but is only what are you are listening to without an narrative about why the music is so attractive. Marcus, you seem like a guy who could admin such a circle. If I have missed such a circle, please let me know..,
Cheers.

[sarora9]

sumoking, I found that Roon really helped me try and find a lot of new music

[Desertpilot]

Nice exchange.

... Marcus, you seem like a guy who could admin such a circle. If I have missed such a circle, please let me know..,
Cheers.

Thank you for the suggestion.  I may do this.  Why not?  The criteria, dare I say for "world class" music, goes well beyond "I like this tune I heard on the radio."  There is nothing wrong with listening to music on Pandora using ear buds.  But, playback on a revealing system like we have with Spatial speakers will not reproduce well (as Mr. Big stated so eloquently).

Here are my criteria for "worthy" music:
The performance.  Do the musicians perform their music with excellence?
Recording.  Does the sound engineer use proper microphones and recording equipment?
Mastering.  Is the recording mastered appropriately?  Are instruments and vocalists located properly.  Is the frequency response true to the performance?

The challenge is finding all three criteria in the same recording.  For example, a new SACD/DSD release may have excellent sonics but the performance is poor.  There are plenty of classical recordings I own but reviewers prefer a 1960s or 70s recording for a better performance.

I will investigate creating such a circle here.  I think it would be fun.

Marcus

[Desertpilot]

sumoking, I found that Roon really helped me try and find a lot of new music

I agree, many of the streaming services help us locate music.  I have used AmazonHD for Jazz/Blues and Primephonic for classical.  At the end of the day, however, I find expert album reviews to be my most trusted source of music selection.  I have not studied music theory.  I still don't know the difference among the many musical forms, such as, sonata, adagio or fugue.  At my age, it's hopeless to begin.  I spend too much money as it is downloading hi-rez albums.  I need a way to discriminate among the many offerings.  Expert reviews help me do that.

Marcus

[sockpit]

This would be a great service to us all.

One of the great disappointments of my Spatial/LTA/Exogal system is how utterly dependent SQ is on the recording engineer.  I can tell immediately whether a recording is going to delight or grate on me.  I listen to classical, jazz, bluegrass, and less and less pop/rock in part because most of the time it’s so badly recorded.

My selection of what to listen to is now dictated as much by the recording quality as it is by the performance or music.  I don’t like that fact.  But so it is. Some may chime in that this is a fault of my system. I’m not convinced. I think so many recordings are just meh.

Turning to the audiophile niche studios that record unknown artists perfectly is no solution.  The solution is to identify labels and series like the BSO’s recent Shostakovich symphonies or the recent Gewandhaus/Blomstedt performances of Brahms that combine world class musicians with attention to outstanding recording quality. Both of these put me in the venue even though I’m in a bedroom.

I suspect this is a hit and miss thing and a group effort.  It’s as simple as laying out some criteria and then letting people compare opinions about what sounds great and why on their respective systems. Who knows, maybe even recordings are system dependent? (I rather doubt it.)

[abomwell]

Sockpit, I agree with you about classical recordings being so hit and miss. Unfortunately there are no standards for recording orchestral music. Most violins are too bright sounding because the mikes are closer to them than one would hear them from a concert hall seat, even seats in the front rows
And recordings made from a mid-hall location just don't sell.

I have Roon and enjoy Roon Radio, a feature that automatically plays random recordings immediately after,  and similar to, the last track of the recording just played. When I hear something that sonically appeals to me I add it to my library.

Al