[DonS]

I believe deep inside that all every decent speaker wants to sound real. It wants to project exactly what the artist and engineer create. The trouble is, there are hundreds of variables that affect as to how something sounds. Our room, our setup, our electronics, cables, yadda yadda yadda. All of this can keep most speakers from producing what was intended. Most of us strive for something better, but what is better? Most everyone talks about tone, balance, linearity and so on. But what really matters? All I know is that when I hear live music it sounds nothing like a recording of the same song. All artist play songs differently, they're recorded differently. In different rooms, by different engineers!
 

[DonS]

I messed that all up. I accidently posted before I was finished.
The truth for me is that I was lucky enough to never chase my tail in looking for a sound that I could never describe. Once I got all my gear on the same level, that's when I would made a change, it just made it more or less real sounding. I paid close attention to how things sounded when I made changes to my set up.  That's why I began thinking I will never change the way speakers sound. I can only change how real they sound.
    After refining my set up skills, I was able to create a massive sound stage with razor sharp imagining coupled with insane clarity and detail across all frequencies. This allows me to be in the room that the music was created in. But if we had to give all that up and could only keep one or two defining attributes of our rig, what do we feel is most important?

A) Soundstage and imaging
B) Clarity and detail
3) tonal balance
4) frequency response
5) transparency and realism

Feel free to respond with comments.

[TRADERXFAN]

Bass.

[nlitworld]

I'd have to vote Soundstage & Imaging my most important feature set. Having grown up with my after school job funding my cd and concert habit and watching hundreds of concerts, I could compromise on most things except soundstage and imaging. Without those, the metaphoric bubble has burst on making things sound "real". Nothing ruins it faster than an album mix having the drums mic'd from behind (left speaker plays drummer's left), but still set farther back into the mix. This immediately makes it seem like the drummer is facing the back wall playing to nobody like he's a little kid in time-out. I've even gone so far when playing vinyl as to swap one side of interconnects so as to straighten things out. Soundstage & imaging, final answer Regis.

Second best attribute would be Clarity and Detail, again highlighted primarily around drums. Apparently I like drums, where others focus on piano tone. Anyways, cymbals should ALL sound different, where they are hit should all sound different, and how they are hit should all sound different. A ride is not a china, a crash is not a splash, is not a trash. If a hi-hat is open, or loose closed, or hard closed should all give different sounds. Not just different tone, but different volume, decay, sizzle, and placement. To me, the more correct these things sound, the more "real" a system is presented.

I love the question Don. It'll be fun to hear what makes other people tick for their system focus. 

[VinceT]

Soundstage and Imaging
Detail and Dynamics

[Tyson]

Bass.

+1

[mlundy57]

There is no one right answer to this question. It boils down to personal taste and whether or not one knows what their personal preferences are in rank order. Which isn't as easy as it might sound since many attributes are interrelated. For example, how do you get soundstage and imaging without clarity, detail, and transparency?

[SoCalWJS]

6) All of the Above (plus bass   )

[Early B.]

Bass is the foundation that creates good soundstaging and imaging, detail, etc. If someone with only bookshelf speakers says, "I got enough bass, I don't need a subwoofer," then they have no clue what good music sounds like. Yeah, I said it... 

[Letitroll98]

Why would you eliminate any of those factors?  If one was lacking why wouldn't you work on that?  I mean the biggest bass head in the world with what they perceive as perfect bass might be driven out of the room by a screeching tweeter, or some such thing.  It might be easier to pick what matters to you least, for me that's frequency response, I seem to be very tolerant of errors there.

[KTS]

I believe deep inside that all every decent speaker wants to sound real. It wants to project exactly what the artist and engineer create. The trouble is, there are hundreds of variables that affect as to how something sounds. Our room, our setup, our electronics, cables, yadda yadda yadda. All of this can keep most speakers from producing what was intended. Most of us strive for something better, but what is better? Most everyone talks about tone, balance, linearity and so on. But what really matters? All I know is that when I hear live music it sounds nothing like a recording of the same song. All artist play songs differently, they're recorded differently. In different rooms, by different engineers!

That is a tough question for me to answer, it changes in my system when adding components, cables, speakers, synergy and the room treatments. I believe sometimes I am looking for ways to move towards the sound I enjoy more than anything else, but if I had to pick 1 it would be bass. Bass imo is the hardest to get correct and it also is the most distracting when it is off, I can’t hear anything else when bass is wrong, but that is just my opinion

[Jaytor]

I believe deep inside that all every decent speaker wants to sound real. It wants to project exactly what the artist and engineer create.

It's never been a priority for me to replicate exactly what the musician or recording engineers heard when the recording was created. I want an emotional connection with the music. I don't care if my system sounds different than the monitoring system in the recording studio.

I've only been in one recording studio while music was being created and I was not impressed by the way it sounded. The sound in most live venues I've been to was mediocre at best (although some orchestral halls have been quite good).

I far prefer the sound I'm getting in my own listening room for most types of music I listen to (not much classical).

I'll grant you that there is something about live music that I have never heard fully replicated on any system. I think it is primarily dynamics (both macro and micro).  Although my system is getting quite good at this, there is still room for improvement.

[Tyson]

It's never been a priority for me to replicate exactly what the musician or recording engineers heard when the recording was created. I want an emotional connection with the music. I don't care if my system sounds different than the monitoring system in the recording studio.

I've only been in one recording studio while music was being created and I was not impressed by the way it sounded. The sound in most live venues I've been to was mediocre at best (although some orchestral halls have been quite good).

I far prefer the sound I'm getting in my own listening room for most types of music I listen to (not much classical).

I'll grant you that there is something about live music that I have never heard fully replicated on any system. I think it is primarily dynamics (both macro and micro).  Although my system is getting quite good at this, there is still room for improvement.

Large horns will get you there for dynamics.  But then you lose in other areas with large horns.  It's a tradeoff.

[Vince in TX]

To crush your enemies -- See them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women!

Oh, and bass.   

[rollo]

   For me it is tonality and Harmonic structure. A sax for example must have the mouthpiece and harmonic of the bell of the sax. Decay of that harmonic creating another harmonic is heaven to me.  Prefer a speaker that does not need a sub. However must go down to a minimum of 25HZ. The Piano goes down to 28HZ. Then a pair of subs to catch the hall effect.
  Just remember the so called perfect speaker still requires an Amp that has synergy with it.


charles

[Zuman]

I'm in my early 70s, and other than decidedly-LoFi radio reproduction, my biggest exposure to recorded music growing up was a few dozen records played on a late 1930's His Master's Voice "Electric Gramophone" that someone had hardwired into the back of a 1940s RCA Victor radio. The turntable had, of course a heavy plastic tonearm that held steel needles, and everything was, of course, mono.  But I loved that "system" so much that when my dad donated it to a village charity sale when I was 12, I went and bought it back.
-So, there was no soundstaging and imaging.
-More clarity and detail than you'd expect.
-Totally screwed-up tonal balance.
-Horrible frequency response
-A bit of transparency and realism.
What it DID have, for some incomprehensible reason, was PRaT: Pace, Rhythm, and Timing. That made listening emotional, whether it was sad or happy, exciting or contemplative. It's easy to get sidetracked by gee-whiz gimmicky sound "effects," but those usually result in 20-minute listening sessions. Find out what it is that levitates you out of your chair, and go for that. And I suspect it will be different for different people.

[morganc]

   For me it is tonality and Harmonic structure. A sax for example must have the mouthpiece and harmonic of the bell of the sax. Decay of that harmonic creating another harmonic is heaven to me.  Prefer a speaker that does not need a sub. However must go down to a minimum of 25HZ. The Piano goes down to 28HZ. Then a pair of subs to catch the hall effect.
  Just remember the so called perfect speaker still requires an Amp that has synergy with it.


charles

Well said, this is my priority as well....

[rollo]

Well said, this is my priority as well....

 Thanks.

charles

[qdrone]

For me it's that whatever music I play must engage me,make me say"Wow,this sounds really good." The Soundstage is full,between and sometimes outside of the speakers. I know that how well the source material was recorded has the final say a good system makes you appreciate the sound engineer as well as the musicians..

[Freo-1]

   For me it is tonality and Harmonic structure. A sax for example must have the mouthpiece and harmonic of the bell of the sax. Decay of that harmonic creating another harmonic is heaven to me.  Prefer a speaker that does not need a sub. However must go down to a minimum of 25HZ. The Piano goes down to 28HZ. Then a pair of subs to catch the hall effect.
  Just remember the so called perfect speaker still requires an Amp that has synergy with it.


charles

This largely has it right.  The big bugbear with digital is getting the time domain phasing right.  This is where gear such as Chord M-Scaler and DACs come into play, as it successfully addresses these issue. 


A quiet black background is essential for the musical illusion.  The lack of this feature is why I went away from vinyl.  Too noisy for symphonic music. 


The other issue is to have sufficient power reserve so loud transients are not clipped by the amplifier.  Turns out my systems were underpowered, and I didn't realize it.  This issue only pops up on loud transients.  I had always thought it was the recording causing the momentary congestion sound.  That was wrong, it wasn't the recordings in most cases.


The rule of thumb is for a 90db/w speaker, need 500 watts to avoid clipping.  Since my system now has 1000 watts, no longer run into clipping issues.   I realize that not everyone buys into this, and that's fine.   Until I experienced this first hand, I was skeptical about this as well.  No more.