[*Scotty*]

The content of this thread http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=50752.0  The Most Realistic Speaker Technology?
has me wondering what aspect of speaker performance ACers consider most important? How have your priorities influenced what you have purchased and what qualities do you feel you have had do without or wish you could have in addition to what you consider most important? Are you looking for the most realistic sounding speaker technology?
Scotty

[Imperial]

1. Piano sound.
Since I on occasion can sit down at a piano and know very well how it sounds when I play, I tend to
use this particular instrument as my reference.
Any particular song or CD? No, not really.

2. Drums and Bass guitar
All of my music loving pals here in Norway play either drums or bass, so I'm really accustomed to hearing that as well.

3. Accordion... I know, horrid sounding instrument, but My dad does play it, so I know how it sounds...

4. The human voice...
Why at the bottom of my list... ?
The brain is so used to hearing voices... he he, it will "get it" no matter what anyway, I don't feel it is good reference..
Allthough some feel it is, just because we know how a human voice sounds...
Well, Hearing our own voice on a recording tells us that we don't perceive it like that when we use it by talking.
It does sound different to others than what we, the users, actually think!!! Food for thought I believe..

Imperial

[John151]

The single most important factor for me is fatigue.  There simply is no point if the system is fatiguing. 

[lazydays]

with me it's probably piano. Next is the acoustic upright bass,and after that the tenor sax.
gary

[ZLS]

The first thing I look for in a Speaker is it's ability to reproduce the pace, rhythm and timing of a recording; if a speaker fails that test nothing else it can do matters.

[Big Red Machine]

I agree on piano reproduction.  But the majority of recordings I search do not do a good job picking up the nuances, so very few excite me.

Drums, well, being a drummer, can raise goosebumps, if recorded properly.  The striking of the head, the ringing of the shell, etc. are what I hope to hear.  But alas, most recordings do not do a good job here.

I also agree, fatigue is something I can't see anyone living with and unfortunately, some of us don't know this until AFTER we get the speakers home.

I want details.  Having played in enough bands and orchestras and all that goes on I want to be able to hear all that activity and point to the person doing the striking or strumming.  I don't want to miss anything or have anything rolled off or filtered in any way.

And something I don't have but want, is a sense of effortlessness and ease, or flow of music, to fully engage me IN the music versus having it performed in front of me.  Probably a limit of a recording moreso than speaker design.

Just a few random thoughts.

[Geardaddy]

Great question Scotty.  This focuses the issue a little more.  I agree with all of the above.  Piano is hard to faithfully reproduce.  Beyond that, in a generic sense, I am looking for that spooky "they are in the room with me" sensibility....a sonic hologram if you will. 

[bpape]

In order of importance:

- Tonal accuracy.  If this isn't right, I don't wanna listen. 
- Dynamics
- Imaging

Things I could live without if all the rest was right...

- I don't need super extended 'tinkly' super highs as that's not real life.
- That last bit of detail.  Super detail again is not 'real' in most cases IMO.

Bryan

[mcullinan]

I think the weight of an instrument is important, so if you hear the thwack of a drum you also hear the air it moves. Same for horns and piano, you hear the mid or lower components of each instrument.
Mike

[BrianM]

For me it's probably a speaker's ability to disappear into the room.  Fatigue is often related to being aware that the sound is coming from the actual driver too much.  The better the disappearing act, the more sense of space and air I get.  Provided there is enough air and spatial definition there can never be too much detail IMO.

[BrianM]

I agree on piano reproduction.  But the majority of recordings I search do not do a good job picking up the nuances, so very few excite me.

Very true.  The problem of piano reproduction is more often than not embedded in the recording.

[Daygloworange]

You're very right about that Brian. Piano's are very often poorly recorded. It often stems from engineers trying to get microphones aimed at the soundboard in order to get a more direct sound, and having to deal with the (opened) top of a grand piano.

I also find a lot of people use acoustic guitar as a reference, but those are often very poorly recorded as well.

Cheers

[DevillEars]

From the posts so far, there seem to be two separate schools of thought on how to respond:

a) By the way various key instruments are reproduced
b) By non-specific characteristics such detail, tonal accuracy, etc.

Personally, I believe that a) could be seen as a break-down of b) - with specific examples from a) used to illustrate points raised under b).

Having said that, I always add a personal aspect to the equation - how do I react to the music being played?

So, my list?

a) Does what is being played sound more like "music" and less like "hifi"?
b) Do I find myself getting "involved" in the performance (toe-tapping, humming, etc.)?
c) If I sit down with a book while something is playing, does the portrayal make me put down the book and listen?
d) Does the "sonic picture" presented provide adequate spatial information (imaging, soundstaging)?
e) Do instruments and voices sound "real" and not "contrived"

If all five answers come up positive then you can bet your bottom dollar that the following will also be true:

- Tonal accuracy is in place
- Dynamics (particularly on symphonic works) will also be in place
- Detail retrieval will also be there in spades (critical to spatial cue reproduction)
- Driver control & integration (taut bass, open midrange, clean highs) will also be present

One other aspect is overall "balance" - across various musical genres - that ensures that one enjoys all aspects of one's music collection and not just one or two types.

Oops... Speaker choice?  These:



Tannoy D700s

[pardales]

a) Does what is being played sound more like "music" and less like "hifi"?
b) Do I find myself getting "involved" in the performance (toe-tapping, humming, etc.)?
c) If I sit down with a book while something is playing, does the portrayal make me put down the book and listen?
d) Does the "sonic picture" presented provide adequate spatial information (imaging, soundstaging)?
e) Do instruments and voices sound "real" and not "contrived"

I agree with your priorities/influences. I need to feel involved and like I am there. I want a believable picture and for the speakers themselves (and the room for that matter) to fade away.

[nathanm]

The speakers must not sound beamy\phasey sounding when I move around (stand up).  Sounds in the natural world just don't sound this way,  so hearing a speaker system do that makes the music seem very artificial and canned.  It should sound even and spacious, not projected in a narrow stream.  Although I'd be willing to discard this notion if I had personally heard, in my own room, a convincing 3D illusion as I had heard elsewhere.  Probably more to do with recording technique, though.

But mostly I would love to have a speaker which produced sound waves which traveled no more than 20 feet, and then stopped cold.  That is why I am starting a trust fund to lobby the world's top scientists to change their ridiculous physical laws on this matter.

[TheChairGuy]

You're very right about that Brian. Piano's are very often poorly recorded. It often stems from engineers trying to get microphones aimed at the soundboard in order to get a more direct sound, and having to deal with the (opened) top of a grand piano

I use piano mostly, too.....I hadn't fully considered that it might be poorly recorded (inspired play from George Winston always let down by poor recording.....but I keep thinking it's just my system  ) 

I just know there is remarkably wide variation of sonics from recording to recording.  Now, I have a more complete picture why 

Thx Denny - John

ps - not that it is the sole criteria I use to judge speakers.  It's fatigue, mostly, for me. 

[Daygloworange]

A real interesting guy to talk to about this would be Russell Dawkins. I have a disc he sent me with some solo piano recordings he did. As some of you know, Russell is an engineer who puts a lot into getting good sounds down on tape (pun intended).

He'll tell you as well, the problems with a lot of piano recordings, as well as others.

I think overall, that a good dynamic symphony recording that has a number of solo( or various instrument highlight) spots where you can really be sure the sonic capture is faithful is a good reference.

The NY Rave CD's are a good complilation of recordings for reference.

Cheers

[BradJudy]

Single most influential aspect: the speaker must produce sound.  100% of the speakers I have bought produce sound and I have passed on buying 100% of the speakers that do not produce sound.  I can't think of any other rule that has worked out as well in my favor. 

As for benchmarks used in the decision process, I have my own demo material like everyone else.  One item is the harmonica on The Blur Rider Trio's "Death have no mercy", which can sound just like it's in the room on some setups.  Usually 2-3 rooms at each RMAF will have this effect.  It's a hard instrument to deal with because of the potentially rapid changes and, of course, the namesake quality of putting out pretty much all of the audible harmonics of a note at the same time.  If the drivers aren't well integrated or don't have balanced FR, reproducing this effect will likely be flawed. 

I also have vocals, strings, percussion, etc. that I use.  I don't use much piano because it's never been my preference, so I haven't developed the ear for it that many audio geeks have. 

[konut]

When evaluating a new speaker I always listen to "Abbey Road".

[Zero]

Tone/Harmonic Richness, Holographic staging, versatility (ability to handle any genre of music) and flat out enjoyability.