redefining "ideal"?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 974 times.

nathanm

redefining "ideal"?
« on: 13 Apr 2004, 08:56 pm »

John Casler

Re: redefining "ideal"?
« Reply #1 on: 13 Apr 2004, 09:28 pm »
Quote from: nathanm
http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?ddspkrfull&1085773174

Note the name of the dealership! :lol:


After looking at the B&W set up I would agree that he must be "redefining" since not a speck of Acoustic Treatment on the walls or blocking the reflections off the "center placed" electronics.

Only the rug to reduce floor reflections.

But to each his/her own.  I don't think I would find it ideal sounding, but it does look OK.

JLM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 10747
  • The elephant normally IS the room
redefining "ideal"?
« Reply #2 on: 16 Apr 2004, 10:11 am »
I've been surprised over the years how some speakers are more room reactive than others, even comparing speakers that use similar designs concepts/performance.  Am I alone on this count?

IMO a good speaker is less room reactive than a poor speaker.  I do know about room size, shape, speaker/listener setup, first reflections, keeping speakers away from walls, Cardias formulas, golden ratios, ideal RT60 times, etc., but still have no idea of how one speaker is less room reactive than another.

I agree tho, that room doesn't look/smell like a good, let alone, ideal room for listening.

rosconey

redefining "ideal"?
« Reply #3 on: 16 Apr 2004, 11:31 am »
i thought this was a thread about the ideal woman :o
rich, deaf and mute-i wont have to listen to her shit and she wont have to listen to mine :mrgreen:

sorry guys :roll:

ohenry

redefining "ideal"?
« Reply #4 on: 16 Apr 2004, 12:37 pm »
Idea is relative.  That IS "ideal" in Sessums, Mississippi.  But I bet he doesn't have the crappy commute that I had this morning.   :|

nathanm

redefining "ideal"?
« Reply #5 on: 16 Apr 2004, 03:15 pm »
It just seems like a really pedestrian way to show off speakers in that heavy duty price range.  I figure if I am paying 9 grand for speakers I'd like for the "red carpet" to be rolled out a little bit ya know? (if I was buying in person that is, not if I bought them off Audiogon of course)  That photo just looks like they're shoved in someone's basement.

I don't mean to rip this guy a new one or anything, but it's like the exact opposite of the B&W display I saw at a dealer once.  That room was all tricked out with acoustic treatment, dimmed track lighting and everything, very swank.  But from that photo I can almost hear the pingy drywall! Heh!

Carlman

Expensively bad
« Reply #6 on: 16 Apr 2004, 03:41 pm »
The only time I see these speakers is at Myer-Emco, a 'sort of' hifi chain around Washington, DC.  They're always dusty, shoved in a corner, and the couple of times I wanted to hear them, the salesmen were less than enthusiastic about demo'ing them.  B&W is not smart about who they choose to sell through.  Plus, when I have heard them, I thought they were kind of thin in the top and vague on the bottom.  Far from 'ideal' to my ears.  They seemed to image fairly well... That's true with most B&W's I've heard.  I liked the cheaper B&W's over these.  However, not enough to buy any of them.

I've been to a really nice local shop with a speaker room similar to an older Circuit City floor plan.  It was disappointing and again, hardly 'ideal'. ;)  All the speakers in that room had so much interacting against them there was no way to analyze them.  It makes 'Ideal Audio's' 'soundroom' look quite good.

From what I've gathered about retail hifi sales the word 'acoustics' is just a synonym for 'sound'.... ignoring the 'science' part of the definition.  

Ideal is relative however it must conform to some part of its definition:
1. A conception of something in its absolute perfection.
2. One that is regarded as a standard or model of perfection or excellence.
3. An ultimate object of endeavor; a goal.
4. An honorable or worthy principle or aim.

So, 'Ideal Acoustics' does not appear to be either 'Ideal' Or know much about 'Acoustics'.  :lol:

nathanm

redefining "ideal"?
« Reply #7 on: 23 Apr 2004, 08:35 pm »
Quote
The only time I see these speakers is at Myer-Emco, a 'sort of' hifi chain around Washington, DC. They're always dusty, shoved in a corner, and the couple of times I wanted to hear them, the salesmen were less than enthusiastic about demo'ing them.


Really?  That is pretty sad.  I heard their older cousins at audiojerry's, the "matrix" version and they were pretty damn nice.  But I would hope the curvaceous nautilus would out perform them, in more than just looks!  I dunno, if I could spend that kind of money on speakers I'd feel guilty about sticking them in anything other than an IDEAL space!

Heck, maybe the salesman at that store just didn't want to MOVE them! Heh!  Jerry told me his pair required a furniture dolly and a helper to get them into his basement.  Sheesh!  It was the most impressive sub bass performance I ever heard in a single unit speaker, (well at least on that one Gladiator tune).

I always thought the idea was that speakers are supposed to sound awesome at the dealer, you buy them, get them home and THEN they sound crappy - not the other way around! :P