AVS Forum banner

Musically tuned Speakers-New Trend.

11K views 165 replies 31 participants last post by  Alimentall 
#1 ·
Has anyone actually listened to one of these new tuned, resonating, undamped speakers?


I counted at least 4 companies making newly designed models. Onkyo being the biggest.
 
#27 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by twenty/twenty /forum/post/0


Ah, see


Ta Da bomber is a perfect candidate for one of the new musical speaker designs.



Open minded folks embrace color, flow, body, euphonia. Accuracy does not always equal enjoyment.


Do any of you enjoy music more after a glass of red wine? Is your hearing more accurate after a glass?

And what new musical designs are you talking about be specific and what speaker do you own?
 
#28 ·
i've never heard this type of speaker but wasnt there a time when people thought an horseless carrige (a car) would NEVER replace a horse driven carrrige?


OP some people just dont like change until they are the last to buy it.
 
#29 ·

Quote:
Open minded folks embrace color, flow, body, euphonia.

Could you explain what you mean by:

"color"

"flow"

"body"

"euphonia"


and how that relates to audio reproduction?


For instance, the term color naturally relates to visual perception, flow may relate to fluids, body to physical sensation, and euphonia to dyslexia. None of these things seem to relate in any way to auditory perception. But I may be mistaken, I guess I've been listening with my eyes for years?


Maybe it's salespeople who are listening with their eyes on your wallet...
 
#30 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ficosucks /forum/post/0


i've never heard this type of speaker but wasnt there a time when people thought an horseless carrige (a car) would NEVER replace a horse driven carrrige?


OP some people just dont like change until they are the last to buy it.

No, some people just don't understand physics.


These designs are inherently high in distortion. That's the whole point. It runs contrary to the basic goal of audio reproduction which is to minimize distortion and increase accuracy. If you want distortion and one-note sound, buy a crappy boombox with boomy bass, or go buy Bose.
 
#31 ·
Chris,


Your arguements apply to tube amps as well and yet, they are more popular every year. By now, it has to be more than just marketing and audiophile ignorance?


Why your favorite, the Lamms, are universally regarded by the high end press as the finest sounding amps in all of high end audio. To listen to you, one might think that all amps should sound the same. That is, if they are designed and built properly.


I have not personally heard any of these musical speakers. I am hoping someone besides Mr. Kal, B and W 802D owning, solid state amp loving, Rubinson will chime in with their learned opinions.


The Ocellia's innards look to be quite complex. I'm very sure it is vastly easier to make them innert and heavily braced. How hard is that?
 
#32 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by twenty/twenty /forum/post/0


Why your favorite, the Lamms, are universally regarded by the high end press as the finest sounding amps in all of high end audio. To listen to you, one might think that all amps should sound the same. That is, if they are designed and built properly.

I never made any comments on the Lamms whatsoever, you must have me confused with someone else.


Yes, of course I believe that ideal amplifiers should sound the same.


Speakers designed to function like musical instruments with resonating paneling or other features is unfathomably stupid.
 
#33 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ficosucks /forum/post/0


i've never heard this type of speaker but wasnt there a time when people thought an horseless carrige (a car) would NEVER replace a horse driven carrrige?


OP some people just dont like change until they are the last to buy it.

there was also a time when people thought horseless carriages would never travel faster than the speed of light....
 
#34 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles /forum/post/0


Yes, of course I believe that ideal amplifiers should sound the same.

not all amps sound the same now just the ideal amps


which are the ideal amplifiers? for example?


or all amps are ideal if not driven to clipping?


i am confused
 
#37 ·
How cool would it be to pair that new chrome Ipod tube amp with a pair of the Onkyo guitar speakers for an office or desktop system?


They use ring radiators as tweeters for gosh sakes. Doesn't the Magico Mini?


Kal,


Your buddy Sam has GOT to get a pair for review. I still use the green pen.
 
#38 ·
Well, some time back I had a chance to discuss this on another forum with one of the Cain brothers who make the Cain & Cain loudspeakers. They are said to take a lot of time to break-in. Perhaps after reading this, you'll wonder if it's just a matter of how long does it take to get used to bad sound.

Quote:
Him: Sure, it will resonate. So will wood, steel, micarta, MDF, and ANYTHING ELSE that has any mechanical stiffness. How it resonates and whether it's important depends upon its stiffness, it's internal mechanical losses, how it's mounted and secured and how it's mechanically loaded and acoustically excited.



Me: This should not be interpreted as the intentional use of materials to impart resonances as opposed to MDF which has a more predictable nature? In ways, it reminds me of the various woods that can be used in the construction of guitars where I think MDF, apart from being heavy, might not make for the most pleasing of sounds.



Him: No, you have interpreted incorrectly. A common misconception though. But yes woods do flavor sound, for guitars and speakers. Part of woods amazing quality is that it can be made to resonate more, as in the case of a guitar or piano, but that same piano usues wood to isolate the vibration (the case) so the most energy can be released to the room (more music) What solid wood does in the case of my speaker is resonate LESS. I use solid wood for it's weight vs ridgidity, it is far more ridgid than mdf. And contributes actually less in the form of self -resonance. In addition we have have made this speaker from teak, oak, mdf, plywood, pine, alder, maple and cherry. All have distinct sonic "flavors". The solid wood particularly the maple extends bass and allows the very

absolute maximum energy transfer from driver cone to port to room without imparting audible resonance of it's own. The mdf example sounded muffled and lifeless. My designs pursue maximum energy transfer from electrical to the room both from the front of the driver and the rear.. I once made a xylephone from different species of wood,

the keys all the same size as an experiment. 5 octaves were covered just from locally growing trees. One really has to integrate decisions about grain orientation, thicknesses of wood as well as joint strength to carry this discussion comparing materials to any logical extent as it relates to speakerbuilding.



Me: If it's your position that cabinet augmentation is desireable, then we stand on opposite sides. If you feel that it gives your speaker a characteristic sound that is pleasing, I can live with that.



Him: The concept that you propose I subscribe to is incorrect, you misinterpret my intention of reducing resonance through the use of solid wood. MDf does not eliminate resonance. It reduces it drastically, such that it also reduces musical content via energy absorption.



If you look at speakerbuilding from another angle, the anthropological veiw, we see that as forests shrank and skilled labor was replaced with machinery. The square box (usually sealed or ported0 became the de-facto method of augmenting the bass drivers own free-air resonance (fs) or limiting it in the case of sealed enclosures. I submit this has every thing to do with the advent of high powered solid state amplifiers as equally as declining skills in our labor pool. MDF was not created for eliminating resonance in speaker boxes but rather to utilize vast stretches of inadequate lumber stocks. From an acoustical standpoint MDF is dampening. It absorbs sound due to it's mass and weight.



I am trying to allow the energy that would be absorbed by MDF to be better utilized re-creating acoustical energy in the room. Of course you do not want your speakerbox to vibrate, but using a "dead" panel is the easy way out and not neccesarily the best method. ANd I think Franco Serbelin agrees.
 
#39 ·
or you could read it and and think he may be on to something.



An individual's hearing can't be described by science.



Wouldn't it be fun to record a Bosendorfer piano and then play it back, using the same electronics, on the top of the line Bosendorfer speaker vs say the top of the line Wilson or B and W. Which would sound more like the actual piano?


Repeat the same with the Onkyo guitar speaker, playing a recording of a Takamine guitar, vs say, the Magico Mini. Which would sound more like the actual guitar?


After all, the goal should be to reproduce the sound of the actual instrument and not the mixer's interpretation of it.
 
#41 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by IcemanDallas /forum/post/0


Sounds like a good idea if all you listen to is Bosendorfer piano music.



Actually, the best way to accurately listen to an instrument with the range, dynamic capability and harmonic purity of a Bosendorfer would be with a relatively high-sensitivity, well-damped, accurate speaker system and a nice, clean, extended subwoofer. The best way to destroy the sound of a Bosendorfer would be to play a recording through a small speaker system with large cabinet panels (diaphragms) that are free to introduce their own arbitrary resonant peaks. Eliminating bracing and internal foam would make things worse.


A loudspeaker should not produce sound. It should reproduce sound. Think about what the term "high fidelity" means. Take five or ten minutes on this one.
 
#42 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by twenty/twenty /forum/post/0


Do any of you enjoy music more after a glass of red wine? Is your hearing more accurate after a glass?

I can answer that. Many of us enjoy music more after a glass of red wine (or equivalent) and we may think that our hearing is more accurate but it is not. Even small amounts of alcohol (and other substances) affect the internal ear and the brain and compromise their functions, albeit pleasantly.
 
#43 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by twenty/twenty /forum/post/0


or you could read it and and think he may be on to something.

Not really. It is simple logic. All the music information that one has is in the recorded source. Reproducing that as accurately and nakedly as possible is the closest we can get to that source's sound. Adding anything (dare I say anything spurious?) such as cabinet resonances, room resonances and
subharmonic synthesizers
, can only change/alter/distort the original. It can be done physically with cabinets that have a characteristic timbre or electronically with intentional or unintentional distortion/EQ but all go in the direction away from accuracy.


Quote:
An individual's hearing can't be described by science.

It can. I think you mean an individual's perception of sound.


Quote:
Wouldn't it be fun to record a Bosendorfer piano and then play it back, using the same electronics, on the top of the line Bosendorfer speaker vs say the top of the line Wilson or B and W. Which would sound more like the actual piano?

I cannot say for sure but the Bosendorfer did a mediocre job with the Bosendorfer recorded sound.

Quote:
Repeat the same with the Onkyo guitar speaker, playing a recording of a Takamine guitar, vs say, the Magico Mini. Which would sound more like the actual guitar?

Are you arguing for a different euphonically-distorting speaker for each source? Could you stand to listen to a guitar on the Bosendorfer speaker or a piano on the Onkyo?

Quote:
After all, the goal should be to reproduce the sound of the actual instrument and not the mixer's interpretation of it.

Sorry. All you have to work with is the mixer's version. All else is speculation.
 
#45 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles /forum/post/0



This thread makes me cry for the future of AVScience forum.

Amen! This place has really gone downhill in the last 6 years. Now I dont want to get off on a rant here but this place is fast becoming a circus of pissing matches, defending ones purchases, and criticizing that which does not supports one's agenda or business.. Here is where I think the problems are:


1. All the tolls like hifisoundguy and others like him (obviously intentionally) plugging crap on this site. Lets face it. There is no better press than praise on this site. No need to mention threads... Why is hifisoundguy who is literally a spammer even allowed to post here?


2. Too many agendas. We all know wire will not make an AUDIBLE difference in sound when proper gage is used. Yet its amazing how those who claim differently either have been duped into buying such wire (and feel the need to defend it), or are those selling it. What a coincidence that these posters are the ones claiming it makes a difference.


3. People refusing to ignore basic rules of science. See #2.



4. the10 new "what is the best speaker" thread every other day. Or what I think is even worse a thread being started about something that could have been answered with a 10 second google search. I think anyone coming here asking any question about what _____ is best should have the thread deleted. It clogs up the forum with stupidity. A quick search or better yet a quick look at the current topics will usually have the same subject in it.



5. People who think that doing all of the auditioning of all these different speakers, in all these different rooms and environments, with all the different amps and sources are going to really be able to make a fair comparison of such speaker..


6. My favorite - the new PC Left Wing crowd that seems to be out to protect the Bose and Monster Cables of the world. Using the wonderful argument that the products must be great since the companies are so successful. Years ago on here Bose discussions did not get drawn out into 20 pages of rambling crap. It was a single short thread basically summing up their position in the market. Now you have all these posters in here to debunk these bashers and the knowledgable veteran posters who have heard the same tired argument again and again don't even bother wasting time in the thread.


7. Posters in general here have become an embarrassment to the site. Some of the grammar here is comical. I am not one to notice that stuff but if you are going to bother to post can you at least use full words?


8. too many wanna be know-it-alls who pass on 100% false and useless info. As in ______ company has gone downhill, when they have not even heard the products. ________ is a bright speaker because such and such, when they are wrong about why a speaker sounds the way it does.....Just shut up already!
 
#46 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruins29 /forum/post/0



6. My favorite - the new PC Left Wing crowd that seems to be out to protect the Bose and Monster Cables of the world. Using the wonderful argument that the products must be great since the companies are so successful.

While most of what you said made sense, I find it more than odd that you would identify Bose and Monster fans as "PC Left Wing."
 
#47 ·
Not to be political, but from an ideological spectrum, the left is generally "anything goes" and the right is generally "there's better and worse". I think that's sort of it. Or just a cheap shot
 
#49 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by twenty/twenty /forum/post/0


Wow,


Lots of negative energy here. What gives guys?


Just a discussion about the latest new trends in speaker design. No need for bashing.


Kal,


I did mean hearing. Not perception of sound.

Then, in terms of the coding of pitch/intensity, you are wrong.
 
#50 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles /forum/post/0


Could you explain what you mean by:

"color"

"flow"

"body"

"euphonia"


and how that relates to audio reproduction?


For instance, the term color naturally relates to visual perception, flow may relate to fluids, body to physical sensation, and euphonia to dyslexia. None of these things seem to relate in any way to auditory perception. But I may be mistaken, I guess I've been listening with my eyes for years?


Maybe it's salespeople who are listening with their eyes on your wallet...

You weren't replying to anything I said, but here are my thoughts on what you said:


Color is a very vague word meaning "how things sound". I take it to mean the amount of enjoyable details in the sound. The sound of a clarinet would have a different color than the sound of an oboe. When talking about amps, I take it as a synonym with tone.


Flow is how the sound sounds as time goes on. A tube amp which gives a nice ring to the sound would have good flow because during times of silence after a loud section, there would be an enjoyable ring to fill the silence.


To me, "body" means how solid it sounds. If that is still too vague, it means, how well represented are the loudest parts of a recording. A clipping tube amp might beat a clipping transformer amp because the tube amp would have soft clipping, which would give better body.


I have no idea what "euphonia" is supposed to mean.
Sounds like a combination of the word euphoria and phono which would imply perfect sound.

***********************************************

***********************************************


I was thinking. With all this talk of "accuracy to the recording", do people actually know what they are talking about? Does faithfulness to the recording actually mean you are getting better sound? Does it even mean you are getting the "intended" sound? NO! It doesn't. A live recording is colored by the microphone (there is no such thing as an uncolored microphone or speaker). Your amp/speakers must be colored in a way that will cancel out the coloration of the microphone. A mixed recording is colored by the mixer who makes the recording with the intention of it sounding like it does to HIS EARS through HIS EQUIPMENT. Your amp/speakers must be colored to make your ears hear what they should.


Think about it, TVs have color, brightness, sharpness, contrast, and hue controls. I don't see videophiles complaining about these "coloring" the video.
 
#51 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson /forum/post/0


I can answer that. Many of us enjoy music more after a glass of red wine (or equivalent) and we may think that our hearing is more accurate but it is not. Even small amounts of alcohol (and other substances) affect the internal ear and the brain and compromise their functions, albeit pleasantly.

I feel you on that one,me and a few friends,used to grab a 12 pack after 1 of us bought a new speaker,needless to say,I watched 2 of them sale their speakers and go on a speaker hunt again,i thought it was funny until I bought some Focal Colbalt 816S and then the joke was on me,no drinking a 12 pack showed a huge impact on what I heard when I got them home they were a demo pair with about 400hrs on them needless to say they had me running out of the room with excesive brightness.The point is I really learned critical listening with a new piece of audio gear,should be done without the beverages.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top