or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › When people say it is a "musical" speaker, what's that?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

When people say it is a "musical" speaker, what's that? - Page 3

post #61 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post


Well... yes and no. Recorded music from its very nature is 'manufactured'. In other words, from the get go, the recording itself is a representation of what the musicians are playing (and can be quite flawed, depending on the equipment used, and the skills of the engineers). Playback is repeating that 'representation'. And with every step of this process, the original performance, is altered.

Certainly.  My statement pertains to goals which, imho, should remain to strive for accuracy even in the face of the issues you describe.

post #62 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

+1.
Trade-offs between accuracy and output can be made, but they're not inevitable, it's not an either/or scenario. My speakers are both accurate and loud. If they weren't they wouldn't be in my house.

Bill, you are the last person i expected to get trapped In this.

Accuracy is measurable but how can you say it is loud? Loud for you but not for somebody else who has louder speakers than yours but not as accurate. So there is always a tradeoff. Scientific breakthroughs keep pushing that intersection higher but it is inevitable. The day accuracy and loud(ness) are parallel lines on a graph i will believe you.
post #63 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by chikoo View Post

Bill, you are the last person i expected to get trapped In this.
Accuracy is measurable but how can you say it is loud?
By using an SPL meter.
Quote:
Loud for you but not for somebody else who has louder speakers than yours but not as accurate. So there is always a tradeoff... The day accuracy and loud(ness) are parallel lines on a graph i will believe you.
You seem to have fallen for the notion that accuracy and high output are mutually exclusive. They aren't. You don't have to settle for one or the other. I don't.
post #64 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by postrokfan View Post

I understand that it makes sense to listen to well recorded music to judge SQ. On the other hand, when someone is auditioning speakers it also makes sense to listen to a wide range of music to ensure complete satisfaction with a possible purchase. I love Sonic Youth but their albums are not particularly well recorded and that is revealed by any well-designed loudspeaker.

Customer: Hi, I'm here to test drive a Ferrari, let's go with the 458 over there.
AJ: Great choice, tremendous acceleration, cornering speed, braking from 100 on a dime, should we head out on some open country road, or go to our test track so you can see what it can do?
Customer: Nope, I want to drive it around my neighborhood. That where I drive every day and what I enjoy driving the most.
AJ: Huh??? I like/enjoy driving through your neighborhood myself...but your neighborhood is a straight line 25 mph grid, stop signs, speed bumps...how will that tell you anything about the cars capability?
Customer: It will tell me if I like it.
AJ: More so than a Buick, which does the same thing?
Customer: Yep. I'll know I'm driving a Ferrari and so will my friends.
AJ: I see. (long pause) Can you pay for this car?
Customer: Yep.
AJ: Ok, let's go.

cheers,

AJ
Edited by AJinFLA - 6/30/12 at 8:24am
post #65 of 82
Thats' hilarious!
post #66 of 82
It's just a subjective, non-scientific judgement about the perceived colour and/or quality of a (pair of) speakers. I don't see what the fuss is about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Del Cosmos View Post

Thats' hilarious!
Hardly, but this too is my subjective judgement aka opinion wink.gif
post #67 of 82
Quote:
Customer: Hi, I'm here to test drive a Ferrari, let's go with the 458 over there.
AJ: Great choice, tremendous acceleration, cornering speed, braking from 100 on a dime, should we head out on some open country road, or go to our test track so you can see what it can do?
Customer: Nope, I want to drive it around my neighborhood. That where I drive every day and what I enjoy driving the most.
AJ: Huh??? I like/enjoy driving through your neighborhood myself...but your neighborhood is a straight line 25 mph grid, stop signs, speed bumps...how will that tell you anything about the cars capability?
Customer: It will tell me if I like it.
AJ: More so than a Buick, which does the same thing?
Customer: Yep. I'll know I'm driving a Ferrari and so will my friends.
AJ: I see. (long pause) Can you pay for this car?
Customer: Yep.
AJ: Ok, let's go

Ha ha. I had a feeling a clever retort was in order. Are you implying that I spent too much money on speakers just to listen to the Misfits? wink.gif
post #68 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Certainly.  My statement pertains to goals which, imho, should remain to strive for accuracy even in the face of the issues you describe.

No argument there.
post #69 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post

"Accurate" reproduction??
To what? Confirmed how?
smile.gif
cheers,
AJ

As you imply, that is another slippery issue but, imho, one that is a bit more tractable.  One way of determining accuracy runs along the lines of michaelkingdom's suggestion.  Another is to use objective measurements of accuracy. 

The thing that bothers me about "musical" is that it implies that the reproduction (accuracy implied) of music is somehow different from the reproduction of any other sounds.

Accuracy can be measured objectively. Novel approaches to prove accuracy will continue to be developed, but I would argue that even today, the competence and capacity exists for accuracy to be determined to within some acceptable arbitrary tolerance for some acceptable arbitrary portion of the human population.
post #70 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

My definition is unequivocally the best one. tongue.gifbiggrin.gif
Can't we all just get along and say "Musical" means extremely clear sound quality at the maximum volume we tolerate? It could be both LE & HE speakers.
The debate with low efficiency (LE) vs high efficiency (HE) is tiresome. Since we all tolerate different volume, whichever speakers that sound crystal clear to us at the Max tolerated volume is "musical". It could be both LE and HE.

Yours is the definition I'd most like to punch in the face.
post #71 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmichaelf View Post

Yours is the definition I'd most like to punch in the face.
You have to like cogent argument like that.

Sent from my wired keyboard using TappyFingers 10
post #72 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmichaelf View Post

Accuracy can be measured objectively.
Do tell us how. Please be very specific, we're big boys here and scientifically literate. Start with the definition of "accuracy". To what?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmichaelf View Post

Novel approaches to prove accuracy will continue to be developed, but I would argue that even today, the competence and capacity exists for accuracy to be determined to within some acceptable arbitrary tolerance for some acceptable arbitrary portion of the human population.
Sharing is caring. Lets see the data.

cheers,

AJ
post #73 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by postrokfan View Post

Are you implying that I spent too much money on speakers just to listen to the Misfits? wink.gif

Nope. Discretionary income is yours to spend as you see fit. That is a separate issue entirely from what I analogized above.
Btw, I like the Misfits. I just don't use them to demo loudspeakers.

cheers,

AJ
post #74 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post

Do tell us how. Please be very specific, we're big boys here and scientifically literate. Start with the definition of "accuracy". To what?

Sharing is caring. Lets see the data.
cheers,
AJ

Accuracy can be defined as what goes in the in-hole comes out the out-hole. If what's coming out is different than what's going in, accuracy to the input signal is lost. Accurate to what? To the input signal.

Frequency response, linearity & power compression, directivity, cabinet resonance, group delay, harmonic distortion, amplitude & phase, impulse response, sensitivity, and impedance can all be measured and all have something to say about the accuracy of a speaker. The arbitrary thresholds come into play here. What are the threshold numbers? What percentage of the human population will be covered?
post #75 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmichaelf View Post

Accuracy can be defined as what goes in the in-hole comes out the out-hole. If what's coming out is different than what's going in, accuracy to the input signal is lost. Accurate to what? To the input signal.
The input signal is electric. The output signal is acoustic. Let's try this again, from the top. What is "accurate" to what?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmichaelf View Post

Frequency response, linearity & power compression, directivity, cabinet resonance, group delay, harmonic distortion, amplitude & phase, impulse response, sensitivity, and impedance can all be measured and all have something to say about the accuracy of a speaker.
To what? What reference?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmichaelf View Post

The arbitrary thresholds come into play here. What are the threshold numbers? What percentage of the human population will be covered?
What "thresholds"?

cheers,

AJ
post #76 of 82
Well obviously for the word accurate to mean anything, there has to be a reference. And that is a moving target. So in a general sense, it has little meaning. However, if you are say, comparing one specific pair of speakers directly to another in a side-by-side listening test, then I believe it would be appropriate to use such a subjective term, in reference to each other.
post #77 of 82
I don't know guys - I think we're whistlin at windmills here - thinking that the technical meaning of life has to be tucked up under every phrase we use. Aside from the straight up technical stuff, an awful lot of this hobby exists in the grey zone of subjectivity and causes us to throw terms like this around all the time. And generally, when we do - most like-minded folk have a pretty good idea of what we're talking about - subjective as it may be. So ok - we don't have a strict definition of what "musical" means - but are you sure you want one? Is one really necessary? When someone uses that term to me, I get the general gist of what they're talking about - at least to the extent that I don't need any further clarification.


BTW - I can't decide whose joke I like the best - Bills or AJs - both got 5 chuckles :>)
post #78 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

By using an SPL meter. You seem to have fallen for the notion that accuracy and high output are mutually exclusive. They aren't. You don't have to settle for one or the other. I don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

By using an SPL meter. You seem to have fallen for the notion that accuracy and high output are mutually exclusive. They aren't. You don't have to settle for one or the other. I don't.

So provide me the examples of speakers that are the loudest and most accurate. I am not a disbeliever, but cannot simply believe it because you said so. Thanks!
post #79 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by javry View Post

I don't know guys - I think we're whistlin at windmills here -

confused.gif must be a Tennessee expression tongue.gif
Edited by RMK! - 7/1/12 at 2:14pm
post #80 of 82
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by javry View Post

I don't know guys - I think we're whistlin at windmills here - thinking that the technical meaning of life has to be tucked up under every phrase we use. Aside from the straight up technical stuff, an awful lot of this hobby exists in the grey zone of subjectivity and causes us to throw terms like this around all the time. And generally, when we do - most like-minded folk have a pretty good idea of what we're talking about - subjective as it may be. So ok - we don't have a strict definition of what "musical" means - but are you sure you want one? Is one really necessary? When someone uses that term to me, I get the general gist of what they're talking about - at least to the extent that I don't need any further clarification.
BTW - I can't decide whose joke I like the best - Bills or AJs - both got 5 chuckles :>)

I see what you mean about not beating the life out of this hobby. The reason I was asking was because I have often read the term when comparing two different speakers, where one was described as more musical. Generally there is no explanation accompanying the this, as if "musical" is a clearly understood quality like "bright" or "veiled." I am just amazed that with how often I read this term, there is very little consensus on what it means. I have not been in this hobby long and part of the fun is to understand the code words.
post #81 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelkingdom View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by javry View Post

I don't know guys - I think we're whistlin at windmills here - thinking that the technical meaning of life has to be tucked up under every phrase we use. Aside from the straight up technical stuff, an awful lot of this hobby exists in the grey zone of subjectivity and causes us to throw terms like this around all the time. And generally, when we do - most like-minded folk have a pretty good idea of what we're talking about - subjective as it may be. So ok - we don't have a strict definition of what "musical" means - but are you sure you want one? Is one really necessary? When someone uses that term to me, I get the general gist of what they're talking about - at least to the extent that I don't need any further clarification.
BTW - I can't decide whose joke I like the best - Bills or AJs - both got 5 chuckles :>)

I see what you mean about not beating the life out of this hobby. The reason I was asking was because I have often read the term when comparing two different speakers, where one was described as more musical. Generally there is no explanation accompanying the this, as if "musical" is a clearly understood quality like "bright" or "veiled." I am just amazed that with how often I read this term, there is very little consensus on what it means. I have not been in this hobby long and part of the fun is to understand the code words.

that's understandable - don't wanna pour water on your fire here [another Tennessee term don't cha know:D] - just putin my 2 cents in.
post #82 of 82
Miles used to always talk about people playing musically. Of course, he was speaking about musicians actually playing rather than what comes out of a speaker but some of what he used to say rings true here. He talked a lot about people who played ahead of the note as coming off as high energy vs those who played behind the note as being sluggish. I can think of plenty of players who did both that developed their signature styles this way. While they never carriied a negative conotation with their music as far as the general public was concerned , Miles saw it differently. Then there were the guys that could hit the note squarely in the center - and to Miles those were the most "musical" players - though sometimes boring. I'm certainly not suggesting this as a strict definition because this is music and not stereo speakers - and its jazz and not opera or folk music. Also, that was Miles only at a certain time in a very long career. It's highly possible that earlier or later, his opinion on what was musical was something else. Heck in his late career, there was no one that played behind the note more. So this term has been hangin around for a pretty long time. The next time someone uses it, ask them what they mean. I'll bet that after they've gone through thier a legnthy discussion, you won't have any more clarity on what they really meant then you did when they first spoke.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › When people say it is a "musical" speaker, what's that?