what kind of audiophile are you ?

>>the quad is the leaast inaccurate in reproducing instrumental timbre<<

In your opinion you meant.

As far as demonstrating the quads "superiority" that will still be a subjective determination based on each listener's preferences and abilities.

So, your initial assertion is simply flawed.

my initial assertion regarding the quad 57 is a hypothesis.

here is a proposed test, constructive criticism sought:

aassemble several pairs of spekears, chosen by "experts", believed to be minimally inaccurate.

select a room which is well behaved.

configure a stereo system in the room.

record an instrument, say, a guitar, for 2 or 3 minutes.

while the musician plays the guitar, take measurements using a spectral analyzer at the listening position. print the graphs. then play the recording, taking measurements and print the graphs. repeat this procedure with each pair of speakers. the control is the graphs generated when musician plays, i.e., the independent variable. compare these graphs to the other graphs generated when recording is played through each pair of speakers.

can also compare , subjectively and hence opinion based, the instrument to the recording via listening panels judgments. this approach is not reliable.

i prefer comparing graphs, which although not "perfect" , provides an objective measure.

i realize the impracticality of finding a room and selecting components, but it's a first step.

Actually, speaker distortion is very very measureable. Yes, it is room dependant, but getting a low distortion signal generator (ie Tek 505) and putting out through various speakers would at least give a relative level of distortion.. pink or white noise would also work, but a low distortion sig gen measured by a Bruel and Kjaer microphone with a 2610 or 2636 measuring receiver would definitively show diferrences in total harmonic distortion. The problem being that at different levels, different drivers will have different distortion patterns and the debate would rage on........ I love what John Atkinson does with measuring speakers... he can reasonably predict certain behaviors based on historic, statistically significant data :)

That's just for THD. Which proves not necessarily a whole lot other than at a certain frequency and input level, driver or speaker a relative to driver or speaker b has more or less THD. And God help the man who measures at one speaker's crossover point vs another speaker crossed over at a different speaker.. hence maybe a swept sine captured on an FFT, which is what many speaker manufacturer;s do anyways.. it is a cheap enough suite to purchase if one is in the business.

How confusing was that????? ;)

Cheers,
Chris

my initial assertion regarding the quad 57 is a hypothesis.

I'd say it came off as an opinion until you declared it a hypothesis.

I have very fond memories of a pair of Quad 57's a good friend of mine owned. Those speakers were one of the things that got me hooked on this hobby. I would have assessed them as being on the very warm (colored) side though. He was using a modified Dynaco amp and an early Audible Illusions pre. What a wonderful memory that is - back in the late 80's I think. I don't know that I'd have the same opinion now after all these years. The new Quads don't sound much like I remember the 57's sounding - I never warmed up to my friends 988's, and he tried several configurations of that sytem. They did vocals brilliantly, but couldn't seem to get anything else quite as good, at least in his room and with his various system changes. He sold'em and now is playing with Maggie 20.1's (a big improvement over the Quads in his room/system as he's developed it). I didn't particularly like the 988's at RMAF either. Different strokes, and all that.

Ah, but the 57's I do remember liking very much. I don't know about "timbre" - I interpreted your option 3 to be a version of 'getting closer to the music'. Otherwise it would never occur to me to describe it as you did.

I understand the draw to having an "objective" device measure what a speaker's doing in a room. There is the idea that you have somehow been "validated" in your observations. Since I'm not an "objective" device (very far from it), nor is the experience of music an "objective" experience, I don't see how it should have any bearing on what I prefer to listen to.

Marco