Do Physicists Or Musicians Design Better Speakers?

It depends on what one considers "better".

From one group's perspective, the purpose of a speaker is to reproduce the signal it receives as accurately as possible. I would think that a physicist would be better qualified than a musician to take on this task.

The there is the group who believe that a speaker must be "voiced" in order to sound "good". A musician might be more likely to design a speaker that suits this group's needs.

the subtle nuances and overtones of certain acoustical instruments are hard to replicate correctly

a musician with a fine tuned ear can hear these things and know when a speaker doesn't measure up

but I find a lot of musicians literally hear the note and focus more on the musical note (was that g or a flat) than the tonal qualities

a lot of musicians have crap audiophile systems

personally I'd want a physics major who really loves music designing things

a musician friend of mine who taught me a great deal about jazz back in art school 25 yrs. ago, had a really cheapo stereo system with "crazy eddie" speakers - believe it or not.. really bad speakers.. his table was'nt too bad, a B&O. Whenever I suggested getting better speakers or amp, he replied to the effect that as long as he was getting just a basic reproduction he did not care to improve upon that.. frankly all the musicians I've known since then have mostly had the same opinion.. their stereo's are basic and they don't care for better.

Do people who read music make better musicians in any sense other than when actually reading a score comes into play?
Having played with many musicians who didn't know how to read music, the overall relevance/similarity is striking.
Some people have the music/design in them, if not taught at the so called professional level.
Who can name a rather famous contemporary guitarist who can't read music?

I realize it's different, but the similarities seem more than relevant to me, begging the question, "Who has the music in them?"

Larry

a lot of musicians have crap audiophile systems

And a lot of musicians have great systems. They just aren't mixing here. You can ask the manufacturers, however, and you'll find out that all of them have sold gear to some very famous players.

but I find a lot of musicians literally hear the note and focus more on the musical note (was that g or a flat) than the tonal qualities

If this were true, they could record an album on the first take, simply by following the recipe. It doesn't happen that way. As well, you're not accounting for the hundreds of albums produced and engineered by playing members of the band. From Donald Fagen to Bob Mould, from Neil Young to Frank Zappa, David Gilmour to Vinnie Paul, etc. ad infinitem, tonal quality and nuance are all they care about. Why do you think Stuart Copeland is so recognizable? Or Alex Lifeson? It has nothing to do with getting the notes right. An electronic tuner takes care of that. It's ALL about tonal quality and tonal signature, all of which are crucial in the final determination as to whether a recording is ready to be mixed, or a speaker is doing its job.

You cannot have one without the other, unless you only wish to appeal to non-musician audiophiles, most of whom would have no idea what recording studio playback sounds like.