For me these speakers are everything I could want except for the fact that they are lacking on the low frequencies on certain music. (And the size lol) But I know they have tons of potential because on certain recordings, the lows are so powerful, rich and satisfying but in a non bloated way. My biggest pet peeve with any system is trying to find recordings/albums to match the speakers vs just hitting play and having most everything sound great. In saying this, the DI's play the best recordings better than anything I've had or heard.
Right, but is this the DI's fault or is it what intrinsic in the music?
I come from a world of headphones, dating back to 1983 or so, and once I got to the upper echelon of cans, I knew that I had to switch to speakers. Notice, however, the bass response with headphones, and how yes, if they recorded the kick drum in 1972 to make it sound like a soft pad, then it should sound that way in 2017. The same with the bass guitar, or cellos, or pipe organ music. What then would make one think that speakers should act any different?
I have the answer. It's that many manufacturers make sure that the bass is goosed when designing speakers. This becomes evident when you get to the lower-mids, and they just sound wrong. These speaker manufacturers posit that the overall ambiance of a recording is directly related to its bass response. They ask the question, "How can we make recordings sound fuller?" They aren't asking how we can make it "neutral" (if there is such a word), yet they certainly aren't asking many of the right questions.
Audiophiles then go into a listening session equipped with certain biases, because audiophiles read a great deal. Audio manufacturers know this, so they play up to it. We come to believe in a certain technology, and it's not that we're going in blindly like so many sheep; nevertheless, anyone who has been an audiophile for a number of years eventually whittles their sonic pleasures down to certain parameters, and a lot of that is predicated upon how the designers, the marketers, and even the record companies want us to hear the music.
So, we're back to subjectivity, right? Well, yes, but as subjective as our environment allows us to be, and that includes what audio gear we decided upon, or can afford, or whatever.
I'm speaking to
@grannyring , too, in that, I think it's a great post. Moreover, it has me interested in possibly "upgrading" the DIs at a later time. Still, at least on the surface, you have both described a common malady associated with audio bias, especially a bias that has grown in favor since about 1992, i.e. let's squash the recording in the mastering phase, so that all of the instruments sound equal. Let's turn a wav into a brickwall, and let's put some more juice into that bass. Speaker and headphones manufacturers have since followed suit in order to cater to this new paradigm. Cable manufacturers (in their wisdom) have found a way to color the sound with their wire and insulation, using certain geometries, sub-atomic quark freezing, and precious metals. Room correction software is touted to eliminate the need for acoustic treatment; room correction does not.
I'm just saying, ask yourself, why would recording X have more bass than recording Y, and why do I expect them to have the same amount of bass?
