2. speakers
  3. 134685-3549

Two Type of sound and listener preference are there more?

In our thirty years of professional audio system design and setup, we keep on running into two distinctly different types of sound and listeners.

Type One: Detail, clarity, soundstage, the high resolution/accuracy camp. People who fall into this camp are trying to reproduce the absolute sound and use live music as their guide.

Type Two: Musicality camp, who favors tone and listenability over the high resolution camp. Dynamics, spl capabilty, soundstaging are less important. The ability for a system to sound real is less important than the overall sound reproduced "sounds good."

Are there more then this as two distincly different camps?

We favor the real is good and not real is not good philosophy.

Some people who talk about Musicaility complain when a sytem sounds bright with bright music.

In our viewpoint if for example you go to a Wedding with a Live band full of brass instruments like horns, trumpts etc it hurts your ears, shouldn’t you want your system to sound like a mirror of what is really there? Isn’t the idea to bring you back to the recording itself?

Please discuss, you can cite examples of products or systems but keep to the topic of sound and nothing else.

Dave and Troy
Audio Doctor NJ
128x128audiotroy
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,333 posts
 
Those are two common camps in terms of how audiophiles think.

I’m in the camp that says every recording sounds different and I want to be able to hear all those differences as much as possible.


Regarding the system, when noise and distortion is very low it tends to facilitate the above and I am a happy camper.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
As an old philosopher once said, what you think great sound is is only as good as the best system you ever heard. (Apologies for the two is’s in a row.) Which of course begs the question, why is it so hard to find a really good sounding system these days, one to aspire to? 
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
"If I hear a speaker that is putting out so much detail that I'm hearing things that I've never noticed before and that shouldn't be audible in the mix, it tells me that the speaker is doing something wrong...it's typically due to a boost in the area that I'm hearing too much of and a dip in other frequencies." 

So, you sat in the studio to know what is supposed to be audible in the mix? 
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Actually, that’s kind of what happens as one tweaks his system. All that information “buried in the grooves” comes out. It’s like an archaeologist trying to extract the details buried in there with his little brushes and picks. Of course, I suppose there are still audiophiles out there who don’t treat their CDs or their systems. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
seanheis1
627 posts
 
So, you sat in the studio to know what is supposed to be audible in the mix?
It's more like I know what's not supposed to be audible. If you want to hear some extra details, you can buy a speaker that is really hot at some frequencies or just buy a Schiit Loki and do the EQ adjustments.  
More to discover