2. speakers
  3. 149378-2227

Tone, Tone, Tone !


I was reminded again today, as I often am, about my priorities for any speaker that I will own.

I was reminded by listening to a pair of $20,000 speakers, almost full range. They did imaging. They did dynamics.They did detail.

But I sat there unmoved.

Came home and played a number of the same tracks on a pair of speakers I currently have set up in my main system - a tiny lil’ Chihuahua-sized pair of Spendor S 3/5s.


And I was in heaven.

I just couldn’t tear myself away from listening.

Why?

Tone.

The Spendors satisfy my ears (MY ears!) in reproducing music with a gorgeous, organic tone that sounds so "right.". It’s like a tonal massage directly o my auditory system. Strings are silky and illuminated, saxes so warm and reedy, snares have that papery "pop," cymbals that brassy overtone, acoustic guitars have that just-right sparkle and warmth. Voices sound fleshy and human.

In no way do I mean to say the Spendors are objectively "correct" or that anyone else should, or would, share the opinion I had between those two speakers. I’m just saying it’s often experiences like this that re-enforce how deeply important "the right tone/timbral quality" is for me. It’s job one that any speaker has to pass. I’ll listen to music on any speaker as background. But to get me to sit down and listen...gotta have that seductive tone.


Of course that’s only one characteristic I value. Others near the top of the list is "palpability/density," texture, dynamics.

But I’d take those teeny little Spendors over those big expensive speakers every day of the week, due to my own priorities.

Which brings me to throwing out the question to others: What are YOUR priorities in a speaker, especially if you had to pick the one that makes-or-brakes your desire to own the speaker?

Do you have any modest "giant killers" that at least to your way of thinking satisfy you much more than any number of really expensive speakers?



prof
prof OP
3,474 posts
 
A perfect example for me would be Harbeth. If this is what you like then more power to you, but please dont mistake these type of designs as accurate.

Bad example, I think.  At least for certain models.  The SuperHL5plus I owned was beautifully neutral-sounding.  JA from Stereophile in measuring said it measured "superbly even" aside from a lively cabinet it measured "beyond reproach."  


Stereonet sent it for extensive measurements and the result was what they deemed a combination of frequency extension and linearity that was to their memory "unprecedented."

Perhaps you are thinking of other Harbeth models?  (Though I still find Harbeth to get tone "right" in a way that escapes many other speakers).


Anyway, not gonna say more on that as that's not the reason for this thread.  Anyone can prefer what he prefers of course.

almarg's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
almarg
9,670 posts
 
What are YOUR priorities in a speaker ...?
Hi Prof,

In my case I agree wholeheartedly that tonality and timbre are priority number one when it comes to selecting a speaker. What can be confounding, though, is that perceived tonality and timbre are dependent on a composite of many factors. And consequently I put it a little differently in the following thread, which addressed a similar question some years ago:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/which-attributes-do-you-value-most

The OP in that thread, member Bryoncunningham, raised the following question:

Here is a list of attributes commonly valued by audiophiles, in no particular order:

1. Resolution
2. Soundstaging
3. PRaT
4. Dynamics
5. Tonal balance
6. Harmonic content
7. Accuracy
8. Coherence
9. Frequency extension
10. Scale

The list could go on and on, but you get the idea. I’m interested to hear which attributes people prioritize above others....

My answer in that thread:

1)Harmonic accuracy.

Which in turn encompasses or is affected by many of the factors that have been mentioned (tonal balance, harmonic content, accuracy, clarity, resolution, coherence, lifting of veils, freedom from distortion, etc.). To me "harmonic accuracy" is the most significant determinant of how "real" the instruments sound. I realize that by lumping its contributing factors together I am begging the question :-)

2)Clean transient response.

3)Dynamic range.

4)Frequency extension.

5)Image scale.


Best regards,

-- Al

twoleftears's avatar
twoleftears
5,318 posts
 

@prof Right on!!  Too many people these days are being lured, one way or another, to opting for speakers that may be super accurate (debatable) but which aren't pleasant to listen to.

Timbral accuracy is all about getting that unique mix of overtones right, and so ensuring that a viola doesn't sound like a violin.

Tone may be a synonym, or it may be more a question of the overall tonal balance/voicing of the speaker, tilted this way or that.

onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,242 posts
 
Yo Prof, it's Tony! Toni! Toné!.  Try to get it right next time.

mapman's avatar
mapman
22,341 posts
 
Music is basically a bunch of structured tones so there you go. Might explain why many people are happy listening to portable devices with speakers. They all can do structured tones in one form or another.
More to discover