beryllium vs diamond

I have the latest large floor standing Ushers with the DMD tweeters and they are so much better than their earlier BE tweeters. The BE tweeters were a large step up over their prior silk tweeters and the DMD are a large step up from the BE. The DMD can go up to 40+kHz and sounds more cleaner. 

This has become a fascinating thread.  I keep wanting to unfollow it but something has kept drawing me back and I think that the underlying argument is one of my biggest issues with the current state of audio.

We have a speaker (Paradigm) that has a bright character.  The dealer, correctly states, that with careful system matching and room treatment, the speaker can be spectacular.  I 100% agree with that.  

I also find that problematic and my issues are not technical.  My hunch is that not many consumers are walking into a store buying a speaker in that price range probably already have a system in place and the Paradigms will be replacing an existing speaker.  Unless that consumer has just the right equipment, they are going to be extremely disappointed when they get that speaker home unless they are revamping their whole system.  Reviewers do nothing to help this.  Have you ever read a bad review?  And, the brand fans advocate like hell for their brand in forums where you might get an honest opinion.  Badging is an amazing phenomenon.  

That being said, am sure audiotroy is highly consultative (you called me out for not being consultative in another thread which was fair) and would never sell these Paradigm speakers to a consumer with Bryston, Ayre, etc... gear and cheers to you for that.  But this industry is not well known for consultative salespeople who are tolerant of other opinions and work to truly make customers happy.  

The added issue is that speaker manufacturers and most (not all) retailers feed into this.  Does everyone remember the Pepsi Challenge from the 80's?  They would show coke drinkers take a side-by-side sip test of Pepsi and coke and 9 out of 10 times consumer would pick Pepsi as the product they like better.  This was fact and Pepsi did not mis-represent the results in anyway.  And ultimately is why Coke launched "New Coke".

The funny thing was, when consumers take a side-by-side sip of Pepsi vs. Coke, the slightly sweeter taste profile of Pepsi is far more appealing. When you test preferences over a long consumption session or with food, most consumers prefer the slightly less sweet taste of Coke as the sweeter flavor becomes less pleasant on the 5th, 8th, 10th sip.  

Speakers manufacturers design products to deliver wow moments in brief listening sessions.  When in practice, over an extended listening session, the speakers can be highly fatiguing unless carefully paired.  And many retailers or manufacturers at shows demo products via "the Pepsi Challenge" method.  They will have a very prescribed amp pairing and series of tracks that will show a product at its very best and deliver a brilliant soundstage and amazing details that will be jaw dropping. 

Bluntly, this method sells speakers.  But, this Pepsi challenge method of selling speakers leads to buyers remorse and ultimately forcing consumers to upgrade other elements of their system.  It takes advantage of the psychology that the consumer couldn't have made a poor choice in their speakers selection.  They have purchased this new brand that they identify with and therefore there has to be something wrong with the rest of there system since these sounded so good in the showroom.  Badging is such a big part of hi-fi that it is easy to exploit this.  Thus, the consumer upgrades to electronics that fit the speakers better.  Bigger register ring for the retailer.  

Irony is, the retailer wins, manufacturer wins and the consumer ultimately ends up with a system that makes them happy but at a significantly higher cost.  Is that a win for the consumer?  Is this sort of selling what is causing audio retailers to close at an astonishing pace?  Could it explain why hi-fi is a relatively obscure hobby in the US?  Is there a better way? 

Verdant that you for the kind words.

What we find so fascinating is how many uber technical guys here think that system matching is bunk and that amplifiers, cabling, and digital front ends don't dramatically or subtitly alter the sound.

We can tell you even with subtitle changes in an amp, digital and cables that those subtitle changes add up and up and up until bam different sounding system.

In the one gentleman who states that he heard different digital front ends and they didn't radically change the sound, we say he heard dacs that were very similarly voiced, like if you had three ESS Sabre dac based units, vs an AKM and Burr Brown, (however the analog stage of the dac also makes a big dif) if you compare a Mytek super clean clear defined to an IFI DSD a tube based dac which sounds lush your system is going to sound different. 

The other funny issue is the guys who don't subsribe to cabling making a big difference we did one demo where an expensive power cable made an $8k dac outperform a $20k one with a much cheaper power cord.

Audio is a lot like cooking, too sweet add salt, too salty add sweet.

Our analogy that a high pefromance car is the sum of all of its parts and not just the engine is an analogy that most people can clearly grasp. 

Simply taking a crashed Ferraris 660 hp engine and putting into your Toyota Camry will not equil the performance of the Ferrari. 

Audio is all about synergies and finding systems and components that work together to create magic. 

When we get in a new loudspeaker the testing process is not just listening to it and positioning it, sometimes that means changing out cabling, or dacs or trying different electronics to acchieve the sound quality we are looking for. 

Sometimes you get lucky and new speakers just work perfectly and other times that requires a rebalancing.

Dave and Troy
Audio Doctor NJ

@Audiotroy  I have no POV on swapping wires and the impact it can have on sound.  My experience is largely with lower end cables in direct swaps with mid-fi systems.  The exception is Kimber who I have partnered with.  I use their wire inside my speakers and in my demo rooms and can only say that my systems have never sounded better.  I have never done any formal testing with power cables.  Though a person I have a lot of respect for reported some results of power cable testing and said the results were not subtle but that gauge was a bigger driver than manufacturer.  Again, I have no formal POV.

Regarding speakers, am pairing is critical but some speakers are more sensitive to changes in amplifiers than others.  There are some speakers that will expose tiny changes in amplification and it is rarely a good thing.  It is usually when the speaker is so forward that it is brutally fatiguing.  

I have a hypothesis on why.  My feeling is, based on T/S parameters, there is an optimal crossover design for a speaker combination in a perfectly damped box. Reality deviates from that optimal scenario.  The further you deviate, the more sensitive the speakers will become to small changes in amplification.  That is a hypothesis that is unproven but supported by my empirical observations.  I am looking forward to testing the theory through the years.

What I sometimes find is that a speaker that might not be as "exciting" and dynamic in a short test might prove to be the better choice long term because it will be less fatiguing.  The goal is creating a speaker that is revealing and can deliver amazing detail without being forward.  My hypothesis is the answer is in the cabinet and it's overall ability to dampen rather than the drivers themselves.  

Additionally, there is an inherent "sonic character" to a speaker.  You can change amps and make a speaker better but if you just don't like the fundamentals of what the speaker does, a swap in amplification may mitigate the issue to some extent but will likely never completely resolve someones underlying distaste.

I will offer an example from my own line when showing at AXPONA.  Like my partner company Art Audio, we don't have a "house sound."  The goal is to make the ultimate expression using specific component parts and let the sound fall where it may.  

My Nightshade speaker is very soulful.  Wonderful detail but decidedly colored.  They make horns and female voices shine like the sun.  My Blackthorn's are precise and analytic.  Sound is intended to be very true.  Through the three days at AXPONA, I had dozens of consumers in and we would make hot swaps between the speakers in the middle of songs so they could hear the difference. 

No one thought the differences were subtle.  As many people would say something along the lines of; I get the Blackthorn.  It is "accurate" but it lacks the soul of the Nightshade and is a bit to "audiophile" for my taste.  Others would say, I get the Nightshade.  It is soulful and female voices sound great, but I love the Balckthorn because it delivers more of a pure, "Audiophile" sound.  

In my opinion, no amp swap, no cable swap, no change in source is going to change the underlying character of those two speakers.  They are very intentionally, radically different speakers.  If you love one, you probably won't love the other.  

That being said, at some point I really want to stop into your store.  I live in CT and my manufacturing is in PA.  I drive through NJ frequently.  Next time I make that trip I think I will reach out and schedule an appointment to see you guys.  

I fear that too often the word synergy in audio is used to describe overcoming the sonic problems of one component by matching them with another component whose sonic problems are the polar opposite.