2. speakers
  3. 1306764448

Compairson ground rules....should we have them?

More often than not, someone will ask, 'How do you compare...' regarding two products--speakers, or electronics. This is fair game, this is a blog site--but too often the comparisons become the 'last word' of the product's value, and with little or no thought to be paid to the relationship of cost between the two products.
This is fair too--but..and a big but here (think Kardashian) if we're talking about the THIEL 3.7 and we start railing about it's lack of deep bass (when comparing it to a speaker costing 2 or 3X as much)...I KNOW, and maybe some of the more traveled audiophiles know...but without context...does the typical person, or neophyte know? Or do they walk away, storing only the statment, 'THIEL 3.7 has limited bass output', in their memory banks--this being misleading.
Audiogon is a constant source of amazement to me--or should I say, 'Human Nature' is that source?

'My name is Dilbert, and I own a pair of $38 dollar, not thousand dollar, Sony speakers that I bought 23 years ago...I'm thinking of replacing them with the MBL 101's...has anyone compared these two?'
At that point someone will offer a comparison of the two with little or no regard for the price differential--in other words an emperical not practical comparison. Don't get me wrong, emperical and practical are both good, and both relevant but rarely part of the discussion.
I suppose this bothers me because people always seem to do this with THIEL--compare them with speakers costing multiples of the THIEL price, as if that's somehow Kosher.
I suppose that it bothers me, because the shortcomings of speaker A (THIEL in this case as I'm harking to a comparison of THIEL versus Egglestons) are highlighted in great detail, as compared to B (the multiple thousand That, coupled with my personal impressions of the Egglestons which is that they are not neutral sounding AND I don't happen to prefer the colors that they've chosen...but now we're in to the crux of audio preferences...chose the 'color' you like.
Whether you're splashing the walls with paint, or splashing the walls with sound, shouldn't a comparison be based on some commonality if we're delving into the two personalities of speakers?
I got cross ways with someone on another A'gon post and made this same point, but it got no traction whatsoever--someone comparing the 3.7 with the Tidal...which at that time was about 2X the price. My comments were...OK, the Tidal may be better, but how does the Tidal compare with speakers costing twice THEIR price? Within that context, let's detail the shortcomings of the Tidals now.

I suppose I'm really saying that questions should have the caveat--I'm asking this question for edification, not to damn with faint praise nor condemn by comparing. CNO comparisons(Cost no object) which would be emperical...all comments are of the 'absolute' variety...any shortcommings of product A, (the lesser priced one) should be taken in context of that obvious price differential.
In my lexicon, Quality is a constant, Value is more elastic...and very time dependant...i.e. where is the buyer's financial health at the moment in question?
My best friend always talks about how much of a 'value' the Mercedez is...yes, of course in his world this is true--at $115K it's a good car...but for the masses, maybe the $39K Buick LaCrosse might just hit the mark more easily. Now, am I going to pretend that the Buick is the equal of the S Car...NO...but all comparisons deserve context.
Just sayin'

Good listening.
Larry
lrsky
james63
534 posts
 
Larry, I fully agree that all things need a context. But I look at it a little different. I would like to see reviews compare all of their reviews to a single speaker with in 50%-200%. A bass line speaker and price could be the Watt Puppy line for example. They are 26k and could be compared to a $13,000 all the way up to a $52,000..... so it could be "not as good as a Watt Puppy ' or "better than a Watt Puppy" and then elaborated on the subject.

With that said I would not give people on audiogon a hard time. Professional reviews are just as bad about it....

"But, if the gear in front of the Thiels is capable of matching them, and the interconnect and speaker cables are capable of passing the signals properly, the CS7.2 can stand toe-to-toe with any loudspeaker I've ever heard. At $13,500 a pair, I'd put 'em against anybody's $80,000 contender. Hoo-ah!"

http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/thiel_cs72.htm

"The Thiel CS2.4 is a great loudspeaker, one of the very best I've heard regardless of price. Its treble soars and its bass plummets, but all the while the CS2.4 sounds utterly neutral and musically communicative. This speaker looks gorgeous and has the earmarks of heirloom-quality craftsmanship. The CS2.4 will be at home in a tweaked-out dedicated listening room or in a finely decorated living room, and its moderate size means it won't take up much space in either."

http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/thiel_cs24.htm

"I briefly auditioned the Thiels while the Avalon Indras that I reviewed in October were still here. The two speakers were essentially cut from the same cloth—both had startling clarity and detail without the in-your-face quality usually implied by "detail." Like the Thiels, the Indras lack a sock-'em bottom end. Of course, the difference in price could buy the Thiels a pretty good subwoofer system. But shipping schedules kept the Indra/Thiel comparison brief, so I trotted out the trusty Wilson Audio WATT/Puppy 8 system, because it's such a known reference point for a compact high-quality monitor."

http://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs37-loudspeaker-page-2

But you do have a point in general. My biggest pet peeve is when people talk about sound-stage between equipment. It is VERY set up and room dependent. Also some speakers are just not integrated well and have weird off axis dispersion and send sounds unevenly all over the room. Some would call the sound stage huge as they can add a false sense space but in reality the speakers do not sound accurate....
Post removed 
paulsax
275 posts
 
one area that may lend itself to some ground rules (good luck with enforcement) is that you only comment if you actually heard the item in question. More than a few responses are puked up-rehashed-read it and want in on the party, stuff.
mceljo
1,357 posts
 
Paulsax - Or at least provide an honest perspective of our experience or lack there of with the product in question. I think it's possible to provide some seeds for thought or insight without hearing a specific product.
lrsky OP
1,118 posts
 
Paulsax,
Thanks for mentioning this...one sore point was a review that someone posted on A'gon, a supposed review of my LSA Designs, the Statment 1's. The guy hated literally EVERYTHING about the speaker...all he did was completely dismantle what I know to be a good speaker. Later, we find out that the poster of the review, didn't own them, was 'house sitting' AND had joined Audiogon that day, or that week. Then, he posted four more comments within that week, only to disappear forever from Audiogon. The review was so harsh that I had suspicions, but when you, as the designer take exception, you can look like an idiot or a 'proud father' who's been told that his beauty pagent daughter is not very pretty and or lacks talent.
Because of what happened later, (knowledge of his joining the day of the review, then disappearing) it became obvious that this was almost certainly a 'set up'...harking back, I said at the time...that to sound 'that bad' something had to be wrong with the speakers, unseen shipping damage or something similar---and I offered to replace them at which time the 'wheels came off' as he admitted to being a house guest.
This is off the beaten path, but it does point out how incredibly iffy some communications on Audiogon can be at times--and how credibility can be in question under such extreme circumstances.
Back to the original post...context is king in comparisons and or reviews. Someone who owns a 'beginner system' has every right to post opinions, but how can we assign maximum credibility to a newbie audiophile, who visited a show in Denver...heard the MBL's and talks about how 'horrible' they were. They well may have sounded bad...but I'm not going to assign the same 'weight' to this opinion as I would TVAD, or Blindjim, or a host of others that I respect so very much, and enjoy reading.
It would just help to have some context of their experience as a contributing member.

I agree Paulsax--one shouldn't comment without first hand experience...and Mceljo, if one is providing those 'seeds', make sure you've given the totality of your experience...context again.

Good listening,

Larry
More to discover