@ddafoe
[please excuse my bad English]
Thanks for your reply, it is a nice opportunity for me to clarify: I was indeed talking about UNamplified acoustic instruments only (i.e. mainly classical, and unamplified jazz&folk if this still exists).And given that the way @jjss49 reported his own experience was so close to mine, especially in the way he puts it in his post, I could not helped copy-paste what I wrote elsewhere on the very same topic; therefore it may have not been totally clear that the scope of what I was saying was not "universal", but roughly limited to classical ;-)
So,
On rock, I like bigger speakers (than my Harbeth M30.2 Anniversary), with higher efficiency and deeper bass (big JBL’s, etc).
(my M30.2 anniversary play fairly good on rock; but one could wish better - and I don’t know their XD serie which is said to be better on rock than previous iterations; I have no opinion).
And as you wrote
- On acoustic unamplified instruments, even if there are different violinS, pianoS, clarinetS, concert hallS (thus acousticS), musicianS, etc, there is still a direct reference/connection with the instrument played (modulated by the room’s acoustics): nothing sits between the instruments and the listener. Moreover, there is a hugely wide range of instrument timbres (woods, brass, strings, percussion, stringed&percussion (=piano), etc). So on one hand, it may be very, very difficult for a speaker to reproduce all various instruments. But at least, a direct reference is accessible.
Roughly, it’s pretty direct. You have:
instruments---(acoustics)--->listener
If one attends live acoustic concert, one has his ear-brain shaped, or trained, by that repeated direct experience.
With some experience, one can identify more easily a speaker that "plays just right" (on acoustic instruments), as real-world direct "references" can be used to evaluate. So, one can feel a bit less lost on a hifi show when facing a profligacy of speakers. This reference serves as a compass.
(and if one does not attends concerts, then one feels lost anyway, and then just chooses the speaker preferred by feeling/sensation).
Attending classical concert (in Belgium) cost approx. €12, and you can change your seat after the interruption, and chose a better one (in this concert hall, for instance).
- On amplified instruments, even more with electronic and synthesized music, the sound system (amplifiers&speakers used by the band in the concert hall) sits now between the instruments and the listener, and becomes a part of the live experience: for instance, the wave guide Electrovoice used here or there sound plays an active role in the perceived "speed, attack, and plain visceral excitement of the show" on the listener’s side. So does its fine-tuning by the sound engineer.
Roughly, now you have:
[instruments + soundSystem]---(acoustics)--->listener.
Does it still make sense to talk here about timbral accuracy? I don’t think so. Speed, attack and sheer energy are probably more important here.Since the sound system used in concert hall is part of the whole, it is more difficult to speak of a direct reference to the instruments: the sound system is a prism which hugely biases the listener’s sensation.
So as "reference" does not really matter here, I think we can chose more "freely" the speakers we prefer, without the hassle of conforming to a "reference", wondering if they are playing right or not. Basically, it’s almost easier in this case, I think. The listener may just choose the one he prefers.
Sure, a few outstanding speakers can reconcile both exquisite naturalness and accuracy on timbres, with speed, attack and excitement, but they are very expensive.
(a clear expression of those simple ideas is beyond the reach of my poor English, sorry... ;-)
[please excuse my bad English]
Thanks for your reply, it is a nice opportunity for me to clarify: I was indeed talking about UNamplified acoustic instruments only (i.e. mainly classical, and unamplified jazz&folk if this still exists).And given that the way @jjss49 reported his own experience was so close to mine, especially in the way he puts it in his post, I could not helped copy-paste what I wrote elsewhere on the very same topic; therefore it may have not been totally clear that the scope of what I was saying was not "universal", but roughly limited to classical ;-)
So,
What if your reference to live music isn’t unamplified acoustic music; is Harbeth still the best in this case?Maybe not, indeed. Especially if my preferred music were amplified rock, pop and electronic music, I probably would have bought other speakers.
On rock, I like bigger speakers (than my Harbeth M30.2 Anniversary), with higher efficiency and deeper bass (big JBL’s, etc).
(my M30.2 anniversary play fairly good on rock; but one could wish better - and I don’t know their XD serie which is said to be better on rock than previous iterations; I have no opinion).
And as you wrote
part of the experience of a live event like that is the not only the clarity and detail I hear at the live event, but very much *the speed, attack, and plain visceral excitement of the show*I cannot agree with more on speed and attack, especially with live amplified non-classical music (though I attended very few of them)
i.e. the many other modern HiFi speaker manufacturers are just plain wrong?I was just saying that on *acoustic music* (UNamplified instruments), Harbeths speakers sound right (so said a sound engineer at Herb Reichert’s place while reviewing the M30.2 Anniversary: "they just sound right!"). They are not the only ones, but they are amongst the last Mohicans: yes, on *acoustic music*, many speakers play wrong. My compatriot Bruno Putzeys (Hypex, purifi, etc) says that too.
- On acoustic unamplified instruments, even if there are different violinS, pianoS, clarinetS, concert hallS (thus acousticS), musicianS, etc, there is still a direct reference/connection with the instrument played (modulated by the room’s acoustics): nothing sits between the instruments and the listener. Moreover, there is a hugely wide range of instrument timbres (woods, brass, strings, percussion, stringed&percussion (=piano), etc). So on one hand, it may be very, very difficult for a speaker to reproduce all various instruments. But at least, a direct reference is accessible.
Roughly, it’s pretty direct. You have:
instruments---(acoustics)--->listener
If one attends live acoustic concert, one has his ear-brain shaped, or trained, by that repeated direct experience.
With some experience, one can identify more easily a speaker that "plays just right" (on acoustic instruments), as real-world direct "references" can be used to evaluate. So, one can feel a bit less lost on a hifi show when facing a profligacy of speakers. This reference serves as a compass.
(and if one does not attends concerts, then one feels lost anyway, and then just chooses the speaker preferred by feeling/sensation).
Attending classical concert (in Belgium) cost approx. €12, and you can change your seat after the interruption, and chose a better one (in this concert hall, for instance).
- On amplified instruments, even more with electronic and synthesized music, the sound system (amplifiers&speakers used by the band in the concert hall) sits now between the instruments and the listener, and becomes a part of the live experience: for instance, the wave guide Electrovoice used here or there sound plays an active role in the perceived "speed, attack, and plain visceral excitement of the show" on the listener’s side. So does its fine-tuning by the sound engineer.
Roughly, now you have:
[instruments + soundSystem]---(acoustics)--->listener.
Does it still make sense to talk here about timbral accuracy? I don’t think so. Speed, attack and sheer energy are probably more important here.Since the sound system used in concert hall is part of the whole, it is more difficult to speak of a direct reference to the instruments: the sound system is a prism which hugely biases the listener’s sensation.
So as "reference" does not really matter here, I think we can chose more "freely" the speakers we prefer, without the hassle of conforming to a "reference", wondering if they are playing right or not. Basically, it’s almost easier in this case, I think. The listener may just choose the one he prefers.
Sure, a few outstanding speakers can reconcile both exquisite naturalness and accuracy on timbres, with speed, attack and excitement, but they are very expensive.
(a clear expression of those simple ideas is beyond the reach of my poor English, sorry... ;-)
