An audiophile dilemma

Hifitime

I did the same thing in Europe. I think I visited every audio club in southern Germany. And I was always trading with my friends. At one time I had two Revox rtr's two nakamichics and more amps than I could keep track of. I was out of control. But with the comeing of the CD, I came to the conclusion that speakers were the only things that could be significantly improved upon. I guess I was in the hobby phase then, as it's meant here. But it was always the music for me. It took me many places, and still does to this day. I can't tell you were I was when I heard of the Kennedy assassination, but I know exactly where I was when my lady gave me the OK to get the complete set of Beethoven's syms by Karajan and the Berliners.(lp)(67usd) Sitting at an outdoor cafe in Nurnberg, Germany. Still have it.
Thanks for your story.

"If great speakers are being made, then the knowledge exist, so why don't all producers make great speakers. What makes a speaker great, and how much does it cost to make one?"

Rok2id, that's a fair question. The answer, I think, isn't any different than the reason why not every composer writes a great symphony, despite the fact that music theory and training are available to all. Speaker design isn't nearly as cut and dry and scientific as you think it is. Yes, it's highly technical -- but then, so is music.

Suppose you were a speaker designer. Assume that you learned everything you could about physics, acoustics, loudspeaker design, and psychoacoustics. You'd be amazed at how much you knew -- and how much you still wouldn't understand, because we don't yet know.

Then, try designing your product. You'll rapidly find yourself coming up against what are known as the engineering trades. The materials you use are imperfect. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses, so when you gain one thing, you give another thing up.

You might for example choose to make an electrostatic speaker. Electrostatics are famous for detail and low distortion. But because of fundamental and practical limitations, they have to be very, very big to play low and loud, and it's hard to get good high frequency dispersion out of them. They're also hard to drive and tend to be unreliable.

A great designer will study what's known, then add some problem-solving innovations of his own, maybe even come up with an entirely new approach. He'll spend years mastering the "black art" aspects of speaker design that aren't in the textbooks, things that you learn only by spending hours in the lab tinkering with prototypes, listening, measuring, and trying to make them better.

So, while you can indeed design a good speaker by the book, using off-the-shelf parts, designing a great one at a practical price point isn't at all cut and dry.

Add to this the fact that the rule in consumer electronics is that a product has to retail for 4-5 times parts and labor cost. As with most things, you can buy a lot of performance. A machined aluminum cabinet costs a lot more than an MDF cabinet, for example, but it has fewer of the resonances that give speakers a boxy, smeared coloration. Exotic diaphragm materials, large multiple woofers for low distortion and high power handling, etc. -- all of these are costly.

Anyway, just trying to give you a sense for why this isn't nearly as trivial as you might think. And it also helps explain (along with what might politely be called commercial considerations) why there isn't a simple relationship between price and greatness in a speaker.

A pair of Quads, for example, will cost only $10,000 and are unquestionably great speakers if they fit your listening needs (limited SPL and bass). There are also great speakers that cost over $100,000. They excel in different areas, because of characteristics in the underlying technology.

Bottom line, I think, is that you should as others have suggested try to listen more. Not because you should become an audio hobbyist, but because you'd be amazed at what they can add to the enjoyment of music. If they take your breath away, then you know.

Josh358

Thank you. An excellent, informative discussion. I guess I sort of forgot about the 'black art' aspects of speaker design. I thought it would all be math by now.

I guess this reasoning is why no one can build a 3-series, except BMW, no matter how hard they try.

Thanks again.

Rok2id, everyone makes assumptions, as you have. I will point out two things to put your awe, good or bad, into perspective:

1. It seems you had an "aquisition problem" which you needed to quit, as you say, "I was out of control." You are to be commended for reining in the impulsivity, which would not be easy. This would make perfect sense why you now own a modest rig and do not seek to hear every new/hot item. When one has to practice a forced contentment to combat impulses then an aggressive stance against the demon of desire is good!

But, did your acquisition fever switch to media? How big is your media collection? I find it interesting how some audiophiles have a "media bias," in that they think they are a bit better than gearheads. My media collection is quite small. I have very defined taste/criteria for my listening, as well as for its performance, so I have not spent tens of thousands on media (If the numbers are crunched it is scary how much can be spent in a lifetime on media!). The media I have is dearly loved and used; I don't have hundreds of pieces of media sitting around unused. But the media I play is exquisitely performed, just the way I like.

I'm actually quite pleased by this now that I can get the world online. I feel vindicated that I didn't spend tens of thousands on media but put the money on systems to play it back. I think that was a wise move long term. And look what I have to show for it - a nice audio system with variety to it rather than stacks and stacks of discs collecting dust and only one form of expression of the music. Some people justify spending $20-25 for an album which will sit along with dozens of others. All those $20-25 decisions I chose to put toward systems. I use all the stuff I buy, gear and media, so that could be a difference between us, perhaps.

Yes, I LOVE the equipment, which is why I focus on it rather than stacks of discs. Some people take pictures to proudly show off their media collection, but no one says, "How shallow! What a waste! Look at all the unnecessary money they spent..." Pursuit of variety in systems is every bit as legitimate a hobby in audiophilia as collecting media and having a more modest system. It may be that you have spent as much as I have when media and system is combined.

2. You misconstrue my agenda; I could have one fantastic speaker system, but have learned about myself that is not what brings me more satisfaction. I am trying to broaden the understanding in the community that a variety of technology at whatever level and price point is as compelling - I assert even more compelling - as having "the One," the supposed perfect speaker. A guy with a variety of three good $1K speakers may have far more fun and enjoyment than having one $5K speaker. This is not to be taken as endorsement of poorer quality, but of variety being a compelling element to enjoyment. Even though I point that out generally in my comments on the system, you seemed to have simply looked at the pics and drawn a hasty conclusion.

3. Lastly, I have spent 20 plus years of consistent annual budgeting and controlled spending on audio to attain a very high level. If you want to call that getting even for something, feel free. I call that sensible, successful and blessed long term planning and execution.

I am done with our discussion. Blessings to you. :)

BTW, you have excellent taste in affordable audio racks. :)

Not sure how this got missed in this discussion, but a major factor in the preference for this speaker over that one goes back to the fact that people differ considerably as to how they prioritize the many sonic variables involved.

On a very simple level, the designer has to juggle dozens upon dozens of variables, making choices along the way. Inevitably some things get sacrificed for others. The cone material and voice coil configuration that handles extreme volume peaks well may not be the perfect choice for another sonic consideration. Super-expensive parts may help to some degree, but alone will never solve all the problems.

Hence, one very expensive "great" speaker rarely sounds like another very expensive "great" speaker.

A good example for me are the Wilson speakers. They are highly regarded, but the times I've heard them they've never impressed me as having a natural sound. I call it the "Kodachrome" effect -- in my book, the designer just couldn't resist the temptation to juice things up a bit compared to live acoustic music.

That said, I recognise that Wilson has a serious following who think they are the penultimate in speaker design. Lots of people think Wilson came up with the perfect balance in speaker design an lots of others don't.

There will never be a universal consensus as to what the perfect speaker should do. There are just too many variables in play and too many differing opinions about priorities.