Do my ears deceive me??


     The money is in the bank, thinking of upgrading speakers, but everything I demo is no better or worse than what I have.   Willing to spend up to $6,000.      Upgraditis??   My main system is Mcintosh MX 134 that I bought in 2003, with a pair of Focal 836v's and a Parasound 5250  (250w/channel) amp I bought around 2012.   I either blew the tweeters or crossover on my 836's, so they are in for repair.   Since I've owned them for 10 years, I was considering new speakers.    The blades are way more than I would spend, but I also demoed the Kef R11s, Martin Logan xtf 200's, Mcintosh XR 100s, and B&W 703 S3.   

       None of them sounded better than what I'm hearing right now from my BP 2006s.    Would I really need to demo them in my room to make a fair comparison??  Or are speakers just not much better than they were 20 years ago?   I know I love detail, and tend to lean towards aluminum tweeters.  I pretty much only listen to classic rock and roll.   Of all I demoed, I really like the B&W 706s.   They sounded much brighter/cleaner than the others.   But they had the reciever set up so I couldn't adjust the treble/bass.  I love a V equalizer curve, and bump up the bass and treble a bit on my home/car systems.   Maybe I just have the good luck of prefering cheaper speakers.   

 

  

fenderu2

Not only did I have the Marantz's tone controls to fiddle with, I also had the pots on my JBLs to do the same with. The problem is, they were both too broad in scope and while it did cure the edge and bite, it was also like wrapping my tweeters and midranges with bolts of cheesecloth. Both ways just sucked the life out of the music. 

Unless you have the money and skill for a highly exacting device, most types of EQ are a blunt instrument, not a scalpel, as you're effecting bordering frequencies that you shouldn't be messing with, unless you like that kind of sound. 

I'm 69 years old with occasional but soft tinnitus, and I can hear minute changes and shifts with everything I tinker with down to some that seem like sideways moves, but I still hear them. The solution is to live with knowing that it's not perfect, but can be mighty damn fine sounding.

All the best,
Nonoise

 

Well I can say this.  In EVERY system I have ever listened to, be it home or car, i can make it sound much better to my ears than it being in the flat position.   I'm not gonna buy 20,000 to 30,000 speakers so I can not need an equalizer.  It's not economical, and I have better things to spend my money.  Audio is important but not everything.   I admit I have not demoed many speakers the last 10 to 15 years, cuz a lot of audio stores have closed up, and I've been content.  Many of these brands have NO way to demo, and I'm not going to travel all over to do that.   Plus I am limited in the speaker placement in my room.  It's not real big, and I kind of need to stick with tall and skinny speakers.   

     Not to flame on, but if you guys have higher end televisions.  Do you get it calibrated, and never use the other settings on it?  With no ability to adjust the contrast, brightness, color, and all the other variables when you watch different programs?   Would you buy a guitar amplifer with no TONE controls???  I'm perplexed as to why one would want this limitation in any endeavor.   

     If I took a hypothetical Jeff Rowland amp (1 with tone control and 1 without) what percentage of sound degradation does the 1 with tone control have???  Could he really not build them to damn near the same specs.  And you could pretty much make them sound identical??

If room acoustics are bad, every speaker will sound similar because of the heavy room signature. Once you start killing reflections and bass overhang, the real nature of speakers comes out.

But if it's not feasible or economical to change the room, wouldn't that be a great reason for EQ.   And isn't that why room correction was created?   I mean if Trinnov, Lyngdorf, Storm, and Anthem are doing it.   It must lead to something better.    You can always leave it off if not.