Neutral or warm? Which do you prefer?


I have 2 sets of speakers with different characteristics (among others I have).

One is neutral while the other one has more warmth to the sound.

I enjoy both on different music, but started wondering what do other members prefer?

What's "supposed" to be "better"? ... if there is such a thing in hifi.

Opinions of members here are most interesting and educational for me...
liquid-smooth
"What is wrong with a system being balanced or unbalanced ?
If it is unbalanced, that can mean either upward or downward."

I agree, the word balanced is less open to interpertation.

So BALANCED is added to the list of words to be used insted of neutral.
I was just going to say, until Bob beat me to it, that live acoustic events can sound weak, thin, and not very image specific. Go one step further and play the same acoustic material at another place and the sound can and will change dramatically. Quite the can of worms, eh?

So, like Peterayer and Jmcgrogan2 imply (if I infer it correctly) is that an actual acoustic event can be not so neutral sounding as we'd like. I think this is due to our hearing acuity, which we should never doubt. Live events can sound wrong if out of tune or played incorrectly. Neutral is satisfying to our ears as no one part of the spectrum is out of line with the rest, drawing attention to itself.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if something sounds pleasant, involving, and gratifying to us, it can be considered to sound "neutral", which then makes it very specific and therefore unique to each and every one of us. But a consensus can be arrived at that most can agree on. The same goes for our home systems even more since that is where we build and validate our beliefs.

All the best,
Nonoise
Neutral is satisfying to our ears as no one part of the spectrum is out of line with the rest, drawing attention to itself.

Nonoise, I think that this is what I would have tried to say and goes with the notion that some systems are cold and some systems are warm. Neutral would be in the middle, I suppose.

I really don't like saying that I want my music to sound as though it is live, because like others have mentioned, live isn't always a good thing. In fact, most live shows sound like cr@p.
I really don't like saying that I want my music to sound as though it is live, because like others have mentioned, live isn't always a good thing. In fact, most live shows sound like cr@p.

I think it might be better if we were to stay with lifelike sound vs live sound. The point being that most recordings are not live in the sense that the venue is having an impact on what is being recorded and thus can adversly effect the sound quality.
Yes, some live events are geared towards aging audiences with the treble tilted up, the same trick that some recording engineers also use. I have also been at poorly produced live shows, that doesn't mean adjusting the sound one way or the other is neutral.

My point is that neutral sounds neither rolled off or tilted up, the presence region is neither enhanced nor hidden. Neutral is not thin sounding, bright or weak. Electronic adjustments are made to accentuate detail that lead to this phenomena. Neutral is natural sounding.

It is easier to judge the sound of live performances without amplification or speakers. Something like an Orchestral performance. I have never heard live, unamplified music to sound weak or thin. As always, YMMV.