New to What's best.

steve59 · Jan 7, 2018

Hello
I found this forum searching speaker evolution and found a thread by Larry Greenhill interviewing Kevin Voeks on updating the salon 1 to the v2. In it he says> "Listening tests over the past 10 years have taught us one other thing. Above the midprice range of loudspeakers, there is no correlation between the sound quality and the loudspeaker's price. Although many high-priced loudspeakers do perform adequately in our listening tests, the most expensive speaker in a given double-blind listening test may be the least preferred by our listening panel".

Kevin does qualify himself when LG asks why pick the salon over the studio then? But my question here where you guys clearly have experience is? Is kevin full of it? What price did you notice the onset of diminishing returns or speakers started sounding different instead of better? For me the VA Beethovens made around 2000-2002 were the best sound I heard regardless of price but limited by a maximum spl of about 92db they listed for $4000.

cjfrbw · Jan 7, 2018

I recall somebody going on a manufacturing tour and the speaker designer himself blurted out that he preferred the sound of his own smaller medium range speaker one step from the bottom of the range to the massive flagship, and that the flagship was mainly for those who required a flagship i.e. price wise, very large listening room, status object etc. The tourist said he thought the designer regretted the statement as soon as he made it.

You will find moments of candor where high end people seem as puzzled by the demand for expensive objects d'audio as the consumers. Nelson Pass has even stated that sound quality of amplifiers does not increase with price and weight. Although one might presume that he would be shooting himself in the foot with his remark, he probably is beyond caring any more and I doubt it would put a dent in the demand for the massive amplifiers.

Rodney Gold · Jan 7, 2018

Welcome
The problem is that you cant double blind or even a/b test speakers ....those tests establish a difference and not a preference ( A difference between speakers is a given) and cant be physically done anyway..

As to preference testing..well its so subjective and dependent on so many other factors as to be useless unless those being tested have your exact preferences etc...

steve59 · Jan 7, 2018

So true... I've typed and deleted about 5 times so far because that comment can be interpreted to mean many things, but The article I read on this forum somewhere is probably 10 years old and maybe they've gained some traction since then. I do like the performa 3 series.

treitz3 · Jan 7, 2018

Hello, Steve and please allow me to offer you a very warm welcome to the What's Best Forum! I agree with your assertion that expensive does not necessarily correlate with great sound. I have heard 25K to 50K speakers that you could not pay me to listen too.

Tom

Simon Moon · Jan 7, 2018

In general, I tend to disagree with the thesis in the OP.

Sure, I agree that high price does not always translate to higher fidelity over a mid price speaker, but it does give an advantage of of better materials, production techniques, better components, etc, that, when implemented well, can mean, lower distortion, better transient response, less dynamic compression, etc.

I am sure we can all point to specific examples of mid price speakers that we prefer to much higher priced speakers, but I can point to many more high priced speakers that outperform a majority of mid price speakers in almost every aspect.

I can name quite a few flagship, or near flagship speakers, that have the ability to do many things that even the best mid price speakers can only hint at.

microstrip · Jan 7, 2018

Welcome Steve,

Using good equipment I own I can make the XLF sound miserable and the old Sonus Faber Amator sound great. Does it prove anything?

LL21 · Jan 7, 2018

microstrip said:
Welcome Steve,

Using good equipment I own I can make the XLF sound miserable and the old Sonus Faber Amator sound great. Does it prove anything?

I think it does when you can then do another trial...and take great equipment to both of these speakers. And under this test, I have to imagine if you had to keep only 1 speaker with its system...you would not choose the Amators over the XLFs. And further arguably would be hardpressed to find ANY one single other speaker over the XLF! It would 'prove' to me your XLF is truly an outstanding speaker, irrespective of price...and even considering price.

steve59 · Jan 7, 2018

I thought Revel was a high end company and a comment like that is something I would expect from a mass market supplier, bummed I guess.

Pb Blimp · Jan 7, 2018

steve59 said:
Hello
I found this forum searching speaker evolution and found a thread by Larry Greenhill interviewing Kevin Voeks on updating the salon 1 to the v2. In it he says> "Listening tests over the past 10 years have taught us one other thing. Above the midprice range of loudspeakers, there is no correlation between the sound quality and the loudspeaker's price. Although many high-priced loudspeakers do perform adequately in our listening tests, the most expensive speaker in a given double-blind listening test may be the least preferred by our listening panel".

Kevin does qualify himself when LG asks why pick the salon over the studio then? But my question here where you guys clearly have experience is? Is kevin full of it? What price did you notice the onset of diminishing returns or speakers started sounding different instead of better? For me the VA Beethovens made around 2000-2002 were the best sound I heard regardless of price but limited by a maximum spl of about 92db they listed for $4000.

The Floyd Tool double blind stuff has been beat to death on forums. I am always dubious of so called science that proves the prima facia case to be false. Harmon is a commercial enterprise with shareholders driven by the same motives as any for profit entity. Double blinds can be manipulated in a million ways with the true statistical significance of the analysis being the biggest driver of reliabiltiy. For statistical significance to be high and accurate the tests must be deep in samples and all variables must be held constant except for the one being measured and this is virtually impossible in audio given the intricacies of the human ear and neurology. Tool does a remarkable job of appearing scholarly, objective and all scientific but to what end?

Of course more resources does not guarantee better performance; in other words the correlation coefficient between the two is not perfect. But it is self evident to me that it is a positive number when you use a large data sample in a controlled environment. The fact that someone can contrive a study that proves otherwise is meaningless to me, especially when that someone is also involved with selling the product in question.

RBFC · Jan 7, 2018

Welcome, Steve.

As you read more, you’ll sure be exposed to a large number of opinions and some new ideas. I hope you enjoy the forums and continue to contribute!

Lee

treitz3 · Jan 7, 2018

Simon Moon said:
In general, I tend to disagree with the thesis in the OP.

Sure, I agree that high price does not always translate to higher fidelity over a mid price speaker, but it does give an advantage of of better materials, production techniques, better components, etc, that, when implemented well, can mean, lower distortion, better transient response, less dynamic compression, etc.

I am sure we can all point to specific examples of mid price speakers that we prefer to much higher priced speakers, but I can point to many more high priced speakers that outperform a majority of mid price speakers in almost every aspect.

I can name quite a few flagship, or near flagship speakers, that have the ability to do many things that even the best mid price speakers can only hint at.

Here is a flagship 24K speaker. One of the absolute WORST that I have ever heard...followed by my own review. This is a glowing review of these speakers BTW. To say anything more, it would be me on my death bed speaking highly of these speakers under duress...

http://www.monitoraudiousa.com/products/platinum-ii/pl500-ii

It's GORGEOUS!!!. It looks like it would belong in a multi-million dollar property. The shine on the wood is so thick and pristine, you can see your reflection in it. The connections are all top notch, build quality excellent....literally everything about this speaker fits the bill of all things luxury and all things audiophile.

Until you hear it.

Yeah, it has a ribbon tweeter so the top end is rolled off. When I say rolled of? Yeah, I don't mean like a typical ribbon speaker. I've heard a few that are outstanding. This one? The song started and I was wondering where the music was. No imaging, no chimes, no micro details to speak of. It wasn't as if I needed to strain to hear it all......it just wasn't there.

At all.

So, the bass passages come in. Where is the bass? Where is the sound pressure? OMG, where is anything that is pleasurable? I have heard low line Polk subs sound better than this thing offered.....and here's the kicker.

It had about 60-70K worth of front end equipment, acoustical treatments, carpeting, properly set up and with a great LP source to boot. I'm not saying that it was so bad that you would have to pay me to listen to it. What I am saying is that from this same company, I have heard a 1K bookie they produced come eerily close to an Apogee Centaurus on all aspects of the reproductive effort (minus the stunning presentation of the Apogees).

What gives? These things sounded horrible. I'd have rather enjoyed a pair of the current Polk LSiM series....any one of them hooked up to an MP3 source playing Adele better than these.

Money means absolutely NOTHING in this hobby. Nothing.

Tom

Pb Blimp · Jan 7, 2018

treitz3 said:
Here is a flagship 24K speaker. One of the absolute WORST that I have ever heard...followed by my own review. This is a glowing review of these speakers BTW. To say anything more, it would be me on my death bed speaking highly of these speakers under duress...

http://www.monitoraudiousa.com/products/platinum-ii/pl500-ii

It's GORGEOUS!!!. It looks like it would belong in a multi-million dollar property. The shine on the wood is so thick and pristine, you can see your reflection in it. The connections are all top notch, build quality excellent....literally everything about this speaker fits the bill of all things luxury and all things audiophile.

Until you hear it.

Yeah, it has a ribbon tweeter so the top end is rolled off. When I say rolled of? Yeah, I don't mean like a typical ribbon speaker. I've heard a few that are outstanding. This one? The song started and I was wondering where the music was. No imaging, no chimes, no micro details to speak of. It wasn't as if I needed to strain to hear it all......it just wasn't there.

At all.

So, the bass passages come in. Where is the bass? Where is the sound pressure? OMG, where is anything that is pleasurable? I have heard low line Polk subs sound better than this thing offered.....and here's the kicker.

It had about 60-70K worth of front end equipment, acoustical treatments, carpeting, properly set up and with a great LP source to boot. I'm not saying that it was so bad that you would have to pay me to listen to it. What I am saying is that from this same company, I have heard a 1K bookie they produced come eerily close to an Apogee Centaurus on all aspects of the reproductive effort (minus the stunning presentation of the Apogees).

What gives? These things sounded horrible. I'd have rather enjoyed a pair of the current Polk LSiM series....any one of them hooked up to an MP3 source playing Adele better than these.

Money means absolutely NOTHING in this hobby. Nothing.

Tom

Ya but to my point above, since when does the exception prove the rule? IMO the body of evidence to the contrary is too great to make that blanket statement (in bold). Maybe to say that money doesn't assure success, but IMO it's hard to argue that at some level resources don't increases the likelihood of improvement.

treitz3 · Jan 7, 2018

It's simply to me a matter of what I hear. No tests, no A/B, no nothing other than my own ears listening to the music.

Isn't that the point of the hobby? Listening and enjoying? Never mind. The point of the hobby is to enjoy what we all do. Listening to music.

I am not one that argues how to get to the point of one's musical bliss. I just strive to achieve beyond it.

Tom

Pb Blimp · Jan 7, 2018

treitz3 said:
It's simply to me a matter of what I hear. No tests, no A/B, no nothing other than my own ears listening to the music.

Isn't that the point of the hobby? Listening and enjoying? Never mind. The point of the hobby is to enjoy what we all do. Listening to music.

I am not one that argues how to get to the point of one's musical bliss. I just strive to achieve beyond it.

Tom

Well said Tom.

Ron Resnick · Jan 8, 2018

Welcome to WBF, Steve!

Search

Search

New to What's best.

steve59

Well-Known Member

cjfrbw

Well-Known Member

Rodney Gold

Member

steve59

Well-Known Member

treitz3

Super Moderator

Simon Moon

Well-Known Member

microstrip

VIP/Donor

LL21

Well-Known Member

steve59

Well-Known Member

Pb Blimp

Well-Known Member

RBFC

WBF Founding Member

treitz3

Super Moderator

Pb Blimp

Well-Known Member

treitz3

Super Moderator

Pb Blimp

Well-Known Member

Ron Resnick

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Similar threads

Members online