Do Speakers That Measure Great Always Sound Great

Steve Williams · Jun 30, 2010

Just a simple question of our experts here. Obviously I take into consideration the proper placement of such speakers in a well treated room

My dilemma is that for my ears I have to say that not all speakers that measure well sound great even in a well treated room.

Why is it then that for many of us the flavor which lights up our ears comes not always from speakers that measure well? Yesterday both Sean Olive and Jeff Fritz were suggesting that off-axis measurements can contribute to a more favorable impression of the speakers. Is this the only reason or are there others

Jeff Fritz · Jun 30, 2010

Steve Williams said:
Just a simple question of our experts here. Obviously I take into consideration the proper placement of such speakers in a well treated room

My dilemma is that for my ears I have to say that not all speakers that measure well sound great even in a well treated room.

Why is it then that for many of us the flavor which lights up our ears comes not always from speakers that measure well? Yesterday both Sean Olive and Jeff Fritz were suggesting that off-axis measurements can contribute to a more favorable impression of the speakers. Is this the only reason or are there others

A few answers:
First, you have to define "measure well." Some speakers measure well in some aspects and don't in others. It could be those "others" that really count.

Second, the battery of measurements needed to cover all the bases is very broad. To get a good snapshot you need a lot of info. What we do at the NRC is a start, but not everything.

Third, you could prefer what you're familiar with, but something else could be the more neutral speaker. This is where bias also comes into play. Like I said in my opinion, we tend to like and defend what we own.

A question for you to ponder: why wouldn't you want your speakers to be neutral off axis as well as on axis? Many of those off-axis reflections will eventually find your ears . . . just makes sense.

Steve Williams · Jun 30, 2010

A question for you to ponder: why wouldn't you want your speakers to be neutral off axis as well as on axis? Many of those off-axis reflections will eventually find your ears . . . just makes sense.

precisely the point of my question Jeff.

Is the inference to be made that the rationale for the speakers good sound is because off axis reflections reach the ears

vinylphilemag · Jun 30, 2010

Great question, to which I think the answer is probably "no", for much the same reasons that amps that measure well don't always sound great.

Jeff Fritz · Jun 30, 2010

Steve Williams said:
precisely the point of my question Jeff.

Is the inference to be made that the rationale for the speakers good sound is because off axis reflections reach the ears

It is one of many factors that contribute to great sound, yes. It is part of working with the room -- a goal of any serious speaker designer.

kach22i · Jun 30, 2010

Electrostatic speakers generally don't measure well, but they are what my ears like. The same goes for tube equipment.

My ears win every time, I'm such a push over.

Jeff Fritz · Jun 30, 2010

vinylphilemag said:
Great question, to which I think the answer is probably "no", for much the same reasons that amps that measure well don't always sound great.

They don't sound bad because they measure well, but because of what the designer did to get there.

Gregadd · Jun 30, 2010

Jeff Fritz said:
They don't sound bad because they measure well, but because of what the designer did to get there.

Assume you may mean negative feedback inter alia

Jeff Fritz · Jun 30, 2010

Gregadd said:
Assume you may mean negative feedback inter alia

The improper use of negative feedback, yes. Some NF amps sound quite amazing.

Steve Williams · Jun 30, 2010

that amps that measure well don't always sound great

or amps that don't measure well sound good

My amp has NF, measures crappy by some measurements but I will put it up against other amps as IMO it is that good

Mark Seaton · Jun 30, 2010

Steve Williams said:
Just a simple question of our experts here. Obviously I take into consideration the proper placement of such speakers in a well treated room

My dilemma is that for my ears I have to say that not all speakers that measure well sound great even in a well treated room.

Why is it then that for many of us the flavor which lights up our ears comes not always from speakers that measure well? Yesterday both Sean Olive and Jeff Fritz were suggesting that off-axis measurements can contribute to a more favorable impression of the speakers. Is this the only reason or are there others

Hi Steve,

As Jeff quickly noted, the notion of "measures well" will be a different set of metrics and measurements to each designer and enthusiast. Some definitions will run quite parallel but differ on prioritization, weighting of one metric over another, or have a few different points of interest in finer details, while others will seem to be diametrically opposed. The inclusion of the qualifier "always" in the posed question effectively insures an answer of "NO!" Absolutes are rare in audio. Good guidelines and indicators are much easier to pin down without having to list a hundred exceptions.

IMO there are two primary problems which hinder further rational discussion without much more narrowing and specificity of what is being discussed. First is that most all loudspeakers defy description with a single dimension metric. There are many more dimensions of variance as compared to electronics making for a large matrix of variables. Even if we pick a set of measurements, determining how to prioritize and weight them, let alone defining what's "good enough" makes for many variables to consolidate. Secondly we have to acknowledge the degree of imperfection in real loudspeakers. It is much easier to define a flat line magnitude response into a resistor as a target for an amplifier than the magnitude response of a loudspeaker at some distance and angle. With such an array of variables, and significant imperfections or variances in most of those variables, you could easily devise a metric which results in the same deviation but dramatically different results.

Here is one conceptualization I like to use for acoustic measurements of loudspeakers when fielding such questions is to imagine the range of audible frequencies as the spectrum of light. I have come to realize I'm unlikely to have time to spend time on this myself anytime soon, so maybe Dr. Olive or others would have time to do some tinkering with this simple computer mapping (I'd love to see it)...

Start by scaling/mapping the visible spectrum of light to the 20-20kHz range of frequencies.
Set the intensity range to vary from max to min over a +/-10 to 20dB window (20-40dB).
Generate a color based on the exact frequency response input to the system as a mix of the light spectrum. (ie a subwoofer only would result in red)
Map a grid, circle or 3D sphere to a set of on and off axis measurements for visual display and interpretation.

Common spectrograms for off axis behavior do part of this for a single axis but instead display color as intensity vs. the spectral deviation I expect the above to display. The above would consolidate the horizontal display of a spectrogram into a single color. In simple terms, it gives us a familiar metric, color, by which to differentiate the 100s of different curves we can draw within a +/-2dB window. At bare minimum, I believe this representation might better convey the basic concept that all responses which meet +/- however many dB are not all equal.

Steve Williams · Jun 30, 2010

Hi Mark

as always I enjoy reading your responses

Perhaps I should rephrase the question and ask why speakers that measure good don't always sound good or the corollary, why do some speakers which measure bad, sound good

microstrip · Jun 30, 2010

kach22i said:
Electrostatic speakers generally don't measure well, but they are what my ears like.

Although, as outlined by other posters, measuring well is a too broad term, considering on axis frequency response and distortion the Quad ESL 63 measure very well. Twenty years ago I have measured them in my room and was astonished with the flat response, even in non anechoic conditions.

My Soundlab A1 Px's measure very badly compared with the ESL63 but also sound great.

The main limitation of electrostatic speakers is bass dynamics, but it is difficult to measure unless you have a smoke analyzer!

Mark Seaton · Jun 30, 2010

Steve Williams said:
Hi Mark

as always I enjoy reading your responses

Perhaps I should rephrase the question and ask why speakers that measure good don't always sound good or the corollary, why do some speakers which measure bad, sound good

Now that should be a much more productive basis of discussion.

Steve Williams · Jun 30, 2010

Mark Seaton said:
Now that should be a much more productive basis of discussion.

want to start the discussion or should we start a new thread

MylesBAstor · Jun 30, 2010

Steve Williams said:
or amps that don't measure well sound good

My amp has NF, measures crappy by some measurements but I will put it up against other amps as IMO it is that good

However tube amps need a small amount of NF for stability. If I remember right, the Lamms are real low-and isn't it adjustable?

Then one can also ask if it's local or global feedback.

Then again others like Ralph Karten have their own views on NFB:

http://www.atma-sphere.com/papers/paradigm_paper2.html

Steve Williams · Jun 30, 2010

MylesBAstor said:
However tube amps need a small amount of NF for stability. If I remember right, the Lamms are real low-and isn't it adjustable?

It's adjustable on the ML3

MylesBAstor · Jun 30, 2010

Steve Williams said:
It's adjustable on the ML3

That what I thought and somewhere I remember us discussing the less the better but zero wasn't the answer the either. I suspect from reading Ralph's stuff that the speaker selected will have a lot to do with the outcome.

Gregadd · Jun 30, 2010

the moscode uses a little negative feedback, THD is no big deal, it can be easily controlled with a little feedback. I think it's local not global. The opposite of the, if some is good more is better corrolar is, if less is good then none must be perfect. not necessarily true.

MylesBAstor · Jun 30, 2010

Mark Seaton said:
Hi Steve,

As Jeff quickly noted, the notion of "measures well" will be a different set of metrics and measurements to each designer and enthusiast. Some definitions will run quite parallel but differ on prioritization, weighting of one metric over another, or have a few different points of interest in finer details, while others will seem to be diametrically opposed. The inclusion of the qualifier "always" in the posed question effectively insures an answer of "NO!" Absolutes are rare in audio. Good guidelines and indicators are much easier to pin down without having to list a hundred exceptions.

IMO there are two primary problems which hinder further rational discussion without much more narrowing and specificity of what is being discussed. First is that most all loudspeakers defy description with a single dimension metric. There are many more dimensions of variance as compared to electronics making for a large matrix of variables. Even if we pick a set of measurements, determining how to prioritize and weight them, let alone defining what's "good enough" makes for many variables to consolidate. Secondly we have to acknowledge the degree of imperfection in real loudspeakers. It is much easier to define a flat line magnitude response into a resistor as a target for an amplifier than the magnitude response of a loudspeaker at some distance and angle. With such an array of variables, and significant imperfections or variances in most of those variables, you could easily devise a metric which results in the same deviation but dramatically different results.

Here is one conceptualization I like to use for acoustic measurements of loudspeakers when fielding such questions is to imagine the range of audible frequencies as the spectrum of light. I have come to realize I'm unlikely to have time to spend time on this myself anytime soon, so maybe Dr. Olive or others would have time to do some tinkering with this simple computer mapping (I'd love to see it)...

Start by scaling/mapping the visible spectrum of light to the 20-20kHz range of frequencies.

Set the intensity range to vary from max to min over a +/-10 to 20dB window (20-40dB).

Generate a color based on the exact frequency response input to the system as a mix of the light spectrum. (ie a subwoofer only would result in red)

Map a grid, circle or 3D sphere to a set of on and off axis measurements for visual display and interpretation.

Common spectrograms for off axis behavior do part of this for a single axis but instead display color as intensity vs. the spectral deviation I expect the above to display. The above would consolidate the horizontal display of a spectrogram into a single color. In simple terms, it gives us a familiar metric, color, by which to differentiate the 100s of different curves we can draw within a +/-2dB window. At bare minimum, I believe this representation might better convey the basic concept that all responses which meet +/- however many dB are not all equal.

Mark you make a lot of sense

In my experience, many design factors also turn out to be mutually exclusive, so it's how the designer balances these factors is related to how the product sounds. In many ways, it's what differentiates high end from mid fi, namely that every piece of equipment has that designers stamp (or every high-end products has its signature, some just taking longer to ID than others) and voicing. Be amps or speakers, I think the [better] individual products are carefully designed, tested and retested to meet the design goals; it's at this critical juncture in the design process, when the ultimate selection of best possible say passive parts (depending upon price point) becomes important.

The other word that has entered the thread is the word neutrality --a term that gets tossed around and overused--but few have a good concept of what "neutrality" on the source material actually is. Do audiophiles even want neutrality or some pleasant form of distortion? And to what do we pay allegiance, the master tape or the sound of live music? To my thinking, the master tape played back on the original reel to reel deck defines neutrality and we better have that as a reference point. For instance, how do we know if what we're trying to "make" neutral is actuallyneutral and not colored/distorted on the master tape? That's why I always liked the idea of Arnie Nudell using master tapes (esp in those days when tables were horribly colored) as his reference in the design of Infinity speakers.

Do Speakers That Measure Great Always Sound Great

Site Founder, Site Co-Owner, Administrator

[Industry Expert]

Site Founder, Site Co-Owner, Administrator

WBF Founding Member

[Industry Expert]

WBF Founding Member

[Industry Expert]

WBF Founding Member

[Industry Expert]

Site Founder, Site Co-Owner, Administrator

WBF Technical Expert (Speaker & Acoustics)

Site Founder, Site Co-Owner, Administrator

VIP/Donor

WBF Technical Expert (Speaker & Acoustics)

Site Founder, Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Well-Known Member

Site Founder, Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Well-Known Member

WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads