Mark Levinson on today’s audio industry

[Mike Lavigne]

Exotic Cabinet materials are a gimmick. Some of the worst speaker systems I’ve heard use the most exotic and expensive materials.

i respect as a fan of vintage speakers that you feel that way. i just don't think it's so simple as that.

my speakers cabinets are built from hundreds of layers of Baltic Birch. owned 2 different sets like that for that last 20 years. love them. my Kharma Exquisite 1D's from 2001 were built from large slabs of resin, glued together, with wood cometic shoulders. sounded very natural.

i've heard systems i enjoyed with speakers built from all sorts of materials. and plenty of systems built with exotic material i did not like. or wood cabinet speakers where i did not care for the system.

i would not agree that universally exotic material speaker cabinets are a gimmick. but clearly some maybe are that way.

i do overall prefer ceramic mid range drivers to paper mid range drivers. and generally exotic material drivers can be less natural than ceramic, or paper to my ears. likely driver materials are more germane to the sound than the cabinet material.

 

[Kingrex]

Remember the Rockport fiasco where someone got a speaker with some finish blemishes. The story of the cabinet and the detail that went into it, as well as the drivers and crossover parts are used as a validation that your getting the best speaker. Its a piece of art. Price is a reflection of the effort and materials and tools required to manufacture the component. It's all over this forum. Look at any thread and the first thing members use as validation someone has the best sounding devices is the esoteric and high prices individual components. Cost of materials is the only absolute parameter in audio equipment you can't question. How its sounds is always debatable. So you sell the parts and effort to capitalize on the pricing structure.

 

[Ron Resnick]

i respect as a fan of vintage speakers that you feel that way. i just don't think it's so simple as that.

+1

 

[Elliot G.]

agree completely that it all matters. and that realism ought to be the goal. are speakers designed where realism in not a goal?

in my post i meant to say that using exotic materials and extreme sizes and weights are debatable.

this requires the giant assumption of what the goals are or should be. Assuming that everyone actually has a goal or that their goal is one you like is a huge leap of fate.
My problem with much of the Industry is what exactly are their goals? What is the target? How can High End Magazines have multiple reference systems from multiple reviewers and not defined goal other than vague words like Organic, Musical, Natural and realism and yet no one agrees what they mean.
Searching for mysteries without any clues....thanks Mr. Seger

 

[Ron Resnick]

Relatedly I always find interesting the question of Magnepan on this topic. Magnepan has always been a value oriented product, and wood is not expensive to fabricate the Magnepan frame out of.

Magnepan could affix the planar magnetic panels and ribbon driver to a fantastically heavy aluminum frame or to a steel frame. Yes, it would be significantly more expensive than the wood frame. But please put the question of cost to one side.

The interesting question to me is this: many, many people over the decades think Magnepan loudspeakers with their wood frames sound good. How do we know a heroically heavy metal frame wouldn't alter the sound in a deleterious way? The wood frame affects the sound differently than a metal frame would affect the sound.

There's just no way to know which sound each one of us would prefer. Perhaps it is partly the wood frame itself which gives Magnepan its characteristically natural and slightly warm-balanced sound?

The wood frame, which is far less expensive than a metal frame, might very well be the frame material that sounds better on this particular loudspeaker.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

this requires the giant assumption of what the goals are or should be.

or what realism means exactly?

Assuming that everyone actually has a goal or that their goal is one you like is a huge leap of fate.

my guess is that in one form or fashion all speaker designers do target realism. but maybe they boil it down to particular measurable things of some sort which works for them. but outputting accurately what is input is going to be the goal and what sounds right. which will relate to what they hear.

My problem with much of the Industry is what exactly are their goals? What is the target? How can High End Magazines have multiple reference systems from multiple reviewers and not defined goal other than vague words like Organic, Musical, Natural and realism and yet no one agrees what they mean.
Searching for mysteries without any clues....thanks Mr. Seger

the marketing-speak and reviewer-speak will always vary for our entertainment.

 

[Elliot G.]

my guess is that in one form or fashion all speaker designers do target realism. but maybe they boil it down to particular measurable things of some sort which works for them. but outputting accurately what is input is going to be the goal and what sounds right. which will relate to what they hear.

perhaps , however much of what's out there sounds nothing the same or IMO even resembles the sound of realism. But alas this is the stickler..what is realism?
Is the goal live music? is the goal the mic feed? is the goal whatever I like, is the goal a rock show in a football stadium, is the goal a solo violin at Carnegie Hall? is the goal a night club? No one ever seems to ask these questions and so it's become "whatever" so if it is whatever then why should anyone care what's "organic, natural etc"

Are we satisfied with say Frozen Pizza? it is Pizza afterall. I'm sure the company was trying to make Pizza!

 

[Elliot G.]

Relatedly I always find interesting the question of Magnepan on this topic. Magnepan has always been a value oriented product, and wood is not expensive to fabricate the Magnepan frame out of.

Magnepan could affix the planar magnetic panels and ribbon driver to a fantastically heavy aluminum frame or to a steel frame. Yes, it would be significantly more expensive than the wood frame. But please put the question of cost to one side.

The interesting question to me is this: many, many people over the decades think Magnepan loudspeakers with their wood frames sound good. How do we know a heroically heavy metal frame wouldn't alter the sound in a deleterious way? The wood frame affects the sound differently than a metal frame would affect the sound.

There's just no way to know which sound each one of us would prefer. Perhaps it is partly the wood frame itself which gives Magnepan is characteristically natural and slightly warm-balanced sound?

The wood frame, which is far less expensive than a metal frame, might very well be the frame material that sounds better on this particular loudspeaker.

These are good questions. Sadly Jim Winey has passed and can't reply. I do think that people have to think about the expertise and the availability of differing materials that are available to any company at anytime versus the cost of change. These are businesses that are trying to make a profit . In this case hypothetically if they had the machinery to make wood frames, the availability of the wood they like and they liked the look and feel of wood why should they drop everything and invest large funds into buying metal or buying the machining to make metal which y its nature would dramatically effect the pricing of a very good selling product a the time?

 

[MarkusBarkus]

...a dealer I know told me he had a customer looking for a system, who showed up with a Maria Callas album and told him: I don't care what anything else sounds like. This album has to sound great.

I guess you gotta admire a guy who knows what he likes.

 

[Al M.]

i respect as a fan of vintage speakers that you feel that way. i just don't think it's so simple as that.

my speakers cabinets are built from hundreds of layers of Baltic Birch.

Mine too!

 

[microstrip]

It was interesting to read about Richard Vandersteen's extremely knowledgeable and experienced views on loudspeaker design. But it overstates the case to describe even those extremely knowledgeable and experienced opinions as "the truth."

Surely. But I am sure that many people will pick a small part of the interview that fits his own opinions and consider him as a his reference, ignoring those they do not like.

Just for fun I quote one of his more challenging points :

""Plus, Vandersteen also reveals that the often-praised wide “sweet spot” of multi-driver designs is actually a warning sign.

“If you had a sweet spot that was four feet wide, that’s your first indication that you’re using something low resolution,” Vandersteen explains.

“The resolution isn’t there to make it really special at that one spot.”

This insight challenges the claims of many high-end brands that promote wide sweet spots as a good thing, when it might actually be hiding poor performance.

I have owned his speakers long ago. They were very good value for money, as many others. But IMO such interview would probably have some value 20 years ago, much less interesting and true today.

 

[JiminGa]

Remember the Rockport fiasco where someone got a speaker with some finish blemishes. The story of the cabinet and the detail that went into it, as well as the drivers and crossover parts are used as a validation that your getting the best speaker. Its a piece of art. Price is a reflection of the effort and materials and tools required to manufacture the component. It's all over this forum. Look at any thread and the first thing members use as validation someone has the best sounding devices is the esoteric and high prices individual components. Cost of materials is the only absolute parameter in audio equipment you can't question. How its sounds is always debatable. So you sell the parts and effort to capitalize on the pricing structure.

or what realism means exactly?

my guess is that in one form or fashion all speaker designers do target realism. but maybe they boil it down to particular measurable things of some sort which works for them. but outputting accurately what is input is going to be the goal and what sounds right. which will relate to what they hear.

the marketing-speak and reviewer-speak will always vary for our entertainment.

I think there are speaker manufacturers who target things other than realism. If you’re trying to make money you cater to the desires of your customers and that is not always or even usually “realism” in my observation/opinion. Wish it were.

 

[microstrip]

“So we see today heroic, I mean, just unbelievable amounts of money spent on cabinets, the speaker cabinets. But once they’re silent, they’re silent. There’s no need to throw any more money at them.” he said.
“It isn’t going to make the speaker any better. It’s just going to make it more expensive. It might make it prettier, but it’s not going to make it perform better.” RV

Maybe he'll start a trend. As designers come closer to retirement they do a 'tell-all' interview in an e-zine. I suppose an earbud and headphone site felt comfortable with such an article from a major speaker manufacturer -- not likely to offend their other advertisers.

"But once they’re silent, they’re silent." - I am also quoting.

What is exactly meant by a silent box?

I can't understand how people favoring horns can accept such childish argument. It reduces horns to a mathematical exercise, ignoring decades of expertise with all kind of materials, old and modern.

 

[jeff1225]

i respect as a fan of vintage speakers that you feel that way. i just don't think it's so simple as that.

my speakers cabinets are built from hundreds of layers of Baltic Birch. owned 2 different sets like that for that last 20 years. love them. my Kharma Exquisite 1D's from 2001 were built from large slabs of resin, glued together, with wood cometic shoulders. sounded very natural.

i've heard systems i enjoyed with speakers built from all sorts of materials. and plenty of systems built with exotic material i did not like. or wood cabinet speakers where i did not care for the system.

i would not agree that universally exotic material speaker cabinets are a gimmick. but clearly some maybe are that way.

i do overall prefer ceramic mid range drivers to paper mid range drivers. and generally exotic material drivers can be less natural than ceramic, or paper to my ears. likely driver materials are more germane to the sound than the cabinet material.

Mike,
Although I currently own vintage speakers, they are the only pair of vintage speakers I’ve owned in 30 years of audio. While I’m no engineer, my ears have shown me that just because a speaker uses exotic materials such as aluminum, resins, and or fiberglass, it doesn’t necessarily mean they will sound better. I believe they are primarily used as a marketing differentiator.

I believe your current speakers, which I think are fantastic, would be just as successful with MDF.

 

[microstrip]

I think there are speaker manufacturers who target things other than realism. If you’re trying to make money you cater to the desires of your customers and that is not always or even usually “realism” in my observation/opinion. Wish it were.

Yes. Wise manufacturers target to listener enjoyment and use realism for marketing.

It is impossible to find significant groups of people having the same close perception of realism, except if they are conditioned by the same faith.

We are addressing sound reproduction. IMO if we want realism we should go to a concert ... But surely maximizing enjoyment incorporates some aspects of realism, such as freedom of artifacts and accentuation of some real aspects.

 

[bonzo75]

i respect as a fan of vintage speakers that you feel that way. i just don't think it's so simple as that.

my speakers cabinets are built from hundreds of layers of Baltic Birch.

The good vintage speakers today use their drivers and change their cabinets. Baltic birch are often used with Altec including sand filled cabinets.

 

[bonzo75]

I actually do not think it is debatable. Most would agree that cabinet and materials design and levels of build quality are very much relevant for sound. To a large degree, they do determine the sound along with some other design choices. It all matters. What is debatable, IMO, is what choices sound the most realistic and whether or not realism is even the goal.

This is not the debate. Richard V is not saying it does not matter to sound, he is saying after a certain point it does not matter to sound and just becomes justification for a higher price

 

[jeff1225]

The good vintage speakers today use their drivers and change their cabinets. Baltic birch are often used with Altec including sand filled cabinets.

Baltic birch is not an exotic material.

 

[microstrip]

Mike,
Although I currently own vintage speakers, they are the only pair of vintage speakers I’ve owned in 30 years of audio. While I’m no engineer, my ears have shown me that just because a speaker uses exotic materials such as aluminum, resins, and or fiberglass, it doesn’t necessarily mean they will sound better.

Ok, we should respect your ears and opinion.

I believe they are primarily used as a marketing differentiator.

If you consider that designer and consumers sound preference are a marketing differentiator I can agree. As written by a famous high-end designer, he designs his products to his preferred target sound, expecting that some people will share his preference.

And surely materials are easier to promote in marketing than emotions or natural sound, that are equal to everyone.

It seems to me we have some divergence on primarily and secondarily.

I believe your current speakers, which I think are fantastic, would be just as successful with MDF.

I will have to leave this hard question to Mike ...

 

[microstrip]

Baltic birch is not an exotic material.

Yes, only some specific baltic birch is an exotic material. Particularly if its unobtainium.

At some point we will have to define what is an exotic material. Should it be simply anything that is not common MDF or plywood?