[Audio Empire]

On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:31:20 -0800, Kele wrote
(in article ):

On Mar 11, 5:27=A0pm, KH wrote:
On 3/11/2011 12:14 PM, Doug McDonald wrote:

But, in an off-topic note ... let's talk speakers. Now there are real
differences!

I wonder why they are not more discussed!


About your speakers discussion - personal preference=85
A friend of thirty years has always preferred a system=92s sound that,
to me, is absolutely too bright and steely. I don=92t live near him
now, but found he just replaced his speakers with Klipsch. No offense
to Klipsch, but to me they will be another bright speaker IMO.
Apparently, my friend hears with rolled off highs compared to me. And
compared to me, my brother thinks my system is a little bright; he
prefers what I feel is too plump & mellow of a sound profile. It=92s
pretty interesting. I have a feeling that generally woman do not like
bright sounding stereo systems. People really are tuned differently.
Speakers, having a huge impact on the overall sound of a stereo
system, are something no one can choose for someone else. I listened
to a pair of reviewer-raved speakers in a high end stereo salon.
Where=92s the base!? The speakers measures nearly flat; should be
correct then? OMG is my hearing skewed!? Is that what I should
strive for!? The treble energy heard from a LIVE instrument isn=92t the
same as global boosted treble. Sometimes I think that=92s what bothers
me with some =93bright=94 speakers. That and slow base.


All due respect, I don't think it's a hearing issue. I haven't found that
rolled-off high-frequency hearing has anything whatsoever to do with
someone's preference for "brightness". I know that a lot of people associate
brightness with highs above 10 KHz, but it really isn't. The brightness
region is between 5 and 8 KHz, and most folks can hear those frequencies just
fine. The people I have known who liked things very bright and steely seem to
me to be associating that sound with eliciting more detail from the music.
Obviously, many don't agree, but if that's what they think real music sounds
like (or even if it's what they WANT real music to sound like), that's their
prerogative, I guess.

The "goals" of high-fidelity have changed a lot since its inception.
Originally, it was "the closest approach to the original sound". Now it's
more "Whatever sounds good to me." That's fine too, but if one's goal is the
former, rather than the latter, then one must constantly "re-calibrate one's
ears" to the reality of real music played in real space. If one does that,
one can generally tell when one's stereo system has wandered too far afield
in one direction or the other. I strongly suggest to audiophiles that they
hear as much real, live, unamplified music as possible. Now, I'm not saying
that some individuals, after undertaking such an exercise, won't still prefer
the overly bright or overly bottom-heavy and boomy sound of their own systems
over the reality of a live performance, and that's fine. But if your goal is
really "high-fidelity", an occasional reality check will help you avoid the
excesses that characterize a lot of stereo systems these days (again unless
of course, you WANT those excesses).