|
Post by Stratmangler on Oct 15, 2015 16:36:45 GMT
I had the pleasure recently of listening to a friend's set of Quad ESL57s. I thought that they sounded lovely, but they gave their own impression of what was on the recording. They're not strictly accurate. They don't do bass, and they're noticeably rolled off at the other end. They're a bit cuddly sounding.
Now I've heard many speakers that don't do proper bass, but in isolation they've generally sounded pretty good and you don't really notice the lack of low end. One thing they all have in common is high frequency extension, and this is vital to reproducing the harmonics produced by instruments that are considered to be predominantly bass instruments. Play bottom E on a bass guitar with your fingers and there's an obvious low frequency fundamental at around 40Hz, but there are a multitude of upward harmonic frequencies too, and these frequencies contain the attack information. Pluck the string a touch harder, and the sound changes. Most of the changes occur in the upper registers. Change to using a pick and the sound changes again, and once again the changes are mainly in the upper registers. I think that it's these high frequencies that contain the attack element to the sound envelope. If the speaker can reproduce the attack element reasonably accurately then the brain compensates for the lack of low end to some degree, and you don't fully notice the lack of low end.
This same friend mentioned once had a set of Quad ESL63s, and I've heard them with and without a supertweeter. Without supertweeter they sounded lovely, but they gave their own impression of what was on the recording. They were not strictly accurate. They didn't do bass, and they were noticeably rolled off at the other end. They were a bit cuddly sounding. With supertweeter they sounded phenomenal, with plenty of snap and attack, and the lack of real low end wasn't an issue.
Now my friend has said that folk who use speakers like the Quad ESLs end up listening to music that plays to the strengths of the speaker, and that effectively dictates what Quad lovers play. I find the concept of playing material because it makes the hifi sound good alien - it's always music first, and the system is never a consideration.
What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Oct 15, 2015 16:57:09 GMT
I know exactly what you mean about the Quad's strengths and weaknesses. When a friend was evaluating the 989s we found the same thing: spectacular on some music but sadly missing the point with much rock or electronic music. I also find small speakers disappointing because I don't want to miss the fundamental and I don't want my brain fooled into thinking there is deep bass through frequency doubling and other such tricks.
I guess I subscribe to the American view on engines: "there's no substitute for cubes", and it's the same for speakers. My musical tastes are eclectic enough that I need a system that plays all music equally well. While that's not strictly achievable, I certainly do not want speakers that determine my musical choices.
|
|
|
Post by speedysteve on Oct 15, 2015 17:40:10 GMT
No. System does all music very nicely.
It used to be something that was creeping up on me when I had less capable speakers but its banished for good now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2015 17:52:53 GMT
Hi Strat A very good question and one which really does hit home again the room / speaker interface issue. A great many people buy with the eyes only to find when they get home it sure doesn't reproduce how the auditioned them in the dealers demonstration rooms. Virtually all speakers are compromises as even the so called very best cannot perform the impossible, however we can with care positioning, amplifier selection and room treatments obtain great results with perseverance. Quad's have many strengths and many admirers, though as you have observed they cannot produce that PMC/ATC/Wilson wall of sound, controversy the Quad's reproductions of voices, choirs, acoustic instruments can be quite haunting (again if partnered correctly) If you take Jerry for example, his MBL demonstrate a complete different soundscape to that of the quads quite unique in fact, while say John's open baffles have a totally different view of the music they present, if you throw in Steves big five way horns you have another q uite different presentation.
Everyone prefers something different, and to an extent the choice of music does play a part in which speaker people choose without question.
However still the biggest factor by far is the room and speaker interface, I have listened to system well in six figures sounding OK and and well sorted £5K systems sounding musically engaging.
However those looking for realistic reproduction of scale will need to looking at larger drivers, more cabinet volume, quality amplification (whether 200W+ of high grade solid state or that very special 11W of super SET which ever way you roll) plus the all important room to allow your speaker of choice to well and truly breathe.
There are the odd exceptions, but generally these are higher in cost than the usual suspects (imho)
Though I must admit I thought you could obtain 'b' on 5 string bass guitar which was nearer 31Hz which almost qualifies for sub bass which is generally recognized as 30Hz and below. My son loves to 'show' me how much air he can move with his 'playing' when he visits during his Uni holidays
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 15, 2015 18:01:50 GMT
I guess when it comes to our systems we all make different compromises depending on what we like to listen too and our speaker choice is a big part of this Some people like hearing a great mid with a rolled off top and not so deep bass. I think a lot of modern speakers trick people into thinking they are hearing good bass for example. I do think speakers and the room they are in have the biggest effect on the sound.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2015 18:25:45 GMT
I know some people that exclusivly listern to well recorded female solo artist cos it makes their Midrange sound wonderful
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Oct 15, 2015 18:46:21 GMT
I know some people that exclusivly listern to well recorded female solo artist cos it makes their Midrange sound wonderful That's the kind of insanity that I was alluding to
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Oct 15, 2015 18:51:52 GMT
IF they just happen to like that music and that music only, then their choice of speakers may be superbly focussed on their needs. However, if they suddenly develop a liking for trance, they're going to have to go back to basics.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2015 19:03:06 GMT
No sudden development with me btw. It's been with me since it was introduced into the UK in the early 90's just that i never mentioned it to anyone till recently... Back to basics is well cool.
I maybe as guilty as some because I could never get prog to sound anygood on anything, however i dearly love my very first proper amp & Turntable, The music i solely listern to sounds good on it hence back to sq one. However i would never suddenly develop a liking for a music because it makes my stereo sound better.
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Oct 15, 2015 19:16:12 GMT
Someone listening to well recorded female vocal music just because they happen to like it exclusively is highly improbable. It has to be the system strengths dictating what gets played, which is the polar opposite of the approach I take. The music comes first, the playback equipment shouldn't matter too much as long as it's good enough to get the tune across.
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 15, 2015 19:43:01 GMT
There is a price to be paid for transparency and resolution It will get you the highs of well recorded music but also give you the lows of poorly recorded music. I tend to be more on the side of music first rather than system first but it is a difficult balance to thread
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Oct 15, 2015 22:00:17 GMT
I don't think I've ever met anyone who doesn't listen to the music they like because it sounds bad on their speakers. Can't say I've ever actually met any of the legendary people that we hear about who only listen to music they don't like because it makes their gear sound good either. I've met a few who have spent a fair bit of cash on a system who never use it for more than about 20 minutes at a time, though. I also know a lot of people who love music and manage to enjoy it despite only having very modest means of playing it.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Oct 15, 2015 22:36:28 GMT
Can't say I've ever actually met any of the legendary people that we hear about who only listen to music they don't like because it makes their gear sound good either. I will have to correct myself here because a few hifi dealers I met in the eighties might have fallen into that category!
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Oct 16, 2015 6:26:52 GMT
They're not strictly accurate. Woo - have I got news for you! - no speaker is strictly accurate. And I tend to turn your question around - I think people choose their speakers to suit the music they like, not t'other way around. Quads are astonishing on some music, and if you like that sort of music then why not have Quads and be astonished by it? Yes, it does limit musical exploration - and personally I do like to explore - but quite a few folks are more than happy playing what they know they like. Every component and system has its strengths and weaknesses - good at some things, weaker at others. I recall a friend who is heavily into bass-led slammy dance music bringing a revamped vintage Perreaux amp round - it was a real brute of an amp - my god, I didn't know my MBLs could do slam like that - it was awesome, and his dance tracks sounded amazing if probably deafness inducing. But put classical on and it was unbearably screechy at the top end. Horses for courses. All systems are like that to a significant extent, imo, try as we might to kid ourselves otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 16, 2015 6:30:59 GMT
One of my favourite albums Black Clouds and Silver Linings is pretty badly recorded and as my front end gets better I just hear how poor the recording is rather then enjoying the music. I have to listen to it on my second system to actually enjoy it The point is if I was to hear it for the first time on high resolution system I would of never got into the album so yes I do think our systems can effect what will listen to. I am lucky I can easily connect in the second system to the Speakers. It will not reach the highs of what I have but also does not reveal the lows
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Oct 16, 2015 6:48:41 GMT
I think Jerry has got it pretty much spot on, but I do like the OP's explanation and examples of why super tweeters do what they do to bass.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2015 10:55:38 GMT
Slightly off topic a tad
What i dont understand is cuckoo's that utterly refuse to use tone controls but would rather listern to dreadfully recorded music when all these recording would need is a tad of treble lift.When not using the tone controls switch to direct for flat responce again. But o no the lord flat earth would not allow this sacrilegious behaviour.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Oct 16, 2015 12:16:39 GMT
Opinions differ, Andr'e, but in my opinion you can't sprinkle glitter on a turd. I just don't think that tone controls help. In my case, it's academic anyway as I have no tone controls!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2015 12:43:21 GMT
They help immensely imho. infact i do believe that Jerry adds a bit of sound shaping at times
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2015 12:55:54 GMT
Arh I see we are back to turd polishing again
|
|