Studio Monitors vs Home Speakers

[PHC1]

Here is a perfect example of the one speaker that was extremely popular with recording studios from the 70's on. The Yamaha HS8. It was the HS7 since the 70s until upgraded to HS8.

For $399, it should be the one of the most accurate and flattest speakers except the steep drop in the top end which in all probability would cause the mix to sound very HOT up top on speakers that have a more linear tweeter response and for folks who can still hear past 12KHz. But for $369, it should be an audiophile's dream?

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by BuffaloBill

I am glad to see a respected member finally admit this. The midrange is the most recognizable sound by the ear and defines the tonal character of what we hear. Paul Klipsch said "the midrange is where we live". To that end, horn and transmission line designs produce the cleanest (less distortion) and most natural midrange sound as compared to bass reflex designs..

Not only that but age takes away a good chunk from the top as well as notching out our hearing in the presence/voice region with severe notch filtering of 30db in some cases. Which for the most part would make this whole discussion we are having ridiculous.

[BuffaloBill]

Originally Posted by PHC1

If the speaker sounds good to your ears, what is the difference how accurate it really is?

I agree, many speaker designers are counting on this.

[Kal Rubinson]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Ok but here are the words of a fellow reviewer from Stereophile. Do not all reviewers view the topic of speaker musicality in a similar light?

No, they/we do not. We differ in our personal philosophies, subjective opinions and, probably, perceptions, as well.

I'd love to hear your thoughts then.

You got 'em.

[Kal Rubinson]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Peter Thomas may say what he likes of course but the graph shows something different. All speakers sound different. If the speaker sounds good to your ears, what is the difference how accurate it really is?

That graph confirms pretty much what I heard.

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson

No, they/we do not. We differ in our personal philosophies, subjective opinions and, probably, perceptions, as well.

You got 'em.

Thanks, I appreciate your input.

[Kal Rubinson]

Originally Posted by BuffaloBill

I am glad to see a respected member finally admit this. The midrange is the most recognizable sound by the ear and defines the tonal character of what we hear. Paul Klipsch said "the midrange is where we live".

Yes, it defines much of what is communicated by speech and, pretty much throughout vertebrates, there is a good match between conspecific vocalization and auditory transduction frequency responses. For music, however, we need more than the melody and the lower and upper frequencies are essential for the harmony.

To that end, horn and transmission line designs produce the cleanest (less distortion) and most natural midrange sound as compared to bass reflex designs..

Often asserted but where is that proven?

[PHC1]

Would be worthwhile to mention in this coversation:

"One of the great imponderables in hi-fi is how much the vibrations of a dynamic loudspeaker's cabinet walls contribute to its overall sound quality.

Studies by William Stevens in the mid-1970s showed that, with some speakers, the acoustic output of the enclosure could be almost as much as that from the drive-units.

Since then, responsible speaker designers have worked hard either to damp cabinet vibrations or to shift them to higher frequencies where their effect on the music will be less deleterious.


The problem has been that, without hideously expensive laser interferometry setups or high-quality calibrated accelerometers, plus the appropriate computer software to analyze the bending and flexing behavior of the cabinet panels, the engineer trying to minimize cabinet resonances has to pretty much shoot in the dark."

Further reading--- https://www.stereophile.com/features/806/index.html

[BuffaloBill]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Since then, responsible speaker designers have worked hard either to damp cabinet vibrations or to shift them to higher frequencies where their effect on the music will be less deleterious.

or 1) channel the strong rear acoustic energy out of the cabinet through a transmission port or 2) greatly reduce the excursion of the drivers by employing more efficient horn technology

[Kal Rubinson]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Would be worthwhile to mention in this coversation:

The problem has been that, without hideously expensive laser interferometry setups or high-quality calibrated accelerometers, plus the appropriate computer software to analyze the bending and flexing behavior of the cabinet panels, the engineer trying to minimize cabinet resonances has to pretty much shoot in the dark."

Further reading--- https://www.stereophile.com/features/806/index.html

That was 25 years ago. These devices are readily available today.