Audiophiles

[Rayden]

Why do people spend thousands of dollars on sound systems that don't sound hardly any different than some $300 dollar systems? I mean what type of music can you hear a difference between speakers? Im not talking crap $30 speakers but some good computer speakers and real "audiophile" speakers. I know i couldn't tell the difference. I really doubt you can hear a difference in rock music, or jazz, perhaps classical music. I always hear audiophile snobs talking about how certain speakers are crap for music. well what kind of music do you listen to that it matters?

 

[tomtomberry]

prepare the flamethrowers...

 

[Pariah]

I think spending 50 grand on speakers is rather questionable as I don't think most people could tell the difference between 75 grand speakers and 10 grand speakers. That being said you have to be deaf to not be able to hear the difference between klipsch promedias and mid level consumer HT speakers. There is definitely a point if diminishing returns, the higher you go, the less of a difference you get, but there is a night and day difference between $300 multimedia speakers and $1000 HT speakers.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

we'll you must be pretty deaf if you can't hear a difference. Seriously though, you probably didn't listen long enough. With better speakers you'll start to hear things you never heard before in tracks and you will be listening to the track the way the studio recorded it.

 

[flood]

note to self: do not flame
:-]

I'd say once you get up to a $10-15k system, its hard to justify another expense to make it sound better (diminishing returns crap). If you listen to high-end speakers, most will sound very good, but each has its own unique quality of presenting the sound. Music is all about subtleties, and each speaker and piece of electronics has its own subtle qualities.
For example:
For $300, you can get a pair of Paradigm Monitor 3's - very respectable speakers for the price.
For $500, you can get a pair of Magneplanar MMG's - also very respectable speakers for the price.
For $1600, you can get a pair of Magneplanar 1.6's - also very respectable speakers for the price.
For $2000, you can get a pair of Paradigm Reference 100's - also very respectable speakers for the price. Perhaps the cheapest speaker you can find that has no apparent flaws/shortcomings.
For $3200, you can get a pair of Sonus Faber Grand Piano's - A very fine speaker, even at this price.
Each will sound excellend, but each of these has their own unique sound. You'd have a hard time finding someone who would find a cheaper one better than a more expensive one (I picked them this way ). Some speakers are overpriced, such as the $100k+ Dynaudio Evidence. If you find a good speaker at a reasonable price, its going to make all the other speakers at the same price range look overpriced. The Monitor 3's and MMG's will make almost anything under $1000 sound like an overpriced, under-engineered piece of crap.

Most people who say they cant hear much of a difference have been listening to MP3's and dont have a good source. A sound card is in no way a good source. Having a CD source, a 24bit DAC, a good analog stage, and a good amplifier (i wont open the cable issue) will let you easily hear the difference between speakers. Also a good recording help (or one youre very familiar with)

 

[Rayden]

I haven't listened to any super expensive speakers so i don't have any personal experience to speak from, i just cant imagine there being much difference. i guess i can see how you would hear stuff on tracks you couldn't before

and another thing! i saw some 6 foot cables selling for a couple hundred dollars!!!!!!!!! what is the deal with that?!?!?!

 

[erikiksaz]

<< I know i couldn't tell the difference >>



There's the problem right there, YOU and YOUR EARS. Just because of your own shortcomings, don't denounce audiophiles as snobs.

 

[Possum]

If you really can't tell a difference between the cheaper equipment and the very expensive equipment, then just be happy that you won't have the urge to spend lots of money to improve what you hear. But other people do notice differences and are willing to spend increasing amounts of money to get sound that they feel is perfect to them, or at least better than what they had.

 

[Rayden]

they are snobs i think its funny. im not putting audiophiles down, i have just noticed that many ppl proclaim theya re audiophiles and start telling other people about certain stuff and act very snobbish. hehe

i think i would appreciate some very very nice speakers, i am just wondering what are you going to get by spending much more, and which types of music are most sensitive to better speakers?

i didn't even realize there are speakers for tens of thousands of dollars, man. i think i'd appreciate a new car than i'd appreciate those speakers


to drive all you snobbish audiophiles nuts, i just got some Z-560's and i think they sound great for music...
course i've only had some 20 year old speakers and a $90 shelf system.

 

[flood]

<< i think i would appreciate some very very nice speakers, i am just wondering what are you going to get by spending much more, and which types of music are most sensitive to better speakers? >>



Its not so much the type of music, but the accuracy of all music.



<< I know i couldn't tell the difference >>


consider yourself lucky :-]
Try going to an audio shop and listen to something youre familiar with, preffereably something acoustic.

and dont ask about cables :-]

 

[HouRman]

When you can hear the distinction between pre-pros, surround processors, and analog bypass you'll notice the difference between speakers.

I for one think you are mistaken that audiophiles are such spendrifts. All it takes is some knowledge and practice with a home theater to make a $5,000 system sound like a $50,000 system.

I've heard of how some pre pros made people hear things in songs they couldn't hear before... Like focusing on the ear piece in the singer's ear giving notes before she sings the next part of a song. (BTW, the Pre-pro is a receiver without the amp). The big difference I see is sound reproduction, a truly perfect home theater would be able to produce sound exactly the way it was recorded. Do your speakers produce voices and musical notes you sware could be real? Do the surrounds produce such crystal clear realism that you turn your head and look for the noise you heard while watching a dvd?

 

[flood]

Also, another quality of better systems is dynamics.
When you play a song, the louds will be louder and the softs will be softer on a better system. They wont compress the dynamic range like other systems will.

 

[Rob9874]

I agree with the original poster to an extent. I used to sell audio products to get me through college, and when I first started I couldn't tell the difference either. Well, after several explanations, and listening long enough, I began to hear what everyone was talking about. One article I read mentioned this one recording of a jazz pianist, you could faintly hear a distant train passing by with the right speakers. Who cares?

Something that was pointed out to me was to listen for the singer's lips forming the words (you can hear them smacking together as they sing). But is that minute detail worth the tremendous amount of money? Not to me, but who am I to say what it's worth to someone else? Also, if you were a trained musician, you'd notice if a violin section sounded too bright or muffled. Most people's ears aren't that precise, but others have that kind of talent (or curse, depending how you look at it.)

 

[HouRman]

Remends me of Hannibal eating a member of an orchestra for messing up his listening experience. I don't think my ears are tuned for hearing a mistake in a symphany orchestra... hehe

 

[RanDum72]

Sound quality is almost 99% subjective. While properly balanced system will sound betterthan a crappy one, the "perception" of sound quality will reach a certain point where it cannot sound any better. The only things that will make it more expensive are more exotic materials (which doesn't necessarily result in better sound), more time spent in improving the aesthetics of the system and just enhancing the perception of quality and "sound quality" (or marketing). A new system may sound diifferent, so there is a perception of "higher quality". Higher expectations will also heighten the perception of "sound quality" ( conditioning). People will start talking about how wonderful this system is because its expensive and he bought it ( he has to justify his expense, some will lie to themselves just to do it) even though a system far less expensive will sound the same. Its like people buying super expensive cables. Blind tests with so called "audiophiles" couldn't pinpoint a cable that makes a diffference in the sound. Might as well buy OFC 12gauge copper wires from walmart and save a bundle.

People will argue how this system is so much better, quote specs and reviews and go hysterical about it. Let them be. The bottom line is, the perception of sound is highly subjective and varies from person to person. Just go with whatever you feel (or perceive) sounds best FOR YOU, taking into consideration your budget, space and other factors such as your wife ( if you are married).

 

[Becks2k]

Give someone 2 computers, one 1.4ghz one 1.5ghz... who can tell a difference?
99% of people the only difference to them is when they say how fast it is.

Give someone 2 sets of speakers, one costing ~1000$/pair one ~4000$/pair (assuming their both good for the money) ... who can tell a difference?
99% of people the only diffderence to them is when they say how much it cost.


People get anal about their own things. I think if you read the forums here you're at least semianal about computers.

If someone here is given 2 computers, one 1.4ghz one 1.5ghz, right away on the desktop you're not gonna really notice a difference. Most games you won't be able to tell. But if you play with both for a bit you'll easly be able to tell which is faster.

I'm anal about UT... when I format, UT feels wierd until I remember i gotta get a v3 oc program and set it to 180mhz instead of the default 166 (this happens EVERy time i format ugh i'm forgetful) But anyways I can boot up ut with v3@166mhz and playf ro 5 minutes and know something is off.

Speakers all all the same way.

Just because you don't see a difference doesn't mean there isn't one. There is, you just have to look closer.



Speakers are a little harder tho than computers, cause there is no timedemo.

Oh well thats my view.

BTW I wouldn't call myself an audiophile by far, I just can see their side I guess. Tho... the amount of money some people spend on cables... thats different... THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE!!!! everyone who says there is is lying to themselves! hehe j/k

 

[Pariah]

"Give someone 2 sets of speakers, one costing ~1000$/pair one ~4000$/pair (assuming their both good for the money) ... who can tell a difference?
99% of people the only diffderence to them is when they say how much it cost."

I would agree with this, but the original poster is saying $300 speakers and $4000 speakers sound the same. I believe that a bare minimum of 95% of people, computers nuts or not, could tell the difference between a PII 300 and a P4 2.2Ghz in a "blind" test, and the same number could tell the difference between a $300 pair of speakers and a $4000 set, and pick out which one costs more. There are a number of factors that affect speakers as well. For example, a small pair of speakers that sound fine in a dorm room will be highly underpowered for a HT setup in a large living room. Also, you get out what you put in. If you're listening to 5th generation tape dubs, it doesn't matter what audio equipment you have, it will all sound like junk.

 

[tweakmm]

I know where you are coming from and I used to be the same way, but if you listen to a $4000 pair of speakers, you WILL be able to tell a difference between your $200 computer speakers unless you are deaf or an idiot.
I am going to be spending about $400 building a pair of speakers soon(comparable to probably $1000+ speakers)

 

[Workin']

Oh my goodness. Interesting. Why would you buy a Ferrari when a Hyundai will get you to the grocery store just the same? Why would you buy a 2GHz computer when a 266 will get your e-mail just as fast? Why live in a nice house when an unpainted plywood box will keep the water off and the heat in?

I don't think snobbery has a a lot to do with it, until you are in the realm of spending over $10k or so for a music-only system. Or if you are a true music lover rather than a poser hardware freak.

I know deaf people (yes, really deaf) that can tell the difference between $300 speakers and $3000 speakers. A $300 speaker doesn't have nearly the low-frequency extension or dynamic range of a $3000 speaker. And even a deaf person can feel if there is more bass or if it is played more loudly. And don't laugh, I spent some time with my cousin at Gallaudet University in Washington, DC (a university for the deaf and hearing-impaired), and they most certainly played music. God it was loud, but the point was to feel the sound.

 

[vash]

Here's a question for the audiophiles of the board: why not buy studio quality kinds of speakers for a home theater setup?

I'm not much of an audio buff (I DO know that Bose isn't what's its all cracked up to be and the $300 Sony HT receiver's only good thing is that it does do DD 5.1), but I'm trying to understand why it'll be better to buy _____ (<-- insert your favorite speaker name here) speakers instead of say, recording quality kind that you simply cannot buy from the local home theater shops (I'm not buying speakers from BB, Circuit City, Good Guys, etc).

My theory is this: if they are good enough to listen to the raw sound, before its mastered, it should be more than good enough to listen to already mastered sound such as DVDs, CDs, etc.

On a side note, I know my next audio setup for my computer will be using the SPIDF out from the Philips AE to a home theater receiver and will go to THX computer speakers (unless there are shielded non-computer specific speakers out there). I want 5.1 ability, even if I don't watch DVDs on my PC.

vash

 

[sohcrates]

<< Here's a question for the audiophiles of the board: why not buy studio quality kinds of speakers for a home theater setup? >>



the truth about that one is that studio monitors are meant to be listened to relatively closely and ALSO, they are designed for 100% accurate reporduction with absolutely no coloration or warmth....a.k.a. so the studio engineer knows EXACTLY how it is going to sound.

when a home consumer is shopping for speakers for stereo or home theater, they want something that is going to sound pleasant to their ear and not sound completely flat (although note that a flat response is desirable...yet SOUNDING flat is not)

i know two audiophiles that are never satisfied (such is the definition of an audiphile)...they also spend just about everything they make on equipment and live in pretty crappy houses because of it....

though i also know a third guy who dropped about 6K into his all tube setup with some 1970's era electrostats and i am absolutely blown away every time i listen to jazz and vocals on his system....but i agree that there's a limit of no return on your investment....

ALSO, room treatments will make more of a difference than better speakers will!! people forget this!

 

[CocaCola5]

The natural wood cabinets of some of these speakers are very beautiful. Alone worth it if you have the$$.

 

[CocaCola5]

<< Here's a question for the audiophiles of the board: why not buy studio quality kinds of speakers for a home theater setup?

I'm not much of an audio buff (I DO know that Bose isn't what's its all cracked up to be and the $300 Sony HT receiver's only good thing is that it does do DD 5.1), but I'm trying to understand why it'll be better to buy _____ (<-- insert your favorite speaker name here) speakers instead of say, recording quality kind that you simply cannot buy from the local home theater shops (I'm not buying speakers from BB, Circuit City, Good Guys, etc).

My theory is this: if they are good enough to listen to the raw sound, before its mastered, it should be more than good enough to listen to already mastered sound such as DVDs, CDs, etc.

On a side note, I know my next audio setup for my computer will be using the SPIDF out from the Philips AE to a home theater receiver and will go to THX computer speakers (unless there are shielded non-computer specific speakers out there). I want 5.1 ability, even if I don't watch DVDs on my PC.

vash >>





I am not a studio expert but these speaker are not necessarily better sounding than "consumer" speakers. You have to consider the role of a monitor, they are used to detect sonic or detail shifts in the music. Because of this, the studio tend to lean towards "analytical" sounding speakers because they perform this job more efficent. Does this mean they sound better, not really. However though, monitors are usually better built and are of a set standard unlike most consumer speakers.

Ed: I disagree about monitors being more accurate. Studios want the most detailed speaker for their monitors(detailed is not necessarily the same as accuracy). For accuracy though, they have huge floor standing systems they use.

 

[Yoshi]

I'm not going to say everyone should go out and buy speakers that cost 10's of thousands of dollars, but there is most certainly a difference between even the very best computer speakers and reasonably priced home speakers. I bought a the Klipsch Promedia 2.1 speaker set for my girlfriends computer, those things can't hold a candle to the Polk Audio speakers hooked to my home stereo system. The Polks have a much flatter and smoother sound not to mention a much wider and deeper soundstage. Besides, anything is better than the bloated fart bass that comes from the Promedia subwoofer!

 

[GoodRevrnd]

I can kind of relate to what Rayden is saying. I used to have a nice pair of Warfdale speakers (nothing great, but do produce some nice sound) that I used all the time. I had to take them down for a while at one point and never put them back up. I relied on a minisystem and my computer setup which all along I thought sounded pretty good. I just moved and hooked those Warfdale's back up, and daaaaamn. I never realized how crystal-clear those suckers are! Even if the bass is pretty weak on these speakers, the higher ranges sound absolutely great and a little equalization makes the bass at least acceptable. All the prior stuff just sounded flat and muddled compared to these. The Warfdales add many many more layers to the music you listen to, and when I'm seriously listening to music various layers is one of the things I listen for and appreciate most.

The other major difference I've noticed between the minisystems/multimedia systems and home theater is that home theater systems are able to hold pure/quality sound at high volume levels MUCH better than the mini/multimedia stuff, which tend to drop off in quality fairly quickly.