When it comes to evaluating audio products not even professional reviewers agree on whether there should be an objective or subjective standard. A couple of recent posts by well-respected audio wonks — who happen to be friends with each other — concisely lay out the arguments on both sides.
Some people believe science can tell them what sounds good. Brent Butterworth at Sound + Vision just published a really nice primer on sound measurement and why it matters. In his view the perfect speaker has “flat sound” meaning it reproduces tones at the same level across the across the spectrum of audible sound frequencies. In other words they output exactly what you put into them. (Note: Your headphones should NOT have flat response.) Using just a microphone and software you can test a product and know its quality. Flat speakers are better because they reproduce sound that is objectively true to a recording.
Fine, but there’s no soul in that position — at least according to a post by Steve Guttenberg at The Audiophiliac. Speakers that sound good just freaking sound good. Guttenberg says he’s heard plenty of sound systems designed by engineers with their newfangled measurement tools and been very disappointed with the results. Something that objectively measures up might sound terrible just as something can sound good because of its imperfections. Humans are a finicky bunch.
So what’s it gonna be? Science or soul? Check out the posts and decide for yourself. [Sound + Vision & The Audiophiliac; Image: Flickr]
TSH
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 10:52 AMAt the pricepoint where this kind of stuff actually matters (i.e. speakers worth $10,000+) you’d be an idiot to spend your money without listening to the product first. At that point, IMHO each individual should make their choice based on what sounds good to them. If they can’t tell the difference and they want to trust the advice (and spend the extra cash) on a “technically superior” sound, that’s up to them. Not something I’d choose to do, though!
Greg
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 2:16 PMAfter reading the two articles, Steve Guttenburg comes across as the typical holier than thou, my ears are better than yours, audio snob that populate most audio publications.
Judging a speaker’s performance should be a very straightfoward job. Does it reproduce the sound the audio engineer heard in the studio? Who gives a crap if a speaker isn’t doing this and still “sounds good”, it’s failing its sole purpose – faithful reproduction of sound. Clearly Guttenburg likes certain frequencies to be accuentated which is the job of an equalizer, not a speaker.
Surely all speakers reviews should just have a mic in front of the speakers (in a properly setup room) and compare the output waveform to the source waveform, the smaller the difference, the better the speaker – no ears required. But according to Guttenburg, only he and these other “golden ears” can tell you whether it sounds good … what a total douche.
Gismon
Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 4:07 PMThat is your opinion and nothing more. Speaker manufacturers tend to target their products at humans, not microphones.
Kris
Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 5:24 PMWell, I would say flat speakers are better, however, the audio source may need to be adjusted to equalize the sound to your liking.
Matt L
Friday, October 7, 2011 at 1:28 PMThe problem is, most audiophiles werent in the room when the original sound was recorded. They just play their symphony and compare it to the first time they heard said symphony. They have no idea what true representation sounds like.
history
Sunday, October 9, 2011 at 3:25 PMActually that assumption is right, i just could not make myself write that speakers that measure wrong in simple tasks can have good musical ability.