Forget measurements - you hear music - not measurements Sorry mate, but you lost me there. You do understand the difference between listening to music and listening to music reproduction, right? If you do, you then must agree with me that what will determine how real and enjoyable our experience will be is how accurate the system that reproduce it. It is very simple you know. If we cant agree on that, I dont see the point of any further discussion. |
Bill, I agree with your view measurements should only be used as a guide & not determinate of what sounds good to your ears, and so conversely disagree with how Usermanual framed up his above comment. As you said listening is the ultimate lipmus test. That said lol I was wondering when your commentary was going to turn into an advertisement for DIY and aLenehan speakers :D. You, like Mbovaird have a long history of evangelizing about your beloved Lenehans on SNA and other forums & being in the DIY camp. Everyone has a natural bias toward thier own gear. Nothing wrong with that until it practically becomes a religion. One form of dogmatism is not cured by another. |
Melbguy - I ask you to look at what I said.
I acknowledged even for products I am positive towards some don't like them, and was very concerned some were not saying what they thought because they were intimidated by people like me.
These days I try very hard to be even handed and get people to forget what those positive or negative towards a bit of gear think.
Regarding this thread I pointed out I prefer the Tannoy, but deliberately refrained saying why. I even pointed out my view meant nothing. You must hear them and make up your own mind.
I really do feel, compared to some in this thread, I have been very fair. The last post I did was a distillation of many years experience listening to gear. I pointed to a review you never see, one where one person pans a product, and another is the exact opposite to get the point across.
To be blunt I believe my comments were very neutral and unbiased.
Thanks
Bill |
Bill, equally go back and re-read my comments. I agreed with some of what you said. I further acknowledge you have a lot of experience in audio & enjoy many of your contributions, but when your posts inevitably return to how Lenehan speakers are equal to, if not the best sounding speakers in the world, and that tubes and diy gear beats $30 and $40k Vitus, Dartzeel etc, I lose interest and walk away. Its like cars..you can get a top engineer and modify a Subaru as much as you want..it will never be a Porsche. It will just be a very good Subaru. I pointed to a familiar theme in most, if not all of your posts going back several years promoting Lenehan. Here are some examples on a quick skim through.. Its all in how you react to what you hear. Check out the following review of exactly the same speaker to see what I mean:
www.stereomojo BTW they were my personal speakers that were reviewed and I obviously side with the speaker builder. Just as an aside those speakers are quite famous here in Australia, with many like me liking them a lot. But it wasn't until that review was published quite a few people came out of the woodwork saying they sided with the Audio Engineer, but were intimidated by the loyal following it had and were afraid to say anything. |
Melbguy,
You said "and that tubes and diy gear beats $30 and $40k Vitus, Dartzeel etc, I lose interest and walk away. Its like cars..you can get a top engineer and modify a Subaru as much as you want..it will never be a Porsche. It will just be a very good Subaru"
This is not a valid comparison. Audio is for the most part a very subjective hobby. This is not like comparing cars where objective benchmarks can be used to quantify performance (0-60 mph time, braking time etc.). Many people can indeed prefer a $1000 tube amp or as you derisively refer to as diy gear, to a $40,000 Vitus or Dartzeel gear.
That does not make their choice wrong or any less valid. If Bill feels strongly about Lenehan audio speakers and wants to promote them, why is that seen as a problem? He thinks they are the best as per his ears and his taste in sound reproduction.
The only Magico speaker I have heard is the S5 -- it was a dealer demo and I thought the speaker was awesome.
You & Usermanual are just hellbent on trying to discredit people who do not say that the Magicos are simply the best. |
Mbovaird, thanks for the info. I guess try the supertweeters if you want to...:D |
'inevitably return to how Lenehan speakers are equal to, if not the best sounding speakers in the world, and that tubes and diy gear beats $30 and $40k Vitus, Dartzeel etc, I lose interest and walk away.'
Oh dear. How you get that from what I wrote is beyond me. I said nothing even remotely like that, nor did I mention any of those names.
Methinks you have a chip on thine shoulders.
Thanks
Bill |
'If you do, you then must agree with me that what will determine how real and enjoyable our experience will be is how accurate the system that reproduce it.'
Your logic is flawed and erroneous. The purpose of Hi Fi is to provide enjoyment to the listener - not to fulfil preconceived ideas that measured accuracy a-priori somehow always attains that goal.
If you think so then I strongly suggest you listen to more gear with others and take on board what they think.
Thanks
Bill |
Bill, to be fair I haven't heard your speakers & so I don't know why you have such big wraps on them, so i'll make you a deal. I'll make a time to drop over & hear them with some familiar music (easy to do if you live in Victoria, otherwise i'll have to wait until probably early next year if you live interstate when I can free up some funds to take a flight). Good cheer promised. Then atleast I could understand why they invoke such passion. And if you have an open mind to the Devil (Magico) you're also welcome to drop over any time & hear my system.
Rgds,
Bodhi |
'Bill, to be fair I haven't heard your speakers & so I don't know why you have such big wraps on them, so i'll make you a deal.'
You are missing the point of my post. I like my speakers, but as I carefully point out others not so much. That's why its vitally important to listen for yourself.
Magico is exactly the same as any speaker, or any piece of audio gear - some go ga ga over them and others don't. The same with my speakers.
If you really want a speaker comparison I heard the other day Southport Hi Fi wants to hold a speaker GTG - undoubtedly Steronet will announce dates etc if it goes ahead. Such will likely be interesting - but prove nothing - except - audio gear tends to polarise.
Thanks
Bill |
I love these kind of threads. Aprica said he wound NOT look at any other bands and the thread is full of OTHER brand suggestions. |
You can like what you (think) you like, but it has already been proven that in a control environment, tested blind, most people prefer a better engineered loudspeaker (see Floyd Toole work). The reason audio is a subjective experience has nothing to do with sound and a lot to do with Psychology (see the example of the Subaru vs. Porsche). |
'If Bill feels strongly about Lenehan audio speakers and wants to promote them, why is that seen as a problem?'
In the past I used to do that, but am much more circumspect these days because I now understand its more complex than what I like, but also it does annoy others which is not my intent.
That said its not what I did here. I have been very careful to point out its quite variable what people enjoy. That's its point and relevance to this thread which is about Tannoy and Magico.
Both the Tannoy and the Magico are very good speakers, the choice of which must be made by listening to them.
As I mentioned a number of posts ago I prefer the Tannoy - but that means nothing - its not my ears in my system that will be listening to them.
Thanks
Bill |
Bill, I see some people never change. Enjoy those backyard speakers & DIY gear. Yeah I have a chip..it's in my pack of Smiths crisps. Now, time to enjoy some glorious music & stop wasting my time with your dross! |
The Subaru -Porsche analogy doesn't hold up at all. Audio components are judged by their sound quality to a given listener and nothing else. Brand prestige, cost, snob appeal etc don't matter, listening does.For some listeners a good DIY amplifier would be considered sonically superior to a Vitus or what other amplifier you may wish to compare. Conversely some will prefer the sound presented by the Vitus, just simply listen and what sounds preferable to your ears. That's what I like about audio, the merit is in actually listening, not marketing or creation of a perceived status. Condescending insults towards those who hear differently doesn't change that fact.
Charles |
Charles, I respectfully disagree with you. Step into a Subaru, it's just a Subaru. Step into a Porsche and the level of quality, engineering and ultimate performance are just so far ahead it's not funny. And i've driven both. If you look at the level of CAD design, innovation, design talent, obsession with perfection & quality assurance of Magico, i'm sorry but no name brands like Lenehan don't hold up. That's not to say Lenehan aren't good speakers. I mean Subaru is a good car, but in my books there are differences you can both see AND hear with Magico if your accompanying gear and setup are up to scratch. I do agree however with your comment that in the end it's horses for courses. Re: your last comment; in my books a slap in face earns a condescending insult. All the best. |
People have test driven(heard) the Magico and were not impressed.They don't impress me, but so what, just my opinion. I totally get the point that you and usermanual find the Magico to be your Porsche standard, others simply do not. It doesn't matter, the Magico S5 suits your needs and desires so other's opinions have no bearing on your satisfaction. I say congratulations to you for finding a sucessful speaker for your system. I hope you enjoy them for a very long time. I feel the same toward those who've gone in another direction as well. Tannoy for instance. In truth, just be happy with your choices and ignore the criticism of others.
Charles, |
Charles, your comment above is likely true I suspect, though I usually find those who dislike the Magico S5's tend to like euphoric sounding gear, and a degree of coloration. They also tent to be those who either a/ can't afford the level of system required to do justice to the S5's, or b/ seem clueless about the importance of carefully matching upstream gear for best synergy. Btw, Myles B Astor was impressed with the S5's & recently posted this video review - http://www.avshowrooms.com/Magico_S5_Speaker.html |
Correction: I meant to say "euphonic" not euphoric sounding gear above, but no edit posts option in this thread. |
'You can like what you (think) you like, but it has already been proven that in a control environment, tested blind, most people prefer a better engineered loudspeaker'
Untrue.
It has been proven, for example, in controlled studies, and this is well known to speaker designers, that more accurate speaker alignments are NOT preferred. A QTC of .5 is the most accurate, being called transient perfect. But most people find it lean and anaemic - its the most accurate - but most designers - yes even your beloved Magico - shy away from it using an alignment of .6 or .65 because people like it better.
But even aside from that accuracy involves many parameters. Which is the most important? For example, early transistor amps had extremely low distortion - so low it was hard to even measure. This was achieved by HUGE amounts of global feedback - yet they sounded like the life was sucked out of the music. Why? I don't think anyone conclusively found out but it was recognised that there is a lag between when distortion occurred and feedback corrected it and that was likely an issue. So transient response became important to reduce that lag. So what is it that determines how an amp will sound - distortion measurements or transient response? BTW most amp designers now use feedback very judiciously and concentrate on its application locally.
The interaction between measurement and what people prefer is a very complex one not accounted for by simplistic platitudes such as accuracy is better.
One must ALWAYS listen to gear - that is the only measure.
But even aside from that exactly what your beef is has me beat. All myself and others are saying is listen to both and make your own mind up. If Magico is so obviously superior then the outcome is not in doubt.
Thanks
Bill |
Charles wrote:
'People have test driven(heard) the Magico and were not impressed.They don't impress me, but so what, just my opinion. I totally get the point that you and usermanual find the Magico to be your Porsche standard, others simply do not. It doesn't matter, the Magico S5 suits your needs and desires so other's opinions have no bearing on your satisfaction. I say congratulations to you for finding a sucessful speaker for your system. I hope you enjoy them for a very long time. I feel the same toward those who've gone in another direction as well. Tannoy for instance. In truth, just be happy with your choices and ignore the criticism of others.'
Spot on Charles. Its self evident really. I am scratching my head why there is any debate.
Thanks
Bill |
A QTC of .5 is the most accurate... QTC is not a scale for determining how good a speaker is, it is simply an indicator of how the speaker behaves at its resonant frequency. A 0.5 QTC is not more or less accurate then a QTC of 0.6 or 0.7 (In general high quality accurate audio loudspeakers Qtc are around 0.707). Frankly, your arguments are senseless. You dont really know what you are talking about, although you think you do, and if, according to you and Charles, it is all subjective anyway, why bother to have a discussion. If you wish to drive your Subaru, and convince yourself that it is better than Porsche, it is fine by me but it still does not change the fact that in reality it is not. And yes, there is such a place call reality. |
Usermanual,
Your comments and disposition are the epitome of immaturity. You insult anyone who disagrees with your childish defensive behavior and narrow viewpoints.You're right and everyone else with alternative perspective is wrong. The persistent and redundant need to wave the Magico flag is overtly pathetic. People here are mature adults and can accept contrary points of view, that's simply life. People here accept your choice of Magico, yet you can't find it in you to return the same degree of common respect. We're only discussing audio speakers and yes it's absolutely a subjective undertaking(you"listen" and decide). Usermanuel some listeners do find your beloved Magico to be the Subaru(or worse) in your chosen analogy. You seem to have much self esteem invested in this Brand ownership. This fragility is actually glaringly sad. All of this from you over mere speakers? |
People here are mature adults and can accept contrary points of view, that's simply life I must have missed something, but what king of views are we talking about? I like/dislike is a view more suitable to a 5 year old. Sorry if I offended you (or made you sad), but I get ticked off when people insist of displaying ill-informed ideas over and over again. This is not about Magico, it is about making well informed choices and sharing real useful information with others, not just feeling. But I guess this is too much to ask for... |
"This is not about Magico, it is about making well informed choices and sharing real useful information with others, not just feeling"
Usermanual,
You are probably too obtuse to understand this concept but in a subjective hobby like audio it is a lot about personal "feeling". For a lot of enthusiasts, objective parameters plan second fiddle. |
Charles, I find your childish and passive aggressive put downs of anyone who expresses a positive viewpoint about Magico are the epitome of immaturity and rather pathetic. I also find your statement "You're right and everyone with an alternative viewpoint is wrong" ironic when you attack anyone who espouses a preference for Magico. No one on this forum should be subjected to such a depraved and personal attack as your attack on Usermanual, and I advise I have taken action to report your post to the Forum administrators. |
'QTC is not a scale for determining how good a speaker is, it is simply an indicator of how the speaker behaves at its resonant frequency.'
Dear oh dear. Your knowledge of speaker design needs work I am afraid.
A QTC of .5 is called transient perfect for a reason - it reproduces transients (ie with the least amount of ringing) the best of any alignment. It is the most accurate - but most people do not like it - it sounds a bit lean and thin. Higher QTC's are not as accurate - ringing more - but sound more real to most people. There is a brain interpreting this stuff - and that is precisely what you are ignoring.
I know it blows a hole in your view of Hi Fi - but its a fact Jack.
I suggest you get a copy of Vance Dickensons the Loudspeaker Cookbook:
http://www.amazon.com/Loudspeaker-Design-Cookbook-Vance-Dickason/dp/1882580478
Thanks
Bill |
08-05-14: Apdoc2004
informed choices and sharing real useful information with others, not just feeling"
Usermanual,
You are probably too obtuse to understand this concept but in a subjective hobby like audio it is a lot about personal "feeling". For a lot of enthusiasts, objective parameters plan second fiddle. Apdoc, Usermanual clearly stated above "not just feeling" so he in no way excluded that element of musicality. |
Mel,
In a previous post I congratulated you on your ownership of the Magico S5 speaker and wished you many years of enjoying them, I meant every word I wrote. I can easily accept and acknowledge that taste and preferences vary amongst all of us. It's a fact the I find quite understandable, subjective decisions entail numerous factors.
Every brand of an audio component will have admirers (some devout) and detractors, no exceptions, so this includes Magico. This is just how things are, people choose what appeals to them and reject what does not suit their needs. Why is this hard to conceive? This reaction from you and Usermanual is frankly puzzling. If you feel obligated to report me due to an open forum discussion on speakers, do as you must. You coming up with this idea speaks volumes.For the last time, guys, we're only discussing a hobby topic. The emotional response from both of you is confounding.
Take Care,
Charles, |
as i was killing a few minutes this a.m. i stumbled across this thread. my god this is priceless on so many levels. it is nearly shakespearean or at least woody allenesque. some of you guys kill me! should i ever develop such deep affection for stereo equipment please pull the plug. fwiw i go for the single full range driver approach but i would swap for a fishing trip in northern ontario. |
Guys, please take it easy. Although I agree with Melbguy1; Charles1dad passive-aggressive style is irritating, there is no need for any reporting.
I stated my views, unfortunately no one seems to bother to take the time to read them. It is easy to take cover under the ignorance shield of subjectivity.
Audio reproduction is not as subjective as so many of you think. If you bother to study a bit about it and about the way the gear you spend so much money on tackle the issue, you will become a much better listener, and perhaps have some advice worth giving. |
A QTC of .5 is called transient perfect for a reason - it reproduces transients (ie with the least amount of ringing) the best of any alignment. It is the most accurate - but most people do not like it - it sounds a bit lean and thin. Higher QTC's are not as accurate - ringing more - but sound more real to most people. There is a brain interpreting this stuff - and that is precisely what you are ignoring. No, I am not ignoring anything, I am explaining, if you care to listen. All things being equal, a Q of 0.5 (0.577) will start rolling off sooner than a Q of 0.707 (which will give you flat, most extended frq response). So although you will have better performance in the time domain with 0.5, you will not in the frequency domain. That is the reason, that for a sealed box, people prefer the sound of a Q 0.707 alignment, it simply goes lower play louder and interact with the room better. These are all complex problems, that unfortunately cant be simplified to the level you are trying to portray here. I am glad you have Dickensons book, it is a good start (-; |
Audio reproduction is not as subjective as so many of you think. If you bother to study a bit about it and about the way the gear you spend so much money on tackle the issue, you will become a much better listener, and perhaps have some advice worth giving. Bravo! |
'All things being equal, a Q of 0.5 (0.577) will start rolling off sooner than a Q of 0.707 (which will give you flat, most extended frq response).'
Although I forgot to mention it, because it was I thought reasonably obvious, the tests were done frequency compensated.
Thanks
Bill |
Although I forgot to mention it, because it was I thought reasonably obvious, the tests were done frequency compensated. Would love to read about these tests, could you please point me (us) to their whereabouts? |
'Would love to read about these tests, could you please point me (us) to their whereabouts?'
They were done by a speaker designer I know. He also said a number of other designers, such as Dunlavey, did the same tests with the same results.
However even without such formal tests its well known eg its mentioned in Vance Dickensen's book on speaker design.
From an Audiogon discussion on it:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?cspkr&1106229169
'Having said that, many people find a very low static Q ( .5 ) to sound TOO tight and dry, even with the slight boost of Q that occurs during actual driven conditions. Raising the static Q will produce more apparent bass but it does so at a slight loss in transient response. The more that the static Q climbs, the more apparent bass that you have and the worse the transient response gets.'
'Much of this is covered in Vance's book to a great extent. Interpreting the trade-off's involved in each approach becomes a matter of personal design decisions'
If you want to pursue it further get Vance's book. It helped me understand a lot about speaker design such as this issue, although I don't personally build and design speakers.
But it does mean I can have enlightening conversations with those that do, like the guy that told me about those tests.
Thanks
Bill |
They were done by a speaker designer I know... Who will conduct a worthwhile listening test comparing a compensated (eq) signal to a pure one?? BTW, taken from your link: Most people that aren't used to "accurate" bass with proper pitch and damping (long time users of vented speakers) should probably use something closer to a static Qtc of .65 or .70 or so As Usermanual already pointed out, all things being equal, there are no psychoacoustics reasons to prefer a compromised parameter on a sound one. However, there may be plenty of psychological reasons to do so. |
Jump on the new MAGICO M Project speaker only 50 made at $130k.They may already be sold out anybody on Audiogon order a pair . |
No doubt measurements i.e correct--accurate/flat/linear etc frequency balance is all but one essential aspect into reproducing realistically believable sound.
But none on timbre and tonal truth can be gauge by any measuring tools that I know/read of. Instead, human sensory ie. ears/brain/heart are left to do these.
Thus, no matter how advanced and thorough measuring facility an audio establishment embodies, products still have to pass the final ultimate test ~ their designers' ears ~ no? |
Two of my absolute favourite speaker brands are Tannoy and ATC. I also like Magico but not as much. It is all about making it sound real and "authentic". |
