Should a reference speaker be neutral, or just great sounding?


I was thinking about something as I was typing about how I've observed a magazine behave, and it occurred to me that I have a personal bias not everyone may agree to.  Here's what I think:
"To call a speaker a reference product it should at the very least be objectively neutral."

However, as that magazine points out, many great speakers are idiosyncratic ideas about what music should sound like in the home, regardless of being tonally neutral.

Do you agree?  If a speaker is a "reference" product, do you expect it to be neutral, or do you think it has to perform exceptionally well, but not necessarily this way?
erik_squires

Showing 1 response by desktopguy

"neutral" is one of those fraught terms in audio--people are always slamming other over the head with it, claiming that this or that product sounds more "neutral."  "Neutral" does nothing because it's essentially meaningless, too open to interpretation.

Early on in my audio journey I decided the only meaningful comparison to audio gear (besides other audio gear/by contrast) was real live music, electric or acoustic, played in a known space. Audio gear that sounds "musical" (ie, like real music) wins out with me. Is this subjective? Hell, yes. But is it meaningful? Yes.

And "reference" to me connotes audio gear that takes audio reproduction even higher, with better qualities recognized & sought in audio (ie, dynamics, bass, detail/resolution, etc). I have some inexpensive, not-very-refined gear that makes music all day long, but is clearly outclassed by bigger/better gear that also makes music, albeit on a higher plane of attainment.