Speakers that are very accurate sounding but don't produce an emotional connection.

What a great topic and thread - thank you sunnyjim!

don_c55 writes: How can a speaker be "accurate", but not produce an emotional connection???

And isn't this the topic itself reworded, or rather a good chunk of it? 

It's precisely the topic that is consuming me over the last 3 weeks as I decide what to do with my Wilson Sophia 1s. I was sure I didn't like them until I moved them into a large-ish carpeted room w/ vaulted ceilings up to 21' driven by a VAC Ren 70/70. Not only am I continually engaged, but for the first time I'm actually hearing a decent image. Are they accurate? I suppose it depends on how you define that term, but in my opinion no speaker that "throws" instruments and vocals at you the way Wilsons do can be considered accurate. What I hear seems to be less of an accurate portrayal of instruments and vocals from say, a live recording, and more of an "enhanced" and "larger than life" version of those things. What do I mean by "enhanced" and "larger than life"? Right. Exactly. Without measuring I can't be certain, but seems like there's more energy in the lower midrange than I would hear with other speakers. What else is enhanced? Upper bass? Yes. What else? Not sure.

Yes I hear an image, but where exactly? And does the instrument or vocal location move in or out as its tone shifts? I think so. Can't be accurate then right? Soundstage? Seems pretty good, but how good?

When I've setup Vandersteen Quatros the way I want I hear an outstanding image and an impressive soundstage. Great depth and a sound that, to my ear, much more closely resembles the live & intimately-set jazz concerts I've attended. It can be fun and precise and "realistic" to my ear, but with the Quatros I have never been as emotionally connected to instruments and vocals themselves the way I've been with the Sophias. Same thing with Maggie 1.7s. Just not enough of that something else that I now think I want. Or do I? The performance itself might get me 90% of the enjoyment I'm listening for, but now the Sophias have me wondering "do I want the spicy sauce to go with it?" 

All this has me asking myself "what am I really trying to accomplish?" Do I really want recordings to be as accurately presented to me as possible, whatever that means. Or do I enjoy it all more if there's an unrealistic accent applied to everything?

Is it ok if I never make up my mind about this?

Coli wrote:
"it’s more about speaker/room interaction. The more accurate the speaker, the less forgiving, you need to setup the room perfectly. Hence why most audiophile speakers are notoriously inaccurate, it helps to cover up shortcomings.

(If you have a non symmetrical room, you’ll never get what you are looking for) Try take that emotional speaker outdoors, I can guarantee you that the emotions will be all gone."

I agree that speaker/room interaction is a significant factor. The most engaging and emotional experiences I've had were with my own setup and only 2-3 times within the 70 or so audio rooms visited at audio shows. There's no question listening room and setup are crucial. Regarding symmetry - I'm certain there are many of us who have set up our extremely asymmetrical rooms with positive results. Often those asymmetries result in annoying resonances,  but sometimes asymmetry is the best and simplest way to mitigate resonances as well. A couple examples are vaulted ceilings and carpeted stairwells where the extra surface area is muffled/baffled somehow.

Among those engaging and emotional experiences I've had with my own setup, twice was outdoors. A huge porch covering in one case (one example: 18' high &10' extended outward). Vandersteen Quatros placed 6 ft beyond the covering, and dialed in to compensate for unusual bass resonance from the band-shell like covering. It was "engaging" because of how close it sounded to an outdoor acoustic show with some selections. Another time was with Joseph Audio Pulsars outside radiating over a pool and partially walled on one side and behind. I can't explain how full the bass was for the Pulsars. Not deep, but I was expecting a 50% loss of bass with so few walls and no ceiling. Was it because the 6" between the water and deck acted like a waveguide? Not sure. Tonally the Pulsars were as outstandingly balanced as always. There was no less engagement going from inside to outside.

Both speakers were driven with a VAC Ren 70/70.

shadorne wrote:   "Very accurate" is going to convey the music as intended and deliver the full emotional impact.

Please understand your statement is an opinion. Some agree with you and others do not as is evident in this thread. Consider this if you will ....

You've heard the same excellent live recording for years on your extremely accurate system. You've listened to the same recording on other extremely accurate systems and you're moved every time by the realism and that feeling of being there during the recording. You know, with some accuracy, how it was intended to sound when recorded. Then one day you hear that same recording on another system, and on that system you're surprised at how clearly you can hear a cello. That same cello wasn't quite that "palpable" before on the other systems, and you've always relegated it somewhat into the background, but now on this system it's louder and more tonally "rich".

You know it's not accurate, but you love cellos and this one sounds wonderful now that it's front and center. 

Maybe this has never happened to you, and maybe you feel it never could happen to you. It's happened to me often enough that it's the reason I'm responding to the OP's post as well as the comments here.

Shadorne- Assuming you refer to only excellent recordings, I agree that greater performance overall will come via accurate equipment setup correctly in an adequate room. That's been my experience anyhow, and yet I can't ignore that sometimes a louder and more forward instrument can be quite captivating and therefore more emotionally moving. 

It's possible that one can have extremely broad musical tastes, but still prefer some recordings over others not because of how faithfully they're reproduced but because they want to get that emotionally moving fix over and over again. Hey, I like me a mean sax which can be heard in countless genres of music. If I was a sax addict, I would probably be more likely to go in the direction of what pleases me most: more sax!

Thank god I don't have that problem!

Mapman-

I can't speak for the OP, but since I feel I understand the gist of his post, I'll attempt it anyhow;-)

I don't think the issue is this feeling of no emotional connection with accurate presentations, but rather that some "systems" (I won't write "speakers" here) come across as so detailed with much focus on precise soundstaging that some elements can be "lesser" than with some systems that are clearly not as accurate. I take my Wilson Sophias as an example. The Sophias sound wonderful, but not accurate in the sense that they soundstage with much precision. Vocals and instruments are too forward than seems accurate to me, and depending upon the frequency range covered often too loud relative to other aspects of the recording. Not enough depth but imaging convincing enough that they get me by for now. It's not the sound I prefer since 90% of the time it's not the realistic soundstage that I need. However, and often enough, I hear something that simply sounds outstanding like a piano key strike from Lyle Lovett's "I've been to Memphis" from Joshua Judges Ruth, or the bass from Diana Kralls "My Love Is" off of the Love Scenes album. In both examples the instruments captivate me - involve me in the music more than when I've heard these played on accurate systems. Those things are louder and the strikes and plucks have more impact than I think is realistic. It's true this is only 10% of the time perhaps, but that 10% is an emotional enough encounter that it sticks and is why I haven't let the speakers go. Yet. Am still waiting for my pre-owned Raidho's to appear at the right price;-)

pryso-

This kind of detail is exactly what I feel this discussion needs. I've been messing around with my SPL meter lately to try and see what range it is where my Wilson Sophias do their coloring, and though I can't be exact it's clear to me that it's in the above 160 hz and below 600hz range. It's a range that presents power to the impact of percussion, key strikes, string plucks and also provides more body to vocals that have this lower range (most vocals do - even female). It's also a range that can impart a sense of space around instruments and vocals. 

But is it accurate? Well, it would be somewhat accurate if the recording space emphasized this range during the recording and then THAT was played back on a more accurate system. It makes me wonder if a large part of this discussion is about our preferences with respect to venue rather than sound reproduction. I'm not the first one here to suggest that.

all this chatter. it renders emotionally involving visions of sugar plum fairy-shaped transducers floating about tethered to helium balloons and candy canes. flitting and dancing, hither and yon, sprinkling teensy gems of excitement and wonder and leaving me in rapturous splendor.

ooooooh

;-) !!!!!!