Stereophile complains it's readers are too informed.

I was lucky with my speakers...

Tannoy dual gold for 40 years...(400 canadian dollars in 1975)

Now for the last 5 years, Mission cyrus 781....( 50 dollars bought used)...

They are very different but the 2 are musical, with more power to fill the house with the Tannoy and a very subtle equilibrium with the Mission... I cannot compare them because they were in vastly different rooms, and connected to very different audio system... but i loved the two dearly and loved the Cyrus, the best Mission ever create...

British rules!

:)

Here we enter philosophy....

brain on one side and brain on the other side : one consciousness....

« Indeed you have a brain my dear, but you need consciousness... »  -Groucho Marx

Measurements of speakers is for the design increase effectiveness and optimal quality of the design...

The measurements cannot reveal how ultimately the speakers will sound, wrongly, partially, or correctly embedded...Or throw in a corner without any treatment of any kind in the 3 embeddings nor any controls?

I will not even speak of different hearings and tastes and experiences....

Is it too difficult to figure it out?

:)

speakers+ room + ears/ brain = one

Measurements divide the speakers from the room.... Other sets of measurements will divide the speakers+room from the ears/ brain....

No measurement can explain or replace the lived experience , too much non-mearurable parameters....

Thanks hilde45....

I am astonished after my 2 years own journey to make Hi-Fi my own experience, to learn that most people have no idea how....

Reviewers sells, consumers buy.....

But how to create a Hi-Fi experience is never adress even here, only by small pieces, never facing the real fundamental problem: How to embed an audio system?

The audio community is divided in subjectivist, objectivist, sellers, consumers, engineers, regular folks and all in between these categories...

No consensus at all...

But i will repat myself, it is simple: the fundamental audio problem, after creating a new electronic design, is how to embed it....

Is it not clear like day?

:)

This was the problem i has to solve for myself in the last 2 years without which i will be till my death in the without end upgrade race to create my hi-fi experience...

It is way less costly to rightfully embed an already good system, than buying other so called better pieces to solve the puzzle....

is it not true?

By the way embedding the speakers is the more complex task ,even more complex than adressing the noise floor of the electrcal grid of the house, or the mechanical resonance of the audio parts...

why?

Because the speakers dont exist apart from the room, and apart from the ears....

Speakers+ room + ears = one not 3 elements...

It is also the more rewarding part in S.Q. results at the end....

Stereophile are forever beholden to the churn and hype of products-for-sale. They exist to help companies sell new stuff, and while they have developed standards based on subjective listening experience and engineering know how, they can never abandon their core mission: to celebrate or denigrate somehow, the “consumability” of the new thing for sale.

People say it all the time: namely, that the improvements made in various elements of an audio system are either imaginary or incremental. Given all the equipment which has been produced so far, if there was never any more “progress” and all we could lay our hands on was the existing range of options, surely there would be an adequate number of combinations to keep our quest for the absolute sound alive and well until the sun burns out.

I like this post...

I cannot imagine that any piece of gear will sound like his measurements say they will....Sound is hearing experience...

I cannot imagine that an audio system has a sound of his own, when it is "off" in the box in the warehouse by virtue of the different measures of his components... He must be out of the audio laboratory and "on" and then in a particular different electrical grid, in a different particular acoustical room, in a different particular resonant vibrations states of his own treated or not treated against that....Then it has a particular "sound" for one pair of ears not the same for others one....

I cannot imagine that a reviewer or a seller or any manufacturer, will oblige himself and will do a duty to reveal these inconvenient truths (for the sale pitch) that an audio system will sound vastly different in relation to the way these embeddings would or would not be adressed before you bought his 10,000 dollars amplifier or dac?
Will you be pleased to learn that day that his perfect engineering gear is not enough by themself to create Hi-Fi experience? Asking the question is answering it.... :)

Reviewers and manufacturers are, willing or not, sellers....

They cannot insist on the truth of their business not because they are liars, they are mostly not, but because an audio system S.Q. exist only in a precise particular state in a particular environment, for specific ears...And they must promote the only thing and facts they know of: the alleged superiority of their design in the audio laboratory or for their own taste, room, house, experiences, etc...

Is it not?

The key problem in audio is never adressed in magazine and if it is, they cannot focus on that key problem, because they must sells the piece of gear like a definitive solution...They must put the key problem under the rug so to speak.... The key problem is complex and triple problems that no single piece of gear can solve on his own ... :)

The key problem is how to embed, mechanically, electrically and acousatically an audio system, in a way that his sound would be optimal?

Is it not evident?