The closest approach...really

i have owned quads--57s and 63s, and will purchase another pair of 57s, soon.

i would not add a sub to the 57s. the integration of the two drivers is a big problem.

i have heard quads with various subs, including gradients, and i don't like what i hear. the integration is not seamless.

i have heard many combinations of dipoles and cones. in each case i have noticed the distinct sound of each driver. thus, for my ears there is a loss of coherence.

i would like to be put to the test, blindfolded, and listen to a pair of electrostatic speakers with a sub.
it would be interesting if i could identify that i was listening to a hynbrid.

hi trelja:

i was not asking for help, but rather to offer a test to confirm my hypothesis that i can detect a hybrid speaker when i hear it. it was a nice try , but i certainly would not seek help, from those whom, as you say, i presumably alienate. i believe that would be counter productive and stupid.

i appreciate your apology, trelja. it shows me you are willing to admit you made an error.

you made another error when you assumed that i would seek assistance to carry out the test i had proposed.
i only suggested a test of a hypothesis.

i have at least 30 would be assistants in the ny area, members of audio clubs, who would assist me, if necessary.

thanks again for your humility and thanks for your concern about my welfare.

hi detlf:

there are two issues. objective quality, which you so aptly stated should be dependent upon how closely the performance of a stereo system approaches live music.

there is also subjective quality, which is basically opinion based upon preference.

as in any aesthetic endeavor, a consumer may select from competing products and end up with some level of inaccuarcy to the real thing and some degree of pleasure with the sound of his/her stereo system.

i wise designer of phono stages suggested to me that if a stereo system does not pass the foot-tapping test, it doesn't matter how close to reality it sounds, as its owner will eventually tire of it and replace components.

my point is that it is difficult to remove the purely subjective element from the process of evaluating stereo systems.

in the end each of us , hopefully, will enjoy listening to music and probably be less concerned with its accuracy, or lack thereof.

hi detlof:

sorry about the spelling. i agree with you in principle regarding evaluation of stereo systems.let me add that preference and accuracy of timbre may be two different conditions.

however, even as a reviewer, while i discuss inaccuracy of timbre frequently in my reviews ( you can read them at audiophilia.com), there is the issue of perception.

you have suggested, and so have i in other posts, inviting musicians to perform in a room, then compare a recording of the performance to the performance. assuming the feasibility of this endeavor, i suspect, that if you have more than one "audiophile"/experienced listener in a room,
there will be a disagreement as to corresponce between live and recorded sound. thus , the problem is, who is to judge ?

whenever i review a component, i am the first to admit that my perception may not agree with that of another hobbyist.

however, i agree with everything you have said, in principle. the problem is implementation. do you have any ideas ? perhaps you could be appointed by your peers as mr. golden ears. if you qualify, your prononucements would be very valuable to both designers and hobbyists.

hi detlof:

i like your approach of assessment by committee. however, if it were possible to remove the potential for misperception, namely, the human brain, the result would be an improvement.

measurement to the rescue ??

what about something as simple as spectral analysis.

here is a simple paradigm:

have musicians perform in a room, and take a spectral analysis (printed of course), of two minutes or so of a performance. record the performance (hopefully, a decent recording). then play the recording through a stereo system and take a spectral analysis of the stereo system's reproduction.

one now has 2 print outs. they can be compared.

of course this is not perfection. the quality of a recording comes into question, and the issue of what instruments to record is also a factor. it's a start, i think.

the whole idea is to make evaluation of a stereo system less dependent on human hearing.

there is one "fly in the ointment". that is the recording.
recording quality varies. if one is trying to attain a semblance of natural timbre, one has to carefully select recordings, as benchmarks.

since the sound of recordings is unknown, the best one can do is listen to a bunch of recordings on many stereo systems and make a selection based upon the results of all of the listening sessions.

essentailly the stereo system and recording is evaluated, not just the stereo system. if one "tunes" one's stereo systems based upon a group of recordings, it is possible that one may not achieve the realism attained from the reference recordings when listening to "non" reference recordings.