My lying ears!

JDLaudio said:
I just picked up a dealership for these Kii speakers, as well as the AudioNet line of electronics. The speakers should start shipping around October. I am working on a couple of other brands, to round out a unique line of fine audio gear. Guess I need to work on my affilation disclosure soon. Happy listening....and happy holidays to all.

Jerry-
Click to expand...



Wow , if those test curves are accurate , some really good stuff technically speaking, the step response is impressive ....!
 
a.wayne said:
How does S5 compare to Q5 ..?
Click to expand...

As far as I know Stereophile does not publish distortion versus level graphs.

Although I am not a specialist in measurement interpretation we can see that the Q5 is a speaker tailored by ear, not by measurements - similar to the Q1 in this aspect, BTW. The S5 is the excellent measuring member of the family! :)

I have always preferred the Q5 to the S5, but unfortunately the Q5 really needs a very powerful amplifier.
 
microstrip said:
As far as I know Stereophile does not publish distortion versus level graphs.

Although I am not a specialist in measurement interpretation we can see that the Q5 is a speaker tailored by ear, not by measurements - similar to the Q1 in this aspect, BTW. The S5 is the excellent measuring member of the family! :)

I have always preferred the Q5 to the S5, but unfortunately the Q5 really needs a very powerful amplifier.
Click to expand...

Interesting! S5 measures better than the more expensive Q5 and sounds better (to me at least).

I still find it funny to think back to the first time I heard the Q5 and S5 and proclaimed the S5 to be the much better speaker. I got eaten alive by the "measurements only matter" group. I guess they should have actually waited for the actual measurements. [emoji3]

Hmmmm....there might be something to all this scientific nonsense after all. Go figure.
 
JD I do hope we all enjoy the Kii THREEs !
When I first heard about them ,I just thought they were the most exciting product I had encountered for a very long time.
Bruno and Chris were both associated with Grimm Audio and their LS1 loudspeaker is absolutely superb albeit more expensive than the Kii.
We also carry Bruno's Moa-Mola amps, they too are absolutely superb.
Magico Q5 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com

$60k !
Keith.
 
One small issue is all the mix and master engineers using their speakers with worse waterfall plots (decay times) etc and making the mix sound good on gear that is technically less effective, so will a mix produced on something with unequal wave launch times and decay times sound as good on a more technically superior speaker?
 
Tomelex said:
One small issue is all the mix and master engineers using their speakers with worse waterfall plots (decay times) etc and making the mix sound good on gear that is technically less effective, so will a mix produced on something with unequal wave launch times and decay times sound as good on a more technically superior speaker?
Click to expand...

So you are saying that all the "mix and master engineers" are using crappy speakers to make the final versions of the recordings we are buying? Is this a new phenomenon or has this been going on for many years? Please tell us your experiences with visiting recording studios around the world and how you know the speakers they use measure badly and their gear is "technically less effective."

It appears that you are inferring that all recordings are optimized to sound their best on speakers that measure poorly because that's how the "mix and master engineers" made the recordings and therefore how can they sound good on a "technically superior speaker." I'm waiting to see the evidence that backs your assumptions of recording studios using speakers with the worst waterfall plots and mixing the sound on gear "that is technically less effective" whatever the hell that means. Technically less effective than what?
 
mep said:
So you are saying that all the "mix and master engineers" are using crappy speakers to make the final versions of the recordings we are buying? Is this a new phenomenon or has this been going on for many years? Please tell us your experiences with visiting recording studios around the world and how you know the speakers they use measure badly and their gear is "technically less effective."

It appears that you are inferring that all recordings are optimized to sound their best on speakers that measure poorly because that's how the "mix and master engineers" made the recordings and therefore how can they sound good on a "technically superior speaker." I'm waiting to see the evidence that backs your assumptions of recording studios using speakers with the worst waterfall plots and mixing the sound on gear "that is technically less effective" whatever the hell that means. Technically less effective than what?
Click to expand...
The Yamaha NS10 Story

Fortunately, I believe they're not so common anymore. There are brands such as Genelec, which are much more advanced, being used in better studios today.

 
mep said:
So you are saying that all the "mix and master engineers" are using crappy speakers to make the final versions of the recordings we are buying? Is this a new phenomenon or has this been going on for many years? Please tell us your experiences with visiting recording studios around the world and how you know the speakers they use measure badly and their gear is "technically less effective."

It appears that you are inferring that all recordings are optimized to sound their best on speakers that measure poorly because that's how the "mix and master engineers" made the recordings and therefore how can they sound good on a "technically superior speaker." I'm waiting to see the evidence that backs your assumptions of recording studios using speakers with the worst waterfall plots and mixing the sound on gear "that is technically less effective" whatever the hell that means. Technically less effective than what?
Click to expand...
You should really read Floyd Toole's ,'Sound Reproduction' , but yes, often speakers are chosen because they are familiar, rather than in terms of quality, hence Yamahas ubiquitous
NS10 , worse than that perhaps there is no agreed conformity between the mastering studios themselves!
There really is a need for conformity and agreed specifications, so that fine sounding recordings canbe made on good speakers in good rooms, and then reproduced on fine sounding speakers in good rooms!
Keith.
 
Face said:
The Yamaha NS10 Story

Fortunately, I believe they're not so common anymore. There are brands such as Genelec, which are much more advanced, being used in better studios today.
Click to expand...

That's an old story and recording studios are not using NS10s to develop their recordings. They were used as a sanity check for how the recordings would sound on crappy speakers.

And finally, are some of you trying to suggest that great recordings don't exist?
 
And many of the best recordings ever were made on crappy speakers. Boom!

The truth of the matter is that the producer and recording engineer knew what they were doing.
 
Purité Audio said:
You should really read Floyd Toole's ,'Sound Reproduction' , but yes, often speakers are chosen because they are familiar, rather than in terms of quality, hence Yamahas ubiquitous
NS10 , worse than that perhaps there is no agreed conformity between the mastering studios themselves!
Click to expand...
''

Horrors! No agreed conformity between mastering studios. Conformity of what? Do we want all recording studios to produce recordings that sound like clones of every other recording studio? Recording studios choose to purchase and use the gear they feel best serves their needs. If you want conformity in your music, go purchase some music made by the manufactured pop stars who can't carry a tune and have to sing through auto tune devices with plenty of sound effects added to their voices. All of that music sounds exactly the same and it's horrid, but there is your conformity hard at work.

Purité Audio said:
There really is a need for conformity and agreed specifications, so that fine sounding recordings canbe made on good speakers in good rooms, and then reproduced on fine sounding speakers in good rooms!
Keith.
Click to expand...

Fine sounding recordings have been made for many, many years. I will take a great jazz recording from the 1950s that was made on a 2-track tape machine through vacuum tube electronics over most any of the recordings being made today with all of the 'superior' technology and the 10,000 plug-in tools meant to simulate the real sound that used to be captured. We don't need to suggest that "fine sounding recordings" have never been made.
 
Face said:
The Yamaha NS10 Story

Fortunately, I believe they're not so common anymore. There are brands such as Genelec, which are much more advanced, being used in better studios today.
Click to expand...


IMO Engineers /producers use the tools they are most comfortable with , many here would consider them bad, their purpose is different from the audiophile , one of the methods to test for complete neutrality in order to hear the mix generated by the engineer/ producers is to record a mix, mic through your monitors , then play it back and record it again , low coloration, low distortion speakers will sound very similar to the original mix on the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th generation, How many generations back is one way Of determining how effective a tool you have ..


This is Much different to liking the sound of a product, playback of highly distorted recordings and instruments for effect will require low distortion speakers at high SPL to sound "right" added coloration kills the effect mixed in by the engineers , some philes want this kind of neutrality , where good sound is from the dynamic impact and liveness of the recordings, others just want playback to have more warmth , smoothness and "good sound" whatever that means to them...


No Genie in the Bottle ...



Regards
 
Purité Audio said:
You should really read Floyd Toole's ,'Sound Reproduction' , but yes, often speakers are chosen because they are familiar, rather than in terms of quality, hence Yamahas ubiquitous
NS10 , worse than that perhaps there is no agreed conformity between the mastering studios themselves!
There really is a need for conformity and agreed specifications, so that fine sounding recordings canbe made on good speakers in good rooms, and then reproduced on fine sounding speakers in good rooms!
Keith.
Click to expand...


Good engineers and producers can make good recordings on anything decent really , like anything else it all comes down to the talent ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top