speakers for music vs HT (1 Viewer)

[EricHaas]

There is only one differentiation that is legit, IMO of course. When people listen to music, the music is all or nearly all of the intended sensory input. With HT, the sonic component is certainly on no more than equal footing with the visual component. Hence, people *listen more critically* to music than they do to the sonic aspect of the HT experience. Therefore, it seems reasonable that people might demand a higher quality speaker for music. The rest, IMO, is BS. Any speaker good for music is also good for HT.

 

[Peter Johnson]

IMO...

Music -> refinement. Everyone knows what a piano sounds like.

HT -> Dynamics. Few know what an explosion sounds like, so they just want it to sound good. With no "reference" to compare it to, "good" is easier to achieve.

 

[DavidAM]

The funny thing is that until I started this thread, the assumption I made from reading tons of posts was that it was harder to find good HT speakers than music speakers. Now most everyone is agreeing that you have to be more picky when choosing music speakers. That is just what I picked up from posts though...I would agree that it would be harder to find a speaker that sounded good for music than HT.

 

[Wes]

refinement. Everyone knows what a piano sounds like.

Hmmmmmmm, Which piano? Not every piano sounds the same, so how could I know what the piano on the recording is truly suppose to sound like!

{IMHO}I think it all comes down to the "Elitist Bastard persona". An Elitist Bastard will not want his music system to be the same as his H.T. Most Music systems I have heard are in no way true sound. Most are incapable of reproducing true bass for instance, but create a mellow smooth bass response. We have all been out to fire works and have felt the ones that go up a short way and just go "BOOM" and you feel the shock wave hit you. Well a good theater will come close to reproducing that but most music systems will not hit you with a shock wave. So which is True to real sounds? All speakers color the sounds/music. If they were perfect why would the manufactures keep coming out with new models, speakers, enclosures. No I'm not saying theater systems is the sound perfect re-producers either. So It all comes down to what you like, can afford, and desire!

Wes

 

[DavidAM]

Another question/example:
I've read that SVS subs are amazing for HT, but aren't that good for music. Why would this be? I guess this works on the theory that whatever sounds good for music will sound good for HT, but what sounds good for HT might not sound good for music. It just seems to me that a sub does one thing...produces bass. If its bass coming from a movie or a 40hz bass note in a song, if the sub can produce 40hz, it will play the signal that it is fed. Is this not right? I would think that a sub would be even more well rounded and easier to find a good one for both music and HT since all it has to do is produce a very small frequency range and doesn't have to deal with imaging and things like that. Of course different subs are clearer and more accurate than others, but they are producing 20hz-100hz while a speaker is producing 100hz-20khz (for example). So, anyone have any input on why an SVS sub is better for HT than music?

 

[Saurav]

It just seems to me that a sub does one thing...produces bass. If its bass coming from a movie or a 40hz bass note in a song, if the sub can produce 40hz, it will play the signal that it is fed. Is this not right?

Not necessarily. What if that 40Hz note starts and stops really quickly, like a quick bass drum beat or something? If your subwoofer was sloppy and lengthened those notes because it couldn't stop fast enough, that would easily show up if you were listening to an acoustic recording with say an acoustic upright bass guitar. Would it be as easily noticable when listening to a movie soundtrack with explosions and car engines? You tell me.
So... there's more to a sub than just being able to play a given frequency at a given SPL. Having said that, I don't know if SVS subs are unsuited for music, that seems to just be the age-old myth about sealed subs being better for music than ported ones. I've never heard an SVS sub, so I don't know one way or the other.

 

[Justin Doring]

Jeffrey, excellent post!
Roger, it's time for you to get out there and listen to a good pair of speakers!
In my experience, a speaker that does music well will also do home theater well. The opposite, however, is not always true. It's relatively easy and inexpensive to put together a really good sounding home theater system, but it takes a lot more effort and a much larger budget to do music well. Part of the reason is that most movies don't sound very good to begin with, and better speakers are often a detriment to soundtracks, as you can hear exactly how a soundtrack is assembled.
Regarding the "pianos sound different" post, absolutely! A good pair of speakers, along with a good pair of ears, will reveal what brand of piano is being played, which is why I always cringe when I put on a new CD and realize that the piano is a Yamaha! Yikes! I HATE the sound of Japanese pianos! I'm not yet skilled enough, however, to distinguish amongst the different models of a particular brand of piano.

 

[Jeffrey Forner]

I've read that SVS subs are amazing for HT, but aren't that good for music.

David, as the proud owner of an SVS, I can assure you that this is not true. Before I bought the SVS I owned an Adire Rava, which is a highly regarded music sub by even the most elitist of the Elitist Bastards. I purchased the SVS with the hope that it would support the Rava for home theater, since the Rava didn't have the extension of the SVS. The Rava would stay in my system as the primary music subwoofer.

Imagine my surprise then when I realized that I actually preferred the sound of the SVS for music. It produced a sound every bit as tight and clean as the Rava's, but with the added benefit of deeper extension, I got a lot more out of my music recordings than I ever imagined was present. The low end of recordings filled out more nicely, sounding fuller and richer than before. Ultimately I traded in the Rava since I didn't need it any more. No sense in having two subs when all you need is one.

Of course I stress that this is simply my own preference. The SV's are mostly regarded for their capabilities as home theater subwoofers (and for good reason!), so I think you get a slightly skewed perception of them by reading these boards, a perception that doesn't give these bad boys due credit when it comes to music. Some may prefer the sound of a sealed sub like the Rava for music and those people are entitled to their opinions.

Saurav is right. There's a lot more to producing good bass than having the sub hit specific frequencies. Bass has textures and tones too. A good sub will be able to articulate these differences in bass signals well and do it without the being sloppy.

 

[Wes]

Oh, I also wanted to interject this:
Elitist Bastard = Audio and Videophilist's!
I must admit, I am neither!
Wes

 

[Henry_W]

Sorry I missed this thread for a day or two, so i want to chime in again..

To Arron about my post stating that if it is good for music it will be good for HT - You raised an excellent point. If your listening preference for music tends toward less dynamic (which is very reasonable and is the basis for several high end speakers) then you may find the speakers sound 'soft' with HT. Let me modify my comment - If you prefer a very dynamic speaker for music as I do (I believe heavily orchestrated music requires this for accuracy to original intent) then if you purchase for music they will work well with HT.

As to SVS - same opinion as Jeffrey - I am currently enamoured with the SVSub because of how well it performs with music. It keeps up with the dynamics and constantly reproduces with amazing clarity. It is as if the sub does this with uncomplicated ease. My SVS is the 20-39PCi

 

[Arron H]

If your listening preference for music tends toward less dynamic (which is very reasonable and is the basis for several high end speakers) then you may find the speakers sound 'soft' with HT. Let me modify my comment - If you prefer a very dynamic speaker for music as I do (I believe heavily orchestrated music requires this for accuracy to original intent) then if you purchase for music they will work well with HT.

Henry, we are now in agreement. I ended up going with B&W 600 series because they seem to provide that "dynamic" element to both music & HT. I also agree with the theory that when purchasing a speaker that will be used for both music & HT, you should nail down the music part first because a majority of the time, a speaker that sounds real good for music will sound real good for HT.

 

[DavidAM]

Thanks for the input on the sub's guys. And I fully understand how some subs can sound better than others due to some subs being sloppy and those sloppy subs not being able to kick out a tight kickdrum, but I was going on the assumption that we would be talking about quality subs that could kick out a hard thump along with a deep booming organ note. So knowing that, my assumption that any good quality sub that can produce the lowest of the lows along with the tight kickdrums should be able to produce them equally as well for music and HT. I don't see why it would matter that a 40hz organ note or a 50hz kickdrum note should sound any different for music or HT. If that signal is fed to a sub via music or HT, it will reproduce that note the same. The sub doesn't know what the source is. I should have made this clearer in the first post. So again, there shouldn't be any reason to say that a sub is better for HT over music or vice versa because as long as you're using a quality, accurate sub, then it will reproduce the bass it is sent the same for music and HT. And we had an SVS owner chime in and say it is a good sub for music also. I had read some posts that said they just didn't sound good for music and I couldn't see how that would be. I guess its more of the elitist bastard thing where the only difference they are hearing is the echo of the bass bouncing around in their hollow head

 

[Michael R Price]

I personally wouldn't buy a speaker that didn't have the capability to do both the effortless dynamics required for HT and the smooth sound with a good soundstage needed for music. But opinions vary, and it is valid to select certain priorities over others (like spending more money to get a speaker with a smoother sound at the expense of dynamics [typical 'music' speaker] or the other way around [typical 'HT' speaker]. The same goes for subwoofers. I guess DIY makes it so much easier for people like me to avoid compromises.

I prefer compromising many things equally, to compromising a few things completely and leaving other priorities intact. But that's just me.

 

[DavidAM]

I've noticed a few people saying that they use DIY speakers to avoid compromises or get exactly what they want in a speaker. How is this so? How can the everyday Joe make a better speaker than a huge company like B&W that has tons of R&D invested into a speaker?

 

[Saurav]

How can the everyday Joe make a better speaker than a huge company like B&W that has tons of R&D invested into a speaker?

If the average Joe tried to design a speaker, there's no way he could build something as good as a B&W. Not until he's spent several years learning how to do it, and even then there's no guarantee he'll become a great speaker designer. However, that's not how DIY works. Most DIY speakers are designed by 'speaker gods', so to speak. The average Joe just builds them, so all he needs is decent woodworking skills. Or, if he's like me and doesn't even have woodworking skills, he gets someone else to build the enclosures for him and just assembles the final speaker (requires some soldering, and knowledge of how to use a screwdriver, that's all).
So... someone who's a good speaker designer can sell a kit which contains the drivers, parts for a crossover, and plans for the cabinet. Unlike B&W, he doesn't have to pay that much for advertising, since most of the DIY community is fairly tight-knit and seems to work more on word-of-mouth. He doesn't have a dealer trying to make money by selling his speakers, so that markup is gone too. Also, many good designs are also available free on the internet, with information on where to get the parts.
I hope that makes more sense now. If you buy a speaker from a store, $1000 is probably buying you $200 in parts, and the rest goes in profits, advertising costs, R&D costs, store rent, employee pay, etc. etc. If you buy a $1K kit, you're getting about $700 - $800 in parts, the rest going to the designer as profit and compensation for the time spent in designing it. These are rough numbers, of course, but that should give you some idea of the difference. However, it's not true that a DIY speaker has zero compromises. It's just that you can build a DIY speaker for $1000 that would probably cost you $5000 to buy something equivalent from a store. So, you get a much better speaker for your money.
On the flip side - no service, no warranty, probably no option of hearing before you buy, low resale value depending on how popular/well-known the kit is, and so on - those are the cons to building your own gear. To most DIYers, these are minor issues.

 

[DavidAM]

Like like this DIY idea now. Where are the plans and specs on some of the better DIY speakers and subs so I can read up on this stuff and see what's out there? I'm looking for Wilson Audio sound at Polk Audio prices :wink:

 

[Jeffrey Forner]

David;
Check out Adire Audio's DIY page. You'll find links to several projects, including speakers and subwoofers. The boys at Adire even go so far as to do the crossover for you on the Kit 281s.

 

[Saurav]

There are many DIY companies. My speakers came from GR Research - www.gr-research.com. Adire is a well known and very respected company, my next speakers might be one of theirs. Seek out the websites of Speaker City, Madisound, and so on, there are several very active forums dedicated to DIY speakers. Those two are mentioned the most often, and from there you should find links to others. North Creek Music - that's another name that comes to mind. ACI, the makes of the Sapphire and Jaguar, they offer kits, or used to offer kits, I don't know what the status is now. I believe AudioReview also has some DIY designs. You'll get a wide range of prices and performance - ranging from under $100/pr to a few thousands.

I'm looking for Wilson Audio sound at Polk Audio prices

Good luck My speakers cost $500/pr, and people have compared them to speakers costing around $3K/pr and say they hold up pretty well. I've only auditioned speakers up to around $1K/pr, and I like mine better.

 

[BruceD]

If you use THX speakers for HT, they may not be ideal for music because of their specific design.

THX speakers are designed with a constrained dispersion pattern that purposely limits room reflections. This is not as much of an issue when you have 5.1 speakers to produce a soundfield for HT, but it can be less than satisfying for 2-channel music.

I don't like the sound of THX speakers. I prefer speakers selected especially for 2-channel music and let them serve double-duty as HT speakers.

 

[Bobby T]

I've been following this thread and realized there's one angle that has been overlooked. With SACD and DVDA multi channel mixes. A direct radiator sounds better for music than a bipole or dipole speaker that is designed with theater in mind.