A slightly different approach on a topic, last of the 2.
A quote from 7review that made me question the world of hi-fi reviews.
Slightly frustrated by the mix of good and bad I got tweaking. A 2 Ohm resistor to the treble unit, replacing the bi-wire positive (+) link, gave a measured flat response but a warm-ish sound, whilst a I Ohm resistor was perfect – clear treble but not overwhelming. This gave me the Denton 85th I wanted to hear and is a very simple thing to do (such a tweak can be made to any bi- wirable loudspeaker). Hi-hats didn’t overwhelm, cymbals didn’t crash harshly and rim shots were clear but not destructive; ride cymbals fell back to accompany rather than dominate.
This is a review about the Denton 85th which got near perfect scores overall in many reviews.
I own this model and have applied the 1 ohm resistor tweak just to be able to form an opinion about what has been written. And compared to the original output, yes.. a 2 ohm resistor creates a warmer signature than 1 ohm, but 1 ohm is still warmer than the original signature.
Compared to the original output it makes the sound slightly warmer due to the effect of lowering the impact of the tweeter. I would like to describe the change it creates as having a CD player for ages and suddenly switching to a turntable and quality record. It gives that vinyl touch. It is definitely an audible difference. Both signatures are market standards in the hi-fi world. But is one better than another?
Let's put aside the specific model, I would like to zoom into the review quality.
As many probably know there are plenty of speaker models, with all having little signature differences.
Now there is user preference versus what the manufacturer intended. And user preference is totally ok. If you want to have something that spices a product to your taste, go ahead. You own the product. If a hypothetical 60% of the hi-fi users prefer a warm sound, it is commercially wise to create a high percentage of warm sounding speakers probably.
But as a professional reviewer you need to keep the other 40% in mind and a reviewer should be able to put his or her own preference a bit aside in my opinion. An analytical type speaker should not receive a lower score just because the reviewer likes it to be warm.
One can perhaps review a product from a stance of preferring a certain sound, but not rate it as such and putting products along that personal line of measure. Let alone, adding components that modify the signature so the desired "personally preferred" outcome is the result.
Why is this a problem?
Sound is quite subjective. Let's take "tweeters that often sound a bit harsch".
A developer might want to recreate the way a hi-hat, ride cymbal and certain high pitched notes sound in real life when standing in front of an instrument player, not being amplified. And I can guarantee that a splash or crash cymbal indeed sound harsch and high pitched notes on western guitars do indeed sound brighter and edged. You might even experience listening fatigue at these non amplified concerts if you would focus on that specifically.
So when you want to replicate this natural sound as a developer, you need more top end and taming the tweeter to get a typical vinyl sound is not giving that specific touch.
Vinyl sound is a way to go as well, more articulated mids and warmer bass. No harschness or brighter violins at top frequencies.
Personally I am conservative in monitors when it comes to the production side of music. But I am totally not conservative and ok with a broad range of characteristics in hi-fi reproduction, since all can be motivated. That is why a little change of atmosphere is not a big deal for me, but for a review.. I think modifying things to a desired personal preference should never be a method. Especially when only selectively applied to models you want to like.
So a little poll
A quote from 7review that made me question the world of hi-fi reviews.
Slightly frustrated by the mix of good and bad I got tweaking. A 2 Ohm resistor to the treble unit, replacing the bi-wire positive (+) link, gave a measured flat response but a warm-ish sound, whilst a I Ohm resistor was perfect – clear treble but not overwhelming. This gave me the Denton 85th I wanted to hear and is a very simple thing to do (such a tweak can be made to any bi- wirable loudspeaker). Hi-hats didn’t overwhelm, cymbals didn’t crash harshly and rim shots were clear but not destructive; ride cymbals fell back to accompany rather than dominate.
This is a review about the Denton 85th which got near perfect scores overall in many reviews.
I own this model and have applied the 1 ohm resistor tweak just to be able to form an opinion about what has been written. And compared to the original output, yes.. a 2 ohm resistor creates a warmer signature than 1 ohm, but 1 ohm is still warmer than the original signature.
Compared to the original output it makes the sound slightly warmer due to the effect of lowering the impact of the tweeter. I would like to describe the change it creates as having a CD player for ages and suddenly switching to a turntable and quality record. It gives that vinyl touch. It is definitely an audible difference. Both signatures are market standards in the hi-fi world. But is one better than another?
Let's put aside the specific model, I would like to zoom into the review quality.
As many probably know there are plenty of speaker models, with all having little signature differences.
Now there is user preference versus what the manufacturer intended. And user preference is totally ok. If you want to have something that spices a product to your taste, go ahead. You own the product. If a hypothetical 60% of the hi-fi users prefer a warm sound, it is commercially wise to create a high percentage of warm sounding speakers probably.
But as a professional reviewer you need to keep the other 40% in mind and a reviewer should be able to put his or her own preference a bit aside in my opinion. An analytical type speaker should not receive a lower score just because the reviewer likes it to be warm.
One can perhaps review a product from a stance of preferring a certain sound, but not rate it as such and putting products along that personal line of measure. Let alone, adding components that modify the signature so the desired "personally preferred" outcome is the result.
Why is this a problem?
Sound is quite subjective. Let's take "tweeters that often sound a bit harsch".
A developer might want to recreate the way a hi-hat, ride cymbal and certain high pitched notes sound in real life when standing in front of an instrument player, not being amplified. And I can guarantee that a splash or crash cymbal indeed sound harsch and high pitched notes on western guitars do indeed sound brighter and edged. You might even experience listening fatigue at these non amplified concerts if you would focus on that specifically.
So when you want to replicate this natural sound as a developer, you need more top end and taming the tweeter to get a typical vinyl sound is not giving that specific touch.
Vinyl sound is a way to go as well, more articulated mids and warmer bass. No harschness or brighter violins at top frequencies.
Personally I am conservative in monitors when it comes to the production side of music. But I am totally not conservative and ok with a broad range of characteristics in hi-fi reproduction, since all can be motivated. That is why a little change of atmosphere is not a big deal for me, but for a review.. I think modifying things to a desired personal preference should never be a method. Especially when only selectively applied to models you want to like.
So a little poll
Last edited:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram