1. Home
  2. speakers
  3. 1306764448

Compairson ground rules....should we have them?

More often than not, someone will ask, 'How do you compare...' regarding two products--speakers, or electronics. This is fair game, this is a blog site--but too often the comparisons become the 'last word' of the product's value, and with little or no thought to be paid to the relationship of cost between the two products.
This is fair too--but..and a big but here (think Kardashian) if we're talking about the THIEL 3.7 and we start railing about it's lack of deep bass (when comparing it to a speaker costing 2 or 3X as much)...I KNOW, and maybe some of the more traveled audiophiles know...but without context...does the typical person, or neophyte know? Or do they walk away, storing only the statment, 'THIEL 3.7 has limited bass output', in their memory banks--this being misleading.
Audiogon is a constant source of amazement to me--or should I say, 'Human Nature' is that source?

'My name is Dilbert, and I own a pair of $38 dollar, not thousand dollar, Sony speakers that I bought 23 years ago...I'm thinking of replacing them with the MBL 101's...has anyone compared these two?'
At that point someone will offer a comparison of the two with little or no regard for the price differential--in other words an emperical not practical comparison. Don't get me wrong, emperical and practical are both good, and both relevant but rarely part of the discussion.
I suppose this bothers me because people always seem to do this with THIEL--compare them with speakers costing multiples of the THIEL price, as if that's somehow Kosher.
I suppose that it bothers me, because the shortcomings of speaker A (THIEL in this case as I'm harking to a comparison of THIEL versus Egglestons) are highlighted in great detail, as compared to B (the multiple thousand That, coupled with my personal impressions of the Egglestons which is that they are not neutral sounding AND I don't happen to prefer the colors that they've chosen...but now we're in to the crux of audio preferences...chose the 'color' you like.
Whether you're splashing the walls with paint, or splashing the walls with sound, shouldn't a comparison be based on some commonality if we're delving into the two personalities of speakers?
I got cross ways with someone on another A'gon post and made this same point, but it got no traction whatsoever--someone comparing the 3.7 with the Tidal...which at that time was about 2X the price. My comments were...OK, the Tidal may be better, but how does the Tidal compare with speakers costing twice THEIR price? Within that context, let's detail the shortcomings of the Tidals now.

I suppose I'm really saying that questions should have the caveat--I'm asking this question for edification, not to damn with faint praise nor condemn by comparing. CNO comparisons(Cost no object) which would be emperical...all comments are of the 'absolute' variety...any shortcommings of product A, (the lesser priced one) should be taken in context of that obvious price differential.
In my lexicon, Quality is a constant, Value is more elastic...and very time dependant...i.e. where is the buyer's financial health at the moment in question?
My best friend always talks about how much of a 'value' the Mercedez is...yes, of course in his world this is true--at $115K it's a good car...but for the masses, maybe the $39K Buick LaCrosse might just hit the mark more easily. Now, am I going to pretend that the Buick is the equal of the S Car...NO...but all comparisons deserve context.
Just sayin'

Good listening.
Larry
lrsky
elizabeth
6,726 posts
 
Another point is the level of knowledge assumed to be in the reader is very high.
Unless a thread is stating 'Help me understand', or such, I would assume the people partaking of the thread are knowledgable audiophiles. If the prices of two components are wildly apart, usally someone will chime in and complain the comparo is unfair.
The sort of assumption that because a comment was made in one post that a permanent stigma is attached to a product is small.
Anyway, in general most folks take stuff they read here with a 'grain of salt' at least they should!
Best to read and get a picture of the consensus before jumping off that cliff... And even then one needs to do ones' own thinking. Just because a pile of idiots says JUMP NOW! does not mean it really actually IS a good idea.
kbarkamian
647 posts
 
When comparing, recommending or criticizing stuff, I try to end posts with something along the lines of "Just my opinion. Everyone's ears, room and system are different." Hopefully they paid attention to that part and even applied it to other posts by other people in the thread.

I can't stand when people make absolute statements like 'there's no way x is better than y,' 'x component is anything but trait z,' etc. Several people said things like that to me when I went against the grain and criticized the Musical Fidelity V-DAC. I stated several times that I thought it was a great DAC for the money, but I found it dull and uninvolving. I also listed several DACs in the same range that I'd take over it. People didn't like that at all. One guy told me that the V-DAC sounds phenominal in his system with a $3k coax cable attached to it. $3k coax cable on a sub $300 DAC? The most absurd thing I've ever heard here.

I guess what I'm trying to say is A) people shouldn't make absolute statements, as their opinion isn't the absolute truth; and B) some people need a lesson in perspective.

All in my opinion, of course. I'm sure many will disagree.
(I use that one often too!)
james63
501 posts
 
Larry, I fully agree that all things need a context. But I look at it a little different. I would like to see reviews compare all of their reviews to a single speaker with in 50%-200%. A bass line speaker and price could be the Watt Puppy line for example. They are 26k and could be compared to a $13,000 all the way up to a $52,000..... so it could be "not as good as a Watt Puppy ' or "better than a Watt Puppy" and then elaborated on the subject.

With that said I would not give people on audiogon a hard time. Professional reviews are just as bad about it....

"But, if the gear in front of the Thiels is capable of matching them, and the interconnect and speaker cables are capable of passing the signals properly, the CS7.2 can stand toe-to-toe with any loudspeaker I've ever heard. At $13,500 a pair, I'd put 'em against anybody's $80,000 contender. Hoo-ah!"

http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/thiel_cs72.htm

"The Thiel CS2.4 is a great loudspeaker, one of the very best I've heard regardless of price. Its treble soars and its bass plummets, but all the while the CS2.4 sounds utterly neutral and musically communicative. This speaker looks gorgeous and has the earmarks of heirloom-quality craftsmanship. The CS2.4 will be at home in a tweaked-out dedicated listening room or in a finely decorated living room, and its moderate size means it won't take up much space in either."

http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/thiel_cs24.htm

"I briefly auditioned the Thiels while the Avalon Indras that I reviewed in October were still here. The two speakers were essentially cut from the same cloth—both had startling clarity and detail without the in-your-face quality usually implied by "detail." Like the Thiels, the Indras lack a sock-'em bottom end. Of course, the difference in price could buy the Thiels a pretty good subwoofer system. But shipping schedules kept the Indra/Thiel comparison brief, so I trotted out the trusty Wilson Audio WATT/Puppy 8 system, because it's such a known reference point for a compact high-quality monitor."

http://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs37-loudspeaker-page-2

But you do have a point in general. My biggest pet peeve is when people talk about sound-stage between equipment. It is VERY set up and room dependent. Also some speakers are just not integrated well and have weird off axis dispersion and send sounds unevenly all over the room. Some would call the sound stage huge as they can add a false sense space but in reality the speakers do not sound accurate....
elizabeth
6,726 posts
 
The issue in discussing equipment also has a problem in that everyones sound is unique. Either the room shape, size, electrical power delivery, the components each one possibly different themselves, the wires, and then the listener. The Listeners skills at listening, and the listeners skills at describing what he/she has heard.
Such a huge nuber of differences, lucky we can discuss stuff at all and be anywhere near the same place.
paulsax
269 posts
 
one area that may lend itself to some ground rules (good luck with enforcement) is that you only comment if you actually heard the item in question. More than a few responses are puked up-rehashed-read it and want in on the party, stuff.
More to discover