the paradox of accurate speakers

> if 2 speakers are considered "accurate", but when compared sound "different" from each other, how can they be considered accurate ? <

No 2 speakers are ever accurate, therefore, they will both sound the same, that is, inaccurate. :-)

I'll see your Zen and raise you 5.

There are things to measure that we don't even know about yet. Even with what we can measure now, if there were 2 speakers and one measured more accurate but the other sounded better to me, I would choose the better sounder.

"the fact that accuracy may not be confirmed by experience does not invalidate the concept. "
Ah yes of course, like there was once upon a time conceptual art. . . MRT's launching now 'Conceptual Audiophilia". . . [Yawn!]

Well, all I can say is that Dr. Floyd Toole and many other Acoustic Engineers with University Degrees in Acoustic Physics and many with PHD's and many members of the AES would be disappointed to learn from this thread that they are completely wasting their time! "There is no such thing as an accurate speaker" and the "paradox" proves it.

If "accuracy may not be confirmed by experience" then any small company starting from a garage with some basic matrials and some cheap mass produced Northern European drivers stands an EQUAL chance of producing what many will describe as an "accurate" High-end audiophile speaker (provided they get the veneer and styling to exceptional standards, of course). Wait a minute - what I am describing is exactly what happens in audiophiledom! The little guys do this for many years and establish a name - and if succesful they get bought out by a big company and become part of their "house of brands". At this point they start to get shunned by audiophiles, no longer a boutique item or fashion statement, as they are now a part of big Harmon or Klipsch or other empire with suspicious engineering departments!

This whole thread about speakers sounding like anything some people want to buy or think they ought to sound like or think of as accurate and then this being accepted as "accuracy" is nonsense.

Most of speaker design is industrial design anyway => the look is FAR more important than the sound to most people who have to accept this item clearly on display in their living room. And that includes those who want something specifically big and ugly - like having TWO of 2001 Space Odyssey Obelisks in your room - that you only wonder what other shortcomings these speakers are meant to address psychologically?

I call this "the symbolism of big tall speakers" and it is as as much a paradox of speaker selection as accuracy ;-)

Accurate is a loose term, and it needs to be, for many reasons. One reason is acoustics which play to large a role in what we hear when music is played back in our listening rooms.

Even the same "accurate speakers" sound quite different in different rooms...or even, different locations in the same room.

Even using matched speakers in a multichannel system shows this if you take a measurement of each speaker.

Fairly accurate is about all you can hope for, even with a so called "accurate speaker". (unless you live in a perfect world).

Dave

Hello, Hi Shadorne I just wanted to make a small correction on the 2001 reference. The large black monolithic slab is just that, a monolith. An obelisk is a "tall. four sided stone pillar tapering towards its pyramidal top". A monolith is a "single large block or piece of stone". While a obelisk is a single large piece of stone the 2001 monolith is not obelisk shaped.
Sorry to correct you on such a trivial detail, but I do have the 2001 monolith designed Acoustat 6, which are "something like a monolith in size, unity of structure or purpose , unyielding quality" thankfully they are not made of stone!

Definitions from the New World Dictionary in quotes.

"Spaceship Orion is here waiting to part the air above you, waiting to take you"
Ozark Mountain Daredevils

Bob