The Critics Go Speaker Shopping (and take a few friends)
What do they listen to? What are they looking for in a loudspeaker? What records would they take to find it?
Sam Sutherland
Since my personal listening tastes touch a number of bases beyond the pop, rock, and r&b I normally write about.
I've learned to be wary not only of manufacturer claims, but also of personal recommendations. While both can be useful, it's important to balance them against my own needs. Had I followed the advice of most studio and a&r pros. I would long ago have sunk my money into studio monitors like the JBL 4311s, only to rue my decision later.
What sounds razor-sharp and viscerally full with contemporary pop and rock programs can prove nasal and unbalanced with acoustic instrumentation recorded across a wider dynamic range.
So what I have come to look for is that theoretical ideal of the neutral reproducer that neither adds to nor subtracts from what's in the grooves. For this reason both the more subdued. distant European designs that sound good with classics and the dazzling presence of certain U.S. speakers are equally unsatisfactory. The former pale with pop material: the latter tend to highlight surface noise. a serious problem for someone owning older LPs and singles they still want to play.
To gauge how well a given speaker will perform with my collection. I try to listen not only to the midrange frequencies where most voices and instruments are captured, but to the lowest bass notes (pedal tones on pipe organ. Synthesizer, and acoustic bass are good benchmarks) and highest upper frequencies (percussion. especially cymbals) as well. And since I have an almost pathological need to listen to records at all times of the day or night. I also look for speakers that will sound as crisp and balanced at low levels as they do at full blast. Higher volumes do give a fuller account of a speaker's abilities. but my neighbors can't be expected to swallow that rationale at 3 a.m.
In my recent year-long odyssey in search of a new set of speakers. I used close to a dozen titles for auditioning purposes.
Among my favorites: the half-speed remastered "Aja" by Steely Dan (Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab), which offers exemplary pressing quality and a wide sonic spectrum: Dire Straits' "Making Movies" (Warner Bros.). which boasts a thundering drum sound useful in evaluating a speaker's rock clout: Concord Jazz titles by the Clayton Brothers and the Louis Bellson band. both for instrumental timbres and pressing quality: any number of ECM sets for the same reasons: Michael Jackson's "Off the Wall" (Epic), which is now available in half-speed re-master as well: and any of the several recordings of Stravinsky's Le Sacre du printemps including the Pierre Boulez/Cleveland Orchestra on CBS and the Michael Tilson Thomas/ Boston Symphony on Deutsche Grammophon (DG).
----- Critic Cioe en route with friends to the audio salon
Steven X. Rea
Shopping for speakers can he a pretty intimidating experience: There you are standing in the middle of some sound perfect listening room, surrounded by a myriad of high-tech components and speakers, with a (usually) fast-talking, ultraslick salesperson breathing down your neck truing to unload this week's "great deal on you. It's not easy to find the right sounds for your ears, even under ideal conditions. One sure way to narrow down the field, though, is to bring along a few discs you know very well.
My listening tastes are divided about 70-30 between, on the one hand, pop, rock, and country and. on the other, early jazz (Benny Carter. Charlie Parker) and classical. Because of the diversity of the music I listen to. I prefer speakers with a "straight" aural approach-a hooray, blasting bass or an overly lush, colored sound just doesn't wash. I like to hear what's coming off the record clean and true, with a deep, defined bass and crisp, well-dispersed highs.
There are three albums I'd take with me on a quest for new speakers. First.
Antonio Vivaldi's "The Mandolin Concertos" (Musical Heritage Society. MHS 1100H). performed by I Solisti Veneti.
The recording crackles with verve and clarity, and the contrasts between the high, lyrical plucked mandolins and the dark hues of the strings and basso continn would pinpoint any weaknesses in a speaker's ability to reproduce sounds accurately and without coloration. Vivaldi's quiet. lilting largos and sweeping finales would play off a unit's depth and volume capabilities.
Pop outfits like Supertramp and Genesis, who opt for a stylistic complexity rife with synthesizers and layers of overdubs and whose end results are sonically lucid and alive, are ideally suited to test the dynamic range of speaker systems.
Unfortunately, I can't stand either group. British electro-rock upstart Bruce Woolley. an artist with a sense of fun, is my pick here, so I would take "Bruce Woolley and the Camera Club" ( Columbia). Awash in a bank of synthesizers. Woolley s tunes (especially English Garden and Video Killed the Radio Star) are grand gestures, thick with guitars, keyboards, and vocals.
Lastly, I would take T-Bone Burnett's "Truth Decay(Takoma). This is American music at its finest: gospel. rockabilly, country-all framed by ringing guitars and a resounding. surefire rhythm section. Burnett's variably whining. wailing vocals can sot merely tinny on inadequate speakers: the upright pass muffled and frayed. But on a topflight system. the vitality of Burnett's songs and the spry, easy playing of his band emerge as a sweeping aural tapestry.
Crispin Cioe
I listen to everything from hard rock to r&b to jazz. But whether reviewing, singing along in the shower. or doing the dishes. I generally want to hear the same qualities in all recorded music: a rich and resonant bass to lower midrange, low distortion at moderate to semi-loud volume levels, reasonably clean and transparent ,, high frequencies. a decent stereo image, and the kind of transient response that accurately tracks abrupt shifts in musical register. At the same time, my ideal good sound at home has as much to do with my apartments floor plan as it does with my musical tastes. Being a city dweller with limited space. I've avoided large speakers since proper placement is impossible. so my shopping criteria would he based on bookshelf-sized speakers.
I would take along the best-produced and hest-engineered samples of the musical styles I enjoy most. Ry Cooder's "Bop Till You Drop" (Warner Bros.). pop's first all-digital recording. has exceptionally resonant guitars and vocals in the midrange, along with no-frills drums and bass. Also. Cooder's pared-down, small-hand approach allows for close detection of subtle frequency and distortion differences between speakers.
For bass in general, I'd take along "Earth. Wind & Fire's Greatest Hits. Vol. 1" (ARC/Columbia ). Given the full-spectrum production and high-energy playing EW&F purvey, the bass and drum tracks are extremely clean and precise. For rock & roll test-listening, I'd take several LPs that best represent contemporary hard edged rock's live-sounding approach in a studio context: Bruce Springsteen's "Born to Run" ( Columbia). Bob Seger's "Stranger in Town" (Capitol), and Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers' "Damn the Torpedoes(MCA). For checking stereo image. I recommend any recent production by Quincy Jones, such as George Benson's "Give Me the Night" (Quest / Warner Bros.). because Quincy is an acknowledged master of creating deep and dramatic three-dimensional stereo space.
Attempts at alternative means of transport fail.
Tom Vickers
Sometimes I listen to music, and sometimes I dance to it. Finding a speaker that fully accommodates both functions isn't easy. The very mechanics of the selection process can he cumbersome.
Imagine going to your local stereo dealer, listening to a few different brands. and then pulling hack the rug to do the Freak or Spacewalk. Most stores try to create an "ideal listening environment." but how many of them have dance floors? Being a dancing fool has other drawbacks as well. Most dance music is propelled by the rhythm tracks. and many of the flat, high-accuracy speakers that have gained prominence in the past five years don't kick with the same deep resonance of their boomy predecessors. To my ears, high accuracy means high gloss: too much treble and midrange and not enough chest-pounding intensity. High accuracy is fine for pop, country, classical, and most jazz, but it often makes hard rock and funk sound tinny. It also sounds better at low volumes. I like a speaker that sounds good at low volumes. yet also has the bass and high-volume kick to satisfy my more primal dancing urges.
To find it, I would take along three albums to gauge the high. midrange. and bass response. And I'd play each disc at both high and low volumes at a flat setting.
I'd use "The Pat Metheny Group" (ECM) to measure the high-end presence or gloss and to see how well the speaker responded to the delicate interplay between instruments. Steely Dan's "Gaucho" (MCA) is a fair test for the midrange. It's also a good indicator of how wearing the speakers are on the ears in terms of accuracy of reproduction and overall crispness. Finally. I would move the listening couch to one side and put on Grandmaster Flash's "Superrappin' " (Enjoy 0001). a twelve-inch rap record that has a truly furious rhythm track. If the bass's powerful pops. stops. and slides drove my feet to dancing. and if I could feel them as well as hear them, then I'd know the speaker had the proper amount of bass response.
Fred Miller
Since I'm in the studio business. I spend many of my days recording and listening to material I'm not crazy about. On my own time, my preferences are symphonic music. recorded as naturally as possible, acoustic jazz, and m.o.r. pop fare by the likes of Paul Simon. Billy Joel, the Pointer Sisters. and Rupert Holmes. If I were in the market for a pair of loudspeakers for the house. there would he several factors to consider. First of all, price. Second, and most important, would be accuracy of reproduction. Does the music sound natural and/or as it was designed to sound when it was recorded? Third. does the pair of speakers give a good representation of the stereo image? Are the instruments clearly definable as delivered from a particular point(s) between the two speakers? To check those criteria, I'd take the following records along: Gerard Schwarz's recording of Haydn's Concerto in E for Trumpet and Orchestra (Delos Digital), the digital recording of the Cincinnati Symphony performing the 1812 Overture (Telarc). Barbara Cook's live Carnegie Hall disc. "It's Better with a Band" (Moss Music Group). "Dizzyfingers" by Bob Wilber (Bodeswell), and my two all-time favorite Paul Simon records. "Still Crazy After All These Years" and "There Goes Rhymin' Simon." Of course, I engineered most of those records. But I would use them because I know what they sounded like under ideal studio conditions. (I may have an advantage there.) If the Haydn sounded clear and crystalline-as if I was in the room with the orchestra-I'd like the speaker. If I could feel Barbara Cook whispering in my ear. I'd like the speaker. If, on "Still Crary." I could tell it was Savuca singing along with his accordion solo and that somebody made a had edit on the harmonica solo (both of which are true). I'd like the speaker.
What I'm looking for is accuracy. The concept of choosing a speaker for its "lush sound," "fat highs," or any other romantic attributes just doesn't make any sense to me. If it has a good, uniform frequency response, good power-handling capacity. and dispersion characteristics that are pleasing to the ear and create enough "space" for the record to sound natural, then it's a good speaker.
Mitchell Cohen
On any given Sunday afternoon. my loudspeakers may have to contend with Merle Haggard. Frédéric Chopin, the New York Dolls. Duke Ellington, and the Miracles. A speaker that imposes its own personality is not one I'd be comfortable with. Accuracy of reproduction, versatility, and stamina are important.
A speaker should not cringe at high volume rock, nor wilt in the presence of big-band jazz, nor fail to detect nuances in string quartets. Modern technology is beyond me--most of my favorite records (Billie Holiday, Hank Williams, the Drifters, Elvis Presley, Buddy Holly, even "Rubber Soul") are monaural. Anyway -- but I want to hear what I want to hear.
To test a speaker's adaptability to these quirky needs. I'd first put on an album filled with Nelson Riddle arrangements: lots of brass and swingy strings. a vocalist like Nat Cole, Ella Fitzgerald. or Sinatra. straight pop melodies. Like Jack Nirzsche's work behind the Crystals, or an Ennio Morricone film score. Riddle's charts demand attention to detail amidst layers of sound. Make it Fitzgerald's "George and Ira Gershwin Songbook" (Verve). Next I'd put on a rock record, brazen and anthemic, and crank it up to hear beefy chords. Slashing, zingy guitar lines, and pounding rhythmic bass and drums.
The Who isn't my favorite band. but "Who's Next" (MCA) is an impeccably constructed with the right instruments.
It has craft, panache, a basic rock bottom, and it is one of the few listenable albums extant that has prominent synthesizer.
Finally, to check for perception of tone and color, for lack of menacing hiss or rumble: a spare. meditative record of small combo or solo jazz, or chamber music. Probably Bach's Six Sonatas for Violin and Harpsichord (CBS) as performed by Jaime Laredo and Glenn Gould. That, or Dion's Runaround Sue (Laurie).
---------The chariot awaits
Don Heckman
am likely to listen to anything from 'Gregorian chant to Béla Bartók. Charlie Parker. and the Stones. Eclectic is the proper word. I suppose, to describe my tastes. In addition to occasional fixations (lately I've been obsessed with Chopin), I find there's very little music that doesn't bring me some kind of pleasure.
Speakers that are sensational for rock & roll might be terrible for, say. a Haydn string quartet. And since I can't afford several pairs custom-picked for each style I listen to. I need neutral reproducers-those that will not make their own. unwelcome, contributions to the audio mix.
In deciding which albums I would take with me to find the right unit. I would pick those with which I am the most familiar. Knowing each detail of an L.P's sound provides just the reference points one needs to compare the nontechnical.
purely auditory qualities of different speakers. For jazz, almost any album by Weather Report would do: I know "1 heavy Weather" ( Columbia) quite well and wouldn't hesitate to use it. But I'd also like to hear what could he done with the crisp rhythm-section sound that Bob James gets on virtually all his outings, especially "H" (Tappan Zee/Columbia). And, to put things in proper perspective. I'd like to hear what a speaker could do with Larker's "Complete Savoy Studio Sessions" (Arista). The Beatles "Sgt. Pepper" (Capitol) is a good test for almost any kind of musical style. For pop and rock I would use the Rolling Stones' early Seventies "More 1 lot Rocks" ( London): the range of rock here, despite the sometimes muddy recording, would expose any speaker's funk limitations. To cover other aspects of pop I'd use the soundtrack from Fame (RSO).Carole King's"Tapestry" (A&M) because I know it so well. and the Pentangle's "Sweet Child" (Reprise) for delicate string interplay.
Finally, for classical music I'd use the Pierre Boulez SQ mix of Bartók's “Concerto for Orchestra" ( Columbia). While a number of recordings of this marvelous work will stretch the limits of any speaker system. I prefer this one for the bright, individual clarity of the instruments. Another choice--one that would reveal a unit's ability to produce clear.
pointed distinctions between sound and silence-is the Henryk Szeryng recording of Bach's Partitas and Sonatas for Solo Violin (DG). i We're Moving Effective immediately, all editorial correspondence should be addressed to The Editor, High Fidelity, 825 7th Ave., New York, N.Y. 10019.
-------------
(High Fidelity, USA print magazine)
Also see: