Since, but you didn’t mention what standards were proposed, I guess this just leaves your audience to imagine big brother was coming for their speakers. Even your statement “I’m sure Dr. Toole……”, could he interpreted as denigrating Dr. Toole without any proof or reference to any standard he ever “may have” suggested. After all, why have any standard, it’s all fake standards anyway. Sorry, but you’ve gone from building beautiful speakers and building other interesting audio components to promoting conspiracies and plots all without a shred of the peer review documentation provided by someone like Toole.

What I'm saying seems to be beyond your ability to comprehend and (more importantly) put in perspective. And I'm not going to try to clarify it for you, since this is of very little importance overall and I doubt I could get through to you when you seem to have gone completely off the rails with your attitude about it. My advice is avoid watching my videos if what I say makes you too upset. You'll be a happier person and that's all that counts.

@@IBuildItI already responded to your thoughts here, but I wanted to add a more personal note. I’ve been making KZfaq videos for about 13 years now (two different channels). I’ve made a lot of videos in that time, and some of them were just ripe for critique. It really sucks when you put a lot of time into making something and armchair experts or internet goblins come seemingly just to tear you down. I don’t believe that people are responding to much more than a disagreement over your thoughts on Toole, though some are more polite than others. What concerns me is that their responses seem to be really getting to you. I’ve been there. It’s deeply frustrating to lay out a full-fledged response to criticism, then 5 minutes later another 3 comments pop up about the same thing. It’s fuel for burning you out and making KZfaq put a bad taste in your mouth. I’d encourage you to do one of a few things:stop reading these comments, remove the video, or consider reframing your thoughts on the matter (I’m not necessarily saying change your mind, but rather find a way to discuss this in a way that people might find easier to swallow). My comments here come strictly for a concern about your wellbeing, and helping avoid any undue strain, stress or anger at your audience. For what it’s worth, a large majority of people watching your videos may have no clue who toole is, or may only have a very basic grasp of his work. This is one of those deep rabbit holes where people get passionate about, but ultimately we’re all here to learn about speaker design, listen to music, and tinker for better sound. I think there’s value in what you’re saying about preferences and art, i think the negative response comes from a perceived attack on Toole, and coming to that topic without providing any hard metrics on why he might be wrong.

How people perceive, respond to and interpret what I'm saying is out of my hands. All I can do is cogently present my thoughts, but it's up to you to listen carefully enough to come away with the correct meaning. When I single out someone and imply that they are the cause of a situation, people who respect and follow that person immediately go on the defensive and that defensive position colours everything they think I'm saying. In other words, they interpret what I'm saying as an attack. In fact what I'm saying is that Toole just presented the findings, but people who are looking for simple, easy answers latched onto aspects of those findings (like they did with Keynes) and THEY are to blame for the situation I'm describing, and not Toole directly. I have nothing specific against Toole - he did fine research - but it needs to be understood within the full context of what he was trying to do. As for you concern for my well being, that can be interpreted two ways. It could be genuine and I'd appreciate it (although I'm fine and you have nothing to worry about), or it could be a tactic to try to annoy me and put me on the defensive, which would be typical.@@n.o.b.s.8458

@@IBuildIt You might be saying it in far too many words 😁, and yes I took the liberty to jump of in time.

Fantastic quote. It really embodies trying to quantify the scale of researching a topic so involved. I recall reading that somewhere and couldn't agree more. It's a disclaimer of sorts too, or it seems that way to me. A modest way of saying "there's some science going on, not sure what it is, gonna try to find out, but it's ultimately an almost impossible task and may not accurately reflect the full scope of the topic".

Well actually there is something called Toole's circle of confusion i.e. " Loudspeakers judged using recordings made with microphones that are judged using Loudspeakers". When you put it in a circle it should start with loudspeaker and end on it, in this way only one loudspeaker word will come in circle. There are also other great things that Toole talks about, but after starting chapters a certain level of knowledge of Physics and music is required. And because of the circle of confusion Toole puts an idea of measurements and standards. Also, Toole does not say that listeners judgement of loudspeakers performance was solely based on Low-Frequency i.e. Bass, instead Toole argues that the directivity of a loudspeaker gradually declines above mid-range if listener is off-axis, as high frequency have a small wavelength compared to low frequencies they suffer directivity loss, and at the same time because of larger wavelength low frequencies does not suffer from directivity loss, and any high-quality loudspeaker will reproduce low frequencies accurately and when referenced off-axis low-frequency is the only information left upon which the listener can draw the judgement.

@@vib_di What you said towards the end is true. I haven't read the circle of reasoning, but there's a crazy paradox that has me scratching my head: The quest for audio bliss is to reproduce what the music studio recorded and mixed, but that's done with speakers, (we'll leave the mic alone for now). So, what are we doing? Trying to get speakers to sound identical to the studio monitors used when the engineer recorded it? And what about "live music"... That quest for the "live performance", but a live performance is just recorded from PA speakers and commercial sound setup. Hmmm....

Oh man I just love the amp part. Or even better: "Audiophile" AC power cable. hahahah

Unless you designed and or built the Drivers yourself... then all you are is basically a "Tinkerer". The box design is the smallest factor of a speakers performance abilities. Its also the easiest to figure out + build. The real performance differences come from high performance drivers. I used to own a pair of Techniques 3 ways, that had 12" woofers (ported)... and were said to be able to handle 200 watts each. Then I got a pair of 1970s era "EPI 100v" speakers. The EPIs only had 8" woofers, with a 2-way setup (sealed). But... The little EPIs put out FAR superior sound quality in both Bass and High frequencies. The bass was not only more "Musical" and detailed.. but it was also had a much more powerful room-shaking "Thump" to it. One single EPI woofer, weighed more than two of the 12" techniques "eco woofers". This was largely due to the much larger and stronger magnets used on the EPIs... and likely, much stronger voice coils too boot. The stronger the magnetic forces.. the faster the potential Acceleration and control = Far more details with FAR less potential distortions. The EPIs have a near Holographic 3D soundstage... that rivals any speaker that Ive ever heard before... And I own, and have listened to, a LOT of different speakers. While they can play as loud as the Techs... they are more than loud enough to get the cops called on you, if you crank them up in your apartment. You dont really miss the additional loudness... because the sound quality, details, superior bass, and 3d soundstage... are SO VASTLY better... that its just pure Nirvana to the Ears. (In fact, with these... I was able to understand lyrics from a singer... that with every other speaker... it was unintelligible) While I agree that extreme room situations, like a Hockey Rink, are going to present a huge problem for sound... no matter what speakers you are using... MOST people are playing their music in standard low ceiling apartments, that are well furnished... and do not "Echo". As for DSP... it can never fix issues with drivers that are struggling to keep up, and are distorting. DSP is mainly for room reflection / timing corrections. It can magically fix low quality drivers. And as for the comment about the AMP being the weak link... In many cases I agree with you. Most speakers dont even come close to requiring a +$1000 Amp. Largely because either 1) They lack speakers that are truly capable of Audiophile level reproduction or 2) They are running low power speakers, that dont need that level of wattage. Now... High power amps CAN make a huge difference, however... only really if you are running some Crazy expensive + super powerful speaker sets. Maybe something like the EPI 1000 towers, that have 8 drivers each in them. Or maybe the massive speakers you often see in PS Audio's videos: "Infinity IRSV", that are taller than many peoples ceilings, and have over 30 drivers in them. With that level of speaker... they would be so Dynamic and Power hungry, that most typical amps couldnt keep them powered effectively enough... AND... any small amp imperfections, will likely be very easily heard on these speakers... where as with most speakers, you would never be able to tell the differences between amps (other than EQ differences).

@@johndough8115 What are you talking about? Like no offense but I understand most of TS parameters and their HUGE interactions with the speaker cabinet lol. Speaker enclosure is extremely important. Ofc you want low distortion drivers that don't ring etc. Amplifier has to have: enough power to drive your speakers for desired SPL, decent DF, low noise, and low distortion 80dB sinad or better at decent volume. Basically what TI's TPA325x or LM3886 (or equivalent AB amp) can do for cheap lol. Then you fix the rest with speaker placement, room treatment and DSP. TLDR: You dont have to spend a fortune on an amp. lol

​@@buka9330 I have owned many low end speakers, and own one very high end speaker set.. One time I used to have a Phillips "Woox" mini stereo. These have a unique Passive Radiator system.. that has more "Extension" than a typical passive. The bass is deep, excited, and non-distorting.. even at max volume levels.. which was very surprising. Well, eventually the foam on the woofers started to crack / rot.. so I tore apart some of the many boom box speakers that I had collected (Im a tinkerer, and speaker-holic).. and I tried swapping the original Phillips woofers with these other drivers. A pair of Sony divers were about the same size.. but when placing them in the phillips boxes... they sounded like A**, in comparison. In fact, all of the other drivers I had, also did not sound good, compared to the Phillips woofers. I went to search about them online... and it turned out, that they use a Taiwanese MFG. that specializes in "Higher End" level drivers. And in fact, these particular woofers were specifically designed for the Woox speakers... as they have more Extension / Travel... allowing them to have much more powerful bass, without over-extension distortions. This also means, that they probably have stronger magnets, and stronger coils, too. I decided to have them refoamed.. and they sounded fantastic... Until the Woox Passives started to rot... and then they were basically Useless. Ive seen that they made an All Plastic passive set in some of their speakers.. but I had the foam versions, and couldnt find a replacement. That said, this is one of the reasons why I know that the Box itself... is not the main issue with most speakers. I also tried swapping around drivers in larger house sized speakers. I found the same issue. Certain woofers, were not nearly as Accurate or "good-sounding", as others. The cabinet itself, didnt factor into this HUGE different in sound quality. I was easily able to hear the differences between each of them. Then I got hold of a used pair of Audiophile grade speakers... and my whole idea about what great sound was... completely flipped on its head. And the reason was revealed, when I opened them up, and looked at the woofers... and felt how much heavier they were. Those massive magnets, provided the abilities for them to prevent typical playback Distortions. The difference was massive. Almost made me cry, it was so good. Those were also fully SEALED speakers... and the sound of the Bass, was so much better than any Ported speaker cabinet design.. that I became immediately Disgusted with Ported speakers from that moment forwards. So while the Cabinet can make some differences... MOST of speakers failures in Quality and 3D imaging... is down to using lower quality drivers. Not the actual cabinet. And not the actual Room.

This video is a continuation on the topic I started 3 videos ago where I talked about speaker measurements. Like I said in your comment on the other video, I saw the video you pointed out months ago, along with some other talks and interviews from Toole, basically to pin down what he's saying first-hand to compare it to what his fanboys have been saying. Some will take this video (and the ones before) as an unwarranted attack on his ideas, but a better way to view them is as an amateur attempt at scientific rigor where the conclusions he came to are questioned and tested in the real world. For example, I know that only under the loosest possible terms can you say that there is such a thing as a typical room. For the most part, the conclusions he came to are based on a typical SITUATION - that's the way I'd say it, rather than the typical room model. That typical situation is that there isn't any effective room treatment and there doesn't need to be any. But, and I know this from experience (because I've built a treated room to do a direct listening comparison), if your goal is the best sound quality possible, you cannot accept listening in a space that is untreated. Room treatment is essential to get the best sound quality and not optional, and that's because the room itself will drastically change the response and character and clarity of the sound the speaker produces - you can't evaluate speaker performance with sound quality as the measure when you discount what the room does. They work together. So, my amateur conclusion is that the work he did in particular for Harmon was to cater to the consumer market. The average consumer doesn't care that much about sound quality (or if he does has odd ideas as to how you can get it) and almost never goes to the trouble of installing and testing room treatment. In other words, a normal guy who reads (or watches) the reviews on a pair of speakers, buys them and then sets them up in his living room, maybe on stands next to the TV. Or in a den, or other small room. Since the research doesn't even include the possibility (and indeed Toole believes it's not required at all) of effective room treatment, it shouldn't be taken as the last word on sound quality when actual sound quality is you goal.

You didn't say anything in your comment that even resembled an attack on me personally. In fact you pretty much just echoed what I actually said in the video. My problem was never with what Toole did - his findings are solid. My problem was with HOW his findings were interpreted and used by others. My problem is that guys take his findings as the be-all and end-all way to determine the best sound quality, while ignoring salient facts that make a huge difference. My biggest problem when making videos like this is that guys hear what they THINK I'm saying, rather than what I'm actually saying.

Gen Z member speaking here: back in my high school days I wanted to have the best sounding system I could afford for the budget I had - roughly 400 $. I researched for weeks what would be the best speaker, receiver, whether I needed an amp, pre-amp and so on. Eventually I found out that my budget was 10 times too small to get anything an audiophile would approve. I stumbled across a comment that said "you can get 95 % of performance for a 1000 $, why spend 10 times as much for the other 5?". So i I got a 20 year old 80 $ Denon amp that was mid-priced when new and a pair of decently sized 20 year old Yamaha speakers. Put some thought into placement and called it a day. I was satisfied with the way they sounded and everyone else thought the same - even though it was nothing impressive. From that point on it didn't make sense (to me) to spend thousands improving something I was satisfied with.

Great story and smart move on your part to not get pulled into the audiophile trap. Most of the better retail gear you can get is every bit as good as the stuff that audiophiles rave about, mainly because there's been some mystical nonsense built up around the products to sell them to that market. If it sound good, it is good.

Harmon does make some higher end gear, but their bread and butter has always been and always will be the consumer market. Those higher end sales certainly don't amount to anything that would drive the research they funded. To say that most economic systems today are not overwhelmingly Keynesian is a flat-out denial of reality.

Please feel free to point out the parts you disagree with and if possible, your reasons. If I'm making an obvious mistake here, it would be educational for me to hear about it.

Excellent last line there Paul, and exactly what's happening: conform willingly, or we'll make you!

one things that every tester i have seen does not take into account is measuring both speakers, the difference between them is important. so many things to measure.

John upset? Must have been watching a different video. Very logical and measured presentation of his thoughts. Glad you discovered that component quality makes a difference. The parts is parts mindset exhibited by measurement fanatics is hopelessly mistaken. Dr. Toole did a lot of good work. It is unfortunate much is taken out of context to support a measurements tell all dogma (not speaking of you). Like John, the rest of us need to learn from a variety of reliable sources, try different ideas for ourselves, and in the end do what works for us.

Funny you ask if I listened to what I said, when most of the comments I've gotten on this video show that the viewers didn't listen to what I said. You are no different. To recap in words that you may take in, I said that Toole's work wasn't the problem. I said they way it was received by people such as yourself is the problem. I said his goal was to set a "standard' for general performance that's widely accepted by most listeners. But you all have taken that as THE standard for ultimate performance. You have taken his findings as the word and the law for speaker performance. So the fault lies with YOU, not Toole. He did fine work, like I said, but you have taken features of his work and misapplied them to get the results you want.

@@IBuildIt I haven’t had the opportunity to talk with Dr. Toole personally, but I have however had many chats with others who have worked with him, and specifically a great individual who worked alongside him at NRA for the studies. Dr. Toole was trying to get a standardized testing model that was meaningful for speakers and sound reproduction. Your headline to your video shows the message you were delivering with “Debunking” and your take that what he suggested were key properties that people like in a speaker from actual studies must be a myth to dispel as you know the truth and that is according to you people want and only listen to bass. Why? Because you seem to imply that is what seems to dominate the current market place in sales, and simply because Dr. Toole went to work for Harmon and now there are less and less speaker companies that the is a correlation back to him. Have you considered there to be a whole load of factors that may have played to the death of the hifi stereo market. You can lay some blame to Steve Jobs for the iPod and iPhone as that lead to convenience of listening to music just about anywhere. It was far better quality than cassette tape and easy access to music. Blame Fraunhofer Society for giving a standard to lossless compression of music. They designed it so you could give away quality for quantity. And by making it that heavily compressed music sounded better with cheaper less revealing and generally lower quality speakers. Give onto the masses that generally don’t know any better a choice between getting quantity and ok sound for a low price, vs better sound with limited choice at a high price, only an idiot would bet on the latter. But music for the masses isn’t what I choose, and I gather it’s not what you choose either. But it misses the point that Dr. Floyd Toole was trying to say. Without some controlled context and means of measurement, how can a consumer make an informed decision? I personally own Axiom Audio speakers that were designed by Ian Colquhoun who worked beside Dr. Toole at NRC and Andrew Welker. They took the research of how people hear and the idea of actual measurements of speakers for both frequency response and sound power in a controlled anechoic chamber (yes they have their own) measured in on and off axis in controlled angle increments. This way then they make changes or upgrades to components there is a method to see how it effects the sound response one reproduction. I think this far better than just design for looks and using a marketing budget to tell people how this must be better. I don’t have a golden ear. I’ve probably lost a good portion of my hearing over the years. But I do believe that my current Active Crossover LFR1100 speakers are one of the best speakers I’ve owned

I accept his conclusions, like I said in the video, but in the context of the average listener in the average listening situation. His work has value for that and I certainly respect it. But what I have a problem with are the people who have latched onto his findings and are now treating them like gospel and saying it's the ONLY way. Classic religious behavior where all of the big questions are already answered in an easy to understand way and this is the way to salvation. They don't seem to realize / can't make them understand that his work was aimed at the consumer market in the average consumer situation and comes up with the best possible (for now) set of compromises to produce the best results. But what happens when you change the conditions? For example, he tested in rooms with no acoustic treatment - he doesn't think it's needed. Likewise treating first reflections - he actually thinks they are beneficial. So immediately if you are starting with a well treated room that does absorb those first reflections, then his conclusion become a lot less relevant. Change the biggest contributing condition (the room) and that changes the priorities.

Since you are here watching and commenting on a video about audio, that means you are not the average consumer (average consumers don't watch these videos because they are not interested in audio that way). So as you are not an average consumer, you should be holding yourself to a higher standard and not settling for the consumer grade findings from Harmon and Toole.

First off, i love the thumbnail but Floyd toole is not my Big brother. 😂👍 I think he summarized known things nicely and backed it up with tests. But he is not the inventer of constant directivity or "average rooms". But you realize that in the context of Tooles work, "average consumer" just means the average of his blind studies. He also made a comparison between "trained listeners" and "untrained listernes" and the only significant differences were, base response and sensitivity for changes in frequency response.(Just in short, i think you know that.) "Surprisingly" i found out that my personal preference corresponds with the preference described by toole for trained listeners. But you are right. I am not the average consumer and I think base equalisation and at least two subwoofers with good placement are "necessary". Also i like developing speakers so im really not in the market for commercial products. I just see so many people wasting time and money with suboptimal designs instead of just understanding the basics and building from there. Reading floyd toole is certainly more useful than learning some bullshit about cables or "soundcharacteristics" of amplifiers.

Like I said in the video, the concept of judging sound quality based on measurements and predicted in room response. Also the notion of a typical room to base that prediction on. Both of these are not only coming from acolytes as the source, but directly from his own mouth in interviews and talks. I don't have his book, but i can't imagine he's in the habit of contradicting himself when he's talking about the issues. Since you disagree (as I do) with his determination on sidewall reflections, then you should also take issue with the idea that off-axis response needs to be as evenly distributed as possible, since it's of very little importance if you absorb those reflections rather than letting them reach the listeners ears at full strength.

"Most rooms are not affecting the quality of the sound to any notable degree at all" - Disagree The room absolutely owns the playback experience. The room's acoustic distortions ------- "Only the very highest end drivers are going to reproduce sound with the smallest percentage of distortion" - Disagree strongly. It's all about leveraging drivers attributes. I traveled to audition enthusiast's system ... Bill Waslo, long time loudspeaker diy'er, built his CoSynes (inspired by Tom Danley's Synergy platforms). $200 in drivers, total, for the pair. Extraordinary performance, in a simple 3-way, 9 driver, co-entrant/coaxial/point source, controlled directivity, linear phase speakers. CoSynes by Bill Waslo, well documented, worth a look. ------- "Tuned port artificial sounding droning bass" - If it's droning or sounds bad, then it's poorly executed. There's nothing inherently wrong with the bass reflex alignment.

​@@FOH3663 "Most rooms are not affecting the quality of the sound to any notable degree at all" - Disagree The room absolutely owns the playback experience. The room's acoustic distortions ------- - I own a pair of 1970s era EPI 100v speakers. No matter what room, or poor placement options that Ive had to operate them under... they STILL sound flipping fantastic. - In fact, the First time I heard them, was in a friends Slot Car track + mini retro arcade. Disco / Earth Wind and Fire was playing... and it sounded like the band members were playing live. It was almost Holographic. I had to know what speakers these were... so I went looking for them... - NORMALLY, I could easily find a speaker, merely by listening to the sound signature.. and following it back to the source. However, the EPIs were very different. I spent nearly 15 minutes trying to find them, and still couldnt. I was toally blown away by this. All I could tell, was that they were located within something like a 15 x 15 ft area... as the sound started to drop off in volume levels, at about that distance. - Mind you... the mans shop was pretty messy. Hes a pack rat, that has all sorts of magazines, display racks, dvds, and more.. all over the place. There were also a lot of classic arcade and pinball games, lining the perimeter of the store. - I finally broke down, going over to ask my friend what they were, and WHERE the heck they were located. He walked me over to the very front of the store, right in front of the stores large glass window. One of the EPIs were vertical, with a large stack of magazine on top of it. The other... about 5ft away from it... was laying horizontal.. with two stacks of magazines on it. In fact, that speaker was partially blocked, by a sit-down racing game. None of that mattered. The sound was still 3D, wide, detailed beyond belief. Unlike anything I had ever heard. - I eventually picked up a pair of my own. Initially, my room was not layed out in such a way that I could fit them most optimally... so they had to sit underneath my desk, behind it.. on either side. I was worried that the details would suffer.. but to my surprise, it didnt effect the sound quality at all.. that I could tell. And trust me, I have fantastic ears... Despite my age, I still can hear very high frequencies, like the whine of an old CRT TV. - Later, I moved them to my open attic, that had sloping, non insulated rafters. The sound was about the same.. but maybe a little better of a listening experience, because there was more open space to enjoy them. The soundstage was again, very wide and deep. Sweet spot was nearly the entire room. - That said, Ive owned plenty of speakers that were far more effected, by where you positioned them. If you blocked them in any way... you would easily notice the negative effects. But those were all non audiophile grade speakers. "Only the very highest end drivers are going to reproduce sound with the smallest percentage of distortion" $200 in drivers, total, for the pair. Extraordinary performance, in a simple 3-way, 9 driver, co-entrant/coaxial/point source, controlled directivity, linear phase speakers. - Nobody said that the Drivers have to be Expensive. Many of the best drivers, are made in low labor cost places, like Taiwan. The designs, however, are often created by high level engineers, in the States. - That said, there is a man that used to work for EPI / Genesis.. and he makes new versions of EPI drivers, the same way they used to be made. He hand builds them here... and you can get the special 8" EPI woofer, for $76 each. And the Magical "Inverted" tweeters for $69 each. Thats $190. The only need a single Capacitor each for the tweeters... as the designer used heavier gauge wire on the woofers, to AUTOMATICALLY filter out high frequencies from entering the woofers. This also help reduce potential distortions. So, for less than $300... you get sound that COMPLETELY DESTROYS the local modern +$3000 high end speakers, at the high end stereo shop (yes, I actually compared them, and they didnt even come close to the EPIs). - Realize that MOST of the cost in modern Audiophile speakers... Is Markup. You are paying for all sort of things, from their Road Trips, to Adverts, website hosting, Engineers Salaries, Building and Storage costs, Shipping costs, construction costs, and a heafty dose of PROFIT. A lot of the specialty companies know that wealthy will pay extreme amounts of cash, and not know nor care, that they are only paying a fraction of the cost for these fantastic drivers. - Meanwhile, most Consumers, are Over-Paying for the WORST quality drivers that the MFG. can provide you with. Some of these drivers may be as low as $10 each. They are often not engineered by anyone.. just randomly produced with a hope and a prayer... and while they function... they have much higher levels of distortions than Audiophile level drivers. CoSynes by Bill Waslo, well documented, worth a look. - I will look, but I have doubts that I will be impressed. Ive basically seen and heard it all. And... Id put my EPIs against some of the best of the best. They might not be as loud as some of the others... but the level of 3d Depth and Non Distorting details.. coupled with a very wide and Holographic 3d Soundstage... makes them nearly unbeatable, IMO. "Tuned port artificial sounding droning bass" If it's droning or sounds bad, then it's poorly executed. There's nothing inherently wrong with the bass reflex alignment. - Completely Disagree. And in fact, you can find many Engineers that will tell you all of the reasons why. The port designs create Artificial sounding bass. A certain "Tone" that is audible notable... every time the bass hits. Thats because most ports are TUNED to produce this Tone. Sort of like a Trumpet / Kazoo. - Now.. IF the port is much larger, often the large rectangular ports.. they tend not to be "Tuned".. and merely allow the air to move in and out. Those designs tend to function better. HOWEVER... even those suffer from various issues. Such as Air Compression issues, when the driver pushes a lot of the air out of the cabinet.. and is trying to produce sounds, without the same level of air pressures involved. - As such, Sealed speakers are still some of the BEST speakers. And of course, to have properly functioning sealed speakers.. you NEED much more powerful woofers drivers, to be able to overcome the internal air-compression forces. This additional magnet strength, also creates much greater levels of Acceleration and Precision CONTROL. - This is ultimately where most speaker drivers end up Distorting... because they are using Low Magnet strengths, which cant control the drivers precise enough. These micro distortions, end up "Muddying" the details. - The next best option for Accurate sounding Bass, are Passive Radiator setups. They have the same sealed benefits.. but they also add a much more natural sounding boost to the bass output. That boost doesnt seem to suffer from the typical Port Noises, and Port Droning. - The other Option that I have less experience with (other than Tinkering with a build myself), is Open-Baffle designs. Open baffle doesnt suffer from port issues, because the open air is uniform.. and isnt going through a "TUNED" port. Therefore, it remains Natural sounding. (My only concern with them, is backwards wave reflection and absorption issues. But again, I have only minimal experience with this design. My little 4 inch open baffle driver experiment, sounded pretty good for what they were. But I wasnt going to be critical over low spec + low powered drivers, either) - Heres the deal.. I have owned like over 30 different speakers. All of them, except the EPIs were low speck speakers. I thought they sounded pretty good... UNTIL, I heard the EPIs. Then, they were all unbearable Trash to me. My techs? I put them out on the Curb, the next day. They couldnt touch the EPIs.. and once I heard what Bass was REALLY supposed to sound like? I could no longer stand to hear Artificial sounding bass, from ported speakers. - As Ive said, you can speak directly to Engineers, and they will tell you the positives and negatives of each speaker type. The differences are well known.

Beethoven continued to compose music even after he was completely deaf. As you get older and your hearing starts to deteriorate, sound quality becomes even more important.

@ggauche3465 Trust me a lot of bad and good stuff can happen up to "only" 9kHz. If you think about it, 20kHz is only one octave up from 10kHz. While 10kHz is almost 9 octaves up from 20Hz.

Exactly. Look at the audio spectrum of a typical piece of music and you'll see there's not a whole lot above around 10KHz. Conversely, and this ties into this flawed idea of the typical room, nearly half of the sound power exists 500Hz and below.

@@IBuildIt That's just funny!

@@buka9330 Yes, agreed, but I too am am old guy and I wish I could hear "only" another octave.

I stopped hoping years ago. This country is no longer on the decline, but in a full-fledged nose-dive.

@@IBuildIt The 1984 reference is well done.