Speaker rating systems

[Jon Silberman]

Lackin further info., I would have to say the originator of the prior thread on this topic deleted his own thread. But that thread was chock full of much useful, helpful info. that many of us spent significant time developing and sharing.

GAT, for starters, could you please reproduce your proposed speaker rating system (which I had endorsed)?

[Jon Silberman]

The client for today's AM guitar lesson just rescheduled so I have a few more minutes again to devote to esoteric speaker musings!

Couple of quick initial thoughts.

I prefer a speaker rating system that provides basic frequency, power/efficiency, smooth versus gritty, and aggressiveness information that I can take and apply to my own amps to decide whether the speaker's a good match. This is following the Ocham's Razor principle of not multiplying values unnecessarily in order to avoid increasing error.

So, I generally prefer someone tell me, "This speaker has smooth highs, strong upper mids, scooped lower mids, and a moderate bottom that holds together well at lower volumes but gets flubby at higher ones, is powerful and efficient, and has an aggressive response," than, "This speaker is a 6.5 for jazz, 8.5 for modern rock, 8.0 for classic rock, etc."

With the former, I can take the basis info. and apply it to my own gear based on my own equipment and prejudices. With the latter, I really can't use the info. unless - and this is an important exception - I know well the person providing the advice. In that case, I can use all the extra info. I know about that person and his or her own preferences, gear, and descriptors to "translate" his/her ultimate recommendations.

When you've tried a variety of a particular speaker manufacturer's speakers, enough of a sample size to be able to decipher its proprietary "terms du description," this can be the same as knowing the person well who's giving the description. For an example of this, see the Eminence website's speaker descriptions:

http://www.eminence.com/guitar.asp?speaker_size=12

On the terms we use to describe speakers, I think Ted Weber's done the best job of attempting to collect and "standardize" those terms. Have a look for yourself:

http://www.webervst.com/spterm.html

Three sometimes-cited speaker terms that can provide very useful info. on a speaker's characteristics:

chimey = upper mid range/lower treble emphasis (think "Voxy")

creamy = balanced tone with smooth overdrive characteristics (the opposite being a gritty overdrive)

edgy = aggressive (i.e., exhibiting a quick attack in response to picking) but with, in addition, a relatively small volume/attack range within which the speaker moves from being relatively smoother to relatively more gritty (think of the difference between Honda and Volvo clutches).

Anyway, this is pretty much sums up what I had posted earlier.

[mbratch]

I was somewhat surprised and disappointed to see the thread disappear. I thought it was one of the more lively discussions (in a positive way) to present itself on the Amp Tech Info forum.

To summarize the position I was taking in my prior posts, I would say that:

(a) We are dealing somewhat with subjectivity so there is no perfect system of evaluation

(b) A machine-generated spec at best provides a very limited basis for helping a consumer choose a speaker

(c) It could be very helpful to have a multi-point evaluation system based upon a combination of specs and evaluative/qualitative categories such as suitable music types (with artists or songs cited). The latter would be based upon the collection of empirical data from a large number of users/listeners.

Currently when choosing a speaker, we basically do a very loose version of (c) by looking at a manufacturer's published speaker specs and polling people on TGP (or where ever) to get opinions about tone.

[Old Tele man]

...remember, with speakers (as with guitars, amps, etc.) it's not just the device, but also how the device is used, by whom, and for what music style.

[mbratch]

...remember, with speakers (as with guitars, amps, etc.) it's not just the device, but also how the device is used, by whom, and for what music style.Yep, that's why factors indicating style and sample artist, etc, are suggested.

[Old Tele man]

...that's gonna be one-helluva big MATRIX of variables!

[mbratch]

...that's gonna be one-helluva big MATRIX of variables!It doesn't have to be comprehensive, just to the point of being at least somewhat helpful.