Audio Lessons Learned - post your best advice for the newer members!

I’d like to think that he did consider the subject of rooms and placement in detail. He just didn’t like what cabinets tend to do to the sound of the drivers.

First i greatly appreciate your toughtful post....

My point is in spite of their limitations what Aczel forgot, is the room precise tuning by controls, with many acoustic devices,( my grid of 18 Helmholtz pipes and tubes among others) not only passive material treatment...

The sound we listen to dont necessarily come ONLY from boucing on passive walls, the room could be activated and help greatly by improving the box speakers...

In fact my box speakers in MY room sound better than magnepan in a bad room.... This is my point by experience....

Then calling all boxes monkey coffins is only revealing a lack of understanding about acoustic controls and where the sound come from.... In a simplistic conception of acoustic the sound come from reflection, absorbtion, or from diffusive surface from the walls, ceilings etc...

This is ONLY half of the story.... A room is a pressurized potential engine that can be activated by many pressuring engine devices like Helmholtz botlles, tubes and pipes... Then what we listen to is no more ONLY the results of waves boucing back from the walls but also a results of this different adjusted pressure devices created by Helmholtz for particular speakers needs and for the particular ears of the listener ...

Then the alleged " monkey boxes" dont lost their limitation, but dont sound either boomy or lacking trans parency... For sure they are mot magnepan but they can beat it in some acoustically prepared room designed for them, when the magnepan are in a bad room...

My point is Aczel go too swiftly to a condemnation of box speakers...

ALL speakers ask for a particular acoustical settings and have all their limitations.... Box speakers are very useful in a small room when we ask also for some level of bass....

I don’t think it’s fair to suggest that loudspeaker cabinets do not present certain sonic issues.

I NEVER said that box speakers dont have limitations of their own, i only said that calling them monkeys boxes coffin is saying too much negative...

For example the rectangular boxes had an internal resonance problem, and it is possible using dyssimetric compressive force and a load with 2 sets of springs under the speakers, and one set under the load on top of the speaker to control the destructive power of the resonance .... It is a result of my listening experiments...And some transparency come to the ears only from that.... add to it a better controlled noise floor of the electrical grid and more transparency comes... At the end add an helmholtz tubes and pipes grid adjusted for these particular speakers in this specific room, another level of transparency comes with it....

Calling them "monkey coffin" is not a solution, nor dreaming also about a totally other kind of perfectly controlled and powered speakers with filters etc....Horns or magnepans are better without being perfect, but a good controls on their working mechanical, electrical and acoustical dimensions we could make them acceptable .... No more monkey coffin.... Acoustic controls of the room is more powerful anyway than the design of any specific speakers...This is my experience....

My deepest regards....

I’ll go even further: Even if the box is not rectangular but some incredibly fancy shape, even if it’s huge, even if it costs more than a luxury car, if it’s sealed or vented and the drivers are all in front, it’s a monkey coffin and will sound like a monkey coffin—boxy and, to varying degrees, not quite open and transparent.

I dont want to offend but Aczel never lived in a good acoustical treated and mainly controlled SMALL room ...

My box coffin did not sound like in his description...

2 years ago, yes they sounded like box speakers compared to magnepan....

They sound today more like magnepan than "monkey box".... Get me right they are NOT magnepan by any means, but i will never describe the sound closed and lacking transparency...

These words confirm my suspicion that almost no one in these audio forums had ever experienced the complete transformation of the same system from a small bad room to a small good one....If you are not coming by yourself from a bad one to a good one, how do you know?

Box speakers are KING only in a SMALL acoustically controlled room...Read that slowly.... 


Box speakers are not what he think they are, "monkey coffins".... Why?

I dont understand for sure the reason why this "specialist" never experienced a good small room with box speakers ? His prejudice come from here....

I prefer the sound of my box speakers in my actual small room now to the sound of one of my magnepan’s friends in his bad room....There is a difference: his speakers are more open yet than mine, they had more transparency yes, but my sound is not closed and dont lacked transparency and is more natural and musical.... In my room they are more musical because they are rightfully embedded...In my 2 positions of listening nearfield and more regular position....

Then Aczel is right in principle, magnepan are more open and transparent in a BIG room in particular, but he is wrong when is disqualify box speakers by his misunderstanding of SMALL room acoustic...

He is not the only one, these confusions are the rule throuh most audio forums....

Box speakers are KING only in a SMALL acoustically controlled room...

There they may shine.... the confusion of Aczel comes from his lack in distinguishing approprietely the deep differences, huge one, between controlled and treated room and the room which are not, and especially the great difference between SMALL room and BIG one, uncontrolled or not....

I never trust audio reviewers anymore this is the reason why.... Distinctions like objectivist/subjectivist, scientist/audiophiles, analog/digital, box speakers/ magnepan or any other type, and many more other distinctions, when pushed to their opposite limits in a competition are childish and gross and created misplaced prejudices....

Audio for me is the business of learning how to trust my own ears in listening experiments experience... Nothing else for me...It is not science but more an art....

Listening music must be learned, listening to sounds must be learned also.... The "bat" ears metaphor reflect stupidity more than anything else....My ears are normal old one, but very educated....Not in a "bat" sense, in a personal history that is reflected in my audio system and room and music choices....

Buy good gear first...

It is simple to do with some studying and even without listening possibilities...



After that Dont upgrade ANYTHING, but try to embed it mechanically, electrically and acoustically...

My system cost peanuts and sound better than very, very, costly one...

Dont trust reviewers, not because they are dishonest but because they must sells...

Dont trust engineer save for specific problem to solve... They will be very helpful for a specific problem...not for teaching you how to trust your ears...

Trust you EARS....And create a set of listening experiments with specific tasks concerning each of the 3 embeddings... I succeed with that completely in 2 years and no expanse of money.... Except peanuts...

Have fun....

Audio is not about gear or consumerism, it is about how to learn to listen music and sound....

Remember that nevermind the sources, or the amplifiers, speakers/room/ears are ONLY ONE, they create ONE phenomenon, not three.... Is it not simple?

Acoustic is the main dimensions or working embeddings of ANY system....