What Neutral Means in Reviews & Our Discussions? Are We Confusing Tame/Flat For Neutral?


Does tame or flat = neutral? Shouldn’t "neutral" in describing audio sound mean uncolored and accurate to what the artists sounded like to the naked ear at the time of the master recording? Or is neutral, as used in our community, intended to mean a lack of crescendo, or the like?

I realize this may get controversial, so lets be mindful of other’s experiences and insight. I’m going to use Dynaudio as an example. They’re often touted as being amongst the most neutral of speaker lines. Monitor Audio is another example of such reviews. I’ve listened to several middle of the line Dynaudio’s, including many times at my brother’s house, where he has them mated to an EAD Power Master 1000 thru MIT cables. They do sound beautiful, airy, smooth, and even slightly warm to my ear (though the touch of warmth could easily be the MITs and EAD). His common statement supporting how great they are is, the audio recording industry sound engineers prefer them as their monitors. But I’ve read that the reason audio engineers prefer them is because they are smooth and "flat" or "level", enabling the engineers to hear the difference of the nuances which they create as they manipulate sound during the editing process. Apparently lively or musical monitors, many engineers find to be a distractor, with too much information over riding what they want to focus on as they edit the sound.

I’ve enjoyed watching live bands at small venues for over 3 decades. Anything from a pianist, to cover bands, to original artists of anything from rock, blues, jazz, etc. My personal listening preference for home audio is dynamic sound which brings the live event to me ... soundstage, detail, with air, transparency AND depth. I want it all, as close as it can get for each given $. When I’ve listened to Dynaudios, Ive always come away with one feeling ... they’re very nice to listen too; they’re smooth and pleasing, airy ... and tame.

Recently while reading a pro review of the latest Magico S7 (I’ve never heard them), a speaker commonly referenced as amazingly neutral, the reviewer mentioned how, while capable of genuine dynamics, they seem to deliberately supress dynamics to enough of an extent that they favor a more pleasurable easy going listening experience.

That’s what jarred my thought. Does "neutral" mean tame/flat; does it mean accurate without audible peaks in db of one frequency over another, which is not on the recording; or is it something we’ve minced words about and have lost the genuine meaning of in the name of some audio form of political correctness?

 

 

 

sfcfran

Showing 2 responses by oldaudiophile

Interesting! The first thing or component I immediately thought of when reading the headline of this post was Dynaudio speakers. Now, don't get me wrong here! These are damn fine speakers! They have always impressed the hell out of me in critical listening auditions when I've been in the market for an upgrade. However, for whatever reason(s), my ears always chose to buy something else that pleased a tad more. I always thought the Dynaudios were a little too accurate, too neutral or too flat, but flat in a very, very good way (i.e.  accurate rendition of the instruments & voice(s), with virtually no coloration). I know this sounds paradoxical because this is what well designed speakers are supposed to do... right? Maybe too much of a good thing? Hell if I know!

There's a quote that I think succinctly explains this paradox. It's from Stereophile founder J. Gordon Holt's book, "The Audio Glossary". He defines accuracy, which I equate with neutral, as:  "(1) The degree to which the output signal from an active device is perceived as replicating all the sonic qualities of its input signal and (2) The ultimate objective of an ideal system, which everyone claims to want but nobody likes when he hears it." He defines "euphonic", on the other hand, as:  "Pleasing to the ear." and goes on to say that "In audio, 'euphonic' has a connotation of exaggerated sweetness, rather than literal accuracy."

So, I guess my ears gravitate to a little sweetness? Not too much! Just a little, to bring out the excitement.

I think one needs to keep in mind that most performances nowadays, with the exception of symphony orchestras and other acoustic venues like jazz ensembles and folk music artists in small, intimate clubs using no amplification or microphones, are heard or experienced through some degree of electronic amplification. The choices for the electronics involved have to color what you hear, I would think, just as the choices recording engineers make to record live musical performances do.

Having been somewhat of a hack acoustic guitar player, over the years, one of the sounds I particularly hone in on during critical listening sessions is acoustic guitar. I tend to like speakers capable of reproducing that sound as accurately as possible. Can Dynaudito speakers do that? Of course they can! So why do my ears gravitate to other speakers? Long story!

@sfcfran, glad you enjoyed my two cents' worth! Actually, there are some speakers that will allow you to hear everything on a recording, good, bad & not so good, without being uber accurate or neutral. Of course, this depends upon everything else in the chain of your audio system. I find the mark of good speakers is those that let you hear a recording as it was intended to be heard. Once reaching that point, one starts paying much more attention to the fine print on album covers and so forth (e.g.  sound engineering; mixing; quality of the medium; production; etc.). The only (maybe) unfortunate by-product of this is that one starts replacing some of those less than sterling recordings with better ones.

Cheers!