Legendary Speaker Designer Says Hi-Fi Accuracy Is a Myth and the “Perfect Sound” Doesn’t Exist

Chasing “the sound the artist intended” is a losing game no one can actually win, according to experts.

People talk a lot about accuracy in audio. But the truth is, there’s no single “correct” version of how music should sound. From the moment a song is recorded to the moment you hit play, it passes through a chain of choices, limitations, and interpretations. Even your own brain gets in the way.

This article looks at why perfect reproduction isn’t possible and why that might not be a bad thing.

The “Circle of Confusion”

At the moment music is captured, it’s processed and turned into something we can listen to. Every step in that chain introduces changes. And once you understand that, it’s easier to see why perfect accuracy in hi-fi is more of a goal than a reality.

Speaker designer Andrew Jones puts it plainly: “The ‘closest approach to the original sound’… what original sound?”

It’s a good question. Was it the sound in the room during the recording? The way the artist heard it while mixing? Or what the mastering engineer intended on their studio monitors?

Dr. Floyd Toole, who worked with Jones at Canada’s National Research Council, uses a term for this: the circle of confusion.

It refers to a loop where music is recorded, mixed, and mastered on one type of system, then played back on completely different systems by listeners. There’s no fixed reference point.

What sounds “correct” in the studio might sound totally different in someone’s living room or car.

Even in professional settings, not every studio uses the same equipment or speaker setup.

Sure, there are some standards for things like loudness monitoring or listening tests, like ITU-R BS.1116 or IEC 60268-13. But they’re not studio calibration guidelines, and they’re not widely adopted across all production environments. That means we’re all guessing what the music is “supposed” to sound like.

Microphones and mixing choices already add color

The idea of “accuracy” falls apart before a single note even reaches a speaker.

Here’s how it happens:

• Microphones aren’t perfect: A mic diaphragm has mass and inertia, so it can’t respond instantly to every pressure change. In theory, fast transients can be slightly rounded or delayed. But with modern condenser mics, the effect is usually too small to notice in most music.
• Dozens of mics, dozens of problems: In multi-mic setups, each mic affects the phase and tone differently. Combine them all and you get a stitched-together version of reality.
• Mixing adds even more interpretation: Engineers adjust EQ, dynamics, effects, and balance based on what they hear in their space. Their decisions shape the final product.

By the time the track is finished, it’s already been sculpted to sound a certain way on a certain system. The listener might be hearing it on something totally different, in a different room, at a different volume. It’s no surprise it doesn’t translate exactly.

Brains Change Everything

Let’s say we somehow built the perfect audio system. No distortion, no room reflections, no speaker flaws. Even then, you still wouldn’t hear “perfect sound.” Why? Because your brain gets the final say, and it’s not always reliable.

Everyone hears things differently

Daniel Levitin, a cognitive neuroscientist and author of This Is Your Brain on Music, explains that perception isn’t just physical. Instead, it’s shaped by memory, expectation, and emotion.

Bias and psychology play a big role

Expectation can also change perception. If someone tells you a new pair of $2,000 headphones should sound incredible, your brain may try to make that true. At this point, that’s just human nature.

It’s the same reason wine tastes “better” when you think it’s expensive. Audio works the same way.

There’s also confirmation bias. If you believe your gear sounds great, you’ll focus on what confirms that belief and ignore the rest. Even things like cable swaps, room lighting, or gear appearance can change how we feel something sounds, even if nothing changed technically.

What research actually shows

Some engineers believed digital would fix this. Besides, numbers don’t lie, right? However, research has shown over and over again that even those that are made to make things ‘perfect’ can add flaws.

Multiple experts have shared their insights on this:

• Karlheinz Brandenburg, who helped invent the MP3, says we’re still limited by human hearing. Even perfect digital files end up going through analog parts, like the DACs, amps, speakers, and rooms, that add their own flaws.
• Audio engineer John Watkinson also pointed this out years ago. You can start with a perfect signal, but once it hits the real world, it’s not perfect anymore.
• Dr. Earl Geddes adds even more layers: your position in the room, speaker direction (polar response), and reflections from walls or ceilings all change the sound. It’s different at every seat.
• Joshua Reiss ran studies comparing high-res audio to CD quality. His results? There’s a difference, but it’s small, and it only stands out in controlled settings. Most people wouldn’t notice during everyday listening.
• Dr. Sean Olive’s research also found that listeners don’t always agree, but there are strong patterns. Many people preferred a slight bass boost and smooth treble, which is the basis of the Harman target curve.

So, while “accuracy” can’t be pinned down universally, preference trends do exist. Still, no single tuning works for everyone.

Speaker Design Is Flaw Balancing

If every listener hears things differently, it makes sense that no speaker can be perfect. So instead of chasing perfection, designers focus on balancing trade-offs.

Speaker design is all about choosing which flaws matter least, and which ones you can live with.

The thing is, sound moves in all directions and not just straight ahead. Fix one angle, and others can change. And that’s just the speaker. Put it in a real room, and the response changes again.

Off-axis performance matters too. A speaker might measure flat directly in front, but as you move to the side or around the room, it can lose clarity or become uneven. Designers work to manage that by using waveguides or other techniques, but it’s still a balancing act.

Every design choice has a cost

Jones and others often talk about the “triangle” of speaker design. If you push for one goal, you usually give up something else.

Here’s what that looks like in practice:

You can’t have all three at once. Want a small speaker with deep bass and high output? Physics says no.

Designers have to make judgment calls

Since perfect balance isn’t possible, every speaker reflects the designer’s personal choices. That means deciding what’s most important, whether it’s tight imaging, smooth mids, or deep bass, and shaping the sound around that.

For example, one designer might focus on midrange detail for vocals, even if it means rolling off the lowest bass. Another might boost low-end warmth, knowing it could slightly smear upper detail.

There’s no universal right answer. It depends on who’s designing and what kind of sound they want.

Even the small stuff adds up

Tiny physical changes can affect the sound, too.

A grille made from quality cloth might reduce treble by 0.5 dB. Plastic or metal frames around the drivers can reflect sound back into the speaker, causing weird peaks or dips. Even screw placement on the baffle can mess with diffraction patterns.

These effects are usually small, but they matter in high-end designs.

It’s also why taking off a tweeter grille or mesh might not always improve sound. Instead, it could leave behind a cavity that causes its own problems.

Spec Sheet Games and Physics Reality

Some speaker brands make big promises on their spec sheets. But if you look closely, a lot of those claims don’t add up. In fact, some of them stretch or ignore the realities of physics.

The sensitivity myth

Take sensitivity, for example. That number tells you how loud a speaker gets with 1 watt of power from 1 meter away. A rating of 94 dB might sound impressive, but when you see it on a tiny speaker that also claims deep bass and normal impedance, it’s worth raising an eyebrow.

Some companies fudge the numbers by testing at narrow frequency bands or under special conditions that make the speaker look better on paper. That’s why two products with similar specs can sound totally different in real life.

Impedance tricks and other games

Aside from sensitivity, impedance can also sometimes be misleading.

That may not sound like a big deal, but it can cause issues.

If your amplifier isn’t rated to handle low-impedance dips (say, below 2 or 3 ohms), it could overheat, shut down, or distort the sound. And the average buyer has no idea, because the numbers look safe on the box.

These tricks hurt more than just the listener. They also hurt honest engineers who follow the rules.

A well-designed speaker that sticks to real-world numbers might look worse on paper compared to something with inflated specs. That makes it harder for good products to compete.

Disclaimer: Not all brands do this

To be fair, not every company plays these games. Some use full-range measurements and follow strict standards like CTA-2034 (also known as Spinorama).

These tests show how the speaker behaves from different angles and across all frequencies, and not just in one perfect setup. But those honest numbers rarely make it into flashy marketing.

Jones and others who speak out aren’t blaming all engineers. A lot of the stretching comes from marketing teams trying to make their product stand out. The problem is, it confuses people and sets the wrong expectations.

At the end of the day, the spec sheet doesn’t always tell the truth. You have to understand the trade-offs, or listen for yourself.

The Post Perfection Era

For years, audio companies chased “perfect” sound, like flat measurements, studio accuracy, and ideal rooms. But that idea is starting to fade. The focus now is shifting toward “what sound that works best for you”.

Modern audio gear doesn’t try to copy some ideal studio setup. It adjusts to your ears, your space, and even your taste. We’re seeing more tools like:

• Object-based audio (like Dolby Atmos), which creates 3D sound that adapts to your setup
• DSP-corrected speakers, which use digital signal processing to fix room problems
• Audiogram-based tuning, where headphones adjust sound based on your hearing test
• Room-aware EQ tools like Sonos Trueplay or Dirac Live, which shape the sound to your environment

The good thing is, more companies are now also building products that accept the reality of imperfect rooms, flawed recordings, and subjective hearing. Instead of pretending there’s one right sound, they give users more control.