In fact maybe too short because you totally miss the point. "Brightness" or "luminance", whatever (although I never heard an audiophile saying "this speaker has too much luminance").
That right there signals a literalism that will be an underlying problem in this discussion.
You know analogies are by definition not equating A and B as identical, right?
My point is that your analogy is not an analogy.
Of course it is.
And the reason for this is that "dark" and "bright" have a totally different relation in your "analogy" when applied to speaker and TV.
"Too dark" or "too bright" is related to the structure of the phenomenon produced by the speaker (the sound) : to much highs, not enough bass, or some combination of the two. There's unwanted differences inside the phenomenon compared to correct reproduction.
When you darken (in a reasonable fashion) your tv with your remote, there's no modification inside the phenomenon. The relation beetween the different portions of the image remains the same and as long the reproduction of the image was correct before the use of your remote, it remains like it after.
That that objection makes no sense, and seems straining to miss the point. Not to mention, incorrect.
First of all, I referenced adjusting contrast/brightness controls. Traditionally (e.g. in CRT sets, and emissive displays) the brightness control adjusted black levels, the contrast control adjusted the proportional luminance of white. This clearly changes the relation of the different portions of the image!
Of course things will depend on the type of display/brightness control - some displays (e.g. LCDs) will, using just the brightness control, raise the luminance in proportion across the board for a brighter image. However contrast will raise the luminance limit being put out by the display, though will not raise all the ranges proportionally! (That's why it typically takes making separate adjustments of "Brightness" and "Contrast" controls to maximize contrast). (And note also, that depending on the setting, even raising the brightness control on an LCD will - due to the way our sight works - alter the PERCEIVED detail and balance of the image).
So, even your description just seems wrong.
But, again, we don't have to get in to such pedantry which misses the point.
What I care about is perception: The analogy is between the two phenomena as we perceive it!
Adjusting the brightness control WILL make an image appear "brighter" and will, all things being equal, make some detail more obvious or visible (e.g. detail that was too dark to notice). Adjusting contrast WILL increase the vividness of the image, and increasing contrast "too much" CAN make highlights POP out more - even to the point of producing an unnatural emphasis in those regions.
Frequency response in speakers may not in a strict technical sense change in exactly the same way - obviously sound is different from light - but the PERCEPTION is a reasonable analogy: The way frequency variations in a speaker can make detail "lit up" or more apparent, and in which high frequency emphasis can make upper frequency sounds "pop out" more, even to the point of an unnaturally vivid emphasis in those regions.
Seriously...you seem to be saying you really don't understand what someone could mean by describing one speaker as "brighter" than the other. (And hence by corollary what they could mean by the other speaker being "darker")
Really?
A correct analogy would have been build around the modification of the gamma curve of the image (hence with brightness or luminance, whatever). But there's two problems for you :
- The differences in gamma curves are not usually described as "brightness" and "darkness".
- The concept of gamma curve is not common sense concept as "brightness" and "darkness".
I'm afraid that is pedantism in service of missing the point.
(And not to mention, per above, my reference to the effects of brightness/contrast controls were indeed relevant)