Our Systems, Scale, and the Sound of Music

[Scott W]

Scott, what happens to scale and image when you adjust the dials on those MIT speaker cable network boxes, while leaving everything else the same?

It is a very subtle change in tonality, adding a bit more air to highs or bit more resolution to bass. It does not change scale or image size.

 

[PeterA]

It is a very subtle change in tonality, adding a bit more air to highs or bit more resolution to bass. It does not change scale or image size.

That is interesting. I played with the adjustments at a dealership once, and I sensed that the sound would increasingly wrap around the room or envelop the listener when I switched to higher and higher resolution settings. But images became more diffuse. It was an effect similar to what I've heard with shifts in phase. Images grew in size, floated slightly and seemed somewhat less grounded. Perhaps this is very room/system or even listener dependent.

 

[microstrip]

(...)
Edit: I just realized that the comments about the NOLA Concert Grand Reference Gold speakers cited above are not from HP, but from someone else offering additional thoughts to his review. My apologies. Nonetheless, the observations obviously stand.

Al M,

The comment was written by JSW - does any anyone know what those initials stand for?

JSW then goes on : "According to Carl Marchisotto, the owner and designer at NOLA, the CGRG was developed to "provided detail at realistic levels". Citing that many speakers need to be played well above "live concert volumes" in order to provide significant detail, Marchisotto "concentrated on preserving the low level detail and also the jump factor. "

Perhaps the capability of having adequate scale is also related to the optimization of the subjective resolution of the speaker versus level.

BTW in adequate rooms the Quad ESL63 had a fantastic scale - it could sound small but also very large, although limited in dynamics.

 

[Al M.]

There is no one correct answer. It depends on the speaker, and sometimes even the system. My speakers are all dipole, some are dipole line-sources and some are four-tower line-sources with separate woofer towers. That makes them different from the majority of speakers out there.

Here's a recent experience - on Tuesday, I went to visit with a Genesis 1.1 owner. This would be one in original condition from nearly 18 years ago. The room was quite small, but well treated (not over-damped). When I first listened, a solo voice like Jacintha was over-large, but a recording of a solo piano was small and thin. All I did was to adjust the low-pass, phase and gain on the bass. The image and scale problem there was caused by a coherence issue - in this case there was a bit of a mid-bass suck-out and the phase was skewed by just under 100 deg off between the midrange and the woofers.

In another case, solo voice was again too large, and a piano was also too large. That instance, I moved the woofer towers closer to the midrange/tweeters and that fixed the problem.

Even the smallest of the Genesis speakers allow you to adjust tweeter output and bass contour. With so much flexibility, we can and do adapt to rooms which are too small and the listener sitting too close, or rooms that are too large and the listener sitting too far away. My speaker set-up procedure is available to all - including non-Genesis owners.

http://genesisloudspeakers.com/whitepaper/Genesis_Loudspeaker_Setup_Procedure.pdf

Fascinating, Gary.

Your speaker set-up procedure is a great read, and very useful, thanks.

 

[Al M.]

Big speakers DO have difficulty reproducing small scale [...]. I personally have never heard any of them do it right.

I'll take that back, the 'never' that is. I have scanned my aural recollections a bit more critically and calmly, and had forgotten about the following: I heard an ensemble piece for 23 players on Rockport Altair speakers in a large room, and the image of the two dueling solo violins in the beginning was quite convincing, as was that of most instruments entering later. So yes, proper imaging through large speakers indeed can be done. Surprisingly, while the soundstage was larger in that large room than at home, it was not by much. SPL were comparable to the ones I have at home for that recording (realistically high, but not more than that); I made sure with a meter.

On the other hand, on a string quartet recording the instruments were somewhat larger in size than they should be, yet not shockingly so (that was the more negative experience that temporarily overshadowed the memory of the positive experience above). Perhaps it was the recording itself. It may well be that deficiencies in size portrayal inherent in recordings become more accentuated with large speakers.

 

[Al M.]

Al M,

The comment was written by JSW - does any anyone know what those initials stand for?

JSW then goes on : "According to Carl Marchisotto, the owner and designer at NOLA, the CGRG was developed to "provided detail at realistic levels". Citing that many speakers need to be played well above "live concert volumes" in order to provide significant detail, Marchisotto "concentrated on preserving the low level detail and also the jump factor. "

Perhaps the capability of having adequate scale is also related to the optimization of the subjective resolution of the speaker versus level.

Possibly to some degree. As Jack pointed out earlier, images become bigger with greater volume, and smaller with lesser volume, but all that not by much. On the other hand, at a given fixed volume setting images should not increase or shrink in size as the loudness of instruments/singers changes.

 

[Scott W]

It was an effect similar to what I've heard with shifts in phase. Images grew in size, floated slightly and seemed somewhat less grounded. Perhaps this is very room/system or even listener dependent.

Your last statement must be very true as in my experience I have not found these knobs to not even come close to causing shifts in phase. I have found the knobs to be most beneficial when a slight and I do mean slight tailoring of the sound is needed.

 

[LL21]

I'll take that back, the 'never' that is. I have scanned my aural recollections a bit more critically and calmly, and had forgotten about the following: I heard an ensemble piece for 23 players on Rockport Altair speakers in a large room, and the image of the two dueling solo violins in the beginning was quite convincing, as was that of most instruments entering later. So yes, proper imaging through large speakers indeed can be done. Surprisingly, while the soundstage was larger in that large room than at home, it was not by much. SPL were comparable to the ones I have at home for that recording (realistically high, but not more than that); I made sure with a meter.

On the other hand, on a string quartet recording the instruments were somewhat larger in size than they should be, yet not shockingly so (that was the more negative experience that temporarily overshadowed the memory of the positive experience above). Perhaps it was the recording itself. It may well be that deficiencies in size portrayal inherent in recordings become more accentuated with large speakers.

I have heard the Arrakis and altair and really liked both...for many reasons...and effortless and proper scale was one of them...both on Rodriguo y Gabriela as well as on Hans Zimmer in the case of the Altairs...and Norah Jones and Nirvana Unplugged (with audience) on Arrakis.

 

[Al M.]

I have heard the Arrakis and altair and really liked both...for many reasons...and effortless and proper scale was one of them.

That shows again how critical set-up and system context are. I was disappointed to hear the Altair being far from effortless, but strained, again at a meter-measured comparable high volume to what I have at home where I hear no strain. Also, while midrange power was good, bass power was lacking. But I had thought already that there must have been something not quite right. After all, Robert Harley highlights in particular the great bass of the speakers in his review.

 

[microstrip]

Possibly to some degree. As Jack pointed out earlier, images become bigger with greater volume, and smaller with lesser volume, but all that not by much. On the other hand, at a given fixed volume setting images should not increase or shrink in size as the loudness of instruments/singers changes.

Peter J Walker of Quad Electroacoustics once referred that the optimum sound level for a good scale is established at the recording phase. IMHO if the images produced by the system shrink or increase when the loudness of instruments/singer changes while playing, the recording is very poor, you are playing it at a non adequate level or something is very wrong with the system!

But yes, you did well remembering this aspect - I have listened to systems where the apparent size of the piano depends on the octave being played and loudness - it is really annoying.

 

[LL21]

That shows again how critical set-up and system context are. I was disappointed to hear the Altair being far from effortless, but strained, again at a meter-measured comparable high volume to what I have at home where I hear no strain. Also, while midrange power was good, bass power was lacking. But I had thought already that there must have been something not quite right. After all, Robert Harley highlights in particular the great bass of the speakers in his review.

Yes, its a funny one...those side firing woofers have a weird way of 'locking' in the room when setup right, or not. I have very limited experience, but I have heard the room lock and spoken with people who have spent years setting them up. Once you get room lock, bass is one the big thrills of owning a Rockport. its organic, effortless, fulsome and yet immensely detailed...its definitely a speciality of the speaker when set up right.

Arrakis was insanely good in bass...I have not heard the equal of what I heard in that system that day, ever. Focal Grandes, XLF, CLX/Descent, X2, Tidal with dual Sunray Tower Subs, etc...

 

[microstrip]

I'll take that back, the 'never' that is. I have scanned my aural recollections a bit more critically and calmly, and had forgotten about the following: I heard an ensemble piece for 23 players on Rockport Altair speakers in a large room, and the image of the two dueling solo violins in the beginning was quite convincing, as was that of most instruments entering later.(...)

You were really lucky - finding a Rockport Altair owner who let you play Mauricio Kagel. Did he enjoy it?

 

[Al M.]

You were really lucky - finding a Rockport Altair owner who let you play Mauricio Kagel. Did he enjoy it?

Well, it was at a dealership, and I was the only one in the room, so I had nobody telling me if they enjoyed my Wolfgang Rihm piece or not...

 

[MadFloyd]

I suspect that LL21 and Al M. (as well as myself) have all heard the Altairs at the same dealership.

 

[LL21]

I suspect that LL21 and Al M. (as well as myself) have all heard the Altairs at the same dealership.

perception is everything! In fairness to the Altairs, that was a huge room when we were there...the ceilings were probably close to 13'? 20' wide and deeper than that? The XLFs can I think scale higher and deliver slightly more propsulsive bass...but I think I remember specifically thinking even an XLF would have trouble shaking the walls in a room that large, and pressurizing the room in volume also not so easy.

Nevertheless, I think the Altair bass in that room was well done. Being a bass freak, I would add a few subs below 40hz in just about every setup I have heard...that one included. But that for me does not mean the Altair lacked bass...on the contrary, I think a lot of speakers might sound great in the room generally, but still struggle to truly pressurize it.

But coming back to the Altairs, I felt they did well in the bass in that room.

 

[MadFloyd]

perception is everything! In fairness to the Altairs, that was a huge room when we were there...the ceilings were probably close to 13'? 20' wide and deeper than that? The XLFs can I think scale higher and deliver slightly more propsulsive bass...but I think I remember specifically thinking even an XLF would have trouble shaking the walls in a room that large, and pressurizing the room in volume also not so easy.

Nevertheless, I think the Altair bass in that room was well done. Being a bass freak, I would add a few subs below 40hz in just about every setup I have heard...that one included. But that for me does not mean the Altair lacked bass...on the contrary, I think a lot of speakers might sound great in the room generally, but still struggle to truly pressurize it.

But coming back to the Altairs, I felt they did well in the bass in that room.

I totally agree. The Altairs sounded really, really good and I don't think there was any lack of bass. I remember hearing the S5's in that same room where unless you went and stood by the sidewalls, there was NO bass. It was the oddest thing.

 

[LL21]

I totally agree. The Altairs sounded really, really good and I don't think there was any lack of bass. I remember hearing the S5's in that same room where unless you went and stood by the sidewalls, there was NO bass. It was the oddest thing.

Frankly, that is a tough room...it is HUGE by most standards, not so much the lateral dimensions...but the height. its a lot of volume and many speakers will have trouble pressurizing in there. That said, i suppose what you can get is great depth of soundstage because the speakers can come so far into the room.

 

[PeterA]

Last night, Al M. and I attended a live performance in a residential setting. Jonathan Miller, Cello, and Marc Ryser, Piano, performed "Music from the Time of Louis Comfort Tiffany". In 1900, Tiffany designed the house in Boston in which we heard the music. They played Sonatas from Cowell, Janacek and Debussy. There were 35-40 people gathered around the living room which was roughly 35' X 28' X 15'.

The performance was truly wonderful, but what I really appreciated was hearing music that was composed when the house was built and that was meant to be heard in just such a setting. The energy from those two instruments in a rather grand living room was simply incredible. It was very loud but very easy to listen to. And it clearly demonstrated what I discussed earlier in the thread about the size of the image of the instruments being clear and distinct from the shear power, volume and scale of the sound they produced. That distinction is one characteristic which separates good systems from great systems, IMO. Large systems which can play loudly without distortion or congestion can perhaps begin to approach this level of energy and ease.

Small scale live performances in these kinds of spaces can serve as wonderful references for us as we try to develop and improve our systems. This is what people heard in their living rooms when this music was written and what a treat it was to experience it last night. It was a delightful evening of great music and a reminder of just how far the best systems still have to go to reproduce such a performance accurately.

 

[microstrip]

(...) These kinds of performances in these kinds of spaces can serve as wonderful references for us as we try to develop and improve our systems. What a delightful evening of great music and a reminder of just how far our systems are removed from the real thing.

These live performances are great to built someone's own reference, but are not absolute. The information existing in the real event is much greater than what can exist in the stereo recording. Going to the live performance will help you in the future to recreate the illusion of the live when listening to recordings, as your brain will easily fill the canvas using minimal clues that are shown by the good systems. But IMHO this information is highly subjective and individual.

I always use as reference a few recordings of performances I had the pleasure of listening live - but I know the risk of easily becoming fascinated by a few extraordinary features of the system, overlooking the global performance of the whole system.

And yes, our systems are far from the real think. It is why the hobby is fascinating - our perception of the recording gives us great listening pleasure, and the sound quality of the systems seems unlimited (perhaps I should have posted this last sentence in another thread!).

 

[Peter Breuninger]

These live performances are great to built someone's own reference, but are not absolute. The information existing in the real event is much greater than what can exist in the stereo recording. Going to the live performance will help you in the future to recreate the illusion of the live when listening to recordings, as your brain will easily fill the canvas using minimal clues that are shown by the good systems. But IMHO this information is highly subjective and individual.

I always use as reference a few recordings of performances I had the pleasure of listening live - but I know the risk of easily becoming fascinated by a few extraordinary features of the system, overlooking the global performance of the whole system.

And yes, our systems are far from the real think. It is why the hobby is fascinating - our perception of the recording gives us great listening pleasure, and the sound quality of the systems seems unlimited (perhaps I should have posted this last sentence in another thread!).

Great post. Our minds fill it in.