What is the correlation b/w measurements and good sound?

[GaryProtein]

Making it work better!

It will still be bright, by measurement, but the trick is to stop the brain focusing on that - which means that the musical message takes centre stage, this comes through clearly enough that any "deficiencies" in the sound are filtered out by the brain.

Once one has done this a few times, one realises what's going on ...

I guess if we learned to do that we could save ourselves tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars by getting iPods and other lo-fi systems.

 

[opus112]

But, an amazing transformation takes place when the system is in good enough shape - all screechiness falls away, and you're truly aware of Tina just powering on the vocals, and all the subtleties of the backing musicians' efforts fall into place - it has become like listening to a live performance, and one gets the full emotional charge from the experience ... these are the reasons I find it worthwhile pulling out all the stops on occasion, to get the best sound.

Siegfried Linkwitz has understood it and demonstrates it - his description of 'Optimal stereo reproduction' I'll reproduce here :

The magic occurs when the loudspeakers seemingly disappear from the sound scene, to the point where one is inclined to ask: what are these two contraptions in front of me doing? ... All that is perceived is a phantom scene. A scene, which is not hard bounded by loudspeakers, softly windowed and extends behind and above the speakers. While there is a sweet spot, namely the apex of an equilateral triangle, the scene does not collapse into the nearest speaker upon moving to one side, but stays between the speakers with a perspective similar to what one would hear at a concert sitting to the side.

Also, when farther away from the speakers and deep into the reverberant field in the listening room, the tonality does not change. The room is easily forgotten.

The magic is difficult to describe in pictures or words but is recognized within 30 seconds when heard. It usually elicits a big smile or even laughter from the listener. Naive listeners, audiophiles and professionals alike recognize the naturalness of presentation. On many recordings it is 3D in front of the listener and resembles a concert experience.

From here : http://linkwitzlab.com/The_Magic/The_Magic.htm

 

[opus112]

I guess if we learned to do that we could save ourselves tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars by getting iPods and other lo-fi systems.

Dunno about iPods but my smartphone (costs about $150, not an iPhone) can do a fairly convincing holographic 3D presentation but it needs to be buffered. Just connecting it to my amp the loading is a bit heavy.

 

[opus112]

A bad recording sounds bad on the best system.

Would you give a description of 'the best system' ?

 

[BE718]

Making it work better!

It will still be bright, by measurement, but the trick is to stop the brain focusing on that - which means that the musical message takes centre stage, this comes through clearly enough that any "deficiencies" in the sound are filtered out by the brain.

Once one has done this a few times, one realises what's going on ...

No you are changing the tonality to your preference/to suit the recording. Or you are trying to ignore a deficiency.

So precisely how do you take my focus away from a distractingly bright recording? Again this all sounds very nebulous.

 

[BE718]

Would you give a description of 'the best system' ?

A generic description to allow others to place their own interpretation of best, but essentially within the bounds of high fidelity - faithful to the original.

 

[opus112]

A generic description to allow others to place their own interpretation of best, but essentially within the bounds of high fidelity - faithful to the original.

And an example of such from your perspective is?

 

[BE718]

Siegfried Linkwitz has understood it and demonstrates it - his description of 'Optimal stereo reproduction' I'll reproduce here :

The magic occurs when the loudspeakers seemingly disappear from the sound scene, to the point where one is inclined to ask: what are these two contraptions in front of me doing? ... All that is perceived is a phantom scene. A scene, which is not hard bounded by loudspeakers, softly windowed and extends behind and above the speakers. While there is a sweet spot, namely the apex of an equilateral triangle, the scene does not collapse into the nearest speaker upon moving to one side, but stays between the speakers with a perspective similar to what one would hear at a concert sitting to the side.

Also, when farther away from the speakers and deep into the reverberant field in the listening room, the tonality does not change. The room is easily forgotten.

The magic is difficult to describe in pictures or words but is recognized within 30 seconds when heard. It usually elicits a big smile or even laughter from the listener. Naive listeners, audiophiles and professionals alike recognize the naturalness of presentation. On many recordings it is 3D in front of the listener and resembles a concert experience.

From here : http://linkwitzlab.com/The_Magic/The_Magic.htm

I dont disagree with this, essentially it means getting the room acoustics right - an area I have concentrated on. However I do disagree that you will re-create a concert experience, the original instruments and acoustic space and the way microphones / stereo speakers work is quite different.

You can of course re-create a very enjoyable facsimile.

 

[opus112]

I dont disagree with this, essentially it means getting the room acoustics right - an area I have concentrated on.

Not in my experience - my room is totally untreated and has fake wood over concrete on the floor, no rugs or carpets. Interesting that in Linkwitz's 5 points to achieve this the first three are about the speakers and only the latter two about the room. In my experience the major points have nothing at all to do with the speakers and all to do with the electronics.

Clearly there's more than one way to skin this cat.

 

[BE718]

Not in my experience - my room is totally untreated and has fake wood over concrete on the floor, no rugs or carpets. Interesting that in Linkwitz's 5 points to achieve this the first three are about the speakers and only the latter two about the room. In my experience the major points have nothing at all to do with the speakers and all to do with the electronics.

Clearly there's more than one way to skin this cat.

With the greatest of respect your room without a reasonable degree of absorption to control reverb will sound appalling. I have rooms like this and they totally ruin the sound. The speaker / room is by far the most important factor.

 

[opus112]

How do you know it will sound appalling? You don't have my kit for a start....

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Not in my experience - my room is totally untreated and has fake wood over concrete on the floor, no rugs or carpets. Interesting that in Linkwitz's 5 points to achieve this the first three are about the speakers and only the latter two about the room. In my experience the major points have nothing at all to do with the speakers and all to do with the electronics.

Clearly there's more than one way to skin this cat.

it's a matter of the SPL's a room can handle before it gets slappy and confused, and the degree of precision you desire in simpler music.

I have a large room ( 29' x 21' x 11') with hardwood over concrete floor in the 'speaker' third of the room.....and hardwood cabinetry on all the walls and ceiling, some of which is built in diffusion. it's about as 'live' a room as can be, but large enough to deal with considerable SPL's. it was not until I methodically treated reflections in the last year that I found the precision that was the original promise of the room when it was purpose built 11 years ago.

I use to feel as you do.....but......

if you have an untreated room you simply don't know what you don't know.......with all due respect.

I loved what my room did over these many years as did many visitors; but there was still so much performance covered by reflective glare and distortion.....removing it has been a revelation.

 

[opus112]

it's a matter of the SPL's a room can handle before it gets slappy and confused, and the degree of precision you desire in simpler music.

I don't go for high SPLs, after all I don't wish to alienate my neighbours. I should also mention I'm listening fairly near-field - the distance between my speakers is under 2m and I'm under 2m from them.

 

[BE718]

How do you know it will sound appalling? You don't have my kit for a start....

Its simple acoustics. Hard surfaces reflect the sound. Without absorption the sound will take a very log time to decay. This will cause "confusion" in the sound and difficulty in discerning lower level detail as its obscured by the decaying previous sounds. You equipment is totally irrelevant to this.

Listening at very near field, and if the room is very small, will ameliorate this to a degree, however.........

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I don't go for high SPLs, after all I don't wish to alienate my neighbours. I should also mention I'm listening fairly near-field - the distance between my speakers is under 2m and I'm under 2m from them.

I also sit in the near-field; my tweeters are 118 inches apart, my ears are 114 inches from the tweeters. my speakers are twin towers, 86 inch tall/ 750 pound each tower.

but I do agree if your speakers are relatively small (don't move much air compared to the room size) and your speakers are quite a ways into the room, it is possible to relatively remove reflections from the equation....like big 'ear phones' almost. but that is not a normal speaker-room set-up so falls outside the normal rules.

and if you don't listen to music at real world levels (or primarily only listen to small scale music) then your room treatment needs are clearly different.

I sit in the nearfield; but my speakers move an enormous amount of air. so they interact dramatically with the room. note the fabric treatments on the walls and ceiling. every one of those was tested over time.

 

[opus112]

but I do agree if your speakers are relatively small (don't move much air compared to the room size) and your speakers are quite a ways into the room, it is possible to relatively remove reflections from the equation....like big 'ear phones' almost. but that is not a normal speaker-room set-up so falls outside the normal rules.

Pretty much that describes my setup yes. The bass/mids are only 5.25inch (no subs) and the speakers are well into the room.

 

[opus112]

This will cause "confusion" in the sound and difficulty in discerning lower level detail as its obscured by the decaying previous sounds. You equipment is totally irrelevant to this.

So then you reckon I am not hearing any lower level details in my system due to the room being untreated? How sure are you of this?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Pretty much that describes my setup yes. The bass/mids are only 5.25inch (no subs) and the speakers are well into the room.

most speakers designed for domestic use are voiced with room reinforcement......basically the bottom end gets balanced by it's room interaction. without that 'room traction' the sound is to some degree lightweight and lacking body. so in your situation you trade bottom end completeness for intimacy. if you like it then no worries. it sounds like in your living situation it's a trade-off you enjoy.

 

[opus112]

The sound is already going to be to some degree lightweight due to there being no lowest (20-40Hz) octave and the speakers I have already roll off before 40Hz. For my purposes this suits me at present, though I am curious to hear how it'll sound with the lowest bass filled in.

 

[BE718]

So then you reckon I am not hearing any lower level details in my system due to the room being untreated? How sure are you of this?

No, thats not what I'm trying to say - but if your room has lots of hard surfaces and little absorption it will simply not sound as good as it could.

Studio control rooms have very controlled reverberation times, often down to 0.2 seconds so the room "interferes" with the sound as little as possible (other things like modes need to be dealt with too).

before treatment my 6*4.5*2.9 m threatre/listening room had RT60 of around 1 second and sounded awful. Flutter echo etc. After treatment its down to around 0.25 /0.3 seconds. World of difference. i am listening about 3.4 m away.

As mentioned I think your set-up is a little different to most, which will to some degree ameliorate the problems.