“Physicality” in sound: my novel theory of its basis.

[Anton D]

I never cease to be amazed by how a good bottom end can convey so much sense of space, beyond the expected bass notes themselves.

I'd put that in the physicality part, but physical sense of space rather than impact, so to speak.

 

[Ron Resnick]

different techniques in speaker design more or less correspond to the degree of this sense of physicality.

Again, what is your take on the sonic physicality of the bigger MBLs?

 

[Duke LeJeune]

Thanks, Duke. When I think about physicality, I mean you literally walk out of the room...go upstairs and listen. And if you think the power of the system makes it feel like there is a jazz trio or solo sonata player through the wall or downstairs, then the system has physicality. Often, beautiful renditions of music with nuances and subtleties even soundstage, do NOT have that level of physicality and power to convince the instruments are in the next room. That is what I am focusing on as a next target.

Got it - thanks for explaining!

In this case, does reflection matter?

YES, the reflections DO still matter! The time gap between the direct sound and the strong onset of reflections that I spoke of earlier does not matter, but the tonal balance still matters.

From outside the room (assuming no direct line-of-sight to the speakers) all you can hear are reflections. If the tonal balance of these reflections is wrong, then the tonal balance you hear from another room will also be wrong. Usually there is not enough top-end energy present in the sound that comes through the open doorway for the tonal balance to be realistic. Usually what you hear from another room will be too dull-sounding.

The other thing you can hear from another room is the dynamic contrast. Obviously the sound has to be loud enough for there to be a realistic amount of dynamic contrast, and this is something big speakers generally do much better than small speakers.

I presume not...and imagine it is genuinely more about the system's ability to drive the power of the music to an air pressure/displacement level that through the wall or floor/ceiling enables a listener to wonder...system or instrument?

Yes, the sheer air-moving capability of the speaker system matters. It's not going to sound like there is live music happening in the other room if the sound is too quiet and the peaks too muted to convey emotion.

As an industry expert and designer of speakers particularly, does that make sense to you? For me, when I heard CLXs, I found the transparency beautiful...but when I went back to Wilsons which did not have the alacrity or transparency or coherence, I found they massively DID have a lot more power/body/density which mattered much more to me.

That makes sense to me.

 

[Anton D]

It is driving me crazy trying to find the data or the quotes, but Jon Atkinson was talking about the "live in the next room" phenomenon and commented that he found it to correlate with excess in-room brightness (overly elevated treble response.)

Has anyone else found this to be accurate, to their ears?

 

[Duke LeJeune]

It is driving me crazy trying to find the data or the quotes, but Jon Atkinson was talking about the "live in the next room" phenomenon and commented that he found it to correlate with excess in-room brightness (overly elevated treble response.)

Has anyone else found this to be accurate, to their ears?

This would be true with conventional speakers whose radiation patterns are considerably narrower at high frequencies than across the rest of the spectrum. In order for the tonal balance to be correct from outside the room, the narrow-pattern high frequency energy would have to be louder than the rest of the spectrum. Yuck.

But Jon Atkinson's observation might not be true of almost-conventional speakers which use a rear-firing tweeter to correct the power response in the top octave(s), without boosting the on-axis highs.

And it would not be true of speakers that are constant directivity or nearly so, which includes MBLs, Sound Labs, many horn systems, and in particular corner horn systems.

So listen in the room FIRST, and if the speaker system sounds good from normal listening locations, THEN you can see whether it still sounds good from outside the room. If it doesn't sound good from normal listening locations, don't waste your time.

When the speaker system sounds good from BOTH inside and outside the room, that's an indication of the reflections sounding very much like the direct sound, which in turn is (ime) a predictor of long-term fatigue-free listening.

 

[PeterA]

This would be true with conventional speakers whose radiation patterns are considerably narrower at high frequencies than across the rest of the spectrum. In order for the tonal balance to be correct from outside the room, the narrow-pattern high frequency energy would have to be louder than the rest of the spectrum. Yuck.

But Jon Atkinson's observation might not be true of almost-conventional speakers which use a rear-firing tweeter to correct the power response in the top octave(s), without boosting the on-axis highs.

And it would not be true of speakers that are constant directivity or nearly so, which includes MBLs, Sound Labs, many horn systems, and in particular corner horn systems.

So listen in the room FIRST, and if the speaker system sounds good from normal listening locations, THEN you can see whether it still sounds good from outside the room. If it doesn't sound good from normal listening locations, don't waste your time.

When the speaker system sounds good from BOTH inside and outside the room, that's an indication of the reflections sounding very much like the direct sound, which in turn is (ime) a predictor of long-term fatigue-free listening.

Duke, I have high-quality corner horn speakers and your comments match very well my observations both in and out of the room. I have a good sense of physicality from the presentation of my system in the room.