Which speakers have the best off axis performance?

[rockitman]

Nobody said panacea. For speaker manufacturers/dealers and hence reviewers, DSP is pan-and-see-ya'.

Everyone has an agenda. For those with a genuine interest, there are really good free opportunities for individual exploration.

Michael.

I see dsp as useful for systems with digital source. It makes little sense for those who prefer analog sources because they act as analogue-to-digital converters for audio signals coming from analogue sources like turntables and tape machines, before applying the room correction algorithms in the digital domain. Nobody in analog that I know of wants their music converted a/d as there is a loss of spatial information, timbral accuracy, sound stage depth and width, ect....mostly due to digital mastering choices of source that was mastered in analog originally.

 

[RBFC]

In the end, definitive comments should only be made by those with experience with both all-analog, A/D DSP implementations, and full-digital DSP usage. It seems reasonable that only under these circumstances could anyone make statements about respective performance parameters. I am not one of these multi-users, so am therefore an "interested thread follower"!

Lee

 

[mep]

I am definitive about not wanting DSP used in my 2 channel system.

 

[ddk]

I am definitive about not wanting DSP used in my 2 channel system.

I'm with you on this, don't like dsp or digital crossovers at all, even in a digital based system where the analog output of the DAC is re-digitized. Its a different story in a pure digital system with a single final conversion to analog before the speakers; still don't like it but I can understand it.

 

[microstrip]

I am definitive about not wanting DSP used in my 2 channel system.

My experiences with DSP were very limited - just playing with a Behringer DCX2496 Ultradrive Pro Crososver that has some interesting equalization capabilities and can be connected to a PC to fasten and simplify setup and comparisons - you can save and change settings very fast. Perhaps due to my inexperience, the subjective results were very poor, although the REW graphs looked much nicer.

None of many the demos or show exhibitions of DSP base systems I have listened sounded tempting or at less comparable to conventional systems - but I am someone who do not expect systems playing in show conditions to sound great.

Almost all people (we have exceptions in WBF) who write nice things about DSP focus on aspects such as clarity, definition, bass quality and impressive dynamics. They do not refer to real listening experiences in terms that can show some emotion and transmit they were feeling something really gratifying that I have also experimented in top systems. In conclusion, as Mark, I do not feel motivated to use DSP in my 2 channel system, although as I recognize that my DAC does a lot digital signal processing, I do not consider DSP an evil think.

 

[ddk]

Almost all people (we have exceptions in WBF) who write nice things about DSP focus on aspects such as clarity, definition, bass quality and impressive dynamics. They do not refer to real listening experiences in terms that can show some emotion and transmit they were feeling something really gratifying that I have also experimented in top systems. In conclusion, as Mark, I do not feel motivated to use DSP in my 2 channel system, although as I recognize that my DAC does a lot digital signal processing, I do not consider DSP an evil think.

Interestingly the worst area of DSP for me is the bass which has little to no definition, texture or depth and you can substitute flat for clarity and definition. I've run these test on speakers with outboard crossovers and heard them on a bunch of different ones and came away with the same conclusion every time.

david

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Almost all people (we have exceptions in WBF) who write nice things about DSP focus on aspects such as clarity, definition, bass quality and impressive dynamics. They do not refer to real listening experiences in terms that can show some emotion and transmit they were feeling something really gratifying that I have also experimented in top systems.

I try never to use emotional terms since the musical content, imho, communicates equally well on a table radio and my emotional receptivity (and yours) varies widely over time. I do not understand most of what I read from those who do.

 

[dallasjustice]

I try never to use emotional terms since the musical content, imho, communicates equally well on a table radio and my emotional receptivity (and yours) varies widely over time. I do not understand most of what I read from those who do.

+1. The music stands on it's own in an accurate system. What more is needed?

 

[microstrip]

I try never to use emotional terms since the musical content, imho, communicates equally well on a table radio and my emotional receptivity (and yours) varies widely over time. I do not understand most of what I read from those who do.

If you describe why you felt that emotion using appropriate terms and language people will understand, and then the table radio will not be confused with a good system . Although many people express themselves poorly - I am surely one of them - fortunately we have people that manage to do it fairly well. Who can not understand and enjoy the words of the reviewer who wrote "My taste in Ms. Fleming’s repertoire, however, veers to Richard Strauss and his devastatingly luscious valedictory, Four Last Songs (Renée Fleming, Münchner Philhamoniker/Christian Thielemann, Decca 478 0647). Here Ms. Fleming’s glorious soprano soared over the spacious carpet of Strauss’ orchestra and thrilled me more than Cohen’s wry “Hallelujah.” For any audiophile worth his salt, what could be more satisfying?." As the Four Last Songs are one of my great favorites, with a penchant to Elizabeth Schwartzkopf, I think I really understood you.

 

[dallasjustice]

Interestingly the worst area of DSP for me is the bass which has little to no definition, texture or depth and you can substitute flat for clarity and definition. I've run these test on speakers with outboard crossovers and heard them on a bunch of different ones and came away with the same conclusion every time.

david

If that's the way it sounded, then it wasn't a wise use of DSP and certainly accurate music reproduction.

DSP is like any other powerful tool. It has limitations and tremendous advantages. When used correctly, there's no downside.

 

[mep]

+1. The music stands on it's own in an accurate system. What more is needed?

Emotion is always nice. Sometimes I think systems that some people say are "accurate" are boring to listen to because they appear to be accurate because what is being stripped out leaves a nice *clean* signal that is missing information that was encoded in the source material. Of course I could be wrong and all "accurate" systems sound wonderful especially after they have been run through DSP that does no harm and just brings goodness to every signal that passes through its digital manipulation.

 

[zztop7]

If that's the way it sounded, then it wasn't a wise use of DSP and certainly accurate music reproduction.

DSP is like any other powerful tool. It has limitations and tremendous advantages. When used correctly, there's no downside.

I know that you are an attorney, and I believe you are NOT in any manner pushing certain audio companies.
Therefore, will you post what DSP unit you are using. I realize that you may have already, but I have not seen the posts.

Respectfully,
zz.

 

[dallasjustice]

Emotion is always nice. Sometimes I think systems that some people say are "accurate" are boring to listen to because they appear to be accurate because what is being stripped out leaves a nice *clean* signal that is missing information that was encoded in the source material. Of course I could be wrong and all "accurate" systems sound wonderful especially after they have been run through DSP that does no harm and just brings goodness to every signal that passes through its digital manipulation.

Accuracy in this context primarily means really good bass. For example, the use of DSP to crossover my main R/L into a pair JL F113 set up in a time/phase coherent way results in tremendous emotional impact. This is particularly true with large scale symphonic pieces. I'm in the process of rediscovering much of my forgotten classical music.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Nobody said panacea. For speaker manufacturers/dealers and hence reviewers, DSP is pan-and-see-ya'.

Everyone has an agenda. For those with a genuine interest, there are really good free opportunities for individual exploration.

Michael.

Wow sure sounded like it. After all, how could one listen to their system without DSP? What other conclusion could one come to?

 

[Robh3606]

Hello mep

Sometimes I think systems that some people say are "accurate" are boring to listen to because they appear to be accurate because what is being stripped out leaves a nice *clean* signal that is missing information that was encoded in the source material.

What would that be??

Rob

 

[Kal Rubinson]

If you describe why you felt that emotion using appropriate terms and language people will understand, and then the table radio will not be confused with a good system . Although many people express themselves poorly - I am surely one of them - fortunately we have people that manage to do it fairly well. Who can not understand and enjoy the words of the reviewer who wrote "My taste in Ms. Fleming’s repertoire, however, veers to Richard Strauss and his devastatingly luscious valedictory, Four Last Songs (Renée Fleming, Münchner Philhamoniker/Christian Thielemann, Decca 478 0647). Here Ms. Fleming’s glorious soprano soared over the spacious carpet of Strauss’ orchestra and thrilled me more than Cohen’s wry “Hallelujah.” For any audiophile worth his salt, what could be more satisfying?." As the Four Last Songs are one of my great favorites, with a penchant to Elizabeth Schwartzkopf, I think I really understood you.

I understand (and agree with all that, of course) but it has mostly to do with the artistry of Strauss, Fleming, et al., and says that the sytem conveyed that to me. Perhaps my remarks conveyed some emotional response to you (intended) but what did you take from it that differentiates the equipment in use from any other?

 

[ddk]

If that's the way it sounded, then it wasn't a wise use of DSP and certainly accurate music reproduction.

DSP is like any other powerful tool. It has limitations and tremendous advantages. When used correctly, there's no downside.

Its nothing to do with wise or unwise, I did a set of experiments to understand the functionality of and effectiveness of a couple of pieces of equipment. We probably approach DSP and digital in general from different perspectives and ideas of good and bad. Not that DSP hasn't been used effectively, specially for live spaces, it has, but for me today, DSP is as bad as it gets when it comes to music, live or reproduced. So its not a viable tool for me to begin with.

+1. The music stands on it's own in an accurate system. What more is needed?

Musicality! That's what makes or breaks a system for me. Its all meaningless without uncontrollable foot tapping, head shaking, finger snapping and a giant surge of emotion. That's what I see as the difference between live and hifi It also happens in live performances, the difference between memorable and poor. I don't care about being impressed by a system! There are too many high end systems that can do just that with great success, I want to be emotionally transported and satisfied and so very few system I've heard are capable of doing that. Aside from the accuracy issues that listed above, its this emotional satisfaction that I find totally lacking with DSP systems, even with multi-million dollar installations I've heard in some concert halls.

david

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Sometimes I think systems that some people say are "accurate" are boring to listen to because they appear to be accurate because what is being stripped out leaves a nice *clean* signal that is missing information that was encoded in the source material.

I wonder if anyone can define such a filter in mathematical terms. Where is emotion or musicality encoded?

Of course I could be wrong and all "accurate" systems sound wonderful especially after they have been run through DSP that does no harm and just brings goodness to every signal that passes through its digital manipulation.

I tell my students that any multiple choice option that includes absolute terms like "all" or "always" are suspect and, in the long run, unlikely to be true. However, while there are objective measurements and standards, albeit incomplete ones, for "accuracy," I know of none for "wonderful" except a statistical compilation of subjective evaluations. I cannot tell you how many "wonderful" systems really sound awful (to me) but there are many fewer "accurate" ones that disappoint. Of course, I do not mean all in either case.

 

[ddk]

I understand (and agree with all that, of course) but it has mostly to do with the artistry of Strauss, Fleming, et al., and says that the sytem conveyed that to me. Perhaps my remarks conveyed some emotional response to you (intended) but what did you take from it that differentiates the equipment in use from any other?

Hi Kal,

What's the importance of a high end system if it can't convey the artistry of Strauss, Fleming, et al.?

david

 

[dallasjustice]

I know that you are an attorney, and I believe you are NOT in any manner pushing certain audio companies.
Therefore, will you post what DSP unit you are using. I realize that you may have already, but I have not seen the posts.

Respectfully,
zz.

You are right. I'm just a music lover.

I use DSP in 3 different parts of the digital chain. I don't convert A to D and back again. I agree with some previous posts that DSP makes less sense with an analog source.

I use a windows computer and Jriver. All music that goes out my computer passes through a digital filter that is designed using DIRAC LIVE. DIRAC is easy to use and free to try. It's a target based DSP solution so you would draw a target according to your tastes or just use the recommended curve (what I do). DIRAC is very advanced DSP. It is not a simple EQ. A great deal of care is taken in the measurement process to make sure DIRAC doesn't try to fix the unfixable (non-minimum phase). Here is some good reading:
http://www.roomeqwizard.com/wizardhelpv5/help_en-GB/html/minimumphase.html

My DAC is a DEQX HDP-4 connected to said server USB. The DEQX has the capability to crossover over up to 6 channels. The crossover filters are IIR. The DEQX also offers speaker correction and a simple parametric EQ. Because the DIRAC so good, I don't use the DEQX PEQ. I do apply a little speaker correction. Speaker correction is done using a very transparent FIR filter. The key to speaker correction with the DEQX is knowing how much of the speaker on axis measurement at 1m is the speaker and not the room. That's why having Nyal is essential to taking the DEQX to it's best use.

Finally, I crossover in the DEQX asymmetrically between my main R/L and a pair of jl audio f113 subs. Of course great care is needed to dial in phase and delay between the main R/L and each sub. The DEQX can do that, of course.

The subs are strategically positioned on front and backwalls to help destroy remaining front/back axial modes and backwall null at 54hz. The bass is very exciting and realistic. I never thought one could say bass is "fast". Accurate bass is full, dynamic and very fast.

Michael.