Do distortion 's affect enjoyment of speaker?


Hoping for a concensus.
ptss

Showing 12 responses by bombaywalla

08-05-14: Chayro
It's obvious that the better the distortion specs, the more
you will like listening to the speakers. That's the way
everyone does it. Saves you the trouble of listening and
making up your own mind. Same goes for amplifiers as well.
I suggest one of the old DB Systems amps with 0.0000001%
THD.
Chayro
this must have been written with your tongue firmly in your cheek!! ;-)
the answer is an EMPHATIC 'yes'!
* distortions in the electronics ruins your listening pleasure thru the speakers..
* distortions in the speaker itself ruins your listening pleasure thru those speakers.
* distortions caused by the room ruins your listening pleasure thru the speakers.
* distortions caused by mechanical feedback of sound coupling back to your audio rack ruins your listening pleasure thru the speakers.
* distortions in the AC power in your wall outlet ruins your listening pleasure thru the speakers.

each of the above 5 items is a WHOLE lengthy chapter to improving playback sonics in the home environment that takes a long time to understand & a long time to master.

Which distortion(s) are your referring to??
"If the question is, are the drivers summed in phase and the phase is perfectly aligned in the crossover region? Then yes." Subjectively i'd have to agree, the S5's are very coherent and well balanced.
Melbguy1
The Magico guys are pretty slick & wiggled their way out of your question knowing quite well that you are not fully knowledgeable on this subject of time-coherence. You are not the only one in this situation - 99% of the crowd is in the same situation & the speaker manuf take advantage of this.
Just to be clear: I'm not berating you & neither am I trying to be harsh. merely stating the situation.
The Magico is phase-coherent only at its cross-over frequency & nowhere else! And this is pretty typical of almost all loudspeakers in the market - being phase coherent at the x-over freq comes about pretty easily. You can see from the measurements that tweeter & woofer are in-phase otherwise there'd be a big suckout at the x-over freq. Obviously that suckout is not happening so the speaker is phase coherent at the x-over. But that's about it re. phase coherence for this speaker. It's maintaining the phase relationship among all frequencies across the entire audio spectrum is where the expertise of the speaker designer comes into play.
Not withstanding the above, good to read that you are enjoying your Magico speakers... :-)
Melbguy1, there are no step response measurements for the S5 to verify what you are saying. All their other speakers are not time-coherent so it's reasonable to assume to that the S series would not be. But, like you wrote, I could be wrong. Anyway, I'm not going to argue with you on this. Enjoy the speakers...
08-07-14: Melbguy1
Bombaywalla, I acknowledge your fair comments. However on the one
hand Magico are telling me the S5's are time coherent, and on the other
you are telling me they are not. One might ask who do you believe? May I
pose this question to you, Is a speaker either time coherent or not? Or can
there be different degrees in between? And are (objective) measurements
more important than (subjective) listening in assessing the overall
coherency of a speaker?
Melbguy1
hi Melbguy1
who do I believe? I believe myself & my research & my understanding of the matter.
The S5 are not time-coherent if they use higher order x-over i.e. 2nd order or higher. Period.
Bifwynne's answer/post is exactly correct re. the S5. The use of higher order x-over destroys the phase difference relationship amongst the various frequencies in the audio band 20Hz-20KHz. The physics of using a higher order x-over prevents the speaker from being time-coherent.
Doug Schneider's review of the S5 is a nice read but Doug is not trained in engineering math & physics to understand the subtleties between phase coherence & time coherence. So, I would not latch onto Doug's words & find comfort in them re. the speakers being time-coherent.
Like Bifwynne wrote, you can still buy & like the S5. Just don't call it time-coherent - it's at best phase coherent/phase linear at its x-over frequencies.
Is a speaker either time coherent or not? Or can
there be different degrees in between? And are (objective) measurements
more important than (subjective) listening in assessing the overall
coherency of a speaker?
Melbguy1
either a speaker is time-coherent or it's not. There's nothing in between - just varying degrees of time-INcoherence. Those like Magico (which are time-incoherent) try to minimize the distortions & other brands have them worse.
Objective measurements verify that the speaker is time-coherent or not (see Stereophile measurements over the years of various time-coherent speakers). And, subjective listening verifies the measurements. Listening & listening carefully with the right kind of music is important towards assessing the merits of any speaker & is always recommended.
Hi Melbguy1,
Somehow the conversation diverged into talking more about the S5 than the original topic of "Do distortion 's affect enjoyment of speaker?". Sorry about that. I'll stop talking about the S5 & concentrate more on the OP's topic.
You're assuming too much about rigidity & my music sounding that way & freshman text books, etc, etc. I'm not going to bother to correct you. Please feel free to think the way you are already....
On the topic of whose opinion you respect more - I'll let you be the judge of that as well since you have to live with your decision. What your ultimate selection is, has no bearing on me.

Anyway, the whole point of this discussion is that one needs to know what situation one is in w.r.t. music & playback equipment. The situation doesn't have to be perfect for the person to enjoy the music. But, if one is unaware of the situation, one can never become a better audiophile, a better listener & a better chooser of playback equipment. One needs to understand one's equipment, it's limitations & what can be done in the future to improve. That's one main reason to discuss these topic on public forums. But if new information is not going to be incorporated in becoming better in this hobby, why be on a forum?

Sorry that you are offended - I was trying to bring forward information on the speaker that I felt was important with the idea that you may chose to do something with it in the future. I/We'll stop the chatter on the S5 & concentrate on the "Do distortion 's affect enjoyment of speaker?" topic.
08-08-14: Charles1dad
Bombywalla,
I always find your comments interesting and informative. This topic is no exception, I just came across it very recently. Are first order crossovers a prerequisite for proper time alignment?
Would a single driver crossoverless speaker be another example of true time alignment?
Are you able to consistently hear the results of time alignment?
Thanks,
Charles,
Thank you Charles.
Excluding single-driver speakers, yes, 1st order x-overs are a requirement for time-coherence.
In your post you asked "Are first order crossovers a prerequisite for proper time alignment?"
Notice you wrote "proper time alignment". Time alignment is just a small aspect of time-coherence.
Time alignment refers to aligning the acoustical centers of all the drivers such that sound from them reaches your ears at the same time. You find speakers with sloped baffles do this. At other times, the older Dynaudios, the tweeter is placed at the bottom & the woofer on top while the baffle is exactly vertical - this makes the pathway from the tweeter longer to your ear compared to the woofer. This a 2nd way to solve the time-alignment issue. In the bigger Focals you find the speaker front curved & the manuf provides a crank on the back that can change this curvature. This is a 3rd way to solve the time-alignment issue.
Speakers that don't have a sloped baffle nor the tweeter at the bottom & woofer on the top nor a curved baffle but still claim to be time-coherent are making totally fake claims. If you haven't take into account the most basic attribute of time-aligning the drivers, how can you even come close to achieving time-coherence??

Note that just because the drivers are time-aligned, the speaker is not time-coherent. Time-coherence comes from the fact that the phase relationship amongst all the frequencies as they go thru the speaker remains unchanged from speaker input to speaker output. This means that the drivers do not distort as the music signal passes thru the speaker in the 20Hz-20KHz range, that the x-over circuit does not distort as the music signal passes thru the speaker in the 20Hz-20KHz range.
This means you need to select your drivers very carefully & it also means that your x-over cannot change the phase relationship amongst all the frequencies in the 20Hz-20KHz region. Only the 1st-order x-over circuit has the property of not changing the phase relationship amongst all the frequencies in the 20Hz-20KHz region. The 2nd-order, 3rd-order, 4th-order & higher order circuits do not have this property. So, yes, 1st-order x-over is required for time-coherence.
A time-coherent speaker has it's drivers time-aligned. Plus, a time-coherent speaker is phase-coherent at all frequencies in the 20Hz-20KHz range and not only at the x-over frequencies like most speakers in the market.

Would a single driver crossoverless speaker be another example of true time alignment?
yes & no. it depends on the quality of the single-driver. For as long as the single-driver's frequency response remains linear, the speaker will be time-coherent. Notice I am writing "time coherent" & not time aligned. Time alignment is just one small aspect of time coherence.
When the single-driver becomes non-linear - maybe due to the whizzer cone or the woofer driver cone break-up or any other reason, the single-driver will start adding its own phase shift to the music signal & the speaker will become time-INcoherent.
So, a single driver speaker could be time-coherent over a limited freq range or over the entire range depends on how good the single-driver is acoustically. Electrically it does not matter as there is no x-over.

Are you able to consistently hear the results of time alignment?
absolutely yes! And, each time one listens one appreciates the time-coherence attribute. Again, I'm using time-coherence & not time-alignment. Time-coherence is the superset of time-alignment.
Time coherent speakers simply sound like real music, they are non-fatiguing & let you concentrate on the nuances of the music rather than wasting your time on audiophile attributes of soundstage height, width, depth, imaging, etc, etc. In time-coherent speakers the imaging is always very good & the images are locked i.e. they do not float in space as the volume goes up/down or when you hear soprano/baritone. Sound from such speakers sounds like it's cut from one cloth - no separate-tweeter-separate-woofer sound. Music of all genres sounds great thru time-coherent speakers even those albums recorded poorly because the speaker is not adding any distortion of its own. Of course, better recorded music sounds better thru time-coherent speakers. Time coherent speakers are largely agnostic to the electronics driving them because the speaker is a benign load to the amplifier - a properly designed time-coherent speaker has very little phase shift in the bulk of the audio band. And, as the electronics improves, the speaker sounds better because the electronics is distorting less (the speaker itself has minimal distortion of its own).

So, the reason I'm talking about time-coherence is because the OP asked if distortions affect the enjoyment of speaker. Choosing time-coherence or not is about deciding how much distortion you want to listen & how much you want your listening pleasure to be bombed by distortions. Everybody wants to spend top-dollar to buy the best electronics but they pay little attention to the speaker. So, you have lower distortion electronics feeding into highly distorting speakers & you have basically undone all your work to selecting lower distortion electronics. what good is that?

Choose time-coherent speakers & enjoy your music to its fullest. And, as Roy Johnson says on his website, "it's about time" (pun intended) that you do so!

hope this helps....
08-08-14: Tbg
Ptss, please note that distortion's is possessive. So what you should have said is, Do distortions affect enjoyment of speakers, as distortions is plural.
here comes the language & grammar police. LOL! :-D
just pulling your leg Tbg. You're right but I decided to turn a blind eye & chose to discuss the subject matter as that seemed more important to me....
Tbg,
Ptss moniker is interesting. maybe it stands for Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome? That's why the grammar is screwed up?? ;-)
08-08-14: Charles1dad
Hi Bombaywalla,
Thank you for your very clear and educational reply, it is much appreciated.
Charles,
welcome Charles. glad I could be of help.