@kota1 if anyone praises a speaker that Floyd o Toole and the national research councils anicocic chamber was involved with the development of that said speaker I know what there system sounds like! 💩
|
@Kota1
To start wiht, If you haven’t seen my responses before, I have been designing speakers since about 1975, so I have a definite advantage that many don’t have. BUT, that doesn’t meant that people can’t take clues from what I discuss and improve on what they have. The first place is to see what your system is producing. and I will say it again the Decibel-X Ap on a phne with or without a high quality mic can give you an idea of what you are producing. Yo can use static tones generated my a machine or a span of frequencies recorded, or some colour of generated Noise, or MUSIC.
I will always start with the idea that any SYSTTEM can only produce what your SPEAKERS are capable of. SO, possibly I am prejudiced, but that is where I always Start. If your speakers can Faithfully reproduce RAWE tones across the entire band with equal response, You have achieved the First step. Then look into the tonal quality, approach, attack etc. of the speaker. My current towers (that I built) I broke many of the basic rules on purpose. Like the crossover. Most of your high end speakers use higher order of crossovers and if you look at the individual response of most drivers. they roll off very gently. That makes me want to AVOID the higher order crossovers with their sharp roll off, This allows the frequency response of a driver to keep the crossover point level where often if you look at a graphic of a speaker, you will see definite dips at the crossover point. Then I of course use high quality components and things like a ’Foil Ribbon Coil’ (Continuous wind)instead of a wire wound coil (Fishing real wind) and this provides a much more accurate response and faster response in my speakers.
After you have a good speaker then you can play around with all of your other components to find a sound that you want.
Then there is a recent event in my life that provides a perfect example of what not to do. I was looking at a new AV unit and went to a local (So Called) high end store. i should have known something was amiss when I was introduced to the sales person as the Expert on that particular brand of machine. Now I had called ahead and told them EXACTLY what I was looking for and what I expected. What I have currently to work with and that I would be bringing my own materials that I was intimately familiar with. They immediately show me a system that on the surface seemed to have good quality Cord & Cables. what I had hoped ewer adequate components, but then he took my disk and put it into an X-Box to play. You can’t get any more Audiophile than an X-box now can you (SIC). The disk was a DVD audio of Chinese drums, which can produce some Very clear Low notes and resonances. His system couldn’t even reproduce the notes and he started backpedaling by telling me how the DiracLive setup originally was tuned with a Sub Woofer and he had just pulled the Sub from the system. I have a serious problem if Your system has defeated the low end of your towers in favor of Subs. Also that this sales person would present anything like this as I had previously told them that I didn’t use a Sub in my system. Also I will never believe that the Minnie towers he had with 4.5 inch bass drivers could EVER equal my system with 8 inch drivers o full towers. Bottom line this was the Worst possible disaster of a sales pitch I have ever heard. Also the store had paper thin walls and the only bass that I heard that day was from the next room over. Noting I don’t identify the store. So now I will NEVER know if the brand of machine I was trying to audition is any good or of any quality. I actually wrote the manufacturer and told them about this in hopes they would pull this store license to sell their product line. I don't think it will be rude to say that the system I wanted to interview was an Anthem and that the Store was somewhere in Metro Denver.
|
If you’re using the ability to replicate live music as a measure of success in Hi-Fi sound, then a flat frequency is almost irrelevant as the sound of music in any venue will depend entirely on the sound characteristics of that venue. And every venue sounds different.
I am afraid I do not buy into the need for a flat, or other, prescribed frequency response. I tested numerous combinations of amps and speakers in my room till I found the sweet spot for me. I have measured it and it’s all over the place but it sounds absolutely incredible. I used Roon DSP to produce a slightly tailing off frequency curve but it did not sound as good as my natural frequency bumpy curve and it flattened my soundstage. Room treatments are not possible in the family room where I listen so fortunately I have no choice but to enjoy the wobbly curve I have.
|
@ghasley
You seem to be assuming that the sound techniques I was talking about were from CHILDREN that listened to Boomboxes and earbuds. No I was talking about the Mid 1900s You know before you most likely were born.
|
@esarhaddon
No, I was talking about recorded music for which the mixes were tailored for the intended audience and how they might play it back. Alot of music was compromised because they made certain that it was optimized for AM or FM rebroadcast.
You are correct, I was born after the middle of the last century so I haven't had time yet to become snarky or bitter. Just pointing out that EVERYONE is likely aware that production values of many recordings has been compromised as a result of distribution/playback decision making.
|
@ghasley
I am sorry that you found my comment Snarky or... But YOU brought up the devices Boomboxes and earplugs, which didn't even exist till the turn of the century. And except for the dollar two ninety-five wired earphones given away with Japanese transistor radios your comment didn’t’ fit what I was talking about, but then you say it was. Colour me confused.
Yes some of it was modified to fit certain formats, as L:Ps still are, but I find that MOST of the music from the 50s, 60,s 70,s 80.s was mostly just what the sound Eng decided that he himself liked or the dictates of the studio. The later you can find that many label’s ’HAD A SOUND’! and that sound often made or broke many a musician. AND that this sound had little to noting to do with the LP, 8-trac, Cassette, Am, or FM industries. It was also a huge period of experimentation in SOUND and sound engineering. I only wish to be a straight shooter and if yo see other comments I make on this site I don't vilify company names or store names if at all possible. I try not to make personal comments other than to point out definite decencies in a comment made to me.
|
Flat on-axis frequency response is clearly the engineering objective for most of these systems. Those that deviate significantly earn lower ratings in double-blind subjective evaluations. Although there is more to be considered, a flat direct sound delivered to listeners is the basis for most reproduced soun
The important takeaway here is 'flat direct sound', in other words flat when reverberating sound is not combining with the direct sound, as in an anechoic state or a free field, meaning no reflected signal or measured in room with gating employed during capture.
I personally strive for a smooth response, which is to say I avoid peaks and nulls by careful driver choice, crossover design and room treatment. Using 2 or more subs will also reduce the lumpy response.
|
@lordrootman, the nice thing about ’online’ is that no one can twist your arm to buy. ;) I’ll read/listen, but that doesn’t mean a sale or commitment to do so. *S*
Never heard of or have heard Audyssey, but no reason to ignore either...*shrug* See which way the tech is drifting...
|
@lemonhaze , you articulated that very well, the key is a "smooth" in room response which combines with both direct sound and reflected sound. This was the strategy I used in treating my room, I pretty much followed the panel distribution laid out in this diagram:
|
@kota1, thanks for the compliment. The layout above looks like it will provide a good environment for our fine art of audio appreciation. 😁
|
Of course not. No-one does.
Thank you @wturkey
|
'Absolute flat' is still a target, given the spaces we have to fill as best one may.
I'm pleased enough to get 'relatively flat', but still tweak to taste and the occasional recording. And most being a work in progress anyway doesn't help much. *L*
|
Amplitude at frequency is one piece of the puzzle. The real question is where the dip or bump is. From 1.5k to 3k a bump will create a bright speaker and a dip will create a polite speaker.
Having said that measurements can be misleading as microphones include the direct and indirect sound…microphones are stupid compared to our brains.
As long as the reflections are delayed a bit, our brains can separate out the direct and indirect sound.
When people make manual adjustments to frequency response based off a microphone, mids and treble can sound off as the direct sound is being altered, potentially making things worse.
|
I may have a very simplistic view on this topic, however getting your listening-space "right" to get the best representation of what you're listening to is more important than chasing component upgrades without it. A great book in my opinion is "Get Better Sound" by Jim Smith. I have used it to set-up my large listening-room 14 years ago and recently in my new smaller space in retirement. Up until I really considered the room being the issue, I swapped-out a number of different components including speakers, preamps and amps chasing improved sound. I found that while the sound did change some for the better, I never really enjoyed it as much until I worked on the room. Once I got the room "right", when I changed components and speakers, I felt that I could really flesh-out the differences/improvements much better than prior to that. I bought my audiophile friend a copy of that book and it too changed his whole perspective on how the room affects the sound. Most of us mere mortals have to live with the physical dimensions of our listening-spaces. It's what you can do within those confines to minimize the effects of the room on the music that makes a great difference in anything you do component wise in the future. This has been my experience.
|
@liquidsound +10, you articulated the entire point of why I started this thread in your post, thank-you. I will order that book too, first I heard of it, thanks!
|
@kota1 You're quite welcome... I believe you'll enjoy the book. It goes about the basics and is easy to understand. It's been a huge help to me.
Happy Listening !
|
