"Frightening" or "Relaxing" sound quality?


What do I mean by that?
Not that I wish to start a new controversy --- knowing some of the usual contributors, it may not be entirely avoidable, so let’s see what gives.

Following some of the threads on the –ultimate- ‘phase-coherent’, 'time-coherent' or yet better, both, 1st order up to steep slopes, an so on, cross-over opinions, I have these notions. So let me explain.

One quite well known ‘maverick’ (done some picking on some other well known reviewer, posting it on his site...), somewhere he states: a good speaker must have the ability 'to frighten you' --- his words, and I can see/hear what he means, at least I think so.

Some other dealer in Wilson’s marvellous products (he's around my place), tells me he can only listen for about ½ hour than he is 'exhausted' --- i.e. too intense to do any longer listening…

Nobody is talking about ‘listening fatigue’ actually, it is more an emotional fatigue, as far as I get it.

Now me, I go to a life orchestra listening and emerge pretty well ‘up-lifted’, never had any fatigue (maybe my bottom, when it got a bit too lengthy) never mind emotional fatigue! Gimme Mahler, Stravinsky, Mussorgsky, heavy (classical) metal, whow --- upliftment. Never occur to me run away, get uneasy, GET FRIGHTENED!

I clearly get ‘emotional fatigue’ listening to some types of speakers!
What were they?
I think they had one thing in common: They all where, in some way, VERY realistic, but they also had something else in common, --- they did not, as it seems, stick too well to a reasonably flat amplitude response… ah ha.

What this design regimen seems to produce during listening to keep on making you jump? Apparently always something rather unexpected in happening! Now we do also know what makes us (as humans) ‘jump’: it is some unexpected ‘something’ coming ‘out of the bush’ a snapping branch, some sort of VERY REAL sound, that does not quite go along with the general set of the acoustic environment.

Now take some ‘benign, dumb’ kind of speaker, it has so little in REALISTIC sound to offer, it just can’t frighten you. You (your instinct, subconscious) just don’t ‘buy’ into it.
Now take a VERY realistic sound-producer (the ones that can make you jump) and mess with the amplitude response, what you are getting is this on the edge of your seat reaction. The VERY opposite of what a lot of music has as its intention. (Not like AV ‘Apocalypse now’ kind of chopper going to attack you from any old angle, top, behind, etc.)

Lastly, has this something to do with why lots of folks perhaps shy away from these sort of designs?
I have listened to my share and I shy away, because as REAL everything seems to be in the reproduction, it keeps me in a state of inner tension, apprehension --- even listening to some Mozart Chamber music, as there is ALWAYS something very REAL, but somehow unsettling going on.

It might just explain why some of these designs don’t ‘cut the mustard’ and not survive in the long run. Unless, and open to opinion, that we are (most of us anyway) so messed up and transistor-radio-sound-corrupted that we seem ‘unworthy of these ‘superior’ audio-designs.
I honestly don’t think so, but you may have it otherwise, as they say YMMV.

I thought it is of value to bring this up, since it does not ever seem to be part of any of the more ‘technical’ discussions ---- the human ‘fright/flight’ element in ignoring proper FLAT amplitude response in favour of minimal insertion losses, or proper impedance compensation, notch filtering, et al, just so to obtain this form of stressful realism.

It might be also something to do with age, a much younger listener (in my experience) likes to be stirred up, and emotionally knocked all over the place ---- listening to Baroque music like bungee jumping?!
Maybe.
It be interesting to hear if it is just my form of ‘over-sensitiveness’ that brings forth this subject.
Best,
Axel
axelwahl

Showing 5 responses by nilthepill

I think Axel is right in that about some speakers unnaturalness of certain details (electronic, staticky, far from true tone) that may contribute to 'frightening' effect.

But I don't think the time, phase, pulse alignment is the cause. IMO, like others have said the time, phase, pulse alignment speakers are one of the best types around capable (when fed with right electronics) of producing life-like natural sounds that gives you great illusion of you being 'there'. That is why I am still sticking with Dunlavy Vs for years. I have heard Vandy, Thiels and they also do superbjob in reproduction. But Same speakers I have heard with less than stellar electronics/source and produce unnatural sounds. I think the reverse is true also. These stellar electronics played back on these so called modern (exotic material tweeters, fancy shaped cabinets, overly tuned rooms and $$$$$ tag) sound similar results.

IMO, The Dunlavys ( and other time,phase,pulse alignment designs without fancy tweeters) reproduce what is fed. So in this it comes down to what is upstream of these speakers- electronics, source quality, recording, power and a room to certain extent).
Frightening is good when it is in recording and these speakers reproduce this when called for. Relaxing is also good when it is called for. Unnatural frightening and relaxing sound is what I would have a problem with also.

So in other words, Axel, your heart is in right place, but you are pointing to wrong reason (or shall I say* w/ all due respect* barking up the wrong tree ;-))
Axel, remember just the time or phase alignment is different than time, phase and 'pulse' alignment. I don't remember or have not reviewed this recently, But I do remember Mr Dunlavy saying the last 'pulse' alignment is extremely crucial to get the tone right in addition to Time and Phase.

I don't know what is your background but I don't know what do you mean tweak my speakers x-over and made it alignment thing and sit back and expect the speakers to behave like the real thing.

What speaker are you using that frightens you? what kind of tweeters in there? What is the associated electronics? SS or Tube.

BTW my hand is down for the SW mentioned. May be I will get the software and listen. Tell me what track and time I should be looking out for.

No it is not open and shut case for me, and I doubt it ever will be. I am not the one go in to this kind of debate, but I really don't see solid evidence yet. I know my Dunlavys extremely well and what they can do with right sw and electronics.

Real life sounds are dynamic and could frighten you if they were to happen silence to loud, especially when you were not expecting. I don't think any system in the world can simulate real life, but many systems can damn well come close or create highly believable illusion.
Oh boy.

Back to blaming the time alignment and phase alignment game again. Who is this speaker-designer-man of yours that says that?
I am with Timtim for possible cause- the cross over design, the speaker quality itself and or most like the upstream components.
The 300B comment proves that you don't know what you are talking about.

I thought you said you started learning and getting it and now you are back to square one.
Axel,

Saying negative things about anyone on anything does not serve me. I just don't buy the idea of time and phase alignment speakers, by design, being a 'frightening' design. Scary good? Yes ;-), but frightening the way you put it? No. That is all. My apologies if I misunderstood your stand. (BTW, I am the last person on the AGon to rant like this) But my Dunlavy's are too close to my heart and they can do no wrong. IMHO.

Agreed, Massed strings and string quartets are very tough to reproduce- analog or great digital. You do need great recordings to come even close. have some Quartetto italliano on vinyls that does pretty good job of it. Also have some emerson quartets on CDs and quality of recording varies. But some come pretty close to perfection. There are for sure some 'frightening' recordings ;-)
Axel,

Extremely well put!

Nothing is 100% perfect. I would take more perfect 'most of the time' design.
A- good- dancer- that -has- just- stumbled rationale would also be my take. Once again, pl accept my apologies.