Ritteri, the strings do make the sound. The vented hollow cavity magnifies the sound of the string, adding it's own colorations. That is why violas have heavier strings than do violins.
Likewise, the box of a dynamic speaker introduces it's own colorations to the playback. The dipoles don't nearly as much. That is why we dipole lovers say our speakers offer more information on the real event. |
Muralman: Dipoles dont "color" the sound as much? You got some scientific evidence to back this up? Ive never heard this claim before. Dipoles have alot of drawbacks that easyily "color" the sound in their own way. Absolutely rediculous this claim.
Violins and pianos and all other instruments are designed to use the physical body to "color" and "tone" the sound yes. But speaker boxes are disgned in just the OPPOSITE way to be inert and to NOT RESONATE. Put your hand on a violin when it plays and you can feel the vibrations very distinctly,just like with a piano, it was designed that way. Put your hand on a competently designed speaker(Like my set of Revels)and you dont feel any resonation. Exactly the opposite in nature. |
Ritteri...Ok, if you don't like my theory about the titanium tweeter in the little B&W 550 speakers, give me another theory of why these little boxes reproduce solo violin better than most megabuck systems, and (by the way) my own MG1.6. (And don't forget, you are not the only one who plays a violin). |
Another theory of why your speakers reproduce "solo violin" better than most megabuck systems? MG 1.6's arent world beater speakers(or considered "megabuck speakers") to begin with so thats kind of a poor comparison. And a different kind of speaker altogether.
Care to define "most megabuck" systems?
Care to define "sound better"?
Thats a pretty bold statement to make. Especially of DM550's which arent known to be top tier speakers(or even top tier B&W products)so this is a bit opinionated. As I could easily state that Sonus Faber Concertos are best sounding for solo violins.Violins arent even considered hard sounds to reproduce as they have minimal harmonics and overtones. But I have heard many times people state that bright sounding speakers(or speakers that arent full range) accentuate violins since most of the tones are in the midrange and extend upward. But some of the older Strats and other vintage model violins need a full range speaker to reproduce rich harmonics that have deep full bodied sound since the violins own "personality" is developed slowly over time. Alot of violins that are made by hand sound very sterile for the first 5-10 years and mature as they age. To me a sterile sounding violin is not something I want to hear. BTW Im not dissing your speakers above. Ive heard em, they are nice sounding units when set up correctly as most B&W products are.
|
I hope Ritteri isn't thinking that he is the only string or piano player.
Every driver material imparts something of itself to the sound. Minimizing that noise pollution is one aim of speaker builders.
When driver materials are mixed, like in a B&W, then you get more than one sound tincture. This can't be the best way to convey the subtleties of a Guarneri vs. a Stradivarius. |
Mixing driver materials doesnt mean that they cant convey an excellent near perfect sonic reproduction. Knowing material resonations and resonation points along with crossover designs help to isolate anomalies. Again part of a competent speaker design. B&W uses alot of different composite materials(as do alot of mfgs), and they are integrated very well in their design specifications.
|
Ritteri..Why don't you read other people's comments before sounding off? Perhaps you did, and just cannot understand them. For example: the B&W 550 are not claimed to be great speakers, just damn good at violins. The reason I mention this is because it is so very surprising.
Since you are a cones-in-boxes guy you evidently feel it necessary to disparage the MG1.6. I think that Maggies, at every price point, can speak for themselves. |
Yes I am a "cones in box" guy, but I also own a pair of ML Prodigy speakers too.
Maybe you need to read my comments again?
Ill repeat what I stated up top again:Pretty much any speaker can sound good reproducing a solo Violin since its not a difficult sound to reproduce and the majority of its audible spectrum lies in the midrange and above. So why you are surprised beats me. The DM 550 as I also stated(even though its not cutting edge transducer technology)above is a good solid sounding speaker. WHy the surprise?
As for me disparaging Maggies(Or Apogees or ML or whatever), I did no such thing. Planar/ribbons have their place and their positive traits no doubt. If they didnt I wouldnt own a pair myself. |
Elhartford you may have misread my skeptic remark. I hold skeptics in very high regard. It is healthy to be skeptical. The point I was making is that if you could come to such a conclusion I would imagine (and you have confirmed) you have some basis for it before you would post something so seemingly off the wall leaving yourself open to scrutiny.
Back to skeptics, I am VERY skeptical of Riteri's general remarks concerning reproduction of instruments by audio system regardless of the design. A reasonable reproduction is not the same as being able to discern between reproduced and real. And now the violin. No Riteri, I don't play violin but have played in an orchestra in my younger days and still attend concerts regularly and know for a fact that I haven't heard a system reproduce the tones of real instruments accurately, as real. I do have a piano in the house and on a direct AB comparison with all things being equal I'll bet a 10 year old could hear the difference, same with the violin. Next you're going to tell us that there are audio systems that can produce massed strings realistically? Have you actually done direct tests or is this just a hunch based on what you hear? LOL
|
Tubegroover: You need to take a magical walk into a controlled studio environment in Norfolk Ct. for some comparisons that may startle you(as they did me 8 years ago). That week I learned more about what the human ear/brain can and cannot detect in that week than most people learn in their entire lifespan. |
Ritteri, I am glad that your experiences have been educational (education is a beautiful thing); and that you have had the opportunity to take part in these "controlled tests". However, the best education is attained by accepting the fact that there is always more to learn. Just because you don't hear the obvious differences between real and recorded, does not mean that the differences don't exist, and that they are not obvious to others. To make comments like "violins are not difficult to record/reproduce because their audible spectrum lies in the midrange and above", simply weakens your case. I guess this means that female vocals, trumpet, clarinet, flute are also easy to record. These have a range even narrower that the violins , but still in the "midrange and above". When digital recordings first came on the scene, and even today, guess what it was that most listeners objected to about their sound? The sound of strings. Anyway, the idea that one instrument is easier to record than another is, overall, simply absurd. It's a bit like saying: the trumpet is easier to play than the oboe. Not true, they are all difficult to play and to record well; overall, to the same degree. We all focus on different aspects of sound, and deem easier those that we are more confortable with.
Happy listening. |
Actually frogman: There are sounds that are easy to reproduce and ones that arent. Complex full spectral sounds are more difficult to reproduce than sounds with a narrow bandwidth any sound engineer will tell you that.
Here is a good starting link: http://www.linkwitzlab.com |
Congratulations Ritteri, you get the last word. I stand by my comments.
Happy listening and all the best. |
Nothing to do with the "last word", it has to do whats real fact. Its like saying a kazoo is as easy to build as a tenor saxaphone. Same basic principal. |
OK all you Kazoo builders! Your turn in the barrel. |
Ritteri, now you go maligning a fine instrument with a rich history. Don't you know that this instrument is based on the African "mirliton"? A sacred instrument used to disguise one's voice.
Eric Clapton, Simon&Garfunkel, Peter, Paul and Mary, are just some of the artists who have used this wonderful instrument in their recordings. Oh, and let's not forget the all-girl Kazoo bands. |
Riiiiiiiiight.................. |
And now here's the rub: What's the best speaker for Kazoo? (excluding of course the Avantgardes since they were obviously voiced with 18th century mirlitons). |
Agreed! Exclude the Avantgardes. My choice would be the Gallos. To properly reproduce the unique timbral textures of the Kazoo/human head interface; the speaker should approximate the shape of the human head. |
Frogman, speaking of human shape, the Cabasse Kara should do the kazoo trick, with the authenticity of a cloistered nun. |
Careful Muralman. Depends on her Habit, don't you think? |
LOL Khrs.... very droll, and surpisingly did not go over my head. ;-) |
LOL Khrs.... very droll - and surprisingly did not go over my head. ;-)
You should see the pastel I did of ruler totting Sister Mary peering over her shoulder at me. There is a wad of paper beside the ink well of my desk, and a fully rigged clipper crashing through the wall of windows.
Drawing it was truly a Cathartic experience. |
