Talk but not walk?

Speaking of tuning, and that of a drum in particular: To proport that a drum that has been "tuned" (the reason for the use of the quotation marks to follow) in one room, and then moved to another where it is now "out of tune", is to unwittingly reveal something about oneself. Except for "tuned percussion" (tympani, vibes, etc.), drums are not tuned, they are tensioned. The threaded rods which pass through the holes in the hoop that holds a drum head in place on a drum shell are called tension rods, not tuners (as on guitars and basses). A drum is not tuned to a note, so can not be out of tune.

A drum produces many fundamental tones, with many, many harmonics and overtones---some related to the fundamentals, some not. Those that are not are referred to as "partials"---tones in between the dominant fundamentals and their harmonics. A drummers adjusts the tension rods until the drum produces the mix of fundamentals/harmonics/partials he prefers (as well as the tightness of the head, which affects drumstick rebound). A drum does NOT produce one, single, dominant note, it produces a vast mix of related and unrelated tones. If that were not true, a snare drum would need to be tensioned so as to match the key each song is played in.

What DOES happen when a drum is moved between rooms, is the balance between all the tones the drum produces is affected by the acoustic properties of the two rooms---the decay times of the rooms at various frequencies, the tones reinforced or diminished according to the resonant characteristics of the room, a result of it’s dimensions. And by the absorptive and reflective nature of the material used to construct the room, which varies at different frequencies, of course. The rooms affect the timbre of the drum(s), not their pitch. The most extreme change occurs when a drum is played outside; their IS no room, so no room-related decay times or resonances. I hate to play outside---drums always sound thin and flat there.

Excellent post shadorne. Yup, I neglected to cover the matter of pitch bend---the phenomenon where the tone of the drum (generally) drops as it’s sustain subsides, a sound I love. I too use Evans, their kick heads exclusively. I for years taped feminine minipads on my drumheads to damp the high ring, but that’s no longer necessary---self damped heads are now plentiful.

I play vintage---Ludwig’s brass-shell snare drums from the 1920’s (I have four), and the Black Beauty from the 70’s (in both 5" and 6-1/2" depths) being my favorites. I have just about all American-made sets from the 40’s through the early 70’s---Camco, Gretsch, Leedy, Ludwig, Radio King, Rogers, and Slingerland.. Did I leave any out? ;-). They all have 24" kicks, and I collect the Black Diamond Pearl finish, hence my AudiogoN moniker.

My use of the term tensioned in place of tuned was done, yes, to make a point. Tuned is of course the term commonly used, but it is used loosely, not literally. My point was, that to say a drum can go out-of-tune when moved from one room to another in nonsense, for the reasons I stated. Unless, that is, one is speaking of something other than pitch. It’s timbre (the relative strengths of it’s fundamentals, overtones/harmonics, and partials) can change, as can it’s sustain, but not it’s pitch. And that is not a matter of semantics.

Drum "tuning" is a talent not all drummers possess. The studio guys are the best---Hal Blaine, Jim Gordon, Keltner, Roger Hawkins (he’s on all the Jerry Wexler-produced Muscle Shoals recordings), Kenny Buttrey (Neil Young’s Harvest album), all masters. And then there is Levon Helm; listen to the sound of his drums on The Band’s "The Weight". As good as it gets!

@theaudiotweak, how can you say such a thing? Why, he’s just posting here to share his enthusiasm for the "hobby". It’s all about having fun!!! Are you suggesting he’s disingenuous?

Get on board, brother---disassemble your electronics and stick little pieces of wood and other doohickeys under all the parts. Those engineers who designed them don’t know anything about how to really achieve good sound, ’cause they don’t do "the walk". Guys like Nelson Pass are so passe’, with their stuffy ’ol engineering education and knowledge. Poor fools, they don’t know HEA is dead.

But don’t despair; there is a new Messiah on the scene, ready to lead us all to the promised land. Just drink the kool-aid, and pass the collection plate. Hey, even Messiah's gotta eat.

@stevecham---You don’t understand. You ask MG to explain what he does, but he’s not gonna give that away---that’s his product! He is no longer a hi-fi retailer selling currently available commercial products (except his own), he sells his "tuning" service. He comes on Forums saying "Let’s have some fun!", but this is his business. He’s not posting here to "have some fun", he’s here to create interest in his services, his business.

MG’s original commercial products in the 1990’s were the Room Tunes. Have you ever seen one, or even better looked inside or taken one apart? It’s a sheet of fiberglass insulation covered in grill cloth. Big Deal! A real acoustical engineer, Art Noxon of Acoustic Science Corporation, produces real, sophisticated acoustical products. They are found in recording studios and high performance hi-fi rooms all over the world. I’ve never seen a Room Tune in any studio I’ve been in, nor any high performance home music system. Everyone gave their Room Tunes away years ago; there are far better products available.

I’m all for optimizing the sound of one’s system and room with tweaks. But "tuning" your CD player, receiver (really? A receiver?!), or speakers, and changing the "tuning" for different recordings? That’s a sure way to madness!

Touche’! There ya go again, flauntin’ yer high school education. ;-) . But why so nasty ("stooge")? In my case, "your" has a different meaning than "you’re". It is clarity of intent and meaning that matter most to me. not spelling or grammar per se.

As for capitalizing Grandmother and Mother, that was done in the name of respect, rules be damned!

Having owned a speaker utilizing the EMIM/EMIT drivers Elizabeth likes (the Infinity RS-1b), Magneplanars (Tympani T-I, T-Id, and currently T-IVa), and ESL’s (currently original QUADS, aka 57’s), there is a contemporary loudspeaker I suggest auditioning that provides advantages of them all and then some---the Eminent Technology LFT-8b.

A better speaker over-all imo than the RS-1b (I sold my pair back to Brooks Berdan), low sensitivity/efficiency like Maggies but at the more tube-amp friendly nominal impedance of 8 ohms (the magnetic-planar m/t drivers themselves are 11 ohms, for those bi-amping. A pair of Atma-Sphere M60 amps would be great with them), fairly low bass response from the sealed 8" dynamic woofer, higher maximum SPL capability than many ESL’s (certainly the QUADS), very low coloration and high timbral accuracy, high transparency (distortion levels approaching that of ESL’s), easy to integrate into a room. All for $2499/pr, barely more than the Maggie MG1.7i, less than half the price of the MG3.7i. The best kept secret in hi-fi.

One thing I can contribute to this discussion happens to be where the subjects of planar loudspeakers and technical facts (at least those posited above by kosst) overlap. Though they are my over-all preferred design, there are very valid objections to be made against planars (as kosst has done), and reasons to not like them. That’s fine.

But there were some statements made about planars that are simply not true:

1- ESL’s and magnetic-planars should not be grouped together in terms of the load they present to the power amp. ESL’s have an impedance profile that varies wildly as a function of frequency (fancy term ;-), magnetic-planars (Magneplanars, Eminent Technology LFT’s) do not. ESL’s are an extremely capacitive load, magnetic-planars an almost purely resistive one. Consequently, ESL’s and magnetic-planars present very different challenges to power amps. That’s why Roger Sanders makes two versions of his Magtech amp---one for ESL’s, one for magnetic-planars.

2- Planars interact with the room in very different ways than do non-planars (or, more accurately, non-dipoles), but some of those ways are actually advantageous. For instance, as a result of their line source behavior, dipoles interact less with the room in terms of ceiling and floor reflections, a potentially good thing. Additionally, because of the cancellation to either side of a dipole (where the front and rear wave meet out-of-phase), planars create less side wall reflections, and the eigenmodes created by the room width dimension are less excited by a planar than by a non-planar, both again a potentially good thing.

However, the rear wave of planars presents a number of challenges to users. To prevent comb-filtering (too complicated to go into in depth here), planars need to be well away from the wall behind them. Three feet has long been considered the minimum, but that has been found to be insufficient, five feet being much better. Five feet creates a 10 millisecond delay between the front and rear wave (sound travels at roughly 1’/ms)---5’ from the rear of the speaker to the wall, 5’ from the wall back to the planar. 10ms is considered the minimum time required between two acoustic events for them to be perceived as separate events, rather than a smeared single one. The rear wave reflection itself can be dealt with either by absorption or diffusion, or a combination of both. A "too lively" room may benefit from absorption, a "too dead" one from diffusion.

My 5’/10ms figure was suggested as the minimum distance a planar should be expected to need for anyone contemplating such a speaker. Of course reflections are more than a single line from the back of the speaker to the wall behind the speaker, and then theoretically back to the speaker, and then theoretically to the listener. The fact remains, however, that if you position a planar closer than 5’ from the wall behind it, there will be the very real possibility of negative consequences. If you have ten feet to spare, all the better! If you have less than five feet, you have been warned. I have had Maggies and QUADs 3’ from the wall, and have found 5’ to provide a definite improvement. I have never had 10’, but would sure like to!

But remember, it is the 10ms delay between the front and rear waves that is important, not the 5’ distance. You can create that 10ms delay by any means you choose; if heavy tow-in causes the rear wave to reflect off more surfaces, thereby delaying its arrival at your ears to 10ms or more in relation to the front wave, great! By the way, that 5’/10ms figure was not pulled out of thin air, it is the inevitable consequence of the behavior of sound---physics, and the brains processing of sound arriving at the ears from the same direction but at different times. "Toeing-in" a planar speaker provides benefits in a couple of ways, one of which is to decrease the direct reflection off the wall coming straight back at the speaker; toe-in scatters the rear wave, but not as effectively and predictably as do properly designed and built true diffusers (RPG, ASC, GIK, DIY, etc.).

As an addendum to my above comments about the spacing of planars from the wall behind them, 5’ or more is no guarantee that the resulting sound will be good. In 2018 I attended the U.S.A. premiere of the new Magneplanar MG30.7 at a retail location (Echo Audio in Portland Oregon), with Wendell Diller himself having set up the speakers. The 30.7’s were quite a distance from the wall behind them---about 8’, though the bass panels were only a foot or so from the side walls. The sound was surprisingly disappointing to me (I own Tympani T-IVa’s, of which the 30.7 is a reinvention).

I don’t want to say any more about the sound, as the digital-only source material (streamed?) was accessed from a handheld remote controlled by the shop owner, almost all of it previously unheard by myself. The electronics were also unknown to me, and the room itself was completely untreated---absolutely no acoustic treatment. The room was constructed of what appeared to be cement, all the walls bare and very reflective, including of course those behind the speakers. Ridiculous!

I did a session at a studio in (coincidently) Studio City (in the San Fernando Valley, just over the Hollywood Hills from L.A.) and the engineer instructed me on where he wanted the drumset. That location happened to put the drum throne about 3’ from a cinder block wall, with my back to the wall. After the first "keeper" take the players went into the control room to have a listen, and I was shocked at how bad the drums sounded. All phasey and "discombobulated", the drums lacking body and tone, the cymbals way too "splashy" (they were very nice sounding Paiste 602’s).

While the engineer reconsidering his mic choices, it occurred to me, based on my awareness of comb-filtering, that the cinder block wall might be the problem. I suggested I move the drumset further away from the wall, and the engineer, though dubious, obliged me. We did another take, and went in to listen. Problem solved! Audiophiles know wall reflections can greatly affect the sound heard in a listening room, but this recording engineer wasn’t aware that the cinder block wall would affect the sound of a drumset? How many recordings had he made with drums in that location?!

At a different session (in Hollywood) a young engineer had set up the main mics, and was now considering where to place his "room" mics. When he stuck one right in the corner where two walls and the ceiling met, I knew the guy had no education in acoustical engineering. The corners, the worst sounding location in any room! I said nothing (you don’t want to get on the bad side of your engineer), and we did a take. Listening to the playback, with the corner-located room mic isolated (the engineer wanted to show-off his talents ;-), the sound was just horrid, like a speaker playing in a 50 gallon metal barrel! Instead of being proud, the engineer was embarrassed; he had revealed his ignorance of basic acoustic theory and the physics of sound. Learning on the job.