What to do with my setup?! $2k+ invested, still horrible... - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 74 Old 10-03-2010, 09:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Fanaticalism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

But how do you know what the recording engineer's intentions were? How did he EQ his recording studio where it was mastered? How is his hearing after years of loud music mastering? How well does your room replicate the recording studio acoustics? What about the next studio? As close may be elusive at best?

That is technically the purpose behind a speaker that has a flat response. It will reproduce the signal without coloration. None of the other things you refer to matter unless you have a speaker that has a flat response, good off axis response and high efficiency. Once you have those basics in order, everything else like room treatments, room correction and proper amplification for desired levels at the LP come into play.

For the record, I am not taking personal preferences into account, strictly answering the question.
Fanaticalism is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 74 Old 10-04-2010, 05:18 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 11,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

But how do you know what the recording engineer's intentions were? How did he EQ his recording studio where it was mastered? How is his hearing after years of loud music mastering? How well does your room replicate the recording studio acoustics? What about the next studio? As close may be elusive at best?

These are all questions that no one can answer other than the recording engineer of the specific music one is listening to. Can you honestly say what significance any of your questions have? Why would I care what the recording engineers intentions were or how his hearing is? Bottom line is I do not want to use any form of EQ or room correction other than the 8033 for my sub. What I meant by "be as close as the recording intended" was that of the CD I am listening to. Not what the engineers intentions were because as I said I have no idea what his intentions were. I just have the finished product.

I want to hear the music I listen to be unaltered whether it is a good recording or not. The chances of my system duplicating the recording engineers intentions is probably never going to happen anyway as the variations are infinite IMO. So I just try to listen to music as clean as possible probably not the most technical terminology to use but that is what my intentions are.

I see using an EQ for 2CH music to make a speaker that sounds dull (as the issue with OP) as nothing more than a tone control to try to up the treble. If someone wishs to use room EQ/correction or tone controls thats fine with me but I prefer not to.

Bill

My SACD collection, watch it grow and my wallet shrink ;-).

 

Denon 4311 (in preamp mode), Parasound 2100, Boston Acoustics A7200 amp, Oppo BDP-103, Consonance CD120, Panasonic TC-P60GT50 plasma, Panamax 5100EX, Salk Song Towers, Song Center, ADS 300C (surrounds) and two Rythmik F12SEs.
Bill Mac is offline  
post #63 of 74 Old 10-04-2010, 08:32 AM
 
geekhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

I want to hear the music I listen to be unaltered whether it is a good recording or not. The chances of my system duplicating the recording engineers intentions is probably never going to happen anyway as the variations are infinite IMO. So I just try to listen to music as clean as possible probably not the most technical terminology to use but that is what my intentions are.

That's easy to do with current crop of digital source, decoder, and amplification gears. They are just about as transparent as our ears can tell. Speaker is the weakest link and the severity of that weakness depends on the room interaction unless one is using headphone.

Quote:


I see using an EQ for 2CH music to make a speaker that sounds dull (as the issue with OP) as nothing more than a tone control to try to up the treble. If someone wishs to use room EQ/correction or tone controls thats fine with me but I prefer not to.

Speakers are voiced certain way based on what the designer thinks is good and or what the market demands. After taking care of speaker choice and room acoustics, EQ can be used as a last resort to alter the voicing of the speaker to the listener's taste or to flatten the response (for the reason mentioned by Fanaticalism - post #61).
geekhd is offline  
post #64 of 74 Old 10-04-2010, 12:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

These are all questions that no one can answer other than the recording engineer of the specific music one is listening to. Can you honestly say what significance any of your questions have? Why would I care what the recording engineers intentions were or how his hearing is? Bottom line is I do not want to use any form of EQ or room correction other than the 8033 for my sub. What I meant by "be as close as the recording intended" was that of the CD I am listening to. Not what the engineers intentions were because as I said I have no idea what his intentions were. I just have the finished product.

I want to hear the music I listen to be unaltered whether it is a good recording or not. The chances of my system duplicating the recording engineers intentions is probably never going to happen anyway as the variations are infinite IMO. So I just try to listen to music as clean as possible probably not the most technical terminology to use but that is what my intentions are...
Bill

So, you want to listen to the music that is on the medium as recorded regardless of what the engineer heard as that is most likely not possible. How do you know what that sounds like or should sound like? Your speakers and room will affect that sound. When will you know it is right? Perhaps use of EQ will make it closer to what it should sound like?
Or, if it is strictly a preference as it most likely is, then, not much matters(eq, no eq, room treatment, no treatment, etc), does it.
CharlesJ is online now  
post #65 of 74 Old 10-04-2010, 02:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 11,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 384
[quote=CharlesJ;19286913]
Quote:


So, you want to listen to the music that is on the medium as recorded regardless of what the engineer heard as that is most likely not possible. How do you know what that sounds like or should sound like? Your speakers and room will affect that sound. When will you know it is right? Perhaps use of EQ will make it closer to what it should sound like?

Why would you care how I or anyone else wants to listen to music? I'm listening to the CD of a specific recording what else do you think I should be doing? Am I supposed to be a mind reader and say "oh the engineer of this recording wanted that instrument over there...." For example if I'm listening to a Steely Dan CD and it seems a bit bright should I adjust the treble down on my preamp? I would not do that because I chose not to use tone controls. But how would anyone know if the CD was recorded or mastered to be bright? If it was then adjusting the treble down would be altering the engineers intentions.

As I said earlier unless I'm the recording engineer or was in the recording studio how would I or anyone else know what the engineers intentions for that recording were? How would a room correction/EQ device know what a specific recording should sound like? I know of no room correction/EQ system that can do that. When will you know if it is right?

Quote:


Or, if it is strictly a preference as it most likely is, then, not much matters(eq, no eq, room treatment, no treatment, etc), does it.

I have already said I do not prefer to use room correction/EQ for 2CH music listening. So are you trying to say the correct way to listen to music is to use room correction/EQ? Well if that works for you thats great but its not for me. As far as room treatments I would like to go that route but not in my current listening room at the moment.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make other than create some form of argument. But if thats your intention have at it.

Bill

My SACD collection, watch it grow and my wallet shrink ;-).

 

Denon 4311 (in preamp mode), Parasound 2100, Boston Acoustics A7200 amp, Oppo BDP-103, Consonance CD120, Panasonic TC-P60GT50 plasma, Panamax 5100EX, Salk Song Towers, Song Center, ADS 300C (surrounds) and two Rythmik F12SEs.
Bill Mac is offline  
post #66 of 74 Old 10-04-2010, 04:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post


Why would you care how I or anyone else wants to listen to music? I'm listening to the CD of a specific recording what else do you think I should be doing? Am I supposed to be a mind reader and say "oh the engineer of this recording wanted that instrument over there...."

well, eq will not affect 'where' in the mix an instrument is placed. It will only affect the relative tonal balance.

Quote:


For example if I'm listening to a Steely Dan CD and it seems a bit bright should I adjust the treble down on my preamp? I would not do that because I chose not to use tone controls. But how would anyone know if the CD was recorded or mastered to be bright? If it was then adjusting the treble down would be altering the engineers intentions.

I get that it is what you want to do, no problem with that. So not taking you to task particularly.

There are a few questions in this last paragraph. DOES it sound bright to you?? Well, for all we know it did NOT sound bright to the engineer, and was never intended to sound bright. (back to the lack of standards in audio)

Ok, it sounds bright to YOU, does it sound bright to me? (back to we all have different ears)

Does it sound bright to you AND does that brightness lessen your enjoyment of it?? in other words, would YOU prefer it to be less bright?? would that increase YOUR listening enjoyment?

If so, then as it is YOUR (general you, not bill specifically) enjoyment at stake then why not use eq on that recording?? Possibly no or different eq on another??

As it is, presumably, all about maximum enjoyment in our listening experience I personally have never understood this 'pure signal path' philosophy as expressed here.

Being a personal choice there is nothing wrong with either approach really, but given the backdrop just outlined I smile when I constantly read about 'the atrocious state of modern recording practices' (not that eq can fix compression either BTW).

Heck, make the recording sound how YOU want it, which could very well be different from how I would like it. But in our own room our taste is king right?

Quote:


As I said earlier unless I'm the recording engineer or was in the recording studio how would I or anyone else know what the engineers intentions for that recording were? How would a room correction/EQ device know what a specific recording should sound like? I know of no room correction/EQ system that can do that. When will you know if it is right?

When I enjoy it most. Which in many cases could be NO eq. But in those other cases then...well I have the best of both worlds.

No more whining from me about bright recordings for example.



Quote:


As far as room treatments I would like to go that route but not in my current listening room at the moment.

Well, unfortunately you have not experienced the benefit of either approach, sadly.

I like both approaches as a team.

Plus the ability to eq in real time. Set the system up for my tastes as a base (my tastes being different from yours) then eq as needed for any individual recording.

Once you have the base set up well, I found I needed to adjust for the recording far less than before.

Quote:


I'm not sure what point you are trying to make other than create some form of argument. But if thats your intention have at it.

Bill

In my case not to argue, to each his own
terry j is offline  
post #67 of 74 Old 10-05-2010, 05:42 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 11,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 384
[quote=terry j;19288116]
Quote:


well, eq will not affect 'where' in the mix an instrument is placed. It will only affect the relative tonal balance.

Very true, good point. I was just showing an example of how one can not know what a recording engineers intentions for a specific recording are.

Quote:


I get that it is what you want to do, no problem with that. So not taking you to task particularly.

To me this is key as that was my point all along. To each his own so to say.

Quote:


There are a few questions in this last paragraph. DOES it sound bright to you?? Well, for all we know it did NOT sound bright to the engineer, and was never intended to sound bright. (back to the lack of standards in audio)

In my example, yes that recording sounds bright. But say I have been listening to music for several hours and all my CD selections sound well balanced with not a hint of brightness. In that case I would presume that recording was bright.

Quote:


Ok, it sounds bright to YOU, does it sound bright to me? (back to we all have different ears)

Good question, one of which only you could answer if you were listening to my system or that specific CD.

Quote:


Does it sound bright to you AND does that brightness lessen your enjoyment of it?? in other words, would YOU prefer it to be less bright?? would that increase YOUR listening enjoyment?

I would say yes it does lessen my enjoyment of that specific recording. If it was less bright it would increase my enjoyment. I just would not prefer to decrease the treble which also effects the overall SQ not just the brightness IMO. But I will try this next time I come across a recording that seems excessively bright.

Quote:


If so, then as it is YOUR (general you, not bill specifically) enjoyment at stake then why not use eq on that recording?? Possibly no or different eq on another??

I guess that depends on the recording. For the most part in my room which has a heavy rug, window treatments and quite a bit of furniture (leather/comfortable) for a small room does not lend itself to making the music I listen to bright at all.

Quote:


As it is, presumably, all about maximum enjoyment in our listening experience I personally have never understood this 'pure signal path' philosophy as expressed here.

Understood. But this again falls under "to each his own" mindset. I listen to music with my Onkyo 886 with Audyssey engaged and I find the SQ to be lacking dynamics as well as overall imaging. Now the 886 is not known for its stellar 2CH SQ though. Maybe if I used Audyssey's MultEQXT external system with my 2100 that might change my mind on using EQ for 2CH music but right it is not an option.

Quote:


Being a personal choice there is nothing wrong with either approach really, but given the backdrop just outlined I smile when I constantly read about 'the atrocious state of modern recording practices' (not that eq can fix compression either BTW).

This is how more here on AVS should look at others perferences IMO. I have been buying quite a bit of female jazz and blues music lately. I find many of these recordings to be very good. But on a whole I do not think much of the music I buy to have substandard SQ.

Quote:


Heck, make the recording sound how YOU want it, which could very well be different from how I would like it. But in our own room our taste is king right?

True but then it takes the enjoyment out of it for me personally. What I mean by that is if one starts spending more time tweaking ones system per recording than time actually enjoying the music. But if someone prefers to do that thats fine with me.

Quote:


When I enjoy it most. Which in many cases could be NO eq. But in those other cases then...well I have the best of both worlds.

Then that is what is best for you which no one should say is right or wrong.

Quote:


No more whining from me about bright recordings for example.

I didn't think you were whining as for some it is an issue.

Quote:


Well, unfortunately you have not experienced the benefit of either approach, sadly.

But I have as I said earlier using my 886. I see no reason for it to be a sad situation as I'm happy with the way I approach listening to music in my system. Don't tell me you are slipping on your "to each his own" mentality?

Quote:


I like both approaches as a team. Plus the ability to eq in real time. Set the system up for my tastes as a base (my tastes being different from yours) then eq as needed for any individual recording. Once you have the base set up well, I found I needed to adjust for the recording far less than before.

Once again this is your perference. One that one day if I have the time and the correct equipment I would be glad to explore.

Quote:


In my case not to argue, to each his own

Now you're talking.

Bill

My SACD collection, watch it grow and my wallet shrink ;-).

 

Denon 4311 (in preamp mode), Parasound 2100, Boston Acoustics A7200 amp, Oppo BDP-103, Consonance CD120, Panasonic TC-P60GT50 plasma, Panamax 5100EX, Salk Song Towers, Song Center, ADS 300C (surrounds) and two Rythmik F12SEs.
Bill Mac is offline  
post #68 of 74 Old 10-05-2010, 06:39 AM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
I missed the bit about you using audessy, sorry.

here's a funny thing, tho hard to 'prove' one way or the other, re the SD cd you mentioned, I'd be willing to net the 'offending' area is not particularly the treble! Well, what I mean is adjusting the tweeter will prob not cure it.

I reckon that when most people say 'bright', and hence look at the tweeter as the culprit they are on the wrong track...IME it is usually the upper midrange. say under 3k.

that was just by the bye, and my personal experience.

Yeah, I was using the eq example on a recording by recording basis, so would like to hear how you went using the tone control next time you find a brightish recording. less is often more haha. Just realised that had a double meaning in it, both true. Sometimes only a slight reduction in the 'treble' can make a big difference.

I am lucky I guess with the ease I can change the eq settings, it is all available on my remote, both in real time or by memory recall if I have saved a previous setting.

So, at least in my case, if I do come across a bright recording, or one that could use a bit of bottom end push it is a very simple matter indeed.

If it were more of a PITA then yeah, I can see the barrier if you will.

Anyway, let us know how it goes with the next bright recording ok?
terry j is offline  
post #69 of 74 Old 10-05-2010, 07:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 11,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 384
[quote=terry j;19290424]
Quote:


I missed the bit about you using audessy, sorry.

Not a problem.

Quote:


here's a funny thing, tho hard to 'prove' one way or the other, re the SD cd you mentioned, I'd be willing to net the 'offending' area is not particularly the treble! Well, what I mean is adjusting the tweeter will prob not cure it. I reckon that when most people say 'bright', and hence look at the tweeter as the culprit they are on the wrong track...IME it is usually the upper midrange. say under 3k. that was just by the bye, and my personal experience.

True and that is why I feel tone controls are not for me. Of course the discussion has been more about EQ/room correction than tone controls.

Quote:


Yeah, I was using the eq example on a recording by recording basis, so would like to hear how you went using the tone control next time you find a brightish recording. less is often more haha. Just realised that had a double meaning in it, both true. Sometimes only a slight reduction in the 'treble' can make a big difference.

I will definitely try it and post my thoughts.

Quote:


I am lucky I guess with the ease I can change the eq settings, it is all available on my remote, both in real time or by memory recall if I have saved a previous setting. So, at least in my case, if I do come across a bright recording, or one that could use a bit of bottom end push it is a very simple matter indeed. If it were more of a PITA then yeah, I can see the barrier if you will.

What are you using for an EQ unit?

Quote:


Anyway, let us know how it goes with the next bright recording ok?

Will do.

Bill

My SACD collection, watch it grow and my wallet shrink ;-).

 

Denon 4311 (in preamp mode), Parasound 2100, Boston Acoustics A7200 amp, Oppo BDP-103, Consonance CD120, Panasonic TC-P60GT50 plasma, Panamax 5100EX, Salk Song Towers, Song Center, ADS 300C (surrounds) and two Rythmik F12SEs.
Bill Mac is offline  
post #70 of 74 Old 10-05-2010, 04:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
hi bill

I run a diy four way with multiple subs, run by two deqx units.

I agree with you, tho certainly try it, an old fashioned tone control is rather limited, and as you pointed out, is not quite the same as being able to target an 'offending' frequency area on the fly, from recording to recording.

Funnily enough, that's another problem! It kinda ties back to my earlier point of most people blaming 'bright' and thinking 'tweeter' (of course depends on crossover points and definitions of what is treble or midrange etc etc)...you gotta go thru that experiential thing of '''hearing an area in the frequency response and then knowing what frequency to target'.

Very clumsily worded, but I hope clear enough? Ie, a certain 'screechiness' on the recording, ok where abouts in the FR are we talking, 2k, 5k, that sort of thing...how wide the filter do we need and how attenuation (or boost if talking the opposite).

So if you target the tweeter, and it is actually the midrange (my example above, and all you can do with a tone control) then yeah, the results may not be so good. And that can come about until you learn 'what is what' in the FR, if that made some sort of sense.

There is a free program on the net you can play with, called rezone IIRC. If you play with that for a while you get to learn some interesting things about all of this.

that was where it became really real to me about 'blaming the tweeter-or treble-when it is usually under 3k for 'bright''.

At least it was per my previous thoughts on 'tweeter', 'bright', 'treble'.

Others may NOT have been as wrong as I was, they may have always been correct.

Still, an interesting educational tool in this area.

And we are only here to learn are we not??
terry j is offline  
post #71 of 74 Old 10-08-2010, 04:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
JRace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Vernon, BC, Canada
Posts: 837
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
One suggestion, easy and FREE:

Move your head, and listen for improved high frequencies.

Those speakers have poor vertical off-axis response(and this is by design, and not a bad thing).

This means if your ears are too high, or too low the HF drops off.

From what I have read the issue appears to be speaker/room/listening position related. Deal with that before adding or subtracting other gear.
JRace is offline  
post #72 of 74 Old 10-15-2010, 06:10 AM
Member
 
taam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I suggest a book

www.getbettersound.com

not too expensive and it has many great ideas.

It is a good place to start before you keep adding components that may not be necessary.

taam
taam is offline  
post #73 of 74 Old 03-24-2012, 11:46 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
sheremey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So, 1 and half years passed... Sorry for disappearing. I was deadly busy.

I'd like to thank eveyone responded to my post - that was very helpful!

Eventually, I managed to make Lsi's sing. Besides positioning (I did not appreciate this factor before your replies, thanks again!), this witchcraft involved changing cables (Mapleshades) and the receiver from 797 to... 10-years old multichannel DSP-A1 picked for $150 (yes, I know what you may think but this was a HUGE upgrade!) I don't like A1's D/A conversion but analog bypass leveraging A1's 0.015% THD is great, and everything looks matched now. Thank you!
sheremey is offline  
post #74 of 74 Old 07-15-2012, 07:15 AM
Newbie
 
macauley86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Polk LSi speakers love old Yamaha amps like the M-80 or MX-1000. You can find them used on eBay. There's a guy that restores them to like-new state and sells them. You can find more at legendaryamps.com
macauley86 is offline  
Reply 2 Channel Audio

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off