Are audio companies all involved in a huge conspiracy? - Page 49 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1441 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 01:26 PM
Senior Member
 
Joe Skubinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 474
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
The fix for AC/DC is add 10 dB at 30 Hz.eek.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post

In the light of these particular phenomena as exhibited by the speakers, you're recommending cables as the cure?

Good point even tho you kinda shot yourself in the foot. Fix these problems inherent in the speaker and forget cables.

I'm trying not to discuss cables, rather the details within the bigger picture. Cables are not the only factor, breaking down the entire system into the smallest components that can have an effect is.

Would be nice if we forget about cables for a while, don't you think?smile.gif

Be the sage.
Joe Skubinski is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1442 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 01:40 PM
Senior Member
 
Joe Skubinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 474
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post


The above statement appears to be trying to falsify my answer by changing the question after I answered it. I call: BS!

If you would show me the respect of at least posing your new question as a new question, then maybe I will overlook your mistake, and answer it as well.

Wasn't meant to sound that way...

Never mind...

Be the sage.
Joe Skubinski is offline  
post #1443 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 01:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,411
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post

noice!
I'm pretty sure I played the Telarc at the last GTG.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Skubinski View Post

Would be nice if we forget about cable sellers and shills for a while, don't you think?smile.gif
Fixed.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #1444 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 02:09 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 Joe Skubinski View Post

The fix for AC/DC is add 10 dB at 30 Hz.eek.gif
I'm trying not to discuss cables, rather the details within the bigger picture. Cables are not the only factor, breaking down the entire system into the smallest components that can have an effect is.

Would be nice if we forget about cables for a while, don't you think?smile.gif

Ok on the cables, twas perhaps an understandable mistake on my part.

But I AM interested in the steps you might have to take to correct those factors you mentioned as exhibited by speakers. What simple cure do you have in mind? BTW, I agree fully and totally that the benefits are worth while having. (for now I will go back to cables) So much so that they dwarf any of the usual tweaks we see from audiophiles. It's all just pissing in the wind by comparison.

Fix your speakers, fix your speaker/room interaction.

Luxuriate in the sound you will not get any other way, and never approached by the usual lines of attack like cables, and spend the savings from not needing these idiotic quantum purifiers that cleanse the higgs boson in your audio system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A9X-308 View Post

I'm pretty sure I played the Telarc at the last GTG.

The nice was cause it was a great counter example used. biggrin.gif

not that I recall, but let's make sure next time. Oh and also was not long way home (the stunning recording) one we had to get too?

check your emails
terry j is offline  
post #1445 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 03:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,411
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post

not that I recall, but let's make sure next time. Oh and also was not long way home (the stunning recording) one we had to get too?
Perhaps you weren't in the room when I played it. I'll bring it next time too. You'll have to refresh me on which version of the other one you wanted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post

check your emails
I saw it before work this morning, and will give an answer tonight. Can't see why it can't be done.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #1446 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 04:11 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 A9X-308 View Post

Perhaps you weren't in the room when I played it. I'll bring it next time too. You'll have to refresh me on which version of the other one you wanted.
.

If you're sure you played it, then yeah must have been elsewhere.

How did it sound? Is that the one which when it came out it had all the warnings?...'be wary of turning this up, they are real cannons blah blah blah'??

The reason I ask is because once someone played that, we sat there all in anticipation...meh. 'You mean that's it?'

Talk about disappointing.

Dunno what you played, but if it were a goodun then we'll find out next time.
terry j is offline  
post #1447 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 04:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kiwi2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post

It's not that there's a standard "nobody would ever be able to reach". The point is that there is no meaningful standard at all.


I know. So setting up a listening room isn't like calibrating a TV screen or there is only "one true way" is there.
kiwi2 is offline  
post #1448 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 04:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,411
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post

If you're sure you played it, then yeah must have been elsewhere.

How did it sound? Is that the one which when it came out it had all the warnings?...'be wary of turning this up, they are real cannons blah blah blah'??

The reason I ask is because once someone played that, we sat there all in anticipation...meh. 'You mean that's it?'

Talk about disappointing.

Dunno what you played, but if it were a goodun then we'll find out next time.
My recollection is 'pretty good for a recording'. I don't think you're every going to get realistic reproduction of a cannon at home.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #1449 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 05:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kiwi2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

I'm amazed that someone would have to ask that! Because it gives a direction, a vision. Because every step towards it will be an improvement.

Good point and I agree. I myself, as I am sure many of us do, try to maximize our rooms and the equipment we have. Trying to achieve a smooth frequency response as possible, trying to minimize unwanted reflections and trying to achieve the symmetry of a balanced soundfields etc.

But ultimately there is no one standard to aim for. Otherwise why don't all studios just use one particular set of speakers and that one set of speakers is all us general public use as well.

The reason why, is that there is nothing wrong in terms of enjoying music by listening to music in different acoustic environments. There aren't any audio police running around saying "your room isn't accurate". It doesn't really matter so long as *you* enjoy the sound. This is why I said earlier that I believe reproducing audio in *my* room is partly science and partly an art form. I am free to make it sound how I want.

This seemed to spark cries of... "there is only one true way"... which even according to the people who believe that, haven't been able to achieve and admit it's an impossibility.
kiwi2 is offline  
post #1450 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 06:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bigus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The South
Posts: 4,258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Skubinski 

The statement 'only to a point' in this context places an artificial ceiling on it. Critical listening is a learned skill, so who best be the judge of what this point is other than the listener.

I'm amazed that this logic persists. Well, I suppose I understand the motivation you have for trying to prop up this nonsense, but I'm still amazed. This is a typical "audiophile" thought process, and has no basis on logic or reality. Examine the equivalent form below using different wording:

"The human sense of hearing is unlimited in capability, resolution, discernment..."

and

"The only fair judges of what humans are or are not capable of hearing, are the humans who claim to hear these fantastically tiny differences..."


Erm... c'mon Joe.

Bigus is offline  
post #1451 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 07:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,176
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
I'm amazed that this logic persists.
I'm amazed that you consider it logic.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
post #1452 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 11:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 326 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

But ultimately there is no one standard to aim for. Otherwise why don't all studios just use one particular set of speakers and that one set of speakers is all us general public use as well.

You left the two important parts out for that to work - you have to standardize the rooms as well.

Disclaimer: The following my view, my vision, my set of unanswered questions.

But there's little use in spending too much time thinking about the studio, first of all you cannot do anything about it and secondly I haven't found any systematic fault on recordings that apply to all material from all studios.

So, where do that leave us? It leaves us with the published media. If you look at CD, that's a well defined standard which tells us how to decode it. Most people would hopefully agree that amplifiers and cables are pure transmission links and should ideally do no other change to the signal than changing the signal strength(volume). That leaves us with one set of speakers, one room and one listener(or more). That's where the problems sit.

We don't want the speakers to be transmission links. The signal is two-dimensional, but that's not what we want to hear. The speakers are in best cases soundfield decoders, otherwise soundfield generators. We also complicate the matter by trying to reproduce sounds originally coming from one three-dimensional point by radiating sound from two points. So how should we achieve that in the best possible way? Placement, frequency curve differences for different directions... How similar are one listener to another from a biological point? And how much does the rooms change the results of this? How do we go from having a room to knowing what kind of speaker design that calls for? Or what to do to our room for a particular speaker model? probably a lot more issues

So back to the "one standard".... do we know the answers to all these questions if all research done was properly compiled together? If not, then there's still a job to do. If we do know, then we need to figure out a way to get the manufacturers to produce accordingly. I'm not saying that all brands should make the same speaker, we don't have the same room... but the information need for us to select the best speaker for the room we have could theoretically be supplied. Perhaps one could even take it so far that you could enter your room data into a digital loudspeaker builder program and it would calculate what speaker you would need to build for your room.

What about 'taste' then? Would above only be liked by some? My belief is that divergence in sound reproduction tastes is primarily based on the existence of large and multiple errors in the reproduction and that people prioritize fixing them differently... so that if we would manage to get rid of (minimize) them, the divergence in taste would go down. Things that could easily be change in the electric domain, like boosting bass, I have absolutely no problem fitting into the vision. Nor giving tools to help fix apparent mistakes on the media. HOPEFULLY there's no taste differences that requires physical changes to speakers once we have optimal speaker/room matching, but I can't know that. But if we assume there will be, my next pursuit would be to learn to quantify these and find ways for people to understand what they want so they could pick the optimal design for that taste.

And all this is based on the assumption that we should use two speakers for two channel recordings. Is that necessarily so? Could it be better optimized in another way, and is that way practically usable and possible to bring to market? Can we turn the argument around and determine a better way to reproduce sound in homes and push it back to the music producers to give us the media needed for that setup?

Everyone should enjoy themselves, they deserve it! This is not an easy thing to solve, but one does not need to complicate those parts that don't have to be difficult... that only hampers real progress.

And finally a reminder about the disclaimer, if you forgot it on the way... this is my current view.

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #1453 of 3048 Old 02-27-2013, 11:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 794 Post(s)
Liked: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

I know. So setting up a listening room isn't like calibrating a TV screen or there is only "one true way" is there.

Unfortunately it's not like calibrating a TV screen (because there are no strict sound reproduction standards). Nevertheless there's only one true way which was defined by mixing/mastering. Problem is that the consumer will never know about the acoustics in mixing/mastering but this doesn't change the fact that some reference acoustics existed when the recording was made.

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is online now  
post #1454 of 3048 Old 02-28-2013, 04:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,383
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 758 Post(s)
Liked: 1169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post


We don't want the speakers to be transmission links. The signal is two-dimensional, but that's not what we want to hear. The speakers are in best cases soundfield decoders, otherwise soundfield generators.

An alternative view is that the brain is the most significant soundfield decoder in the audio chain.

All this talk about speakers needs IMO to be balanced with an understanding of headphones and earphones.
Quote:
We also complicate the matter by trying to reproduce sounds originally coming from one three-dimensional point by radiating sound from two points.

As the saying goes, we have only 2 ears.

I'm a professional recordist with well over a thousand custom recordings of orchestra, band, choir and, small ensemble, and vocalists behind me. I also have done live sound for over 600 live events with medium sized audiences and an equal number of rehearsals behind me. I've done 100s of both multitrack and minimalist recording gigs.

I can tell you that the realism battle is largely lost by the time the music is going down the microphone cable. After that everything is a series of fairly crude kludges even though the recorders and production tools can themselves be sonically transparent (perfect signal transmission).

We don't have the right strategy, yet.
arnyk is offline  
post #1455 of 3048 Old 02-28-2013, 05:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 326 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

An alternative view is that the brain is the most significant soundfield decoder in the audio chain.

Should've written encoder or transcoder, I guess. You're quite right, the decoder is in the brain.

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #1456 of 3048 Old 02-28-2013, 07:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 794 Post(s)
Liked: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

We don't have the right strategy, yet.

Amen!

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is online now  
post #1457 of 3048 Old 02-28-2013, 07:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kiwi2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post

Nevertheless there's only one true way which was defined by mixing/mastering. Problem is that the consumer will never know about the acoustics in mixing/mastering but this doesn't change the fact that some reference acoustics existed when the recording was made.

I would still dispute that. Personally I couldn't care less what the guy at the mixing desk heard. I prefer real life to be my reference and goal. A real human's voice. A real violin etc.

We may not know what the guy at the mixing desk heard but we can all use real life as a reference.

Take for example this demonstration where a speaker system was designed to sound like a real live Steinway piano. A Steinway piano and speakers were placed in the same room and played to an audience of Steinway employees. They couldn't pick the transition from the piano playing to a recording being played on the speakers.

My point is... did the guy that mixed the track that was played at the demonstration also hear an accurate rendition of a Steinway piano? Maybe he was only listening with a set of old Yamaha monitors in a bedroom at his parents' house?

So what's more important... what the guy doing the mixing heard or what was heard by the audience at playback?
kiwi2 is offline  
post #1458 of 3048 Old 02-28-2013, 10:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 326 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

So what's more important... what the guy doing the mixing heard or what was heard by the audience at playback?

So... you have two CD's. One has a decently clean recording of that Steinway with mics that has a slight rolloff in the lower range. The other have had a digital reverb added to it and some bass boost.

How do you get both of them to sound as the Steinway did with the same settings on your setup?

And if you in some peculiar manner can get rid of both the bass bost and the reverb... you might enjoy the piano - but you're not listening to what the artist wanted you to hear - he had those added because that's how he wanted the piece to sound.

And what about all music that haven't had a live event until you play them? How's that going to sound if your setup has been tuned to fix mistakes when recording Steinways?

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #1459 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 12:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 794 Post(s)
Liked: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

I would still dispute that. Personally I couldn't care less what the guy at the mixing desk heard. I prefer real life to be my reference and goal. A real human's voice. A real violin etc.

What you prefer isn't necessarily the same others prefer. And you don't get to decide what the preference of the person mixing/mastering a recording has to be. Just as you don't get to decide how Picasso has to paint. If you want your preference to become part of the art then you have to change from music listener to music maker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

Take for example this demonstration where a speaker system was designed to sound like a real live Steinway piano...

Now this is one of the oldest audio marketing tricks to fool people. It has been discussed numerous times why such a demonstration is utter nonsense. We don't need to repeat it here.

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is online now  
post #1460 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 01:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kiwi2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post

What you prefer isn't necessarily the same others prefer.

Of course not. What a stupid thing to say.

Quote:
And you don't get to decide what the preference of the person mixing/mastering a recording has to be.

Of course not. What a stupid thing to say.

Quote:
Just as you don't get to decide how Picasso has to paint.

Of course not. What a stupid thing to say.
Quote:
If you want your preference to become part of the art then you have to change from music listener to music maker.

Not at all. I have the freedom to do what I want with my room. Why hold "what the guy at the mixing desk heard" as the holy grail when A; there is no standard across all mixing studios (a track you play could be from a multi million dollar studio and the next track could have been mixed on a laptop in someone's bedroom at his parents' house) and B; none of us has any idea what any of those mixing studios sound like. It's an impossible target to achieve.

By using what I know real life sounds like as my reference, I have already diverted quite far from "what the guy at the mixing desk heard". For starters I upmix 2ch music tracks into 5.1 when playing back. I like the holographic 3D soundstage that results. It gives a depth to the soundstage that I just don't get with straight 2ch playback. I'm sure that if a band set itself up in my room I would also hear that depth as opposed to the more flat sound of just 2ch reproduction.

As of yet the audio police hasn't broken down my door and confiscated all my CDs.
kiwi2 is offline  
post #1461 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 01:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 326 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

By using what I know real life sounds like as my reference

Again... since about every CD (or whatever media you prefer) has been altered differently, how do you do your adaptions - as they have to be different from recording to recording? If you move the sound permanently in one direction, you may improve some recordings, but you will definitely make other ones worse. There is no single common flaw to all recordings.

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #1462 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 01:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kiwi2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

Again... since about every CD (or whatever media you prefer) has been altered differently, how do you do your adaptions - as they have to be different from recording to recording? If you move the sound permanently in one direction, you may improve some recordings, but you will definitely make other ones worse. There is no single common flaw to all recordings.

No one is immune to this.
kiwi2 is offline  
post #1463 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 02:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 326 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

No one is immune to this.

Immune? One can accept that the published recording is a work of art which stands for itself. It's not the original event, it's not what the mixer heard as his monitor speakers isn't correct either. If it doesn't sound correct on a recording, it's likely because the recording is wrong - not your setup. ( If about all your recordings sound wrong in the same way, then you probably have a coloration in your setup you could do well to get rid of, though. )

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #1464 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 02:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 794 Post(s)
Liked: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

Of course not. What a stupid thing to say.

Then why do you argue against accurate sound reproduction? If you would state your personal subjective preference as just that, nobody would raise any objections.

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is online now  
post #1465 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 03:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kiwi2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post

Then why do you argue against accurate sound reproduction?

Which is what, according to you?
kiwi2 is offline  
post #1466 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 03:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 794 Post(s)
Liked: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

Which is what, according to you?

I already answered that.

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is online now  
post #1467 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 04:39 AM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 23,027
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Liked: 426
move on please
markrubin is offline  
post #1468 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 05:26 AM
 
goneten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
On the subject of accurate reproduction, Harman did research into this and found people prefer a flat on-axis power response to the usual irregular frequency response profiles of exotic speakers. One of the audiophile myths ... if I can call it that, is that a flat response sounds like crap.

One guy I know has a TACT system for correcting issues in both the time and frequency domains and claims the sound is utter crap. From this, he makes the claim that a flat response is really not preferable. Sounds like a BS claim.
goneten is offline  
post #1469 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 05:37 AM
Advanced Member
 
JD in NJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by goneten View Post

On the subject of accurate reproduction, Harman did research into this and found people prefer a flat on-axis power response to the usual irregular frequency response profiles of exotic speakers. One of the audiophile myths ... if I can call it that, is that a flat response sounds like crap.

I don't get it. I don't get it at all. Even if one does prefer to emphasize or cut certain frequencies (I'm looking at you A below middle C, I've never liked you very much) why wouldn't it be best done starting from a base that is as close to reproducing what the amplifier puts out as possible? It just doesn't make any sense.

I want my pre/processor to make only the specific changes I intend it to based on mode and room correction. I want my amplifier to do absolutely nothing to the signal but amplify it perfectly. I want my speakers to give me, without coloration, what the amplifier gave them.

Isn't that enough of an unachievable goal?

JD in NJ is offline  
post #1470 of 3048 Old 03-01-2013, 05:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 326 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by goneten View Post

On the subject of accurate reproduction, Harman did research into this and found people prefer a flat on-axis power response to the usual irregular frequency response profiles of exotic speakers. One of the audiophile myths ... if I can call it that, is that a flat response sounds like crap.

One guy I know has a TACT system for correcting issues in both the time and frequency domains and claims the sound is utter crap. From this, he makes the claim that a flat response is really not preferable. Sounds like a BS claim.

Let's assume that to be correct, or very close to... then I would like to see the same research done with regards to different response shapes off-axis (not only sideways, but also up) ... and probably tested at different room size..

Having had Canton Digital 1.1 (still own, don't use) which measured quite flat after calibration, I do feel there are other apects in play, given that I've retired them for a non-digital brand.

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

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