Official Rythmik Audio Subwoofer thread - Page 217

Sanjay, is accuracy to the signal different than accuracy to their intention or the real performance?

Resort to ad hominem attacks much.

Certainly, but it is a different definition of "accuracy" than what I was discussing with Brian: "All of these are something we can experience in life. We can make judgement how detail and truthful the sound is." Of the three definitions of accuracy you mentioned above, this would fall closer to 'real performance' than artistic intent or source signal. Obviously, there's more than one view of what accuracy means, hence me originally asking "accurate to what?".

I'm still confused on your comments about step 6.1. In the subtuner I am supposed to enter "the distance of front speakers (in ft)" which you say is for audio delay. But any sound delay settings in my AVR are in miliseconds (0-100) for syncing audio and video.

You are confusing audio/video sync delay (usually listed in milliseconds) with your speaker settings used in calibration (e.g. Audessey). Brian's sub tuner is referring to the calibration settings, not audio/video sync.

+1. What your receiver does with distance information is essentially delay the closest speakers so that their sound reaches your ears at the same time as the more distant speakers, as it would if you had all your speakers an equal distance from your ears. It can't make the farther speakers "speak" sooner as that would require time travel and it obviously does not physically move the more distant speakers closer. There's really only one option left to calibrate for distance . . .

^
Check.

Not golden, just a valid reference because that's what the film makers signed off on. Your reference to guage accuracy was your aural memory of certain sounds.
Other way 'round: I said that my Rythmiks let me hear more bass detail (and lower frequencies) than the commercial subs in mixing studios, just as I hear imaging between speakers at home that is not possible on mixing stages.
I'm not advocating that we limit our home systems to match the limitations of a mixing studio or commercial theatre. My only point was that, if I'm hearing more and/or different things than the film makers intended, then I can't label that as "accurate". YMMV

Speaker accuracy really has nothing to do with our hearing or listening environment, Brian, you know that as an engineer. It's about how a speaker can replicate the input signal. I know you don't design your subs to suite your particular hearing abilities or anyone elses. I assume that listening tests are done, though, to see how the design performs based on the design specs.

Your response to...

Originally Posted by sdurani
'Accurate' in this case is based on your aural memory of those sounds (gusty sea wind, waves hitting hull of ship, splash of barrels dropped into water). But that is a very personal view of 'accurate', since we each have our own ideas of what those sounds should be like, based on our own personal memories. This is why I refer to it as preference. A more objective idea of 'accurate' is to compare the bass you're hearing to the bass that was heard on the mixing stage, since this doesn't rely on each person's aural memory as a reference.

Based on my experience with your subs, and listening to the same material on mixing stages, you're hearing more low frequency details at home compared to the commercial subwoofers in mixing stages (not to mention reproducing lower frequencies). Likewise, I routinely hear phantom imaging between my surrounds that simply isn't possible with the large arrays of surround speakers in commercial venues. So if you're hearing details that the film makers did not intended you to hear, is that still considered 'accurate'? That's not how I would use the word, but at the same time I'm not willing to give up those details in order to pursue some notion of 'accuracy'.

...is off base in my opinion. What's this 'aural memory' thing, anyway? Lot's of leniency towards many of your posts.

Do a search for "aural memory", much discussed...

Having been in the studio on both sides of the mic and done live sound plus played in various groups (small jazz through orchestra) over the decades, as well as being a design engineer, I have decided accuracy is fairly meaningless and just go for what I like to hear. (OK, joking, but with a bit of truth in it -- I'd rather listen to the music than the gear.)

You mean if this studio recorded a full blown orchestra the sound would be more accurate at the studio



than this ?

qguy,

First photo is a recording studio, second photo is a mastering studio. Totally different things.... Mastering is the final step on any record (EQ, compression, limiting, etc) Usually mastering studios use Hi-Fi high end speakers instead of powered monitors. Sterling Sound NY is one of the biggest mastering studios in the US. They bought from us 3 pairs of F15 three years ago to replace old Velodyne subwoofers.

http://www.rythmikaudio.com/reviews.html

Quite interesting.

It's no wonder then, that this sounds so good on my system:
http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/75...id_Stereo_SACD

It's one of the top 5 titles in my collection for both SQ and performance. Now waiting for release of "Teaser and the Firecat".

I thought this thread was about Rythmik Subs not the pseudo science, theory, conjecture and BS on what the definition of "accurate" is.

Thanks for all your help. I realize my questions may seem elementary but I really want to get this right.

I checked my audyssey menus and it appears the parameter check that reports the distances as calculated by audyssey is what I should be using. Audyssey reports it as:

FL 13.2
FR 13.4
C 12.5
RL 9.2
RR 9.2
Sub 14


So based on this I would set step 6 to 1 since the sub is about 1 foot further away than the average of my three front speakers.

What do I put in step 6.1?? I still cannot find the delay value you have refered to so if you know where I can find this with my Marantz please offer some suggestions. Or is this delay value calculated from the information above? If it is and the front speakers are time aligned with the sub since it is the furthest speaker then I would enter 0 in this step - correct? Or should it be calculated differently?

Thanks again. By the way the FV15HP is amazing. I have quickly realized that my sub is no longer the weak link in my audio setup

I find all this conjecture and false equivalence examples disheartening.
One's playback system should aim for accuracy first, because it provides consistency. Afterwards if one prefers to tweak somethings to preference within a certain degree, then enjoy.

A proper studio system does its best minimize variation and to conform to a standard of accuracy. If this does not happen it will result in significant inconsistencies and variances in the final product.

An example that actually has bearing on this would be if a studio used speakers that cannot accurately and dynamically reproduce high frequencies. The engineer's response will be to compensate for the recessed highs but the final release will have excessive HFs which will sound terrible and fatiguing on any system that is even close to being accurate. That is completely different from an auditorial decision to emphasis say clapping with a boost in EQ or adding some compression to best compliment the recording.

The best engineering and mastering studios strive for flat accurate systems because it reduces unintended variances. Many have used or still use the NSM10 as a baseline to gauge how their mixes will sound in the real world. Clearly some studios do not follow good practices and engineers in both the recording studio and mastering are far too often asked to compress any semblance of dynamics but to argue that standards and accuracy are subjective and unnecessary is absurd.

Pandering to the subjective snake oil arguments of pseudo-audiophiles leaves me cold. In fact it causes me to be disinclined to follow up on purchasing and assembling another DIY kit.

The primary reason I even decided to spend my money with Rythmik was the review by Audioholics that extolled the performance and value of the FV15HP with provided verifiable measurements. Also the supposed company mantra of being accurate but more efficient also appealed to my expectations.

I do applaud that Brian is an active participant in the thread and seems to genuinely provide a solid product yet casting the virtues of accuracy as unattainable and unnecessary with goal post moving arguments does not imbue concrete objective confidence.

Best Regards
KvE

You're right, and I'm guilty of it. Having spoken to Brian several times, exchanged multiple e-mails with him and bought subwoofers from his company, I have no desire to fight with him but I am interested in having a civil discussion about differing definitions of the term "accurate". If that comes across as leniency, then so be it. But I hope you understand the reason for my tone.
Same here, hence my earlier comment about having bought Rythmik subs based on personal preference rather than some notion of accuracy. I may not know what a lightsaber or dinosaur sound like, nor what those sound effects sounded like during the final mix, but I do know what I like.

Fair enough Brian, thank you for the reply and clarification.

My initial reaction is partly due to some prior statements that at least to my understanding fall under esoteric snake oil claims, such as upgrading various expensive wiring options to improve performance.

With that said I am very pleased with the stellar performance of my, for some around here lowly 370watt amp;}, DS1505 kit. Even more so after making a few adjustments in my settings; specifically turning off THX BGC which helped my old sub but evidently hindered my current one. Now I just need to tweak in the levels because it is a smidge fatiguing with BGC off.

On another topic, I thought it was said somewhere that there may be plans for a 1200watt amp for the F25 or was that simply speculation from another commenter. I ask because after all the praise given for the 15" 600watt it has left me wondering if perhaps I sold myself short. Yet things sound awesome right now, the possibilities tease at the Hi-Fi soul.

Best Regards
KvE

The wonderful thing about this forum is that everyone is civil in their posts. Okay, I've read a few that were out there but overall, the conversations are instructional and sincere.

oops.. I thought it was a high end home rig as it looks just like what I have at home mine is better as it has Rythmik Sub, this photo does not

Brian,

I noticed in using the sub tuner that there is not an FV15HP option. I just used the FV15 option for my use (two ports). Is there any adjustments I need to make to better tailor it to the FV15HP?

Thanks!

Regards,

RTROSE