As DF96 said why discuss BBE in same sentence as the others, okay dolby is also filtering but its decoding is exactly the inverse of its encoding which BBE is not and also stereo plus dolby is a accepted world standards we all more or less have.
If you interested i can make you a stereo convolution wav-file phase correction based on your speaker systems excess phase caused by minimum phase XO points, simply give me data for those XO points and to test it you need a player as for example foobar or JRiver that can load the correction file, this way you can investigate how that sounds verse BBE "kind of mirror curve" filtering.
Last edited:
It depends on your perspective .. while the decode is the opposite of the encode in dolby, the differences in circuitry to achieve this decoding isn't precisely the same among players/decks as even speakers themselves vary within the same model number .. therefore dolby is also flawed.
Stereo is certainly also not perfect nor is it an encode decode process so change has occured to the original signal hasn't it.
I mention them in the same sentence because at their HEART they are perturbations of the initial sound with the best intents described afore.
To denounce BBE when stereo and dolby alterations of the sound are allowed, are being contradictory to put it fairly.
Most certainly both Dolby and BBE are compensating for inadequacies in the recording and playback technologies.
In intent they are identical and in implementation they both have their flaws.
Stereo is certainly also not perfect nor is it an encode decode process so change has occured to the original signal hasn't it.
I mention them in the same sentence because at their HEART they are perturbations of the initial sound with the best intents described afore.
To denounce BBE when stereo and dolby alterations of the sound are allowed, are being contradictory to put it fairly.
Most certainly both Dolby and BBE are compensating for inadequacies in the recording and playback technologies.
In intent they are identical and in implementation they both have their flaws.
@armarra1 - please stop quoting the post directly above yours.Corrected words in italics.
What is the recording event? Where are you sitting, or which seat do you want the recording to place you in?
For live performances, I have been in the back row of a music concert, with loud, amplified music, actually it might as well have been recorded music. A live band playing in a hall of 200 people, sounds like a live band, the power and attack is there. Stereo? Depends on where your table is.
For recorded performances, I would rather be on this side of the recording window. I do not want to stand in front of a live band in a recording studio and hear unmixed unbalanced sounds from the real instruments, some of then which will be on tape only. For a rock band, or soft rock, or pop, or jazz band I do not care what the actual instruments sound like, anymore than I want to see what the pixels on my monitor look like really. I want to see the finished picture, the "impression" of sound that the recording artist wants to produce, and then I want to mix my own.
Now where does BBE fit in? If it helps restore the above fidelity to the recording, including the stereo effects, I am in. Anything else is doing a second mixing and recording job.
Okay so we're both comung at this from dofferent angles.
I see your point that live performances have their problems regarding seating position but I'm more interested in being true to the instrument's sound than the recording artists inpression of the performance artist.
In that way. Dolby and BBE and even Stereo have the same aim... to suspend disbelief that we are in fact in the presence if the artist themselves.
How many times have we closed our eyes to truly hear a playback. Removing the visual cues can intensify the aural experience and assist the stereo image to convince us we are in fact THERE... right there in the same location as the intended source of the sound...which is of course the oerformers themselves.
I see your point that live performances have their problems regarding seating position but I'm more interested in being true to the instrument's sound than the recording artists inpression of the performance artist.
In that way. Dolby and BBE and even Stereo have the same aim... to suspend disbelief that we are in fact in the presence if the artist themselves.
How many times have we closed our eyes to truly hear a playback. Removing the visual cues can intensify the aural experience and assist the stereo image to convince us we are in fact THERE... right there in the same location as the intended source of the sound...which is of course the oerformers themselves.
Hmmm.. its not necesarily retrieving lost data but rather removing extraneous emphasis and phase shifts that arises from the very act of recording and playback through speakers.
Howmamy times have you compared a recording with the actual source of that recording.. you intuitively know that they'll be different.
An oboe will sound different than the same oboe recorded and played back wount it.
Any instrument will sound dofferent when you play it back through a device after recording.
Well it needn't surprise you that with enough research (both experimental and theoretical) the differences can be identified and indeed explained.
Knowing the differences then electronic circuitry can be devised for undoing these differences which turn out to be phase changes in certain frequency ranges and also lack of emphasis at the upper and lower extremes of the aural frequency spectrum.
Now whilst the BBE cannot fully compensate for the differences between speakers and between equipment and between venues it can put a general compensation assuming all these are the same. It should be noted that neither can dolby or stereo fully compensate for differences of speaker or venue or equipment.
So.. think of it as adjusting to compensate for the alterations you hear wgen playing back a sound you just recorded after hearing the original instrument played in front of you.
Your point about adding lost data is addressed in this link who quotes the actual designer of BBE themselves a Bob Crook.
Barcus-Berry 402 Sonic Maximizer (MT Mar 87)
The premise from here Barcus-Berry 402 Sonic Maximizer (MT Mar 87)
"When we hear sound unamplified, we receive the higher harmonics first and fundamental sound behind them. This translates into the experience of crisp, clean sound that retains its natural transient response, or punch. When sound becomes amplified, the high frequencies become delayed and we hear the bass or fundamental sounds first. This results in dull, mushy sound that seems to lack punch."
There are two lies I can spot.........
"When we hear sound unamplified, we receive the higher harmonics first and fundamental sound behind them. This translates into the experience of crisp, clean sound that retains its natural transient response, or punch. When sound becomes amplified, the high frequencies become delayed and we hear the bass or fundamental sounds first. This results in dull, mushy sound that seems to lack punch."
There are two lies I can spot.........
Stereo adds an extra channel, so we have some spatial information. It turns out that two channels are much better than one, while three or more channels are not much better than two, so we generally stick to two.armarra1 said:
Dolby reduces noise by doing companding. The aim is to replicate the original signal via a noisy channel.
BBE is different: it fiddles with the signal in an apparent attempt to correct for some other (relatively unknown) alleged fiddling done by some other component. In some cases the result may please some people, but it is essentially an effects box.
No. That frequency may be a high frequency. It may be a low frequency.
A professional is someone who is paid to do something. This does not necessarily mean they are better at it than someone who does the same thing for other reasons.
My understanding is that Dolby Labs were quite careful to licence their technology only to people who would promise to do it properly. To compare minor errors in Dolby processing to an effects box which deliberately changes the signal is a category error.
You are floundering. We can see it; soon (if not already) you will realise this too. Why not quit this silly BBE line now while you may still have some credibility?
No. Stereo adds an extra channel. BBE damages the existing channels. No comparison.
Why persist in these foolish assertions?
No. In intent they are quite different (as I have explained above, and others have too) so an imperfect implementation of a good idea (e.g. Dolby) is far superior and should not be compared to even a perfect implementation of a bad idea (e.g. BBE).
My original quote:
Lessons I have learned so far:
1. Use CD-quality music. Speakers and systems cannot restore missing information, unless through re-mastering.
2. Use a sufficiently powerful amplifier, that is 10W + to compensate for low recording levels.
3. Use an equalizer or tone controls to restore bass that was present at 83dB playback. Surprisingly little bass tone control needs to be used to do this. Be careful about over - compensating for bass.
4. Try a DSP unit.
It should be noted that I has in mind the tonal balance of the music, and not necessarily stereo imaging, however, this is a separate topic, but there is no harm addressing it here.
Thanks to all. I am looking forward to my more powerful amp and tone controls.
Need a bit of clarification on DSP vs Equalizer.
edit: this helps
System Equalization
I think sufficiently useful answers have been given here so far, and several users have experienced success in sound reproduction.
Lessons I have learned so far:
1. Use CD-quality music. Speakers and systems cannot restore missing information, unless through re-mastering.
2. Use a sufficiently powerful amplifier, that is 10W + to compensate for low recording levels.
3. Use an equalizer or tone controls to restore bass that was present at 83dB playback. Surprisingly little bass tone control needs to be used to do this. Be careful about over - compensating for bass.
4. Try a DSP unit.
It should be noted that I has in mind the tonal balance of the music, and not necessarily stereo imaging, however, this is a separate topic, but there is no harm addressing it here.
Thanks to all. I am looking forward to my more powerful amp and tone controls.
Need a bit of clarification on DSP vs Equalizer.
edit: this helps
System Equalization
Last edited:
Any hope that someday artists will offer their multi tracks for users to re-mix to their own recording levels and tastes?
6 Places to Get Multitracks for Practice — The Pro Audio Files
Oh Wow
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band *Original Multi-track Stems* : The Beatles : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive
6 Places to Get Multitracks for Practice — The Pro Audio Files
Oh Wow
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band *Original Multi-track Stems* : The Beatles : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive
Last edited:
I think you are correct in assuming it's mainly tonal balance that suffers when we listen to "miniatures of music" due primarily to psychoacoustic effects, mainly the equal loudness contour of our ears, amplifiers and speakers and probably even rooms are surprisingly linear when it comes to volume differences.
The better the source the better the output, but Hi Fi can still do a very good job with poor source material.
You can equalise within a DSP and it can provide other functions such as phase shifts and time delays and crossovers all of which can be useful.
I like the idea of being able to get hold of the multitracks, I can't see it happening for the vast majority of stuff though due to the high number of tracks used
The better the source the better the output, but Hi Fi can still do a very good job with poor source material.
You can equalise within a DSP and it can provide other functions such as phase shifts and time delays and crossovers all of which can be useful.
I like the idea of being able to get hold of the multitracks, I can't see it happening for the vast majority of stuff though due to the high number of tracks used
Why would they lie ?
I suppose my dolby was lying as well ?
Perhaps it needs further investigation but at its heart it is just trying to recapture what is lost in recrd playback n amplification. Especially now where higher power is attained through electronic amps that no doubt alter the signal as they arent perfectly linear across their operating range are they.
Technically it should be the other way around since woofers have higher moving mass and higher le.
DF96 Ill agree that the way its expressed it assumes a lot of knowledge and can therefore appear as technobabble.
Ive been trying to follow/remind the main tennants of the BBE and it appears to be plausible if followed deeper into the assertions made.
For example... i started off with the effect impedance has on current flow.