Interesting point you are making here. I can’t argue any study I haven’t seen or read about so any source recommendation would be appreciated.
From Neve transformers I have measured you could clearly see a roll off below 20Hz. After consulting the designer himself back then he was convinced that the low roll off wasn’t important as the extension above 20K because of what you already stated in your “congruency” explanation. Back then (70ties) he was already convinced that the brain is able to fill in those frequencies that belong to lower harmonics that human ears can pic up. Especially trained ears from engineers/producers seem to 'suffer' from this. That’s why Neve was already designing up to 40K while the rest of the console world was still focussing on 20K.
But basically what you are saying a similar concept of 'filling in' (excuse me for my simplification of words) happens at low frequencies. Although our hearing no longer senses these LF the same brain is also able to 'fill in' those frequencies that belong to upper harmonics our bodies (and ears) do receive. I must say I have never thought of it but it sounds logical but it also raises new considerations…
I believe (and correct me if I’m wrong) our brain can only 'fill-in' those parts that we know off. Like the similar event of what happened to American native Indians when they didn’t ‘saw’ the ships of Columbus because they didn’t recognise them as they didn’t have any knowledge of such ships. But this is where it becomes tricky in my view. If we amplify those frequencies that are not of an importance to the sound ( with sound I mean of how we hear them in reality) we train our ears to hear unnatural things. Our brain is developed that way if we listen long enough to these kind of unnatural things we start to except them as a new truth/reality.
It is this effect that makes LF material in films as 'generally accepted' or maybe I should use the word convincing. In Fx recording playing sound samples at lower sample rates is most time how LF content in film is created. This 'unnatural' sound representation of the image we are watching is changing our hearing, I think. Now you might think what has that to do with music, but in my view a lot. Everyone who watches those moves will memorise this sound information in their brain and therefore the fiction becomes the truth. So if we expose ourselves more and more to 'unreal' LF content we might pollute our ideas of reality in sound.
Another effect can be taken in consideration. The human brain filters automatically these sounds (or frequencies) that are not relevant for us at that moment. This is how we can hear and understand the voice from one person in a crowded surrounding of talking people and background noises like a PA in a pub for instance. A microphone isn’t able to shift information like that. So when we record 'all' information, I believe, it is the task of an engineer/producer to decide which information is important to the music and therefore the ear of the listener. In case you leave everything as it is picked up, in my opinion, you also amplify those frequencies that shouldn’t be heard in the first place. This amplification is correct from a theoretical point of view but it still doesn’t make them natural in my view.
Now, if you consider al those influences as part of how we record sound and how we perceive and interpret the reproduction I don’t think it is that easy to explain in words, studies or mathematical correct theories. Well, for the words it might be my bad English
(And sorry Vmcfer for going beyond your question and reason for this thread...)
Last edited:
awraudio, do not bother...you can not convince me how good the fan subwoofer is, for me its waste of money...overpriced useless stuff
I want to hear music, and the midrange is where the music is
every celo or contrabass or organ which goes as low as 30 Hz has ton of upper harmonics which determine how it actually sounds
its a lower midrange which makes bass guitar to sound realistic, not just fundamental
same goes for organ
yes, lowest pipes can do 16Hz, but the music is in the midrange, its in the upper harmonic content
and if some cds have the recording down to few Hz, so what?
I want to hear music, and the midrange is where the music is
every celo or contrabass or organ which goes as low as 30 Hz has ton of upper harmonics which determine how it actually sounds
its a lower midrange which makes bass guitar to sound realistic, not just fundamental
same goes for organ
yes, lowest pipes can do 16Hz, but the music is in the midrange, its in the upper harmonic content
and if some cds have the recording down to few Hz, so what?
You are absolutely correct when you talk about midrange and lower midrange. That is why I use Martin Logan electrostatic
speakers and Magneplanar Tympani IV bass panels. Together they
reproduce all the upper harmonics, detail, spaciousness, low
level detail, imaging, huge sound-stage in a well acoustically treated
room. To each his own, but when I listen to the Mormon Tabernacle choir with that huge organ with the above speakers and
the rotary sub I feel like I am there in the hall.
Attachments
I went to Verdi's Requiem concert last week to Strathmore Concert Hall here in Bethesda. 300 member choir, spectacular. Went to Bach's St. Mathews Passion in National Cathedral in DC month ago. Last year went to Berlioz Requiem in Immaculate Heart Church in DC, even better. I know what you mean...pretty imposible to replicate at home due to limited size of the room. Your livingroom looks like mine in size, but its not concert hall, that's for sure. Nothing like 40ft ceiling...
Last edited:
It happens! We may already say something like, "It is true Hi-fi sound", or "True movie soundtrack". But we don't say that it is "True Real sound", when we hear Hi-fi or movie tracks.
But the time frame during which we learned the "artificial reality" differs from evolution time during which we learned to be warned by sounds, so anyway despite of poisoning we don't believe that what we hear from Hi-fi or soundtrack is real, unless it is High-end record and reproduction, that differs from usual artificial Hi-fi.
That's why my main test of quality of sound systems is, how often subconscious reacts on sounds as if they are real, before we calm down and realize that it is not real sound, but reproduced through speakers. I have one test record, I recorded rain, but a helicopter come, so I made a record of rain and helicopter. When I switch it on and see people are looking to the sky, I conclude it is a good reproduction.
Surround sound makes a big difference
I sang in a large choir and live music is beyond the best stereo systems. Surround sound helps considerably and when done
correctly will make a smaller space feel like a very large space
with a feeling of being there. There is no such thing as a
perfect sound system, but none the less, one can get closer
to the real thing than I ever imagined. I also attend live
concerts and yes, this is better than any sound system. I have
been involved with audio for 50 years and play piano and guitar.
My father had a great tenor voice and sang in some live events
as well, so I know very much how real instruments and voices
sound.
I sang in a large choir and live music is beyond the best stereo systems. Surround sound helps considerably and when done
correctly will make a smaller space feel like a very large space
with a feeling of being there. There is no such thing as a
perfect sound system, but none the less, one can get closer
to the real thing than I ever imagined. I also attend live
concerts and yes, this is better than any sound system. I have
been involved with audio for 50 years and play piano and guitar.
My father had a great tenor voice and sang in some live events
as well, so I know very much how real instruments and voices
sound.
We are really only a small fraction of the way to being able to reproduce "real". But the situation Anatolly describes happens here often... and you know it ia getting scary when it is the dog (much less often the cats) reacting to what they hear on the hif. They are truly "blind listeners"
dave
I do not play any instrument, unfortunately. (mother decided early I do watercolours and scuptures and brother studied violin and harmonica. Perhaps should have been other way around)
Anyway, I have been soundman and sound engineer for couple of amateur rock groups for a long time. (Btw, I cut most of the mic below 50Hz during recording)
Anyway, I have been soundman and sound engineer for couple of amateur rock groups for a long time. (Btw, I cut most of the mic below 50Hz during recording)
Fooling the dog's ears is harder than most.
I'm actually quite interested in several variations of rotary subs. IMHO there's lots of commercial potential in rotary subs. Besides his rotary servo motor belt-drive subs, Danley had some other interesting "fan" variations, with a recirculating wind-tunnel and a modulated diverter-vane. Another of his was an array of direct-drive fans driven by the audio signal. Lots of variations of size, speed, and range of blade pitch.
The motor-driven constant-speed designs with variable-pitch prop, or some kind of modualated diverter, have a lot of potential to get a LOT of sound from minimal amplifier power.
You could use a mechanism not much different from an aircraft variable-pitch prop, actuated via a sliding collar similar to a car clutch's throwout bearing. Hohum.
You could rotate the blades' pitch via electric motors, piezo-electric actuators, or coil-type actuators, voice coils, etc. Instead of slip-rings with brushes, you could transmit the control signal to the spinning apparatus by varying the current thru a stationary electromagnet that couples to a coil on the spinning armature. In fact, you could probably make a cost-effective electro-mechanical bass amplifier that way. Most of the power, even for the blade-pitch co2ntrollers, could be derived from the big motor driving the fan. You could design it such that a very few watts of control power would modulate many horsepower of fan power.
There's also many possibilites that originate with compressed air and modulate that. Kind of like sirens and air horns, but with controlled modulation. A 2-horsepower electric motor seems expensive...but it's cheap compared to a 2-horsepower audio power amp. And I can rent an 800 horsepower air compressor for an outdoor sound gig; problem is just how to moudlate the release of air.
Even the Eminent Technology rotary should probably be able to achieve more output power than the control signal input power! The rest of the energy coming from the power of the constant-speed rotary motor.
Not a great design, but I've always wondered: what does happen if you take ten thousand small cheap DC computer fans, mounted in an array, and put a powerful amp into them? They'd certainly shudder, but wouldn't they also make bass?
This started as a weird idea thread, but perhaps we need a 'really really weird idea thread'?
I'm actually quite interested in several variations of rotary subs. IMHO there's lots of commercial potential in rotary subs. Besides his rotary servo motor belt-drive subs, Danley had some other interesting "fan" variations, with a recirculating wind-tunnel and a modulated diverter-vane. Another of his was an array of direct-drive fans driven by the audio signal. Lots of variations of size, speed, and range of blade pitch.
The motor-driven constant-speed designs with variable-pitch prop, or some kind of modualated diverter, have a lot of potential to get a LOT of sound from minimal amplifier power.
You could use a mechanism not much different from an aircraft variable-pitch prop, actuated via a sliding collar similar to a car clutch's throwout bearing. Hohum.
You could rotate the blades' pitch via electric motors, piezo-electric actuators, or coil-type actuators, voice coils, etc. Instead of slip-rings with brushes, you could transmit the control signal to the spinning apparatus by varying the current thru a stationary electromagnet that couples to a coil on the spinning armature. In fact, you could probably make a cost-effective electro-mechanical bass amplifier that way. Most of the power, even for the blade-pitch co2ntrollers, could be derived from the big motor driving the fan. You could design it such that a very few watts of control power would modulate many horsepower of fan power.
There's also many possibilites that originate with compressed air and modulate that. Kind of like sirens and air horns, but with controlled modulation. A 2-horsepower electric motor seems expensive...but it's cheap compared to a 2-horsepower audio power amp. And I can rent an 800 horsepower air compressor for an outdoor sound gig; problem is just how to moudlate the release of air.
Even the Eminent Technology rotary should probably be able to achieve more output power than the control signal input power! The rest of the energy coming from the power of the constant-speed rotary motor.
Not a great design, but I've always wondered: what does happen if you take ten thousand small cheap DC computer fans, mounted in an array, and put a powerful amp into them? They'd certainly shudder, but wouldn't they also make bass?
This started as a weird idea thread, but perhaps we need a 'really really weird idea thread'?
agreed
----------------------------------
24" Hartleys here.
almost 39 cubic foot boxes, >
Goto Unit horn system in Lithuania. New DACs. - YouTube
11,797
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.