Hi thanks again and you are very right. Is maybe like in a picture. The more the detail the more the wrinkles stand out even in a stricking way
I like detail a lot ... because it is fundamental in recreating the virtual soundstage for instance.
Message received. Of course the comparison was carried out between the direct feed from the phono preamp and the digital copy of the signal coming out from the phono preamp with levels matched.
But the most important thing is that a digital copy of an analogue master when well done is completely satisfactory. That is the more important thing.
The medium is so more handy that is not even a discussion. I am trying to improve my digital playback. I have no intention to go back to LPs ...
To begin with, I mostly red this in magazines, books and online. Statements, facts, results from experimentations/tests, wise words and so on.
But during the years of work and gaining experience with reparing cars, food, women, social interaction and trying to build and enjoying speakers and electronics. I also found out that I could become my own source of confusion. Everything can be thought to pieces and everything has some kind of reason to be limited at one point or another. Lets take my newest speakers as an example. Even though, I know that the design of my front baffle, choise of drivers and filters, make a huge difference. It still irritated me a bit, that my new favorite tweeter - is cheaper than my old one. I have gotten over it now, but still - it reminds me that we are often driven by forces that are not emmidiately apparent to us.
So now that I sit here at home and enjoy my little system, with DSP, multiple subwoofers and a certain level of constant directivity. It's begining to fall into place - and will never be perfect.... but when the system becomes more neutral. A bad recording simply becomes a bad recording and a better one is just more joyful to listen to. So for me - the key to lessen listening fatigue and still listen to what you like. Is to keep the system pretty much neutral - cause the music you like to hear, will necessarily never be in a quality you truely hoped for - i.e. change what you can change - mostly yourself and your system.
Finally... I do believe in personal preference. If you do like a little roll off at the upper frequencies or a bit more "filling" in the lowest octave. Then that can sound great - as long as the response is still smooth and even both on- and off-axis.
Last edited:
I love details too.... but at a certain point, it becomes an obsession. My goal now is to enjoy listening. Cause it is so easy to try and maximize detail and forget that it should really be about the music and not about listening to a system. You should forget the electronics and speakers and enjoy the experience of sound. I'm a geek, I zoom in - I look and I dig deep. So believe me - it's not easy for me to shut up and listen
Cool! Experiment and learn your own way. I do too and it's the only way to move forward
Oh yes..... convenience. It has to be a little hard to be worth it.... but some modern technology is really nice to have 
This was very likely mentioned somewhere up this lengthy thread, so my apologies, but in addition to distortion and too high of a SPL for too long a period, I think that a perceived tonal imbalance at the listening position also seems to promote listening fatigue. I suspect this this a a very common cause.
i think you are right A good measure of this obsession could be how much time is spent on reading reviews and lab reports and how much actually listening to music
However i tend to use the stereo for everything from listening to music and listening to the news and watch movies
For instance when i go back to the tv speakers i am shocked how big the difference is ... and i enjoy everything so much more that this motivates me to go further in the audio journey trying to improve
Hi,
If a loudseaker had a 4 stiff db peak at 600 to 700 hz above the average spl, whatever the cause : would you notch it or leave it as it is ? Read few posts before a 600 hz rise could be fatiguing ? It's in the 80-800 hz range: more or less where the music lives as er the popular claim ?!
If a loudseaker had a 4 stiff db peak at 600 to 700 hz above the average spl, whatever the cause : would you notch it or leave it as it is ? Read few posts before a 600 hz rise could be fatiguing ? It's in the 80-800 hz range: more or less where the music lives as er the popular claim ?!
Absolutely. I use my stereo for movies too, youtube, news and the like. And it sounds much more relaxing/real, when the system is mostly neutral
Indeed. But many people forget or dont know how to obtain this. Perceived, is most likely the best word, cause you cant measure the response in the listening position, since the response in the room, is a product of reflections and therefore a 3D issue ..... EQ can only correct 1D problems.
I mostly depends on level and width of the dip or rise in freqeuncy response. If you have a rise at 600hz - it needs to be higher in level(dB) if the dip/rise is narrow(low Q). If you have a low Q - wide/broad deviation of frequncy response... then a smaller difference in dB level can be heard or noticed.
In general/roughly - look at the space under or over a given curve. The bigger the area - the more easily you'll hear it.
Mostly a rise can be more annoying than a dip, since a rise can be a result of ringing/breakup, which causes distortion over time - smearing.
Around 800hz, is also where our listening experience in most rooms transit from mostly being dominated by the room to being dominated by the direct sound from the speaker - read Schroeders frequency.
Our ears become more sensitive to distortion/deviation from the original signal, in between the frequency of around 700-7.000hz. But that just means, that we have to grade the problems and compromises differently, when we tune a system. A smooth response might not sound good, if I use the wrong tools and methods to obtain it, because the tools and methods differ, when you correct and work around issues and problems at different frequencies.
Greets!
This is in the ~500 - 1 kHz 'honk' BW, so would depend on if I notice it, which I probably would if horn loaded and a rising 'honk' would get on my last nerve PDQ!
Close.
In an early '50s RCA recording studio design manual it lists the ~75-7 kHz BW as adequate for orchestral and vocal groups with 50-11 kHz for a truer, fuller reproduction and only ~200-4 kHz for good speech intelligibility, though noted that going lower helped maintaining tonal balance. On topic:
Did a thread search and didn't find this, so FWIW per ancient data:
Excessive percussion attack, vocal recognition, hard consonants in the 2-4 kHz [crunch] BW is a main source of listening fatigue with the sibilant 4-8 kHz another source and my personal 'waterloo' as it can ~literally make my teeth hurt, but have noticed over time that a surprising [to me] number of 'full range' single driver and multi-way cone speaker aficionados like a bit of excess sibilance for added clarity, definition.
GM
Sorry... but we have to dig a little deeper than that
Yes - you can correct a reponse in one tiny little space - exactly where the microphone is places. But your ears are in two different places - I hope
So you have two different situations here.You could average and smooth it all out with some extra curves and microphones placements. But that just smears it all out, leaving you with an unknown mix of reflections and in the end - no idea what the speakers really are doing.
Please understand the difference between direct sound and reflections. I know that it's tempting to mix them, so that we can get that lovely flat curve where we sit and listen. But unless we're talking about frequencies so low, that we can play tricks - like with multiple subwoofers - then you cant do what you claim - simply impossible. EQ can only change the sound that leaves the speaker - it can never change what happens over time in any given room.
Exactly. They do this in studios too - to enhance some effects. It can be like putting chili in or on food.... you kick your taste buds, so that everything comes a bit/bite more to life
But just like any spice and trick, to enhance any experience.... like makeup on women. You really have to be careful not to overdo it
I worked in a professional recording studio Conny Plank - Wikipedia for some time, we listened the whole day at high levels, 100 times the same track. None of us got listening fatigue, what does that prove?
How lucky you had been. It should have been very instructive to see him works. He was a very good engineer and producer.
+1 with Plasnu. Low distortion is uttermost importance for low listening fatigue in my own case.
In Connies Studio ther were some tubes hanging above our heads, empty one side closed.
6" and 8" and 10" different lengths up to 2m.
In those times I didn't quite understand the function, now I know they were quarter wavelength stubs positioned in points of highest velocity of the standing waves caused by room reflections.
Havn't seen that anywhere else
6" and 8" and 10" different lengths up to 2m.
In those times I didn't quite understand the function, now I know they were quarter wavelength stubs positioned in points of highest velocity of the standing waves caused by room reflections.
Havn't seen that anywhere else
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.