It can't of course, but sometimes it sounds like it can.
You're so indecisive
Look at the Statement speaker, how the midrange driver is put in a separate enclosure with open back. The back tunnel is stuffed with absorbing material that is used to alter the illusion of depth.
You need only three:
(1) Recorded micro detail of the room/space reverberation [in the source]
(2) Speaker that can disappear and produce micro detail
(3) Room that doesn't interfere.
The hardest part of the three is the speaker that can disappear.
The speaker with little baffle for the tweeter will easily disappear than speaker with horn/WG. Some speakers like Stradivari will never disappear in a small room. Speakers like the Harbeth/Spendor or even Orang Utan will never produce similar sound stage like speaker whose appearance similar to that in Kindhornman's avatar.
Yes I'm often surprised, people use this and that room treatment devices like shooting in the dark. Easy or difficult shouldn't be about circumstances.
If the room is a perfect 3m^3 cubical made of 100% stone in all sides, will you say it would be easy or difficult/impossible? If you know it is impossible then don't put your system in there. Easy, right?
Jay, you're always right, and 99% aligned with my experiences
Listen to the spatial effects at the beginning of the song "warheads" on the CD by Extreme-III sides to every story...In my 5mx6m acoustically controlled room-and using low diffraction speakers, the aeroplane - that I assume has some delay and Phase shift, appears well outside the speaker perimeter with precise localization..
IME, listening to speaker diffraction and/or room reflections is like having a preference for Bose 901's.. For me, speaker diffraction and room reflection sound is a non-negotiable but others it might be a negotiable.. My friend who builds tube amps doesn't mind diffraction sound and prefers horns..
For quality Audio preferences, everyone needs to determine his or hers negotiables and non-negotiables..This will help ease the struggle to find the desired equipment..
Listen to the spatial effects at the beginning of the song "warheads" on the CD by Extreme-III sides to every story...In my 5mx6m acoustically controlled room-and using low diffraction speakers, the aeroplane - that I assume has some delay and Phase shift, appears well outside the speaker perimeter with precise localization..
IME, listening to speaker diffraction and/or room reflections is like having a preference for Bose 901's.. For me, speaker diffraction and room reflection sound is a non-negotiable but others it might be a negotiable.. My friend who builds tube amps doesn't mind diffraction sound and prefers horns..
For quality Audio preferences, everyone needs to determine his or hers negotiables and non-negotiables..This will help ease the struggle to find the desired equipment..
Last edited:
Of course it would be nice to be able to acoustically treat a room. However this is a more difficult problem than so many believe when it is the low frequency range that is causing any problems. Studios can be built as suspended rooms inside of rooms and this is one of the many ways things can be done on a very high level. In our homes with normal plaster or drywall and stud construction any problems in the bass region are very hard to deal with. Even the so called bass traps that some sell really don't function that low in the frequency range. Higher in frequency it is much easier to absorb and reflect those wavelengths and this is more typical of what I see people attempt to do. Now throw in a couple of glass windows and door openings and things get interesting again. Throw in the biggest impediment, a wife and many times you just have to deal with the room the way she wants it to look with whatever things she wants in the room. A happy wife is a better proposition than a great sound system and I think she usually will win out. So then you have to come up with the best sounding speaker that fits into this room and do what you can. Mostly just enjoy the music and forget about reproducing an orchestra in a large space!
Now if I was Pano and had a man cave under my house boy could I do some things, but alas I don't have one of those. On the other hand I'd probably be outside most of the time, it is just to beautiful to sit in a cave in Hawaii! You just make me so jealous Pano, good for you!
Now if I was Pano and had a man cave under my house boy could I do some things, but alas I don't have one of those. On the other hand I'd probably be outside most of the time, it is just to beautiful to sit in a cave in Hawaii! You just make me so jealous Pano, good for you!
Oh no, its always possible - just ask Pano
My listening room is a "man cave" (no windows, no WAF influence) and it has floating (isolated) walls, ceiling, etc. It is custom designed to be as good as a listening room can get. And yet, I have never heard a recording that I could not tell was a recording. As I said, "they are here" can be eerily realistic, but "you are in a large auditorium" is not possible. (And let's keep in mind that we are talking about two channel, non-binaural here. Multichannel and binaural are completely different issues.)
Last edited:
It pretty much takes an anechoic chamber to eliminate the reflections.
Then you need to make artificial reflections with additional speakers and time delays.
True, especially "in a large auditorium in Israeli concert hall". Otherwise Joshua will be interested hehe
Jay, you're always right, and 99% aligned with my experiences
Listen to the spatial effects at the beginning of the song "warheads" on the CD by Extreme-III sides to every story...In my 5mx6m acoustically controlled room-and using low diffraction speakers, the aeroplane - that I assume has some delay and Phase shift, appears well outside the speaker perimeter with precise localization..
IME, listening to speaker diffraction and/or room reflections is like having a preference for Bose 901's.. For me, speaker diffraction and room reflection sound is a non-negotiable but others it might be a negotiable.. My friend who builds tube amps doesn't mind diffraction sound and prefers horns..
For quality Audio preferences, everyone needs to determine his or hers negotiables and non-negotiables..This will help ease the struggle to find the desired equipment..
Interesting person that can audibly identify diffraction as defined instead of mistake the properties for time delayed reflections of one kind or another. I base my preference for horns on the reduced reflections from the added directivity over direct radiators. This goes a long way for me and others in normal size listening spaces.
In reality, it's purely subjective for me......and many. I do enjoy a small direct radiator speaker in a large space with hard reflective surfaces from time to time........but not with all content and not all of the time. If a system could be made to selectively operate in multiple simulated environments selectively......oh what a system that would be. Sadly today's digital implementations fall far short of those performance standards. A room with an opening ceiling would be nice!......but not very practical.
But as others have suggested, get the sub 400hz content down to 20hz or so flat and without significant time errors.......well.....that's a really great start for even an MP3 player and entry level active 2 ways to top off. Easier said than done of course in a practical setting. Multiple dipole subs with DSP is the only true and tested method I can think of. Geddes multiple sub approach comes close but IMO don't operate high enough in freq to avoid time smearing from floor and ceilings as well as enclosure induced resonances........BUT....it is a more practical approach. With that I'd add two subs of any configuration in a stereo configuration as most use fall faaaaaaaar short in regards to recreating any resemblance of 'being there' illusions.
On that note, there's interesting DIY efforts in regards to flat panel radiators for bass and IMO a suitable and somewhat practical solution might be found here where hung and suspended panels can actually produce low freq content with accuracy AND absorb unwanted higher frequency reflections. There's no physical law that says a radiator has to be round and conical that I know of. The chains of constraint placed on Hifi decades ago with aged technology might just be on the cusp of being broken. Today's avaition and space exploration materials are now readily available and affordable to retail markets. Extremely light yet strong and rigid composites could soon solve the LF dilemma. One can only hope! My own use of these materials in watercraft leads me to suspect I'll be experimenting with scraps in the near future!
Ha! I'm surprised that you know something about it.
Because non rounded cone will create problem with casual surround suspension, I'm thinking what's wrong [for midrange application] with no surround design to ensure pistonic behavior.
mayhem13
There was a thread over on LinkedIn some time ago that was exactly the subject of what the next transducer technology will be. Lots of ideas, but as a long time practitioner of the art I am afraid that I simply don't see things ever changing all that much, and certainly not soon. Transducers is a highly evolved technology and as such not likely to see much change. Multi-transducer DSP controlled arrays - like underwater has had for decades - sounds like it has some potential but then you run up against the cost and the fact that small transducers just are not full range devices, so the tradeoffs start creeping in and soon you find that all you have is a higher cost but the tradeoffs have eaten away at any advantages.
I don't see how or why flat panels make the LF problem any different. IMO even dipoles don't change the problem in a significant way. And at these LFs most materials are rigid so "Extremely light yet strong and rigid composites" don't seem to me to be of any real importance to the LF situation. Care to explain.
There was a thread over on LinkedIn some time ago that was exactly the subject of what the next transducer technology will be. Lots of ideas, but as a long time practitioner of the art I am afraid that I simply don't see things ever changing all that much, and certainly not soon. Transducers is a highly evolved technology and as such not likely to see much change. Multi-transducer DSP controlled arrays - like underwater has had for decades - sounds like it has some potential but then you run up against the cost and the fact that small transducers just are not full range devices, so the tradeoffs start creeping in and soon you find that all you have is a higher cost but the tradeoffs have eaten away at any advantages.
I don't see how or why flat panels make the LF problem any different. IMO even dipoles don't change the problem in a significant way. And at these LFs most materials are rigid so "Extremely light yet strong and rigid composites" don't seem to me to be of any real importance to the LF situation. Care to explain.
Can't get the concert hall illusion with only stereo.
Years ago I had extra speakers laying around and I used them as surrounds played with delays and rolled off mids and highs as would happen if I were in the balcony.
I was pleased and surprised that the effect was fairly decent for such a crude experiment. I got the effect of a big space but still had the subjective direct sound as in the theatre. But it only worked for some recordings and I had to fiddle with levels. It was not for every day.
I suspect the being-there illusion is going to be easier when new display technology does away with screens and we'll be visually "transported" to the venue.
True. I also have treated listening room and large living room (two systems and three large loudspeaker pairs; 2xaltecs, 1xtannoys
) and have listened to countless high-end systems but never heard concert hall illusion.
Gary,
You say you needed to replace the tube in the amplifier as they were reaching the end of their useful life. I thought that part of the design of this amp that Lynn did was going to make those tubes last for many years, why the short tube life? I hope I understand what you were saying correctly. That was one reason I just got tired of tube amps, the having to test and replace them and then reset the bias if need be. At least in my tube tuner that isn't a common occurrence , they seem to last virtually forever.
You say you needed to replace the tube in the amplifier as they were reaching the end of their useful life. I thought that part of the design of this amp that Lynn did was going to make those tubes last for many years, why the short tube life? I hope I understand what you were saying correctly. That was one reason I just got tired of tube amps, the having to test and replace them and then reset the bias if need be. At least in my tube tuner that isn't a common occurrence , they seem to last virtually forever.
Different Scott.
-still, any Scott is always good.
That has been my experience as well
Oh Lord, help us all, if the "G" and the "L" are ever in the same place at once !