The Advantages of Floor Coupled Up-Firing Speakers - Page 55 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 23rd February 2010, 10:18 PM   #541
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Sounds like a "they are here" scenario?
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2010, 10:22 PM   #542
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
That's a very idiosyncratic definition of HiFi that probably not many people share.
well, the definition is after Hartley who invented the term in 1927

from the begining it was not high fidelity of telephone lines or cinema sound but high fidelity of music reproduction at home

than the marketing guys made of it what it is thought to be by many today
__________________
"high phooey and hystereo" - Yascha Heifetz
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2010, 10:27 PM   #543
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Sounds like a "they are here" scenario?
not really

rather like "it is there"
__________________
"high phooey and hystereo" - Yascha Heifetz
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2010, 10:56 PM   #544
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Err, I guess that's the same. You perceive the sound sources in your room?
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2010, 10:59 PM   #545
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by graaf View Post
well, the definition is after Hartley who invented the term in 1927

from the begining it was not high fidelity of telephone lines or cinema sound but high fidelity of music reproduction at home
I don't know that text by Hartley. Doesn't really make sense to narrow HiFi down to music reproduction.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2010, 04:42 AM   #546
Key is offline Key  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Sure you can make it more realistic if the goal of each and every paintings has to be photorealism. What about the art? It gets destroyed in that process.
What if the artist considers his art not to be a static image but something that can be enjoyed in a variety of ways? Similar to a movie that gives you the choice of 3-D.

One of my favorite albums is Electric Ladyland. Being released in 1968 I'd consider it an early stereo recording or basically one of the first stereo recordings that was really interesting. To tell you the truth from the lack of information on the album and it's intended playback I couldn't tell you if it's supposed to be played in quad, stereo, 3 channel or what (it's pretty clear you shouldn't play it in mono because of cancellation).

All you have is speculation and some really ambiguous quotes from Hendrix and interviews with Eddie Kramer. Hendrix says there is 3-D sound on the album but doesn't say exactly how to hear it the way he heard it. And well it's my thinking that if you could make the 3-D somehow more accurate he would want you to listen to it that way as long as you are still enjoying the music.

From my experience most recordings are like this. You truly can't tell if it's supposed to be listened to on headphones, nearfields, midfields, Stereo or surround decoded. It's anybodies guess what's correct. We don't even have an objective picture of which of those and what flavor of those is actually the most accurate.

Last edited by Key; 24th February 2010 at 04:45 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2010, 05:51 AM   #547
el`Ol is offline el`Ol  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bavarian Forest
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Sounds like a "they are here" scenario?
CFS is "they are here", Carlsson is "you are there". Both have a good localization if there is integrity of the ceiling reflection. And in contrast to other speakers "localization" it is not only the information about the position, it is the feeling that the instrument is really there.
You probably can have this experience with a ceiling-mounted second pair of your CD speakers, delay lines and some amount of crosstalk. Unfortunately I never had the opportunity to listen to a 2+2+2 recording from the MDG (not enough channels, not enough speakers). I can imagine this is the real thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2010, 06:12 AM   #548
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
I don't know that text by Hartley. Doesn't really make sense to narrow HiFi down to music reproduction.
Quote:
I invented the phrase "high fidelity" in 1927 to denote a type of sound reproduction that might be taken rather seriously by a music lover. In those days the average radio or phonograph equipment sounded pretty horrible but, as I was really interested in music, it occurred to me that something might be done about it.
I investigated the nature of sound, the behavior of the human ear, the minimum requirements of good sounding equipment, and finally produced something which did appeal to others also interested in musical reproduction.
from Audio Design Handbook, page 200

Quote:
I did not invent the word "audiophile" but I am grateful to the man who did because it is a very convenient term to apply to a certain type of audio equipment user. I do not want it to be thought that I have any derogatory opinions of audiophiles. On the contrary I greatly value their existence if only because they are good for trade. But that they exist emphasizes the logical need in this argument for a clear definition of both parties to the discussion.
I shall call a man who has no interest in the mechanics of audio reproduction but is concerned only with the most faithful reproduction of existing music a "music lover"; the man who is more interested in stunts or the overpowering reproduction of drums, triangles and, if it comes to that, the components of "concrete music," an audiophile. In doing just that I imply that his major interest is in the means and not the end.
There is nothing discreditable in this. There is no absolute law which says that a long-haired musician is any more desirable a creature than a gimmick hound. So long as we remain an ostensibly free people we have a right to amuse ourselves as we want to, but it should be a point of honor that our amusement doesn't impinge on the free enjoyment of others. Some audiophiles make their presence heard over a very wide area. Then there are the folk in between. A music lover has every right to inrerest himself in the machinery that produces his music but, if he takes the advice of an audiophile, he may find himself landed with an outfit that doesn't give him what he wants. Some people are perfectly happy with a 10-watt amplifier feeding a modest speaker system. If it sounds good, then why should they waste money on something more elaborate? Some audio engineers are very fond of music, and design equipment to satisfy themselves. Others are not very interested in real music but get a kick out of devising complicated systems that emit perfectly overwhelming sounds. Let everyone do as he will; but my motto is "live and let live" and the aim of this chapter is to guide the reader in the way he wants to live, not the way the other man says he should.
from Audio Design Handbook, pages 201-2

Quote:
Don't tell me there is no coloration in a modern speaker. I can hear it, and why shouldn't I? What makes the difference between a Stradivarius or Amati and a mass-produced fiddle is the stuff of which the instruments are made. What makes the difference benveen the woodrvind and brass of the orchestra is the stuff of which the instruments are made. What makes the difference between a Steinway and a Bechstein is the stuff of which they are made. You just don't get away from it, and the sound you get from a paper-coned woofer is quite difterent from the sound you get from an aluminum-cone tweeter or an electrostatic speaker for that matter. I can hear it, and music lovers can hear it. But I suspect the audiophile doesn't bother. He seems to want to reproduce the sound of a triangle more triangular than the real thing. I don't mind one little bit if that is what He wants; all I beg is that he doesn't call it high fidelity.
from Audio Design Handbook, pages 206-7

Ask people at diyaudio.com why they are in this hobby?
Are they in it for the news so that thay can listen to them with high accuracy? Are they in it for watching movies at home with cinema-quality sound?

Or rather they are in it for the music?

what happened was rather broadening of the term "high fidelity" - an idea from the marketing department, and now the term is understood to mean nothing other than just "high quality" when referring to audio and video equipment
and because this quality is defined in technical, abstract terms, the "fidelity" became just "fidelity to strict technical requirements", dehumanized and quite the contrary to the original meaning of "high fidelity"

and in the last years we can witness the next stage of this (d)evolution - the term "high fidelity" is slowly being replaced by "hi-end" - purely marketing ideal

for Hartley it was satisfaction of a music lover that was a measure of quality of consumer audio equipment, then it became satisfaction of technical requirements ("satisfaction of microphones"), now more and more it is money and satisfaction of spending money on fancy boutique gadgetry with the right trademarks on it ("the money is the product")
__________________
"high phooey and hystereo" - Yascha Heifetz

Last edited by graaf; 24th February 2010 at 06:27 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2010, 06:41 AM   #549
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Err, I guess that's the same. You perceive the sound sources in your room?
sometimes with solo instruments and voices, perhaps when acoustics of the recording is close to the acoustics of my room

but most of the time it is like audible equivalent of a hologram, by way of an analogy I would say that I can "hear a different space before my ears", clearly distinguishable from the space of my room, somehow superimposed on it, with things happening in this space
most of the time this space I perceive as much bigger than my room and the front wall, the side wall and the ceiling before me disappear

but I don't have an experience of being transported somewhere else ("You are there"), it is just an experience of "there" being transported "here before me"

anyway Markus, You know, I am just hallucinating, it is all just "creamy soup instead of minnestrone" and horrible, sacrilegious deformations of the original artistic intent of the Picasso-producer
__________________
"high phooey and hystereo" - Yascha Heifetz

Last edited by graaf; 24th February 2010 at 06:45 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2010, 07:07 AM   #550
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by el`Ol View Post
in contrast to other speakers "localization" it is not only the information about the position, it is the feeling that the instrument is really there.
and this is realism, isn't it?

I believe that CFS in Beveridge arrangement I describe in the first post in this thread would be closer to "You are there", unfortunately WAF prevented me from such room arrangement

but oh no el`Ol! You are completely wrong! You just HAVE TO BE WRONG

read "the books", get all "the data" and You will understand that it all just has to be horrendous, undefined and unfocused "cream soup"

and also a sacrilegious act on the sanctity of ART of the sound producer (aka Picasso)

It was artistically supposed to sound flat and artificially and You make it sound "really there".
__________________
"high phooey and hystereo" - Yascha Heifetz

Last edited by graaf; 24th February 2010 at 07:19 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Using a diffuser cone for up-firing speakers tspringer99 Multi-Way 19 23rd July 2014 02:04 AM
Floor Standing Speakers. gurpreetsingh Full Range 11 12th June 2012 06:42 AM
side/ rear firing speakers Good/Bad? mcmahon48 Multi-Way 1 6th February 2009 12:28 PM
How far can the driver of a down-firing sub be from the floor? The Paulinator Subwoofers 11 16th May 2007 08:10 PM
Woofer: side firing pair vs front firing? tcpip Multi-Way 13 9th September 2005 02:13 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:46 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2