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 15th May 2013, 04:38 PM   #21
jReave is offline jReave  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Seriously?

What, do most of you not finish a design and build by 'voicing' your speakers? Which is what? Tweaking the xo so that it sounds right to you and that includes whatever personal variation and/or losses in hearing you may have. Re-measure it and it may not be flat, but somehow it sounds better to your ears.

dangwei, seems like what you are proposing is also no different in theory than the old loudness button: making EQ adjustments to the frequency response to compensate for human hearing perception. In the case of the loudness button, the compensation adjusts for the FR differences perceived at different SPL whereas what you are proposing adjusts for human hearing variation across people and across time. Once you've had a hearing test done and seen that your hearing is far from flat, compensating for it certainly doesn't seem like audio heresy to me.

The only problem I can see is that it's unlikely that your hearing loss is likely to be the same in both ears. So, do you adjust the left speaker for your left ear and the same for the right when in fact each ear hears the sound of both speakers? And I guess having multiple people's ear inaccuracies listening at the same time would create even more problems.

Still, I can't see any reason why it's not worth experimenting with. If you find something that sounds better to your ears then it sounds better to your ears.

Just my opinion of course........
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 04:50 PM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hamburg
Dear all,

The brain compensated for hearing loss a lot. I suspect it also compensates for poor reproduced sound in the ear. This is known by all ear doctors.

When my hearing was fixed (excessive wax in my ears) it was explained to me that my brain would return the high frequencies to a normal level with approximately 1 day for every 4-5 years I had suffered from my high frequencies being blocked.

How you measure and what you measure are important questions, and what you compensate for may or may not help the sound of the speaker. Personally I think Electrostatic speakers sound much better than moving could speakers, even if moving coil loudspeakers may have flatter frequency response, as presented by manufacturers, but maybe they are measuring things in "selective" ways, and don't want to talk about resonance etc...

Best regards

Owen
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 04:58 PM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
mondogenerator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: City Of Villans
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by jReave View Post
Seriously?

What, do most of you not finish a design and build by 'voicing' your speakers? Which is what? Tweaking the xo so that it sounds right to you
yes, seriously. I voice for my ears, NOT the artists...
__________________
Every new piece of knowledge pushes something else out of my brain - Homer.....................Simpson
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 04:59 PM   #24
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Birmingham, UK
I did a proper hearing test and as it happens my hearing is excessively sensitive around 3-6kHz by about 6-8dB and drops off rapidly between 17 and 18k.

If I compensate for this with an equalizer everything sounds very, very wrong and far from natural.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 05:53 PM   #25
jReave is offline jReave  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by mondogenerator View Post
yes, seriously. I voice for my ears, NOT the artists...
Well, that was my point. You voice your speaker so that it sounds right to your ears. And that seems to me to be exactly what the OP was suggesting be done: voice your speakers to compensate for any defects in your hearing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 05:55 PM   #26
dangwei is offline dangwei  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
I think a lot of people misunderstand my point.

My proposal is to create a catalyst for defining what accuracy and precision means in sound reproduction. I am not talking about what sounds "better" or "wrong." That is a case of personal preference which this post is not addressing. Personally I like a pair of old tube amps and my main listening speakers are a pair of Infinity Kappa 8.2s(far from measured precision or accuracy). To me this sounds "right" but this post isn't about what sounds right to me.

To my understanding precision is highly emphasized in sound reproduction design:

Current mainstream sound reproduction: mechanical (voice, instrument etc)-> converted to electronic (recording)-> converted back to mechanical (amp+speaker)-> converted back to electronic via (the ear and brain or machine for measurement)
The emphasis is on precision. Same degree of measured differences focusing on narrowing the differences between various playback scenarios. Aka. What YOU hear is what YOU hear back but 5 people hearing the SAME reproduction hear 5 different things. E.g. You heard the live sound, you hear the recording and they sound the same to YOU. I heard the live sound, I hear the recording and they also sound the same. However, in my version, the 19Khz is lower in volume by 6db and the 20Khz is not even audible for me. This is precision.

But where is the accuracy? If it is sound re-production and not production, then the goal should be to focus on both precision AND accuracy. If people have differences in hearing (I am not talking about mental interpretation. Our brain will "equalize" most sounds to a degree), then that issue MUST be addressed for the purpose of accuracy. Again, our brain can only equalize, adapt, change what it actually receives. If it does not receive that 19Khz signal via the ear, it is synthesizing it and although the perceived difference may be none, it is not conductive to advancement.

Ignoring accuracy (in some people's opinions Completely) because the last .02 dbs of precision is EASIER to measure is just that: easier.

As DIY, our hobby is to address issues that economy and profit-driven models do not need to. Similar to academic but without "institutionalized recognition."

The world is flat when we did not have the mechanical expertise to sail around the world.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 06:06 PM   #27
dangwei is offline dangwei  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by jReave View Post
dangwei, seems like what you are proposing is also no different in theory than the old loudness button: making EQ adjustments to the frequency response to compensate for human hearing perception. In the case of the loudness button, the compensation adjusts for the FR differences perceived at different SPL whereas what you are proposing adjusts for human hearing variation across people and across time. Once you've had a hearing test done and seen that your hearing is far from flat, compensating for it certainly doesn't seem like audio heresy to me.

The only problem I can see is that it's unlikely that your hearing loss is likely to be the same in both ears. So, do you adjust the left speaker for your left ear and the same for the right when in fact each ear hears the sound of both speakers? And I guess having multiple people's ear inaccuracies listening at the same time would create even more problems.

Still, I can't see any reason why it's not worth experimenting with. If you find something that sounds better to your ears then it sounds better to your ears.

Just my opinion of course........
Interesting point! That is something that will go into the drawing board! I did not think of that at all!! 2 ears with varying accuracy. Such an obvious road bump once you point it out. This is why these forums are such good avenues to share ideas and discover solutions.

I do know that some speaker designers already design for Left Right and individual driver placement and time distortion when using digital crossovers. Perhaps this is something I can test as well. Thank you again!
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 06:07 PM   #28
jReave is offline jReave  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Darwin View Post
I did a proper hearing test and as it happens my hearing is excessively sensitive around 3-6kHz by about 6-8dB and drops off rapidly between 17 and 18k.

If I compensate for this with an equalizer everything sounds very, very wrong and far from natural.
Ok, now that is interesting and adds some real experiential data to the discussion. Do you have the same sensitivity in both ears? If not I wouldn't doubt that something is going to sound out of wack if you change the EQ for both ears.

If both ears are the same then saying that it doesn't work for you doesn't necessarily mean that others with different hearing profiles would have the same subjective experience.

Somebody must have looked into this in the area of psycho-acoustics?
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 06:13 PM   #29
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New England
Am I missing something here or won't an old fashioned analog 64 band graphic EQ get the job done? 32 bands/side and you can adjust each side if you ears don't hear the same or, if your room is not symetrical.
__________________
"It's all about the music!"
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 06:18 PM   #30
dangwei is offline dangwei  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Are you sure you're talking about a proper hearing test and not equal-loudness contours?



Do you see the white triangle?

Click the image to open in full size.

Although you know that there really is no white triangle, you still see it. Your conscious mind can't overrule subconscious processes.
This is a bit subjective/objective and semantic though. If I answer your question following the accepted scientific definition of shapes and color, then of course there is no white triangle and I do not see it! How can I see something that isn't there. What I see may be variations in color that resembles the definition of a white triangle aka an illusion. But does my brain know the difference between the 2 before logic processors are fired? I don't know.

For those reading: How this applies to our topic is then: does our mind differentiate illusion from reality. This question is the reason why I am proposing to experiment with the speaker and for others to try as well!
  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
loudspeaker enclosure design davidel94 Multi-Way 49 11th November 2012 10:05 AM
speaker design for high freq. hearing loss sprinter Multi-Way 21 16th February 2011 07:48 AM
Measuring speaker response to design XO on future projects gabdx Multi-Way 39 29th April 2010 06:09 PM
which loudspeaker design? maghen Multi-Way 128 2nd October 2009 09:10 PM
Confused About Speaker Design and Hearing Loss LHMAudio Full Range 16 4th January 2008 10:41 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:17 PM.


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