no, either i liked what i heard or i don't.....
building tube amps, i keep quiet during listening tests
and let those auditioning give their comments,
if they liked what they heard, i am happy for them,
if they did not, i try to get their feedbacks
and maybe try to do better next time....
i never try to inject my own comments,
even if they ask me, i will tell them "you decide, after all you are the one going to live with it."
Dave,
If you could get some university lab that can do laser inferometry, you would be able to see how the dashes are managing the cone resonances. I would love to see it. We know it works, we know about what it is doing, but pictures would be very informative. Sounds like a great project for some physics masters student.
Can cone resonances ( 100% distortion) cause changes in "soundstage"? Why not. If soundstage is abut interaction between the speaker system and the environment, it seems reasonable that excessive distortion would cause additional muddying of the sound as it bounces around on it's way to you.
My concepts on this are mostly by how my room has responded to treatments. I went from a very confused and ill-defined soundstage to very precise width and depth imaging that seems larger than the room.
So, my view is that "soundstage is easily hurt by both speaker problems and room problems. Either that or it is all hooie made up by magazine editors.
If you could get some university lab that can do laser inferometry, you would be able to see how the dashes are managing the cone resonances. I would love to see it. We know it works, we know about what it is doing, but pictures would be very informative. Sounds like a great project for some physics masters student.
Can cone resonances ( 100% distortion) cause changes in "soundstage"? Why not. If soundstage is abut interaction between the speaker system and the environment, it seems reasonable that excessive distortion would cause additional muddying of the sound as it bounces around on it's way to you.
My concepts on this are mostly by how my room has responded to treatments. I went from a very confused and ill-defined soundstage to very precise width and depth imaging that seems larger than the room.
So, my view is that "soundstage is easily hurt by both speaker problems and room problems. Either that or it is all hooie made up by magazine editors.
Indeed. But i think that there may be a good chance that what we want to look at id how the air is effected by the cone. For this something like the Microflown might be the tool. This, i understand, is the tool used to see Geddes' HOMs.
dave
Let's not bring flight's of fancy into the discussion with that EnABL crap please. Undocumented with zero data to show it does anything. That's why there are two threads devoted to it. One for actual technical discussion (which showed nothing measurable) and the other for the well......"I heard this" mumbo jumbo.
To me soundstage is the speakers ability to project a 3D area of sound and is determined by the position, spacing and directivity of the speakers and of course how the music was recorded and mixed. Cables, power cords and similar components cannot affect the soundstage contrary to some reviewers that falsely say otherwise..
So far, people are basically saying that sound stage means a component sounds good.
However, how does one qualify good?
As far as speakers go, they can of course sound different in different environments. so, how can an ambiguous term like sounds stage be of any use for them?
However, how does one qualify good?
As far as speakers go, they can of course sound different in different environments. so, how can an ambiguous term like sounds stage be of any use for them?
"Good" means closer to the real thing - with your back turned or yourself just outside the door you're nearer to being fooled ...
Joe, I don't think that all we have said is that it sounds good!! What we have said is that if the soundstage is good you can hear depth and width to the soundfield. Too me a good sound stage means that the sound extends wider than the physical placement of the speakers, and that there are also queues for height and depth (front to back) It really does mean 3D sound.
This depends as much on the recording as the playback environment. Some speakers manage this only if you have your position very pinpoint, others give the effect even if you move around somewhat. Why this is I don't know.
Soundstage is a completely subjective quality in that it is an illusion, and every single person will no doubt perceive it differently because of their unique ear/brain interface. Your brain is being fooled into hearing something that isn't actually there. How can there ever be an objective measurement of that, it is completely personal for each and every individual!
Tony.
This depends as much on the recording as the playback environment. Some speakers manage this only if you have your position very pinpoint, others give the effect even if you move around somewhat. Why this is I don't know.
Soundstage is a completely subjective quality in that it is an illusion, and every single person will no doubt perceive it differently because of their unique ear/brain interface. Your brain is being fooled into hearing something that isn't actually there. How can there ever be an objective measurement of that, it is completely personal for each and every individual!
Tony.
Even though an illusion, the interesting thing is that if a system is good enough to be thoroughly convincing in the primary listening space, then it is also so much further afield. As an example, it still sounds the "real deal" at the other end of the house, or if you go outside ...
That is certainly not the case around here. Sure the data is undocumented and not robust enuff to convince someone with a closed mind but there us a decided audible improvement.
The very clue i use to quickly determine the EnABLed speaker from the stock one in a blind test.
dave
Well, if it's a recording of appalling musicians, that's what you'll get! But it should still sound like real instruments, just having a bad day of it ... 😉.
If the recording label was truly incompetent, that should be audible. A very recently recorded violin duo, playing classical snippets, the studio couldn't be bothered warming up the recording chain properly before each take, and this stood out very badly - the quality change from one track to the next was the worst I've ever heard ...
"Closed mind" in your opinion means some one who doesn't fall for subjective say so but requires proof which you just admitted does not exist. Thanks.
But of course you have no hard data of said blind testing so once again, subjective "I heard this" Thanks again.
Only possible depending on the recording.
This comes back to the argument of reproduction or choosing to be another step in the process and intentionally changing the signal to suit your preferences. An argument that will not be won as both sides are correct. You are never going to be fooled by Sgt. Pepper, but I almost was with a master half-track of a single upright bass. Almost.
Please kids,
Nothing about changing the mass distribution or coatings to change the modulus of a cone violates any law of physics.
If one is in business to make an honest buck, one may choose to market different approaches. Measurable results to those who can accept them, a bit of audiophile magic for those who prefer to believe in them. The target market seems to be the "full range & 12-Watt tube club", so the choice of audiophile mysticism may be the best approach from a business standpoint. Measured response showing the absence of breakup, hence almost no real music treble, would let the cat out of the bag on full range drivers so that would not be a good business decision.
My next woofer may be a ScanSpeak with the slit cone. It attacks the same problem with a different solution.
PS: As I have heard both Planet 10 prepped FOSTEX and the originals, rest assured you don't need any blind testing: Intolerable harshness vs. just needing a tweeter. Differences in response and distortion due to breakup are easily measured by any speaker builder. I did.
Many fail to understand is this is true of all hearing. The advantage of reality is access to visual confirmation.
Last edited:
Exactly, As I said, soundstage is a completely ambiguous term..
Soundstage has crept into audio as a catch all phrase for everything to the point of eliminating any meaningful measurements of components..
Now all on has to do is say it has great sound stage for ad copy and reviews .
Everyone says their/that product " will increase sound stage" without one word of explanation about why is is better.
Last edited:
The fact that the ad men have grabbed the term doesn't negate its existence.
For me it one of the most important parts of audio playback. Soundstage is the ability of the system to present a believable 3D space , as has been already mentioned. Width, depth and height. The best of system can give a feeling of 3 dimensions even to individual instruments and voices.
How you measure that, tho, I have no idea.
For me it one of the most important parts of audio playback. Soundstage is the ability of the system to present a believable 3D space , as has been already mentioned. Width, depth and height. The best of system can give a feeling of 3 dimensions even to individual instruments and voices.
How you measure that, tho, I have no idea.
I used to think of it as hokum, or at least mostly absent in pop-rock music.
(IMO the size and clarity of a soundstage varies a lot, depending on the music and maybe more so the recording technique (probably best with a single mic)
But after hearing the occasional system that generates a good soundstage, it's moved from off my radar, onto my criteria
IMO, Good soundstage seems to follow on from some unambiguous qualities:
- ideally, speaker directivity that's consistent not just at crossovers, but over many octaves, especially in the bass and midrange
- deep bass can help ensure less loss of recording space acoustics, eg a large room, and or an echoey space like a church
- closer matching of left and right: speakers - and room acoustics
- a listening room that's somewhat live
- a listening position equidistant and with equal angles to the speakers
- speakers preferably well away from walls
I have only heard Linkwitz' Orions, but think his LX521 could be the best
Of course, being relaxed and tuned in 🙂
My 10 shekels
(IMO the size and clarity of a soundstage varies a lot, depending on the music and maybe more so the recording technique (probably best with a single mic)
But after hearing the occasional system that generates a good soundstage, it's moved from off my radar, onto my criteria
IMO, Good soundstage seems to follow on from some unambiguous qualities:
- ideally, speaker directivity that's consistent not just at crossovers, but over many octaves, especially in the bass and midrange
- deep bass can help ensure less loss of recording space acoustics, eg a large room, and or an echoey space like a church
- closer matching of left and right: speakers - and room acoustics
- a listening room that's somewhat live
- a listening position equidistant and with equal angles to the speakers
- speakers preferably well away from walls
I have only heard Linkwitz' Orions, but think his LX521 could be the best
Of course, being relaxed and tuned in 🙂
My 10 shekels
Last edited:
The fact that the ad men have grabbed the term doesn't negate its existence.
For me it one of the most important parts of audio playback. Soundstage is the ability of the system to present a believable 3D space , as has been already mentioned. Width, depth and hight. The best of system can give a feeling of 3 dimensions even to individual instruments and voices.
How you measure that, tho, I have no idea.
We all want audio to reproduce reality as close as possible.
However like you asked, how do you measure it/get there? This is rarely discussed any more.
Most here know how to get good audio, but how can the masses obtain something if they have no idea how to obtain it?
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.