I hope you aren't too upset but I did find that banning notice funny and at the same time sad.
The 3rd edition of Toole's book has a more balanced viewpoint that acknowledges more clearly that there is not just one 'right' way and that sometimes side reflections aren't always an improvement. But this tends to get glossed over in preference for the earlier papers where the wording was less balanced. Nothing like a bit of selection bias when picking your quotes
I know what you're saying, what Toole has written has never been the problem for me, in fact, it was very helpful to say the least. But the (almost) common interpretation of his words on ASR is a problem, at least for me (lol). I had to laugh about that notice too, but it does show that "the owner" is not as professional as he claims to be every chance he gets. I got out of ASR what I wanted, when I had a moment of attention from Toole and could ask him the same question I asked Dr. Earl Geddes.
That was enough for me, I still read stuff there from other posters that I do respect.
That was enough for me, I still read stuff there from other posters that I do respect.
Probably a mix of passing through critical distance and something with ER being lessened.
Yes, most likely multiple things combined. Lucky event that helped me to realize there is such and event, which led to investigate it and so on now almost year later with new waveguides and otherwise developed system the transition is not as clear anymore, but is still there, perhaps one or more issues that attributed are now fixed while some still remain. Yet to test with narrower / wider coverage speakers.
now almost year later with new waveguides and otherwise developed system the transition is not as clear anymore, but is still there, perhaps one or more issues that attributed are now fixed while some still remain. Yet to test with narrower / wider coverage speakers.
They kicked you out Ronald? When did it happened?
This doesn't surprise me though, despite some great contributors there, always was that weird feeling to me about the ambiance in ASR.
I will finally agree with N.Pass when he said it is all about 'an audience' and his in here being way more funny than at ASR...
This doesn't surprise me though, despite some great contributors there, always was that weird feeling to me about the ambiance in ASR.
I will finally agree with N.Pass when he said it is all about 'an audience' and his in here being way more funny than at ASR...
As I said, I never did like the discussions as nothing is open for debate if you like to think out of the box etc. And I have to say, I do like to think out of the box.
Not my scene and I don't regret it happened. It didn't get me much and I can still read it and browse from time to time, as I do like to read up on the new Genelecs to see what's up etc. It probably is best I don't get caught up in yet another discussion about perception of phase and other twinky stuff.
Not my scene and I don't regret it happened. It didn't get me much and I can still read it and browse from time to time, as I do like to read up on the new Genelecs to see what's up etc. It probably is best I don't get caught up in yet another discussion about perception of phase and other twinky stuff.
Thank you wesayso and tmuikku.
Sadly... or not, the best "sounds" I have heard, (or should I say, the best sound my "ears" have heard) is when I took a pair of very average bookshelf speakers out side and played mp3 youtube music, there was so much more clarity to the music, it was great. However, if I take the same setup back inside, and listen.... not to the speakers, but to the singer, and if the singer is...... hmmm how to word this, if the singer is operating from within a higher state of consciousness, some might call it the flow state, but it's probably beyond, or maybe I could say they are connected to something greater/beyond themselves, well then I can get goose bumps for a few seconds at a time. Tmuikku you alluded to this too. So why am I (we) futzing on an audio forum when we could be listening to the Intent of the singer/music buzzing us inside..... lol
Sadly... or not, the best "sounds" I have heard, (or should I say, the best sound my "ears" have heard) is when I took a pair of very average bookshelf speakers out side and played mp3 youtube music, there was so much more clarity to the music, it was great. However, if I take the same setup back inside, and listen.... not to the speakers, but to the singer, and if the singer is...... hmmm how to word this, if the singer is operating from within a higher state of consciousness, some might call it the flow state, but it's probably beyond, or maybe I could say they are connected to something greater/beyond themselves, well then I can get goose bumps for a few seconds at a time. Tmuikku you alluded to this too. So why am I (we) futzing on an audio forum when we could be listening to the Intent of the singer/music buzzing us inside..... lol
Duke has a (2021) write up on a forum on one of his speakers and he goes into some of David Griesinger ideas and how he applies them to his speaker.
https://www.whatsbestforum.com/thre...n-215-design-notes-more-teaser-content.32778/
Also... if you have never seen a speaker with 3 modes of operation, Narrow, Wide and Omni, with cardioid bass, down firing woofer, a coaxial where the tweeter is enabled for Narrow and disabled for Wide with the help of a Planar Magnetic tweeter, and a rear firing wideband all in one cabinet..... lol
(Oh and the designer AJ got banned from ASR too for clashing with the "Boss" ;-) )
https://soundstageglobal.com/index....most-ambitious-loudspeaker-system-at-the-show
https://www.whatsbestforum.com/thre...n-215-design-notes-more-teaser-content.32778/
Also... if you have never seen a speaker with 3 modes of operation, Narrow, Wide and Omni, with cardioid bass, down firing woofer, a coaxial where the tweeter is enabled for Narrow and disabled for Wide with the help of a Planar Magnetic tweeter, and a rear firing wideband all in one cabinet..... lol
(Oh and the designer AJ got banned from ASR too for clashing with the "Boss" ;-) )
https://soundstageglobal.com/index....most-ambitious-loudspeaker-system-at-the-show
I have started this project to get to that part: the listening, goosebumps, chills down the spine. I started with putting a reasonable audio system in my car, which I upgraded until I got something I could not believe. It was then that I wanted to have at least a similar experience at home, which started this journey.
But listening can have many moods, this hobby could kill the listening to the actual singer for you, focussing on details and technical parameters until you drop.
It shouldn't be like that, but it often is. Unless you get to a point where the music simply takes over, nothing you can do about it. Hours fly by listening, going up in the songs, getting lost really. Its that part that has been the motivator for me. These days I get to spend way less time listening, and I miss it, regret that I don't have more time spend just floating away with the songs...
I've seen another post from Duke recently where he connected David Griesinger to the lectures of Toole, Linkwitz, Klippel and Geddes. It's amazing to me how many in this hobby have never heard of Mr. Griesinger. On ASR as well as here they all know Toole and Olive, but many have never heard of Griesinger.
I've been "promoting" his lectures any way I can, because he's the one that connects the dots for me playing audio, stereo to be precise, in a room. Everything is different, as soon as you put it in the room. But make them work together, that's where the DIY hobby can make the difference.
Been there on FB in a group called Loudspeaker Pad something. They had their guru and mentor, who was coming up with very questionable conclusions about sound, and when I tried to ask how he got to those conclusions, I faced a barrage of offended members, and next thing I saw, was I got banned.
Happened on a photography group too, when a mod copied my post, and then erased mine, to claim my post as his own. I got the boot when I asked why would he do such a thing!
Lots of dogma out there, not just in audio!
ok, sorry for the rant…..
Found it, Griesinger paper/lecture "The audibility of direct sound as a key to
measuring the clarity of speech and music" describes quite accurately what I've noticed. Paper says it is about direct to reflected sound, while strong early reflections make most contribution to it. Rather easily calculated if needed, and is due to what planet10 described as coherence on another thread recently.
"
When the D/R increases just a little bit, suddenly the sound image can
become clear, and the reverberation is perceived as both louder and more surrounding the
listener. In demonstrating this effect to audiences of 50 to 100 people I have found that many –
but by no means all – listeners can easily perceive the change from frontal to enveloping. It may
take a bit of learning to perceive this effect, but it is quite real."
Quite a while ago I raved about a JRiver effect, called "Surround Field" (around 2015). It was doing something that I liked for perception. The guys at JRiver would not tell me what it did specifically. So I decided to research that effect and found it was a slight boost (depending on the level of effect chosen, I used Medium Enhancement) of the side channel vs the phantom center sum. A bit later I changed it to more of an "S" curve, based on a hint in the "Fixing the Phantom Center" thread.
I'll see if I have kept the old paper that was linked on that specific (LoCo) website (wayback machine did not keep a copy). Anyway, the theory was: in a room + speakers, the bass frequencies loose width in imaging as perceived when compared to the higher frequencies. The solution? Apply an "S-curve" in a mid-side equalizer. That was the start of a long series of experiments (I was already using mid/side EQ, but still with a simpler boost of the side channels). The paper that this website used to link to is a Blumlein Shuffler approach: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Shuffler.pdf and the accompanying http://www.sengpielaudio.com/FrequenzabhHoerereignisrichtung.pdf and http://www.audiosignal.co.uk/Resources/Stereo_shuffling_A4.pdf
I've talked about and shown my mid/side EQ work on several occasions (*). For a little more in depth info on that "enhancement" one only needs to look at another paper by Griesinger, namely this one here: http://www.davidgriesinger.com/spatialization_and_loc.doc which confirms the above findings.
Just to hint at another random piece of information in the huge library that is available on Dr. Griesinger's site. One day I really should start to make an off-line copy of that site (lol).
(*) = which for me has grown into a much more elaborate EQ scheme over the years, but still largely targeting the same issues as I perceived them.
Just a bit of background info of where I got my inspiration, most of it was posted in this thread at one time or another.
I'll see if I have kept the old paper that was linked on that specific (LoCo) website (wayback machine did not keep a copy). Anyway, the theory was: in a room + speakers, the bass frequencies loose width in imaging as perceived when compared to the higher frequencies. The solution? Apply an "S-curve" in a mid-side equalizer. That was the start of a long series of experiments (I was already using mid/side EQ, but still with a simpler boost of the side channels). The paper that this website used to link to is a Blumlein Shuffler approach: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Shuffler.pdf and the accompanying http://www.sengpielaudio.com/FrequenzabhHoerereignisrichtung.pdf and http://www.audiosignal.co.uk/Resources/Stereo_shuffling_A4.pdf
I've talked about and shown my mid/side EQ work on several occasions (*). For a little more in depth info on that "enhancement" one only needs to look at another paper by Griesinger, namely this one here: http://www.davidgriesinger.com/spatialization_and_loc.doc which confirms the above findings.
Just to hint at another random piece of information in the huge library that is available on Dr. Griesinger's site. One day I really should start to make an off-line copy of that site (lol).
(*) = which for me has grown into a much more elaborate EQ scheme over the years, but still largely targeting the same issues as I perceived them.
Just a bit of background info of where I got my inspiration, most of it was posted in this thread at one time or another.
So glad I re-read that paper by Dr. Griesinger. As you all know by now I've been running mid-side processing since about 2015. Started with that relatively simple "Surround Field" implementation and got more refined trough the years. But in the paper from Griesinger I was reminded how a specific range of bass could influence the feel of envelopment. I've always had that in the past but... when changing to the 10F drivers, I rolled off the arrays at about 160-200 Hz which cuts short what I used to have. So, some tweaks were needed. Mid-side EQ was added to the subwoofers .
First song I played: "Infected Mushroom - Shakawkaw"
Boom! Instead of the about 150 degree "scenery" I got stuck with, it now was back at full envelopment! All this time I thought I had my ambience speakers setup inadequately. It turns out I had forgotten how to use the mid-side on the mains properly.
I reduced the 'mid' energy of the subs a bit and added the energy to the 'sides' with Voxengo's MSED. Next I added a couple of mid-side tweaks to the Sub specific EQ, tapering off at 50 Hz so that at 30 Hz, it's back to normal again.
As always, a bit more tweaking may be necessary, will do so over time. Did not have long to play with this stuff, my Son took over the listening session and seemed to really enjoy himself. Even way at the side behind my PC, I got the goosebumps in spades.
P.S. Note to @tmuikku I get to sit on my couch and still be getting great imaging, but with this tweak also the feel of envelopment. Have the cake and eat it, working quite well from about 2.7 to 3.5 meters distance to speakers. Sitting up-right is the bingo spot, relaxing into the couch is a bit more bass heavy.
The arrays put me in the nearfield with its first reflections absorbed.
.First song I played: "Infected Mushroom - Shakawkaw"
Boom! Instead of the about 150 degree "scenery" I got stuck with, it now was back at full envelopment! All this time I thought I had my ambience speakers setup inadequately. It turns out I had forgotten how to use the mid-side on the mains properly.
I reduced the 'mid' energy of the subs a bit and added the energy to the 'sides' with Voxengo's MSED. Next I added a couple of mid-side tweaks to the Sub specific EQ, tapering off at 50 Hz so that at 30 Hz, it's back to normal again.
As always, a bit more tweaking may be necessary, will do so over time. Did not have long to play with this stuff, my Son took over the listening session and seemed to really enjoy himself
. Even way at the side behind my PC, I got the goosebumps in spades.P.S. Note to @tmuikku I get to sit on my couch and still be getting great imaging, but with this tweak also the feel of envelopment. Have the cake and eat it, working quite well from about 2.7 to 3.5 meters distance to speakers. Sitting up-right is the bingo spot, relaxing into the couch is a bit more bass heavy.
The arrays put me in the nearfield with its first reflections absorbed.
Last edited:
To quote the valid part out of Dr. Griesinger's paper:
Griesinger mentions a boost of 4 dB in this paper, I'm at a careful 2.3 dB as I remembered (neh, I looked it up) that being the boost of the side channels in "Surround Field - Medium Enhancement", the JRiver effect. I guess I could play with it a little.
Dr. David Griesinger - Spaciousness and Localization in Listening Rooms said:
Griesinger mentions a boost of 4 dB in this paper, I'm at a careful 2.3 dB as I remembered (neh, I looked it up
) that being the boost of the side channels in "Surround Field - Medium Enhancement", the JRiver effect. I guess I could play with it a little.
I've played a lot of songs until the rest of the family came home again. Didn't get to listen to the above song yet, as I was trying to listen to my most familiar test songs again to "judge" the latest tweak I made. The one where the side energy gets bumped up (and mid sum down) below 400 Hz.
Actually I should say: restored, as before I started using the 10F I've always had it like that. At least by some amount, but I do realize I've never adjusted the sub channels accordingly. I've played with the levels a bit but nothing seriously. Somewhere between 2 and 3 dB. Still re-adjusting to what I hear and I have to say I like it very much! In some ways it feels like coming home, as it does sound somewhat familiar. With a distinct difference, there is more depth to the sound, as when the recording has it, voices tend to appear closer. Closer than I've ever had with the Vifa drivers.
I definitely like it, I doubt I would have thought about this tweak if I had not re-read that paper from Griesinger. It is doing what it is supposed to do.
I guess now I owe it to myself to really check imaging of pan potted sounds at differing frequencies to see if it's somewhat in-line with the approximation of the "S-curve" I have dialed in. It gets complicated when mixed with the cross talk stuff.
What this does is render spaces like crazy. That has been what's missing for a while. It worked "somewhat" but I did realize I had lost something on the way. The hardest thing is to be able to keep track of the tweaks and it's effect on perception. As some small tweaks go a long way. Glad it happened like this. I was going crazy to re-adjust the Ambience back drop to find it and all along, it was missing due to that mid/side tweak I had overlooked.
Edit: I almost forgot, the chills down the spine and goosebumps could not be avoided
.
Last edited:
" I guess now i owe it to myself to really check imaging of pan potted sounds at different frequencies to see if it's somewhat in- line with the approximation of the 'S curve' i have dialed in. "
Hmm. Sound familiar to me.
It should be doable to perform something like that with a project on a DAW: sinus played at different frequency with different pan settings to assess things, before implementing anti Xtalk. And after.
But it won't tell you if and how it affect 'true' stereo recordings. But it's another mater... maybe next step?
Hmm. Sound familiar to me.
It should be doable to perform something like that with a project on a DAW: sinus played at different frequency with different pan settings to assess things, before implementing anti Xtalk. And after.
But it won't tell you if and how it affect 'true' stereo recordings. But it's another mater... maybe next step?
Well to be honest, I was thinking of something more simple (for a start at least). I used to have a couple of test CD's where there was a person that would call out the position he was in a room like: front left, back left etc. I believe it was from one of the Car Audio competitions out there (could be from the European EMMA). I've used that in my car long ago to get an idea of stage size and placement etc. I never entered competitions, as that wasn't my cup of tea. I just wanted to do the music justice and enjoy the songs.
Anyway, I could use such a recording and simply bandpass it to test for positioning. I guess you won't hear much below 400 Hz with spoken word but hey, I could try. Point is, I need to listen where sounds panned far left or far right end up (perceptually) if all they have is frequencies below say 700 Hz and also from 700 to 2 KHz and 3 KHz and above. Just to see if they end up at somewhat similar spots. I expect it will not be as easy to point at sine waves consisting of single frequencies. Something with a start, a sort of transient or impulse like signal would be easier for placement tests. But I could try both.
Anyway, I could use such a recording and simply bandpass it to test for positioning. I guess you won't hear much below 400 Hz with spoken word but hey, I could try. Point is, I need to listen where sounds panned far left or far right end up (perceptually) if all they have is frequencies below say 700 Hz and also from 700 to 2 KHz and 3 KHz and above. Just to see if they end up at somewhat similar spots. I expect it will not be as easy to point at sine waves consisting of single frequencies. Something with a start, a sort of transient or impulse like signal would be easier for placement tests. But I could try both.
If you already have access to some material it makes sense to use it.
The kind of cd you describe is what we used to characterise the different renderings (and flaws) of mic couples ( coincidents -xy,ms- spaced (AB) or hybrids ( Nos, ortf,...)): someone saying a text moving along different lines ( to assess depth) with signals played when angles of interest within SRA where reached.
Bandpassing the signal is good idea. Below 400hz on voice you'll loose intelegibility but there must still be some signal.
However to process all this simply, you would need a DAW in my view ( it'll enable fast and direct comparison through the use of some switchs real time ( mute, solo).
I'm not sure you need transients in signal though :we demoed haas effect with relatively static pad sounds to students so i don't believe transients are mandatory.
The kind of cd you describe is what we used to characterise the different renderings (and flaws) of mic couples ( coincidents -xy,ms- spaced (AB) or hybrids ( Nos, ortf,...)): someone saying a text moving along different lines ( to assess depth) with signals played when angles of interest within SRA where reached.
Bandpassing the signal is good idea. Below 400hz on voice you'll loose intelegibility but there must still be some signal.
However to process all this simply, you would need a DAW in my view ( it'll enable fast and direct comparison through the use of some switchs real time ( mute, solo).
I'm not sure you need transients in signal though :we demoed haas effect with relatively static pad sounds to students so i don't believe transients are mandatory.