Hi! I have not much experience with DSP-s yet, so i ask. As we know, on same dB levels low frequencies are less audible than high frequencies. Can this be solved with pragrammable DSP so that i adjust the DSP graph so that on low frequencies the amplifier would give more power to driver, than on high frequencies? Is this an average DSP's standard feature or only some "high-tech" DSP-s could handle that?
Are there any other options than DSP to handle this phenomen?
Are there any other options than DSP to handle this phenomen?
Looks like you are talking about something call 'Loudness Compensation,' which is used to adjust EQ curves at low volume levels according to Fletcher-Munson curves?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour
https://www.pradeepd.com/research/loudness-compensation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour
https://www.pradeepd.com/research/loudness-compensation
A well-designed loudness compensation only corrects for the difference between the equal loudness contours at the playback volume and the mastering or recording volume. Trying to equalize the complete equal loudness contour is possible, but would lead to a very weird sound: excessive bass and high treble, very little midrange.
An AES paper can be downloaded from the second link in #2. It includes a number of possibly interesting references on the subject.
Here is a direct link to the download version: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wIKoYgbK7qtPKxPT2Q8AyQ6MGuSQTLGw/view
Here is a direct link to the download version: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wIKoYgbK7qtPKxPT2Q8AyQ6MGuSQTLGw/view
It's done on Jriver when you engage 'loudness' parameter, but as said in the manual it is an approximation only ( and work only if you use inner volume control ( obviously) and if your loudspeakers are calibrated to 83dbspl at listening point- it is explained into the manual too).
Also, the Fletcher-Munson curve changes shape with spl so a dynamic EQ would be required.
For $3,000 I think you get a little more than that. Reason I know is because I took my very elderly mom to have her hearing checked and hearing aids readjusted. Talked at length with the audiologist about technical features of different classes of hearing aids. Thought it pretty impressive how much real time DSP they can do with such tiny batteries.
While it is true about the improvement of hearing aids in general, there really is only so much that they can do. On top of that, no one out seems to have gone a certain level of quality. Don't confuse certain gadgetry with improvement. It may not always be so. I had to start using hearing just a bit ago and am generally disappointed after $6,000 out of MY pocket. heard all kinds of hype, but no, in the end each case is different. It gets a lot more complicated than you might expect, and unfortunately, the 'audiologists' that I have talked to pretty much read from the book, and sound like they know something, but in reality, I wouldn't have bothered in the first place. Rant over.
This is so important. The Yamaha HT receivers have a well sorted loudness control, but I have gone away from much to do with HT now. These days, I am having to manually engage the bass knob on my 2.1 from PC speakers for long hours of nighttime listening while my wife studies beside me. On a system that plays pretty balanced at daytime volumes, the bass would be inaudible at nighttime levels and the bass needs lifting
What I have also found is that having a small near field type nighttime sound system is even worse. Firstly, the bass is inaudible unless some loudness measures are used and secondly, there needs to be enough power behind the bass so that the loudness can actually do something
But I think not many people suffer from this as looking at what is perceived to be normal bass sounds is not really that much of bass in it. For the last year or so, I have been observing people who use the higher frequency artefacts by produced with bass instruments like the bass guitar and regular bass amps to scrutinise the sound of 'bass'. I can't get my head around this as the music that I listen to contains actual bass frequencies as the main event in the song
This need for the loudness compensation is only for the very few like us who actually choose songs for actual basslines in the actual 'bass' frequencies. I don't think there will be much offered in the way of active loudness compensation products commercially
What I have also found is that having a small near field type nighttime sound system is even worse. Firstly, the bass is inaudible unless some loudness measures are used and secondly, there needs to be enough power behind the bass so that the loudness can actually do something
But I think not many people suffer from this as looking at what is perceived to be normal bass sounds is not really that much of bass in it. For the last year or so, I have been observing people who use the higher frequency artefacts by produced with bass instruments like the bass guitar and regular bass amps to scrutinise the sound of 'bass'. I can't get my head around this as the music that I listen to contains actual bass frequencies as the main event in the song
This need for the loudness compensation is only for the very few like us who actually choose songs for actual basslines in the actual 'bass' frequencies. I don't think there will be much offered in the way of active loudness compensation products commercially
Lots of people have read Self, Cordell, Ott, Art of Electronics, etc. What other essentials would you care to add to the list?
'Flat' is a fine reference point. Then every other consideration must be accounted for, including your own hearing in each ear. Assuming that your hearing is fine, there is still so much of a move away from the original flat, as it should be to finally get to the audio result that is best for you, ad infinitum.
I think the answers to minenohh questions completely derailed to "loudness", when he was talking about DSP.
IMHO he referred to how low frequencies were less audible than high frequencies, which is a fact and partly (and badly) solved by loudness controls. Fletcher Munson were from another time, where bass and treble controls were used to compensate deficiencies in the electronics and the speakers. Their loudness control sounds artificial if compared to the original recorded sources: LPs, tapes, cassettes, CDs, etc.)
As by chance I was an audio engineer for more than 50 years, I happened to listen to the original sources in the studio, the instruments and the singers. So we tried to put on tape something that approached the original live sound.
And that was not something that you could achieve with loudness control, or with analog equalizers, certainly not adjusting bass or treble.
So I believe minenohh is asking is how to use DSP to help the speakers reach the low frequencies which most speakers deny us, because they are hard to reproduce.
DSP eq is what we should be discussing, not loudness.
IMHO he referred to how low frequencies were less audible than high frequencies, which is a fact and partly (and badly) solved by loudness controls. Fletcher Munson were from another time, where bass and treble controls were used to compensate deficiencies in the electronics and the speakers. Their loudness control sounds artificial if compared to the original recorded sources: LPs, tapes, cassettes, CDs, etc.)
As by chance I was an audio engineer for more than 50 years, I happened to listen to the original sources in the studio, the instruments and the singers. So we tried to put on tape something that approached the original live sound.
And that was not something that you could achieve with loudness control, or with analog equalizers, certainly not adjusting bass or treble.
So I believe minenohh is asking is how to use DSP to help the speakers reach the low frequencies which most speakers deny us, because they are hard to reproduce.
DSP eq is what we should be discussing, not loudness.
Agree with you, always seek "natural" sound, meaning as close to original.
By the same token I hate Loudness "compensation" with a passion.
Meaning: does the speaker lack Bass because of unavoidable Technical imperfections?: fair game to be corrected.
Do I want to compensate my own frequency sensitivity variation at different levels? .... I find that cheating and misleading and sound is annoyingly artificial.
At least once a Year I visit our own opera house: Teatro Colón, for some ear "NIST calibration" equivalent, in nthe form of some Opera or Symphonic Orchestra listening.
I sit there, close my eyes and notice NO "Audio System" can even get close to the real thing. Period.
By the same token I hate Loudness "compensation" with a passion.
Meaning: does the speaker lack Bass because of unavoidable Technical imperfections?: fair game to be corrected.
Do I want to compensate my own frequency sensitivity variation at different levels? .... I find that cheating and misleading and sound is annoyingly artificial.
At least once a Year I visit our own opera house: Teatro Colón, for some ear "NIST calibration" equivalent, in nthe form of some Opera or Symphonic Orchestra listening.
I sit there, close my eyes and notice NO "Audio System" can even get close to the real thing. Period.
Except maybe to satisfy one's curiocity, it makes no sense at all to try and equalize out one's equal loudness contours.
It is not what loudness controls are meant for, those only attempt to correct for differences between the equal loudness contours at different levels.
It doesn't make sense no matter how you implement it.
After many years of working in high end audio sales, designing and building speakers, amps, turntables, tonearms and even full range drivers, I have come to some conclusions that I never really wanted to admit. Speakers are designed and voiced for a flat response through a microphone that has a different response curve than the human ear at a varying levels by manufacturers in varying room dimensions and some level of frequency adjustment is needed for each specific room and listening level.
For many years I religiously adhered to "The absolute sound" mantra of nothing added for the purest recreation. This led to weak sounding systems or systems that only started to sound right when cranking at levels that people do not like to listen at. I wasted so much time and now that I have gotten over it I have fully active speakers that are tweeked for my room and listening level.
On another note I have not heard many DSP systems that have great sound but the one that really stunned me had active head tracking and was ambisonic.
For many years I religiously adhered to "The absolute sound" mantra of nothing added for the purest recreation. This led to weak sounding systems or systems that only started to sound right when cranking at levels that people do not like to listen at. I wasted so much time and now that I have gotten over it I have fully active speakers that are tweeked for my room and listening level.
On another note I have not heard many DSP systems that have great sound but the one that really stunned me had active head tracking and was ambisonic.
By any chance, is it the one that cost $23,000? I read about an amazingly brilliant idea in maybe Stereophile some time back. Head tracking was involved.
https://www.theoretica.us/bacch4mac/
this was through a set of Sanders electrostats and the RME digital interface.
this was through a set of Sanders electrostats and the RME digital interface.