Yes, I think the penchant for simplicity is overworked. I cringe a bit when showing some designs to people who have preconceived notions of what complexity supposedly sounds like, as they are immediately prejudiced against something that looks complicated. This along with misleading notions like dogs chasing their tails interferes with the evaluation.
Certainly one wants no more parts in a device than are needed. And no less than are needed.
May-be because it is a miracle. To can transform an electric signal in music with some pieces of paper glued together.Rather interesting that everyone is talking about what the speakers sound like - rather than how good the speakers are at getting out of the way,.
Tt is not real science, it is sport.
Last edited:
People who understand even the basics of science do not apply it blindly. People who know enough to be dangerous do though. But to be scientific requires evidence. To be a homeopathic tuner only requires belief and wibble.
Well, those who constantly chase lower and lower numbers in THD, with no real way of correlating that with what they hear, are dangerously close to doing that, IMO.
As an alternative "way", one learns how to "stress test" audio systems with recording playback, such that they throw up very obvious distortion artifacts - these bits of "wrongness" are used to diagnose weaknesses in the overall system, which are then addressed. As progress is made, less and less problems can be provoked to occur - even under severe stress from particularly "bad" recordings; when "engineered" to be fully "robust" under these conditions then any recording can be put on, and makes musical sense - you can fully relax and go with the music, all you hear is the recording and not the system ...
A good example of a diagnosis: the quality of the human voice. Pristine, "correct" recordings should at least get that right ... then you progress to more complex, heavily backed with orchestra efforts. Finally, a 100% full on, raucous pop effort with the sound powering ferociously - even in the latter, the humanity of the voice should be perfectly clear, register true - if it has an artificial, processed quality to it then more work can be done.
You're assuming that there is a direct correlation between THD in a particular component, and audible artifacts. IME that is not the case, I have heard only one system to date - not my own - where I could pick no audible weaknesses in the sound - yet the core of that system had no better or worse THD figures than large numbers of similar equipment ... where was my numbers metric, to tell me that?
Klipschorns are not for everyone. It depends on your priorities. If tonal fidelity is a must then horn systems will tend to be problematic.
The Heyser article was done in the 1980's and was sort of a "Klipschorn re-visited" article. Heyser developed a different way of presenting phase data. The Klipschorns in that respect certainly did not graph well. Most of the problem was due to a lack of time alignment between the woofer and mid-range (can be corrected with DSP if you are not averse to that path).
There were two things I loved about the article. First was comparing the bass response via listening to a live event (sticking his head out the window) to a reproduced event (sticking the microphone out the window) played through the speakers. The second thing was the astonishment he had when listening to the Klipschorns in a adjacent room (similar to the Live In Another Room - LIAR) phenomenon.
Again, horns are not for everyone .....
I would assume that most people here have an audio system to render a recording with minimal audible distortion - or at least pretend to do so. If they are genuine about the "audible distortion" factor then they should at least attempt to be able to differentiate a system with distortion, versus one without, by just using their ears. Otherwise, there is no reason for them not to deliberately add any sort of distortion that's useful for making the sound "nicer" - since they've decided that what's actually heard it quite irrelevant.
My life ;-)
I had all the prejudices of the earth against horns... Untill i discovered the spherical waves horns. Donald Duck has no roles in my movies anymore.
Yes, a system sounds "good" a foot in front of the speakers - and just as "good" from the other end of the house.
I would say, convincing sound is not for everyone ...
.
Yes, a system sounds "good" a foot in front of the speakers - and just as "good" from the other end of the house.
I would say, convincing sound is not for everyone ...
Is bad sound for everyone?
Many years ago I joked with composer Douglas Leedy about bad vibes. We started laughing together, as almost simultaneously we imagined a defective vibraphone: clunk clunk
Doug didn't get tenure at UCLA and was probably a bit p-oed about it. The last embarrassment was his being blamed for bringing the late Salvatore Martirano to the campus for a 1969 performance of his "L.'s G. A.", a multimedia work for multiple video projectors, electronic tape, and "gas-masked politico with helium bomb". The latter role was played by Sal's sidekick and bodyguard Michael, who described himself as a "retired steelworker and poet". Both men at an apres-concert "party" wasted no time trying to engage my friend Lockie, whose much-looser sister was a popular new-music groupie at U of Illinois. You can't make this stuff up.
Clunk.
Doug didn't get tenure at UCLA and was probably a bit p-oed about it. The last embarrassment was his being blamed for bringing the late Salvatore Martirano to the campus for a 1969 performance of his "L.'s G. A.", a multimedia work for multiple video projectors, electronic tape, and "gas-masked politico with helium bomb". The latter role was played by Sal's sidekick and bodyguard Michael, who described himself as a "retired steelworker and poet". Both men at an apres-concert "party" wasted no time trying to engage my friend Lockie, whose much-looser sister was a popular new-music groupie at U of Illinois. You can't make this stuff up.
Clunk.
I suspect we are the 1 percenters of audio. So, bad sound IS for everyone.
The only loudspeakers I know of and have used are those made by Dynaudio. They are specifically designed to be used with 6db/oct cross-over filters to match their characteristics.... giving a 12db/oct total roll-off. And they sound excellent and are high quality construction.
THx-RNMarsh
The only loudspeakers I know of and have used are those made by Dynaudio. They are specifically designed to be used with 6db/oct cross-over filters to match their characteristics.... giving a 12db/oct total roll-off. And they sound excellent and are high quality construction.
THx-RNMarsh
I suspect we are the 1 percenters of audio. So, bad sound IS for everyone.
The only loudspeakers I know of and have used which are suitable for use with simple cross-overs are those made by Dynaudio. They are specifically designed to be used with 6db/oct cross-over filters to match their characteristics.... giving a 12db/oct total roll-off. And they sound excellent and are high quality construction. Transient performance behavior is also very good.
THx-RNMarsh
The only loudspeakers I know of and have used which are suitable for use with simple cross-overs are those made by Dynaudio. They are specifically designed to be used with 6db/oct cross-over filters to match their characteristics.... giving a 12db/oct total roll-off. And they sound excellent and are high quality construction. Transient performance behavior is also very good.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.