Marsh, listening to my music in the next room doesn't really detract anything from the quality. Now listening with a **** stereo, car stereo, etc, does... I don't see your point. A very good audiophile stereo sounds good period, whether it is in a special room, the other room, etc.
Accuracy to source to me is important. It's funny because as long as the voltage and distortion from recording to medium was in tact, you can have VERY different presentations from studio playback systems and home systems just because of how they work with current. The info is there, whether it gets portrayed well or not. Despite say NS10's or some other crappy speaker being used, often a lot of good calls on adjustments work universally if the engineer was good at all. Steve Hoffman doesn't have very good playback gear but people love his stuff, for example. I've found a good master sounds good on ipods and real stereos, but a bad one might sound ok on an ipod and bad elsewhere, as another example.
Accuracy to source to me is important. It's funny because as long as the voltage and distortion from recording to medium was in tact, you can have VERY different presentations from studio playback systems and home systems just because of how they work with current. The info is there, whether it gets portrayed well or not. Despite say NS10's or some other crappy speaker being used, often a lot of good calls on adjustments work universally if the engineer was good at all. Steve Hoffman doesn't have very good playback gear but people love his stuff, for example. I've found a good master sounds good on ipods and real stereos, but a bad one might sound ok on an ipod and bad elsewhere, as another example.
We keep going back to "LIKE" it. I don't care about what people like. I am only talking about accuracy and the sound field/imaging is a part of that. Good or OK is not of any interest to me. That is not a High-End view point IMO.
With that in mind, you might be able to see my point.
THx-RNMarsh
With that in mind, you might be able to see my point.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I don't know about Toole but many popular loudspeakers such as Magnepan do not shoot for the flattest frequency response. They have some attenuation above 1kHz and some bass boost. This my preference as well and how I set the response in my home system and car stereo. I find flat can often sound strident and fatiguing even with very good recordings.
Another LIKE response. Its like I want to calib the video for white without a blue or green or red tint to it. But some LIKE the warmth or coolness of a tint. If setting for white color temp and it is suppossed to be white displayed... then I want it to be white without colorations for any reason for accurate reproduction.
THx-RNMarsh
But listening to music on the same setup as the recording was mastered on isn't really an option though, unless you are the one recording and mastering it. Often mastering is done on headphones as well ... so that throws another wrench into the system doesn't it? I don't listen critically on headphones myself.
For me I just set up my systems so they sound most like listening to live music. Using good recordings acoustical musical events is one way to do it. Whatever best creates the illusion of listening to the live event, for me, is likely my choice.
I love live acoustic music ... if it doesn't sound more like that, it just doesn't fly with me. To me that is accurate.
Smyth SVS Realizer heard it, was impressed as possible in 15 min demo at a CANJAM show
may spring for the coming A16 version - Bob Ludwig's Gateway Mastering Studio in Portland isn't that far...
Last edited:
I use to be more like you Marsh, then I matured some and found out what mattered to me.
Also, I found out that gear that you think measures well isn't always doing you justice for representing the source material.
There are just so many interactions going on, that it's very difficult to form a simplistic "accurate" goal. You need to measure current response in dozens of places to really get an idea, and that's hardly possible. But designing because you know behaviour does tend to work, but you're listening by ear for a lot of the results.
If you really are THAT OCD about accuracy you should PM/email me and pick up a couple of my devices that go in the breaker box. Some audiophile don't like them because their stereos are tuned for the problems in the AC system of a home/studio.
Also, I found out that gear that you think measures well isn't always doing you justice for representing the source material.
There are just so many interactions going on, that it's very difficult to form a simplistic "accurate" goal. You need to measure current response in dozens of places to really get an idea, and that's hardly possible. But designing because you know behaviour does tend to work, but you're listening by ear for a lot of the results.
If you really are THAT OCD about accuracy you should PM/email me and pick up a couple of my devices that go in the breaker box. Some audiophile don't like them because their stereos are tuned for the problems in the AC system of a home/studio.
The reproduction system should be flat. If reproducing the recording doesn't sound right, then the problem is with the recording. Ideally the problem is fixed there, not in playback.
Fixing it on the playback end in the speakers, for example, is the wrong approach because not every recording is going to be "defective" in the same way. I disagree with the philosophy of building equipment that is "voiced" without any knobs to adjust said coloration.
This is really an incredibly simplistic view and really doesn't take into account how we hear. A super flat frequency response really has little to do with accuracy, in my opinion. And how many listening rooms are flat?
Better break out the digital 20 band equalizer ... and major room treatments.
And that only addresses the frequency response not other measurement parameters.
Flat dosen't have to sound more accurate at all even with the best recordings.
Anyway , to each his own. Do what makes you happy, I say 🙂
A superflat response doesn't necessarily sound accurate, as in it doesn't necessarily sound like music you'd actually hear in a studio.
Marsh's M2's very low woofer inductance while still being a big VC makes things sound more real than probably up to roughly a 5db variance, 3db for sure, in it's response. That's how weird things get once you have to add speaker on top of the electronics. Mere distortion figures don't help a lot. For example a very low distortion TangBand fullrange with low QMS (high dampening, physical) tend to shrink the general scale and/or make things sound closed in even with low distortion. I'm not a fan of low QMS...
Marsh's M2's very low woofer inductance while still being a big VC makes things sound more real than probably up to roughly a 5db variance, 3db for sure, in it's response. That's how weird things get once you have to add speaker on top of the electronics. Mere distortion figures don't help a lot. For example a very low distortion TangBand fullrange with low QMS (high dampening, physical) tend to shrink the general scale and/or make things sound closed in even with low distortion. I'm not a fan of low QMS...
Last edited:
I second that. I had a year when I demo'd my A8 at my little Linear Audio stand at the RMAF before they did it at CanJam. Scared the hell out of people, they never realized reproduction can be so lifelike.
About listening at home to the recording monitor speakers: one large problem is that at home the room acoustics are totally different from the studio. Since the room acoustics determine the sound 'character' to a very large extend, using the same speakers isn't terrible important or helpful.
Jan
This is primarily true if you do not sit in the near field. If you are far from your speakers, you will hear a lot of room sound. I of course don't do that. And controlled -more narrow- dispersion speakers further reduce room influence when listening near field. see line #93609 again. and, read Tools work and S Olive's. .
also..... http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/01/what-loudspeaker-specifications-are.html
It is not unknown to see speakers in homes at one end/wall and sofa/listening against opposite wall. bad idea. Very bad. A lot of room sound.
In a 30 foot long listening room, I am within 10 ft of the M2 speakers. In the direct sound path before room reflections.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Yes having a large room would certainly help. But then you still don't have the room acoustics of the studio venue, don't you?
I think that is where the reference to the Smyth Realiser comes from. The setup goes as follows. Ideally, you listen in the studio, to the studio monitors, with a couple of small DPA miniature mics in your ear canal. The Realiser records that sound field with a test tone and thus captures both the room acoustics and the speaker characteristics.
Then you go home, listen to a headset through the Realiser and presto! you think you are in the studio!
If you are serious about this you could build up a 'listening venue library' from various well-regarded studios and concert halls and you can listen to your music as if you were there!
Jan
I think that is where the reference to the Smyth Realiser comes from. The setup goes as follows. Ideally, you listen in the studio, to the studio monitors, with a couple of small DPA miniature mics in your ear canal. The Realiser records that sound field with a test tone and thus captures both the room acoustics and the speaker characteristics.
Then you go home, listen to a headset through the Realiser and presto! you think you are in the studio!
If you are serious about this you could build up a 'listening venue library' from various well-regarded studios and concert halls and you can listen to your music as if you were there!
Jan
So who is mastering on M2s? According to the press releases
Kenny 'mixx' Daniels is the only one.
I would never put my speakers next to a wall, even if I'm listening out of the sweet spot. It matters.
In an analogy, should you only be able to enjoy Van Gogh's "Café Terrace at Night" outside of the café, at night?
What I am reading here appears to be a series of 'rationalizations' as to why we can't have 'accurate' hi fi. You guys act as if our voices would change dramatically when we enter a different room, yet they don't, unless we are in something like an echo chamber. We subjectively separate the direct sound from the reverberant sound when we sit close enough. Richard is right.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.