This is unsubstantiated Audiophile Dogma. Do you have any data to substantiate it? There is lots of data that disagrees. Please use the "well I hear it so it must be true" argument so that I can quit this discussion.
But if there are distortions up that high - will I hear them? What's the 2nd harmonic of 10Khz? And 15? Maybe the distortions I hear and don't like arise from fundamentals in the 4-5K range. I don't know.
I just know that I don't hear that stuff in acoustic music or nature - unless I visit the bat cave! 😀
.
I just know that I don't hear that stuff in acoustic music or nature - unless I visit the bat cave! 😀
.
Well sorry to disappoint you then but I can tell you my system measure quite flat up to over 20kHz and there are nothing bright or sizzly in it's sound. It did not just happen, I've paid lots of attention to every component, from CD player through to speakers to achieve that.
I have found that bright mid/top can easily be caused by even the tiniest artefacts from crossover
One could be very small phase issues
Other could be electrical interacting ressonance issues between xo components
Or if its significant, just plain ordinary BSC
Maybe it isnt really distortion, but sure sounds much alike, and makes music sound artificial, edgy and unnatural, and boring
In worst case you may have whats often referred to as digtal sound
And ofcourse the CD player is blamed fore that
It is ofcourse just a theory based on my own experience, and ofcourse I cant prove any of it
But its just fore my own use, so who cares
One could be very small phase issues
Other could be electrical interacting ressonance issues between xo components
Or if its significant, just plain ordinary BSC
Maybe it isnt really distortion, but sure sounds much alike, and makes music sound artificial, edgy and unnatural, and boring
In worst case you may have whats often referred to as digtal sound
And ofcourse the CD player is blamed fore that
It is ofcourse just a theory based on my own experience, and ofcourse I cant prove any of it
But its just fore my own use, so who cares
Last edited:
What more do you want?
I've seen a while ago already that you don't care, I do and spend lots of time finding answers to these problems, not just ignoring them and call everything that doesn't suit my view "hogwash" or "Audiophile Dogma". Is your way the only correct way or are others also allowed to have an opinion based on their experiences?
Do you have data to show that the cause of your bright sound is because of "unusually wide coverage" and not perhaps some distortion?
Regarding the HF response, here are some of my observations.
I have a pair of Focal 7" midrange which can play up to the 13~14kHz on axis. This number is in the published FR chart, also revealed by my own simple measurements. Playing fullrange (without filter in front of it), for some recordings (solo piano for example), such HF response is enough in home environment. I feel NO shortcomings of the HF sounds (those attacks and harmonics). My mother plays and teaches piano at home, so I'm very familiar with the sound in the house.
RTA readings of both source input signal and in room mic picking reveal that there is barely HF content beyond 10kHz in piano sound. So my 'midrange' drivers do have sufficient ability to play it.
However, for some other recordings with much more extending HF, e.g., percussions, violins... HF sounds above 10kHz DO exist and I really can hear them, and also my test mic can pick them up and show it on the RTA. My midrange drivers with only 13-14kHz upper limit are now not doing the job well enough. The sounds are obvious darkened, muffled, rounded.... Simply put, now they sounds not what they should. Adding tweeters (and proper xovers of course) solves this 'problem' right away.
One may argue that a 7" midrange beams like hell up there, so actually the HF power response is not enough in the first place, thus the feels of lacking. (Funny that beaming or not, it's perfectly OK in all solo piano recordings, really! )
Let's see other cases.
I've been also playing with some 'fullrange drivers'. They were all used without tweeters and they all beam like hell in HF. However, the performances of their top end are very easily distinguished, both in sound quality and the sense of extension. And, again, of course I 'saw' their responses on RTA which perfectly matched what I heard.
So I'm not convinced that I don't need HF higher than 10kHz. I really need, at least for now. (I'm 40, BTW.)
If I can throw away 10kHz and up, it's really a wonderful thing. Then I am going to plan my next project with compression drivers which are good at midrange and the low end. It should be much easier and cheaper than looking after the very top at the same time.
I have a pair of Focal 7" midrange which can play up to the 13~14kHz on axis. This number is in the published FR chart, also revealed by my own simple measurements. Playing fullrange (without filter in front of it), for some recordings (solo piano for example), such HF response is enough in home environment. I feel NO shortcomings of the HF sounds (those attacks and harmonics). My mother plays and teaches piano at home, so I'm very familiar with the sound in the house.
RTA readings of both source input signal and in room mic picking reveal that there is barely HF content beyond 10kHz in piano sound. So my 'midrange' drivers do have sufficient ability to play it.
However, for some other recordings with much more extending HF, e.g., percussions, violins... HF sounds above 10kHz DO exist and I really can hear them, and also my test mic can pick them up and show it on the RTA. My midrange drivers with only 13-14kHz upper limit are now not doing the job well enough. The sounds are obvious darkened, muffled, rounded.... Simply put, now they sounds not what they should. Adding tweeters (and proper xovers of course) solves this 'problem' right away.
One may argue that a 7" midrange beams like hell up there, so actually the HF power response is not enough in the first place, thus the feels of lacking. (Funny that beaming or not, it's perfectly OK in all solo piano recordings, really! )
Let's see other cases.
I've been also playing with some 'fullrange drivers'. They were all used without tweeters and they all beam like hell in HF. However, the performances of their top end are very easily distinguished, both in sound quality and the sense of extension. And, again, of course I 'saw' their responses on RTA which perfectly matched what I heard.
So I'm not convinced that I don't need HF higher than 10kHz. I really need, at least for now. (I'm 40, BTW.)
If I can throw away 10kHz and up, it's really a wonderful thing. Then I am going to plan my next project with compression drivers which are good at midrange and the low end. It should be much easier and cheaper than looking after the very top at the same time.
CLS: This might be due to the fact that the brain is supposedly processing higher frequencies than 'what you can "hear" ' . That gives us a 'sensation' which is not quite equal to "hearing". I would say hearing is probably a situation where you can point out a source. In 'sensation' you can't (?). However 'sensation' of higher frequencies is probably what makes the 'overall sound' different from a version rolled off early 'because we can't hear' above a certain frequency and so shouldn't matter !
My hearing ( with sine waves ) drops off rapidly above 14Khz ( maybe 12 Khz ). However I can clearly hear the difference between something that rolls off by 14Khz and another that extends to 20 Khz or higher. It sounds more airy and cleaner.
There is another thread about the effect of frequencies beyond 20Khz on our hearing capabilities. Skin and bone transmission though highly damped I would think , still appears to play a part in all this.
My hearing ( with sine waves ) drops off rapidly above 14Khz ( maybe 12 Khz ). However I can clearly hear the difference between something that rolls off by 14Khz and another that extends to 20 Khz or higher. It sounds more airy and cleaner.
There is another thread about the effect of frequencies beyond 20Khz on our hearing capabilities. Skin and bone transmission though highly damped I would think , still appears to play a part in all this.
Last edited:
I'm no expert on hearing of human. In fact, I don't care the HF sensation to my brain comes from my ears or other senses. I (my brain, or my mind) do sense those sound frequencies. Last time I tested myself with sine wave, I heard 16kHz. On music recordings, I can 'sense' the different performances up to 20kHz (according to and compared with RTA).
Point is, what should initiate these senses? I'm sure not on me. My brain or my mind can not 'produce' what is not there. So, inevitably there should be something out there giving me those frequencies. Loudspeakers, aren't they? No?
Point is, what should initiate these senses? I'm sure not on me. My brain or my mind can not 'produce' what is not there. So, inevitably there should be something out there giving me those frequencies. Loudspeakers, aren't they? No?
Geddes the compromise you're making in your designs is a reasonable one.
But JBL also know a thing or two about sound and they fitted everest with a supertweeter.
i know you will say that was a marketing move. but i would disagree.
marketing move is when you replace a grey surround with red one or anything that doesn't cost nothing to accomplish and has no effect on anything.
but when you develop an entirely new driver from scratch using a beryllium diaphragm - that's not marketing. marketing people would never waste that much money.
your speakers all beg for a nice supertweeter crossed at 8 khz. unfortunately there aren't too many nice supertweeters around except maybe this guy:
Welcome to E-Speakers.com - Very High End Loudspeaker Components
of course having the supertweeter cost more than the speaker itself would be kinda silly 🙂
But JBL also know a thing or two about sound and they fitted everest with a supertweeter.
i know you will say that was a marketing move. but i would disagree.
marketing move is when you replace a grey surround with red one or anything that doesn't cost nothing to accomplish and has no effect on anything.
but when you develop an entirely new driver from scratch using a beryllium diaphragm - that's not marketing. marketing people would never waste that much money.
your speakers all beg for a nice supertweeter crossed at 8 khz. unfortunately there aren't too many nice supertweeters around except maybe this guy:
Welcome to E-Speakers.com - Very High End Loudspeaker Components
of course having the supertweeter cost more than the speaker itself would be kinda silly 🙂
Last edited:
well, those frequencies are just not present in music material. at least I'm not aware of such music. I already posted similar chart on this forum. This is averaged output from my preamp. one of Paul Mauriat's composition, which sounds like it has a lot of treble. I've tested many different tracks, none get to 20k.
Attachments
Try some very simple jazz piano trio (with drum set). There are cymbals and brushes giving you very very much 16kHz and up.
any particular artist you would recommend? I listen to jazz rarely and don't know any of the band names.
Frequency response and phase are directly linked, phase are influenced long before you see a drop in frequency response. I guess PA dogma is that phase are not important but since we are talking hi-fi, don't forget the importance of phase relation in stereo imaging, especially at higher frequencies.
i guess since according to some of you music doesn't contain high frequencies ( even though many instruments go to 100 khz outside of your fantasy land ) then CD in fact sounds the same as a compact cassette ( which goes to 16 khz ).
anybody who thinks he can hear the difference between compact cassette ( or AM radio for that matter ) and CD is imagining things i guess.
this reminds me of a friend of mine back in college. he lost his sense of smell when he had his tonsils removed. he never washed his gym clothes and wouldn't believe people when they told him that they were stinky as hell.
believe whatever you want to believe !
i don't care ...
anybody who thinks he can hear the difference between compact cassette ( or AM radio for that matter ) and CD is imagining things i guess.
this reminds me of a friend of mine back in college. he lost his sense of smell when he had his tonsils removed. he never washed his gym clothes and wouldn't believe people when they told him that they were stinky as hell.
believe whatever you want to believe !
i don't care ...
You got that one right - most of the rest is wrong however.
The CD vs cassette comparison - come on! Do you think FR is all that makes up all this difference? And Cassette had a lot of trouble above about 8 kHz. 16 kHz is a real stretch.
Diaphragm mass is certainly relevant. I agree that the shape of the diaphragm has some effect, but you can not disregard mass.
Hmm, perhaps you learned to like that particular form of distortion?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.