"If masking is not a problem - "if it is not the case at the concert" as You have put it - then why people at "Meyer sound" see that PA at Tony Bennet concert in the presence of 75 dB background noise is a difficult problem?
(see the example I referred to and a quotation from their website I cited above)
and why people at Yamaha speak of dynamic range as limited by background noise? In what sense does the background noise limit the dynamic range if there is no masking?
(see another quotation I cited above)"
Hello Graaf
Maybe I am looking at this from a simplistic view but the Tony Bennet concert is not the norm. The surf can be quite loud and it's broadband so it covers a wide spectrum. If this was done on the beach and you had the back row 100 yards from the stage the surf could be a real problem. How do balance things so the guys in the first 10 rows are not getting hammered. Also he's a singer not a rock band so his concert levels are more modest in comparison . That didn't help either.
If your backround noise level is high and you can't hear the softest passages then you need to turn it up. Once you start turning up the average level you start loosing headroom. It shifts the average power usage up to a higher level than you would normally be running the system at.
Rob 🙂
(see the example I referred to and a quotation from their website I cited above)
and why people at Yamaha speak of dynamic range as limited by background noise? In what sense does the background noise limit the dynamic range if there is no masking?
(see another quotation I cited above)"
Hello Graaf
Maybe I am looking at this from a simplistic view but the Tony Bennet concert is not the norm. The surf can be quite loud and it's broadband so it covers a wide spectrum. If this was done on the beach and you had the back row 100 yards from the stage the surf could be a real problem. How do balance things so the guys in the first 10 rows are not getting hammered. Also he's a singer not a rock band so his concert levels are more modest in comparison . That didn't help either.
If your backround noise level is high and you can't hear the softest passages then you need to turn it up. Once you start turning up the average level you start loosing headroom. It shifts the average power usage up to a higher level than you would normally be running the system at.
Rob 🙂
Robh3606 said:
And then the audience talks and sings and cheers and roars even louder. And the band plays 6dB louder on the input channel desk meters than in the sound check. Vicious circle. You can never have enough cabinets or kW or spare HF drivers...
Robh3606 said:
In really big events, you can use delay towers. (For those not familiar with live reinforcement, a delay tower is a second smaller system that is set up further down the audience area and it is fed electronically delayed signal so to 'echo synch' with the main system, and not make it sound as a repeat echo.) Also, if we are not talking huge gigs, most line array systems can through coherent enough SPL from top row to last row if hanged and aimed properly. There are software and optical aiming means that come as standard accessories with serious line array systems.
Attachments
Some comments,
First, I would use the more conservative NIOSH standard instead of OSHA, the US in all its wisdom believes two standards are better than one.
Second, these standards were designed to protect workers in industrial applications, not people rocking out on their stereo. They estimate 8% will have hearing loss at NIOSH levels after decades of employment. I think it was 40yrs but I don't remember
the NIOSH standard is 85db/8hr, 88db/4hr, 91db/2hr A-weighted
Third, I think the specs quoted in the first post aren't very good.
listen to 118db sustained/130peak/1m spl (112/124db at listening postion) concert and your ears will ring.
Most clubs can't do that.
12db peak to average is also poor as well, If listen to terrible music it is fine though. Your system should have at least 18-21db peak to average capability. Europeans are trying for an 18db peak to average standard, and I think THX is 20 db.
First, I would use the more conservative NIOSH standard instead of OSHA, the US in all its wisdom believes two standards are better than one.
Second, these standards were designed to protect workers in industrial applications, not people rocking out on their stereo. They estimate 8% will have hearing loss at NIOSH levels after decades of employment. I think it was 40yrs but I don't remember
the NIOSH standard is 85db/8hr, 88db/4hr, 91db/2hr A-weighted
Third, I think the specs quoted in the first post aren't very good.
listen to 118db sustained/130peak/1m spl (112/124db at listening postion) concert and your ears will ring.
Most clubs can't do that.
12db peak to average is also poor as well, If listen to terrible music it is fine though. Your system should have at least 18-21db peak to average capability. Europeans are trying for an 18db peak to average standard, and I think THX is 20 db.
What are your opinions on modest 75-85 SPLs plus loudness compensation for normal home listening?
Right now at my seat the SPL meeter reads ~75db, and Diana Krall is jamming. An ISO 226-2003 (Fletcher-Munson type) loudness equalizer keeps low SPLs lively.
For my home I built a 3-way speaker with the 80-2,400 Hz vocal range on one 3" x 90" ribbon linesource. This midrange centric philosophy sounds best to me, but the best sounding midrange ribbon I can design limits low distortion SPL to about 115 db @1m, about +/- 1.5mm excursions with an 80Hz LR8 slope. To me, the vocal coherence is worth much more than monster SPLs in my home, and 85db is about the limit for a wife approved kids safe living room.
Right now at my seat the SPL meeter reads ~75db, and Diana Krall is jamming. An ISO 226-2003 (Fletcher-Munson type) loudness equalizer keeps low SPLs lively.
For my home I built a 3-way speaker with the 80-2,400 Hz vocal range on one 3" x 90" ribbon linesource. This midrange centric philosophy sounds best to me, but the best sounding midrange ribbon I can design limits low distortion SPL to about 115 db @1m, about +/- 1.5mm excursions with an 80Hz LR8 slope. To me, the vocal coherence is worth much more than monster SPLs in my home, and 85db is about the limit for a wife approved kids safe living room.
LineSource said:
I've never been a fan of loudness compensation. I just don't get that "I'm there" sense at low levels. For every mood and every performance there seems to be a level that clicks and makes it "pop" sound wise. I hate not being able to reach that level because of the family. Thats why my listening room is sound proof. Its after midnight here, kids and wife are in bed and I'll go pop in a Cd and listen at whatever volume "sounds right". No worries.
MJL21193 said:
I considered that option too, but since my wife makes more than I do, the sound proof room was cheaper.
On another thread, the subject of listener fatigue was posed. What I find to be tiring, and I will not do, is to listen to music at a less than ideal volume. To be fully involved (for me), it needs to be able to reach a realistic level. In my life, there is listening to and enjoying music, or there is background music. With nothing in between.
If the system cannot fulfill these requirements, then it is only useful for background music, to be listened to while doing something else.
This is my perspective anyway.
If the system cannot fulfill these requirements, then it is only useful for background music, to be listened to while doing something else.
This is my perspective anyway.
MJL21193 said:
I find this too. Many people do other things while they listen and to do this the level has to be lower. If I am seriously listening then I don't do anything else and I want the level to be realisitic. At that level the music pretty much demands your attention and if you don't give it your full attention is will become annoying.
I have seen this in my wife. She seldom doesn't do something else while listening and usually wants the level much lower than I do.
I prefer silence to music at any level when trying to do something else that involves concentration; otherwise it's an irritant. The prevalence of 'background' music at shopping centres also annoys me. Apart from the rubbish they play, especially at Xmas, it seems to devalue music - McDonalds-ifying it.
I look at as 2 different things. A casual system (SET, 2-way horns and subs, triamped, FM, CD.ect..) - typical playback level is maybe 80-85 db max - and as complete symphonic reproduction - My big rig.
All my big rigs (Stargate Systems) have a combined (five channels) SPL goal of 130 db peaks(16 cycles to 16 thousand cycles at the" transport area" with low distortion and compression. Nothing else will do it
All my big rigs (Stargate Systems) have a combined (five channels) SPL goal of 130 db peaks(16 cycles to 16 thousand cycles at the" transport area" with low distortion and compression. Nothing else will do it
salas said:
salas said:
Do You distinguish between two kinds of "peaks"? "ordinary" "100 dB peaks" ("how most people listen to their Hi-Fi at home") and "extraordinary peaks" of 110 dB (???)
I don't understand - for me there is average and there are peaks,
peaks correspond to max 0 dBfs level from CD
I have measured both SPL average and peak, weighted and unweighted in my room and than I have measured voltage across speaker terminals for the same position of my amps potentiometer for noise recorded at -10 dB
taking into account voltage sensitivity of my speakers and adding 10 dB for the "peakest peaks" from CD I have arrived at that 100 dB for those loudest peaks in my room
The second measurement confirmed the results of the first
Should I really add another 10 dB? This would correspond to +10 dBfs from CD - in the digital overload area, not very HiFi thing
I also have serious doubts as to "inverse square law" application to domestic HiFi conditions.
salas said:
this EXACTLY what I am saying in this thread
in a listeing rooms there is no audience, no talking, cheering nor roaring
so there is no need for SPLs needed to play over those roars
not 70 dB but only about 40 dB of background noise
consequently to achieve the same subjective loudness one doesn't need the same SPL
130 dB SPL at a rock concert is something different than 130 dB SPL at home
130 dB SPL at a rock concert means >>100 dB average
this means guaranteed temporary threshold shifts
It seems that I have found confirmation of my results in the results of research done at NRC of Canada - for them 90 dB (unweighted) average is "very loud and far beyond normal listening levels"
there are certainly people enjoying higher SPLs at home but should their highly atypical expectations serve as a standard for "SPL target for speaker design"?
this seem unreasonable to me
best,
graaf
mbutzkies said:
exactly! and despite of this You are half-deaf when leaving such a club
I've been to such clubs couple of times, it was rather frightening experience
best,
graaf
graaf said:
I think that this comment may be the unreasonable one. I pointed out what several Pro's suggest as targets. If you want to ignore them because the levels are "too loud" for you that's fine, but don't say that they are unreasonable for the rest of us. I've done the same measurements as you and I get 10 dB more.
The point here is that if you have the higher SPL capability then its never a problem to listen at lower SPLs. But if you design to the lower SPL then it WILL BE a problem on that rare (or not so rare) occasion when you have had a few drinks with friends and you want to turn it up. (Everybody goes home thinking "What a crappy sound system!")
Its up to you.
graaf said:
gedlee said:
Gedlee covered what I wanted to answer. As for the live event noise threshold shift, and the excitement factors, that is why I originally suggested the -10dB relaxation of 'optimum' max SPL targets at home.
Best. Salas.
"It seems that I have found confirmation of my results in the results of research done at NRC of Canada - for them 90 dB (unweighted) average is "very loud and far beyond normal listening levels"
there are certainly people enjoying higher SPLs at home but should their highly atypical expectations serve as a standard for "SPL target for speaker design"?
this seem unreasonable to me"
Hello Graaf
I find the NRC statement a bit odd. I would like to know what they consider as a normal listening level. For me it's mostly in the mid 80's. I designed both of my systems to be able to hit 115db peaks at the listening position with no clipping. I wanted at least 20db of clean headroom above my average.
Depending on source material it's not at all hard to get peaks between 105 and 110db without it being loud or unpleasant. Without the designed headroom I could not reproduce those peaks. The high SPL capabillity is there for that reason.
Rob🙂
there are certainly people enjoying higher SPLs at home but should their highly atypical expectations serve as a standard for "SPL target for speaker design"?
this seem unreasonable to me"
Hello Graaf
I find the NRC statement a bit odd. I would like to know what they consider as a normal listening level. For me it's mostly in the mid 80's. I designed both of my systems to be able to hit 115db peaks at the listening position with no clipping. I wanted at least 20db of clean headroom above my average.
Depending on source material it's not at all hard to get peaks between 105 and 110db without it being loud or unpleasant. Without the designed headroom I could not reproduce those peaks. The high SPL capabillity is there for that reason.
Rob🙂
Member
Joined 2003
When buying a sailboat a number of years ago, a friend told me "you can always make a fast boat slow but you can never make a slow boat fast".
I bought the faster boat...and the thought for years to come.
With an appropriate alternative, I won't choose a system requiring full Xmax to achieve the SPL target. Conservative operation usually equals cleaner sound at any level.
Paul W said:
Slow sail boats aren't nearly as much fun either.
I agree with you as long as its not taken to an extreme. To me the 10 dB that we are talking about for headroom is not extreme, but audiophiles do have a tendancy to be extreme about other things, like cabinet vibrations of X-max, or THD. There is no point going going 30 dB above a typical playback level, but 10 dB seems reasonable.
gedlee said:
well, defending myself I only want to add that I also referred to some authoritative sources, first of all NRC position which has an advantage in that it concerns specifically domestic HiFi, not Pro applications (Public Address)
and also "too loud" not only for me 🙂
at least in this thread the division is clearly not between me and "the rest of You" 🙂
gedlee said:
I am not questioning that 🙂
I think that this is mainly a consequence of entirely different approach with regard to speaker-room interface
Your room is certainly more "free-field-like" than mine
gedlee said:
a good point! I cannot deny nor counterargue 🙂
If I was to propose a kind of conclusion of our discusion it would be: "people have very different expectations and needs with regard to SPL, there is no universal target, one should measure what one needs OR should just buy something in agreement with Pro's recommendations as a "safe buy"" 🙂
thank You Dr Geddes for starting this interesting and important thread and - again and as usual - for Your kind and patient responses 🙂
best,
graaf
- Status
- Not open for further replies.