Yess, the wide baffle helps, the f... port for deep bass is what hurts as usual, the eq the saviour as usual too: DRC for mature users...😀
At home sweet home? Almost ever...😉
The 60º equilateral triangle is what really rules, imho... The rest a simple consequence of distance from speaker to speaker. Might be half a meter on a dsktop home studio, might be over 3m in a large living room...Even heard guys praising the virtues of nearfield monitors in the middle of a large living room/loft...
You don't seem to want to understand.
The critical distance isn't some set-in-stone number, but depends on the directivity of the speakers and the reflectivity of the room.
Because when you speak or play a live instrument in a room, what you hear is the direct sound of the voice/instrument plus the early reflections and reverberation of the room - and that of course sounds natural.
INSTEAD, when you reproduce a real stereo recording, the latter already has the reflection and reverberation cues of the original recording venue baked into the recording itself. If you want to get a credible approximation of being "transported" to the original venue, then those reverberation cues of the recording itself must not be swamped by the reflections and reverberation of the listening room. This can only be achieved by listening within the "critical distance", which is often only possible by employing narrow directivity speakers.
it's critical only with some recordings - exceptionally dry studio recordings
because most of venues in which music is played is much bigger than most listening rooms so it is physically impossible for a normal listening room acoustics to effectively superimpose over the recorded acoustics
in most cases it is physically imposible for them to be swamped by unless one listens in a bathroom
yes, and it happens very seldom, hardly anyone listens "within the "critical distance"
OTOH see above, it's immaterial in most cases
Sounds great, you realy a pro!
And maybe some kind of a priest too...Did you ever heard about de-reverberation and stuff like that?
And the psy part of psychoacoustic, may be this part does not make any sense to you... Must be the typical hardware guy...
Last edited:
Sorry but this is simply not true at all.
Yes, the reverberation time of the original recording venue is almost always longer than that of the listening room. But the realism of the reproduced auditory illusion may still be significantly impaired if the listening room reflections and reverberation are much louder than the reflections and reverberation in the recording.
I'll rest my case.
is not matter of type microphone.
the problem is another.
You talk only about acoustics, acoustic is not all the problem.
"the microphone not know it if you speaker has lost or modificate space/time information", what mean this?
acoustics don't know what the wave include,
acoustics does not matter if wave trasportate musical sound.
Our brain, on the contrary of the microphone, is capable to perceive errors related to space/time sound also all the other errors there are in musical sound,
therefore,
The microphone show a perfect result,
the brain do not agree.
and no one measure will show what the brain perceive..
This is not a news!
We are stuck on this point for many years!
why no one suspects that maybe something is missing?
or perhaps we do not want to solve this conflict?
Two big ostacle that i often see, for talking of this argument are:
1) who said this, have a link for read?
How if.. we need each time to have someone have already spoken and documentate this.. for repeat how a parrot, without to have understood the significate..
2) often associated to the point 1), when have personal business interest or if the significate of this new solution invalidate the personal autoreference of someone.
Throw 1/10 of military budget for 1 year on exploring acoustics and exploring the unknown parts of hi fidelity reproduction and you'll see thing solving quite rapidly 🙂
Reflections may cause very different effects depending on their time of arrival, their level, shape of the wavefront and their spectral content.
You have to identify what kind of reflections You mean precisely, because early reflections may be loud enough to cause some effects but not an effect of "reverberation cues of the recording itself" "be swamped" by them
Room acoustics have a HUGE effect on the sound. In typical hard, flat rooms it's a midrange Ping! that we notice, and that immediately affects tonal balance, it's easy to hear. Acoustics can make a room comfortable or not, to be in. Those are the obvious effects.
You may not "think" that bad room acoustics are swamping the recorded acoustics, but they are - they really are. Having gone in a short time from a room that was fairly leaky, absorbent and diffuse, to a room that was tight with bare gypsum board walls, to heavy room treatment, then to a Hawaiian lava cave with all hard surface and almost ideal diffusion - the differences are striking. The differences in how much of the recorded acoustics you hear is surprising, and real.
You may not "think" that bad room acoustics are swamping the recorded acoustics, but they are - they really are. Having gone in a short time from a room that was fairly leaky, absorbent and diffuse, to a room that was tight with bare gypsum board walls, to heavy room treatment, then to a Hawaiian lava cave with all hard surface and almost ideal diffusion - the differences are striking. The differences in how much of the recorded acoustics you hear is surprising, and real.
tonal balance - absolutely yes, swamping the recorded acoustics - no
"how much of the recorded acoustics you hear" depends also on tonal balance because tonal balance affects how much details you hear
Yes, tonal balance itself will change what you hear of recorded acoustics.
But then we would have to get into what "swamped" means. If you take it as meaning that you can not hear recorded acoustics because the room completely masks them, then I agree - they are not swamped in a normal room. You'll hear the basic acoustics.
But I can tell you from direct, multiple and varied experience that there is an amazing amount of acoustics in the recording that most people never hear, the room does wipe it out. It doesn't swamp all of it, but it does hide much of it. Better rooms will surprise you will a wealth of acoustic information you just won't hear in a normal "bad" room.
But then we would have to get into what "swamped" means. If you take it as meaning that you can not hear recorded acoustics because the room completely masks them, then I agree - they are not swamped in a normal room. You'll hear the basic acoustics.
But I can tell you from direct, multiple and varied experience that there is an amazing amount of acoustics in the recording that most people never hear, the room does wipe it out. It doesn't swamp all of it, but it does hide much of it. Better rooms will surprise you will a wealth of acoustic information you just won't hear in a normal "bad" room.