Hi Dave
I tend to agree. there is a lot of guessing going on. I am not even sure that we all view "fatiguing" as the same thing.
One thing that I am very clear on, because I have 100's of hours experience here, is that I get very tired watching a movie on my smaller TV upstairs than I do on the HT in the basement. (Both systems have separate speakers and amps etc., but night and day difference is quality.)
It seems like I have to strain to understand dialog on the smaller system and this gets real fatiguing after a couple of hours.
I have often started watching a movie on the small system (because he projector and everything takes time to startup) and ended up going downstairs and turning on the HT because I was so tired of straining to hear what was being said.
Its not just a volume thing - I can set that at whatever I want in either case. It is simply a mater of intelligibility. Dialog is crystal clear on one and muddy on the other and after a while this becomes quite tiring.
My "others" don't seem to notice this as much or don't seem to ever comment.
I tend to agree. there is a lot of guessing going on. I am not even sure that we all view "fatiguing" as the same thing.
One thing that I am very clear on, because I have 100's of hours experience here, is that I get very tired watching a movie on my smaller TV upstairs than I do on the HT in the basement. (Both systems have separate speakers and amps etc., but night and day difference is quality.)
It seems like I have to strain to understand dialog on the smaller system and this gets real fatiguing after a couple of hours.
I have often started watching a movie on the small system (because he projector and everything takes time to startup) and ended up going downstairs and turning on the HT because I was so tired of straining to hear what was being said.
Its not just a volume thing - I can set that at whatever I want in either case. It is simply a mater of intelligibility. Dialog is crystal clear on one and muddy on the other and after a while this becomes quite tiring.
My "others" don't seem to notice this as much or don't seem to ever comment.
Yes, I think the causes are varied and many. What we have is a collection of thoughts on what fatigues us. That's at least a start, as there is some general agreement (I think).
Are you sure? Is "100's of hours experience" necessarily objective enough? Have you tested this thoroughly?
Questions like that are fatiguing, no? 😉
Still, I believe I've experienced the same condition.
It would seem that dialog designed for a center channel and a certain average output level vs. a lower-noise environment, really doesn't "cut it" for an average room noise level at a lower average output and particularly played-back on a 2-channel stereo system.
Worse, on lesser systems the tendency is to turn-up the volume - which likely is the correct choice *except* for the fact that at those higher output levels smaller drivers start having more and more distortion.
The discussion of high v low efficiency leaves out one thing that high efficiency does superbly-
Low flux modulation. Keep the steel saturated and currents in the VC relatively low and you have much lower flux modulation. Shorting rings are great, but in the bass, my understanding is it's almost entirely about the shaping of the pole (and even that, I suspect, has frequency-based limitations in efficacy, becoming less effective with decreasing frequency).
So you can shape the pole, but if you have a field that's 10x stronger from the voicecoil, because you're 10dB less efficient, you have a much worse issue with flux modulation, not much getting around it. Perhaps flux modulation is key in the tiring sound of little wimpy speakers? It's certainly not an issue with my 100ish setup, where I rarely exceed 1W.
Low flux modulation. Keep the steel saturated and currents in the VC relatively low and you have much lower flux modulation. Shorting rings are great, but in the bass, my understanding is it's almost entirely about the shaping of the pole (and even that, I suspect, has frequency-based limitations in efficacy, becoming less effective with decreasing frequency).
So you can shape the pole, but if you have a field that's 10x stronger from the voicecoil, because you're 10dB less efficient, you have a much worse issue with flux modulation, not much getting around it. Perhaps flux modulation is key in the tiring sound of little wimpy speakers? It's certainly not an issue with my 100ish setup, where I rarely exceed 1W.
This is the ongoing myth ... it's the poorly engineered electronics feeding the drivers that's the problem. I've done the exercise so many times now of using sorted out electronics driving "junk" speakers to know where the real problems lie - one can easily fill a house with clean sound from very low cost speakers if the effort is made to feed them with less than garbage input ...
I strongly disagree. Speakers/room are by far the worst performing component in almost any rig and are nearly invariably the biggest opportunity for improvement.
There are many aspects to the situation ... I was here specifically addressing the common belief that the really crappy sound one gets from a midfi quality system when one turns up the volume is because the speaker drivers are misbehaving. This is not the truth: take those drivers, stabilise the cabinet they're mounted in, and drive with them with top quality electronics with tons of headroom -- and prepare to be shocked. They will produce deafening levels of clean sound, that will start your ears ringing within minutes.
That's what I'm talking about at the moment ...
That's what I'm talking about at the moment ...
Last edited:
It doesn't matter.
If it's part of your TV system that necessarily includes the electronics driving it - which are likely to be crappy as well. THAT was the context Earl reported on and I continued with. 😉
Nor is it a myth simply on the basis of *small* drivers and their in-ability to produce lower freq.s with low distortion levels. It's not necessarily about how cheap a driver is (..cost and performance don't have to equate), but rather it's surface area and linear excursion in relation to the content it's trying to reproduce.
Movies often have more bass content (summing-in effects to 2-channel or mono) that tend to "swamp" vocals that are closer in bandwidth to those effects. Male voices (or particularly those with a lower freq.) are more likely to be less easily understood than most female voices in the presence of those sound effects. And it does get fatiguing..
Same sort of thing happens to a lesser extent with TV broadcasts where the show you are watching is broadcast in stereo. And it becomes all to apparent when it "flips" to an advertisement that is NOT produced for stereo (nor has any environmental effects). The result is you reaching for the remote to turn the damn thing down.
Last edited:
Yes, an excess of low bass will overwhelm the driver if using a simple full range device. But in the case of TV broadcasts, etc, this is mostly "junk" bass - designed to made the sound impressive, "scary" - but completely unrealistic, and pointless. The simple expedient of chopping of everything below 100Hz will allow a cheap, small driver to perform very nicely indeed, IME.
I've had my fill of systems bellowing away with blubbery bass, trying to fake a mini earthquake in the room ..
I've had my fill of systems bellowing away with blubbery bass, trying to fake a mini earthquake in the room ..
Yes, bit. 🙂 The wide angle lens makes them look smaller than they seem in person. But maybe I do need bigger speakers.
Hahaha, so give up all your bass and your speakers will play louder, that's great! Wish someone had thought of....
oh wait 🙂
Running a system without <100hz is not worth doing. Flat boring sound is the result. THAT is fatiguing!
Perhaps I don't know what to listen for? But whatever it is does not seem to bother me.
Would this cone breakup be evident on an impedance plot? Here is mine made at a rather high level:
http://www.tribade.org/audio/B&W 801 Impedance 09172012.pdf
This doesn't mean there is cone-breakup. (..though there could be, it's just that's not the sort of aberrant impedance I'd expect from a surround issue which tends to be "narrower" in bandwidth, and usually much more subtle.)
Here is an example (Tangband W4-1757S) measured by Zaph:
Impedance:
http://www.zaphaudio.com/temp/Tangband-W4-1757S-IMP-2.gif
Frequency Response:
http://www.zaphaudio.com/temp/Tangband-W4-1757S-FR.gif
Note that the impedance artifact "peak" has a resulting "dip" in response. Rarely is a dip or null characterized as fatiguing.
For your loudspeaker - it does mean there is inductive rise in the mid, and the tweeter also has impedance peaking near fs (and a fairly high fs as well).
The critical point however is that IF your amplifier's output impedance isn't very low THEN you'll likely have an increase in pressure in the pass-band where the impedance is "peaking". (..in this case the "presence" region or lower treble.)
A resulting freq. response aberration like that is sometimes characterized as "forward" and fatiguing over time (..depending on the design). 😉
Last edited:
A lot of so-called <100Hz bass is "fake", it sounds impressive because what you're hearing are all the above 100Hz harmonics, courtesy of the drivers distorting their heads off. So, then just select your flavour, style of bass distortion that sounds "nicest", the most impressive ... 🙂
Just did an interesting experiment with some PC monitors, one a tiny Harman Kardon, absolutely zero audible output when below 100Hz in; and a much more impressive, solid, Altec unit, with a bass boost pot, no less! Hmmm, lots of sound coming out of the Altec from below 100Hz ... but wait, just gone past 100Hz with rising frequency sweep, and now, can just start to hear the actual fundamental signal through all the "noise"! So, all that impressive sound from the Altec had nothing to do with "hearing" the below 100Hz stuff - it was all pure distortion, a nice backdrop of bass "rumbling" ...
As for "boring" ... have been running some excellent drumming clips through these tiny, 'bass-less' monitors, and all the guts and bite of the drum kit is coming through loud and clear - I have heard considerably more "boring" sound though setups with megawoofer add-ons that could crush a car roof ...
For my son's stereo this was one aspect I watched for. The 4" full range drivers (Panasonic) covers the entire upper range, but is lost below 250. Your typical bass level control has little effect. Sound isn't fatiguing, but lacking. To fill this in an old Monsoon powered sub with it's own electronic crossover for 200 down. Not a complete match, but sounds wonderful. Of course this is a FAST setup. Will add that the entire vocal range is quite intelligible, lyrics are always heard clearly, tho not always understood 😉
If I were to add a tweeter to this setup I wouldn't go below 4k and would prefer 5k up. Below this point you get into the most critical range of our hearing and if not done spot on in amplitude and phase (electrically and acoustically) will cause fatigue, making vocals difficult to define. For this system off axis power response isn't a priority as it's in a small bedroom.
On a more typical design I stay away from the 2.5-4.5k range to avoid this headache. For example a 3" driver covering say 400-5k, A 6.5"crossed to a tweeter at 2k.
What the heck kind of Altec woofer was that? I own several, and they don't have much distortion below 100Hz. Was it a midrange driver, maybe?
You missed the earlier bits, 🙂 ... these are just simple plastic PC monitors, the typical Made in C. stuff - with an appropriate label stuck on. The Altec is just using the usual dinky 3" full-range, plus super-tweeter - but they're trying to make something happen under 100Hz with a bit more effort thrown into something like a reflex enclosure ...
Quite pointless, unless you like bass burble ... 😀
At least the h/k is dead clean down to about 85Hz, then falls off the cliff ...
Quite pointless, unless you like bass burble ... 😀
At least the h/k is dead clean down to about 85Hz, then falls off the cliff ...
Ah, should have known The new, fake Altec-Lansing. The name was sold off to a maker of cheap computer speakers. A real sin. Nothing to do with the Altec of old. Please don't call them Altec, no matter what is printed on the box. 🙁
Altec is a brand and they chose to sell it. So the new speakers are "Altec", they are just also junk. Almost all the audio brands have prostituted themselves.