Now, that is a great line!
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
The most important parameter of all: overall system integrity
- Thread starter fas42
- Start date
Ray Girard
Member
***deep bow***
Haha
Haha
- Thread Starter
- #283
Since my attention has been drawn back to this thread - thanks, Ray - and noting that people constantly "miss the point" when I mention something, I thought I might create a little Q & A dialogue that summarises what I regard as important:
Q: Why is overall system integrity important?
A: Because IME it contributes more to achieving convincing sound than anything else.
Q: What is "convincing sound"?
A: When a system projects an audible illusion so robust that it become impossible to pinpoint where the speakers are, if you are in the same room as their location - literally, if you were blindfolded, you would be unable to point to the left and right cabinets, and would still fail to note their location even when you were about to collide with them, if walking around blindfolded.
Q: How is this possible?
A: The mind wants to believe in the illusion of the music being created in a space, but can't normally because artifacts in the sound keep drawing one's attention to the speakers - you can "hear the drivers working", and just by moving out of what people call the "sweet spot" the operating of the speaker becomes very obvious. The solution is to remove the artifacts which are audible, and then the mind has nothing to "grab on to" - the speakers become "invisible".
Q: Okay, I have to say I've never heard this happen myself - is it hard to get a system to this level of 'quality'?
A: Too bloody right, it is !!!
Q: Well, why do I want this, "convincing sound"?
A: Because when a system has this capability it's possible to play any recording, at any volume, within the limitations of the amplifiers and speakers and get satisfying sound - you not only get an impressive illusion, you also get immense pleasure in the listening. IOW, it's a pretty good end goal ....
Q: Well, I listened to a very expensive, very impressive looking rig recently, and the sound on the recordings the owner chose to play was very spectacular - it was pretty darn good! Why isn't that a valid goal?
A: If the owner is happy with it, then all's good. But were the speakers always invisible, and did any recordings you chose to play sound as impressive as the ones he put on?
Q: Well, not quite - so you're saying one can do better?
A: Yes. If one wants the best that one can get then other steps need to be taken.
Q: Which are?
A: Improve the system you currently have by determining the weaknesses within it, and resolving them.
Q: How do I know I have "weakness" somewhere?
A: By the fact that certain recordings are unpleasant to listen to, or that you can't increase the volume beyond a certain point without things starting to "get messy" - the sound is just not 'nice' to listen to. And, the speakers most certainly aren't invisible !!
Q: So, the job is to resolve all the weakness - and then I get, invisible speakers?
A: Exactly!
- and noting that people constantly "miss the point" when I mention something, I thought I might create a little Q & A dialogue that summarises what I regard as important: Q: Why is overall system integrity important?
A: Because IME it contributes more to achieving convincing sound than anything else.
Q: What is "convincing sound"?
A: When a system projects an audible illusion so robust that it become impossible to pinpoint where the speakers are, if you are in the same room as their location - literally, if you were blindfolded, you would be unable to point to the left and right cabinets, and would still fail to note their location even when you were about to collide with them, if walking around blindfolded.
Q: How is this possible?
A: The mind wants to believe in the illusion of the music being created in a space, but can't normally because artifacts in the sound keep drawing one's attention to the speakers - you can "hear the drivers working", and just by moving out of what people call the "sweet spot" the operating of the speaker becomes very obvious. The solution is to remove the artifacts which are audible, and then the mind has nothing to "grab on to" - the speakers become "invisible".
Q: Okay, I have to say I've never heard this happen myself - is it hard to get a system to this level of 'quality'?
A: Too bloody right, it is !!!
Q: Well, why do I want this, "convincing sound"?
A: Because when a system has this capability it's possible to play any recording, at any volume, within the limitations of the amplifiers and speakers and get satisfying sound - you not only get an impressive illusion, you also get immense pleasure in the listening. IOW, it's a pretty good end goal ...
.Q: Well, I listened to a very expensive, very impressive looking rig recently, and the sound on the recordings the owner chose to play was very spectacular - it was pretty darn good! Why isn't that a valid goal?
A: If the owner is happy with it, then all's good. But were the speakers always invisible, and did any recordings you chose to play sound as impressive as the ones he put on?
Q: Well, not quite - so you're saying one can do better?
A: Yes. If one wants the best that one can get then other steps need to be taken.
Q: Which are?
A: Improve the system you currently have by determining the weaknesses within it, and resolving them.
Q: How do I know I have "weakness" somewhere?
A: By the fact that certain recordings are unpleasant to listen to, or that you can't increase the volume beyond a certain point without things starting to "get messy" - the sound is just not 'nice' to listen to. And, the speakers most certainly aren't invisible !!
Q: So, the job is to resolve all the weakness - and then I get, invisible speakers?
A: Exactly!
Fitzcaraldo215
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2016
- Messages
- 1,440
- Likes
- 634
My perception is you are not wrong entirely. But, like anything, there is a continuum. For example, I just got the April TAS in which the esteemed (ahem) Jonatanan Valin holds forth for a record 3-page, barf-worthy fest on the yuuuge advantages of vinyl. Fake news, but God help us, bigly.
On the other hand, I know a few reasonably prominent reviewers quite well. In one case, I visit and offer my subjective input prior to publication. I trust this guy, and he is a great friend, whose reference system I have had major influence on, helped set up, etc. We do not always agree quite exactly. In another case with a different guy, I have read all the reviews, met the man, talked at great length, seen and heard his systems, and for me, he speaks the truth without question and without the pull of any commercialism.
For those guys, I do not think their sense of intellectual integrity and honesty interferes in any way. They strike me from personal knowlege as sincere audiophiles who are just trying to inform the rest of us. I wish objective audio science could answer all questions, except it doesn't. So we need honest guys like this to try to provide what is missing. They are open to it, believe me. The problem is, of course, separating the good guys from the bad.
In a third case, well, all your worst fears are absolutely true of a former friend now with his own website/blog/forum. I have been to his listening room many, many times, never impressively. I have heard his reviewing philosophy from his own lips. Barf.
Nightlord
Active Member
In my book system integrity really boils down to the speakers being designed to do the soundfield decoding they should, and the room staying sufficiently away from breaking that.
The rest of the system only have a single responsibility - to bring to the speakers what's on the media unharmed in all dimension (besides being able to adjust the amplitude).
The rest of the system only have a single responsibility - to bring to the speakers what's on the media unharmed in all dimension (besides being able to adjust the amplitude).
Exactly and nice hat.
Keith
Nightlord
Active Member
Thanks.
Fitzcaraldo215
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2016
- Messages
- 1,440
- Likes
- 634
I have absolutely no objections whatsoever, but only as far as it goes. The problem is understanding correctly the "soundfield" to be decoded. For a concert performance before an audience in a small to large hall, that soundfield is three dimensional. It cannot possibly be fully reproduced by a two speakers, which form a one dimensional array - a line between the two speakers.
Synthetic mixes of studio recordings are an entirely different matter and may fare better from just two speakers, as the entire engineering process is designed for that.
Nightlord
Active Member
Right, not the recorded soundfield. The transfer function of how you decode the electrical signal into a sound radiation pattern. It's fixed and based on the psychoacoustic knowledge of the speaker designer and their ability to manifest that in physical form with the speaker elements, crossover, speaker placement and cabinet shape (and probably a few things more that I forgot now or don't even know about). Quite correctly it's an art of weighing which aspects that are the most important for the illusion, as you rightly state - we have dimension lacking in the signal.
But it's quite a few speaker makers out there that seem to care mostly about on-axis response or some other fix idea they have instead of having a holistic view of it all.
But it's quite a few speaker makers out there that seem to care mostly about on-axis response or some other fix idea they have instead of having a holistic view of it all.
- Thread Starter
- #290
Very good newish thread on WBF, http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?22970-Installing-Aries-Cerat-Symphonia-horn-speakers/ - a description of how competent playback comes across, Yet Again. 853guy's reaction is what it's about, he understands what the goal is now - of course, mega money is not necessary to get there; it may help in some situations, but, there are alternative methods ...
- Thread Starter
- #291
Linkwitz is making good headway in discovering the need to identify weaknesses in a chain, for achieving satisfying playback - this blog page, http://www.linkwitzlab.com/my_setup2.htm, is a good example of the journey that may need to be taken, the latest event is noting the importance of the "Transfer of audio data from laptop to DAC and performance of the DAC".
- Thread Starter
- #292
An example of how everything is not 'solved' - from the Munich show, two videos with the common denominator of using the same recording apparatus ... first, the Kii THREE,
and then, a room highly praised by Peter,
I call this chalk and cheese ... but, others may disagree,.
and then, a room highly praised by Peter,
I call this chalk and cheese ... but, others may disagree,
.
Let me...
I call it:
- Two different recordings.
- Two different rooms.
- Thread Starter
- #294
I see ... therefore, the approach is to keep changing rooms, and recordings until it "sounds good" - a bit like having a car where one has to find the few roads where it feels comfortable and safe to drive on, and avoid travelling along all others ...
- Thread Starter
- #295
This clip captures the subjective experience of convincing playback about as well as anything I've come across,
The recording device is apparently of good quality, and the Aries Cerat system has been widely praised, and this shows through. Particularly note the expansive nature of the presentation, not the normal squashed, musclebound midget one often gets ...
The recording device is apparently of good quality, and the Aries Cerat system has been widely praised, and this shows through. Particularly note the expansive nature of the presentation, not the normal squashed, musclebound midget one often gets ...
Yes, its almost always down to the recording. In say the last three clips that fas42 shows , listen to how each channel is giving nearly the same information, this is stereo acting more like mono, and easier for you brain to deal with, some recording engineers are good at this blending across the channels, vinyl invokes a form of this mixing as well.
- Thread Starter
- #299
Tom, "stereo acting more like mono" is one of the signatures of convincing sound, you lose entirely the sense that "some sounds come out of the left, some come out of the right" - what I find is that as a particular system is steadily optimised, you go from "left and right" to "stereo mono" presentation - in your terms - in all recordings. In particular, true mono recordings present as a layered depth behind the speakers, which moves sideways as one moves sideways - the soundstage "follows you".
- Thread Starter
- #300
"its almost always down to the recording" ... is it? Let's see, I didn't know the Kii THREE demo track, but it should be easy to find out - OK, "Song Of The Stars (Remastered)" by Dead Can Dance. Don't know this mob, check it out on YouTube - right, there it is ...
Hmmm ... ...
Hmmm ... ...
Similar threads
