• 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 tweeter is the most critical part...

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,745
Likes
16,176
We've been through this when discussing Harman's research methodolgy. I am not only sceptical of subjective reports but also very demanding when it comes to research. :p
As you know I also am critical to some parts of the Harman research (we have even some overlapping there :p) but personally don't find fundamental flaws in above study and thus also agree to its results until different is proven. Also if you listen to the above amateur headphone experiment you will see how few the type of transducer plays a role, although distortion and radiation wasn't even taken into consideration in that test.
 

tuga

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
3,984
Likes
4,281
Location
Oxford, England
Yes, it‘s a masters thesis. There is some more info on the test subjects, directly copied and autotranslated from the main text:

A total of ten subjects took part in the listening test, with one person repeating the listening test (see evaluation). The average age of all persons was 31 years. Seven of the people were either employees or master students in the department of audio communication or came from their environment and were familiar with conducting listening tests and evaluating differences in acoustic simulations. Three of the people had no experience with listening tests, but had a musical education.

I agree that this study is not fit to unmistakably proof that tweeter material or construction has no audible effect after eqed to the same frequency response and with reflexions taken out of the picture.

At the same time, I don't see any technical flaws that would justify a complete invalidation of their data. So for me personally, unless disproven by a more thorough study with a higher level of scrutiny, this evidence definitely helps to put things in perspective.

I find that corner-cutting, box-ticking approach reductive (and flawed). One less issue to worry about, now what's next?
But, hey, who am I to question "Science"...

It would be so easy if all that mattered was frequency response, wouldn't it?
Soon people will be saying that all EQ'd speakers in mono in anechoic conditions will sound the same. :facepalm:

Oversimplification galore!
 

fredstuhl

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2021
Messages
86
Likes
140
I find that corner-cutting, box-ticking approach reductive (and flawed). One less issue to worry about, now what's next?
But, hey, who am I to question "Science"...

It would be so easy if all that mattered was frequency response, wouldn't it?
Soon people will be saying that all EQ'd speakers in mono in anechoic conditions will sound the same. :facepalm:

Oversimplification galore!
I disagree, in my opinion the takeaway message of this study helps to reduce the noise (marketing departments telling us to buy a speaker, because it has this unreached new hyper material that makes everything categorically sound better) and focus more on what matters most - the actual implementation in a loudspeaker. How much difference the engineering makes, we all regularly appreciate in the scientific product reviews posted here.
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,423
Likes
7,940
Location
Brussels, Belgium
Bass extension and flatness is the most important thing, anyone who thinks otherwise is deaf. Sorry but it’s extremely obvious.
 

tuga

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
3,984
Likes
4,281
Location
Oxford, England
I disagree, in my opinion the takeaway message of this study helps to reduce the noise (marketing departments telling us to buy a speaker, because it has this unreached new hyper material that makes everything categorically sound better) and focus more on what matters most - the actual implementation in a loudspeaker. How much difference the engineering makes, we all regularly appreciate in the scientific product reviews posted here.

I don't know what say... Should I cheer the foo-fighting brigade? Audiophiles will still want to try stuff, no matter how daft.

But yes, reviews of speakers here have been improving since different/extra measured parameters were added to the initial "a spinorama is all that's needed" oversimplistic approach.
 

tuga

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
3,984
Likes
4,281
Location
Oxford, England
Bass extension and flatness is the most important thing, anyone who thinks otherwise is deaf. Sorry but it’s extremely obvious.

Interestingly someone highly regarded and a lot more knowledgeable than me once said that we can hear through the room (I presume he was referring to the range below Schroeder or he would not be so vocal about smooth off-axis response from the mid-mids upwards).
 
OP
Pearljam5000

Pearljam5000

Master Contributor
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
5,125
Likes
5,355
Interesting stuff so far, thanks.
I guess what I meant is the tweeter and the highs are critical for the tonality and if you don't like how the tweeter sounds you're going to hate the speaker no matter what bass / mids it has.
It's something that can't be cured not even with EQ because the basic characteristics of the tweeter sound remains the same.
I can't stand any tonality that is off even by 1%.
The speaker either sounds like the real thing or not, there's no middle ground.
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,522
Likes
37,050
Interesting stuff so far, thanks.
I guess what I meant is the tweeter and the highs are critical for the tonality and if you don't like how the tweeter sounds you're going to hate the speaker no matter what bass / mids it has.
It's something that can't be cured not even with EQ because the basic characteristics of the tweeter sound remains the same.
I can't stand any tonality that is off even by 1%.
The speaker either sounds like the real thing or not, there's no middle ground.
I find that idea while philosophically sound, in practice flawed. Why? Because you don't control the recording and it varies more than the tweeter. I'll grant that over time a person can select better recording and reject poor recording for evaluation purposes, but still is a bottleneck.
 

MarkWinston

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jul 13, 2021
Messages
736
Likes
577
Im a straight up mids guy. If the speaker dont project mids forward the way I want it to, its a fail to me. Speakers that project mids like champ? Meta. Harbeths. Proacs. Guess it cover highs too, depending on what your definition of highs is. Once bass and treble overtake the mids, even a bit, the soul of the music is gone. To me at least.
 
Last edited:

tuga

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
3,984
Likes
4,281
Location
Oxford, England
As you know I also am critical to some parts of the Harman research (we have even some overlapping there :p) but personally don't find fundamental flaws in above study and thus also agree to its results until different is proven. Also if you listen to the above amateur headphone experiment you will see how few the type of transducer plays a role, although distortion and radiation wasn't even taken into consideration in that test.

Maybe if I listen to the above amateur headphone experiment I will see how unfit for purpose that method of assessment is? :)
 

BrokenEnglishGuy

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
1,914
Likes
1,147
Im a straight up mids guy. If the speaker dont project mids forward the way I want it to, its a fail to me. Speakers that project mids like champ? Meta. Harbeths. Proacs. Guess it cover highs too, depending on what your definition of highs is. Once bass and treble overtake the mids, even a bit, the soul of the music is gone. To me at least.
That's why the sound is subjective and there is people who enjoy a mid centric FR..
 

BrokenEnglishGuy

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
1,914
Likes
1,147
By the way to see how much the frequency response dominates the listening impression, I can only recommend below videos and recordings were some very different headphones were EQed to the same response and recorded binaurally:


Download of the ABX 5 headphones equalized to the same frequency response: FLAC 96/24 - https://cutt.ly/2YNcfSA


Yes, with careful listening some very small differences can be heard, but these are mainly due to high distortions and small FR irregularities like channel imbalance.
headphones are very controversial, most of people who use headphones doesn't even want or care about a '' flat fr ''.
 

BrokenEnglishGuy

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
1,914
Likes
1,147
I noticed that I love or hate a speaker mostly because of how the highs and the tweeter sounds.
Obviously you can EQ the highs but it will never change the basic characteristics of how the tweeter sounds.
Obviously bass and mids are also important be less so in my mind( you can always add a sub etc)
Does anyone else feel the same way or am I the only one?
The most critical things... must be what want in a speaker and your personal bias about it.


Most of the speaker problem are very easy to fix using EQ.
 

BrokenEnglishGuy

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
1,914
Likes
1,147
The problem with a listening assessment is that you are comparing what you listen to your references.

In other words, your references must produce a neutral tonal balance (frequency response) or your impressions will be skewed/biased. To make matters worse, the partnering electronics, the room and even the recordings will also affect your perception.

For this reason, measurements are a good starting point but cannot replace listening; a speaker may produce stellar measured performance but not sound good to you.
Measurements are good for find a way to set the speaker to your own taste.
If you don't like how it sounds, just try EQ, if you don't like.. you must be keep training your EQ skills. Most problem are FR problems.
 

tuga

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
3,984
Likes
4,281
Location
Oxford, England
Measurements are good for find a way to set the speaker to your own taste.
If you don't like how it sounds, just try EQ, if you don't like.. you must be keep training your EQ skills. Most problem are FR problems.
No.
 

BrokenEnglishGuy

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
1,914
Likes
1,147
We mainly hear direct sound frequency response, directivity and distortion (in this row of decreasing significance), here I had posted a research about the effect of different tweeter materials and types.

Nice post.


To most people who aren't in forums you pretty much tech how to use the EQ properly to adjust at their taste and these guys never register in any forum.

For example i teached a friend to how to use the parametric EQ in his LCD i4 because he didn't like his first super expensive IEM, take me some days to translate what he hear into words and make some filters, once i did them he never changed or care about '' audiophile things '', he just enjoy his music and don't have any forum account or in a facebook group.
 

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,745
Likes
16,176
Maybe if I listen to the above amateur headphone experiment I will see how unfit for purpose that method of assessment is? :)
You will experience how similar very different drivers sound when EQed to the same FR despite having distortions above audibility limits. Now about unfit or not as said I see it differently than you and it seems I am not alone here.
 

BrokenEnglishGuy

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
1,914
Likes
1,147
By the way to see how much the frequency response dominates the listening impression, I can only recommend below videos and recordings were some very different headphones were EQed to the same response and recorded binaurally:


Download of the ABX 5 headphones equalized to the same frequency response: FLAC 96/24 - https://cutt.ly/2YNcfSA


Yes, with careful listening some very small differences can be heard, but these are mainly due to high distortions and small FR irregularities like channel imbalance.
I just remember that guy listened The '' state of the art '' Stealth who have perfect fr and bla bla, he just think the Stealth sounds like shit.

There is always people who complain about something in audio and believe his opinion is very important.
index.php

''There was no single element or aspect within the sound which would somehow capture my attention, it sounded just cheap and off to me, I cannot quite explain the high praise about it already posted in many forums and youtube reviews hyping it as "The world's best closed headphone?", WTF!''
 
Top Bottom