Toole video "exceptional" $1800 speaker ID

[mikeanon]

In the video

"Floyd Toole - Sound reproduction – art and science/opinions and facts" at elapsed-time = 1:03:33 Toole discusses an $1800 speaker that has "Exceptional performance at the price!" What speaker (manufacturer and model) is he referring to?

I highly recommend the video for anyone just getting into equalization and room corrections. Very enlightening! I just purchased the eTextbook version of his book "The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms" but could not find a reference to this particular speaker with a quick search.

 

[Erik]

It was the Infinity IL60, if I recall correctly.

 

[Eetu]

What speaker (manufacturer and model) is he referring to?

Yes it was the Infinity IL60 (also discussed here)

 

[Lbstyling]

Shame they are so ugly though! Those things look mega cheap.

 

[ashegedyn]

So forgive me if there are some other threads that may have more explanations but I have not seen them. Sorry about bringing this thread back to life but it is one of the ones that came up when searching for Toole videos.

I am a bit of a newbie and more versed with traditional audiophile sites rather than this one. Pointers are appreciated. I just viewed this same video of Toole on youtube and I thought it was great.
However, I did have several questions that were brought up in the video one of which brings into question equalization which Amir does for speakers when doing a subjective test.

1. I understand that doing preference tests mono versus stereo it has been shown that doing a blind test on a single speaker would still bring forth the same preferences if you did a stereo preference test. It sounds reasonable and I would love to find some studies on this. However, it begs the question of other measures. One reason I became an audiophile or rather bought "better" audio equipment is that I experienced the effect of a sound-stage, I heard the piano as played almost as if it was there in the room in front of me. I am sure it is due to the recording and speaker placement etc..., but with cheap generic setups I never heard that. As a long description what I am getting at - are there specific measures that can be done to identify this and compare between speakers? Or are there studies that show this effect does not vary based on speaker?

2. Do the Kippel spinorama and anechoic spinorama measures assume a mono speaker sound field or do they calculate a stereo pair when they calculate the predicted room frequency response curve? As a corollary would the sound field be different - I assume it would be - for a stereo pair vs a mono speaker?

3. Regarding equalization. I heard in the video that equalization does not solve issues with certain defects in a speaker. If I understood correctly it depends on the directivity of the speaker. Certain defects cannot be overcome by equalization. Is this reflected somehow when Amir makes a speaker review and changes the equalization? I did not notice if there is a caveat when equalization is done on whether it is because the speaker issues can be equalized? Or is it that there is a difference of opinion with Toole?

 

[Alexanderc]

These are all great questions and I am not the best equipped person here to answer them, but I’ll give it a shot.

1. I understand that the speaker/room interaction plays huge role in this. You can get some idea from the room response curves, but a lot will still depend on where they are.

2. Just mono I think

3. Look at directivity. If the lines are approximately parallel and more or less evenly spaced, that means the reflected sound matches the direct sound and the EQ can help more. The EQ only fixes direct sound so if the off-axis doesn’t match then you don’t know how the off axis sound will end up.

 

[MSNWatch]

Have owned IL60s for a long time and use them in the bedroom. Haven’t felt the need to replace them for over 15 years and running. They have been dinged from moves and such and still they run.

 

[MZKM]

So forgive me if there are some other threads that may have more explanations but I have not seen them. Sorry about bringing this thread back to life but it is one of the ones that came up when searching for Toole videos.

I am a bit of a newbie and more versed with traditional audiophile sites rather than this one. Pointers are appreciated. I just viewed this same video of Toole on youtube and I thought it was great.
However, I did have several questions that were brought up in the video one of which brings into question equalization which Amir does for speakers when doing a subjective test.

1. I understand that doing preference tests mono versus stereo it has been shown that doing a blind test on a single speaker would still bring forth the same preferences if you did a stereo preference test. It sounds reasonable and I would love to find some studies on this. However, it begs the question of other measures. One reason I became an audiophile or rather bought "better" audio equipment is that I experienced the effect of a sound-stage, I heard the piano as played almost as if it was there in the room in front of me. I am sure it is due to the recording and speaker placement etc..., but with cheap generic setups I never heard that. As a long description what I am getting at - are there specific measures that can be done to identify this and compare between speakers? Or are there studies that show this effect does not vary based on speaker?

2. Do the Kippel spinorama and anechoic spinorama measures assume a mono speaker sound field or do they calculate a stereo pair when they calculate the predicted room frequency response curve? As a corollary would the sound field be different - I assume it would be - for a stereo pair vs a mono speaker?

3. Regarding equalization. I heard in the video that equalization does not solve issues with certain defects in a speaker. If I understood correctly it depends on the directivity of the speaker. Certain defects cannot be overcome by equalization. Is this reflected somehow when Amir makes a speaker review and changes the equalization? I did not notice if there is a caveat when equalization is done on whether it is because the speaker issues can be equalized? Or is it that there is a difference of opinion with Toole?

1) A neutral speaker with wide dispersion (DI curves which are low in value) will have a wide soundstage and good imaging.

2) Just mono. A stereo pair likely will boost the bass a bit more, but the midrange and treble should be about the same.

3) If the DI curves are low in value and are linear, then EQ works well.

 

[NTK]

I think for those who are unfamiliar with Dr Toole it would be beneficial to know a little bit on where he comes from.

Dr Toole is a big proponent of multi-channel audio, and has mostly abandoned/ignored/discounted 2-channel stereo. The are important differences in picking speakers for 2 channel versus multi-channel.

Below is from part 1 of a three part series lecture by Dr Toole.
https://www.harman.com/documents/LoudspeakersandRoomsPt1_0.pdf
https://www.harman.com/documents/LoudspeakersandRoomsPt2_0.pdf
https://www.harman.com/documents/LoudspeakersandRoomsPt3_0.pdf

Because he is only interested in multi-channel, he basically only values conventional forward firing speakers, and not dipoles or other speakers with non-conventional directivity. Stereo imaging qualities are off his radar. So, if you are looking for speakers for stereo, please keep this in mind.

 

[ashegedyn]

Yeah - not convinced regarding multi-channel. I would first want a better understanding on the measurements of Stereo. I would guess linkwitz speakers would not fit the paradigm. I did notice the emphasis on center channel and movies. I listen to two channel stereo. I never found cinema sound persuasive except for special effects. I will keep that in mind but a bit disappointed since I find his analysis persuasive.

 

[ashegedyn]

I think for those who are unfamiliar with Dr Toole it would be beneficial to know a little bit on where he comes from.

Dr Toole is a big proponent of multi-channel audio, and has mostly abandoned/ignored/discounted 2-channel stereo. The are important differences in picking speakers for 2 channel versus multi-channel.

Below is from part 1 of a three part series lecture by Dr Toole.
https://www.harman.com/documents/LoudspeakersandRoomsPt1_0.pdf
https://www.harman.com/documents/LoudspeakersandRoomsPt2_0.pdf
https://www.harman.com/documents/LoudspeakersandRoomsPt3_0.pdf

Because he is only interested in multi-channel, he basically only values conventional forward firing speakers, and not dipoles or other speakers with non-conventional directivity. Stereo imaging qualities are off his radar. So, if you are looking for speakers for stereo, please keep this in mind.

View attachment 119185

Well that was a bit of a mix. I guess the meat of this is in the AES papers which is what I would rather read but I would guess I would need to brush up on some of my math skills. The part I found disappointing is the marketing tone for multi-channel. Not much scientific data points regarding that in the slides.
Several things I noted from these slides or not on these slides

- No measure or sets of measures to define imaging in multi-channel or stereo. That is what I would like to see. If there are no measurement what is the psycho-acoustic literature regarding this. I would think whether stereo or multi-channel you want some data. I do not want to rely on preference studies regarding that.

- From a first precepts point of view I do not want my audio system to sound like headphones. I do not want to be in the middle of the grand piano when I listen to a recording. I want it in front of me as if I was in the best seat of the house during a concert. To accomplish this what specific manipulation would need to be made for multi-channel? It is not clear to me that there are such measurements from the slides.

The overall tone seems pretty commercial to me with some nuggets on technical details.

 

[ahofer]

No measure or sets of measures to define imaging in multi-channel or stereo. That is what I would like to see. If there are no measurement what is the psycho-acoustic literature regarding this.

The engineers on this site would suggest, I think, that this information is in the reflected sound and panning/balancing in the recording (or not), and equipment either gets in the way with weird frequency response or directivity, or doesn't.

I do not want to be in the middle of the grand piano when I listen to a recording. I want it in front of me as if I was in the best seat of the house during a concert.

Certainly my experience in all my systems. A couple of thoughts:

1. If you have Roon, trying adding crossed to your headphones, to make it more like a speaker presentation. Similarly, crossfeed will center an unruly image in stereo speakers. But beware, you are actually *reducing* the imaging information to do this. which leads to points 2 and 3...
2. One thing I've seen asserted in another thread recently is that super wide-directivity speakers may project an image forward (specifically re. Genelec), while narrow directivity produces a more recessed or "deep" image, which seems to be what you want. Without any formal tests, I believe I have experienced this. (uneven directivity is generally hear as inferior, but wide vs. narrow seems to be more of a preference/room decision). My Genelecs and JBLs do seem to push the soundstage forward vs. my Harbeths, but there are too many other variables (and no controlled experiments) to draw conclusions.
3. Obviously room treatment will help you. If you are getting a lot of first reflection in your setup, particularly from one side, it will reduce/interfere with the reflection information in your recording and destroy the studio/hall depth impression. A noisy room mode might also obscure information that helps you decode the stereo image.

I'll leave it to others to discuss the psycho-acoustics or even correct me on the above.

 

[ashegedyn]

The engineers on this site would suggest, I think, that this information is in the reflected sound and panning/balancing in the recording (or not), and equipment either gets in the way with weird frequency response or directivity, or doesn't.


Certainly my experience in all my systems. A couple of thoughts:

1. If you have Roon, trying adding crossed to your headphones, to make it more like a speaker presentation. Similarly, crossfeed will center an unruly image in stereo speakers. But beware, you are actually *reducing* the imaging information to do this. which leads to points 2 and 3...
2. One thing I've seen asserted in another thread recently is that super wide-directivity speakers may project an image forward (specifically re. Genelec), while narrow directivity produces a more recessed or "deep" image, which seems to be what you want. Without any formal tests, I believe I have experienced this. (uneven directivity is generally hear as inferior, but wide vs. narrow seems to be more of a preference/room decision). My Genelecs and JBLs do seem to push the soundstage forward vs. my Harbeths, but there are too many other variables (and no controlled experiments) to draw conclusions.
3. Obviously room treatment will help you. If you are getting a lot of first reflection in your setup, particularly from one side, it will reduce/interfere with the reflection information in your recording and destroy the studio/hall depth impression. A noisy room mode might also obscure information that helps you decode the stereo image.

I'll leave it to others to discuss the psycho-acoustics or even correct me on the above.

Thanks - appreciate the comments. I actually have B&W CDM 7NT which I have had for 20 years and recently purchased the Adam Audio T5V which I am bedding in for another room. I find both sets of speakers capable of producing the effect. In fact the Adam Audio speakers seem to have better imaging in my subjective view. I thought the Adam Audio speakers had wider directivity yet they have a deeper soundstage. I don't have Roon (too expensive but I may spring for it if the best way to do room correction is Roon) so not sure how I would do this with headphones. Not that interested for the headphones though. I find headphones intrusive for other reasons.

However, I am seeking a measure or measures that identify these affects. If there are none then a psycho-acoustical study. I am interested in the science of this rather than just adjusting my home audio setup although that is worthy.

I also just found another thread that may be more appropriate
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ding-toole-and-geddes-for-stereo-setup.20569/

 

[Putter]

- From a first precepts point of view I do not want my audio system to sound like headphones. I do not want to be in the middle of the grand piano when I listen to a recording. I want it in front of me as if I was in the best seat of the house during a concert. To accomplish this what specific manipulation would need to be made for multi-channel? It is not clear to me that there are such measurements from the slides.

The overall tone seems pretty commercial to me with some nuggets on technical details.

While I don't feel the need to convince you that multichannel is better than stereo (although it obviously is), I do feel a need to correct a few misunderstandings. Most multichannel recording DO NOT put you in with the musicians. The only exception that I can think of offhand is the Quadrophenia Bluray which I consider to be an artist decision rather than a producer based. Most recordings, especially concert ones put the musicians in front on the stage and add some ambient sound from the hall and crowd noise. In fact one the main complaints I read in reviews of concerts is too little sound coming from the surrounds.

 

[ashegedyn]

While I don't feel the need to convince you that multichannel is better than stereo (although it obviously is), I do feel a need to correct a few misunderstandings. Most multichannel recording DO NOT put you in with the musicians. The only exception that I can think of offhand is the Quadrophenia Bluray which I consider to be an artist decision rather than a producer based. Most recordings, especially concert ones put the musicians in front on the stage and add some ambient sound from the hall and crowd noise. In fact one the main complaints I read in reviews of concerts is too little sound coming from the surrounds.

Is that with multi-channel recording? When I heard normal recordings they do not sound like what you describe. Some kind processing is probably being done to make it work as you describe. If so what is the basis of doing those manipulations. Like I mentioned previously there is a different thread that may have more info.

 

[MrPeabody]

... One reason I became an audiophile or rather bought "better" audio equipment is that I experienced the effect of a sound-stage, I heard the piano as played almost as if it was there in the room in front of me. I am sure it is due to the recording and speaker placement etc..., but with cheap generic setups I never heard that. ...

So, with "better" audio equipment the piano sounds almost as if it was there in front of you, and you are sure that this is due partly to speaker placement, and you never heard the same effect with "cheap generic setups". For you to have said this, it seems that you must have some sense of how the speaker placement affects the soundstage, and also some idea of why cheap generic setups do not permit this kind of speaker placement. Perhaps you could elaborate on how, in your experience, speaker placement affects the soundstage, and on why cheap generic setups do not permit the kind of speaker placement that accommodates a good soundstage.

 

[ashegedyn]

So, with "better" audio equipment the piano sounds almost as if it was there in front of you, and you are sure that this is due partly to speaker placement, and you never heard the same effect with "cheap generic setups". For you to have said this, it seems that you must have some sense of how the speaker placement affects the soundstage, and also some idea of why cheap generic setups do not permit this kind of speaker placement. Perhaps you could elaborate on how, in your experience, speaker placement affects the soundstage, and on why cheap generic setups do not permit the kind of speaker placement that accommodates a good soundstage.

So I don't know what you are after. Sounds like you want to argue about my subjective experience.

Twenty years back I decided to have better speakers for my TV viewing. I started trying different speakers, amps, and cd players to try them out. At the time most of the more inexpensive options either did not have bass, or were boomy, or the fidelity did not seem right. Sure they were set up that way in the showrooms but even after adjusting the tone controls or whatever could be adjusted none of this seemed to help. This was not a scientific experiment. I also went to a bunch of higher end shops and some audiophile shops at the time to listen to what was available. In the end with limited experimentation I heard an amazing setup where it felt like the piano was in the room and I heard the pieces I used to play there in front of me. Was this speaker placement, proper setup, or I could have gotten this using cheaper components no matter. I bought a system that satisfied me and changed my listening from just getting a better system for the TV to listening to music again. It is subjective but that is what happened. You seem to doubt my experience. I am making no excuses. I subjectively had a good experience listening to music.

Do you doubt soundstage or imaging in a stereo setup? Please show me the psycho acoustic studies to dispute that. I am open to read and discuss if you can point me to this. I am interested in the science and would like a better understanding of the effects that I hear. If they are psychological so be it. Show me the studies etc... If soundstage and imaging are things that can be measured then I would also like to read about that.

The only things I have experimented and seen some change is moving the speakers wider or further from the walls. I did not do a scientific study of the impact on my room but from my perception I heard differences. I think this is corroborated in different studies of room acoustics although I did not do a study obviously. Is that what you really expect when people set up an audio system in their home?

Sheesh - all I asked for was some articles, data, or measures. I think there are studies that can better elaborate on speaker placement than I can answer from my "experience." I think you know that and all you are after is an argument or to denigrate my experience. If you want to add something useful it would be appreciated. Please point me to articles, studies, measures, etc....

 

[amirm]

Do you doubt soundstage or imaging in a stereo setup? Please show me the psycho acoustic studies to dispute that. I am open to read and discuss if you can point me to this.

You should buy Dr. Toole's book: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B074CHY128/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i0

There is extensive coverage of issues with stereo and how multi-channel solves them. Things like poor frequency response of phantom image in stereo, what it takes to have envelopment, etc. are covered in incredible detail with research paper after research paper cited and summarized. Probably 20% of the book is dedicated to issues of reflections in the room, psychoacoustics of imaging, envelopment, etc., etc.

 

[ashegedyn]

You should buy Dr. Toole's book: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B074CHY128/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i0

There is extensive coverage of issues with stereo and how multi-channel solves them. Things like poor frequency response of phantom image in stereo, what it takes to have envelopment, etc. are covered in incredible detail with research paper after research paper cited and summarized. Probably 20% of the book is dedicated to issues of reflections in the room, psychoacoustics of imaging, envelopment, etc., etc.

Thanks I saw a reference to this in another thread as well and was starting to look for the book.
Appreciate the pointer.

 

[NTK]

Thanks I saw a reference to this in another thread as well and was starting to look for the book.
Appreciate the pointer.

There are also very helpful resources in this thread. Look under the Psychoacoustics heading.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/lecture-library.9105/