A Broad Discussion of Speakers with Major Audio Luminaries

[sceptical1]

The direct sound might come from the front, so your brain calculates instruments being localized as coming in from the front as well. ´No sound from behind or above´ is not true, though, as particularly concert halls, opera houses and churches have a pretty significant RT60, so actually a lot of sound is coming in from non-frontal angles. Particularly when you are sitting somewhere further from the musicians. It is just your brain being capable of recognizing the significant amounts of indirect sound patterns as reflections, so they are not directly affecting localization.



I have recently been attending an opera performance in a ´modern´ (constructed in 1874), some people say the most advanced worldwide, iteration of such a theatre, which offers both excellent singing intelligibility and orchestral ambience, at the same time:

View attachment 479233

Encourage everyone to witness one or two evenings there. It is a life-changing experience in terms of how you perceive music and sound in a closed venue. Avoid the rows 20+, though!

How could this possibly sound great when nobody took any measurements at the time? :/

 

[dagfinn]

How could this possibly sound great when nobody took any measurements at the time? :/

Maybe they did?

"The ancient mystery surrounding the great acoustics of the theater at Epidaurus in Greece has been solved.
The theater, dating to the 4th century B.C. and arranged in 55 semi-circular rows, remains the great masterwork of Polykleitos the Younger. Audiences of up to an estimated 14,000 have long been able to hear actors and musicians--unamplified--from even the back row of the architectural masterpiece." https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...theaters-may-no-longer-be-so-great-180965360/

14.000 unamplified!!!

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305433730_Project_Ancient_Acoustics_part_2_of_4_Large-scale_acoustical_measurements_in_the_Odeon_of_Herodes_Atticus_and_the_theatres_of_Epidaurus_and_Argos

https://pure.tue.nl/ws/files/51052504/2016_Project_Ancient_Acoustics_part_4_of_4_Stage_acoustics_measured_in_the_odeon_of_herodes_atticus_and_the_theatre_of_argos_Wenmaekers_Nicolai_Hoekstra_Hak_update_.pdf

 

[Newman]

When I go to listen to a symphony in an auditorium, the music comes from the front. The soundstage is very distinct and focused in front of me; no sound comes from behind or above.

Measurements show that the typical audience member at a classical music recital hears far more sound energy from indirect energy reflected off the walls and ceiling than from the performers directly. Furthermore, psychoacoustic experiments show that this indirect energy is crucial to obtaining the highest levels of listening pleasure.

Of course, exactly what we should recreate in our listening room. With two cleverly placed speakers, I can have all this.

As Toole explains, and backs up with reference to psychoacoustic experiments, your claim is quite incorrect. Our acoustically-small home listening rooms create indirect energy that is perceived as largely negative, quite unlike the positively-perceived auditorium or hall. Two loudspeakers in an acoustically small space has been demonstrated to fail to provide numerous important sound qualities that are important to listeners.

Nothing else is needed for music.

At a minimum, musical energy from the rear and sides is needed, with a delay, reverberation and decay that our too-small home listening spaces cannot deliver. So something else is indeed "needed for music": multichannel loudspeakers surrounding the listener, driven by discrete channel feeds that are not merely modified versions of front left and front right.

I can't speak for you personally: after all, you might be an outlier, but it is very unlikely. What I can say is that the logic you used in the above posts is demonstrably wrong. Toole's books give a decent summary of the research behind this, conducted over decades by many researchers.

cheers

 

[Thomas_A]

What our rooms do deliver is another model. They are here. The room is a lounge with an opening to the event. It’s dependent on the setup at the recording. While surrounds sound is needed to be tranferred to the event. I can live with both models.

 

[Sokel]

Measurements show that the typical audience member at a classical music recital hears far more sound energy from indirect energy reflected off the walls and ceiling than from the performers directly. Furthermore, psychoacoustic experiments show that this indirect energy is crucial to obtaining the highest levels of listening pleasure.


As Toole explains, and backs up with reference to psychoacoustic experiments, your claim is quite incorrect. Our acoustically-small home listening rooms create indirect energy that is perceived as largely negative, quite unlike the positively-perceived auditorium or hall. Two loudspeakers in an acoustically small space has been demonstrated to fail to provide numerous important sound qualities that are important to listeners.


At a minimum, musical energy from the rear and sides is needed, with a delay, reverberation and decay that our too-small home listening spaces cannot deliver. So something else is indeed "needed for music": multichannel loudspeakers surrounding the listener, driven by discrete channel feeds that are not merely modified versions of front left and front right.

I can't speak for you personally: after all, you might be an outlier, but it is very unlikely. What I can say is that the logic you used in the above posts is demonstrably wrong. Toole's books give a decent summary of the research behind this, conducted over decades by many researchers.

cheers

Now wait, because I agree about classical venues but not all people are crazy about it like me.
I've been in live music (of all shorts) clubs which were smaller than my listening room and way worst or not treated at all acoustically.

Yet the music was fine and the experience of live was just fine as well.

I think that we sometimes picture suboptimal conditions like a dragon is about to eat us and vice-versa we picture some nice attributes like a revelation (nope, a small two-way no matter how good is just that and probably won't differ much than a worst one the next day)

 

[kyuu]

As Toole explains, and backs up with reference to psychoacoustic experiments, your claim is quite incorrect. Our acoustically-small home listening rooms create indirect energy that is perceived as largely negative, quite unlike the positively-perceived auditorium or hall.

I don't recall Toole saying that the reflections in a home environment are generally perceived negatively. Quite the opposite, actually.

Regardless, your point that the sound in a concert hall (or anywhere, really) does not solely come from the front even if that's where the stage is positioned is of course correct. And I think that would hold true whether you were in the audience or in a lounge open to the performance space.

 

[levimax]

The best live sound I have experienced whether classical or rock or whatever has been outdoor venues.

 

[Sokel]

The best live sound I have experienced whether classical or rock or whatever has been outdoor venues.

I like outdoors as well but I think it's not only the acoustics that boost the experience.
There's something magic in a nice summer evening with the galaxy strip on the sky for background for example, not many things can spoil that and it can alter everything in a positive way.

 

[Keith_W]

The best live sound I have experienced whether classical or rock or whatever has been outdoor venues.

Did those concerts have sound reinforcement?

Traditional classical performances in concert halls have no sound reinforcement. Reflections and reverberation are required for sound to even reach listeners at the back. If concert halls were treated with absorbers instead of diffusors and reflectors, the sound would be unpleasantly quiet at after a certain distance, barely above the noise floor.

 

[NTK]

Here is Dr Toole's opinion regarding unamplified outdoor concerts. (source)

 

[Newman]

I don't recall Toole saying that the reflections in a home environment are generally perceived negatively. Quite the opposite, actually.

The main exception that I am aware of is the importance of first reflection from the nearest side wall as an aid to the limitations of stereo playback. Other than that, like I said, he describes significant issues with the type of reflections and modes present in small rooms. Room modes in the low frequencies; dominance of reflections over reverence and diffusion in the higher frequencies: lack of sufficient delay between first arrival and indirect sound.

Regardless, your point that the sound in a concert hall (or anywhere, really) does not solely come from the front even if that's where the stage is positioned is of course correct. And I think that would hold true whether you were in the audience or in a lounge open to the performance space.

Critical distance being the term to describe the point where direct energy becomes less than indirect energy, and it is not a very long distance compared to the size of performance venues and the distance of the audience from the players.

 

[Bwaslo]

I submit that bagpipes sound infinitely better outdoors.

 

[mglobe]

I submit that bagpipes sound infinitely better outdoors.

Bagpipes sound best when played on a different continent than I’m on at the time.

 

[MattHooper]

The best live sound I have experienced whether classical or rock or whatever has been outdoor venues.

Interesting. Much of the worst sound I’ve experienced has been from outdoor venues.
I’m talking to amplified.

Could’ve been luck of the draw, but that’s how things went.

 

[Keith_W]

Interesting. Much of the worst sound I’ve experienced has been from outdoor venues.
I’m talking to amplified.

I am not sure we can draw a generalisation about "indoor venues" being better than "outdoor venues" because in both cases there is a huge variable - the skill of the sound engineer. Not to mention, where you are located. This is the same reason you can not say that one DSP program sounds better than another because the outcome depends on the user. For sure the general acoustics of an open space is different to a closed space, but that does not mean that one or the other always gives you a worse result.

 

[levimax]

I like outdoors as well but I think it's not only the acoustics that boost the experience.
There's something magic in a nice summer evening with the galaxy strip on the sky for background for example, not many things can spoil that and it can alter everything in a positive way.

Did those concerts have sound reinforcement?

Traditional classical performances in concert halls have no sound reinforcement. Reflections and reverberation are required for sound to even reach listeners at the back. If concert halls were treated with absorbers instead of diffusors and reflectors, the sound would be unpleasantly quiet at after a certain distance, barely above the noise floor.

Interesting. Much of the worst sound I’ve experienced has been from outdoor venues.
I’m talking to amplified.

Could’ve been luck of the draw, but that’s how things went.

For classical I have been to outdoor venues that have a structure for the orchestra and if you sit close to it I like the sound. As @Sokel mentioned part of the experience is being outside.

For amplified music there is a venue called Humpreys by the Bay in San Diego which is on the water. Seats 1,400 and their sound system and acoustics are fantastic. Best sound I have ever heard.

I have also been to many outdoor stadium concerts and for the most part the sound is terrible.

 

[Suono]

Measurements show that the typical audience member at a classical music recital hears far more sound energy from indirect energy reflected off the walls and ceiling than from the performers directly. Furthermore, psychoacoustic experiments show that this indirect energy is crucial to obtaining the highest levels of listening pleasure.

Reverberant field; if it weren't there, it would be a different sound. In our rooms, we don't hear reverberant sound; in fact, depending on the size of our room, we hear at least 10 early reflections that need to be treated appropriately because they are too charged with energy.

 

[Suono]

As Toole explains, and backs up with reference to psychoacoustic experiments, your claim is quite incorrect. Our acoustically-small home listening rooms create indirect energy that is perceived as largely negative, quite unlike the positively-perceived auditorium or hall. Two loudspeakers in an acoustically small space has been demonstrated to fail to provide numerous important sound qualities that are important to listeners.

I partially answered your question above. What if there weren't any secondary reflections, which you consider negative? That's not the case. Reflections beyond 30 ms up to about 50 ms are useful.

 

[Suono]

At a minimum, musical energy from the rear and sides is needed, with a delay, reverberation and decay that our too-small home listening spaces cannot deliver. So something else is indeed "needed for music": multichannel loudspeakers surrounding the listener, driven by discrete channel feeds that are not merely modified versions of front left and front right.

I can agree but recordings must be created for multichannel and I have never listened to a multichannel with its recording that sounded as realistic as a well-set stereo system.

 

[Mart68]

How many outdoor concerts take place in a open field? Surely there's going to be some boundary reflection? In a stadium you're surrounded on all sides by concrete, the only thing missing is the roof.

Ancient amphitheatres relied on it for sound reinforcement - stone seating and walls.

Hollywood bowl has hills all around and they set up in that concrete dome thing.