• Welcome to ASR. 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!

A Broad Discussion of Speakers with Major Audio Luminaries

Just curious. I attach my version,
Good evening Dr. Floyd. Alton Everest acoustics manual.
and you will see that even the first room reflections are around the threshold of detection for image shift. So, don't get concerned about "image shift and focus" caused by even later room
Crosstalk is certainly a general problem, but from what I understood from reading many years ago and from my listening experience, it is precisely the lateral crosstalk that is very close to the direct sound (short) and homolateral that is detrimental to the image and focus.
Image shift is a serious phenomenon. In my experience with systems that have been meticulously designed for acoustics and speaker placement, I haven't heard any shifts in the soundstage even when moving along the line of a single speaker.
 
Last edited:
The 4th edition will explain in more detail - it will be published Oct.28.
I know, I did some research to buy it, but I find such a technical manual difficult to understand. I'm waiting for a well-translated. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
I know, I did some research to buy it, but I find such a technical manual difficult to understand. I'm waiting for a well-translated version in Italian. Thank you.
Earlier editions of my books were translated into Chinese, but I know of no other languages. I understand language problems. Sorry I cannot help. Publishers are businesses.
 
At what sound pressure level from speakers does a person feel a blow to the chest?

The sensation comes from acceleration and displacement over a wide range of frequencies, where peak SPL is highly variable depending on the signal. Ordinary SPL meter would hardly tell anything useful.

The effect is rather a byproduct of a system that is behaving linearly as you turn up the volume, meeting the required demands of the signal within its operating range, and, on the other hand, body tissue that is highly nonlinear as far as acoustic impedance. The waveform summation you may actually feel is also highly variable depending on your position in the acoustic field.

Good thing is that our hearing has a protective mechanism, but, time of exposure is a huge factor when body sensation is dominant over perceived loudness (a clean system may not sound as loud as it actually is).
 
The sensation comes from acceleration and displacement over a wide range of frequencies, where peak SPL is highly variable depending on the signal. Ordinary SPL meter would hardly tell anything useful.

The effect is rather a byproduct of a system that is behaving linearly as you turn up the volume, meeting the required demands of the signal within its operating range, and, on the other hand, body tissue that is highly nonlinear as far as acoustic impedance. The waveform summation you may actually feel is also highly variable depending on your position in the acoustic field.

Good thing is that our hearing has a protective mechanism, but, time of exposure is a huge factor when body sensation is dominant over perceived loudness (a clean system may not sound as loud as it actually is).
"Good thing is that our hearing has a protective mechanism," I presume you are referring to the auditory reflex that acts on the middle ear bones. It acts as a high-pass filter so really does not protect hearing - bass is a low-risk part of the spectrum. It has been suggested that it exists to attenuate the low frequency sounds from our own voices when talking (it activates during speech) so that we can still hear other sounds. It is a plausible explanation, but I haven't followed the topic for many years. Another curiosity of the human body.
 
It is plausible IMHO, because our hearing is "tuned" evolutionary to detect danger.
 
It is plausible IMHO, because our hearing is "tuned" evolutionary to detect danger.
Yes, indeed. Like the perception of sounds within the head or behind when there is insufficient information to localize an external source, which causes a spontaneous head movement to resolve the ambiguity. This requires a sound that continues, which must have caused our hunter-gatherer ancestors great concern when a single twig snap was heard in the forest.:)
 
Yes, indeed. Like the perception of sounds within the head or behind when there is insufficient information to localize an external source, which causes a spontaneous head movement to resolve the ambiguity. This requires a sound that continues, which must have caused our hunter-gatherer ancestors great concern when a single twig snap was heard in the forest.:)
Maybe this even contributed to my "defection" from the surround "camp"? who knows...
 
Without saying what is right or wrong, there is difference between the goals of recreational listening and monitoring: Pleasure or source scrutiny. Nearfield stereo monitoring makes sense for that reason, to get a grip on ambience, LF fluctuation (auditory envelopment), intimacy and clarity baked into the content. Flush-mount main monitors actually reveal such content-qualities also.

Considering surround or 3D formats, however, right and wrong is clearer: Recreational listening should not just carry on with an enjoyable but dominant listening room:
The problem is that when a diffused signal is delivered from one speaker, of course it's entirely coherent at two ears, and no longer diffuse. This is why 5 or 7 channels can do a much better job, yes, the interference between them helps. A lot.
I generally don't want the room to contribute much, and experience from big rooms is not good due to poor design and poor acoustical performance. My goal is the build a Auro 3D setup in a room around 6x7m, or a litte bigger...
I agree to both. Multichannel formats are somewhat wasted if the listening room is allowed to dominate to the extent typical of recreational stereo listening.

It is generally simple to get a good image in a good room way, way, outside a critical distance, due to the way that the ear emphasizes the leading edges in an ERB.
Indeed. If you are able to hear inter-aural contrasts using noise-based AE test signals, you therefore also are in recorded music, when the quality is latent.

At 2-3m, the speaker dominates and I do feel physically "immersed" at 75-80dB SPL (which equates to 96db SEL).
Coming back to listening safety, Sound Exposure Level (SEL) should not be way above average SPL Where did you read “96 dB SEL” on the REW meter?

Anyway, raw SEL numbers are difficult to work with. Consider the NIOSH Sound Level Meter app, which is baseline calibrated per iPhone model, see attached. I have not yet seen an uncalibrated A-weighted reading more than 1.5 dB off. Hold the phone out from your body when measuring. Note the NIOSH baseline is 5 dB higher than WHO's (my post of 28 Sep), so use 20% Dose and 20% Projected Dose as safety limits, in order to observe WHO guidelines.

SEL explanation edited 10 Oct for clarification - hopefully :-)
 

Attachments

  • NIOSH SEL.jpg
    NIOSH SEL.jpg
    188.9 KB · Views: 44
Last edited:
I just looked for it on Tidal and I couldn't find it. Do you know where I might be able to hear that recording?
No. I think I have the CD, but those were limited-production recordings usually sold privately to family members and attendees. I’m not surprised they wouldn’t be available commercially. I was there in person, and usually attended the all-state concerts at the Texas Music Educators Convention during the years I lived in San Antonio.

Rick “will have to check the library” Denney
 
The sensation comes from acceleration and displacement over a wide range of frequencies, where peak SPL is highly variable depending on the signal. Ordinary SPL meter would hardly tell anything useful.

Something to remember is that the eardrum/3-bones system is a high pass filter itself that acts much like (assuming stapes reflex is not activating) a first order highpass filter with its knee at about 600 to 700 Hz, person depending.

This very serious attenuates very low bass signals, under 100Hz or so (well, it works above that, of course, but when you get under 100Hz or so, and it's still dropping at approximately 6dB/octave, the attention builds up very fast, obviously.

With very, very low frequencies (say 10-20Hz narrowband noise) and a clean (large volume enclosure with a huge driver, we built two a while ago, but we don't find any practical use) subwoofer, you can feel the pressure change on your chest and abdomen well before you even realize it's a sound you're hearing. Such signals may or may not be bad for you, but they don't even get to the cochlea in any substantial way.

Most subwoofers also create audible harmonics, you really can't do much with a smaller enclosure, even with positional feedback, as far as I've seen, to prevent that. Consider, for instance, a run of the mill 15" dayton "max" sub. Put it in a 15x15x15 enclosure, and you find that the interior volume changes enough during extension and compression (way over the 120 to 140dB SPL limit for linearity in air) to make an even order distortion system. This is why a lot of the "small, powerful" subwoofers can be quickly located, which should not be the case, because of audible harmonics above 90 hz or so. Even if most of the distortion is below 90 Hz, if the phase of the harmonics lines up on the cochlea, the CNS manages to help you locate this. (note, this is not like a 'steady tone' at one frequency, which isn't going to 'locate' anything, nor is it a variation in phase across the two ears, which again is audible, but which does not appear to provide directional sensation, only spatial sensation)

Yeah, people are complicated.

As to "loudness" (meaning the sensation level, not the power in the soundfield, please), adding harmonics is a way to increase the loudness of anything quite substantially. While low frequency bass may not be too terrible for the ear, high loudness means you are exercising a LOT of inner hair cells, and that does appear, although I have no clinical examples, to be bad for your continued hearing. I don't know any really clear work on this, annoyingly. Lots of confusion between effects, time exposure, etc, but not great data to grab on to.

Oh, and Floyd, indeed the "snap" in the forest is a classic example of how our auditory system is set heavily to the "detect more events, and therefore making more false events happen" side of things, probably because ducking when it's not necessary costs very little in evolutionary terms, and not ducking when the club is coming down can be extremely, um, painful, at least.

Edited to add about LF effects:

Oh, and to low frequency SPL: Consider barometric pressure changes. Yes, those are milliHz or microHz frequencies, but consider how big those change are. If you remember, approximately 194dB SPL is "1 atmosphere" amplitude. Driving from Estes Park Colorado to the Rocky Mtn National Park visitor center at the top is about a 3PSI change, if I recall correctly (it certainly lacks enough O2 for this human, let me tell you, wheeze wheeze). https://www.mide.com/air-pressure-at-altitude-calculator note, check your units FIRST!

3/14.7 = .2 .2 is about -6 db. If you didn't have your ear drum and eustachean tubes, you'd be dealing with a constant 188 dB stimulus at about 1/3600 Hz. Yeah, that eardrum is a useful thing, that.
 
Last edited:
"Good thing is that our hearing has a protective mechanism," I presume you are referring to the auditory reflex that acts on the middle ear bones. It acts as a high-pass filter so really does not protect hearing - bass is a low-risk part of the spectrum. It has been suggested that it exists to attenuate the low frequency sounds from our own voices when talking (it activates during speech) so that we can still hear other sounds. It is a plausible explanation, but I haven't followed the topic for many years. Another curiosity of the human body.

Sorry, I was actually referring to auditory compression mechanism, but there's also a startle reflex. @j_j talks about it for about 9 minutes or so, starting from here:

 
"Good thing is that our hearing has a protective mechanism," I presume you are referring to the auditory reflex that acts on the middle ear bones. It acts as a high-pass filter so really does not protect hearing - bass is a low-risk part of the spectrum. It has been suggested that it exists to attenuate the low frequency sounds from our own voices when talking (it activates during speech) so that we can still hear other sounds. It is a plausible explanation, but I haven't followed the topic for many years. Another curiosity of the human body.
The other day a friend was over and asked me to play some new music I've been enjoying, I was stuck at the time how the sound seemed thinner than I was expecting, I'd assumed a psychological trick, but it was physical, wasn't expecting that.
 
As to "loudness" (meaning the sensation level, not the power in the soundfield, please), adding harmonics is a way to increase the loudness of anything quite substantially. While low frequency bass may not be too terrible for the ear, high loudness means you are exercising a LOT of inner hair cells, and that does appear, although I have no clinical examples, to be bad for your continued hearing. I don't know any really clear work on this, annoyingly. Lots of confusion between effects, time exposure, etc, but not great data to grab on to.

Adding harmonics to the waveform as a way to increase perception of bass on smaller systems, and then reproducing the same at high SPL on a system that also does play the otherwise "missing" fundamentals? There are systems out there that can "put you in motion" while you are sitting still.
 
As to "loudness" (meaning the sensation level, not the power in the soundfield, please), adding harmonics is a way to increase the loudness of anything quite substantially.
Are you saying that comparing a high vs low distortion amp when level matched the high distortion amp will sound louder to us and as commonly thought unfairly better?
 
Adding harmonics to the waveform as a way to increase perception of bass on smaller systems, and then reproducing the same at high SPL on a system that also does play the otherwise "missing" fundamentals? There are systems out there that can "put you in motion" while you are sitting still.
Are you saying that comparing a high vs low distortion amp when level matched the high distortion amp will sound louder to us and as commonly thought unfairly better?

I'm not sure whether this is pertinent or not, but you may consider it:

from https://testhifi.com/2019/08/09/fla...rally-weighted-intermodulation-disconsonance/

"The cochlea is the part of the inner ear devoted to hearing. It is a 35 mm long spiral fluid filled tunnel of reducing aperture embedded in bone with 12,000 outer hair cells spread every 10 microns in sets of 4, each tuned to a different frequency.
Studies via instrumenting sets of outer hair cell neurons have verified the creation of harmonics within the cochlea. Those studies documented already in 1924 that the human ear produces such harmonics by itself. Inspecting this data, the second harmonic of a 1kHz fundamental tone is 50dB above the threshold of hearing. The ear creates significant levels of the second harmonic. To an amount of nearly 10% of the fundamental for sound pressure levels (SPL’s) of 90dBA and above. Even for the moderate SPL of 80dBA, the 2nd harmonic is at the equivalent of 65dBA or normal voice level, and the 3rd at 45dB. This is still ~40dB above the average human threshold of hearing, yet one does not hear the harmonics as a separate tone. Only a single pure tone is heard.


The ear/brain appears to be able to completely suppress the sound of a range of harmonics if they conform to this specific pattern. This pattern is the aural harmonic envelope. It follows that this same mechanism will mask harmonics arising in the sound reproduction chain if they follow this pattern.


If the harmonics do not follow this pattern, the ear brain indeed detects these as new tones. Therefore, we perceive any sound system that generate this harmonically consonant envelope as transparent, for all but extreme frequencies and sound pressure levels. Those sound systems that generate harmonic overtones outside the aural harmonic envelope will be perceived as distorted, less transparent."
 
Are you saying that comparing a high vs low distortion amp when level matched the high distortion amp will sound louder to us and as commonly thought unfairly better?

In reality, it is usually more like an effect of a tape recording vs. a PCM recording, or a vintage tube amp vs. a modern solid state amp.

In both of those cases, the tape or tube amp will have a distortion percentage that GROWS with higher output. It's not just more distortion, it's when the distortion occurs. In such cases, this can (have, does) create a larger peak loudness, by some amount (from very tiny to a fair amount), creating a sensation of higher peak level, even though tape and vintage tube amps are more compressive, so slightly lower ENERGY output, but with more harmonics, a higher LOUDNESS.

In general, substantial distortion will create a sensation of higher loudness, even if the actual non-linearity is compressive.

The problem? The biggest effects like this are JUST on the hairy edge of realizing THAT IS DISTORTING!!!! So in a small amount of increased effect, it goes from "sublime" to "ridiculous".

The other problem is that when you learn this, your tolerance for the effect tends to go down.

Perception is fun. Sometimes.
 
Thanks, I think :)
So, if I level match at 70db or 100db it won't mke any difference? Please don't ask me if one of the amps is clipping,neither one is even close.
 
In reality, it is usually more like an effect of a tape recording vs. a PCM recording, or a vintage tube amp vs. a modern solid state amp.

In both of those cases, the tape or tube amp will have a distortion percentage that GROWS with higher output. It's not just more distortion, it's when the distortion occurs. In such cases, this can (have, does) create a larger peak loudness, by some amount (from very tiny to a fair amount), creating a sensation of higher peak level, even though tape and vintage tube amps are more compressive, so slightly lower ENERGY output, but with more harmonics, a higher LOUDNESS.
Brilliant description. This is something that confuses many listeners to believe that high distortion tube amps are more “dynamic” than solid state amps. And the FR modulation effect (by complex impedance) with seemingly more bass.
 
Back
Top Bottom