Bruno Putzeys ‘Life on the edge’

[Multicore]

I didn't say 'improve' but ...

Then why start your answer to the question "I can’t see how a transparent system can improve poor recordings?" with "It can do though in my experience, ..." ? That's confusing.

 

[Sokel]

I want to ask for examples but I won't because this thread is way off in the weeds already.

A good overall example are Radiohead in general.
They are just unlistenable to high-hot gear.
Put at KH420 for example and it's where they should be.

 

[antcollinet]

Pop is such a wide label, but here are some pretty commercial examples produced the last 10 years or so. These are not cherry picked to be especially pristine recordings, and the DR is probably mostly pretty low. But they all still pass the test of sounding better on better systems with flying colors.

And let's not forget the queen of pop. And whatever you think of the artistic merits of this particular track, it sounds great.

 

[DSJR]

Then why start your answer to the question "I can’t see how a transparent system can improve poor recordings?" with "It can do though in my experience, ..." ? That's confusing.

Apologies for not making myself clearer. Does - A decent uncoloured system 'Improve one's perception' of bad recordings - help you any better? If you've never heard this for yourself, it's just clumsy words on a forum page

 

[AnalogSteph]

And let's not forget the queen of pop. And whatever you think of the artistic merits of this particular track, it sounds great.

Maybe not entirely surprisingly so. Content loudness +5.7 dB, that's not even hot hot by pop standards. Probably around -9.5 dB RG track gain, DR5-6ish. You can get quite a bit out of that if you know what you're doing.

So we can conclude that "more revealing" could be a function of either reduced indirect sound (generally good) or wonky frequency response (not good). Not trivial.

 

[JSmith]

the queen of pop

... gold hotpants.

Apparently her butt is insured for $5 million.


JSmith

 

[pjug]

... gold hotpants.

View attachment 402383

Apparently her butt is insured for $5 million.


JSmith

Oh, that kind of Pop.

 

[tmtomh]

Look at 8361A,all 4-10kHz range in comparison to the rest of the range down low,It's subtle but it's there.
Compare it with older models and you'll see,I have done it 100 times before to see what's bothering me sometimes (I'm very sensitive there,not an ear condition,that's checked yearly,probably a brain one,I have it since my teens,I'm a walking RTA for pronounced highs with the round headache I get if they are there)

Ruling out the class AB amplification and analog el. x-overs vs class D and DSP for the new as I have tested it myself all what's left was the FR.
So...

Every source I've seen says human hearing is most sensitive from either 1kHz or 2kHz up to 5kHz. So 4-10kHz might be where you feel you're especially sensitive, but it's mostly above the range where human hearing is generally most sensitive.

At any rate, here is the 8361a Klippel measurement from @amirm 's review:

The energy from 4-10kHz is basically identical to the energy from about 300Hz to about 1500Hz. From 1500Hz to about 3200Hz the response looks to be a bit more choppy, to the tune of +/-1.5dB through that range as opposed to what looks to be about +/-0.5dB in the rest of the frequency ranges.

So I don't see a pattern, subtle or otherwise, that supports your claim. And as many folks have pointed out in other threads over the past couple of years, the 8351b's response is even slightly smoother.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Every source I've seen says human hearing is most sensitive from either 1kHz or 2kHz up to 5kHz. So 4-10kHz might be where you feel you're especially sensitive, but it's mostly above the range where human hearing is generally most sensitive.

At any rate, here is the 8361a Klippel measurement from @amirm 's review:


View attachment 402388

The energy from 4-10kHz is basically identical to the energy from about 300Hz to about 1500Hz. From 1500Hz to about 3200Hz the response looks to be a bit more choppy, to the tune of +/-1.5dB through that range as opposed to what looks to be about +/-0.5dB in the rest of the frequency ranges.

So I don't see a pattern, subtle or otherwise, that supports your claim. And as many folks have pointed out in other threads over the past couple of years, the 8351b's response is even slightly smoother.

One could argue that it's slightly hot on-axis from 300hz to 2khz. That could definitely come across as "revealing", not necessarily in a good way. If we look at the estimated in-room response instead, we see that it's sliiiightly hot from 1500-3khz, but not much. Not likely to be enough to be problematic. We do not see an increase in 4-10khz.

Amir's listening test says it's slightly lean sounding, and might need a bit of bass boost - which might be enough to remove the experience @Sokel has. "Wrong" level in the bass is often perceived as problems further up.

 

[Sokel]

Every source I've seen says human hearing is most sensitive from either 1kHz or 2kHz up to 5kHz. So 4-10kHz might be where you feel you're especially sensitive, but it's mostly above the range where human hearing is generally most sensitive.

At any rate, here is the 8361a Klippel measurement from @amirm 's review:


View attachment 402388

The energy from 4-10kHz is basically identical to the energy from about 300Hz to about 1500Hz. From 1500Hz to about 3200Hz the response looks to be a bit more choppy, to the tune of +/-1.5dB through that range as opposed to what looks to be about +/-0.5dB in the rest of the frequency ranges.

So I don't see a pattern, subtle or otherwise, that supports your claim. And as many folks have pointed out in other threads over the past couple of years, the 8351b's response is even slightly smoother.

One could argue that it's slightly hot on-axis from 300hz to 2khz. That could definitely come across as "revealing", not necessarily in a good way. If we look at the estimated in-room response instead, we see that it's sliiiightly hot from 1500-3khz, but not much. Not likely to be enough to be problematic. We do not see an increase in 4-10khz.

Amir's listening test says it's slightly lean sounding, and might need a bit of bass boost - which might be enough to remove the experience @Sokel has. "Wrong" level in the bass is often perceived as problems further up.


View attachment 402409

You're probably both right and I would weight more on the "lean" explanation as I'm a strong fun of rich mid-bass and impact so I must probably look at things always in comparison.
That's probably the reason I like KH420.
Good thing is that are all EQable (with a low Q of course) so adjustable to taste or needs.

 

[Chr1]

Surely we are talking about "flat" rather than "lean" here?
What monitors are designed to be.

The possible question is : do you want a bit more bass/mid baked in to the speaker or would you rather do it via DSP? For me the latter.

(Obviously smaller monitors don't really do bass like the KH420. Therefore subs usually required there obvs.)

 

[antcollinet]

... gold hotpants.

View attachment 402383

Apparently her butt is insured for $5 million.


JSmith

They googled it. It must be true.

We hear some crazy stories in the media to make you click on a headline, but after some extensive Googling, we’ve found some fun facts that we think are true.

 

[Sokel]

Surely we are talking about "flat" rather than "lean" here?
What monitors are designed to be.

The possible question is : do you want a bit more bass/mid baked in to the speaker or would you rather do it via DSP. For me the latter.

Obviously smaller monitors don't really do bass like the KH420. Therefore subs usually required obvs.

I would sure like the ability to do so,better still if flexible.
But mid-bass is a very misunderstood story.It's what satellites and subs placed apart struggle to do for example.
And the reason W371 stands for.
There's a ton of energy there (at classical the main bulk) that has to be translated properly to sound rich and natural.

That probably comes from a driver able to do it obviously,at an appropriate size cabinet.
That's what broad,older speakers did with ease with their big drivers even if they were not so nice overall and also what mains monitors do,obviously.
It's probably that balance that I like.

 

[Chr1]

I decided on the KH310s as I wanted something capable of "mid", at least. Could not afford the KH420s. They are on top of the subs too, so this helps with integration.
(Tho I realise in saying this, I may be opening another whole can of sub-placement worms!)

 

[Sokel]

I decided on the KH310s as I wanted something capable of "mid", at least. They are on top of the subs too, so this helps with integration.
(Tho I realise in saying this, I may be opening another whole can of sub-placement worms!)

X-overed high-ish I suppose and of course stereo.
Yes,that can do it.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Surely we are talking about "flat" rather than "lean" here?
What monitors are designed to be.

The possible question is : do you want a bit more bass/mid baked in to the speaker or would you rather do it via DSP? For me the latter.

(Obviously smaller monitors don't really do bass like the KH420. Therefore subs usually required there obvs.)

It's hard to say how they will sound in a room, but I would also suggest they're probably a bit lean. Forgive me for using my own speakers for comparison, but I will since I know them well, and because I think they have a more correct in-room response in the upper bass / lower mid than many speakers.

We can at least agree that the the Genelecs is leaner, and then it's a larger debate what is most accurate I guess.

Genelec is the dotted one below. Ours would be paired by a sub, so it would typically be extending in a straight line from the start of the roll-off. So the response would be above the dotted line of the Genelec all the way to 20hz. It gives a fuller response, and to me more accurate compared to actual live instruments (which are typically not lean sounding at all).



On-axis:

 

[misterdog]

However, if you want to blame something for the decline of hi fi, blame the poor economic perspective for the younger generation.

Worse than the shit show of the economy in 1970's UK ?

The 1970's and 80's were the hay days of HiFi.

Though we didn't have the Chinese producing SOTA equipment for peanuts then.
I would argue that HiFi is more affordable now than ever.

 

[Sokel]

Though we didn't have the Chinese producing SOTA equipment for peanuts then.
I would argue that HiFi is more affordable now than ever.

It's peanuts if you get one of them,not 10 the same year
Patagonians has a say translated roughly as "cheap eats the money" .

 

[misterdog]

It's peanuts if you get one of them,not 10 the same year
Patagonians has a say translated roughly as "cheap eats the money" .

The same nonsense was attached to Japanese HiFi in the 70's yet many of us are still using this same kit.

 

[Sokel]

The same nonsense was attached to Japanese HiFi in the 70's yet many of us are still using this same kit.

No,I'm not talking about the (whatever) quality of the devices,I'm talking about the mentality "it's cheap,let's buy one each month" .
Cost is always measured through time,that's the only meaningful metric.