Consideration about Timbre

[fas42]

Suppose 99% of audio systems had a flaw that meant that even though they might be very expensive and measured flawlessly in all conventional measurements, they were subtly blurring together the musical ingredients into a 'soup'. Individual ingredients no longer had their own satisfying textures and flavours that contrasted exquisitely against others because the system was liquidising them all together at some level. The only thing you could do would be to season the soup to the best average taste you could - hence tone controls, EQ and the use of 'room correction' ("It's definitely not a tone control, honest").

Perhaps there is such a flaw, and people can't imagine how it could be any different.
http://www.linkwitzlab.com/Attributes_Of_Linear_Phase_Loudspeakers.pdf

The alternative - when the system maintains the true separation of the ingredients - would be that you wouldn't even think about tone controls because each individual sound was fully-formed and self-contained.

Yes. That's it. Only, it's not a specific "flaw", but a combination of all the weakness, and subtle implementation issues that every system has, which add up to "colouring" the overall sound, and "liquidising" the critical low level detail.

The good news is that there seems to be almost no limit to how far one can go to "clean up the act" - I certainly haven't found such, so far ...

 

[Frank Dernie]

The problem with enjoying linear phase speakers is finding linear phase recordings to listen to to get the full effect.
I have heard a demonstration of a pair os dsp speakers where the demo consisted of listening to 2 pieces of music on the speakers, once with the DSP simulating a conventional passive crossover and a second time with the full DSP correction.
The first piece of music was a modern rock music track (I forget which now, only 10 months later ) and the improvement was audible but quite modest.
The second piece was a simply miked Gilbert and Sullivan comic opera where, despite not being a G&S fan, the improvement was one of the biggest I have ever heard in comparing stereos in 50+ years.

The problem is even classical music is a mixture of loads of mike feeds nowadays so finding recordings which benefit most from the technology won't be easy.

 

[Purité Audio]

Which speakers were those Frank?
Keith

 

[Frank Dernie]

Which speakers were those Frank?
Keith

It was at Scalford Keith. Linn sent engineers only and they were discussing and explaining their "Exakt" technology by demonstrating how they develop it using a Wilmslow Audio kit speaker.
They went through various measurements and steps and the experience I mention was the beginning to end comparison.
Best demo I have been to, no salesmen allowed

 

[Purité Audio]

Merci, it does sound as though Linn are trying to do something with Exact, I am still not sure why they just done use a microphone for the room measurements though?
BW Keith

 

[Frank Dernie]

Merci, it does sound as though Linn are trying to do something with Exact, I am still not sure why they just done use a microphone for the room measurements though?
BW Keith

I think they want a general compensation, rather than correction at one place and the potential for it to be much worse elsewhere in the room.
I don't use electronic room correction since it doesn't work in my system with CDs or LPs and the DSPeaker anti mode I tried streaming was unconvincing to me.

 

[March Audio]

Suppose 99% of audio systems had a flaw that meant that even though they might be very expensive and measured flawlessly in all conventional measurements, they were subtly blurring together the musical ingredients into a 'soup'. Individual ingredients no longer had their own satisfying textures and flavours that contrasted exquisitely against others because the system was liquidising them all together at some level. The only thing you could do would be to season the soup to the best average taste you could - hence tone controls, EQ and the use of 'room correction' ("It's definitely not a tone control, honest").

Perhaps there is such a flaw, and people can't imagine how it could be any different.
http://www.linkwitzlab.com/Attributes_Of_Linear_Phase_Loudspeakers.pdf

The alternative - when the system maintains the true separation of the ingredients - would be that you wouldn't even think about tone controls because each individual sound was fully-formed and self-contained.

Then, you might find yourself saying things like this (2 x Kii Three and 1 x Meridian review):

This has been precisely my experience through the process of designing my own DSP speakers - I just dont find myself thinking in those traditional terms any more.

 

[Nowhk]

I do not want my speakers or other components to color my sound; I like to start with a flat system and adjust from there.

The fact is: "flat" doesn't exist in any practical sense. Even if you buy 2 of the the most flat systems in the world, they sounds differents. i.e. explicitly you have added color. I think nothing you can do about...

I disagree with the premise we are "distancing" ourselves from the original. In many cases it is to get closer to what (we think) is the original sound.

The same as above: closer its not "exactly" the same. So even if you are close, you are away from it. Why hear somethings "closer" should be more realisting than somethings that add colors? In both case you are listening somethings not ideal. I don't say "so don't hear music", but why minor distance should be prefered by major distance? It's... always not the "real" one.

• Recordings reflect the taste of the people who mixed and mastered the recording. That may or may not match your taste.
• Your room and system are different than where the recording was made, whether a concert hall or a studio, so you may need to tweak settings to recreate the original sound, or what you think is the original sound. Everybody has a little different idea of what it "should" sound like.
• On the room, your room may emphasis highs and lows by being very reflective, or suck them out due to absorption and bass modes/SBIR effects, so you need to compensate for that. Flat speakers in an anechoic chamber will not be in your room (assuming it is not an anechoic chamber).
• If you do not play it at the same volume as the original then you will need to tweak bass and treble to account for perceived loudness (Google Fletcher-Munson).
• As you age your hearing rolls off and you may need to boost the highs to compensate.
• Preference is real; you may desire sound with more bass, more treble, boosted midrange, or whatever. Nothing says you cannot EQ to make it sound more pleasing to you the listener.

Do you agree that all of them change the original characteristic of the song? Even if in minor parts...
The same if you play with sophisticated pro gears, as said above: a bit of distortion always happens.

I think in both case you are:

1 - coloring the song with ANY systems
2 - don't hear the same across 2 different (same quality levels) equipements, because of the different (even if minor) distortions

Most of them I think won't agree with this (you DonH56 have already confirmed this by your last reply, with "I do not want my speakers or other components to color my sound").
I'm just asking "why and where" these two statements may be both false. Basically, the "I choose flat because I don't like color" don't make sense for me You are adding it... in any case...

That's why the phrase "it sounds better to me" make sense afterall: you are shaping (i.e. change tone, and other elements) as you prefer. Why otherwise that phrase would make sense? :O

The only thing you could do would be to season the soup to the best average taste you could - hence tone controls, EQ and the use of 'room correction' ("It's definitely not a tone control, honest").

What do you mean with "It's definitely not a tone control, honest". EQ is tone control, isn't?

 

[Cosmik]

What do you mean with "It's definitely not a tone control, honest". EQ is tone control, isn't?

Room correction may just be a surreptitious tone control for audiophiles who would claim their system doesn't need a tone control or who would normally eschew them...

 

[Cosmik]

The fact is: "flat" doesn't exist in any practical sense. Even if you buy 2 of the the most flat systems in the world, they sounds differents. i.e. explicitly you have added color. I think nothing you can do about...

There have been several comments on how similar the Kii Three and D&D 8c sound to each other. And I was reading an article this morning (but can't remember where!) on how speakers that are corrected can be made to sound very similar.

There is no mystery: modern electronics all sound the same; speakers have pretty predictable characteristics if created scientifically.

 

[Nowhk]

There have been several comments on how similar the Kii Three and D&D 8c sound to each other.

This shouldn't mean they equate "flat". It simply means they are similar. Just looks at FR of Kii Three. Not really a flat line.

There is no mystery: modern electronics all sound the same; speakers have pretty predictable characteristics if created scientifically.

Not sure about this, never tested so many pro equipment to say somethings like this. What I've tried always sound with different colors, even on treaty rooms.

In any case, even if you have a total flat setup, that's not how you tipically listen to music. You shouldn't either rotate your head, else some freq will mask others I find pretty maniac this approch, and useful only for measurements.

"Normal/daily" listening add colors, do you agree with this?
Or you don't play music in your living room? Or while you travel?

 

[Purité Audio]

The Kii THREE and Dutch&Dutch 8C measure pretty similarly and sound pretty similar.
Keith

 

[Cosmik]

This shouldn't mean they equate "flat". It simply means they are similar. Just looks at FR of Kii Three. Not really a flat line.


Not sure about this, never tested so many pro equipment to say somethings like this. What I've tried always sound with different colors, even on treaty rooms.

In any case, even if you have a total flat setup, that's not how you tipically listen to music. You shouldn't either rotate your head, else some freq will mask others I find pretty maniac this approch, and useful only for measurements.

"Normal/daily" listening add colors, do you agree with this?
Or you don't play music in your living room? Or while you travel?

This is something I bore people with frequently! I could give you several quotes from people in the industry who basically say the same thing: we 'hear through' the room to the speakers, and this is an ability that has evolved to allow us to locate and recognise the sources of sounds in a reverberant environment. Our hearing separates the direct sound from the ambience. We hear the ambience - so a horrible room still sounds horrible - but it is separate from the direct sound. So a flat speaker (with good dispersion characteristics) will still sound flat regardless of the room. You can't 'correct' the room by modifying the signal, and measurements don't show what we hear.

But I will not try to persuade you of this! Very few people are prepared to accept that smoothed frequency response measurements at the listening position are not the whole story.

 

[Nowhk]

This is something I bore people with frequently! I could give you several quotes from people in the industry who basically say the same thing: we 'hear through' the room to the speakers, and this is an ability that has evolved to allow us to locate and recognise the sources of sounds in a reverberant environment. Our hearing separates the direct sound from the ambience. We hear the ambience - so a horrible room still sounds horrible - but it is separate from the direct sound. So a flat speaker (with good dispersion characteristics) will still sound flat regardless of the room. You can't 'correct' the room by modifying the signal, and measurements don't show what we hear.

BINGO! Here's where I want to arrive.

SOOOOO...

If that's true, why "eq a bit" your sound? Why to spend those 1000€ plus for a minor/decent frequency response speakers and/or room?

In ANY case, having a decent setup, our brain is power enough to extrapolate things. So why lose time and money taking and testing similar setups when we already have this brain power?

Paradoxically, we don't need Kii THREE at all for our listening. Even my "decent" monitor pair provide enough signal to be extrapolate by our internal DSP brain I want you now... <3

 

[Purité Audio]

If you compare ‘traditional ‘ actives with the cardioid response speakers then you definitely hear more, there is separation, higher resolution it is totally obvious when you listen .
Keith

 

[Cosmik]

BINGO! Here's where I want to arrive.

SOOOOO...

If that's true, why "eq a bit" your sound? Why to spend those 1000€ plus for a minor/decent frequency response speakers and/or room?

In ANY case, having a decent setup, our brain is power enough to extrapolate things. So why lose time and money taking and testing similar setups when we already have this brain power?

Paradoxically, we don't need Kii THREE at all for our listening. Even my "decent" monitor pair provide enough signal to be extrapolate by our internal DSP brain I want you now... <3

I don't EQ my system beyond a minor compensation for the speakers' imperfect dispersion characteristics. And I still keep the speakers themselves linear phase.

People EQ their systems when they find (or possibly imagine) something offensive about the sound and cast around for a way to fix it. Phase, time alignment, uneven dispersion are the 'mysterious factors' that don't show up directly in traditional measurements but which may colour the sound. If the speakers are a bit haphazard to start with, EQ then adds another layer of random phase shifts, etc.

Or that's how I see it. As BE718 confirmed above, when the speakers are designed scientifically the urge to EQ diminishes.

 

[Cosmik]

I think it's a question of 'dimensionality'. A speaker is a combination of many different factors, some of which are more significant than others. For a typical speaker, some factors include:

• non-optimal cone damping
• non-optimal number of 'ways'
• non-optimal crossover slopes
• non-optimal crossover frequencies
• port characteristics
• phase shifts - various
• timing misalignment between the drivers
• uneven dispersion - narrow baffles are fashionable but may not be best for the sound
• inaccuracies between speakers

Changing one factor has knock-on effects for the others. The results are complex e.g. shallow crossover slopes result in driver distortion, while steeper slopes result in more aggressive phase shifts, etc. Changing the crossover filter also affects the cone damping, etc.

Some of these factors result in unstable characteristics that shift with signal content - stereo imaging suffers among other things.

The 'scientific' speaker (active, DSP, sealed, etc.) eliminates a lot of these complex detrimental factors and stabilises the performance regardless of signal content. Suddenly it begins to sound a lot more believable, hence the reduced urge to play around with EQ.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Room correction may just be a surreptitious tone control for audiophiles who would claim their system doesn't need a tone control or who would normally eschew them...

No idea how my name appeared on the phrase you reply to here?????

 

[Cosmik]

No idea how my name appeared on the phrase you reply to here?????

Not sure how I managed that! I've changed it anyway.

 

[fas42]

People EQ their systems when they find (or possibly imagine) something offensive about the sound and cast around for a way to fix it. Phase, time alignment, uneven dispersion are the 'mysterious factors' that don't show up directly in traditional measurements but which may colour the sound. If the speakers are a bit haphazard to start with, EQ then adds another layer of random phase shifts, etc.

Or that's how I see it. As BE718 confirmed above, when the speakers are designed scientifically the urge to EQ diminishes.

Exactly. Typically, the treble is "offensive", because the the level of audible distortion is far too high in this critical area, to be subjectively acceptable - not from the recording, but from playback misbehaviour. Which is not the fault of the speaker, or the treble driver, but the artifacts in the signal driving the speakers.

Active speakers, powerful DSP, are good ways to make sure the electronics do exactly what they need to do, and nothing more, and divides the load between multiple circuits - a highly effective mechanism for reducing the audible anomalies.