Embracing Simplicity in Audio: Anyone Else Skipping Room Correction, Measurement Microphones, and the Like?

[MattHooper]

The non-highlighted parts are full of response triggering rhetoric. Intentionally or not, the controversy has been there from post #1.

If someone here finds that triggering, that seems to say more about them than the OP.

In all seriousness, I think measurements are fundamental. Part of the reason is the audio industry exists in such a circle of confusion. Leads to all sorts of odd pseudo-science like fancy cables, fancy feet, green pens, etc. More practically, randomly moving around speakers and furnishings and changing rooms without knowing what the various room modes are. Not understanding how the room measures and interreacts with your speaker is the antithesis of ASR.

Sure, many on ASR see using measurements as fundamental - in this case in the service of ironing outspeaker/room response. But one can acknowledge the usefulness of doing so, for that goal, without doing it yourself. One can find value in ASR for avoiding audiophile woo-woo, b.s. marketting/audiophile claims, and gain some understanding in one's areas of gear interest. It doesn't entail everyone has to do in his/her system everything the most accuracy-devoted members have done.

Also, while room measurements have allowed more revealing information, and DSP has allowed more surgical precision in getting flatter sound, it's not like audiophiles have never been able to achieve good sound without all that, up to this time. Yes, it's less precise to experiment with speaker and listener positions just using your ears, and some issues may go unnoticed. But plenty of problems are quite noticeable and can be ameliorated to some degree by playing with placement. If many problems were not obvious enough just in what we can percieve unaided by technology, then we wouldn't need to bother with measuring in the first place. Why care about what you can't notice without a laptop and a mic? In the end, most care about noticeable, audible problems, and some of those problems are tractable by just experimenting! Often enough so as many audiophiles, like the OP, have found high sonic satisfaction.

And to again to bring in talk about "fancy cables, fancy feet, green pens, etc." seems to be associating the OP with all sorts of negative concepts that I do not see in his posts or attitude.

It may come across as snarky or condescending if you want, it really isn't my intent.

Fair enough. I'm just giving my take too.

 

[droid2000]

OMG

My brother, your tongue-in-cheek and nuance detector must be in cold storage next to your measurement microphone.

 

[Old Listener]

To clarify near field listening is insufficient to minimise room influences. The OP might not care, but we know there are a lot of people following threads without participation and they might run away with this idea if no one refutes it.

I think this statement is a bit too general.

My opinion:Near field listening can't substantially reduce the effects of room modes. Above those low frequencies, it can reduce room influences. Just how much depends to the geometry of the listening room and the position of speakers and listener in the room.

 

[computer-audiophile]

I had a yagi on a rotator on the roof for years.

Rotor antenna, yes, those were the days, but it still sometimes hissed when the signal was borderline weak to go to stereo. I prefer Internet radio with wide reception.

 

[Rednaxela]

If someone here finds that triggering, that seems to say more about them than the OP.

Why more? Why not just as much? Or also something?

 

[Geert]

I think this statement is a bit too general.

It has been explained in detail earlier in the thread.

 

[mhardy6647]

Engineer chic!

I was initially gonna also post where's his pocket protector? But then I looked more closely and... sure 'nuff, he does appear to be sporting one!

 

[fpitas]

Is that haircut also Engineer chic?
Actually all nerd stereotypes may have birthed from that very photograph.
Hair, glasses, pens in pocket, questionable trousers.
Keith

Don never claimed to be anything but an engineer. And some of us are perhaps a little geeky

 

[mhardy6647]

Rotor antenna, yes, those were the days, but it still sometimes hissed when the signal was borderline weak to go to stereo. I prefer Internet radio with wide reception.

Had one on House 3.2, but I've been loath to put one on this house (House 4.0) for a variety of reasons.
I've been toying also with putting one in the attic (either a directional antenna with a rotator* or an omni) above the hifi loft. I did have coax installed when the house was built, just in case!

___________________
* of course I have a rotator box, motor, and cabling in the basement, just in case.

 

[MAB]

And to again to bring in talk about "fancy cables, fancy feet, green pens, etc." seems to be associating the OP with all sorts of negative concepts that I do not see in his posts or attitude.

If it seems that way, fair. I can see how you would interpret it that way. But really not my intention, I am describing the state of the industry, and the circle of confusion we all exist in, and the veil that can be removed by measuring.

Fair enough. I'm just giving my take too.

Thanks, appreciate.

 

[MattHooper]

Measurements are fundamental and required.

Required for whom?

Does every ASR member have to sign a pledge that they will use a full range system, employ room measurements, a required amount of room treatment and DSP, in order to be an accepted member? We don't want that level of dogma do we? This is a big tent one hopes, right?

I think we should remember to keep separate the fundamental usefulness of measurements in various forms, from the implied requirement that an ASR member must engage in measuring his system and flattening the response in order to be a member in good standing, or they will be cast as "against the ethic of the forum."

Some even imply that to be an ASR member is to be devoted to the highest possible accuracy, therefore it's nonsensical to be an ASR member and yet still enjoy playing vinyl. And yet...we have a turntable phono section of the forum. Not everyone who doesn't like audiophile woo-woo has precisely the same goals, and ASR can satisfy any number of approaches.

 

[Geert]

Why care about what you can't notice without a laptop and a mic?

Pick one or many: because our ears/brain don't have the resolution to pinpoint the issues, most people don't have the skills, even if they do it's a terrible process of trail and error, and it's not easy to have a collection of reference recording you're sure of how they should sound. OP can do as he pleases, never said anything else, but no need to slide into an 'Are measurements Everything or nothing' discussion.

 

[computer-audiophile]

I've been toying also with putting one in the attic (either a directional antenna with a rotator* or an omni) above the hifi loft. I did have coax installed when the house was built, just in case!

___________________
* of course I have a rotator box, motor, and cabling in the basement, just in case.

Great that you had so many houses/upgrades! Of course you need a good aerial for your beautiful tuner collection. Are there any good FM stations in the area?

 

[computer-audiophile]

... but no need to slide into an 'Are measurements Everything or nothing' discussion.'

Agreed! I would like to take this opportunity to speak out against black and white thinking.

 

[DonR]

That can get complicated too. I had a yagi on a rotator on the roof for years.

My grandparents had a Bush TR82 on top of the fridge. That was relatively simple with only MW and LW bands. They listened to The Archers on it. We had to be perfectly quiet while that was on or leave the kitchen.

My favourite tuners are the all-discrete separates from the 70s. Keeping it simple would require me to fall back to a crystal detector. My best reception by far comes from a Sony HD tuner that is all-digital, however.

 

[MattHooper]

Pick one or many: because our ears/brain don't have the resolution to pinpoint the issues, most people don't have the skills, even if they do it's a terrible process of trail and error, and it's not easy to have a collection of reference recording you're sure of how they should sound.

Again: the greater precision and helpfulness of measurements in getting maximum neutrality is obvious, and acknowledged.

But of course if you don't know how to do it, that also takes gaining some knowledge, skill, understanding and experience using, understanding and properly deploying room measuring and DSP. Some don't care to bother and find satisfaction without it. As Stuart Smalley councils us:

I also find it somewhat exaggerated to say that dialing in a system by ear is a "terrible process" of trial and error. First, even employing measurements when moving your speakers or subwoofer to optimal performance spots will involve some trial and error. But in any case, I've managed to pretty easily place many different loudspeakers in my room, without the need for mics and laptops and measurements and DSP, and nonetheless achieved what I and most guests tend to recognize as spectacular sound quality. Not technically perfect...but to the ear...plenty good!

OP can do as he pleases, never said anything else, but no need to slide into an 'Are measurements Everything or nothing' discussion.

Not sure what you mean. Are the folks posting about the virtues (and even necessity) of measurements sliding in to 'Are measurements Everything or nothing' discussion?

The subject of asking who is eschewing such stuff is literally in the thread title.

 

[Multicore]

I didn't expect pictures of pets to appear in this thread.

Victor gramophone and Nipper, Bose Bluetooth speaker and Zeno, ... It's all perfectly logical.

Had one on House 3.2, but I've been loath to put one on this house (House 4.0) for a variety of reasons.
I've been toying also with putting one in the attic (either a directional antenna with a rotator* or an omni) above the hifi loft. I did have coax installed when the house was built, just in case!

___________________
* of course I have a rotator box, motor, and cabling in the basement, just in case.

Put in an omni and see how it goes. Seems a shame to waste the coax. Can always upgrade it if it seems like a station you want to hear could benefit from it.

 

[Balle Clorin]

No,

 

[DLS79]

But of course if you don't know how to do it, that also takes gaining some knowledge, skill, understanding and experience using, understanding and properly deploying room measuring and DSP. Some don't care to bother and find satisfaction without it. As Stuart Smalley councils us:

as I already showed here, it can't get much simpler than software that walks the user through the process.

Embracing Simplicity in Audio: Anyone Else Skipping Room Correction, Measurement Microphones, and the Like?

After decades in the hobby, I've realized that every recording and mastering has its own sound profile so I equalize everything the way I like best. I think of myself as the last creative link in the chain. That is also a very interesting attitude, I can understand.

www.audiosciencereview.com

But in any case, I've managed to pretty easily place many different loudspeakers in my room, without the need for mics and laptops and measurements and DSP, and nonetheless achieved what I and most guests tend to recognize as spectacular sound quality. Not technically perfect...but to the ear...plenty good!

Setting yourself aside, how many people who are buying gear that costs in the hundreds of dollars do you think even know what to listen for?

 

[MattHooper]

as I already showed here, it can't get much simpler than software that walks the user through the process.

Embracing Simplicity in Audio: Anyone Else Skipping Room Correction, Measurement Microphones, and the Like?

After decades in the hobby, I've realized that every recording and mastering has its own sound profile so I equalize everything the way I like best. I think of myself as the last creative link in the chain. That is also a very interesting attitude, I can understand.

www.audiosciencereview.com

That video is targeted at professionals, working with DAWs. Most audiophiles aren't working on DAWs and may not have the required audio interface, and not everyone is using a computer as their source. We are often talking about audiophiles with existing set ups, and so going about room measurements/DSP will be easier for some than others. And some people enjoy doing that stuff...other's don't.

In my set up, full o' tube amps, turntable as well as digital sources, none of them run by computer, it was extra equipment and hassle I didn't care for. YMMV.

Setting yourself aside, how many people who are buying gear that costs in the hundreds of dollars do you think even know what to listen for?

I was responding to Geert's view: "most people don't have the skills, even if they do it's a terrible process of trail and error"

So as an audiophile who has long used his ears, I pointed out I don't agree with that bolded part.

And I don't consider myself ultra skilled. I think many audiophiles have achieved very good sound over the years before room measurements/DSP became popular and easier to use. We may disagree on that to some extent, since what they found to be good sound may not be up to your standards of neutrality. But I have spent lots of time listening to many different audiophile systems, from super expensive to pretty cheap, and I've heard lots of amazing sound. Heck my first nirvana moment was listening to second hand Quad ESL 63s with a dynaco ST-70 tube amp in my friend's little basement and it was the most amazing sound I'd heard! Optimized? No. Amazing compared to most other systems owned by my friends? Hell yes!