Has DSP turned us into audio neurotics? [rant]

[Sokel]

I have promised myself three things,long time ago.
- this hobby must be fun
- this hobby is the means to a greater cause
- any upgrade must be "WOW!" upgrade (except my silly diy stuff) .Same size speakers for example just for different "tunning" don't cut it,must be way bigger to change them (there's no other "WOW!"-er upgrade,everything else even if a little different is the same the next day)

So,DSP is NOT one of these upgrades and surely far from a good treatment.But it's a tool nevertheless when sanely used.
I'm with Dr Toole on this,religiously,I tried EVERYTHING before even I was biased about his study.Minimal down low and that's it.
(and when DSD enters at my mixed playlists and cancels it I can't say I miss it )

So...

 

[MattHooper]

that's what I do too!! I have three subwoofers parked, I tried and tried again, but it always gave me a strange effect. I also used the AV preamps, with the possibility of changing the setting....I didn't understand anything!! in the end I dismantled everything, put it aside and with my simple system I started playing with the speakers and the acoustic treatment, ASC tube traps....I had fun, and for months now I've been listening to music without worrying about anything, just writing a few posts around here. No more tests, no cables, microphones, instructions, manuals, the same track to try to understand...I listen to music and nothing more!!!

*bro fist bump*

I appreciate measurements. Whenever I read Stereophile, I always read the measurements as well to help round out the info.

But being more of an artsy fartsy (even though I work in sound POST PRODUCTION)
I’m just not attracted to the work of doing measurements myself. Some people have a natural interest in that type of thing, and thank goodness because I get to benefit from their work ! But it’s not attractive work for me. That’s why I left that work to the acoustician I hired to design my room. Boom. Done.

Between the fiddling with subwoofers and room correction, and the approach of playing around with different materials in building a base for my Joseph speakers, the latter appealed a lot more to me. The sort of tactile experience of working with all the different materials and footers, just listening to see if the result appealed to me, with a little bit of “ mystery” and unpredictability involved, if only out of my own sheer ignorance. Not to mention whatever bias effects I might have been enjoying. It wasn’t as objective (even though I did a tiny bit of measuring using a vibration app), and certainly not scientific, and it doesn’t constitute results anyone here would find useful. But it was fun, and I’m totally happy with the results.

“ Know Thyself” goes along way…

 

[kyuu]

I think what we'll end up with is not perfection but rather soulless homogeneity. It will be very, very good in quality -- but more or less bereft of character.

Yeah I don't get this at all. Character and soul is a quality of the content, not the equipment. All the equipment is there to do is reproduce the content correctly.

 

[Timcognito]

When one thinks about it the most important things are the music and performance, then transducing that energy into electrical signals via microphones, placement and venue. Good electronics are a commodity, so next are the speakers and speaker design which is very much dictated by the microphone measured output and digital, mechanical and/or analog processing to get linear transduction back to sound by the designer. So the third and highly important factor would be placing the speakers and ameliorating the rooms deleterious effects on the sound. So DSP is a very powerful tool in getting accurate sound and is pretty much one of few substantial things the end user has control over in purchased audio gear and music.

 

[MattHooper]

Yeah I don't get this at all. Character and soul is a quality of the content, not the equipment. All the equipment is there to do is reproduce the content correctly.

That reminds me of a thread I created asking:

Do we want all speakers to sound the same?

The idea being that if there is some ideal we arrive at in terms of how speakers should measure, then in principle it would be better if “ all speakers measured like that” which suggest that they would sound essentially the same.

Basically, that idea that speaker design reaches commodification of a sort, a unanimity of sound.

That’s not an idea that appeals to me as I like the variations I hear among loudspeakers.

Many others in that thread seemed to be happy with the idea of speaker performance, being commodified and unified.

As to one Soundsystem having more “ soul” than another, I get that.

NOT in the sense that it is an inherent quality of the system, as if everybody would rate that system as “ having more soul.” But in terms of my own personal reactions, I have certainly found sitting in front of some Soundsystem to be quite a sterile experience Which I don’t care to prolong, versus other systems, which seem to hit all my pleasure points, and sweep me up in the music.

 

[Daverz]

I've obsessed over many things that never got me very far toward getting satisfying sonics: turntables, tonearms, cartridges and record cleaning equipment; tube rolling; hi-rez digital; and fiddly speakers (e.g. Vandersteen Quatros with their dedicated high-pass filter, adjustable tilt and 11-band analog EQ).

DSP could mean just applying some PEQ filters to tamp down the biggest bass peaks (based on measurements). That will probably give the most overall sonic improvement for the effort put in. Beyond that the subject can get very technical very quickly, with lots of conflicting opinions out there about how to apply it "properly".

 

[klettermann]

This has been illuminating and helpful in charting my path forward. Here it is: use what I've got to best advantage and enjoy it! What's that mean? I've got a nice 2ch system, a very useful equalizer (Shiit Loli Max), 2 OK (but not fancy) subwoofers and 4 ASC tube trap towers. This is all in a nice new soundproof media room. And everything can be positioned without any WAF constraints.

"Do what you can, where you are, with what you have.". Actually I'm pretty damn fortunate, cause what I have is more than I ever dreamed of back in college with those AR2a's. So, no new DSP! No more bass traps! Maybe I'll get around to building some acoustic panels but I'm not sweating it. Thanks to all and now back to the music! Cheers,

 

[MattHooper]

Going back to DSP and subwoofers …

The thing that always gave me caution about trying to integrate subwoofers using a crossover (and DSP or whatever) is the idea that I, some amateur who has never designed a loudspeaker, is now redesigning the loudspeaker I bought.

If I’m taking a floor standing speaker from a skilled speaker designer, that designer has used long experience and expertise to carefully make the sound cohere among all the drivers and throughout the frequency range. And then it’s like handing over this speaker to me and say “ OK now you redesign the speaker crossover, and try to make it cohere with some totally different drivers in a box placed somewhere else in the room. Good luck.”

A while back I had Jim Thiel’s flagship CS 3.7 speakers. I absolutely loved those speakers: they were the most coherent speaker I’ve ever heard, and I’m an absolute stickler for the specific tone and timbre of loudspeaker, and these speakers were just bang on for my taste.

But I had to downsize a bit from those due to some ergonomics in my room. so I bought a secondhand pair of the Thiel CS 2.7 speakers, which were the follow-up to the 3.7 and slightly smaller, and which did not reach as low in the bass. I was a bit worried that this would entail they would have a somewhat different total balance, and timbre.
But I had both speakers in my room to compare and the Thiel designers nailed the job. The 2.7 had just the tonal balance and timber that I loved in the 3.7.

OK now it comes to when I try to integrate subwoofers with the 2.7s. Even though I had a great CR1 crossover from JE audio which makes integration a snap, and even adding DSP to flatten out the base frequencies for integration, no matter how I tried, adding the subwoofers changed the character somewhat of the 2.7s. The timber and tone changed enough that I didn’t like it as much.

So despite my efforts, I could not do with the Thiel designers managed to do which is to maintain great consistency of sound even across different speakers with different woofers and different bass frequency response.

So after a while, I just gave up.

I could imagine perhaps that many people would not have minded or noticed or cared about the slight change in tonality to the speakers, and have simply appreciated the addition of lower, flatter bass response.
But I’ve got to please me, And I decided to stick with the speakers as designed and as I originally fell for their sound.

 

[GXAlan]

no matter how I tried, adding the subwoofers changed the character somewhat of the 2.7s. The timber and tone changed enough that I didn’t like it as much.

I think this is one reason that a lot of AV gear (where subs are necessary) would switch out the bass management in 2 channel Pure Direct mode.

That said, just as a little bit of negative feedback is bad and the solution can be MORE feedback, I think the strength of DLBC, RoomPerfect, and Trinnov Waveforming is in the bass integration with not a lot of effort.

 

[levimax]

After several years of messing around with sub integration with near full range speakers it has become apparent to me that subs don't really do much unless the music is playing quite loud. The Fletcher-Munson curve in action. For playing music with LF content loud then the subs can really shine by adding an extra octave of FR, higher SPL, and reduced IM distortion. My current solution is to have it both ways. For normal volume levels and most content just the mains are fine and I prefer it to using the subs but the difference is small. For loud listening level with a lot of LF content I can switch in the subs (placed, timed, and EQ'd) and enjoy that experience as well. Compared to upgrading the main speakers the subs have been disappointing on balance.... but can be fun at times

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Going back to the original question:

Has DSP turned us into audio neurotics?

I think audio neurotics have existed since people needed to choose which needle to use in their wind up gramophone. I don't think it's a specific technology that causes this, but the personality of the individual. You can see the behaviour over decades with each new "opportunity". It's fed by adverts and by magazines. Some might attribute it to FOMO. Ultimately, DSP is just a tool.

 

[voodooless]

You can see the behaviour over decades with each new "opportunity"

Methods change, not the madness...

 

[Purité Audio]

Reducing room gain with EQ is arguably the single largest improvement you will ever make.
I really don’t understand why a listener would not want a completely full-range sound.
Keith

 

[Rednaxela]

During the first year of owning a DEQ2496 I used to be a little bit neurotic.

No longer though. I have settled for a filter set that works very nicely for me and I'm now just enjoying the music.

 

[Keith_W]

I have promised myself three things,long time ago.
- this hobby must be fun
- this hobby is the means to a greater cause
- any upgrade must be "WOW!" upgrade (except my silly diy stuff) .Same size speakers for example just for different "tunning" don't cut it,must be way bigger to change them (there's no other "WOW!"-er upgrade,everything else even if a little different is the same the next day)

So,DSP is NOT one of these upgrades and surely far from a good treatment.But it's a tool nevertheless when sanely used.

Funny that, I have the exact opposite view

DSP IS fun.
DSP IS a means to a greater cause.
DSP can definitely give a WOW factor.

More and more people are buying microphones and using REW. And when they start seeing all the horrors there is to see, they will want to do something about it. That will surely drive DSP adoption.

 

[CapMan]

More and more people are buying microphones and using REW. And when they start seeing all the horrors there is to see, they will want to do something about it. That will surely drive DSP adoption.

I agree with @Keith_W - measuring in my room and using DSP has been totally liberating.

How far you take it is just about your personal wiring - I'm happy to run Dirac a couple of times , check things in REW and sit back. Others will want to invest more time and experiment - it's free so why not! (Unlike most other audio tweaks).

It's like car cleaning - some are happy with a sponge and a bucket which gets them 80% there, others will want to clay bar, wax, seal and all that other stuff to get the last 20%

 

[CapMan]

Reducing room gain with EQ is arguably the single largest improvement you will ever make.
I really don’t understand why a listener would not want a completely full-range sound.
Keith

The 15dB bump I have at 55Hz fully supports your point !!

 

[Sokel]

Funny that, I have the exact opposite view

DSP IS fun.
DSP IS a means to a greater cause.
DSP can definitely give a WOW factor.

More and more people are buying microphones and using REW. And when they start seeing all the horrors there is to see, they will want to do something about it. That will surely drive DSP adoption.

I've been using them (and still am) for about 10 years.Funny thing is I had respect about my measurements,I regarded them as of high value!
Till I made my new home and put pros to fix my (chaotic) listening space.
Then I understood that all I did was close to a joke.

Ok,they had some value correcting down low but that's about it.
So,yes,DSP can be great.Specially the RC part of it.
But the gear it needs to be done right are way-way over from what it's worth to invest let alone the knowledge it needs to use them fixing a room WITHOUT even having gear in it.

I do not invalidate what others do,they can have all the fun they want.
I just feel way uneducated to trust myself and the silly gear.

 

[Waxx]

DSP actually stopped my endless tweaking on my main (diy) system. It's done with adding a MiniDSP flex (even without Dirac) to it. I did measure, tweak and came to a good sound. And since then i did not touch it anymore... I probally made 10 different passive crossovers for it over the 12 years i had that system before (in different versions of cabinets also), and they all worked but had little faults. Now it's done so i started the project for a new main system (which will take years probally) because my nerdy self was bored...

But i still also see places where passive crossovers are valid, or the combination of both. It's just that we have more options now and DSP is a very powerfull tool. And now the sound quality of the convertors and processing is beyond our hearing limit with some devices like the Flex, i and the rest of the world can use it in critical systems without affecting sound quality in one or another way. But like with everything, the trick is to not overdo it, and that is hard for nerdy autistic perfectionists like many here on this site (including myself).

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

DSP does not create neurotics, it reveals them.

My car, my office, my vintage speakers, all play with no dsp. I play my main system with no DSP at times (at lower levels).

I only have one system that I do everything I can with in terms of DSP, but that's it's purpose. To be "that". Everything else, I just enjoy the variation and focus on the tunes.