Timber/Timbre/Tymber/Tymmer matching for surround speakers

[polmuaddib]

I have one brand of speakers for LCR (B&W 804n and htm2 d2), another for Surrounds and Surround backs (Focal chorus), and a third brand (in ceiling, Monitor Audio cheapest) for top speakers. They are level matched and room correction is applied and when a good mix is played (whether a movie or music) I really don't have a feeling that they are different brands. The sound is full, transitions (cars, helicopters, rockets etc.) from front to rear and back are seamless, in other words, my immersion is complete and i enjoy the content. Would it be better if all speakers were same? Maybe, but it would be very expensive, and i am not sure if it would be justified...
BTW, I remember that there were recommendations for Rears, Surrounds.... to be higher then ear level placed. Ten years ago and more. But when height channels were introduced, recommendations are that bed channels shoud be ear level.

 

[JoachimStrobel]

What I want to know is: Does it matter? If is does, how through measurements can you do timbre matching?

If there's no objective way to timbre match speakers, I would think that timbre matching is marketing double speak.

You can use room correction software to analyse the speaker and potentially correct them. REW is good for that. You can play sweeps and use a microphone positioned at your hearing place to see the frequency responses. Mics like the Umik are objective as they do not have a head-transfer function that you have with your head and ears which gets in the way. Does it matter? That question can be asked for almost any audio gear... For sure, buying an identical centre speaker but placing the speaker horizontally and the others vertically defeats the purpose 100%.

 

[pozz]

What I want to know is: Does it matter? If is does, how through measurements can you do timbre matching?

If there's no objective way to timbre match speakers, I would think that timbre matching is marketing double speak.

There is no "timbre matching" for speakers or speaker drivers. All that's being discussed is plain old vanilla frequency response.

 

[pozz]

So based on these then, if placed on rear wall above listener, which I think is also done to increase distance for listeners, so that one isn't sitting too close to a single speaker, downfiring speakers such as Dali Alteco C1 be a better fit for compromised placement?

If you can only place speakers high because the room is too small or the decor won't allow it, then downfiring ones make sense. But then you could also buy a regular speaker and mount it on a bracket.

Distance and angle is all about controlling the room's mix of direct vs. reverberant sound. More distant or oblique placement is just a means to an end.

 

[Marakk]

If you can only place speakers high because the room is too small or the decor won't allow it, then downfiring ones make sense. But then you could also buy a regular speaker and mount it on a bracket.

Distance and angle is all about controlling the room's mix of direct vs. reverberant sound. More distant or oblique placement is just a means to an end.

Agreed. Downfiring makes more sense now especially after reading the recommendations by ITU. I'll look over my options and figure out what I can get. I'm thinking Atmos too. A 4.0.2 setup. No subwoofer coz apartment. Dali Alteco offer a lot of flexibility in placement but might be a tad low on bass., but maybe as they'll all be in corners, bass might get a small boost too. Plus, they'll look cleaner than speaker plus wall mount. I gotta mull this over. Thanks though. You have helped me settle the surround debate in my head.

 

[rrahmanucla]

https://www.svsound.com/blogs/speaker-setup-and-tuning/74790851-the-art-of-speaker-placement

I would disagree with SVS on this. They seem to be following older recommendations from before ATMOS. I would argue that the final arbiter on this for home theater would be Dolby, since the majority of block buster movies use Dolby ATMOS algorithms. From my understanding, Dolby assumes speakers are at ear height, since elevated surrounds will interfere with ceiling speakers as discernable points sources.

https://www.dolby.com/us/en/guide/dolby-atmos-speaker-setup/index.html

 

[Marakk]

Started reading Floyd Toole's book to actually know more before I commit to a system. Found this:

"In a home theater, if broadband pink noise (not the common band-limited
multichannel calibration signal) is switched to each of fi ve identical loudspeak￾ers, a listener facing forward will hear obvious changes in timbre. In jumping
from the center to the left front or right front loudspeaker, a high-frequency boost
may be heard. From there to either of the side surround loudspeakers, there are
more timbral changes. This is as it should be. To confi rm that all fi ve loud￾speakers in a system are similar in timbre, it is necessary to face each of the loud￾speakers as they play the same test signal. Then, and only then, can identical
loudspeakers have identical perceived timbres. This is the timbre matching
important to sound reproduction, not what is heard while facing forward."

 

[JoachimStrobel]

This is caused by the head related transfer function:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-related_transfer_function
That is the reason, why a synthetic centre channel fed from extracted left and right channels is troublesome.

 

[pozz]

Started reading Floyd Toole's book to actually know more before I commit to a system. Found this:

"In a home theater, if broadband pink noise (not the common band-limited multichannel calibration signal) is switched to each of five identical loudspeakers, a listener facing forward will hear obvious changes in timbre. In jumping from the center to the left front or right front loudspeaker, a high-frequency boost may be heard. From there to either of the side surround loudspeakers, there are more timbral changes. This is as it should be. To confirm that all five loudspeakers in a system are similar in timbre, it is necessary to face each of the loudspeakers as they play the same test signal. Then, and only then, can identical loudspeakers have identical perceived timbres. This is the timbre matching important to sound reproduction, not what is heard while facing forward."

Good find. Which version of the book and chapter was this in?

Note that, even here, the term "timbe matching" is about subjective impressions of speakers due to their placement around the room, not differences from speaker to speaker, and implies a test procedure to confirm evenness which can be applied whether or not all speakers are identical.

 

[LightninBoy]

"Timbre matching" was invented by speaker companies to make sure you bought 5-7 speakers from their models instead of 2. In my experience, If you care about multichannel music where the center channel is involved, match the front 3 speakers as best you can. But for HT in general, if you shoot for generally neutral speakers at all positions then you'll be fine.

 

[pozz]

"Timbre matching" was invented by speaker companies to make sure you bought 5-7 speakers from their models instead of 2.

You mean in those full multichannel sets. Right. Because going to another manufacturer's products should be angst-inducing and wrong.

You just reminded me of the talk my fellow salespeople used to say back when I was selling HT. I spent most of my days as a walk-in therapist for worried customers.

Another piece of ad jargon bites the dust.

 

[Marakk]

Good find. Which version of the book and chapter was this in?

Note that, even here, the term "timbe matching" is about subjective impressions of speakers due to their placement around the room, not differences from speaker to speaker, and implies a test procedure to confirm evenness which can be applied whether or not all speakers are identical.

Ahaan! I'll continue reading to update my knowledge. Finding it to be a fascinating read.

The book is Sound Reproduction: Loudspeaker and Rooms. Not sure about version. I found this on page 38, chapter 3.

 

[ace_xp2]

Surrounds were mixed as though they are at height in most 5.1/7.1 tracks IIRC, it mimics the way theaters are built. The atmos standard does indeed want the bed level at even height to the fronts, though this apparently sometimes sounds a bit off with upmixing of 5.1/7.1 (haven't heard it myself, but there's a pretty long thread an avr where were mentioned ending up low in the upmix.)

 

[Snoochers]

Any more thoughts on this? Building a home theatre and debating whether it makes sense to have JBL/JBL, REVEL/REVEL/ KEF/KEF LCRs and surrounds vs mixing (e.g., JBL/KEF).