Vinyl is not as bad as I expected.

[MattHooper]

That's not a quibble at all. My home speakers do not have perfect phase response as I do not use DSP at home and they are very enjoyable and measurably accurate in the frequency and time domain. And, lot's of expensive pro audio speakers sound bad, especially at domestic levels. I'm talking more specifically about systems with sophisticated FIR processing along with some of the older Meyer systems with analog processing to flatten the phase response.
Cheers

Just wondering: Would speakers like the Kii Audio Three fit your perfect phase response description?
(Those are among the speakers I've heard and admired but not loved).

FWIW: I use Thiel speakers at home, passive, but time/phase coherent. I have no idea if it's due to time/phase coherency or other aspects of the design, but they have a particular level of precision, focus and density with imaging, like they've "lined up all the sonic information correctly" that I find lacking in most other speakers (other speakers tend to sound a bit 'swimmy' in their imaging).

 

[psemeraro]

Which high end professional loudspeakers with flat frequency and phase response are you referring to? Has Amir measured any yet?

Home 'correction' of loudspeakers and rooms via DSP is over a decade old at this point. Products in that area range from simple to complex.

HI. I'm referring to EAW Gunness focused, and Meyer pretty much everything in the past few years. There are others but EAW and Meyer are the ones I'm most familiar with. You can look up EAW NT and focusing to learn more. I dont think any have been tested here.

I am familiar with DSP room correction available domestically that can perform basic functions like eq, crossovers, time delay,etc. What I'm referring to is manufacturer "black box" captive processing that goes further to include flattening of the phase curve, dealing with cone resonances, horn reflections, and more in dsp. I'm familiar with the Venu360 processor Amir tested and others like it. They are basic processors that along with good measurement allow proper setup of a sound system, but they are nothing like the more sophisticated FIR processors with manufacturer developed presets like EAW UX 8800 or Crown's V5 presets that run on Crown HD.

Amir should have access to Crown HD and a JBL tour speaker where he can load latest FIR presets along with older more basic presets and compare the difference in loudspeaker performance. In use, the difference is startling.

 

[psemeraro]

Just wondering: Would speakers like the Kii Audio Three fit your perfect phase response description?
(Those are among the speakers I've heard and admired but not loved).

FWIW: I use Thiel speakers at home, passive, but time/phase coherent. I have no idea if it's due to time/phase coherency or other aspects of the design, but they have a particular level of precision, focus and density with imaging, like they've "lined up all the sonic information correctly" that I find lacking in most other speakers (other speakers tend to sound a bit 'swimmy' in their imaging).

Appreciate this discussion! Phase coherent (drivers matching in time at the crossover frequency) is not the same as flat phase (literally a flat line when measuring phase response) Most speakers when measured will show a phase "wrap" which is a time domain behavior error and is separate from drivers being "in time" at their crossover frequencies.

Just looked up the Kii speakers and I didnt see anything about the level of dsp correction and will assume it is the basic level of eq/crossover/time delay and limiting.

This speaker uses the David Gunness temporal processing https://www.presonus.com/products/Sceptre-S6

This is an example of a JBL speaker with V5 tuning. Note the author uses words like "incredibly detailed, smooth, etc) not words you normally associate with PA speakers. I can tell you the even EAW's least expensive powered speakers with FIR "focusing" have a very wide deep soundstage, reverb tails that go forever, etc, again, not how you would normally describe PA speakers. https://www.svconline.com/industry/strother-bullins-reviews-jbl-srx835p-402893

Here is some more detail from David's current company. He and John Meyer were really the pioneers on flat-phase processing (to my knowledge) https://www.fulcrum-acoustic.com/audio-technology-insights-resources/temporal-equalization-tq/

Bluehorn from Meyer https://meyersound.com/news/first-bluehorn-patent/ "The system-specific correction algorithms hosted by the processor were developed by meticulously analyzing all physical and electrical non-linearities throughout the entire system, from 25 Hz to 20 kHz, in order to bring acoustic output – at any level – into phase and frequency alignment with the input signal. Essentially, the digital processing nullifies the non-linearities of drivers and enclosures, resulting in a phase-coherent response previously achieved only by open-air electrostatic headphones"

It's difficult to describe the difference in words other than the sound is "put together" in a natural sound way. Being able to A/B the same speakers with standard processing and time-based FIR processing is eye-opening. When mixing live sound, the instruments dont "fight" each other in the mix but blend more naturally like how they blend in real life. Its difficult to describe but hopefully my explanation makes some sense?

 

[abdo123]

Appreciate this discussion! Phase coherent (drivers matching in time at the crossover frequency) is not the same as flat phase (literally a flat line when measuring phase response) Most speakers when measured will show a phase "wrap" which is a time domain behavior error and is separate from drivers being "in time" at their crossover frequencies.

Just looked up the Kii speakers and I didnt see anything about the level of dsp correction and will assume it is the basic level of eq/crossover/time delay and limiting.

This speaker uses the David Gunness temporal processing https://www.presonus.com/products/Sceptre-S6

This is an example of a JBL speaker with V5 tuning. Note the author uses words like "incredibly detailed, smooth, etc) not words you normally associate with PA speakers. I can tell you the even EAW's least expensive powered speakers with FIR "focusing" have a very wide deep soundstage, reverb tails that go forever, etc, again, not how you would normally describe PA speakers. https://www.svconline.com/industry/strother-bullins-reviews-jbl-srx835p-402893

Here is some more detail from David's current company. He and John Meyer were really the pioneers on flat-phase processing (to my knowledge) https://www.fulcrum-acoustic.com/audio-technology-insights-resources/temporal-equalization-tq/

Bluehorn from Meyer https://meyersound.com/news/first-bluehorn-patent/ "The system-specific correction algorithms hosted by the processor were developed by meticulously analyzing all physical and electrical non-linearities throughout the entire system, from 25 Hz to 20 kHz, in order to bring acoustic output – at any level – into phase and frequency alignment with the input signal. Essentially, the digital processing nullifies the non-linearities of drivers and enclosures, resulting in a phase-coherent response previously achieved only by open-air electrostatic headphones"

It's difficult to describe the difference in words other than the sound is "put together" in a natural sound way. Being able to A/B the same speakers with standard processing and time-based FIR processing is eye-opening. When mixing live sound, the instruments dont "fight" each other in the mix but blend more naturally like how they blend in real life. Its difficult to describe but hopefully my explanation makes some sense?

this doesn’t make a lot of sense to be honest. Unless it is in anechoic conditions.

Reflected sound has inherently different phase, so whatever ‘smoothing out’ you do will be corrupted by the reflections.

However, one could make the same argument about the frequency response itself. So it might be actually beneficial to ‘start with a clean slate’ before engaging phase response focused room correction.

 

[psemeraro]

this doesn’t make a lot of sense to be honest. Unless it is in anechoic conditions.

Reflected sound has inherently different phase, so whatever ‘smoothing out’ you do will be corrupted by the reflections.

However, one could make the same argument about the frequency response itself. So it might be actually beneficial to ‘start with a clean slate’ before engaging phase response focused room correction.

 

[Andysu]

Liking my Technics SL-1210GR for second day, thou I rather like my Cats instead.

I have my own video up later showing the wonderful noise of snap crackle and pop. I like it.

 

[psemeraro]

this doesn’t make a lot of sense to be honest. Unless it is in anechoic conditions.

Reflected sound has inherently different phase, so whatever ‘smoothing out’ you do will be corrupted by the reflections.

However, one could make the same argument about the frequency response itself. So it might be actually beneficial to ‘start with a clean slate’ before engaging phase response focused room correction.

You're exactly right. This is about the speaker/amplifier "system" on its own being intrinsically accurate including flat phase response. The room is a completely different variable and "room correction" by the end user via DSP, treatments, etc is a different process but that process is made easier and potentially more successful if the user is only correcting the speaker/room interface, not trying to correct inaccurate speaker plus room interface.

 

[Andysu]

Fight Night, 1985 this vinyl is frighteningly scary the bass kick was kicking and resonating in my chest via the JBL cinema and Lucasfilm Ltd THX Sound System. I have a video later up where I react to it. I played the first track "fright night" it made feel disorientated almost feeling sick, good thing I wasn't playing a 105dB. Not sure I didn't think to checking with SPL dB may have been 105dB as the cinema JBL can easily go above 105dB and the JBL subs, something about the vinyl? Wow.

 

[Andysu]

James Honer
Star Trek II the wrath of khan, a vinyl disc that is best served cold on Technics SL-1210GR

 

[Andysu]

Fight Night, 1985 this vinyl is frighteningly scary the bass kick was kicking and resonating in my chest via the JBL cinema and Lucasfilm Ltd THX Sound System. I have a video later up where I react to it. I played the first track "fright night" it made feel disorientated almost feeling sick, good thing I wasn't playing a 105dB. Not sure I didn't think to checking with SPL dB may have been 105dB as the cinema JBL can easily go above 105dB and the JBL subs, something about the vinyl? Wow.

I may give this another spin tomorrow not now still recovering from it. That made me feel nauseous. but a cool bass beat .

 

[Mountain Goat]

I've been in mastering booths, I'm not a professional by any means but I do know when it was done right. 70's and early 80's classical music was done exceptionally well by a few record companies such as Deutsche Grammophon, Arciv. That era of artistry simply isn't commonplace any longer. Double tracking on tape etc, all done by hand. Physically cutting and splicing reel-reel tapes to create a track. A lost artform. I'm sure a few do it, but a very few people.

Legendary 80s punk star turned legendary recording engineer (don't call him a "producer" to his face) and analog recording studio owner Steve Albini. He cuts during this series of talks:

His analog studio: https://electricalaudio.com/

 

[Andysu]

I have attached a headphone cable from my headphone to the jack input on the Sony SDDS DFP-D3000 (THX approved) then connected my oscilloscope probes cables to the tiny jack end of the headphone then conncected the + to the audio mixer, then lead to the Sony 4k handicam to do a direct sound from the Technics SL-1210GR.

 

[Andysu]

Corrected a imbalanced as I noticed on the oscilloscope the signal was too high on one channel yet after some troubleshooting for a 40mins to see the A-chain was balanced which it was, I then rewired the input jacks to another input on the audio mixer where I had a balance control to correct the 7dB imbalance with 1KHz sine for equal balance.

 

[Andysu]

LSO the true original Star Wars music sound for six Fox Star Wars, not that jar jar abrams trash scored in usa.

 

[levimax]

Corrected a imbalanced as I noticed on the oscilloscope the signal was too high on one channel yet after some troubleshooting for a 40mins to see the A-chain was balanced which it was, I then rewired the input jacks to another input on the audio mixer where I had a balance control to correct the 7dB imbalance with 1KHz sine for equal balance.

7 dB imbalance is a lot! Sounds like something is broken.

 

[Dackel]

forgive me for wading in here. But there is no way that the vinyl can beat CD technically. CD (yes good old 44Khz) is technically better in all aspects to vinyl. Apart from the technical specifications of the formats how could it be? The record label takes the same 44khz recording, which will be used for both the LP and CD versions , and then for the LP passes it through a multitude of mastering and manufaturing stages before the physical record itself is created. So objectively the humble CD will win outright (and that is what this forum about right?) . On the other hand there is no getting away that subjectively LP can sound amazing and in some aspects can end up better sounding than the same CD version. It can be a more enjoyable experience (there a a multitude of real reasons why which have been discussed in this thread - DR springs to mind). The emphasis here though is on 'can sound better' because in order to achieve that goal everything with the analog system has to be set up perfectly. And that takes skill, knowledge and a lot of effort (and is probably more expensive to boot)

 

[solderdude]

CD (yes good old 44Khz) is technically better in all aspects to vinyl.

Vinyl is technically 'better' in one aspect though compared to CD and that is frequency response.

 

[krabapple]

Is it though? Being able to output very high frequency content does not mean the response is *accurate*. (Nor of course does it mean humans can hear it.) CD response can be 'flat' nearly to their bandwidth limit. Nor of course does it degrade with repeated playback.

 

[Dackel]

Is it though? Being able to output very high frequency content does not mean the response is *accurate*. (Nor of course does it mean humans can hear it.) CD response can be 'flat' nearly to their bandwidth limit. Nor of course does it degrade with repeated playback.

no one is listening to vinyl for an accurate frequency response and even the most die hard super audiophiles will admit to that. If that were the aim then there would only be one type of cartrige (the super flat response one ). With digital we had the opportunity to hear the same recording which was made in the studio. But it was wasted because the record labels have never made use of the full technical capabilties of CD to create quality sound instead they used it for brinkmanship on the radio utilizing ever louder and hotter recording levels. The end result is that many modern CDs (some classical excluded) dont sound as good as they could. Ironically the limitations of vinyl have meant that it is generally mastered quieter which in many cases can then sound better.

 

[krabapple]

no one is listening to vinyl for an accurate frequency response and even the most die hard super audiophiles will admit to that. If that were the aim then there would only be one type of cartrige (the super flat response one ). With digital we had the opportunity to hear the same recording which was made in the studio. But it was wasted because the record labels have never made use of the full technical capabilties of CD to create quality sound instead they used it for brinkmanship on the radio utilizing ever louder and hotter recording levels. The end result is that many modern CDs (some classical excluded) dont sound as good as they could. Ironically the limitations of vinyl have meant that it is generally mastered quieter which in many cases can then sound better.

It's not true they 'never' made use of it; there have been numerous fine-sounding masterings on CD (and on 'higher rez' digital formats) , and by no means are they all classical. And 'quieter' is not always better.