Dr Toole,A great bang-for-the-buck question. First, there is good information that a 5 channel system can do an excellent job of replicating the perceived and measured envelopment of 12 and 24 surrounding channels - Section 15.7.1 in the 3rd edition. We also know that achieving truly good bass in small rooms is best done with 2 or 4 subwoofers in specific locations - not those locations that are optimum for the 5 satellite speakers - so why spend money on floor standers that are not as good at low frequencies as "real" subs. Consequently, my answer to your question is none that you suggested, but rather 5 M126Bes and 2 or 4 good subwoofers in a bass managed scheme. I have 7 base-channel speakers, 6 elevated speakers - all of which are high-pass filtered at 80 Hz - and 4 subwoofers in a "Sound Field Managed" (using digital processing in each sub feed) scheme (Section 8.2.8 in the 3rd edition). Simpler, lower cost solutions are possible as described in the same chapter. Multiple subs in one of these arrays can be small because as a group there are significant efficiency gains.
Anyone promoting LPs does not understand, or won't admit, that the signal that is extracted from an LP cannot be the same as the master recording. Cannot = can not! So, such people are content not to hear the art as it was created. This is provable fact, not my opinion. LPs are interesting as historical memorabilia, as are old cars, replicas of old cars, etc., which is absolutely fine - I would love to have an old Chevy to cruise around in on a sunny Sunday morning, but I have zero interest in LPs for enjoying music. Let the flames begin . . .
I am not Dr. Toole, but here a full description of his setup.Dr Toole,
Do you listen to stereo music mostly with multiple speakers and subs?
What do you use for your AVR/processor/amps and what do you use to control the subs?
Thanks!
I am not Dr. Toole either but I have been fortunate to visit and listen to his system. Yes, he does prefer to listen to stereo music with multiple speakers and subs and, iirc, he uses Auromatic for upmixing.Dr Toole,
Do you listen to stereo music mostly with multiple speakers and subs?
What do you use for your AVR/processor/amps and what do you use to control the subs?
Thanks!
I am not Dr. Toole, but here a full description of his setup.
https://www.thescreeningroomav.com/...te-Real-World-Home-Theater-and-Listening-Room
@Floyd Toole, I wonder if you could share your thoughts on the relative importance of dynamic performance and how useful it might be to have dynamics properly measured and included in loudspeaker reviews. I included interview quotes from Greg Timbers in the post linked below in which he said he believes that the dynamics required to reproduce live music are not given adequate consideration in most loudspeaker designs and that in his opinion Dynamics will make or break the loudspeaker system:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ewed-powered-monitor.25300/page-7#post-863296
...
Power compression is measurable and always is back in the design stages, but only occasionally is it revealed in specifications or in review measurements. This is useful information, although power compression has a significant time-constant - it takes time for the voice coil to heat up - so it is really difficult to hear. Mechanical or electrical limiting or "clipping" is easily heard and is to be avoided.
I discuss this in the companion website to my current book: www.routledge.com/cw/toole It is open access.
...
I had to dispute that statement to convince the (then) publisher to let me publish my (erstwhile) column, Music in the Round and I continue to review multichannel products. Unfortunately, most of the reviewers are less enthusiastic about multichannel than I am.
Dr. Toole,
Since you have not yet gone on vacation (form this) forum, I wonder if you would comment on panel speakers such as electrostatics and Magneplanars?
... particularly with respect to SpinoRama results compared to subjective listening experiences for them
The "bunch of seats and people" do indeed corrupt a well organized floor reflection from the audience floor - but not the stage floor. The same seats and people do however create a strong and audible "seat dip effect" - a fairly wide and deep dip in the frequency response around 100-200 Hz. Which one is worse? I wonder. But my favorite seats have been within the first 3 rows of the front balcony, mezzanine, terrace (whatever the first elevated level is called) where the seat dip effect has not been able to develop. Perfection is hard to find. I also like the experience of looking slightly down on the orchestra.
We actually do listen with our body and feet as well. So if you have a non-solid floor (won't work with say concrete), removing your own feet from the floor may actually have a similar effect as your spring-based pods. You may get an impression of cleaned up sound and attentuated bass. It's quite fascinating![]()
Agreed but I still acquire/download a couple of new ones each week.more source material would generate more enthusiasm
Quantum Logic is a totally different process intended to construct "new" listening experiences, not to subtly enhance stereo. Dr. David Griesinger, the brains and good judgment behind the original Logic 7 is retired. I know nothing about the current offerings - I too am retired.
Yes, even a quick listen is enough to tell one that what is now promoted as Logic 7 is not the same, or even a sensible development, of the original. It is a pity that they didn't change the name, but instead used the good reputation of the early Griesinger designs to sell something different.david and I have talked at length about this. He feels a good intentioned engineer likely misunderstood his original process and has since forever corrupted it beyond recognition. He told me that both “Logic 7” and the newer Logic 16 of devices made over the last 10-15 years are not reflective of his original intent. In fact the transition happened when Lexicon modified the surround processor they had at the time to include HDMI. Logic 7 was apparently reprogrammed for the new hardware and fundamentally changed. It’s too bad.
My experiience with too much absorption is howewver negative. Adding it at the spekaer wall side in moderate amount gives to me higher dynamics and quiteness in silent parts. Also, there is an feeling of needing more amplifier power, and to turn up the volume. The rest of the room has no special treatment. It sounds fine by me.
I’ve built a reputation of apparently liking things louder than most. For me, it adds to the perception of realism. It’s a scale issue. I find that the performance feels less real when the dynamics and output aren’t there.It is of course obvious that limiting dynamic range anywhere in the record/reproduction chain of events will negatively impact the ultimate "realism" of the listening experience. We have no control over the upstream events, so all we can do is attempt to prevent audible degradation in playback. Again, obviously, small cone and dome or horn loudspeakers cannot compete with large cone and dome or horn loudspeakers in terms of their ability to play loud. How loud, though? Loud enough, is the answer, and it should be done without obvious power compression in the loudspeaker drivers or clipping or protective compression/limiting in the amplifiers. Modern home theaters attempt to maintain the cinema sound requirement of peak levels of 105 dB at the listening position. With all channels running in a blockbuster movie audiences in cinemas often find that this is too loud and cinemas turn the volume down (by up to 10 dB) to keep patrons from walking out. In a small home theater these can be, in my terms, abusive sound levels, a hazard to hearing. So how much is enough is a personal thing, having something to do with the condition of one's hearing and the desire to preserve what one has. Hearing loss among musicians and recording engineers is common - it is an occupational hazard that ironically affects how well they are able to do their jobs.
But, back to the story, my LCR speakers were selected not to be limitations to dynamic range - they are large, and at my listening distance easily exceed my limits. I debated between the JBL Pro M2 (a modern "neutral" horn loudspeaker) and the Revel Ultima Salon2 (a large four-way cone dome design). The Revel won the appearance contest. There would be subwoofers, crossed over at 80 Hz, so the loudspeakers would be liberated to play even louder than in their full-bandwidth mode.
Power compression is measurable and always is back in the design stages, but only occasionally is it revealed in specifications or in review measurements. This is useful information, although power compression has a significant time-constant - it takes time for the voice coil to heat up - so it is really difficult to hear. Mechanical or electrical limiting or "clipping" is easily heard and is to be avoided.
I discuss this in the companion website to my current book: www.routledge.com/cw/toole It is open access.
Most music and movies do not challenge the limits to dynamic range, so part of the product selection/decision process is to interrogate one's listening preferences.