Can we hear anything, allowed to hear anything, or are you deaf/stupid?

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

If you listen to the video, Rob Watts actually says “the brain works at 250kHz”. I have no idea what that means. Certainly from what I remember when I studied some neuroscience, the nervous system works much slower than that - it’s to do with cell walls, myelin sheaths, refractory periods and the like. Here’s some lecture notes on the frequency of coding in the nervous system. 1000Hz would seem to be good going. This doesn’t of course mean that the nervous system can’t respond to much higher frequencies - obviously it responds to high frequency sounds and indeed light. But the brain does not “work at 250kHz”. Doesn’t stop Rob Watts designing good DACs though, but neither he nor his followers need to use bogus neuroscience to justify his designs.

I heard him say that, but the way I heard it, he was being metaphorical, so ‘works’ was in inverted commas. You may have understood it differently, but for me he was drawing an analogy, not literally making a claim about the brain’s ‘clock speed’.

Also, some on here seem to be using the term ‘objective’ when they seem to mean ‘technical’. It’s perhaps a small pedantry point, but if somebody makes a claim about ground planes, etc, that’s a technical claim; it only becomes objective if they allude to numbers or measurements. I’m sure all objectivists understand this, but if we desire precision in our discourse, let’s not let our standards slip, hey?

 

[dudywoxer]

I am pretty sure we can convince ourselves we heard whatever the hell it was we thought we heard, so subjectively it's all pretty much lurking somewhere in between our ears
Objectively, I am equally sure a lot of us would not want to live with the "best" measuring boxes of tricks on the market.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I did not go out to buy a hi-fi, I went looking for something that I enjoy listening to music on.
It may be an overs simplistic view of things, but I would imagine that as well as making listening more of a pleasure, it is of a higher fi than the average music system in use around the country.
Seeking to convert objectivists to subjectivity, or the other way round is about as pointless as presenting a vegan with steak pie.

 

[Alex S]

My comments are generally in reference to classical music.

But I agree that the pop audience is neither particularly demanding in regards to sound quality nor equipment.
It would have been so easy to provide a compression circuit or algorithm in phones and MP3 players and cars...

With superfluous to dad system I’ve found this true on uptake: ‘yeah, whatever dad’ but not on downtake: ‘no you’re not having that back, dad’.

 

[Andrew C!]

Just caught up reading the this thread.

Anyone wanting to hear a Z1 in tune upright piano, and then a recording of it thru my rig is more than welcome?

 

[Alex S]

Yeah please, we’ll all be round tomorrow.

 

[Andrew C!]

Yeah please, we’ll all be round tomorrow.

It wasn’t recorded by a BBC engineer tho...

 

[Alex S]

Sorry, I’ve booked the minibus.

 

[Cereal Killer]

Of the Sunshine Variety?

 

[Andrew C!]

Of the Sunshine Variety?

lol

Actually I retract the offer, as the recording equipment used may not have been of the right spec

 

[pocketkitchen]

I am pretty sure we can convince ourselves we heard whatever the hell it was we thought we heard, so subjectively it's all pretty much lurking somewhere in between our ears
Objectively, I am equally sure a lot of us would not want to live with the "best" measuring boxes of tricks on the market.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I did not go out to buy a hi-fi, I went looking for something that I enjoy listening to music on.
It may be an overs simplistic view of things, but I would imagine that as well as making listening more of a pleasure, it is of a higher fi than the average music system in use around the country.
Seeking to convert objectivists to subjectivity, or the other way round is about as pointless as presenting a vegan with steak pie.

It may be simplistic but the "Am I having fun yet?" approach has worked very well and reliably for me when choosing hifi over the years, to the point where I simply can't see myself upgrading again, bar cartridge replacement. Just got to hope nothing breaks now.

 

[camverton]

I'd bet your speakers do actually measure very well in some (important) respects, just not the ones Keith insists on trotting out at every opportunity.

That’s the chap, used to post here didn’t he?

I guess, if you have a product to sell than your products good points will become the most important. As for my various speakers they all have their pros and cons. Most people would regard them as hi-fi!

Quad dipole electrostatics image well with excellent resolution which is not achieved by tilting up the treble. Damn big things which need plenty of space behind them and can sound slight lacklustre at low volumes. Which is unlike Martin Logan’s which have a very forward sound, terrific detail but are best for a single listener. MBL omnis have very good on and off axis conformity, apparently something good, don’t image quite as well as Quads but do give an extraordinary sense of a musician playing in front of you, either in your room or taking you to a venue dependant on recording.

All the particular models I have, for my ears, need a sub but then again so do D&D. Measuring low frequency response with REW is not the same as feeling proper bass and that is not just a question of gain at low frequencies.

So, they all measure slightly differently and react with the room in a different way. Most realistic are the MBLs and least realistic are the D&D, but then again they are very good for analysing the recording but to my ears the sound always sounded like a reproduction coming from loudspeakers. The dipoles and omnis get out of the way and you just hear music. Difficult to explain, but if you like acoustic music, difficult to do without once experienced.

Measurements could help in determining the right sort of speaker for an individual but only if one knows how they correlate to the sound they produce and more importantly how they react to a particular room.

In the last analysis it is a subjective judgement as to which speakers give the higher fidelity to ones experience of the original sound, assuming it existed as such of course. Others, particularly with something to sell, may think differently which is fine and right for them particularly if their tastes in music are different to mine.

 

[DimitryZ]

That’s the chap, used to post here didn’t he?

I guess, if you have a product to sell than your products good points will become the most important. As for my various speakers they all have their pros and cons. Most people would regard them as hi-fi!

Quad dipole electrostatics image well with excellent resolution which is not achieved by tilting up the treble. Damn big things which need plenty of space behind them and can sound slight lacklustre at low volumes. Which is unlike Martin Logan’s which have a very forward sound, terrific detail but are best for a single listener. MBL omnis have very good on and off axis conformity, apparently something good, don’t image quite as well as Quads but do give an extraordinary sense of a musician playing in front of you, either in your room or taking you to a venue dependant on recording.

All the particular models I have, for my ears, need a sub but then again so do D&D. Measuring low frequency response with REW is not the same as feeling proper bass and that is not just a question of gain at low frequencies.

So, they all measure slightly differently and react with the room in a different way. Most realistic are the MBLs and least realistic are the D&D, but then again they are very good for analysing the recording but to my ears the sound always sounded like a reproduction coming from loudspeakers. The dipoles and omnis get out of the way and you just hear music. Difficult to explain, but if you like acoustic music, difficult to do without once experienced.

Measurements could help in determining the right sort of speaker for an individual but only if one knows how they correlate to the sound they produce and more importantly how they react to a particular room.

In the last analysis it is a subjective judgement as to which speakers give the higher fidelity to ones experience of the original sound, assuming it existed as such of course. Others, particularly with something to sell, may think differently which is fine and right for them particularly if their tastes in music are different to mine.

Since in most cases original sound doesn't exist, it seems to be an impossible subjective task to judge the system's realism.

Tony, at least, accepts that and models his system on historically correct studio equipment, which makes some sense.

Making a studio recording sound like a small jazz club doesn't make a lot of sense to me. A system thusly tuned will make the actual live jazz club recording sound claustrophobic and a classic orchestra sound like a chamber group.

I have nothing to sell, but I give away stuff sometimes.

 

[camverton]

That is why I say that it is a subjective response, not necessarily sounding exactly the same as the original but creating the closest and most convincing illusion of the original sound in the listeners mind. Given the right speakers, recordings of classical chamber music can sound particularly convincing in that given a suitable recording it is conceivable that the musicians could fit in at the end of my room. Orchestras take a bit of suspension of disbelief but in that case one has the feeling of being transported to the concert hall. At the moment I am listening to a recording of a harpsichord; it really does sound as if a harpsichord is being played at the end of my room, in its own space, not sounding like an audio facsimile coming out of speakers. As a dipole user I guess you know what I mean depending on what music you listen to.

 

[DimitryZ]

That is why I say that it is a subjective response, not necessarily sounding exactly the same as the original but creating the closest and most convincing illusion of the original sound in the listeners mind. Given the right speakers, recordings of classical chamber music can sound particularly convincing in that given a suitable recording it is conceivable that the musicians could fit in at the end of my room. Orchestras take a bit of suspension of disbelief but in that case one has the feeling of being transported to the concert hall. At the moment I am listening to a recording of a harpsichord; it really does sound as if a harpsichord is being played at the end of my room, in its own space, not sounding like an audio facsimile coming out of speakers. As a dipole user I guess you know what I mean depending on what music you listen to.

We are talking past each other.

In a studio record there isn't any concert hall or jazz club.

There is NOTHING on that record to compare to in order to judge subjective goodness of your system.

You can try judging against a recent trip to a concert hall or a jazz club. But that has nothing to do with this particular recording. It is just your preference.

For people who listen to many different sources and styles of music, like myself, no subjective tuning is adequate.

 

[darrenyeats]

Camverton, non-dipole speakers are also capable of producing this feeling you describe IME.

 

[marshanp]

We are talking past each other.

In a studio record there isn't any concert hall or jazz club.

There is NOTHING on that record to compare to in order to judge subjective goodness of your system.

You can try judging against a recent trip to a concert hall or a jazz club. But that has nothing to do with this particular recording. It is just your preference.

For people who listen to many different sources and styles of music, like myself, no subjective tuning is adequate.

If you are privileged to live within reach of Birmingham, UK, you can often go to an orchestral concert at Symphony Hall, one of the world's finest concert halls, and then hear the same concert on BBC Radio 3 as recorded by their excellent engineers. That's my gold standard. Radio 3 is very good at capturing the sound of an orchestra in a concert hall as heard from the best seats, and its reproduction at 320kbps AAC is just fine.

My frame of reference is regularly expanded by trips to Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow and Edinburgh to attend concerts in other halls which are often broadcast on Radio 3, having been recorded to the same high standard.

 

[Rockmeister]

Pedant mode on. You'd need to have been sitting beside the recording Microphones to hear the concert as you heard it obviously, but I agree that R three does it as well as it can be done on that scale. You've reminded me to dig out my old tuner and get that FM aerial fitted! Spring project.

 

[Tony L]

Omni speakers are odd things IMHO. They can sound very impressive and enjoyable, even quite “real”, but I don’t think I’d ever want to record or mix a track on a pair. By saying that you get used to the kit you have so would likely adapt given enough time. All I’ll say is speakers like Larson, Shahinians, MBLs etc bare absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to any sound I’ve ever heard in a studio. That’s not to say they are wrong/bad/invalid or anything, just that they are doing a very different thing. I’d rather like to hear that sort of speaker in a TV sound perspective, I bet they’d work rather well.

 

[Malky Moo]

"Anticipation is always better than realization."

He should get off with his next door neighbour and forget the HiFi he isnt going to get a better offer.

 

[camverton]

Perhaps I am not explaining myself clearly enough!

My aim in choosing a pair of speakers is not necessarily to hear what the mixing engineer hears, or even to replicate the exact sound from the concert hall. My room isn’t big enough! My aim is to get the sensation of having the musicians in front of me as a convincing illusion without the distraction of thinking the sound is coming from a pair of loudspeakers. Think Proust and his Madeleine cake; something that triggers a memory and brings it into the present as opposed to being the memory. As a visiting friend, scientist and regular concert goer said when I had both Dutch & Dutch and MBLs in the room was that the sound from the D&D were very impressive but that the MBLs sounded musical, as in it was like listening to the real thing.

Get that sensation of having music being played in front of you and any arguments of how it measures, or whether it is high fidelity, become an irrelevance. A lot depends on genre; when I listen to rock, pop and some jazz, what I am describing is less important for me and I would possibly go for the more technically impressive D&D. Unfortunately they didn’t convince with the genre I listen to the most, and MBL and Quads, both with sub are good enough (actually far more than good enough) for my occasional listens to King Crimson, Cream or LED Zeppelin.

I really wanted the D&D to work for me as they are much easier to accommodate in the room, not having to be located six feet from the wall behind. I can fully understand that the sound they give could well be more convincing for some people than dipoles or omnis. Our perception of sound is individual to each of us which is why we choose different ways of achieving sound reproduction in our home. In essence it is subjective.

All my comments are IME and IMHO. It is not a statement of fact that will apply to everyone else and so Possibly irrelevant to some contributors here!

For reference in reaching my “current” conclusion I have owned B&W, PMC, LS50, Meridian, BKS, Monitor Audio, ”conventional” style speakers and Quad 57s, 63s and 2812, Apogee hybrid, Martin Logan Aerius, Ascent and Electromotion ESL, MBL126. In the past year I have had Dutch and Dutch in the house and lengthy auditions of Kii and B&O 50. The most technically impressive from an objective point of view were probably the D&D. The ones that sounded most like having music played in front of me were the MBLs. The Quad 2812s came the closest to having the virtues of D&D and MBL in that they reproduce the detail present in the recording whilst still not sounding so much like a speaker but like hearing music. Ideally, I could do with a wider room and probably a pair of MBL 101e. The first isn’t going to happen because I like where I live and those 101s are hideously expensive. Mind you, if I hadn’t spent so much discovering what works for me I would have enough cash to buy a pair!