C´mon, someone own up. What´s the secret of good sound at lower volumes ?

[mrlamonta]

A loudness button is a quick and dirty compromise really. It'll be setup about a specific volume level, and if that matches for you (system, environment, level etc) then great, but otherwise... Tone controls are very limited in the frequencies that can be adjusted but setting the tone for a certain volume is usually better than loudness. I think digital eq correction is possibly the better all round solution these days, whether in software or built into the speakers, dacs etc.

Thank you Gavreid. I only have a small set up and a lot of my listening is with vinyl.

 

[gavreid]

Thank you Gavreid. I only have a small set up and a lot of my listening is with vinyl.

An amp with tone controls is your best bet I reckon if you want to stay all analogue. I like the idea of @Robert 's suggestion but I've never heard one.

 

[ToTo Man]

Thank you Gavreid. I only have a small set up and a lot of my listening is with vinyl.

An amp with tone controls is your best bet I reckon if you want to stay all analogue.

A Yamaha amp with variable loudness knob may be even better as you wouldn't need to keep adjusting the bass and treble controls as you change your listening level. Simply set the master volume to the level at which everything 'hangs together' tonally, and then use the variable loudness control to turn the volume down to your desired listening level whilst maintaining the same perceived tonal balance you experienced at your 'hanging together' level. That's the theory anyway, and it works well in practice IME, at least it does on the vintage models, e.g. CA-1000, CA-1010, CR-820/1020/2020, CR-1000, etc. I can't speak to the contemporary models like the A-S801 etc, but I don't see any reason why the implementation would differ.

 

[seagullsnacker]

Quite a change in my lower level listening recently.

Moved from Neat Elite SE driven by Nait 5i which really needed the wick turning up to sound alive.

Initial change was to Tannoy Legacy Eatons…much better at lower volumes.

Next change was 5i to Luxman 505 mkII which made quite a difference in the grip/coherence of the Tannoys at lower volumes.

The magic loudness button has made lower level listening a lot more fun for me…I am sure lower cost alternatives could well just as well but for me big cones, big amp and loudness button really seems to work

 

[gavreid]

To follow up @Robert 's point - what tried and tested (analogue) options are there for adding EQ via tape loop?

 

[tuga]

Horns (and perhaps high sensitivy) sepakers and minimalist circuits (in electronic equipment).

 

[mansr]

minimalist circuits (in electronic equipment).

What difference does that make?

 

[Tony L]

I am sure the human ear-brain system's increasing inability to perceive bass as audio level reduces (the Fletcher-Munson curves) is a key element. You won't hear what the mixing/mastering engineers heard unless you at listen at the same level as in the studio (and in a similar acoustic with similar loudspeakers). And that studio level is, AIUI, usually higher than I normally use for foreground listening. A tilt control or a loudness control is a partial compensation although I have had neither in my active system for a while.

It depends on the studio and the material. None of the BBC monitors are designed for high-level monitoring (that’s part of what the ‘BBC dip’ is for). It would shock many here I’m sure, but most classic rock and pop is/was mixed on the NS10s, AR18s etc, not the huge Tannoys or JBL main monitors as they are so much more representative of what people listen to at home (the main monitors are more for understanding exactly what you have recorded on tape, spotting mic errors, clipping etc, though also as a cross-reference). Now much if not all is done on small active speakers and aimed somewhere between iPhone ear buds, TV soundbars and cars. No one is mastering for large speaker high-volume home listening these days, and it is arguable anyone ever did. I doubt even the finest classical labels assume the end user has anything more than say a pair of LS50s, small Spendors or whatever.

 

[tuga]

What difference does that make?

I've listened to simplified/modified circuits which measured (and sounded) better than the original layout.

 

[tuga]

It depends on the studio and the material. None of the BBC monitors are designed for high-level monitoring (that’s part of what the ‘BBC dip’ is for). It would shock many here I’m sure, but most classic rock and pop is/was mixed on the NS10s, AR18s etc, not the huge Tannoys or JBL main monitors as they are so much more representative of what people listen to at home (the main monitors are more for understanding exactly what you have recorded on tape, spotting mic errors, clipping etc, though also as a cross-reference). Now much if not all is done on small active speakers and aimed somewhere between iPhone ear buds, TV soundbars and cars. No one is mastering for large speaker high-volume home listening these days, and it is arguable anyone ever did. I doubt even the finest classical labels assume the end user has anything more than say a pair of LS50s, small Spendors or whatever.

The BBC dip is mostly conceptual. All their of designs are flat on axis:

LS3/4

LS3/5a

LS3/6

LS5/8

LS5/9

 

[mansr]

I've listened to simplified/modified circuits which measured (and sounded) better than the original layout.

If you like it, fine, but why do you suggest simple circuits are especially suited for low-volume listening?

 

[gavreid]

No one is mastering for large speaker high-volume home listening these days, and it is arguable anyone ever did.

I'd agree. The issue was more that they mastered for Dansettes so we get no bass.

 

[Amormusic]

Mine is a Sugden A21Se, by the way and the speakers are WD25TEx. Can anyone recommend a freebie sound meter phone app, just to get an idea of levels.

Your experience is the polar opposite of mine, which is strange. My amp is a Sugden A21a Signature, so not all that different to yours. Mine sounds fantastic even at lower levels. I can only guess that the synergy to your speakers is not optimal, or that your speakers only come "alive" when you give them some Welly.

 

[tuga]

If you like it, fine, but why do you suggest simple circuits are especially suited for low-volume listening?

That is just my experience, better low-level detail retrieval and more clarity at low listening levels. Of course I like it, who doesn't/wouldn't?

 

[tuga]

Listening sessions at 2AM?

 

[John]

It would be useful to put some db figures on this before going further, i.e. what is your favoured median level, what is hers? By saying that both high-efficiency monitors and near-field minis work for me at levels I could certainly hold a conversation over.

Indeed! I still think the OP has failed to give us an idea what he means by low level listening. To me, it is under 70db from listening position.

 

[Cootie]

Attenuation on the interconnects also worth a look - some amps need cranked up a bit to come alive, but that can offend the volume police, so feeding them a lower voltage can neatly offset that, whilst still allowing amps to be working in their sweet spot.

 

[foxwelljsly]

Tone controls. Quad 34's are the best I've yet used.

 

[Cereal Killer]

The room

 

[Mongeddavid]

In my experience its the systems ability to retain a high degree of weight , scale , resolution, dynamics and soundstage ( providing spatial clues ) at low volume levels which makes a system good to listen to at low volumes. I have achieved this with both high efficiency front loaded horn speakers and highly inefficient 2 way stand mounts with subs. The aforementioned qualities not changing throughout the usable operational volume range of the system it simply gets louder as you turn the wick up. Probably a lot has to do with room , positioning and potentially at what volumes you set up the system in addition to having a well balanced sound from the components themselves. What I have found useful in recent years is having a couple of pairs of high quality headphones for reference they are no good for judging soundstage on a main system but great for referencing timbre tonal, balance and resolution etc. I guess a lot of folks have a single main system and its easy to get lost not knowing just how good your system can or should sound in your room, there's always the yes it sounds great but i wonder if i do this or that would be even better or perhaps you stop tinkering when greatness is just around the corner ( greatness in the context of what makes you very happy ). Having a reference point by either listening to other systems or having additional systems / quality headphones yourselves can really help in this regard.