advertisement


System Components

merlin said:
You enjoy your music. That's great.

But that is different from what you claimed.



You cannot faithfully reproduce music in tune and time unless your room acoustics are sorted out. As I said. That's the physics of it. Now I'm not suggesting that faithful reproduction is in any way preferable to many.
Click to expand...

The room acoustics are already sorted as is required. The round earth mentality cannot accept that the brain will filter out mild room effects but will be fatigued by gap-filling when the information at source is wanting.

Action or context?

Action every time and the human brain will happily filter out all but the most extreme interaction between the two.

Enjoy your anechoic chamber!
 
I respect Serge, but I can't see how he can rail against valve amps ,whose high output impedance changes the loudspeakers frequency response and yet be content to allow his room to do the very same thing.
Keith.
 
Steven whether you use passive or active correction the result is the same, a greater fidelity to the recording you should measure your room, The results would be interesting and could lead to real and significant gains in sound quality.
Keith.
 
Purite Audio said:
Steven whether you use passive or active correction the result is the same, a greater fidelity to the recording you should measure your room, The results would be interesting and could lead to real and significant gains in sound quality.
Keith.
Click to expand...

If a disembodied, eerie, asynchronous sound stripped of texture and harmonic structure is your idea of significant gains in sound quality, I think I'll pass.

What works in theory seems to fail the ultimate test in practice. What the Trinnov seems to do is flatten the frequency response but does nothing to ameliorate the natural reverb and echoes of the room that naturally accompany such unevenness of frequency and the combination of this serves to create such confusion to the human brain that it interferes with our ability to filter out any of the effects of the room.

It is a(n expensive) dog's dinner.
 
Steven,

if you seek to "faithfully reproduce" then you are barking up the wrong tree I'm afraid.

If you simply want to enjoy listening to music then there are many ways to skin that cat.

If room correction works in the time domain then it does serve to correct for many room issues including the smearing that heavily on bass resolution and ambient clues that give a faithful recreation of the recording's venue.
 
merlin said:
Steven,

if you seek to "faithfully reproduce" then you are barking up the wrong tree I'm afraid.

If you simply want to enjoy listening to music then there are many ways to skin that cat.
Click to expand...

If you tread an absolutist path you end up with dystopia. Faithful reproduction is not and cannot be an absolute goal. It has to be relevant to the human experience for it to be perceived as faithful by the listener*.

All that matters is what we experience.

*Note what I did there. I said 'listener' not 'measurer.'
 
Acoustic foam of a suitable density would also absorb excess bass.
Ultimately it is your room and your system, why not at least measure your room , something like the XTZ analyser will help you position yourself and your speakers in the optimum position, it would highlight specific problems which you could decide to treat or not.
Keith.
 
Steven we are all listeners. It's a question of how much colouration we want to listen through.

Live recordings sound so much more emotive when replayed on a system that can recreate the acoustic to a greater degree. Sound effects used by many recording artists as part of their performance suddenly play their part in your enjoyment.

To ignore those facts and to bracket the listeners who want to hear the work as intended as "measurers" is somewhat shortsighted. For instance, if you were myopic, would you visit the Tate and leave your glasses at home?
 
I dislike live recordings. Hearing the reproduction of the 'ambience', the shouting, clapping, coughing and some silly bint letting off a squeal right in the middle of a good bit does nothing for me.

Live music itself (i.e. being there) is another matter but it is the dynamic range that thrills not the bloody 'atmosphere.'
 
merlin said:
Steven we are all listeners. It's a question of how much colouration we want to listen through.

Live recordings sound so much more emotive when replayed on a system that can recreate the acoustic to a greater degree. Sound effects used by many recording artists as part of their performance suddenly play their part in your enjoyment.

To ignore those facts and to bracket the listeners who want to hear the work as intended as "measurers" is somewhat shortsighted. For instance, if you were myopic, would you visit the Tate and leave your glasses at home?
Click to expand...

I would leave the microscope and the binoculars at home though.
 
You still wouldn't be able to see what the artist had lovingly created. You wouldn't be able to admire the depth of the pieces, the wonderful use of colour.

In short you could not appreciate the art for what it was. That's not to say you wouldn't enjoy yourself of course. But you might struggle to sit around the table afterwards and discuss the artist's work on anything more than a superficial level.

But if that superficial level is what you want then that's great. It's just that your posts seem to suggest you are looking for more.
 
Purite Audio said:
Acoustic foam of a suitable density would also absorb excess bass.
Ultimately it is your room and your system, why not at least measure your room , something like the XTZ analyser will help you position yourself and your speakers in the optimum position, it would highlight specific problems which you could decide to treat or not.
Keith.
Click to expand...

I would go with the analyser but foam stuck to the walls might be a step too far though. My wife is reasonable, fair and puts up with a lot but that could be a walk into taking-the-piss territory, i.e. I wouldn't be a wuss for understanding her annoyance.

In any case it would still be an unnecessary step towards that anechoic chamber when my sonic goals, as already stated, clearly lie elsewhere. If the room was really bad, which it is not, there might actually be something significant to gain from messing about with analysers and bits of sculpted foam.
 
merlin said:
You still wouldn't be able to see what the artist had lovingly created. You wouldn't be able to admire the depth of the pieces, the wonderful use of colour.

In short you could not appreciate the art for what it was. That's not to say you wouldn't enjoy yourself of course. But you might struggle to sit around the table afterwards and discuss the artist's work on anything more than a superficial level.

But if that superficial level is what you want then that's great. It's just that your posts seem to suggest you are looking for more.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that I DO need a microscope and a pair of binoculars?

If I was myopic I would wear glasses, of course.
 
Steven Toy said:
Are you saying that I DO need a microscope and a pair of binoculars?

If I was myopic I would wear glasses, of course.
Click to expand...

I'm saying that because your room blurs things, you need glasses to get a faithful rendition of the music in tune.

Rightht now you are refusing to consider that visiting Specsavers to get some might be a good idea. This seems somewhat myopic.
 
Stop press.

Room acoustics declared 'largely irrelevant'.


Thank you for telling me that if my system sounds crap in a crappy
room it is a crappy system and the room is not to blame.

I shall swiftly remove Daniel, Leonard, Trixie, Heather, and Nina.
They are no longer needed.
 
Steven Toy said:
It is only going to affect the sound in ways that are largely irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it's better if you contain your enthusiasm to plastic secews and cat piss deflectors.
I have tried,
Keith.
Oh and ask your wife if you can move the sofa so it doesn't cover the speaker.
 
For some reason I read that as "plastic piss flap deflectors"

I need to get out more....
 
Steven Toy said:
It is only going to affect the sound in ways that are largely irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Steve, the effects are in precisely the areas that you have sitting right at the top of your priority list. Every contribution made by the room to the final sound that you hear is delayed relative to the direct sound - it's the biggest cause of what gets referred to as time smear.
Forget smearing from stands, cables and amps because the room (any room) is producing effects many orders of magnitude greater.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top