|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
|
|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
In Reply to: RE: Or the French horn... posted by unclestu on August 29, 2014 at 18:02:12:
... is, so many instruments disperse sound in weird omni-polar fashion. Our systems can only create a wavefront that is a highly artificial summation/approximation or the real thing. The true character of instruments and sounds is lost, and regardless of the "polar accuracy" of our systems, the end result will always be a somewhat perverted and farcical presentation. The wavefront presented by live music is too complex and nuanced to be accurately reproduced by speaker systems as they exist today, and "perfect polar" response (or, as close as we can get to it) has not cured the problem, as real instruments and recordings continue to sound different from each other.I've been listening to a pair of speakers that is supposed to offer time/phase coherent behavior. These "augmented single-driver" speakers have tweeters that can be slid fore and aft so that the user can adjust time alignment for listening distance. If I deliberately mis-adjust the tweeters so that optimum coherency is lost, the feeling I get is not so much that of lost *realism* as it is a feeling of *slightly diminished smoothness*. I'm not sure that this experiment shows anything conclusive, but it re-confirms my experience so far: Physical coherency contributes more to a increased sense of smoothness and/or long term "listenability" than it does to an increased sense of *realism* in sonic reproduction.
At best, "perfect (driver) polarity" might provide fleeting waves of sonic respite within a sea of sonic turmoil. Perfect amplitude response and the optimal mixture of direct and reflected sound have shown themselves to be the more important goals to strive for because they contribute most to the impression of realism, for most people. Assuming that we can take the idea of "realism" all that seriously in record playback, that is...
As you have pointed out, AKG has decided that inverted driver polarity sounds best in a pair of headphones, and I'm pretty sure that they must have tried things both ways before deciding on their "signature sound". Could it be that *inversion* naturally shows itself to be a minor issue when *perversion* is the name of the game?
Edits: 08/30/14 08/30/14 08/30/14 08/30/14 08/30/14 08/31/14
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Or the tuba, or the piano, or... The point... - genungo 09:25:25 08/30/14 (18)
- The point... - unclestu 14:45:02 08/30/14 (17)
- "Why screw up the playback of what is supposed to be reality any further." - genungo 15:35:10 08/30/14 (16)
- Question: - unclestu 17:01:21 08/30/14 (15)
- RE: Question: - genungo 18:07:03 08/30/14 (14)
- Therein lies the big issue - unclestu 12:46:29 08/31/14 (13)
- RE: "... you are a brave man, because many would disagree, as obviously I am." - genungo 13:40:10 08/31/14 (12)
- hmmmm.. - unclestu 17:20:09 08/31/14 (11)
- RE: hmmmm.. - genungo 18:09:32 08/31/14 (10)
- The acoustic wavefront - Inmate51 10:21:36 09/03/14 (9)
- should be simple - unclestu 20:46:37 09/03/14 (3)
- The only thing simple... - genungo 10:14:09 09/04/14 (2)
- RE: The only thing simple... - Inmate51 13:07:50 09/04/14 (1)
- RE: "... doing our best to 'get it right'." - genungo 14:48:15 09/04/14 (0)
- RE: "Whether or not it is perceivable is another matter." - genungo 20:06:51 09/03/14 (4)
- RE: "Whether or not it is perceivable is another matter." - Inmate51 21:16:14 09/03/14 (3)
- RE: "However, with regard to sound, you're on the wrong track." - genungo 22:35:49 09/03/14 (2)
- ask yourself - unclestu 22:53:02 09/03/14 (1)
- RE: "I think you better re-examine your suppositions." - genungo 23:18:40 09/03/14 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
