Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
206.255.213.61
In Reply to: RE: Quad ESL 63 impedance curve: not as bad as we thought? posted by kentaja on March 29, 2016 at 13:06:13
...and does not need to be pushed to loud levels to open up. The reason why many people like them versus other speakers. Low level resolution is outstanding.
Follow Ups:
Agreed. I suppose 100db+ might be fun every now and again to shock a visitor. I would be exhausted after focused listening to music at those sorts of levels for more than a few minutes. This is not typical of listeners here I gather.
A healthy pair of original Quads will play louder than many people think can (obviously not Wilson or Magneplanar QR levels). I will bring my Radio Shack SPL meter with me the next time I sit down with my Quads. I am curious to see what average and peak levels I measure.
FYI: I turned on the TV as I typed this and set it for what I consider normal listening level. I am measuring 64-67db average, 70db peak (fast response, C weighting) at my ears.
100+ dB peaks are a function of the waveform and not audible - I go to my local Jazz club and measure a piano at 15 ft away, and you get peaks over 105dB, a snare hit pops 116dB the average level (LOUDNESS) is only about 85-90 dBC - they aren't even trying to play loud - the place seats 40.
Sure you can lower the volume in playback but it is not real. And how many of you have your loudness compensation button pushed in.
Granted - the mastering engineer/producer will not allow a real life 25-30dB crest factor to go into a music recording even if he has 16 or 24 bits to play with.
Why? one reason is to prevent likely amplifier clipping when played back on typical playback equipment.
Of course the main reason is the most folks would think the recording is "broken" not playing loud enough.
"The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there is no cat" - Confucius
The crest factor for large scale orchestral works reaches into the 30 db range. Which is why NAD class H amps work so well despite lowish RMS ratings.
While my listening preference is for higher peak volumes I don't actually play average volumes much over 80 db. The loudest passages are played at 90-94 db average but they peak at 105-115 db.
I ran bass sweeps when a pop fan friend was over and was doing 90-95 db SPL at 25 and 20 hz and he asked "what is THAT?" so I told him. It was only moderately loud subjectively, but outside of large hall sub harmonics short bass drum whacks and organ pedals we don't get to hear that bottom octave often. In pop music it is only in synth hip hop (Erika Badu) and electronica (Anderson) that those show up any sub 30 hz content.
My music teacher's quads with the 40 watt Macs did not do orchestra very convincingly even with his KEF 9" oval subwoofer. In his tiny listening room you would be surprised how loud the quad could go but the setup did not do peak volumes at realistic orchestral levels. While this did marvelous string quartets and vocals the orchestral and piano peaks were always decidedly clipped and bass dynamics really limited if not just plain MIA. The alternative was to play music at low volume so that peaks don't go beyond mid 90s db.
Instruments just don't sound like themselves at the wrong volume. You obviously hear the clarinet having the $&%# blown out of it but it barely passes mezzo forte in the quad system. The trumpet or violin played hard lose their smoothness and get gritty and are ear shearing in real life in the front orchestra seats. Nothing like it in restricted volume listening. Brings you back to row 53 deep under the balcony. Seats you so don't want to sit in that you consider not going even with free tickets.
For the front orchestra listener there has to be a match between the volume at which the instruments or voices sound strained and those indications of strain in tonal structure and texture. Not a problem for a mid balcony listener where the strained sound occurs at moderate levels. If you listen to chamber music is living rooms and small venues then you are aware that they were written with full scale orchestral dynamics in mind that are achieved readily in the small space they were traditionally performed in. One of my pet peeves is the original instrument movement insisting on using chamber orchestra ensembles in gigantic modern halls built for a 200 member orchestra. Why don't they also insist on playing these ensembles and instruments in the 300-500 seat halls in which they were originally performed, or having a piano quartet performed in a salon of 25X50 ft seating 40 or 50 people.
For people growing up with real instruments at close quarters then listening to live performances at the front orchestra seats a Quad based system will just not match up with their experience of live music. Fortunately, recordings are made from a much closer perspective so you can play the back with a row 4 -row 7 volume levels that DO reach 115 db peaks (a few milliseconds) on large scale works from Stravinsky or Mahler. That being while preserving the spatial spread of the orchestra in front of you going 20+ feet in either direction. .
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: