 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
83.84.177.139
In Reply to: Re: Real life posted by morricab on November 22, 2005 at 01:32:16:
Dynamic range of an orchestra, without background noise, is say 100 dB at 1m. If that range is never to be put on CD (because of background noise, dynamic compression, because you place the mikes in the 10th row etc.), and if the playback systems can't handle that range, why then does CD have 115 dB dynamic range? Why does good playback electronics have dynamic ranges of 115 db+? And why do the big studio monitors play that loud? Wouldn't that be serious overengineering? Just for the pleasure of having good looking specs?If speakers have problems with low level passages how does the engineer do the mix for those passages? Does he crank the volume up or do the speakers these guys use have better appropriate low-level performance?
For dynamicall compressed CDs I have experienced that they sound best in the neighbouring room. You still get the slam, but you don't have the aggressiveness.
Klaus
Follow Ups:
"Dynamic range of an orchestra, without background noise, is say 100 dB at 1m"1) you are not sitting at 1 meter
2) you cannot ignore the masking effect of background noise. It may be possible to hear "below the noise floor" but it depends on the frequency range and amplitude of that noise.
I would give at best in a normal midhall listening position, 50-60db dynamic range at best.Specsmanship has been around for ages. How else did they convince you of "perfect sound forwever"? If some is good then more is better, right? Why don't people give dynamic range on speakers? They give maximum SPL (sometimes to silly loud levels) but let's be honest Klaus, how long do you think you can stand music at 110db? You think your speakers measure flat at that level? Think again.
If you assume the maximum reasonable level for music peaks is around 100db then work downward from there. No one gives a minimum SPL spec for which their speaker keeps the same frquency response curve. Or even better would be a speaker that follow the Fletcher/Murcheson (think that's the name)curves as a function of SPL (now that would be something useful to do with DSP).Do yourself a favor and buy a Behringer DEQ 2496 and a Behringer calibrated measurement microphone. The DEQ has a built in SPL meter, 61band real-time analyzer, and 31 band equalizer (with auto correct function). Do two things with it: 1) Measure the SPL levels in your room when you are listening to your favorite music. Note the min and max when the music is playing. Note the background level in your room.
2) Measure the in-room response of your speakers using the RTA. If it measures flat to 20Khz it is likely too bright sounding.
Yes, I'm not sitting at 1 m but in close-miked recordings the mikes are that close that you probably can forget about background noise.
"Why don't people give dynamic range on speakers?"Most people don't even give the most basic specs, I tried to get measurements and what I got was audiophile gobbledygook.
"You think your speakers measure flat at that level?"
I've heard that sound engineers listen at 90-95 dB for the reason that the ear is most sensitive at that level. Maybe that's why the measurements are made at that level.
"You think your speakers measure flat at that level? Think again."I don't think, I wait to see the graph.
"No one gives a minimum SPL spec for which their speaker keeps the same frequency response curve."
As I said, apart from a few courageous manufacturers like Thiel, Dunlavy, nobody provides measurements and when asked, they refuse.
"Or even better would be a speaker that follow the Fletcher/Murcheson (think that's the name)curves as a function of SPL (now that would be something useful to do with DSP)."It's Fletcher/Munson, and why would that be a good idea? Does a symphony orchestra follow that curve? It's your hearing that follows that curve, not the signal source.
Klaus
.
Its not that the ANECHOIC response can't be flat. It is just that if it measures flat anechoically then it will usually manifest itself as ELEVATED high frequencies in a normal sized room...assumming the dispersion is relatively even. I did experiments with the HF response in my DIY ribbon hybrids. When I had the measuring flat in room everyone, including myself, found them to sound bright. When a gradually sloped the response downward above 8khz the result was much more appealing.
.
and flat in-room response are two pairs of shoes. Flat anechoic response can be turned into sloping in-room response by acoustic treatment or EQ. However, the speaker designer cannot know in which acoustic environment his speaker is going to be used. So basically the only option he has from a design point of view is anechoically flat and have the end user take care of in-room response.There are/were some brands (such as Thiel) that design for anechoically flat. Do/did these speakers get consistently remarks that they are too bright?
When your speakers are flat in-room, how do they measure under anechoic conditions?
Klaus
Haven't measured them under anechoic or even semi-anechoic conditions, not that it really matters. With the digital eq I can essentially dial in any response I want (within the limits of the drivers and the eq of course). This gives ultimate room flexability. I start in room flat but then "tilt" the response, raising the bass by a couple of db and lowering the HF by a couple of db. Works really well and is perceived as well balanced. If I make the bass, in-room flat, it seems a bit too reserved. Now this might be the recordings but I find a bit of boost (only a couple db below 60Hz) does nicely. Also, I have found the BG's natural HF roll-off works perfectly and no equalization is now necessary up at the top.
In my design I concentrated more on controlling cabinet resonances, edge diffraction, and radiation pattern. Instead of using the BG ribbon as a dipole or a monopole I decided to make the output in the back reduced in level and dispersion compared to the front. This gives a kind of cardioid response pattern. My logic was that the woofer will have a similar pattern in the bass with a forward facing driver. However, sound will still radiate from the sides and rear to some extent. Do they match perfectly ? No but its not too bad for a first run attempt. It also gives a bit of the spaciousness of a dipole with a bit more focus like a monopolar line source.
.
He said : "subjective accuracy".That's what it is, an opinion expressed by an individual. Did you ever read Floyd Toole's AES papers:
- Loudspeaker measurements and their relationship to
listener preference, parts I, II
- Listening tests - turning opinion into fact
- Subjective measurements of loudspeaker sound quality and listener performanceThey show a quite different picture.
Klaus
They're very good, although there are things I disagree with.But I don't listen to AES papers.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
