 
|
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 |
216.223.197.26
In Reply to: Science, pseudoscience, spurious explanations of real phenomena posted by bartc on November 20, 2006 at 20:46:08:
my estimate is that the room itself, including the various physical objects within the room, including the side and rear faces of the speaker cabinet, are doing more to the total sound than we have given then credit for... one the room is energized, there is basically one giant speaker, which IS the room plus all the ingredients of the room... the resonatory merely capture a fraction of this stray energy and reshape it in ways that the ear seems to like. In one experiment, I took a cluster of the silver resonators, placed them on a bench top, and spoke across them, right over the top of the resonators from about 6 inches away,.... it sounded like I was speaking into a super-tweaky PA system, my voice had exceptional projection and clarity... I've been told by the folks behind this concept that they do have a pro model (or models) that go in front of microphones to act as a passive vocal tuner....
Follow Ups:
That was used by the Greeks in their theaters to amplify the desirable frequencies of human speech, exactly as you and the 6moons reviewer describe it. Even the style looks familiar! LOLHowever, this is really a form of tone control. As you are amping by sympathetic resonance only a narrow band of frequencies, you are making a peak there and in its harmonics (also a poorly understood acoustic physical phenomenon among audiophiles, I see) at the expense of the rest of the spectrum. What that does is alter the balance of freqs to your brain. YOu may find it pleasing or you may find it not.
So with a bunch of "tuning" options available for your frequency spectrum tweaking you are shaping your sound to your liking. Same thing you could do electronically, if the purists here didn't so much despise it! ONly in this case it's additive and not subtractive of frequencies. So you don't lose info, you augment and shape its perception.
As I stated earlier, the physical possibilities are not a mystery. Just the objections!
Now this guy's a jeweler, so he made them pretty AND expensive. The latter is my only objection or I'd buy a bunch to play with.
However, this is really a form of tone control. As you are amping by sympathetic resonance only a narrow band of frequencies, you are making a peak there and in its harmonics...
That's incorrect. At the device's resonant frequency, it's not amplifying. It's doing just the opposite, it's absorbing. It's like a notch filter. The less lossy the resonator, i.e. the higher the Q of the resonance, the greater the absorption and the narrower the bandwidth of the absorption. Conversely, with a more lossy resonator and a lower Q, the less the absorption and the wider the bandwidth.
se
I was speaking in terms of the open mouthed bowl a la a Helmholz (sp?) resonator, not the resonant frequency of the solid material of the bowl and stand. But both would enter into the equation to some degree. I wouldn't want to hazard a guess as to how much of each!The Greeks learned to use open bowls and open mouthed jars (Greeks and Romans embedded these in walls of arenas I'm told) as resonators to amplify specific frequencies related to speech. That's what I thought he we referring to and that to which I think much of the descriptions of this product's impact refers to.
Of course, I can be dead wrong here. I'm just advancing a plausible explanation for what might be a very real phenomenon with acoustic impact that is perceivable and perhaps even pleasant.
I was speaking in terms of the open mouthed bowl a la a Helmholz (sp?) resonator, not the resonant frequency of the solid material of the bowl and stand.
That's what I'm referring to as well. When I said "the device's resonant frequency" I simply meant the device being used as a resonator.
The Greeks learned to use open bowls and open mouthed jars (Greeks and Romans embedded these in walls of arenas I'm told) as resonators to amplify specific frequencies related to speech.
Except that they don't amplify. They absorb. At least at the resonant frequency. What they don't absorb they re-radiate and accoring to my reference (Everest's Master Handbook of Acoustics) it was this property that they were used for:
In Helmholz resonators, we have acoustical artifacts that far antedate Helmholz himself. Resonators in th eform of large pots were used in ancient times by the Greeks and Romans in their open-air theaters. Apparently they were used to provide some reverberation in this nonreverberant outdoor setting. Some of the larger pots that have survivied to modern times have reverberation times of from 0.5 to 2 seconds. These would also absorb sound at lower frequencies. Groupings of smaller pots supplied sound absorption at the higher frequencies.
And just for additional trivia:
More recently (that is, in medieval times) such resonators were used in a number of churches in Sweden and Denmark. Pots like thos of Fig. 9-30 were embedded in the walls, presumably to reduce low-frequency reverberation that is often a problem in churches. Ashes have been found in some of the pots, undoubtedly introduced to "kill the Q" of the ceramic pot and to broaden the frequency of its effectiveness.
se
Because you have the Handbook at home! I read it a few years ago borrowed from the library. It appears it does amplify and absorb somehow.
What have the Greeks done for us lately?.... must be resting on their laurels...:-)
and the second nice thing is that you can move them for specific adjustments in ways that no equalizer on the market is capable of... there have been some reports that the "basic" copper-silver alloy actually removes vibratory modes... I suppose this is possible if it can absorb enough kinetic energy and spectrally reshape it in a way that the ear does not perceive... seems that the little wooden pedestals have something to do with this... I've tested them nekkid, no pedestal, and they are quite different w/o the maple base... on the major positive side of the equation, they don't deaden the room like fibergalss batts will.... in the final analysis, you WILL need three or four room tuning modalities, some tube trap, some QR products, some wall panel, some Tchang... I have never heard a room, and I've visited some damn expensive rooms, that succeeded from overkill of any one product or approach... unless you're considering a full on Russ Berger custom interior which will cost you some heavy coin and a few years wait time.... if cost is a factor, clean up your corners first... my first choice would always be tube traps in the corners, that's where the real junk is emanating from, then I'd consider some wooden QR squares on the first reflection points of the side walls, the fiberglass acoustic bags on the wall behind, THEN worry about the resonators.... in the meantime you might consider a *basic* or two behind the speakers to clear up the "sog" ... the rest depends a lot on you listening style, what you listen for, how long you like to listen, what kind of material turns you on... just like I love carbon fiber interconnects and tolerate their deficiencies in compensation for what the do so well, with that set up, a *silver* resonator about 1 foot outside of each speaker, positioned between the woofer and tweeter, and on the same plane as the speaker face (not on the wall behind in this case) was awesome.... really awesome...
Yes, if you don't include the acoustic waves in the signal chain :-)
...than crack yolks all day long? How about a little more R&D for one? ;-)
sic Porziob on you.Are you there yet? :-)
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 ]
