|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
12.73.206.6
In Reply to: Re: Thanks, Troy! posted by chmedly@yahoo.com on January 17, 2007 at 23:44:05:
...but it sure as heck better be good. No direct radiator woofer trying to reproduce 20 hz, bottoming out and forcing an ClassAB amp into clipping and slew rate limiting. There is very little information down at 20hz anyway. There is also no such thing IMHO as a "constant directivity" horn. I don't like them. I also don't like metal horns that ring! That's just me. Give me a tractrix wood horn anyday! Ray
"I take you as you are
And make of you what I will,
Skunk-bear, carcajou, bloodthirsty
Non-survivor.
Lord, let me die but not die out." THE LAST WOLVERINE by James Dickey
Follow Ups:
I was referring to your mention of the sound system being behind a curtain. What a great way to kill the very top end. Of course if you don't use real CD horns then you don't have even dispersion of the very highs anyway. I do understand what you are saying. I do audio for a living and I find that the average person wants to hear voices above all else. But the concert enthusiasts and disco dancers love the "boom and sizzle". There's often a wide technical gap between the two. And so many systems sound lousy trying either. Usually I find it comes down to money. A well designed and implemented system often costs more and doesn't look as cool as a brute force install. Sure there are snake oil sales going on but there are also uneducated customers who demand something that they don't need or want something they can't afford.
And there's no accounting for taste;)Is there a chance that the sound tracks of the past had audiences who were better at listening?
Well put.
"Is there a chance that the sound tracks of the past had audiences who were better at listening?"No, I don't think they were better at listening. I think that most people who buy sound systems think their sound salesman knows what he is doing and talking about when in reality few do. The customer just wants the problem solved and they don't care how it's solved. Fox, Metro, Warner, and FP Lasky theaters used university trained EE and acousticians, Western Electric and RCA engineers to set up a theater. They knew what they were doing. Plane wave horns haven't advanced very much because they are big and people equate big with "Old". There is also a feeling that there must be a more modern way of doing things. "That which is new must be BETTER!" Bruce Edgar in California and the people at Klipsch are the only ones that I know of still building and selling folded horns. It's till the most efficient form of speaker and IMHO produces the least amount of distortion. They are big and unsightly and too often the room decor votes them out. It depends on what the priorities are and sound quality has IMHO taken a back seat. Cordially, Ray Hughes
"I take you as you are
And make of you what I will,
Skunk-bear, carcajou, bloodthirsty
Non-survivor.
Lord, let me die but not die out." THE LAST WOLVERINE by James Dickey
Let me put my question into a better context. My experience has been that actual spl levels are very subjective, especially to the untrained ear. So often I find that what seemed plenty loud with no crowd and no adrenalin before a show feels weak and uninspired when the show is going. I've found that for a lot of clients, no matter how loud it is, if you can't hear the voice then it's not loud enough. And if you don't like the style of music then it's always too loud;) It seems that we hear in a relative manner. If the background noise goes up then whatever it is that we are focussing on needs to go up with it.My question was about whether audiences were quieter and maybe more attentive to the theater program as they weren't surrounded by noise and chaos like folks are today? I understand that theater soundtracks of that era were edited mixed and mastered using an industry standard db scale similar to Bob Katz's K metering system. This scale was followed all the way to the theaters so it ensured that the volume level in theaters was very close to the level used when it was mastered. What a wonderful concept. Humans don't hear things the same at different volume levels and so by keeping level consistent it creates a more consistent experience for audience members. I wonder as well if this led to more pleasant soundtracks than we often have today.?
As far as advancement of the art, yes it does appear to be rather limited. But it seems that there hasn't been an economic incentive to advance it. Sure there's a fair number of dollars in portable music players but public address systems have found a bouyant point where most people are happy with this status quo. There simply isn't as much money to be made in audio design and installation as there is in other fields. I don't know that many contractors (sound salesmen to you) can afford to keep fully university trained EE's on staff. I suppose there was a stronger collective "brain" in the industry back then but there are some smart cookies today too.
Btw, I think people like Tom Danley and Dave Gunness have made some interesting advancements in recent years. There's lots of research still going on in Europe and compression drivers and woofers have made good strides in the past 10 years as well. Further, there are lots of Pro-Sound companies making "folded horns". In fact I've seen a resurgence in folded bass horns in the past few years partly because of the better woofers now available to drive them. I'm not sure what the old altecs really sounded like but a lot of Pro-Sound speaker systems on the market today are tremendously better than they were 10 or 15 years ago (lower distortion, better power response, etc).
Thank you! Probably each room would have it's unique equalization curve much like the Fletcher-Munsen equal loudness curves. My limited experience with 70mm, 6 track mo pic sound installations revealed that intelligibility was greatly affected by equalization. I don't believe you can design for flat response. If you do the human voice will sound tinny and unintelligible.I believe that sound systems should be designed into the room by an acoustical engineer and architect when the building is being designed. Preferably they should be led by a musician-artist, not a committee. Built in very much the same way a pipe organ is tuned, honed or carved into a church as an integral part of the architecture; not an appendage that is stuck on the wall. The organist supervises it's installation. Sound systems are, by and large, after the fact additions. But architects and engineers can make BIG mistakes! Look at Avery Fisher Hall in New York. An orchestra there sounds like it is in the next county! The PA system there in the lobby sounds better than center seat, center isle. I would much rather attend Carnegie Hall! Maybe such buildings should be equipped with headphone systems where discerning audiophiles could bring their headphones and have a volume control-joystick to suit their tastes. They do it for the deaf!
It is good to know that folded horns are still being developed in Europe. Maybe they can teach us something.
I'm just a lover of fine music not liking what I hear in most professional sound installations. I would like to feel that I'm not alone, but most people just don't care. Cordially, Ray Hughes
"I take you as you are
And make of you what I will,
Skunk-bear, carcajou, bloodthirsty
Non-survivor.
Lord, let me die but not die out." THE LAST WOLVERINE by James Dickey
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: