A thread to discuss things related to what and how we hear. System Building too!
- Thread starter FrantzM
- Start date
Simple, he has no system or at least one with speakers!
david
No David
I am learning how to properly use multiple-subs with a pair of Kef LS50 Wonderful but limited speaker and am about to acquire a of Geddes Speakers...
You systems are interesting and your philosophy on sound reproduction unusual.
I would have liked to hear your perspective on the proceedings...
It took me a while to decide to build a speaker -based system. I am at this point, it is to be soon and not a minute too late
. It is fun to me to involve this community. I am not an equipment swapper. The purchase process is always deliberate and I keep my components for a long time, thus my penchant for manufacturers who keep their product line intact for long while. Yet this system will be an interim system, in a living room where room treatment will have to take a back seat to aesthetics and space constraints. I am sure i will have to change some of the components likely speakers For now the limitations of the Ls50 are clear to me. Even on aninterim basis they aren't entirely satisfying to me. THis is my second go at these. I am moving to a horn/waveguide approach. I like the works of Earl Geddes and have always wanted to own one of his speakers. Will it satisfy me? We'll see, we'll hear and I'll share
As for my headphones based systems. They will remain .. I have learned a lot from what headphones can do and interestingly cannot do. I still enjoyed them
@PeterA
I believe that sometimes some us get to be enamored to an aspect of music reproduction to the detriment of the musical message. We are quick to be amused by those who shake entire neighborhood when they drive by. At the same time most of us have heard at shows or at some audiophiles systems what amount to just the midrange and not much else. This extreme type of systems are often single-driver driven by SET. Midrange is said to be glorious ... Which is IMO normal since those systems can only play in the midrange anyway ..
I would have preferred to avoid this editorializing, by the choice of equipment.
Now it would be said that no component is entirely transparent. The great cable debate is testimony to that notion. This line of reasoning per absurdo doesn't advance knowledge. I am interested to build on people experiences to build this system qnd i like the discussion anyway so ... more people! more!
Live classical concerts are as much a function of the venue's sonics as any instrument.
and what if one doesn't like classical music?
No, because if you go to enough different venues and sit in different positions, while you will get different sounds, you will easily be able to make out a fake sound.
If one doesn't like classical music, he should try extending his tastes to it by going to classical concerts. If one doesn't want to learn, that's fine as well.
No, but that's one method of doing it, of course. My approach is to make sure the electronics are capable, and then conventional speakers are quite adequate.
I might just mention again, as part of this thread, a combination of Bryston monblocks and big Dynaudios - easily the most impressive raw system I have ever heard, at the audio show this was the Ferrari, everything else was a Korean hatchback ...It took me a while to decide to build a speaker -based system. I am at this point, it is to be soon and not a minute too late
You remind me of a recent, prominent political discourse in the USA, where certain anti-abortionists were unwilling to concede abortion rights to a woman who had been raped because, allegedly, they would be unable to be fertilized as a result of rape because of the stresses of the rape itself. It is a miraculous anti-conception process that is fundamental to nature and to God, himself. Rape could not possibly cause conception, they argued, therefore raped women needed no special legal rights to abortion.
Like them, you have concluded something that you might wish to believe, but for which there is no actual evidence whatsoever in support of your notion. In fact, all available evidence is to the contrary.
Right! Live music is not good enough. You can do much better than live on your home system. Unfortunately, the rest of us have feet of clay and need to be shown the way. Clearly, what we need is for you to set up audio systems in the concert halls around the world, have the performers fake playing to recordings and lip-synch any singing and it will sound way better than live. We do not need those expensive live performers at all, fussy divas who think way too much of themselves and all that. We just need cheap actors to stand in. Maybe I just need to hear your wondrous system in your home. Can I buy a ticket?
What I have to keep doing is repeating, over and over and over again, that I managed to acquire this "belief" because it happened in front of me, as an accident so to speak - if the flying saucer lands on your lawn then it may not be aliens, but there is a damn big object sitting there, crushing the grass - you can immediately run away and read lots of books about how such things can't be - but you still have to deal with that great lump of metal out there ...
Exploring it, I have worked out what the characteristics are, what turns it on and off - and believe I have a pretty good handle on it.
Why reproduction can be better than live is pretty simple - because, when recording everything is optimised to get the best possible result down on "tape"; the instruments are tuned as best they can, the players are on their best behaviour, they record in as good an acoustic as they can manage; the microphones are positioned for the best pickup, of the optimum sound - seen in that light, any decently done recording should outperform a live session, every time ...
The only thing missing is competent playback - which currently is usually hard to achieve. What I have done over the years is to explore how that can be done, with a variety of equipment. Anyone can do exactly the same thing with their system, components, and if they do the equivalent in terms of optimising I'm sure their sound would be superior to what I usually achieve - because, many or most aspects of the raw ingredients of their rigs are better quality than what I've played with. My "shtick" is to get the maximum out whatever is in front of me, that's what I find interesting.
Last edited:
fas
History is full of people who have had special talents and made important discoveries who were derided by their contemporaries or countrymen ... Your theories could well be of the sort. IN the here and now they struck us as ... <fill the blank with an utterly negative term> ... Since you are the only person we know of who has experienced these findings .. Not even another bloke to simply say, he/she was there... SO you'll excuse us when we take your "findings" with an Himalaya of salt when we're in a good mood and outright rejection and almost hostility when we are ..well... just well
History is full of people who have had special talents and made important discoveries who were derided by their contemporaries or countrymen ... Your theories could well be of the sort. IN the here and now they struck us as ... <fill the blank with an utterly negative term> ... Since you are the only person we know of who has experienced these findings .. Not even another bloke to simply say, he/she was there... SO you'll excuse us when we take your "findings" with an Himalaya of salt when we're in a good mood and outright rejection and almost hostility when we are ..well... just well
Frantz, I'm not alone, not be a long shot. Muralman, a very dear member from here who unfortunately passed away some years ago, knew exactly what was going on, he managed to get this happening. Pano, a chap from the diyAudio forum, also understood the concept, because he witnessed it at the Paris audio show many years ago, and replicated the behaviour at home with a setup using similar gear to that used at the show. I also note written comments by people, who experience some system which happens to be in peak condition, and say, ah-hah! - there's an example of competent sound happening, because those people are describing the quality in the same terms I would use.
So, the behaviour's out there, happening in odd places - but it's not tamed, so to speak ... methods have to be nailed as to how to make it happen all the time, for any system, at will.
So, the behaviour's out there, happening in odd places - but it's not tamed, so to speak ... methods have to be nailed as to how to make it happen all the time, for any system, at will.
You are completely missing his point, I have been to many shows where the DVD experience can blow away what you are hearing depending on simply where you are standing. I do lots of GA shows in small venues and it is completely hit or miss on sound quality both from venue to venue and where you happen to be standing.
Just a general observation I tend to get in early and stand right at the stage. In most cases I am actually not in the primary sweet spot for the venues speakers and actually hear more of the stage monitors. As a result in many shows the vocals tend to be a bit muted and bass heavy with many set-ups with the bass bins either under or directly in front of the stage. Percussion is also louder because of the close proximity to the drum kit.
If I go back into the crowd away from the stage I can balance the sound more in line with what the guy on the mixing board is hearing. With live music there are no guarantees what you are going to get.
I don't know why anyone would try to use live music as a standard against which recorded music is compared too. Two different animals with absolutely no correlation.
Just enjoy both and be done with it.
I am assuming that is at least part of your point fast42??
Rob
Amusing thread. It runs along these lines: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs1aUws0Lrs
The statement made at 14:10 is central to the discussion here and the intent of the OP.....
The statement made at 14:10 is central to the discussion here and the intent of the OP.....
Sounds a little like a convoluted regurgitation of monsieur Schumacher's quote....
Putting "perception" aside Frantz, what are you looking for in a speaker/system?
I don't get the point of the OP - was he looking to get views from other people on speakers and systems and learn from there with an open mind or make this another accurate reproduction thread - there are many.
Who's Schumacher?
Answering your question:
I want a system capable of:
- Fooling me often and long enough that I am listening to something real.
- Get the message whatever it was warts et al...
- Full range and with a wide-dynamic range: Capable of realistic and distortion-free SPL.
- Fuss-free, Tube rolling is not for me. I like to set and forget for along while. No constant tinkering that deter from the music
- I have become thrifty as I age and no longer want to spend an arm and a leg. I am very much on the lookout for over the top performance at sane (subjective here ) prices.
- The dream speaker-based would have the reproduction characteristics of the Hifiman HE6 midband and bass, the midrange and highs of the Stax SR-009... I want real bass shaking the floor and my guts with all that and would like the entire system to cost less than $100K room treatment, HVAC and power included (Those may involve a good amount of DIY) . Interested for example to ditch all audiophile pretenses and spring for something like the JBL M2 system... Will I go for it? The JBL 4367 or something like the geddes NS15 could be it. Not sure yet... but you get my leanings.
Maybe it would be interesting if not important to explain the reason of this thread:
I have learned more from Audiophile fora in the 12 odd years I have been frequenting them than in my previous >30 years of being an audiophile. I have changed my views on many things among them cables, tubes and CD music, I have enjoyed music more in the process. The collective knowledge is IMO always superior to any individual's. Different and dissenting views challenges our beliefs and results if the mind is open, in better systems. I am of the opinion that real, honest and fierce discussions teach us more and lead to much better reproduction in one's settings than congrats. This is what I would like to get from this thread. To learn and synthesize.
FrantzM said:
Who's Schumacher?
Answering your question:
I want a system capable of:
- Fooling me often and long enough that I am listening to something real.
- Get the message whatever it was warts et al...
- Full range and with a wide-dynamic range: Capable of realistic and distortion-free SPL.
- Fuss-free, Tube rolling is not for me. I like to set and forget for along while. No constant tinkering that deter from the music
- I have become thrifty as I age and no longer want to spend an arm and a leg. I am very much on the lookout for over the top performance at sane (subjective here
- The dream speaker-based would have the reproduction characteristics of the Hifiman HE6 midband and bass, the midrange and highs of the Stax SR-009... I want real bass shaking the floor and my guts with all that and would like the entire system to cost less than $100K room treatment, HVAC and power included (Those may involve a good amount of DIY) . Interested for example to ditch all audiophile pretenses and spring for something like the JBL M2 system... Will I go for it? The JBL 4367 or something like the geddes NS15 could be it. Not sure yet... but you get my leanings.
Maybe it would be interesting if not important to explain the reason of this thread:
I have learned more from Audiophile fora in the 12 odd years I have been frequenting them than in my previous >30 years of being an audiophile. I have changed my views on many things among them cables, tubes and CD music, I have enjoyed music more in the process. The collective knowledge is IMO always superior to any individual's. Different and dissenting views challenges our beliefs and results if the mind is open, in better systems. I am of the opinion that real, honest and fierce discussions teach us more and lead to much better reproduction in one's settings than congrats. This is what I would like to get from this thread. To learn and synthesize.
Frantz, this is an interesting thread, and I agree that much can be learned from these forum discussions. However, I am confused by what seem to me to be your conflicting goals. On the one hand, you write that the goal should be for the system to be out of the way and reproduce this electrical signal as well as possible. This argues for a completely transparent system that presents the electrical signal. On the other hand, you write that you want a system to be capable of fooling you often and long enough that you think you are listening to something real. This argues that the system is an integral participant in the experience and that it should present a sound that fools you into thinking your are listening to actual live instruments, regardless of how well the recording is made or the quality of the signal.
I happen to subscribe to this second goal, that is to be fooled into thinking the sound in my listening room is that of real instruments, not the original event, but like my memory of past live performances. This is what a subjectivist favors because it is unverified and a personal impression. Strict adherence to the electrical signal, that is, complete transparence, verified by measurements, is what the objectivists seem to favor because the signal, from the recording, is concrete, it exists and it is all that we have.
Since we are discussing system building, and what and how we hear, I should clarify my position and the approach that I have taken. I have relied on my experience of listening to live acoustic music to guide me in the decisions that I have made with my listening room, system set up, and equipment purchases. Ultimately, I want the system to sound real. It so happens that it is also fairly transparent to the electrical signal, but not completely faithful to it. There are distortions and colorations that can be objectively measured, but they form a system of interactions which subjectively remind me of the sound of live music.
Could you clarify your position and approach for me, because I am confused by your goal as you begin to build your system? You write that you are starting with your speakers. Are they the pair that you find most transparent to the electrical signal, the most reminiscent of a real performance, or both? You have written that you are building your system around your speakers. How and why did you choose those speakers, and how will you now select the rest of the gear? Did you compare the sound of these speakers by listening to various systems and room configurations to the sound of real instruments or did you select the speakers with the best measurements to faithfully reproduce the electrical signal?
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |