Does Tonal Balance Affect Perceived Pace and Perceived Resolution?

[PeterA]

Acoustic guitars have a lot of subtle transients and dynamic swings going on, I find them, and all string instruments, to be good tests for audio system performance. Maybe not as dynamic as percussion for example, but even more demanding in some ways.

I agree about guitar and strings. Great test. Ella and Joe Pass. I just don’t hear a lot of good examples with pop music girl with guitar recordings.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I thought I answered this. Perhaps it does to some but not to me. Resolution is about extracting the information on the recording and presenting it to the listen. I’m talking about all the information on the recording.

So you hear the same exact level of detail and the same exact level of intelligibility whether a system is warm balanced or tilted up in frequency balance?

Do you not see the emphasized high frequencies in that plot above 800 Hz?

I see what you are talking about about, yes.

But I think you are misunderstanding the curve if the question is about brightness or emphasis in the "presence" region.

 

[thedudeabides]

Hi dude,

Please elaborate.

So a stereo system with a more forward, tilted-up tonal balance will sound more resolving?

To the untrained, non WBF member ear, generally yes. Same applies to excessive bass and its negative impact on perceived system speed / quickness. Experienced folks will likely identify this anamoly much quicker and, depending on personal biases, decide if it serves the musical listening experience or not.

As always, this is totally subjective and only each listener can decide the impact tonal balance has on overall system performance. Like all things audio related, there is no universally correct answer. Best.

 

[PeterA]

So you hear the same exact level of detail and the same exact level of intelligibility whether a system is warm balanced or tilted up in frequency balance?

I do not hear more resolution when the system is tilted up. I thought that’s what we were discussing in that post about “resolution”. if you hear more resolution, that is fine.

Of course, when anything is emphasized one’s focus tends to go in that direction, which is why I described a natural sounding system is one that does not emphasize certain frequencies.

I see what you are talking about about, yes.

But I think you are misunderstanding the curve if the question is about brightness or emphasis in the "presence" region.

I didn’t see the guy who posted that plot say anything about some presence range. You are introducing new topics and terms to the discussion and changing the original focus.

 

[Swen]

I would like to mention the so-called "Blauertsche Bänder" as an example. These are known and it is sufficiently proven how frequency elevations (i.e. tonality) influence the spatial feeling.

The figure shows the frequency-dependent relative frequency of test subjects. In it is e.g. B. to recognize that the direction "rear" is the safest, namely with over 80 percent probability, in the frequency range around 1 kHz. The numerous elevations and depressions of the outer ear, together with the ear canal, represent an acoustic resonator system that is stimulated depending on the direction of sound incidence. This creates a direction-dependent filter whose spectral maxima and minima depend on the direction of incidence of the sound. They are evaluated by the hearing and the directions front, top, back are derived from them. However, this localization at the median level is significantly less accurate with a localization sharpness of about 10° than e.g. B. the horizontal localization over runtime and level differences between both ears with 1°.

The correct frequency response is always linear. If it is not for a listener group, either the room is a disaster, or the alcohol level of the listeners present is too high.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

So you hear the same exact level of detail and the same exact level of intelligibility whether a system is warm balanced or tilted up in frequency balance?


I see what you are talking about about, yes.

But I think you are misunderstanding the curve if the question is about brightness or emphasis in the "presence" region.

balance, balance, balance. job one. tonal emphasis in one direction or the other in a limited way does not necessarily eliminate detail. natural listenability and realism is more an issue concerning tonal rightness. distracting thin-ness reduces immersion and emotive connection.

 

[Ron Resnick]

So you hear the same exact level of detail and the same exact level of intelligibility whether a system is warm balanced or tilted up in frequency balance?

I do not hear more resolution when the system is tilted up. I

I'm sorry if the sequence of posts is unclear. In my most recent question to you I am not asking about resolution. You are answering a question I did not ask.

I am asking: Do you hear the same exact level of detail and the same exact level of intelligibility whether a system is warm balanced or tilted up in frequency balance?

 

[PeterA]

I'm sorry if the sequence of posts is unclear. In my most recent question to you I am not asking about resolution. You are answering a question I did not ask.

I am asking: Do you hear the same exact level of detail and the same exact level of intelligibility whether a system is warm balanced or tilted up in frequency balance?

I touched on it in this comment up thread:

“Of course, when anything is emphasized one’s focus tends to go in that direction, which is why I described a natural sounding system as one that does not emphasize certain frequencies.”

If a frequency range is emphasized, I’m not sure if I hear more detail within that range of particular instruments. It is hard to say, without hearing it, and knowing how naturally it is presented to the listen. If the emphasis comes along with a bunch of distortion, then no, there’s not more detail. If certain frequencies are simply dropping out and other frequencies remain, I might hear more detail, but at that point I’m not listening for that because there’s a lot wrong with the presentation.

Your honor, the witness is being lead to admit to some preconceived narrative.

Ron, why don’t you tell us what you hear happen to the details when your system emphasizes certain frequencies as it does in your two recent girl/guitar and Solar Energy videos with the different speakers? Answer the thread title based on what you hear from your two different speakers in your room. I can only judge from the videos.

 

[DaveC]

I'm sorry if the sequence of posts is unclear. In my most recent question to you I am not asking about resolution. You are answering a question I did not ask.

I am asking: Do you hear the same exact level of detail and the same exact level of intelligibility whether a system is warm balanced or tilted up in frequency balance?

Frequency response and "warm" tone aren't the same thing. Warm is even order harmonic distortion and whatever distortion/noise is added by certain materials like copper wire, gold plating, carbon resistors, some vacuum tubes, etc.

Frequency response doesn't really affect resolution or pace directly, but it can seem that way. Distortion, warm tone and acoustic issues with decay or delay reduces resolution and rounds off transients, that's what sounds "slow".

 

[Kjetil]

Help me understand here. What are you suggesting here? Why do you have "resolving" in quotes?

Resolving is audiophile speak for a tilted up frequency response.

 

[DaveC]

Resolving is audiophile speak for a tilted up frequency response.

Disagree, resolution is the ability to reproduce fine detail and has nothing to do with frequency response as long as the system is capable of reproducing the entire frequency spectrum.

It's important to keep definitions straight to avoid confusion, it's a huge issue with trying to convey listening experiences.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I touched on it in this comment up thread:

“Of course, when anything is emphasized one’s focus tends to go in that direction, which is why I described a natural sounding system as one that does not emphasize certain frequencies.”

If a frequency range is emphasized, I’m not sure if I hear more detail within that range of particular instruments. It is hard to say, without hearing it, and knowing how naturally it is presented to the listen. The emphasis comes along with a bunch of distortion, then no, there’s not more detail. If certain frequencies are simply dropping out and other frequencies remain, I might hear more detail, but at that point I’m not listening for that because there’s a lot wrong with the presentation.

Thank you.

Your honor, the witness is being lead to admit to some preconceived narrative.

No, not at all.

Answer the thread title based on what you hear

1) Actual resolution is independent from tonal balance.

2) I think people sometimes mistake a difference in tonal balance for a difference in resolution.

3) A tilted-up tonal balance -- especially a bump in the "presence" region -- does not increase resolution (defined by me as the audio equivalent of pixels per unit of area), although it may appear to enhance intelligibility and it may appear to enhance detail. When people identify this apparent enhancement to intelligibility or apparent enhancement to detail as an increase in resolution they are mistaken.

 

[Kjetil]

I am completely in agreement with your three points, Ron. I would use "often" instead of "sometimes" in 2) though.

Still my example hints to a fundamental problem with way too many expensive loudspeakers: They are tonally way off, more often than not to create a sense of resolution, and in dire need of tone controls.

 

[tima]

I can describe CJ premier 8 as fat, sweet and juicy, very close to your description.

Heh. yes. I owned CJ Premier 12 monoblocks before owning the Premier 140. This was a time when Audio Research and Conrad-Johnson -- the silver and the gold -- were in the lists, battling for your audiophile soul. Some ARC amps from the prior and turn of the century, like the VT100, were another batch with a hatchet like leading edge. CJ went the opposite direction.

 

[sbnx]

Ron -- Good thread topic.

I think it is intersting that American audiophiles seem to be obsessed with tone or tonal balance while British audiophiles are obsessed with PRAT. Both are essential to music. The below is just my take on the subject. I tried to read most of the posts but didn't get to everything so maybe some of this is repeated. Standard disclaimers apply -- YMMV etc.

As is indicated in the name PRAT, timing is essential. Actually, I think timing should be listed first in the acronym but TRAP just doesn't sound that great. One thing for sure, you can't have rhythm and pace without timing.

How do you get PRAT? Simple, time align the speakers and the room and lower the system noise floor. Notice I said simple and not easy.

In my expernience, yes, the subjective pace of the music can be altered by speaker attitude or changes to the systems noise floor. This is something I have struggled to wrap my head around. I mean the score was performed and recorded with a certian BPM (beats per minute) so how can I change that?? It is definitely an enigma, but it is definitely a thing. It has to do with exposing the decay of notes and experiencing them to their fullest extent. This is the space between notes. I just spent about 4 hours this afternoon chasing this down on the left speaker of my system in the front room. I use a piece (and a couple others) that Ron actually posted about in another thread -- Katherine McPhee "She used to be mine". I was making extremely small movements to tease out the emotion of this piece of music. In the end the smallest of small taps to toe-in the speaker an infintessimal amount and the music just slowed down and there was all of the raw emotion. As Tom said "You will know it when you hear it.".

 

[bonzo75]

I think it is intersting that American audiophiles seem to be obsessed with tone or tonal balance while British audiophiles are obsessed with PRAT. Both are essential to music.

This might be the most ridiculous generalisation I have read on the forum.

Aside from that, wilson type speakers and krell blessed amplifier styles are more popular in the US and are the biggest culprits of bad tone . If one were to generalize, I would say American audiophiles are obsessed with big, loud, expensive objects.

 

[Holmz]

Ron -- Good thread topic.

I think it is intersting that American audiophiles seem to be obsessed with tone or tonal balance while British audiophiles are obsessed with PRAT. Both are essential to music.

Agree

As is indicated in the name PRAT, timing is essential. Actually, I think timing should be listed first in the acronym but TRAP just doesn't sound that great. One thing for sure, you can't have rhythm and pace without timing.

How do you get PRAT? Simple, time align the speakers and the room and lower the system noise floor. Notice I said simple and not easy.

Totally agree.


Assuming that there is PRAT, and that it is something with timing or rise time, or decay time, then I am perplexed as to how people talk about using cables and soft suspensions, or transformer coupled amps with a low damping factor, as if it is anything other than describing the danger fleas and ticks on an attack dog.

Both the box “order” and crossover “order” can store a lot of energy.
When those are hit with some impulse, it takes longer for that energy to decay away.

In a planar speaker we can attribute that to light mass, but it is also a 1st order “enclosure”. A big driver in an open baffle is also a 1st order “enclosure”.
I suppose that one can try to loosen the grip on the driver in a lower order box.
(I am discounting whether that is the right thing to do or not.)

But it is diffuse to increase the grip on a driver, when the box and XO are high order. In that case we are gripping onto the XO and the box has largely evaded our grasp.

In any case if PRAT may not something that is trying to describe transcient and impulse response, so I could be wrong.

@sbnx mentioned “time aligned”, and the close cousin to time is phase, and group delay is related to phase.
Most of the attributes of time and phase are more “easily” seen in lower order boxes and lower order XOs.

This might be the most ridiculous generalisation I have read on the forum.
…

However it seems true.
Most Americans rate speakers on amplitude smoothness of the frequency response.

 

[mxk116]

He is saying (I think) that the different tonal balance of the two different performances (although he says "the performance" which seems confused) makes them sound like two version of the same recording.

Perhaps I am confused; what "two different performances" are you referring to?

 

[Robh3606]

PRAT? Never understood this. If you are taking toe tapping I could get it from an old transistor radio on the beach with my parents back in the 70's when I was a teenager.

Useless made up term in my book.

Rob

 

[tima]

Perhaps I am confused; what "two different performances" are you referring to?

The two you reference in the post upon which I commented.