Griesinger's teachings show up in Klippel, Linkwitz, Toole, and Geddes

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
2,907
777
180
IMO, this is the underlying explanation for our acclimatisation (we can accept most systems as long as there are no major issues) & it also explains how we can become fatigued over time listening to our playback system - it doesn't engage our attention, involve us emotionally (see above) - just replays all the note sin the correct order (I think

With fatigue, I think it's even worse... the system is producing sounds that trigger an alert response. Some sounds stimulate the nervous system's alert response simply due to genetics, like the fact we're very sensitive to smells of decay to keep us from eating things that make us sick. In the same way we key into certain sounds to keep us from being eaten by predators.

I also think there's levels of overall nervous system stimulation and the preference for warmth is mostly driven by the preference for a system that is less stimulating. OTOH, others may prefer a more stimulating system, and there are electronics and cables that enhance leading edges and attack, add sounds that stimulate alert response, and some find this exciting.
 
Likes: Duke LeJeune
May 30, 2010
16,083
1,133
420
Portugal
(...) Here is my in-a-nutshell philosophy of what a speaker should do; it contains elements of what you are saying but is not as well articulated:

There are two things a speaker should do. First, a speaker should do SOMETHING so well that the listener can, when focusing on that something, suspend disbelief and get lost in the music. That something can be timbre, clarity, imaging, impact, inner detail, immersion, PRAT, whatever. If a speaker can do more than one of these things, so much the better. But this is the easy part.

The HARD part is, a speaker should ALSO be free of colorations and inadequacies which collapse that hard-won illusion.
Very interesting. Why do you consider that doing things well is an easy part and dealing with the inadequacies is the hard part? Which technical aspects do you relate intrinsically with each of them?
 
Likes: Duke LeJeune

Duke LeJeune

[Industry Expert]/Member Sponsor
Jul 22, 2013
353
269
120
Princeton, Texas
Very interesting. Why do you consider that doing things well is an easy part and dealing with the inadequacies is the hard part?
Just my opinion, but it seems to me there are lots of speakers which do something well, but relatively few that don't also do something poorly.
 

Duke LeJeune

[Industry Expert]/Member Sponsor
Jul 22, 2013
353
269
120
Princeton, Texas
Which technical aspects do you relate intrinsically with each of them?
Hmm, that's a pretty big question. Let me start with the first thing I mentioned and see how far I get.

So, which technical aspects do I relate intrinsically with timbre?

In pursuit of natural-sounding timbre, I shoot for a smooth and gently downward-sloping frequency response curve for the first arrival sound, and I try to get the reverberant sound as similar in spectral balance as I reasonably can. I like the timbral richness that comes from a well-energized reverberant field, but try to avoid having a lot of early reflections because ime they degrade clarity which makes it harder to hear the "textural" aspect of timbre. To convey texture properly imo resonances must be kept to a minimum, in the drivers as well as in the cabinet. And we need to avoid acoustic problems like diffraction, which can impart a harshness particularly at higher SPLs, which can instantly ruin the timbre. I pay particular attention to certain frequency regions where either the ear is most sensitive, or where mechanical resonances seem most likely to occur.

I'm not sure that paragraph conveys anything useful. In reading it over just now, it sounds like a first draft of poorly-written ad copy... like trying to mention too many sound-bite topics and doing none of them justice.

I may come back to your question another time, after I've mulled it over a bit, but a complete answer is probably beyond the scope of what I can do.

If it's obvious to you that I've misunderstood your question, could you re-phrase it, and I'll try again?
 
Last edited:
Dec 13, 2010
284
21
18
Hello Duke,

have been abroad for a while with no internet connection.

Happy New Year to all.


Duke LeJeune said:
KlausR. said:
The argument is that you don’t perceive the last/late part of reverberation anyway because it is masked by the music being played continuously. You only would hear reverberation fading into inaudibility when the sound/music is stopped suddenly. From Blesser 2001: “In continuous music, only the first 10 dB of decay can be perceived because the remaining reverberation is masked by the next part of the music. This is called “running reverberance.” The reverberation tail, “stopped reverberance”, is perceived only when the music stops.”
What I'm doing is adding reverberant energy which starts out about 10 dB down relative to the direct sound. If Blesser's findings apply, any effects would be imperceptible until the music stops. And if such is indeed the case, then clearly I have been deluding myself all along.
Your effect is based on a first ceiling reflection, with the other first reflections being weakened by narrow dispersion speakers, Blesser is talking about reverberation. Two different issues.

Would you have any interest in the other kind of listening? It may be possible to configure a crude but adequate test system. If this might interest you, let me know whether you have access to a pair of small speakers which can be played at the same time as your big Klein & Hummels, and we can take a look at the feasibility.
If that test is what I think it is, feasibility would be an issue: in our living room we have an acoustic ceiling in the form of a stretched fabric with the air space above filled with rock wool, so basically there are no ceiling reflections. To make that test I would have to clear the dining area of our kitchen-diner from all furniture and move the system, which would include pulling the preamp with all cables, which are in cable compartments of the custom-made piece of our audio/TV furniture (see pic). At this point WAF would come into play.

IMG_20200105_170600.jpg
Duke LeJeune said:
KlausR. said:
... I can’t but repeat myself: white paper.
How would that change the legitimacy (or lack thereof) of my opinions?
There is, of course, absolutely no need to justify or legitimize your, or anybody else’s, opinion, this goes without saying. I only thought that a white paper would make things clearer for people visiting your website.


Klaus
 
Likes: Duke LeJeune

Duke LeJeune

[Industry Expert]/Member Sponsor
Jul 22, 2013
353
269
120
Princeton, Texas
I'm not a researcher in the field so don't have a wide range or depth of readings in the field. My interest stems from my experiences in audio & attempts to understand & explain what I'm perceiving. I consider I'm on a journey in trying to understand a very complex, unfinished & active field of auditory perception research...
Apologies in advance for the tangent/slash/potential thread de-rail:

Jkeny, in your explorations of the published research have you come across anything related to the tactile perception of sound... what we might call "impact"?

If so, by any chance, anything that might pertain to the time window within the nervous system (limbic system, sympathetic nervous system?) intergrates tactile sensations into "impact"? It might be related to the firing rate of sensory neurons in the skin, which I think maxes out at about 400 Hz. But then there is also the time required for nerve impulses to reach the central nervous system possibly from different areas of the body, though "chest-thump" - presumably from sensory receptors in the torso - may be the most relevant.

Anyway my reason for asking is, I'm trying to figure out if there is a critical-to-tactile-perception first-arrival-time window for multiple subwoofers. Or to put it another way, what I hope to eventually get a handle on is whether there is a perceptual tradeoff in tactile sensation for the superior in-room response smoothness of a distributed multi-sub system, and if so, what is the arrival-time "window" outside of which the sensation of impact is degraded?

Not that I expect you to know this off the top of your head, and I certainly do not expect you to look anything up, but if you recall anything that might point me in the right direction, I'd appreciate it very much.
 

jkeny

Industry Expert, Member Sponsor
Feb 10, 2012
3,362
29
48
Ireland
Hi Duke
It's not an area I have paid much attention to - I struggle enough trying to research/understand one mode of perception never mind multi-modal perception.
But I did a quick search & this might be a good starting point for your research "Auditory-Tactile Experience of Music"
This is a recent article & I often find them a good source of references to other relevant & probably seminal material
Hope you find it of use?


PS This also seems useful https://www.dhi.ac.uk/openbook/chapter/ICMEM2015-Merchel

But all the research I've seen seem to use electromechanical body exciters rather than woofers
 
Last edited:
Likes: Duke LeJeune

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
2,907
777
180
Part of the reason I prefer a large front-firing woofer w front-firing BR port is that I believe it recreates drums better, especially kick drums in a set. I think having air accelerated at the LP by the woofer and ports is noticeable, especially with designs like Pass' SLOB woofer arrangement or front horn.

I believe a sub setup can provide impact, the issue is the main woofer is often smaller in systems with sub setups. I think it's still better to have as much woofer surface area as possible, even if the woofers don't have to reach under ~40-50 Hz. Similarly, I think more midrange driver area is better, or a horn. Impact is a phenomenon that covers the entire frequency range, for example kick drums are really a full-range instrument and you'll hear that HF information just before the lower frequencies, so really, the bigger the speaker the better, at least imo... ;) And horns are effectively big speakers due to impedance matching with the air improving efficiency, and the reason they can have excellent dynamics and impact.
 
Likes: Duke LeJeune

Duke LeJeune

[Industry Expert]/Member Sponsor
Jul 22, 2013
353
269
120
Princeton, Texas
I did a quick search & this might be a good starting point for your research "Auditory-Tactile Experience of Music"
This is a recent article & I often find them a good source of references to other relevant & probably seminal material
Hope you find it of use?


PS This also seems useful https://www.dhi.ac.uk/openbook/chapter/ICMEM2015-Merchel

But all the research I've seen seem to use electromechanical body exciters rather than woofers
Thank you very much!

I read the papers/articles at those links as well as one of the papers cited which seemed likely to be relevant, and didn't find anything that addressed precisely what I'm curious about... BUT it looks like "perceived simultaneity" of auditory and tactile stimulus occurred when the tactile stimulus was in effect "first", by a time interval (7 milliseconds in the case of tactile stimulus at the hands) which synchronized the arrival of the audio and tactile signals at the brain. I think this implies a fairly tight time window for first-arrival bass pressure from multiple sources. I'll keep looking.

Part of the reason I prefer a large front-firing woofer w front-firing BR port is that I believe it recreates drums better, especially kick drums in a set. I think having air accelerated at the LP by the woofer and ports is noticeable, especially with designs like Pass' SLOB woofer arrangement or front horn.
My understanding is that the output from the port lags the output from the front of the cone by 180 degrees, and I've heard ported systems with imo excellent "slam", so perhaps the time window for integration of multiple arrival times in the bass region is at least 1/2 wavelength wide?

You mentioned the Slot-Loaded Open Baffle... I assume you've found it to do good job with impact? In my experience that's been a weakness of dipole systems. I would expect the slot loading's benefits to be confined to the nearfield, but I haven't really looked into it.

I believe a sub setup can provide impact, the issue is the main woofer is often smaller in systems with sub setups. I think it's still better to have as much woofer surface area as possible, even if the woofers don't have to reach under ~40-50 Hz. Similarly, I think more midrange driver area is better, or a horn. Impact is a phenomenon that covers the entire frequency range, for example kick drums are really a full-range instrument and you'll hear that HF information just before the lower frequencies, so really, the bigger the speaker the better, at least imo... ;) And horns are effectively big speakers due to impedance matching with the air improving efficiency, and the reason they can have excellent dynamics and impact.
Agreed!

Most of my work is with bass guitar speaker cabinets, and my observation is that not only does effective cone area matter, so does motor strength. But so does the in-room frequency response: In my experience if the response curve doesn't support "thump" as opposed to "boom" or "meh", neither cone area nor motor strength can make up the difference... therefore, I build an unusual amount of tuning flexibility into my bass cabs via multiple pluggable ports. Imo in the bass region there are a lot of things to get right... or to put it another way, there are a lot of opportunities to get it wrong!
 
Likes: DaveC

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high-end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. A place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss existing and new audio products, music servers, music streamers and computer audio, digital to audio converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel to reel, speakers, headphones, tube amplifiers and solid state amplification. Founded in 2010 What's Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing