Live vs. Reproduced?

[mep]

The clipping will probably fry the voice coils first, Mep.

Tim

Tim-I'm pretty sure that if I take a cheap pair of speakers that were designed for 15 watts RMS and lash them up to a 200 watt per channel amp and crank up the sound so that the amp isn't near clipping, I will overheat the voice coils fairly quickly and ruin them.

 

[fas42]

I still think I hear tons of fine detail in my system along with the sense of space.

I'm with Mark on this. I think the problem is defining what we mean by fine detail, and perhaps here we're coming down to differences in the way people's hearing works. When I listen to a live orchestral effort I appreciate the big dynamics and the bloom, it flows over me beautifully. At the same time, if I choose to do so, I can look at or tune in by ear, to the sound of a particular instrument or area of the orchestra that's participating, without effort mentally zooming in to what's going on in that area, for the moment, in my mind, shifting the rest of the sound into the background. From the language used I get the impression that's how a lot of people are able to, or naturally do so, listen.

So what I am saying is that a correctly functioning system should allow the same sort of listening to be possible ...

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim-I don't know if I agree with what you said with regards to giving up resolution of fine detail in order to gain a "huge" sense of space. I still think I hear tons of fine detail in my system along with the sense of space. You are probably way more sensitive to this than most of us since you are listening very near-field due to the nature of your set-up. You probably give up detail when you go from your cans to your powered speakers even though you are sitting in the near-field when you listen to your speakers. My room is L-shaped and at the narrowest point, my room is 15' W x 23' D x 9' H. The L shape adds another 4' to the left side of the listening position. Each of my speakers has 9 drivers (two are 14" passive radiators) and my sub adds another 3 drivers (two are 14" passive radiators) so depending on how you count them, there is either 21 speakers moving air or there is 15. Either way, they are moving lots of air and provide plenty of detail at my listening position.

Plenty of detail? Sure. Less detail? Of course. What happens when I take off my cans and listen in the near field, or when I move my monitors to the living room and listen from 12 feet away, is exactly the same thing that happens if I move from the front row of the concert hall to the 20th row, or from the 20th row to the balcony -- less direct sound, more reflected sound. And with more reflected sound comes comb filtering, image smearing and reverberation. And all of that masks detail. There is really no way around it.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I'm with Mark on this. I think the problem is defining what we mean by fine detail, and perhaps here we're coming down to differences in the way people's hearing works. When I listen to a live orchestral effort I appreciate the big dynamics and the bloom, it flows over me beautifully. At the same time, if I choose to do so, I can look at or tune in by ear, to the sound of a particular instrument or area of the orchestra that's participating, without effort mentally zooming in to what's going on in that area, for the moment, in my mind, shifting the rest of the sound into the background. From the language used I get the impression that's how a lot of people are able to, or naturally do so, listen.

So what I am saying is that a correctly functioning system should allow the same sort of listening to be possible ...

Frank

Of course. Our brains are incredibly gifted at focusing in on sounds, pushing our attention to the sounds around them into the background. If not, we couldn't carry on a conversation in a noisy room. That doesn't change what is there to focus in on.

Tim

 

[fas42]

That doesn't change what is there to focus in on.

I'm sorry, I don't follow what you're saying here ...

Plus, I can't reconcile that the sound of your system changes dramatically moving from the normal 3 to 4 feet that I think you have mentioned as your normal distance, to something a bit over 3 times further away. If I were to do that with my system working well I would be very hard pressed to nominate anything having changed.

Frank

 

[RUR]

...What happens when I take off my cans and listen in the near field, or when I move my monitors to the living room and listen from 12 feet away, is exactly the same thing that happens if I move from the front row of the concert hall to the 20th row, or from the 20th row to the balcony -- less direct sound, more reflected sound. And with more reflected sound comes comb filtering, image smearing and reverberation. And all of that masks detail.

That's not been my experience in properly treated rooms and, as Floyd Toole would tell you, some amount of early lateral reflection is a desirable thing. Using cans, OTOH, robs one of any (IMHO also desirable) bass/mid-bass tactile effects, evident even without overly emphasizing the LF (near-flat FR).

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

That's not been my experience in properly treated rooms and, as Floyd Toole would tell you, some amount of early lateral reflection is a desirable thing.

Some amount of early reflection is a desirable thing. It creates that ambient space that is much more natural to us than an anechoic chamber. It also masks detail.

Using cans, OTOH, robs one of any (IMHO also desirable) bass/mid-bass tactile effects, evident even without overly emphasizing the LF (near-flat FR).

I agree. but the loss of the tactile feel of bass (and the aforementioned ambient space) takes nothing away from the superior resolution of detail.

It's all trade-offs, but if you think you've got it all, tell me to shut up. I don't want to spoil that one for you.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I'm sorry, I don't follow what you're saying here ...

Frank

The higher the level of reflected sound, the more masking, the lower the level of detail available for your brain to focus on to the exclusion of other sounds. I can focus on that violin and bring it forward in my awareness, but if a subtle overtone is masked by the reflections in the room, it is no longer there, in my ears, for my brain to focus on. Is that clearer?

Tim

 

[fas42]

loss of the tactile feel of bass (and the aforementioned ambient space) takes nothing away from the superior resolution of detail.

I certainly agree with you on this one, Tim, good bass is not essential for detail to be resolved. In fact, I can remember reading that the brain will reconstruct the fundamental of a bass note if only the overtones are there, and correctly deduce which key, so to speak, had been struck. Clever thing, our brains ...

but if a subtle overtone is masked by the reflections in the room, it is no longer there, in my ears, for my brain to focus on.

but disagree here. Your ear/brain must really work differently from mine! Are you really saying that if your volume is at a decent level, and you move from about 4 feet to 12 feet away, changing nothing, that the whole perceived experience changes very significantly, or even dramatically?

Frank

 

[garylkoh]

You do not lose detail and resolution for volume of air moved if the speaker is capable of it. The speaker has to be large enough. When you can distribute the high frequencies over 56 matched tweeters, distribute the midrange over 12ft of ribbon, and distribute the bass over 24 twelve-inch woofers with 12,000W of servo-controlled power, you get the best of both worlds...... but you need the room to handle it all.

Sorry for the shameless plug - the speaker shall remain nameless.

 

[garylkoh]

but disagree here. Your ear/brain must really work differently from mine! Are you really saying that if your volume is at a decent level, and you move from about 4 feet to 12 feet away, changing nothing, that the whole perceived experience changes very significantly, or even dramatically?

Frank

Frank, that's just the laws of physics. With a point source, when you have moved from 4 ft to 12ft, you will need about 6 times the power to get the same dynamics, resolution, and volume. (6fB fall-off for doubling of distance)

When you move that distance, room interactions (assuming that the walls of the room doesn't shift) also becomes two and a half times more prominent.

SO, the experience changes dramatically. That's why some people listen exclusively nearfield.

 

[fas42]

what I think was the most prominant thing is a sort of what I call halo effect.

What I mean by that is the projection of sound in all directions. That is simply something that any forward firing speakers can not do. That distinguishes the real vs reproduced sound. My system and yours can easily replicate the "sound" of the single piano or the harp, but not that halo/spherical effect.

I think this is what some people call "bloom". Am I correct?

Frank

 

[garylkoh]

Listening to these three instruments, each on their own, I really conentrated on what I was hearing (given the rarity of unamplified music) and what I think was the most prominant thing is a sort of what I call halo effect.

What I mean by that is the projection of sound in all directions. That is simply something that any forward firing speakers can not do. That distinguishes the real vs reproduced sound. My system and yours can easily replicate the "sound" of the single piano or the harp, but not that halo/spherical effect.

That is why dipole loudspeakers like Maggies and Martin Logans have such a huge and loyal following. Those who have owned a pair hardly ever leave the fold.

 

[DonH50]

Yup, I love my Maggies!

And, I have not only heard but played live jazz (lead trumpet) and orchestral (principal trumpet) in the past few weeks. My wife thinks I am one in a thousand, but I am not sure she always means that in a good way...

 

[fas42]

SO, the experience changes dramatically. That's why some people listen exclusively nearfield.

Interesting. That's why I constantly refer to correctly working systems, because when mine is in that shape the sound changes not one iota. It's only recently that I've twigged onto why this happens, and that's because of the ear/brain's automatic level compression mechanism. As the sound level of a live instrument or well sorted out system increases there is an inbuilt fader that effectively cuts in, protecting the delicate mechanism. That's why if you have live music in your home and you listen at one end of the house it still has a very dramatic quality to it; moving towards the source the volume the sense is not so much that the sound gets get louder, rather that it gets more intense, more dynamic.

Of course, this fader for the ear can only go so far. After doing a reasonable amount of fiddling and close listening I have to back off, at least in terms of distance from the drivers, otherwise ringing starts to develop in the ears. This is not a problem with harshness or overload, just the ear's way of telling me that the machinery needs a bit of a rest ...

Frank

 

[DaveyF]

Frank, when I am referring to 'bloom' what I am trying to describe is the ability of the orchestra to seemingly envelope the hall in sound...however, not multi-directional sound, because one can clearly hear that the music originates in the front of the hall.
Frankly, (no pun intended) I do not believe that your system, or for that matter any system, can reproduce the sound of a live orchestra in full tilt. The orchestra i heard last night had about fifty musicians playing all kinds of instruments. I have heard most of the very best large speakers that are available and none of them even comes close to being able to reproduce that 'bloom' or sense of 'majestic expansion' for want of a better word if you will. As I said before, the music wasn't that loud, but the dynamics and overall 'gestalt' ( I know I'm beginning to sound like JV...Yikes) was clearly
what delineates the real from the reproduced. BTW, I do think that our systems do a much better job with the small ensemble..be it jazz or ?

 

[RBFC]

Sorry for the shameless plug - the speaker shall remain nameless.

Gee, won't you even give us a hint?

Lee

 

[garylkoh]

Frank, you touch upon something very close to my heart - psychoacoustics, and the ear/brain/loudspeaker/room interface. When you have your system sorted out well, the ear/brain is fooled. When you are at a live, unamplified event (even some well-amplified events) if someone walks in-between you and the band or single instrument, you do not hear the "sound shadow" of the person - no matter how fat he is. I think that might be what Tom refers to as the halo/spherical effect - that halo seems to envelop the environment. If the system is very well sorted out, when someone walks in front of the loudspeaker, you don't hear the "shadow". Very few systems can do this.

 

[fas42]

I do not believe that your system, or for that matter any system, can reproduce the sound of a live orchestra in full tilt.

and of course this is where my debate with everyone else here, apart from Vince, goes around and around and around ... . We're back to that bloody red wine again!!

Once heard, never forgotten ...

Frank

 

[garylkoh]

BTW, I do think that our systems do a much better job with the small ensemble..be it jazz or ?

I agree - it's harder to convincingly do a full orchestra or big band. I have NEVER heard a system do a high-school marching band convincingly..... but that may be because I've never heard a band like that well recorded. May be someone will jump in here with a suggestion - and it'll cost me more money.

IMHO a single instrument or solo voice is also difficult to do so convincingly. What's in between - a jazz quartet, or a chamber group is easier than a solo harp. But then again, it might be the recording.....