Luxury Sedan Priced Speakers- they have fancy car paint, but do they sound better?

[fas42]

'tiny' speakers sound 'tiny' in the context of SOTA.

Tiny speakers sound tiny when they produce significant levels of distortion, and don't have deep bass to help "cover" for this. In this sense physically larger speakers, which in fact nearly always means a structure required for producing deep bass, typically do a better job of fooling you into thinking you have good sound because the bass rumble is doing a fair job of compensating for the upper ranges not quite working properly. How many people here put quite some effort into giving a downward tilt to their system's frequency reponse, and are quite pleased with the result? How many people can't stand Wilson speakers because the treble projection on these takes no prisoners? If all else fails push that which is not quite right more into the background ...

Agreed, all things being equal, a setup with performance reaching into the bass will be superior than one without, but from where I stand nearly all of the musical action occurs beyond the bass region, so I want to be sure that that is working correctly first. Tim's solution is probably ideal, a good 2 way, then subwoofers to add the grunt as required. The trouble with bass is that you need big, heavy lumps of metal and cabinetry to do things properly and that equals money.

I have listened to "tiny" speakers working at deafening levels and have enjoyed the energy of the pure, clean music washing over me; when operating like this the last thing they sound like is tiny. I have also experienced monstrous, exorbitantly priced behemoths hooked up to similarly priced componentry at very moderate levels, and figuratively, run screaming from the room. So, again, the size and price of the gear has almost nothing to do with the quality of the listening experience ...

Frank

 

[DaveyF]

Tiny speakers sound tiny when they produce significant levels of distortion, and don't have deep bass to help "cover" for this. In this sense physically larger speakers, which in fact nearly always means a structure required for producing deep bass, typically do a better job of fooling you into thinking you have good sound because the bass rumble is doing a fair job of compensating for the upper ranges not quite working properly. How many people here put quite some effort into giving a downward tilt to their system's frequency reponse, and are quite pleased with the result? How many people can't stand Wilson speakers because the treble projection on these takes no prisoners? If all else fails push that which is not quite right more into the background ...

Agreed, all things being equal, a setup with performance reaching into the bass will be superior than one without, but from where I stand nearly all of the musical action occurs beyond the bass region, so I want to be sure that that is working correctly first. Tim's solution is probably ideal, a good 2 way, then subwoofers to add the grunt as required. The trouble with bass is that you need big, heavy lumps of metal and cabinetry to do things properly and that equals money.

I have listened to "tiny" speakers working at deafening levels and have enjoyed the energy of the pure, clean music washing over me; when operating like this the last thing they sound like is tiny. I have also experienced monstrous, exorbitantly priced behemoths hooked up to similarly priced componentry at very moderate levels, and figuratively, run screaming from the room. So, again, the size and price of the gear has almost nothing to do with the quality of the listening experience ...

Frank

Have to agree with you Frank. Plus, IMO no speaker, large or small ,really does the 'live' sound of a symphony orchestra at full tilt in a hall. In that comparison, all speakers sound 'tiny' IMHO. As an aside,the size of the room is another factor; I think in a small room, small speakers typically sound more realistic than large speakers. I also agree with Tim's thought, get the mids and highs right and you can always add a sub ;OTOH, get the mids and highs wrong but getting the bottom end right isn't going to sound realistic, again IMHO.

 

[fas42]

Plus, IMO no speaker, large or small ,really does the 'live' sound of a symphony orchestra at full tilt in a hall. In that comparison, all speakers sound 'tiny' IMHO

You'd be surprised at what's possible! If the system is working correctly then it is eminently achievable, in that the great crescendo at the end of a movement will roll over the top of you in an overwhelming, totally effortless way, just like the real thing. The key, as you say, is getting the the upper end of the frequencies right; the slightest problem there and the illusion will fail, it will be cringeworthy in the extreme ...

Frank

 

[KlausR.]

All musical instruments, and singers send their sound in a fan to cardioid shape.

The singing voice has a cardoid shape with a peak towards the floor. Instruments show fan-like patterns at some, but not all frequencies. The French horn, for instance, radiates almost exclusively to the right side, and for the higher frequencies more and more to the rear. No loudspeaker can do that.

For tuba, most goes towards the ceiling. For the violin, some stuff goes full circle, some half circle, some only to the ceiling. No loudspeaker can do that.

Wang, “Evaluations of output from room acoustic computer modeling and auralization due to different sound source directionalities”, Applied Acoustics 2008, p.1281 shows balloon diagrams of loudspeaker, grand piano, violin, singing voice. Only the diagram of singing voice has some resemblance with the diagram of the loudspeaker.


So far I've not seen the pattern for a triangle, if you have the bibliographic data of a paper/book where such pattern is shown, please let me know.

Klaus

 

[terryj]

Tiny speakers sound tiny when they produce significant levels of distortion, and don't have deep bass to help "cover" for this. In this sense physically larger speakers, which in fact nearly always means a structure required for producing deep bass, typically do a better job of fooling you into thinking you have good sound because the bass rumble is doing a fair job of compensating for the upper ranges not quite working properly. How many people here put quite some effort into giving a downward tilt to their system's frequency reponse, and are quite pleased with the result? How many people can't stand Wilson speakers because the treble projection on these takes no prisoners? If all else fails push that which is not quite right more into the background ...

Agreed, all things being equal, a setup with performance reaching into the bass will be superior than one without, but from where I stand nearly all of the musical action occurs beyond the bass region, so I want to be sure that that is working correctly first. Tim's solution is probably ideal, a good 2 way, then subwoofers to add the grunt as required. The trouble with bass is that you need big, heavy lumps of metal and cabinetry to do things properly and that equals money.

I have listened to "tiny" speakers working at deafening levels and have enjoyed the energy of the pure, clean music washing over me; when operating like this the last thing they sound like is tiny. I have also experienced monstrous, exorbitantly priced behemoths hooked up to similarly priced componentry at very moderate levels, and figuratively, run screaming from the room. So, again, the size and price of the gear has almost nothing to do with the quality of the listening experience ...

Frank

guess we all should be wary of going to far with out personal experiences, in other words we should have the humility to realise they are only our experiences....

I note the use of prejudicial terms like 'bass rumble' to make your point...who actually likes bass rumble??? or would they prefer tight, taut and articulate bass instead??

Funnily enough, I have found it far more true that BASS influences the perception of the frequency range above it than the reverse, and so (to me at least) we need to reverse your order, we sort the bass then move on to the rest.

How, in actuality, is it philosophically different to start with a solid full range system (as suggested by mike or steve) as opposed to a good two way and add subs?? Do we not end up at the same place??

I chose to quote this post of yours, I was initially was grabbed by an earlier one that said something like 'a good pair of speaker stuck on a poor preceding chain' (so apologies if it has been misquoted).

Well, I guess it all depends on where you believe the importances in audio lie. I have chosen to put ALL of my energies into the speakers and room, frankly I do not care for anything earlier in the chain.

It is easy to set up our arguments to prove what we want....I have listened to "tiny" speakers working at deafening levels and have enjoyed the energy of the pure, clean music washing over me...well, ok. I have heard the total opposite, completely DUE to small speakers trying work at deafening levels, and failing miserably simply because they are tiny.

As I said, easy to set it up for whatever purpose you want...I have also experienced monstrous, exorbitantly priced behemoths hooked up to similarly priced componentry at very moderate levels, and figuratively, run screaming from the room....never experienced the opposite?? Is it possible you may be able to find a big system that does not make you run screaming from the room?

The effortless ability of a system to move air, that is what gives you headroom and clean sound, not some 5 inch driver masquerading as bass (notwithstanding the excellent magazine reviews)

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I note the use of prejudicial terms like 'bass rumble' to make your point...who actually likes bass rumble??? or would they prefer tight, taut and articulate bass instead??

A question of semantics, perhaps. Call it boom or rumble or a mid-bass hump or...musical...I find that many people prefer it and, evidently, so do the many speaker manufacturers who engineer it into their offerings. And we're not just talking about midfi offerings.

Funnily enough, I have found it far more true that BASS influences the perception of the frequency range above it than the reverse, and so (to me at least) we need to reverse your order, we sort the bass then move on to the rest.

I think it works both ways, but I get Frank's point. Harsh, zingy trebles spoil the whole soup. They mess up the imaging, the transparency, the tonal balance, the sense of realism in a way that bass doesn't, probably because we're so accustomed to variable room gain that it seems "normal" to us. Let that boom get too high into the lower mids, though, and it becomes much more intrusive. I think the "veil" that makes the critical midrange seem recessed often has more to do with lower mids/upper bass masking than it does with the upper mids not being there. I have often proven this point to myself with a bit of eq.

How, in actuality, is it philosophically different to start with a solid full range system (as suggested by mike or steve) as opposed to a good two way and add subs?? Do we not end up at the same place??

It's different if you're talking about really big full range systems because, in their favor, the sheer volume of the drivers can scale better to really big rooms and, in their favor, subs give you volume, crossover, phase and placement control, giving you more, better, simpler tools for controlling the balance and tonality of the system. In smaller domestic rooms (20 x 20 or less, and even bigger, depending...) I personally think a pair of good 2-ways and sub(s), properly set up, can be superior, but a lot of mileage varies.

The effortless ability of a system to move air, that is what gives you headroom and clean sound, not some 5 inch driver masquerading as bass (notwithstanding the excellent magazine reviews)

If they're trying to masquerade as bass, I'd agree completely. But if your five inch drivers are not attempting to produce the illusion of something deeper than their capabilities, if they are just extending to their 50 or 60 hz limit and rolling off naturally, they can make beautiful music within their range. Sonny Rollins Sax is floating in front of me now in a nearly perfect phantom center channel and it is absolutely...ahem...palpable . Add a sub or two and they can make beautiful full-range music. If you have a huge room, huge speakers will work. If you don't, they will do more harm than good. How this is even controversial eludes me.

Tim

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Tiny speakers sound tiny when they produce significant levels of distortion, and don't have deep bass to help "cover" for this. In this sense physically larger speakers, which in fact nearly always means a structure required for producing deep bass, typically do a better job of fooling you into thinking you have good sound because the bass rumble is doing a fair job of compensating for the upper ranges not quite working properly. How many people here put quite some effort into giving a downward tilt to their system's frequency reponse, and are quite pleased with the result? How many people can't stand Wilson speakers because the treble projection on these takes no prisoners? If all else fails push that which is not quite right more into the background ...

Agreed, all things being equal, a setup with performance reaching into the bass will be superior than one without, but from where I stand nearly all of the musical action occurs beyond the bass region, so I want to be sure that that is working correctly first. Tim's solution is probably ideal, a good 2 way, then subwoofers to add the grunt as required. The trouble with bass is that you need big, heavy lumps of metal and cabinetry to do things properly and that equals money.

I have listened to "tiny" speakers working at deafening levels and have enjoyed the energy of the pure, clean music washing over me; when operating like this the last thing they sound like is tiny. I have also experienced monstrous, exorbitantly priced behemoths hooked up to similarly priced componentry at very moderate levels, and figuratively, run screaming from the room. So, again, the size and price of the gear has almost nothing to do with the quality of the listening experience ...

Frank

the word 'tiny' is unfortunate and i regret repeating it. small speakers can and many times do sound very good. but there is a reason that they sound small when directly comparing them to a large speaker (with high quality deep bass capability) that is properly adjusted to a large room.

i own Dynaudio 52SE's, small bookshelf speakers, which i use for my flatscreen in my family room where i watch TV (sports mostly). also; a few years back i owned Marten Duke's, small 2-ways, i used for rear channels in a multi-channel configuration in my 2-channel room. the 52SE's list around $1200, the Dukes around $7k. these are both nice sounding speakers. the Dukes were really very special. i did compare both in my 2-channel room directly to my MM3's.

here is the difference. getting the high frequencies truely correct is a curious thing, and it is a bit counter-intuative. back when i had the Von Schweikert VR9's i spent lots of time trying to get three tweeters (2 front facing, and one rear facing) to really sound right. each tweeter has a gain control. try as i might i could not get them to behave. i struggled mightily with it and was very frustrated. it was not until i got the bass properly adjusted that the high frequencies finally behaved.

i had the same experience again when i 'fixed' the bass in my room (and MM3 speakers) last year. the treble 'locked in' when the bass achieved linearity. it was one of those 'i'll be damned' realizations.

music has harmonics and overtones up and down the spectrom. highs don't get completely fleshed out unless a system can do deep bass and do it in a linear way. as you approach linear deep bass the treble attains a much more natural presence....and ease. completness. scale.

2-ways extending to 45-50hz cannot attain this. not to say they don't sound good. but they sound small. sure; they may sound like they disappear and sound larger than your eyes think they should, but in direct comparison to a full range speaker that is dialed in they sound small.

2-ways + subs have the same problem, unless they have perfect integration. if the coherence is lacking the 'trick' of that scale and ease is not pulled off. they sound like a 2-way + sub.

until you hear a full range system synergize it's hard to 'get' this issue. ultimate high frequency performance requires great bass performance. otherwise even very refined speakers sound lightweight. even though the music may not have obvious content below 35hz or 40hz the complete harmonic picture does go lower.

and that is part of what you (should) get for your 'fancy car' dollars.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I find myself in agreement with MikeL here... I am struggling to find a way to express this clearly but it seems to me that small speakers , even with subs sound ...well ... small... it could be a psychological thing but I am not entirely sure... With subwoofer properly integrated small speaker based system does sound full range in term of pure frequency response but still seems to lacks a certain "something" , a sense of scale if you will. At least that has been my impression thus far. Larger speakers and I am not entirely certain that it is a simple matter of radiating areas ... have presence and scale to a degree that smaller speaker do not seem to possess. I suspect that it is in the area of mid and upper midbass dynamics that small speakers are lacking or in dynamic linearity in the same region. I think that asking the driver to pump some low bass ( say below 100 Hz) and upper mid bass, anything above is where we should look at ... On the surface the larger speakers usually use same or similar tweeter an midrange but in the midbass the larger enclosure allows some liberties ... Audiophile may cringe at this but I am certain speaker designers don't: A 15" woofer is at ease reproducing frequencies up to 1000Hz ... The larger speakers can take the advantage of multiple drivers for example using four 8” or 10 inches to have both extended response from low to mid highs, dynamic response and dynamic linearity. I would take the example of the Evo MM3 with 2 7” drivers which can easily go as low as 50 Hz if needs be, also have two big 15 inch that also can go as high as 1000 Hz or above with no break up .. same with the Wilson X-2, which uses a 15 ich woofer and a 13 inch mid-woofer and 2 midrange drivers, The Top VOn Shweikert, the top of the line Genesis, the Magnepans (most of them if not all), the top Magico (not the min of course), the top Rockport speakers (spectacular!!),. Revel Salon (another gem), etc in fact most of the larger speakers..
I would have preferred to be able to show measurements but I can tell you that no mini-monitor plus sub, I have heard can rival the aforementioned speakers in term of scale and dynamic linearity, even with normalized (i-e level matched) volume or within the SPL capabilities of the small speakers…

Slightly OT, I am stressing MikeL point. In the sense his experiences with the treble mirror mine .. Once the bass is properly dealt with, the treble becomes much better ... The Sound becomes much better within the Audio spectrum. I am a staunch advocate of the (at least ) 3 subs approach even with Full range speakers. Making sure that your low frequency reproduction is linear brings the rest of the spectrum in step … And that seems to requires multiple subs ..

Better bass seems to equal better sound ..

One last thing .. Audiophile mentality is also biased toward higher priced components ... Often you will hear the modifier "for its price" ... The Magnepan MG 20.1, the Revel Salon 2, and the EVO MM3 (to name those only, there are others) rival IMO most of the uber over 100 K speakers .. They seem to suffer from their relative modest (in audiophile terms) prices ... when the discussion comes to the best speakers around at any price ...

 

[LL21]

As someone who lived with mini-monitors and subs for 20 years, i am with ML and Frantz on this one as well. I found great satisfaction with mini-monitors and subs...i preferred them to many floorstanders...but in no way does the sound of a cello through my prior system, a chorus of human voices...nearly all of my music for that matter... have the realistic size, breadth as compared with my Wilson Grand slamms (btw, i still run a sub in parallel from 35hz down with an extremely high cut off above 35hz.) i owned Celestion SL6si and then Guarneris with great subs set up by trained engineers...but the grand Slamm does everything they did down to the most delicate nuance (and more)...plus it has an effortless capability and lifelike scale that is totally different...even in the mids. Even when listening to my system from the next room, you can totally tell. A chorus sounds could actually pass for a chorus from a scale perspective, as could a guitar or a harp (which are huge instruments)...and i have heard lots of drum kits up close and personal. That was just never the case before...no matter how much sub i had or juice running through the monitors...and forget larger concertos pieces, closely miked bands. No doubt getting the treble right is critical...frankly you really gotta get it all right if you're going to push the envelope. The key (for me) is you never get perfection in any one area...not one...but when a system is missing the ability to create scale (ie, you get a "9 out of 10" on vocal but a "3 out of 10" on a cello actually being lifesized)...it is not the same (for me).

 

[LL21]

...oh and one more thing. i repeat that i lived with minimonitors and subs for years, because i always preferred them to many floorstanders...many. But until i had the Wilson Grand Slamms and have now lived with them for a bit, i did not truly get the scale thing. i have been totally surprised as i have listend and relistened to my albums that the scale thing applies to so much more of my collection than i would have ever expected. in fact almost all of it (almost). I come back to Cello, or a standup bass...i listen to them being plucked in real life and then come home and compare...they really are big instruments with a very large "halo" of sound if you close your eyes to a live one and listen as if you were back home with the system. And that relates to flutes, to violins to a degree as well. the resonance of a violin requires some real power to deliver cleanly but also with the "volume" of sound you hear when you stand next to one in real life. its not just the decibels i think...it seems to be the "volume" of an instruments sound in (completely) non-technical parlance. again, my two cents and my own experience so far.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

While I agree that big speakers are better in big rooms, this is going to require further, and verifiable explanation....

music has harmonics and overtones up and down the spectrom. highs don't get completely fleshed out unless a system can do deep bass and do it in a linear way. as you approach linear deep bass the treble attains a much more natural presence....and ease. completness. scale.

2-ways extending to 45-50hz cannot attain this.

First, let me make sure I understand what is being said: content happening below 50hz effects the frequency response of content above 1khz? Deep bass adds presence to trebles? That's going to take some 'splainin', and it ain't harmonic overtones, because if the overtones of a sound thats fundamental is deep are high, and they are captured on the recording, they will be reproduced by the transducer that plays those frequencies, regardless of the presence of another transducer capable of reproducing the fundamental.

Scale? Sure. This? I have my doubts.

Tim

 

[LL21]

OK...here goes a layman's repeat of what a well respected engineer who was part of the team that helped build up Acoustic Energy many years ago told me about why deep bass properly done helps mids. Apparently, when a small speaker struggles to put out bass, the bass wave is not smooth and screws around in the room with the upper frequency waves. When a sub is properly integrated into the room, the sheer force of the sub is able to smooth out the lower frequency waves in the room which has benefits for upper frequency wave forms in the room. i hope i repeated that correctly...i apologize if i didnt, but that was what i thought had been explained to me in terms of why my Velodyne sub (set up right) might actually provide benefit to the mids of the Wilson Grand Slamms.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

While I agree that big speakers are better in big rooms, this is going to require further, and verifiable explanation....



First, let me make sure I understand what is being said: content happening below 50hz effects the frequency response of content above 1khz? Deep bass adds presence to trebles? That's going to take some 'splainin', and it ain't harmonic overtones, because if the overtones of a sound that's fundamental is deep are high, and they are captured on the recording, they will be reproduced by the transducer that plays those frequencies, regardless of the presence of another transducer capable of reproducing the fundamental.

Scale? Sure. This? I have my doubts.

Tim

Tim,

i don't claim any great technical knowledge about this. when it happened (that deep bass improvements made significant improvements in my perception of treble performance) i was very surprised.....dumbfounded even. first with the VR9's, then years later with the MM3's. i'm simply relating my experience. i make no claims of scientific data to support my interpretation.

one can turn a subwoofer on and off in a system with an otherwise competent 2-way and hear benefits to the treble. it's a subtle effect but typically it is there. the more integrated the subwoofer the more evidant the effect. with a full range fully integrated speaker system the effect is considerable.

listen to a flute, brush strokes or even a triangle and turn a subwoofer on and off. there are overtones filled in with deep bass. the more linear and deeper the extension the greater the effect.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I've heard deep bass improperly done effect mids because the uncontrolled harmonic boom gets in the way and masks them. That, of course, would have nothing to do with this effect that sounds like high overtones in the recording that a system somehow can't reproduce without the fundamental. That one escapes me. I've been fooling around with domestic and professional audio for about 40 years. I've switch bass drivers in and out of the system when all kinds of treble information was playing, in studios halls and homes, and I've never heard or heard of this effect and can think of no reasonable explanation for it. If anything, the opposite is true: Turn off the bass, the mids sound better. That's a good indication that you don't have the bass right. But you hear what you hear, Mike. Enjoy.

Tim

 

[RBFC]

I would think that improperly reproduced bass would have higher distortion than intended, which in turn would generate incorrect harmonic information in the higher bands. Thus, the treble gets screwed up.

Lee

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I would think that improperly reproduced bass would have higher distortion than intended, which in turn would generate incorrect harmonic information in the higher bands. Thus, the treble gets screwed up.

Lee

Perhaps, but that would still be bad bass getting out of the way, not the presence of deep bass improving treble.

Tim

 

[RBFC]

If the system was reproducing all the correct deep bass, and not adding distortion, then the overtones/harmonics would make the treble sound more "correct". Errors of omission or commission both deviate from truth.

Lee

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

If the system was reproducing all the correct deep bass, and not adding distortion, then the overtones/harmonics would make the treble sound more "correct". Errors of omission or commission both deviate from truth.

Lee

If the recording has all the correct deep bass information, and the amplifiers are sending it on to small speakers capable of reproducing down to 50hz, they'll reproduce all of the overtones present down to 50hz, period, regardless of the fundamental they were originally associated with. The presence or absence of drivers capable of producing tones below 50hz should not effect that, unless the crossovers are too shallow and the big bass drivers are attempting to produce tones above their range. And while that is not only possible but fairly common in passive speaker systems, it is not a good thing.

Tim

 

[Mark Seaton]

I recently had the displeasure of listening to a pair of $20K speakers with four(4) fifteen inch drivers per side in a four way config. The 15" drivers were powered internally by a 1000 watt amp per channel!
I say 'displeasure' because while these speakers could make the walls in the listening room flex, they simply did not sound at all like music and were able to drive me out of the listening seat in no time at all
IMO, there are a number of speaker manufacturers who simply do not seem to know what the sound of a real instrument is in an un-amplified setting and therefore do not know how to design to that ideal.
The size of the drivers has IMHO very little to do with how the speaker will ultimately sound....Although many manufacturer's have priced their wares based on this factor.
OTOH, I do agree that large drivers are usually needed to move enough air to dig deep in the bottom end, BUT that is not by any means the end of the road to realistic reproduction.

Knowing how the real instrument sounds is pretty much useless, IMO, for designing loudspeakers because of the very different radiation patterns of instruments, as compared to the patterns of loudspeakers. Because of this difference in radiation pattern and the directional characteristics of human hearing there is a perceptual difference between the sounds of instrument and reproduction:

Klaus

So Klaus, you believe that knowing how real instruments sound is pretty much useless in the design of a speaker
If what you say is true, then I ask you, what is a speaker designer attempting to make his speaker sound like.....rice krispies in a bowl of milk?....Which BTW, if he can truly succeed at that he might be on to something... That speaker would most likely have a reasonable ability to sound like a 'live' instrument in some areas of frequency response. My point being, that if you know what the reference sounds like, then you should try and design to that goal.
OTOH, if you do not have a reference in 'live' sound, then the results will speak for themselves!IMHO!

Sounds like a failure in communication here.

While I would agree that you have to have experienced live music and be familiar with what should be attainable, I would argue that recognizing/identifying the sound of live music only helps in the confirmation/affirmation of a design, and doesn't directly give you insight on the means to that end.

Beyond the most basic qualities, reproduction of sound is less intuitive than some would like to portray it, or at least the intuitive parts go back to 1st order production of sound and not esoteric, subjective aspects.

While not as fun for the marketing departments, my position has long been that you hear the prioritization of qualities and compromises made by the designer, and how well those priorities were executed. With all speakers having fundamental limitations, especially once required to sit in a real room, all have limitations. To use an oversimplified analogy to the video world, we have a target grayscale that in the speaker world has another 3-4 dimensions. None are perfect, and even within a seemingly reasonable % deviation, you will see a plethora of resulting colors. Some colors will be more bothersome or stressful on the eyes than others, and some a bit rosier.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

There is a difference between Frequency Response and perception of an audio signal. Neither MikeL or I claimed that the the Frequency Response changed. I observed a better representation of the treble when the bass was taken care of. I observed that instruments rich in treble overtone like the violins took more "dimensions" when the bass was dealt with. One tend to consider the violin as without bass and indeed it does not have much "bass" but a look at a violin spectrum shows a lot of content in the 200 to 500 Hz region

It is clear to me that proper reproduction of this region will lend more realism to violins reproduction... Another case for full range IMO

The response in the treble may not change but the perceived tonal balance hence the degree of realism of instruments should increase with better reproduction of the lower frequencies IMO... TO repeat larger speakers tend to excel in linearity in the low to mid bass ... in dynamics in general...

I haven't seem too many measurements of dynamic linearity in speakers aside from a few from the Soundstage network ..I think we need to look more into this ...