Ron’s New System

[shakti]

After I get the third AVAA I will run the frequency response measurement again.

There is a new AVAA model in the market, adding dsp functionality to better customize the correction effect.

may be worth a try

PSI Audio AVAA C214 - Digital Active Bass Trap

Do you have room mode problems? AVAA C214 is the clever solution to remove them. Active, evolutive DSP solution, no calibration needed, auto adaptative, effective from 15Hz to 160Hz.

www.psiaudio.swiss

 

[Ron Resnick]

There is a new AVAA model in the market, adding dsp functionality to better customize the correction effect.

may be worth a try

PSI Audio AVAA C214 - Digital Active Bass Trap

Do you have room mode problems? AVAA C214 is the clever solution to remove them. Active, evolutive DSP solution, no calibration needed, auto adaptative, effective from 15Hz to 160Hz.

www.psiaudio.swiss

Yes, I am aware of it, thank you. I'd rather stay away from the DSP.

 

[cjfrbw]

Umph in lower mids. Bottom up compared to top down

Was this live or was it Memorex? Sounds excellent over headphones in standard mac mini.

 

[Ron Resnick]

On videos Ron…on videos…

You are asking me to apply to videos a utility I don't believe in.

 

[PeterA]

I don't hear on my system the focus on that frequency range that I hear from the videos of Peter's system. But left to my own listening I don't think I would hear any issue.

You are asking me to apply to videos a utility I don't believe in.

Ron, your statement is making a clear comparison between what you hear from your system and what you hear from videos of my system. In fact you have made quite a few statements about my system.

You have described what you keep referring to as my system’s “center of gravity“. So on what are all of your statements about my system based?

It makes no sense to me that you are dismissing brads question by simply stating you have not heard my system. If that’s your position, you should not make any comments about the sound of my system.

You cannot have it both ways.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron, on your reports of systems auditioned in person did you provide an assessment of how they did in poor recordings and that the poor recordings were representative of the system

I don't think I ever tormented audiophile hosts with Chainsmokers or Kings of Leon or Hootie & the Blowfish.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron, your statement is making a clear comparison between what you hear from your system and what you hear from videos of my system. In fact you have made quite a few statements about my system.

You have described what you keep referring to as my system’s “center of gravity“. So on what are all of your statements about my system based?

It makes no sense to me that you are dismissing brads question by simply stating you have not heard my system. If that’s your position, you should not make any comments about the sound of my system.

You cannot have it both ways.

Yes, you are correct here. I cannot have it both ways.

I have been evaluating the sound of your system based on the videos, even though I don't believe in using videos to evaluate a system I've never heard in person. (This, Brad, is a discrepancy.)

I think I have been assuming that the lower midrange of your system sounds similar to the lower midrange of David's Bionor system. It's probably correct, but it is an inappropriate assumption.

So, between the videos I don't believe in, and the assumption which is inappropriate, I withdraw my comments about your system's sonic center of gravity.

Thank you for pointing this out.

 

[bonzo75]

I don't think I ever tormented audiophile hosts with Chainsmokers or Kings of Leon or Hootie & the Blowfish.

so why did you here

 

[Ron Resnick]

so why did you here

Only on my own system thread.

I have assumed that not every audiophile looks down his/her nose upon pop music. That may very well be an incorrect assumption.

 

[bonzo75]

Only on my own system thread.

ok if you want to post any random video by all means it’s your system thread. It does nothing for those who use videos to exchange info nor does it do anything for your personal message

 

[bonzo75]

I have been evaluating the sound of your system based on the videos, even though I don't believe in using videos to evaluate a system I've never heard in person. (This, Brad, is a discrepancy.)

the discrepancy is in your belief, you could have been right about your assessment.

 

[bonzo75]

Was this live or was it Memorex? Sounds excellent over headphones in standard mac mini.

it was recorded by me on the phone at the Sheldonian the day before.

imagine you can hear the difference between live and someone’s system playback over a mobile video. Who would have thunk?

 

[Al M.]

Umph in lower mids. Bottom up compared to top down

Very nice Bruckner 7, I enjoyed that performance.

Not that much oomph in lower mids. Ron's system can easily do that. Also, it's easier to get more body in the sound if highs are a bit subdued, as on this video. That's no comment on the live sound, but on the video.

(listening on laptop using headphones)

 

[bonzo75]

Very nice Bruckner 7, I enjoyed that performance.

Not that much oomph in lower mids. Ron's system can easily do that. Also, it's easier to get more body in the sound if highs are a bit subdued, as on this video. That's no comment on the live sound, but on the video.

(listening on laptop using headphones)

so you are listening to a video and saying it has not much oomph and not much highs. This concert hall I regularly find has the best acoustics I know, completely reflected in the video. Either you don’t interpret videos well, or your concept of body and highs is formed by your system

 

[morricab]

Yes, you are correct here. I cannot have it both ways.

I have been evaluating the sound of your system based on the videos, even though I don't believe in using videos to evaluate a system I've never heard in person. (This, Brad, is a discrepancy.)

I think I have been assuming that the lower midrange of your system sounds similar to the lower midrange of David's Bionor system. It's probably correct, but it is an inappropriate assumption.

So, between the videos I don't believe in, and the assumption which is inappropriate, I withdraw my comments about your system's sonic center of gravity.

Thank you for pointing this out.

It seems discrepancies abound in your posts…

 

[Al M.]

so you are listening to a video and saying it has not much oomph and not much highs. This concert hall I regularly find has the best acoustics I know, completely reflected in the video. Either you don’t interpret videos well, or your concept of body and highs is formed by your system

Ok, let me qualify: the sound does not have *that* much oomph, it has enough oomph. But this is also not the best choice of music for that purpose: if you want to show off oomph in the low mids, e.g., on low brass, other music by Bruckner will be better suited than this wonderful but lighter sounding 7th symphony (in particular this beginning of the first movement, in the dramatic development section of the movement there are some heavier sounds).

My concept of body and highs in orchestral sound is primarily informed by sitting in different seats in a number of different concert halls over decades. There is a wide range in that, both when it comes to body and to highs. When it comes to sound reproduction, it is informed by listening to several systems.

There is nothing to interpret in a video, the sound is the sound. If you really believe great concert hall acoustics are completely reflected in a phone video: what can I say?

Mike Lavigne once brought up an excellent point (I am paraphrasing): it appears that sometimes video enthusiasts hear not the actual sound of the video but their memory of the sound recorded on the video, from which they fill in while listening to the video.

I have found a similar phenomenon when listening on cheap TV audio to an orchestra. Seeing the orchestra playing on the TV screen makes you fill in the concert hall sound from memory and it can seem to sound so good, but when you close your eyes and concentrate on the actual sound from the TV it's much worse. It takes discipline and analytical effort to concentrate on the *actual* sound, rather than allowing your mind to reinterpret it.

 

[bonzo75]

Ok, let me qualify: the sound does not have *that* much oomph, it has enough oomph. But this is also not the best choice of music for that purpose: if you want to show off oomph in the low mids, e.g., on low brass, other music by Bruckner will be better suited than this wonderful but lighter sounding 7th symphony (in particular this beginning of the first movement, in the dramatic development section of the movement there are some heavier sounds).

My concept of body and highs in orchestral sound is primarily informed by sitting in different seats in a number of different concert halls over decades. There is a wide range in that, both when it comes to body and to highs. When it comes to sound reproduction, it is informed by listening to several systems.

There is nothing to interpret in a video, the sound is the sound. If you really believe great concert hall acoustics are completely reflected in a phone video: what can I say?

Mike Lavigne once brought up an excellent point (I am paraphrasing): it appears that sometimes video enthusiasts hear not the actual sound of the video but their memory of the sound recorded on the video, from which they fill in while listening to the video.

I have found a similar phenomenon when listening on cheap TV audio to an orchestra. Seeing the orchestra playing on the TV screen makes you fill in the concert hall sound from memory and it can seem to sound so good, but when you close your eyes and concentrate on the actual sound from the TV it's much worse. It takes discipline and analytical effort to concentrate on the *actual* sound, rather than allowing your mind to reinterpret it.

i am out of Truss usual uninformed discussion on videos. People might confuse me with you if we argue

 

[Salectric]

Mike Lavigne once brought up an excellent point (I am paraphrasing): it appears that sometimes video enthusiasts hear not the actual sound of the video but their memory of the sound recorded on the video, from which they fill in while listening to the video.

This is an excellent point and one that’s consistent with my experience. When I listen to videos others have posted on WBF, I have trouble reaching conclusions about sound quality (although I have found new music I like). However, when I listen to videos I recorded of my own system in past setups or videos I made of other systems, I can immediately recall the same details and emotions I experienced when I made the videos. The videos somehow trigger a flood of memories and, therefore, are useful in evaluating changes made to my current system.

 

[Ron Resnick]

This concert hall I regularly find has the best acoustics I know, completely reflected in the video.

completely? If this is the case, why bother ever to go to a live performance except to socialize?

Either you don’t interpret videos well, or your concept of body and highs is formed by your system

Another possibility is that you are making the mistake of assuming that an internal iPhone mic is an accurate, full-range, flat frequency response, sound capture device.

 

[Alrainbow]

Our hearing is based on memory same as our sight
so this can be true. but videos can be useful to a point as a reference. if someone posted a few videos of there system playing at the same volume but varying songs there are conclusions we can extract. what we can’t assess is what people in the room hear.
playback is where we need to better at. A cell phone is below what is needed for playback.
i use phones too. But to really understand I use headphones they show much more information we need.