Smearing

[Tangram]

I completely agree with NekoAudio on this. I view smearing as a time and phase domain issue (which involves cabinet diffraction as well). Without proper time and phase correctness the leading edge of a dynamic (any sound) is blurred, smeared, or rounded off. Without properly intact leading edges the realities of dynamics, timbral accuracy, and inner detail are compromised. Time and phase correctness isn't just about imaging (which it certainly benefits) but about much more. Speakers are the last stand when it comes to maintaining proper time and phase. And speakers are really the biggest offenders of the important aspect of sound. To hear a speaker with proper relative phase between the drivers and proper time correct wave launch characteristics, is to get closer to the real thing. The king of this domain in the loudspeaker category are the Vivid Audio speakers. To experience this is enlightening and truly special.

I have open baffle speakers with twin 15” woofers. On bass heavy tracks, it is a relatively easy exercise to demonstrate how much the baffles move. I’ve brought this up on a forum dedicated to these speakers and other owners are in complete denial that this is an issue. One owner even likened the movement to BBC-style thin-walled box speakers that are designed to resonate. While I find them “musical,” I am quite sure that if this movement was reduced, the sound presentation would be better than now. There is one industrious owner who likes to mod all of his equipment who has stiffened the baffle but he didn’t really indicate (it’s a Youtube video) what the impact was. I’m only keen to try bracing if it doesn’t compromise the speakers, which isn’t an easy thing to do.

 

[henrich3]

I view smearing as a time and phase domain issue (which involves cabinet diffraction as well). Without proper time and phase correctness the leading edge of a dynamic (any sound) is blurred, smeared, or rounded off. Without properly intact leading edges the realities of dynamics, timbral accuracy, and inner detail are compromised. Time and phase correctness isn't just about imaging (which it certainly benefits) but about much more. Speakers are the last stand when it comes to maintaining proper time and phase. And speakers are really the biggest offenders of the important aspect of sound. To hear a speaker with proper relative phase between the drivers and proper time correct wave launch characteristics, is to get closer to the real thing.

"Smearing" is a subjective description of audible distortions in the time domain. Those issues are best resolved with acoustic treatments and DSP room corrections of the sort that a Trinnov Altitude, for example, would make. (There are other products that also do these things, but I'm more familiar with this one.) Phase response, group delay, and the impulse response of each speaker are measured at the main listening position & corrected by this product. I know that there's a knee-jerk revulsion against "DSP'ing the signal chain" amongst many audiophiles, but there is a solution for "smearing" for those who have an open mind about this.

https://www.trinnov.com/en/technologies/#The-Optimizer

 

[Mike Lavigne]

"Smearing" is a subjective description of audible distortions in the time domain. Those issues are best resolved with acoustic treatments and DSP room corrections of the sort that a Trinnov Altitude, for example, would make. (There are other products that also do these things, but I'm more familiar with this one.) Phase response, group delay, and the impulse response of each speaker are measured at the main listening position & corrected by this product. I know that there's a knee-jerk revulsion against "DSP'ing the signal chain" amongst many audiophiles, but there is a solution for "smearing" for those who have an open mind about this.

https://www.trinnov.com/en/technologies/#The-Optimizer

i'm pro-dsp, but there is no free lunch. the degree of 'Optimizer' that is needed comes from digital manipulation. so if your aim is musical purity there is a price. which does result in an overall superior experience, but compared to what exactly? the Trinnov can do the details, but the room and acoustics first needs to do the heavy lifting.....for music. OTOH for movies the Trinnov can take you a very long ways without much room treatment. who knows how movie soundtracks are supposed to sound? and you have the video and big bass to get your attention.

a very reflective room will still be reflective, if some better, with Trinnov Optimizer.

the Trinnov is the best there is at overcoming room issues; but it's potential is limited still by the room. it can make a bad room decent, and decent room good, and a good room very good. great is reserved for the real deal and a pure signal path.

so a big yes to the Trinnov, but it can't work miracles. i will say considering the price/value of the Trinnov, it is a stone cold bargain at what it can do compared to other high end music only choices at that price. especially if you like big music. if your music choices are small scale such as girl with guitar, which does not ask much from a room acoustically; basic non-dsp gear is probably a better choice at that price. the Trinnov does sound very fine for a digital processor. it will improve things related to smearing if it gets a little help. so i agree with you.

 

[treitz3]

Great is reserved for the real deal and a pure signal path.

Indeed.

Tom

 

[pjwd]

I have open baffle speakers with twin 15” woofers. On bass heavy tracks, it is a relatively easy exercise to demonstrate how much the baffles move. I’ve brought this up on a forum dedicated to these speakers and other owners are in complete denial that this is an issue. One owner even likened the movement to BBC-style thin-walled box speakers that are designed to resonate. While I find them “musical,” I am quite sure that if this movement was reduced, the sound presentation would be better than now. There is one industrious owner who likes to mod all of his equipment who has stiffened the baffle but he didn’t really indicate (it’s a Youtube video) what the impact was. I’m only keen to try bracing if it doesn’t compromise the speakers, which isn’t an easy thing to do.

Tangram
I suspect the baffle displacement addition to sound generation is probably not a big deal at low frequencies but if vibration is transmitted to other drivers or their baffle that is an issue for sure .. after a few generations of the orion linkwitz designed a separate support for mid/ tweeter baffle ... I've always made sure they are separate
Phil

 

[treitz3]

There are some things that make one thing better at the expense of something else. I am personally looking for things that make everything better.

As well, sir.

Tom

 

[henrich3]

i'm pro-dsp, but there is no free lunch. the degree of 'Optimizer' that is needed comes from digital manipulation. so if your aim is musical purity there is a price. which does result in an overall superior experience, but compared to what exactly? the Trinnov can do the details, but the room and acoustics first needs to do the heavy lifting.....for music. OTOH for movies the Trinnov can take you a very long ways without much room treatment. who knows how movie soundtracks are supposed to sound? and you have the video and big bass to get your attention.

a very reflective room will still be reflective, if some better, with Trinnov Optimizer.

the Trinnov is the best there is at overcoming room issues; but it's potential is limited still by the room. it can make a bad room decent, and decent room good, and a good room very good. great is reserved for the real deal and a pure signal path.

so a big yes to the Trinnov, but it can't work miracles. i will say considering the price/value of the Trinnov, it is a stone cold bargain at what it can do compared to other high end music only choices at that price. especially if you like big music. if your music choices are small scale such as girl with guitar, which does not ask much from a room acoustically; basic non-dsp gear is probably a better choice at that price. the Trinnov does sound very fine for a digital processor. it will improve things related to smearing if it gets a little help. so i agree with you.

Hi Mike,

I said in my previous post that "{smearing} issues are best resolved with acoustic treatments and DSP room correction". We're on the same page that room acoustics needs to be resolved first. Room correction products supplement acoustic treatments. They don't replace them.

It sounds to me like even though you've embraced the benefits of an Altitude for your HT, you still have a bias against it being able to be part of a great system. Greatness, in your mind, requires signal path purity - analog all the way. That's where we disagree. The Altitude's A/D signal-to-noise ratio is 119 dB. Yes, that is added noise, but it's below audibility. If one weighs the cost/benefit ratio for that room correction product (added noise that's below audibility vs. significant improvements in frequency response, phase response, impulse response, and group delay), the benefits far outweigh the cost IMO. Of course Altitude owners can also enjoy playing music from digital sources (streaming immersive audio, SACD's, Atmos Blu-rays, etc.).

i'm pro-dsp, but there is no free lunch. the degree of 'Optimizer' that is needed comes from digital manipulation. so if your aim is musical purity there is a price.

You're right. Correcting "smearing" problems requires digital manipulation. So what? Cost/benefit.

The concept of "signal path purity" is embraced with a religious fervor by many subjectivist audiophiles. Eschewing DSP room correction means living with sound quality problems that that solution is able to fix. High end room correction products actually get you closer to musical purity.

who knows how movie soundtracks are supposed to sound? and you have the video and big bass to get your attention.

That's why I fine tune my house curve by listening to music - not movies.

You have an exceptional system that's already been fine-tuned the old fashioned way. I'm not trying to talk you into changing your ways. My comments about smearing were intended to help folks who don't have audio systems that are at your level.

Cheers.

 

[mtemur]

DS Audio-001 ionizer is a great example for smearing. It causes a very dull sound when placed next to the turntable. Turn it off and you’ll notice everything opens up from top to bottom.

 

[Tangram]

Tangram
I suspect the baffle displacement addition to sound generation is probably not a big deal at low frequencies but if vibration is transmitted to other drivers or their baffle that is an issue for sure .. after a few generations of the orion linkwitz designed a separate support for mid/ tweeter baffle ... I've always made sure they are separate
Phil

Thanks for your insights. They are a relatively simple design in which all drivers are mounted directly to the baffle. The tweeter is near the top of the speaker, which is where the most movement occurs by virtue of the design. I’m actually surprised they sound so good, but that may be because I’ve become conditioned to their “musical” sound (who would have thought “musical” would become code for “inaccurate?”)

 

[audiopro92]

Smearing - typicaly a loss of upper midrange and high frquency detail or sparkle /brilliance, due to elevated bass frequencies, excessive colorations, or DSP.

 

[sparkie]

I am reading Chuck and MikeL & sbnx post about "smearing."

What is "smearing" in audio?

J. Gordon Holt's glossary provides: "smearing: Severe lack of detail and focus."

Okay, but then smearing is a pretty egregious problem -- like a connector isn't making full electrical contact, or a phono cartridge stylus is covered by goop.

Is "smearing" -- other than due to some major malfunction -- a real thing?

Oh yes. Bad or wrong type part used can do it. Also low quality parts.
Non oscillating ground loops can do it too. That is why I don't support the RCA connector anymore.
Handsome.

 

[Zeotrope]

DS Audio-001 ionizer is a great example for smearing. It causes a very dull sound when placed next to the turntable. Turn it off and you’ll notice everything opens up from top to bottom.

That seems odd if the DS-001 is properly grounded. I will turn mine off just to check but it shouldn’t do that.

 

[Atmasphere]

We encountered a smearing problem decades ago WRT paralleling coupling caps, in particular using a small value cap bypassing a large one to obtain better HF response. This has been a common practice we've seen in the industry.

We found it didn't work. The cap retains energy depending on its dielectric- so it has a 'speed'. As best we could make out at the time, the smaller parts retained less energy so the signal they passed was arriving faster than the main signal. We sorted out that when it came to coupling caps you just had to give it your best shot and no bypassing.

We did some measurements. It was easy to show at high frequencies (less than 100KHz) how caps were really different, not just dielectric but also in terms of value. I'm sure our measurements were not as conclusive as the measurement guys would want but it was enough (since we were concerned about phase shift) that there was a relationship. IOW, filter theory.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

That seems odd if the DS-001 is properly grounded. I will turn mine off just to check but it shouldn’t do that.

mine is grounded to my preamp, and does not do that in my particular system.

 

[Zeotrope]

DS Audio-001 ionizer is a great example for smearing. It causes a very dull sound when placed next to the turntable. Turn it off and you’ll notice everything opens up from top to bottom.

That seems odd if the DS-001 is properly grounded. I will turn mine off just to check but it shouldn’t do that.

mine is grounded to my preamp, and does not do that in my particular system.

I actually think @mtemur is right! I have been toggling the DS-001 on and off a couple of dozen times while playing back classical and jazz albums. There is an audible slight loss of clarity in the high frequencies — just a ”smidge” of edge lost (~1-2%) on the leading and trailing notes of a trumpet or a violin… It’s not a huge difference by any means; but once you hear it, you cannot ‘unhear‘ it.

I have grounded the DS-001 to the Shunyata Altaira Signal Hub, along with the TT chassis and tonearm cable and preamp, so it’s not an issue of a dirty ground. I also have a linear power supply feeding the DS-001, so it’s not AC noise. The LPS is powered off a PS Audio Duet which is connected to the Shunyata Denali v2.

I actually wanted @mtemur to be wrong, so if anything, I was biased in favor of the DS-001! So, Thank You, @mtemur! How did you discover this?

What I may end up doing is powering on the DS-001 while I brush the record, to help get rid of static, and then powering it off during playback.
There is ample humidity in my home, so static should not be an issue, anyway.
Was not expecting this!

 

[JackD201]

another common manifestation of smearing, maybe the most prevalent, is acoustical smearing. where the room reflections arrive at the ear too many milliseconds late, and confuse the direct sound to corrupt the precise music timing and note coherence. again; until you solve it and hear the music without it you won't know what you are missing.

some driver types are more susceptible to it than others, based on how they interact with the room surfaces. probably one reason why Ron prefers panels/dipoles for his vocals. they have less issues with acoustical smearing. and vocals are where it might be most obvious with that. in my room tuning i had maybe 50 vocal tracks (among over 200 i used) that were part of my testing.

I think you meant too early, as in within the Haas window Mike Otherwise, spot on.

 

[mtemur]

I actually wanted @mtemur to be wrong, so if anything, I was biased in favor of the DS-001! So, Thank You, @mtemur! How did you discover this?

Thank you for testing and reporting back. I tried turning DS-001 off while playing and noticed the improvement. Actually I noticed the smearing effect of DS-001 when it’s on and tried turning it off. That’s how I noticed. Two of my friends reported the same results.

As I said before in DS-001 thread the reason for smearing effect could be ion bombardment of cartridge while playing.

IMHO DS-001 should only be used when brushing to eliminate static buildup. After that it should be turned off. There should have been a push button that activates it for 30 seconds instead of a on-off switch.

 

[Zeotrope]

Thank you for testing and reporting back. I tried turning DS-001 off while playing and noticed the improvement. Actually I noticed the smearing effect of DS-001 when it’s on and tried turning it off. That’s how I noticed. Two of my friends reported the same results.

As I said before in DS-001 thread the reason for smearing effect could be ion bombardment of cartridge while playing.

IMHO DS-001 should only be used when brushing to eliminate static buildup. After that it should be turned off. There should have been a push button that activates it for 30 seconds instead of a on-off switch.

Thank you again. This is exactly how I will use the ION-001 going forward [sorry, I called it the DS-001 when in fact it’s called the ION-001. Fremer thought I meant the cartridge; but I think it’s clear that we are talking about the ionizer.]

 

[chuck]

J. Gordon Holt's glossary provides: "smearing: Severe lack of detail and focus."

It is a character of reproduced sound that I have heard in my room. It is mainly apparent in comparison to systems that have less. YG Sonja XV speakers when driven by ARC 160M amps, had a noticeable reduction in detail and soundstage width/depth compared to when driven by the Boulder 3060. Wilson Alexandria XLF speakers when driven by the Boulder 3060 had noticeably less detail and a smearing of choral music when compared to the YG Sonja XV driven by the same amp. On familiar music, I have yet to hear a system that matches the accuracy of the YG XV/Boulder system.

Smearing has to be read with other definitions in the glossary. ""Detail" The subtlest, most delicate parts of the original sound, which are usually the first things lost by imperfect components. Compare: "haze", "smearing", Veiling"". Another definition is ""musical, musicality A personal judgment as to the degree to which reproduced music resembles live music. Real musical sound is both accurate and euphonic, consonant and dissonant." "Euphonic. Pleasing to the ear. In audio, "euphonic" has a connotation of exaggerated richness rather than literal accuracy." Accuracy is defined as "The degree to which the input signal from a component or system is perceived as replicating the sonic qualities of its input signal. An accurate device reproduces what is on the recording, which may or may not be an accurate representation of the original sound."

IMO a musical system is accurate to the recording with all the detail, and no smearing.