The audio analyst Episode 4 and 5 the listening room

[Damon Von Schweikert]

Greg Weaver of The Audio Analyst just wrapped up his two-part video series on listening room optimization. And from my experience, Greg is correct in his assertion this is often the most overlooked aspect of many audio systems. Lots of great information here, enjoy!

Part 1

Part 2

 

[stehno]

Hi, Damon. Thanks for the informative videos and hope you and family are doing well. Can't say I agree with Weaver on at least several things, especially his emphasizing that the room is the most important component of the playback system.

I don't wanna' unneccessarily downplay the significance of "the room" but in light of so many overplaying it's significance, I generally do. From a performance perspective, this "component" doesn't even make my list of priorities. Yes, a well-designed, constructed, and configured room can be extremely pleasing aesthetically (which too is a form of performance) and can make things a bit easier to set up but there are simply other and far superior ways to compensate for even a far less-than-perfect room.

By far, the greatest compensation is to grealy improve the playback system's performance such that far more of the recording's ambient info completely overshadows a given room's acoustic anomalies so they become essentially a non-issue. Anything less than greatly improving the playback system and we're left with the room's acoustics competing head on with what little ambient info we hear from the recoridng.

The secondary compensation is locating AN and hopefully THE optimal speaker placement within a given for vastly superior bass response. But this generally requires roughly the same amount of effort whether the room is superior or inferior.

Both of these compensations are easily the two most difficult to achieve but also the most rewarding especially since both are dealing with causes rather than potential effects (the room). Since we all have limited time and/or resources, to spend, any time and resources focusing primarily on the room (instead of the system) because they've been told and now believe the room is the most importnat component, will all but guarantee tremendously compromised potential listening pleasures for perhaps their entire lives. Especially if the ability exists for a playback system's performance level to transport our listenig perspectives to somewhere anywhere within the venue of even most "inferior" recordings or at the very least transport our listening perspectives out of the listening room. At this point, the room's anomalies are already overshadowed audibly so the room really no longer matters anyway, right?

 

[Damon Von Schweikert]

Hi Stehno,

The family is doing good and certainly better than I'd have expected, thank you! And let me preface this post by saying I respect everyone's opinions even when they differ with my own, we all have our experiences and how we interpret them.

That said, I do not think the system is separate from it's environment. The room will absolutely have it's say through physics and there's simply no way to avoid that. A small speaker, no matter how well setup will ultimately fail to pressurize a large room. Reflective walls will impact performance, even in a near field setup. These are unavoidable truths.

But this discussion brings to mind something my children have taught me over the years which is to avoid asking questions like, "what's your favorite movie" or "what was the best ride at Disneyland." It almost always stalls the conversation with deep consideration, a few answers that are quickly taken back upon reflection, etc. Now I know to ask "what is one of your favorite movies or rides at Disneyland."

I think the same is true when considering our systems, the rooms they reside in and how we might best improve them, "what is one of the best ways?"

I think getting the best performance from our audio systems require a holistic approach.

With that said, I still agree with Greg about rooms often being the most overlooked "component" in a system. Now I have a somewhat unique perspective in that Leif and I not only setup a large number of systems each year (for shows, for dealers and customers alike) but I also get invited to many systems in our travels and I'll tell you that from my experiences rooms are often forgotten and imho, room consideration would drastically yield more fruit than moving the speakers around in these untreated or under-treated and adversarial environments. But I will agree... not all.

And speaking of adversarial rooms, let's talk audio shows which as I understand it is a tough subject on this forum But if I'm going to blow my legs off, I might as well do it with style.

As someone who takes the same system to multiple shows in various venues often within weeks of each other, I can say the room has the biggest impact on our ultimate performance since the system is unaltered. There are other factors for sure, especially power but the room is the one that can lift or clip our wings the most often.

At audio shows, we're only able to present a fraction of what the system is capable of. I've never had a show where we achieved 100% of what a permanent installation can do. So the challenge for us is how to maximize that percentage. The system is locked in months before shows and while many of our designs enjoy our proprietary analog controls which allow us to integrate with the room better than a purely static design, there are limits. So room treatment is critical and no amount of moving the speakers around will correct for it.

That's why we invest thousands of dollars a year to ship our room treatment from show to show. And some rooms would actually require twice what we're financially willing to invest to fix like the AXPONA and Munich shows for example. Our rooms there are among the most challenging on the circuit. But in contrast, our room at Capitol Audio Fest is amazing and one I encourage everyone to visit if you want to experience the best sound our system can make at an audio show. The system hasn't changed, our skill at adjusting the placement hasn't changed and yet those who experience AXPONA and CAP all agree CAP is better by far for our system. The room is just that good and has an overwhelming impact on our performance.

This brings up a fun thing I think about often. A customer of ours from the Netherlands told me about an annual event they do in his country that I think would be both fun for the participants as well as enlightening. This group of audiophiles puts on their own audio show with no manufacturers or dealers, only system owners. They rent rooms at a hotel just like we do with industry shows but they all bring their personal systems, set them up and then hang out all weekend going from room to room listening. What I love about this is the perspective they gain by hearing their system in these conditions., bad rooms, limited setup and settling time, power issues, etc. Not only do they develop a greater understanding of the challenges faced by manufacturers but more importantly, they appreciate the inherent limitations of these auditions. Audio shows are still fun and a great way to hear many components quickly but they also understand that much more is possible with these components than the venues often allow.

But don't take my word for it, these are just my observations. Thanks for the thoughtful discussion, all the best!

 

[stehno]

Hi, Damon. I'm glad all are doing well and I appreciate your feedback.

I agree to some extent on a playback system and its room cannot be separated. Not sure if I really believe it but it sounds good. Actually, I do believe it, but only because any old somewhat reasonable room should suffice.

Of the 2 videos you provided, Weaver first stated the room was the most overlooked and further down the road he stated the room was the most significant component. Apparently, unlike many I have zero reason to believe that. One of my other primary concerns was Weaver stating that room corrections led to far greater timbral accuracy. To the best of my knowledge there’s but one way to make that happen and that’s not it. I suppose if a room was soooo bad and convoluted and then cleaned it just might have some impact on timbre, but I just can’t see it. To me, that’s like saying room treatments eliminate or greatly minimize negative sibilance. How might any room treatments possibly remedy this?

The only physics I'm aware of with the room are 1) ensuring enough physical space for speakers to sufficiently breath and disperse 2) Finding an or the optimal speaker placement within any given room for superior / musical bass reproduction. But that's for any reasonable room. I can't confirm but I suspect there exists the optimal speaker location within any reasonable room to achieve this superior bass even when we can't seem to find it.

These two areas are absolutely paramount to achieve greatest levels of musicality from our playback systems. But the room is nothing more than a required ingredient, just like a recording or AC current are required ingredients. Nothing more or less. It's what one does with the recording, with the AC, with the room, etc that makes all the difference.

Otherwise, when I hear of the room being anything close to the most important component, I can’t help but think just more folklore we’ve bought into over the years.

Regarding the group in the Netherlands getting together. I’ve thought about a scenario like that as well. However, as you’ve already stated, your sound at shows is only smaller percentages of what you’re able to obtain at home and I have to believe any group would encounter much the same dilemma. Even without dealers and mfg’ers. J

But I figure if people are so willing to sacrifice that much sound quality for weekend setups in hotel rooms, why bother going thru so much effort and trouble when we can do just as well or better by simply sharing recorded in-room playback presentations using our smart phones and an inexpensive little microphone?

After purchasing a Shure MV88 mic for my iPhone XR about a year ago I’ve been playing of and on with recording in-room sessions. It’s taken a while to refine things a bit but I think I got it down pretty well. One may never get the full gestalt of the in-room presentation, nor the full extent bass or warmth. But even with inexpensive ear buds there’s still much musicality of the playback presentation that is preserved including the much coveted ambient info, timbre, pristine/delicate detail, overall detail, even some of the expansive soundstage (between your ears of course) etc.

IOW, with a bit of experience, understanding, and imagination, there’s much potential to share rather than just take others' word for it. But as usual the typical “audiophile” snubs and mocks these recordings while salivating over an abundance of inferior sounding exhibits at audio shows. Go figure. In contrast, I say high-end audio is missing out on perhaps the greatest learning opportunities about others and their systems, and from a number of perspectives.

Circling back to the main topic, based on the video I provided, I’m curious if can you tell how my room and/or acoustic treatments might be influencing the playback presentation, good or bad?