The Noob Linearity factor

[Kingrex]

Ok, so lets open up the can of worms and blame it on Ked.
Bonzo (Ked) says Weight is a "Fart".
Well, most of the people I meet do not listen to classical music. So that "Fart" is perceived as a very full and well rounded immersive song. And I admit, it sounds awesome in their systems with their music. Way better than what I could do with mine or with a horn. I think???.

I personally listen to classical, so I am intent on hearing a harpsicord and Timpani drum. I am very aware what Ked is looking for and personally gravitate to it. But the friends I mention (Marc and Bob) find my system lacking in bass authority and richness. And I 100% agree. But that is not my focus. I get attributes of playback in classical they don't. But that is not their focus. And honestly, I wish I could have both. But at this time, I have not heard any system that really captures all musical genera at a level that is considered above all others. They all have their sweet spot from what I have heard.

 

[PeterA]

Peter, I am not taking a shot at you at all. I think part of what might have lead you to a totally different topology is that you had your time with Pass Lab and I forgot your speaker. You did it, and did it well. From the psychology that I have read, fundamentally people desire change. They also need grounding. A place to call home. But we like change or life becomes stale. So its natural you could grasp what DDK showed you, fully engage with it and move to a new place. It does not mean where you went is any better than were you came from. Its just a different path with a different sound. And that sound works well for you now. Mike L may be at the same place. Who knows.

Rex, I assure you that not much here offends me. I had Magico Q3 speakers with my Pass XA amps. You are right that I thought I had taken that system as far as I could and that I enjoyed it very much. But then I heard something different and knew the old system had to be sold.

I actually do not like change. I recently bought a suit and a bunch of shirts and trousers at a men's clothing store that my father took me to as a child. I told the salesman that the reason I still shop there is because I want clothes that has not changed in fifty years. I used to play squash at a wonderful club on Park Avenue in NYC. It is in a lovely McKim, Mead and White building across from Mies' famous Seegram Building. That place prides itself in not changing. The baths, locker rooms, racquets courts, and everything else there is basically as it was when built in 1918. My corner breakfast spot remains frozen in time.

I did not buy a new system for the sake of change. I bought it because it brings me closer to the experience of live music.

 

[bonzo75]

Indeed, different priorities, tastes and preferences preclude a "best system approach" generally applicable to everyone.

There is no place for dogmatic absolutism.

Are you fighting some other battles on here. The responses I had given to Tiilted fault were about his queries before that post on a context that was directly talking about orchestra? Not about best system approach. Not about any other genre of music. It was a very narrow discussion about scaling/bigness realism of orchestra only. You really need to take some time off if you fell haunted by the same battles at work too.

Boss: Al, have you submitted your recommendations to the working group?
Al's report: First, there is no place for absolute dogmatism.

 

[bonzo75]

Ok, so lets open up the can of worms and blame it on Ked.
Bonzo (Ked) says Weight is a "Fart".
Well, most of the people I meet do not listen to classical music. So that "Fart" is perceived as a very full and well rounded immersive song. And I admit, it sounds awesome in their systems with their music. Way better than what I could do with mine or with a horn. I think???.

Sorry, please don't misnterpret. I love weight. I said weight simply by adding cone size for weight is a fart., thinking it comes closer to the real thing by increasing this size because our previous size was a s bit smaller and did not get us there.

completely different things.

 

[bonzo75]

Another very good point about the reproduction of orchestral swell and how this dynamic factor contributes greatly to the emotional impact and believability of the recording, and being a classical music lover it’s important to me though my system certainly won’t swell like a well sorted horn. But what about the “linear noob” with different musical tastes where those dynamic swells are less important to the musical genre. In that case his system priorities might be quite different, and his “linear noobery” might make perfect sense.

Matt

Your previous post was referring to a discussion that came from orchestral scale.

As for other music, for me there is not even any other consideration for rock apart from dual FLH. Art Dudley saying Bonzo was the best he heard on the Devore. I don't know as never tried rock on them. But Sujay is a rocker and listens differently compared to me and he definitely is preferring his O96 to his Rockport Aviors.

So for me, thinking cones for amplified rock is a higher NLF than for classical. There are cones/non-horns I like for classical.

For girl on guitar, I would say take your pick, I could care less

 

[Al M.]

Are you fighting some other battles on here. The responses I had given to Tiilted fault were about his queries before that post on a context that was directly talking about orchestra? Not about best system approach. Not about any other genre of music. It was a very narrow discussion about scaling/bigness realism of orchestra only. You really need to take some time off if you fell haunted by the same battles at work too.

Boss: Al, have you submitted your recommendations to the working group?
Al's report: First, there is no place for absolute dogmatism.

My reply was to Tiltedfault, who was talking about different tastes and system priorities, which I affirmed, not to your post.

Anyway, I am not fighting the same battles at work too. I am a scientist (biochemist) and in science there is a quest for objective truth.

In audio on the other hand there is no "objective truth", only subjective perceptions, preferences, tastes and priorities (objective truth only exists in certain measurements; however, the interpretation of their meaning is often subjective as well).

It is true, however, that in science there is no place for absolutist dogmatism either -- but for very different reasons. You can't arrive at the objective truth that way, which instead is strived to be found by dispassionate and patient observation and experiment, by trial and error.

Thus, unlike here I don't need to point out to my boss or anyone else at work that there is no place for absolutist dogmatism. Everyone who works in science understands that.

 

[bonzo75]

My reply was to Tiltedfault, who was talking about different tastes and system priorities, which I affirmed, not to your post.

Anyway, I am not fighting the same battles at work too. I am a scientist (biochemist) and in science there is a quest for objective truth.

In audio on the other hand, there is no "objective truth", only subjective perceptions, preferences, tastes and priorities.

It is true, however, that in science there is no place for absolutist dogmatism either -- but for very different reasons. You can't arrive at the objective truth that way, which instead is strived to be found by dispassionate and patient observation and experiment, by trial and error.

Thus, unlike here I don't need to point out to my boss or anyone else at work that there is no place for absolutist dogmatism. Everyone who works in science understands that.

You seem stuck like a repeat record. Since you are not into records, a repeat disc. We were specifically discussing a point on bigness and scale of orchestra. It is great that you have the above sermon. I will clap hands and ask your professor to give you a good grade for that essay.

 

[Al M.]

You seem stuck like a repeat record. Since you are not into records, a repeat disc.

Pretty rich, coming from *you*.

 

[bonzo75]

Just had a Eureka moment: a potential NLF for non-acoustic music is stereo. Kal R will tell you it is for acoustic too

It has been argued often here there is no advancement in stereo since yesteryears. while all of you are familiar with those arguments, one thing I assume most of us will agree on is that there has been tremendous improvement in Home Theatre. There is no denying that Atmos or Auro 3d and such are absolutely fantastic, and while you might struggle to enjoy the orchestra at home, a good HT actually is more enjoyable than the cinema for the movie experience. Unless having an evening outside, in a crowded shopping mall with a cinema upstairs, is the part of the experience you enjoy

You get all the immersion, surround sound, your trouser leg WILL flap at the bass when an explosion happens in the movie, It makes dreck movies highly enjoyable. Dialogues sound like music. You can keep rewinding and replaying the helicopter flying over your head. This is serious bass and immersion.

This is phenomenal on multi channel blu ray music concerts, and also if you process amplified stereo to multichannel. It lacks on classical purely because of the tone and that LPs do not like being processed.

In fact, one of the leading set-up-er of HT in UK was an ex-Royal Albert Hall acoustician. And while I do not like RAH at all for acoustic sound, it is brilliant for amplified, having watched Eric Clapton there many times, Knopfler, and also a blues concert. It is better than O2, and some of the outdoor arenas. This engineer as a demo disc also used Adele’s concert, for which he had arranged the acoustics.

 

[morricab]

Just had a Eureka moment: a potential NLF for non-acoustic music is stereo. Kal R will tell you it is for acoustic too

It has been argued often here there is no advancement in stereo since yesteryears. while all of you are familiar with those arguments, one thing I assume most of us will agree on is that there has been tremendous improvement in Home Theatre. There is no denying that Atmos or Auro 3d and such are absolutely fantastic, and while you might struggle to enjoy the orchestra at home, a good HT actually is more enjoyable than the cinema for the movie experience. Unless having an evening outside, in a crowded shopping mall with a cinema upstairs, is the part of the experience you enjoy

You get all the immersion, surround sound, your trouser leg WILL flap at the bass when an explosion happens in the movie, It makes dreck movies highly enjoyable. Dialogues sound like music. You can keep rewinding and replaying the helicopter flying over your head. This is serious bass and immersion.

This is phenomenal on multi channel blu ray music concerts, and also if you process amplified stereo to multichannel. It lacks on classical purely because of the tone and that LPs do not like being processed.

In fact, one of the leading set-up-er of HT in UK was an ex-Royal Albert Hall acoustician. And while I do not like RAH at all for acoustic sound, it is brilliant for amplified, having watched Eric Clapton there many times, Knopfler, and also a blues concert. It is better than O2, and some of the outdoor arenas. This engineer as a demo disc also used Adele’s concert, for which he had arranged the acoustics.

Many of the movie theaters here in Switzerland have excellent theater sound systems (often big JBL setups). I haven't heard a home one get close to the best ones here....plus it's nice to get out, have a nice early dinner and then see a movie on a huge screen with impressive sound.

 

[bonzo75]

Many of the movie theaters here in Switzerland have excellent theater sound systems (often big JBL setups). I haven't heard a home one get close to the best ones here....plus it's nice to get out, have a nice early dinner and then see a movie on a huge screen with impressive sound.

Have you heard a good Atmos or Auro 3d MCH, with ceiling speakers? Like 14.4, for example (14 speakers, both like normal HT, plus ceiling surround, and an overhead speaker for getting the distance effect

 

[Lee]

Marty,

Regardless if all that you wrote will be agreed with or not:
Best, most interesting post of the entire thread!

Al

Agreed.

 

[Lee]

Just had a Eureka moment: a potential NLF for non-acoustic music is stereo. Kal R will tell you it is for acoustic too

It has been argued often here there is no advancement in stereo since yesteryears. while all of you are familiar with those arguments, one thing I assume most of us will agree on is that there has been tremendous improvement in Home Theatre. There is no denying that Atmos or Auro 3d and such are absolutely fantastic, and while you might struggle to enjoy the orchestra at home, a good HT actually is more enjoyable than the cinema for the movie experience. Unless having an evening outside, in a crowded shopping mall with a cinema upstairs, is the part of the experience you enjoy

You get all the immersion, surround sound, your trouser leg WILL flap at the bass when an explosion happens in the movie, It makes dreck movies highly enjoyable. Dialogues sound like music. You can keep rewinding and replaying the helicopter flying over your head. This is serious bass and immersion.

This is phenomenal on multi channel blu ray music concerts, and also if you process amplified stereo to multichannel. It lacks on classical purely because of the tone and that LPs do not like being processed.

In fact, one of the leading set-up-er of HT in UK was an ex-Royal Albert Hall acoustician. And while I do not like RAH at all for acoustic sound, it is brilliant for amplified, having watched Eric Clapton there many times, Knopfler, and also a blues concert. It is better than O2, and some of the outdoor arenas. This engineer as a demo disc also used Adele’s concert, for which he had arranged the acoustics.

We don’t agree on much but home theater has gotten much better. When we created our short film on Jerry Harrison I got to hear the Talking Heads catalog in 9.4 Atmos. It was spectacular! It really suited the music and added an immersion experience that was addictive.

 

[Lee]

Your previous post was referring to a discussion that came from orchestral scale.

As for other music, for me there is not even any other consideration for rock apart from dual FLH. Art Dudley saying Bonzo was the best he heard on the Devore. I don't know as never tried rock on them. But Sujay is a rocker and listens differently compared to me and he definitely is preferring his O96 to his Rockport Aviors.

So for me, thinking cones for amplified rock is a higher NLF than for classical. There are cones/non-horns I like for classical.

For girl on guitar, I would say take your pick, I could care less

Why would cones work for you on classical and not rock? Aren’t there dynamic swings in both?

 

[bonzo75]

We don’t agree on much

Whew that.

 

[bonzo75]

Why would cones work for you on classical and not rock? Aren’t there dynamic swings in both?

The excursion style of a cone woofer in a closed cabinet is quite fake compared to the excursion style of a dual FLH, just the impact, weight, etc.

Ask them

 

[Robh3606]

The excursion style of a cone woofer in a closed cabinet is quite fake compared to the excursion style of a dual FLH, just the impact, weight, etc.

Ask them

View attachment 116285View attachment 116286

What is excursion style???? Those FLH are typically reflex boxes you can see the vents on the sides of the horns. That is where there low end comes from. They are not true bass horns. They are combo cabinets.

Rob

 

[Ron Resnick]

But what about the “linear noob” with different musical tastes where those dynamic swells are less important to the musical genre. In that case his system priorities might be quite different, and his “linear noobery” might make perfect sense.

That's me! I am a proud planar/tube noob (a "PTN")!

 

[bonzo75]

What is excursion style???? Those FLH are typically reflex boxes you can see the vents on the sides of the horns. That is where there low end comes from. They are not true bass horns. They are combo cabinets.

Rob

817 around below 100 hz, Leif type below 75, I have heard with dual 18 inch woofers till 40 hz. The midbass punch is what makes the difference. Plus, the openness of the cabinet

 

[Al M.]

The excursion style of a cone woofer in a closed cabinet is quite fake compared to the excursion style of a dual FLH, just the impact, weight, etc.

Ask them

View attachment 116285View attachment 116286View attachment 116287

LOL. Yeah, ask them!

Woodstock Had Some of the Most Legendary Performances in History. But Many Attendees Never Heard a Single Note

Woodstock Had Some of the Most Legendary Performances in History. But Many Attendees Never Heard a Single Note

A too-small soundsystem, combined with oppressive physical conditions, made it difficult for many at Woodstock to focus on the music

time.com

Quote:

But many people who attended the festival didn’t get to hear the music that brought them there in the first place. While organizers were initially expecting 50,000 attendees, closer to 400,000 arrived. The field on which the audience assembled to hear the music was far too small to contain such a large crowd all at once — so many simply remained in the sprawling campgrounds and found other sources of entertainment.

[...]

But while that technology was cutting-edge for the time, it was just not meant to carry music to such a large and dispersed crowd spread over 600 acres of open farmland. In the New York Times that weekend, Barnard Collier wrote that “most of the hip, swinging youngsters heard the music on stage only as a distant rumble. It was impossible for them to tell who was performing and probably only about half the crowd could hear a note.”

[...]

In an interview for Joel Makower’s Woodstock: The Oral History, Chip Monck, the stage lighting and technical director for Woodstock, said that Hanley was “at that time just about the only contractor available” — and that his sound system was “a really small, nice, cute little system that nobody in their right mind would have used for a gathering of that size.”