Dear @mahgister : Which was your target and your sound /music reference that permits you be satisfied ? in other words: against what you already made evaluation/comparisons to be sure you are satisfied.
R.
- ...
- 302 posts total
My target is also my starting point : ears/brain training ....It is a learning spirals around acoustic concepts and my way to work on them : timbre, dynamic, transients, crosstalk, listener envelopment, listener position, Balance ratio between reflection/diffusion/absorption, I used tuned resonators, foldable screen, and all devices homemade...The only cost was time and a dedicated room ... Acoustics concepts and basic experiments in my room for one year full time ... When acoustic of the room is relatively under your controls, inspired by experiments grounded in basic acoustics, you reach this minimal acoustical satisfaction threshold ...This threshold though is so amazing when you live through that there is no comparison between before and after ...For sure you can pay high cost and reach the maximum acoustical satisfaction threshold using the same method of mechanical,electrical and acoustical workings controls...... It is possible to go with better results than mine as with more sophisticated materials instead of homemade , with electronical tool also instead of only homemade mechanical tuned resonators , but it was enough for me ...😊 I know enough now to understand why most people had no idea of the huge impact of a dedicated controlled room ... Because of that they try costlier upgrade and sometimes stay frustrated ... They dont own a dedicated room and lact the heavy amount of time for learning alas! But nothing replace acoustics concepts experience, sorry ... I am satisfied with my musical/sound experience because it is basically good and cost little but it cost me a big amount of time to go there ... i am retired ... If not i would had never go there because of the cost in time ... One thing is sure it is not my " taste" who guide me so much as the learning curve in acoustics ...What i learned can be applied on any system at any price ... Add to acoustics the importance of vibrations/resonance controls and electrical noise floor level importance , this was enough for me to reach my sonic minimally satisfying acoustic threshold ... This threshold is related to a balance ratio between all acoustics factors at play ... These results had no relation with any "taste" because they were obtained by methods of learning and experiment which are independant of the gear price tag or design ...Taste there is because i had tastes too ,( uninformed biases), but there is no taste at last as much as a new acquired set of informed biases from acoustics learning which cannot be call mere "tastes"... ... The definition of timbre in acoustic for example had at least 5 parameters, knowing them help to understand how to work for improving them for a better perception of the recorded timbre quality with your system then optimized ...You need your ears training to modify these parameters and play with them but the end result is a better objective timbre experience, it is not the results of a the owner " taste" when he justify his buying of a piece of gear for example ...😊 When you damp speakers box and play with the mechanical tuning of the speakers to control vibrations and resonance , you need ears to fine tune the results , calling it "taste" is not even wrong ...Because timbre perception is the result of training not so much of " taste" ... If someone design an amplifier, i will better trust the engineer who will use acoustics knowledge not only his taste but a trained set of biases , as harmonics perceptive interpretation by the brain as atmasphere , or the non linear time dimension of the brain for Dr. Van Maanen in his design , or the destructive stereo crosstalk effect on the brain as Dr. Choueiri in his design filters ... Etc .. Taste there is for sure but this is not mere taste; but acoustics ...Taste is a marketing concept, or an argument used by subjectivist opposing to objectivist in an audiophile war ...I am neither subjectivist nor objectivist, because this distinction loose his meaning when you are grounded in psycho-acoustics concepts and not focussed on the gear market ...
|
@mahgister It’s curios that not only in your last post but in any other you don’t reffer to LIVE MUSIC. You post about experiments/tests/audiophile adjectives and the like but not live MUSIC. No pun intented.
All people, some conscious of it and other not, " know " about acoustic concepts some way or the other and at different knowledge levels designers or not reviewers or not. Every one know about " acoustic perception " ( example ) even if never read it about in so specific way as you.
" When acoustic of the room is relatively under your controls, inspired by experiments grounded in basic acoustics, you reach this minimal acoustical satisfaction threshold. "
That minimal acoustical satisfaction threshold has a " flavor " as all the experiemnets have a specific flavor and when we don’t like that flavor then we follow experimenting till arrive that threshold and flavor means TASTE even that you don’t like the word and even with all your explanations about.
Look, I was following this dialogue with you trying to discover something that I did not do it even that I arrived at least to that satisfaction threshold with no discover success that could be my fault. For all those and with all respect I don’t need any following response by you about. I think you already shared very clar and with wider explanations your point. Thank’s for that but for me is enough to read more of the same.
R.
|
Live music does not sound like a recording unless its made in the same venue. Your listening position would have to be the same as that of the microphones if you were lucky enough to be in the same venue. If you are looking for this sort of reference, then you are probably going to have to make a recording of your own and put on LP or digital format. Otherwise hearing live music won't tell you much about a recording or how its supposed to sound. |
First i dont mention live music because at my age i had been at some live events multiple times ... And the sound of a real piano is familiar to me for my children memory because we had one ... I used piano timbre and dynamic as a meter for tuning my room for the timbre aspect ... For other spatial aspects i used opera well recorded etc ... Second there is no understanding of acoustic concepts with no experiments ... why ? because acoustics concepts cannot be understood mathematically only but by the listening body modifying his position and modifying the physical content and controls of the room ... Simple ... You dont oppose to me any valid argument to my claim that in audio , taste there is for sure but it is not and never has been about taste if we want to understand how fine tuning the relation between any system at any price and the room and the ears ... It is not as you said already to me necessary to reply ... 😁 Taste there is, taste it is not ....
|
- 302 posts total