2. best-of
  3. 1023153274

Listening Through Walls at Show: Vodoo or Valid?

My girlfriend and I visited the NY show on Sunday.

Although I enjoyed it nonetheless, I found it a bit crowded and the rooms a bit cramped to really settle into any particular demo for a relaxed listening session.

This led to a very weird observation: although I am normally opposed to A/B comparisons and snap judgements, thinking that only longer term listening sessions really reveal the subtleties of our hobby, I found myself making judgements about the systems from OUTSIDE the rooms, sometimes standing in the hallways through only a crack in the door or even walking past closed doors.

Pacing down the corridors we felt compelled to enter some and avoid others. My girlfriend is not an audiophile but she is really interested in music and would often say "too bright" before we would even completely enter a room. (This was not about the music, especially as 9 out of 10 demos seemed to be Patricia Barber anyway.)She particularly ran out of the Phillips? home theatre room and also shied away from the pipedreams system.

Two rooms that we liked were the Dynaudio room and the Wilson set up (Innovative Audio?) which both sounded great to our ears from outside AND inside the room -- with different music and with the Dynaudio room actually having us wonder "is it live?" -- here again from down the hall!

Obviously this might not be the most intelligent way to make pricey decisions on purchasing new components but it was quite a surprise to think about and reflect on.

For the record, I didn't have 6 bloody marys at breakfast or anything.

I would be curious to hear what others have had similar experiences or think of this test methodology?!?!?! Maybe there is something to it!
cwlondon
pbb
1,140 posts
 
This is not even voodoo. It only lends credence to what I wrote on this site many months ago: audio shows are the worst places to form any kind of opinion on a sound system. The dreaded subject of blind testing gets short shrift because it, according to its detractors, puts undue pressure on the listener as it forces one to decide under some form of duress brought about by not being able to settle in and listen normally. The second worst place to listen to compomnents or systems is at a dealer. This does not leave much choice: get a sample of what you want into your own room and go through a standardized listening evaluation. Are you serious about judging sound through a crack in the door? As high-end audio come to this? Tell me it ain't so Joe!
Ag insider logo xs@2x
drubin
3,274 posts
 
At one point I was walking down the corridor on the second floor and thought I was certainly hearing live music. Turned out it was the Wilson room. The sound was indeed good in that room and if it fooled me from down the hall, they must be doing something right. But I wonder if the main factor in explaining the illusion was SPLs. That system was cranked (although it handled the volume nicely).

I found a majority of rooms were playing louder than I normally listen at home and, well, just too loud, sometimes way too loud. Are exhibitors using volume to mask poor sound?
audiofile9
45 posts
 
Actually, there is a lot of credence to listening OUTSIDE of the room. The sound outside is now "equalized". As in, when inside the room you are prone to bass peaks and dips, high fequency ricochets, and an unpredictable mix of direct vs indirect sound arriving at your ears. But OUTSIDE the room, the entire sound (spkrs + room + flat bass) comes out of the door in a homogenous manner. Once you step inside the room, you have to get your ears to the right spot where everything might equalize to some extent (assuming good speaker-room interaction). But outside, it has already been blended to smooth, coherent sound.

This is best demonstrated by having your significant other point out changes in your system's sound, while standing in the KITCHEN!
cwlondon OP
1,210 posts
 
Again, I wouldn't recommend making a major purchase decision this way, but I do agree there is something to it. It's as if the quick listen from outside gave a gut level, emotional reaction, and a stepped back perspective of the entire forest and not just the trees.

And if a system sounds bright distorted or fatiguing through the muffling of walls ?!?!? than it just isn't any good in my book and no further listening is required. Sorry guys, but you can't blame that on the Hilton.

Many years ago, when Stereo Review used to argue -- backing up their assertions with data and graphs - that all power amps sounded the same, a reviewer from the Absolute Sound argued that he could hear the difference between power amps with cotton in his ears. I still believe him.
audiokinesis
2,737 posts
 
L.I.A.R. stands for "Listening in another room", and is a very valuable tool in serious loudspeaker evaluation.

One of the things I do when auditioning speakers (or demoing them for customers) is crank the volume up a bit louder than normal and go into the next room, leaving the door open. From the next room, all you can possibly hear is the reverberant field, and a good reverberant field response is necessary for long-term listening enjoyment. Also, listening from the next room puts a premium on the dynamic contrast - without good dyamic contrast, the music will be lifeless from the hallway.

Note that, from the next room, a live piano sounds totally convincing. A speaker that can pull that off is something special, and is obviously doing something right.

When there is a significant tonal discrepancy between the on-axis and reverberant response, the ear/brain system has to work harder to integrate the events because they are not as closely related as natural sounds are. The eventual result is listening fatigue.

Of course a speaker has to sound good from the normal listening position, but the L.I.A.R test will quickly give you reliable information on whether a speaker that sounds initially impressive will remain enjoyable hour after hour, or will soon wear out its welcome.
More to discover