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
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
2,724 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.
pbb
1,140 posts
 
You gotta be kidding. Are people like you promoting the "LIAR" test called "LIARS"? 'Agon is getting wackier and wackier by the day. Tell me it ain't so Joe. Speakers should be auditioned in the same manner they will be listened to. Reducing the variables like using only known material and, if at all possible, doing it in your own listening room is the only valid test. To pretend that tricks such as listening from another room to better equalize the response is doing a disservice to audiophiles, most especially new ones. If you sold vacuum cleaners you probably would be doing the ball bearing test to show how powerful the machine is. Everybody in this hobby affected by now chronic scientific deconstructionism is a would be Newton. I recommend blindfold testing so that one's eyesight does not overcompensate for one's hearing. Yes systems sound different from the next room. No, you will not, in all probability, be listening from the next room; so to say that long term listening can be simulated or evaluated by this so-called test is strange. It goes the other way 'round: if you think it sounds good through walls, you should walk into the room to listen to the system, certainly not if it sounds bad to get out to listen through the walls. And what if it sounds bad to your ears from the hall, like the original poster postualtes; in the search for audio truth, you should bravely walk in and face the music. Only then will you truly know, my child...
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,150 posts
 
Listening to a loudspeaker in your listening room with your equipment is the primary way to evaluate the product. However, that being said, judging how the loudspeaker sounds like from another adjacent room (with the door open) is an accurate and valuable way to get a down and dirty certain performance aspects. Audiokinesis clearly lays out the hows and whys. Pbb, I value and welcome your role as a contrarian in these forums, but on this specific issue you need to open your mind.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
drubin
3,267 posts
 
I would add that Duke (Audiokinesis) is, to my mind, as credible and rational a voice as there is on Audiogon.
More to discover