Perfect Path "Solutions" (PPS) eMat

You speak an infinite deal of nothing-
The Merchant of Venice

millercarbon ...

• "Frank, you are too kind. He is the one, probably just about the only one, I would have to disinvite."

Not me. I’d love to have the guy over for a listening session. Within the first few notes, he would have a look on his face as though he had just eaten a crap sandwich. No doubt he would try to save face by finding fault with the system, but once the session was over, he would leave and never be able to forget what he had heard. And the best part? He would try to match the sound somehow but would fail miserably, and would be chasing it for the rest of his arrogant little life. :-)

By the way Miller, I still laugh every time I think about your late-night phone call when your greeting was ... "Frank ... I had to call someone who understands!" That was truly a classic.

Frank.

If I ever decide to teach again on the side, I will certainly be using this thread as a lesson in perceptual bias and how strong an influence that can be on someone such that they can convince themselves that older and rather average speakers in an absolutely horrible acoustic space, can be the "best sound ever". Those token Hallographs are not going to fix all the acoustics issues that include, but are not limited to:

- No front wall reflection control
- No first reflection control
- The reflections off the glass table
- The reflective equipment between the speakers
- The lack of symmetry due to the windows on one side, and the wall/records on the other side
- The blinds (that will rattle)
- The reflective pictures on the wall
- The reflective (curio/china cabinet?) in one corner behind the speakers, but not the other

I am quite serious when I say that if you sold all that fancy (an expensive) AR gear and bought a half decent receiver and invested 1/10 of the money on the sale of the AR gear and put it into effective acoustics, the overall sound would be better, if not a lot better. Oh it would not be perfect, but you are so far from that now, that anything would be an improvement.

And no, I don't need to "hear" this system to know what a mess it will be. 8+ wrongs do not make a right.


You could also call this perhaps harsh Mijostyn, but obviously provoked.

- No front wall reflection control
- No first reflection control
- The reflections off the glass table
- The reflective equipment between the speakers
- The lack of symmetry due to the windows on one side, and the wall/records on the other side
- The blinds (that will rattle)
- The reflective pictures on the wall
- The reflective (curio/china cabinet?) in one corner behind the speakers, but not the other

You description to bash the experience of oregonpapa is not fair...

Try to apply this analysis to the room picture in this article....
This is the room of Floyd Toole, one of the great acoustician in the world...

Almost all you just said apply to HIS room pictured here...

Wrote to him that he is an idiot in acoustic....

Try that with him....
😁

https://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/room-reflections-human-adaptation


I dont say that Toole is right about the positive use of reflections i only say that Acoustic of room is NOT what you think it is....

Then before judging other pick a mirror and think about reflections in another way....

i am sorry to be harsh.....😊

As usual Mahgister, your replies are essentially misguided, the effect of too much confidence, and too little knowledge perhaps or are you just rushing to your keyboard without taking the time to think things through?


Read more, think more, and type a whole lot less!

I will point out a few paragraphs which you conveniently glossed over or did not understand. I will also note the size of Dr. Toole's listening space (which was a long time ago), and how that compares to oregonpapa's and the closeness and high reflectance of those surfaces.

The dramatic change happened when the precedence effect broke down and two images were perceived – that was a problem. The strength and spectrum of any reflection depends on the strength and spectrum of the sound radiated in that specific direction by the loudspeaker, and by the frequency-dependent acoustical performance of the reflecting surface. If you look at (a) in the preceding diagram, the adjacent side-wall reflection is the sound radiated at close to 90° off axis from the loudspeaker. This is much attenuated in most loudspeakers, and is motivation to angle the loudspeakers to face the listener.

the very neutral, essentially omnidirectional, Mirage M1s

You figure out why this is important.

Because of the designed-in irregular scattering surfaces, the heavy carpet and thick felt underlay brought the reverberation time down to under 0.5s so the room sounded much less “live” than one would think.

Figure 7.1 above shows the first reflections in a stereo setup, and in an LCR arrangement. Anyone claiming that a phantom center image is superior to a real center loudspeaker has some persuading to do. The phantom-image situation is significantly muddled, and most listening situations are not perfectly symmetrical. As we will see later, eliminating all of the reflections does not solve the fundamental problem with the phantom center; in fact it makes it worse.

That last one is for MC and others ignorantly claiming that a center channel is not needed for movies.

As an illustration of how much loudspeaker technology has improved over the years, these data on the JBL Pro M2 indicate that whatever one’s opinions of loudspeaker/room interactions were in the era of the UREI, they cannot be the same in the era of the M2, and any similarly “neutral” loudspeaker.

And this is specifically w.r.t. the Legacy III’s which were somewhat average at the time and have significant issues with the integration of the two different technology tweeters, and would not be, as Dr. Toole mentions above"neutral". They have a significant anomaly where the two speakers crossover.