mikebse2a3

Regulars
  • Content count

    3708
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

419 Excellent

About mikebse2a3

  • Rank
    Forum Ultra Veteran

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

5473 profile views
  1. What drivers are on the K402 and K510..? You have all the ingredients to make an awesome 2-way or 3-way system. I ran the K402/K-1133 and K510/B&C-DE75 with Klipsch passive networks and the LF flipped on their sides for a lower vertical height of the system. miketn
  2. The information and reasons/goals and perception results are in the paper. miketn
  3. Interesting room design... MyRoom_Design-white_paper.pdf
  4. If you talked with Ellery (etc6849) and looked at his (prior) room, I bet you would be surprised to find that he has basically taken the room out of the running...in other words, his experience is the opposite of what you are reporting. I have personally experienced positive effects of farther-field reflections from the back of the room (40 feet away), but I attribute some of that to sitting in the near field at those frequencies (i.e., low frequencies). I've found that near-field reflections and clarity are inverses of each other, as described in Griesinger's presentation. "Properly" seems to be a bit mushy. Please explain further what you mean. I'm not sure if we are using "envelopment" (in relation to 2ch reproduction) to describe the same thing Chris after reading your comments. To be clear my goal is to always allow the recording's imaging to develop fully and clarity is an intimate part of that and we cannot completely have one without the other. If a recording has really good sound imaging I expect to be able to hear the space that the recording was made in which often consist of reflections/echoes off of the boundaries of the recorded space. The instruments and vocalists will have specific lateral and depth locations and to some degree a sense of vertical height. Vocalist and instruments can appear life size with a sense of body like hearing the vocalist project from their mouth and perceive the chest area as they inhale air and to sense the body of the instruments like piano, drums and guitar for example. If a recording is done with a live audience and this aspect was captured well then when they clap for example there is a sense of spaciousness to some degree but it is limited to in front of me. In a really well acoustically treated room the energy/vibrations from instruments for instance will be perceived as traveling through the air to your body. So we all know that the listening room's reflections of sound are what we use aurally to perceive the boundaries and thus size of our listening space and it is easy for us to sense the enveloping difference between a small room such as our listening rooms versus large venues or outdoors spaces even. It is possible to control and use these room reflections to aurally create a perception of envelopment different from the untreated space and in the case of 2ch reproduction in small rooms if we have acoustically treated the room properly we will have excellent imaging, clarity and spaciousness from the loudspeakers while being enveloped with the perception of a larger space that feels relaxing and natural. Anechoic chambers do not feel natural and to spend much time in one would not be pleasant...at least for me and to play our typical 2ch music recordings in one would not be like anything you would experience in a home listening room. You might experience excellent imaging but I doubt anyone would consider it a pleasant place to listen in and when the music goes silent you would immediately sense the unnatural space. Rooms for 2ch reproduction when heavily treated with absorption (and often with little or no acoustically diffusive attention given) can increase the perception of imaging and clarity but will also start to take on an "Anechoic Effect" especially in the higher parts of the audible frequency spectrum and this again in my experience can often lead to perception of beaming at some frequencies and increased listener fatigue. You can tell if your acoustically treated room falls into this category because while these rooms can impress with the increase in imaging and clarity for awhile but over time the negative issues I noted will start to be perceived leading to early listener fatigue and dissatisfaction in the long run. So what do I consider a properly treated room for 2ch reproduction based on my experiences..? and of course YMMV..!!! (1) Attention to and treatments effective for modal issues of the room. This can be bass absorbers/traps and EQ compensation in certain instances. (2) Attention to First Order Reflections with absorption or diffusion adequate enough to eliminate the perception of image smearing and tonal colorations. I will often use absorption at the first reflection points on the front and side wall immediately next to the loudspeakers due to the time and energy level of these reflections. I will often experiment with absorption or diffusion on the ceiling at the first reflection point from the loudspeakers and other areas close to the loudspeakers on the ceiling. I prefer to use 2D diffusors (that suppress the specular reflections) at the first reflection points on the side walls opposite each loudspeaker. The benefits here are decreasing the energy level of the specular reflection while increasing the density and number of directions of the useful reflections after the Initial Time Delay Gap of about 15ms to 20ms. My experience indicates by using diffusers to increase the density and number of direction of reflections after the Initial Time Delay Gap of 15ms to 20ms the room envelopes me with a since of a much larger space while allowing the recording's imaging and clarity to fully develop. The room will be a pleasant, relaxing and natural feeling space with very low listener fatigue. PWK advised us of the importance of and advantage of diffusion in our listening rooms and cautioned the over use of absorption and I believe it is still valid advise. miketn
  5. Here is what the author said: He has clearly noted this as a "special case, and it is clear that most reflections will simply diminish sound quality." Chris I do not read the author as you do he is referring to the fact that in "some" instances reflections can help in "speech intelligibility" and in some acoustical environments this has been reported by other respected researchers that I have read. I can tell you I have experienced this personally at work where in large spaces it can be difficult to here the person speaking but if you move around in that space sometimes the reflections can help the mind to fill in the gaps leading to a perceived clarity not heard clearly through the direct path. Hmmm... Envelopment from 2 channel reproduction always requires room involvement in my experience. The sound field from 2-channel reproduction is always (with exceptions to some processing manipulation of some recordings) from the plane formed between the 2 loudspeakers with depth perception behind that plane. (ie: a window on the performance). Developing Envelopment in 2 channel reproduction means to me that I've been able to remove the effects from interfering reflections causing (despite the actual small physical space of the room I'm listening in) the perception/deception of being in a much larger space than I'm physically in and this is perceived as more relaxing/natural experience with the width and depth of the original sound field recorded preserved within this space. The loudspeaker directivity can be used of course to advantage in small rooms especially but that in itself is insufficient to giving the perception of envelopment in my experience. I will also say that the perception of envelopment and clarity are not exclusive of each other when done properly in my experience. I still consider this to be a very good article and my experiences agree with much of what I believe the author is trying to tell us. Wow Chris you hit me with a fire hose of information/thoughts.... and I will try to respond more to all you have posted over time. miketn
  6. Check this Klipsch Brochure for systems similar to what your wanting to do. I've listened to the KPT-942-4-B configuration and it is excellent and I've owned the older version of the KPT-535-T 3-way and loved them. Klipsch Brochure: Klipsch-Cinema-Brochure-2017.pdf miketn
  7. I would be interested in your thoughts on this. miketn
  8. More on myths and human perception and also how it relates to the use of Equalization. "For a human, frequency is time-dependent" See the story of MR A, MR B, MR C and Mrs D Here is the whole paper which is well worth your time if you are interested in how both the subjective and objective approach is needed to advance in sound reproduction : on_room_correction.pdf I'll also post the pages the story is on for anyone that doesn't want to download the whole pdf but again I suggest reading the whole paper which contains very good information in many areas relating to "faithful sound reproduction" in listening rooms (such as how we perceive reflections differently depending on direction such as front and back walls versus side walls for one example). Bottom line is use equalization responsibly...!!! The key is to learn how it can and can't be used to improve any sound reproduction system in our listening rooms. miketn
  9. The ASC site has a test signal " Musical Articulation Test Tones ( MATT ) " that I have found useful and recommend. What is great about it is that you are actually using your perception to perceive parts of the frequency spectrum where you have acoustical room issues affecting articulation which then if your so inclined you can treat the room for reflections and modal issues and actually hear if you have made improvements. It could also help in testing for different loudspeaker and listener locations that you may want to try for best performance. http://www.acousticsciences.com/matt The signal is available as a download wav file or on the Stereophile Test CD 2 (Track 19) Go to the linked page and Be sure and listen to the test signal demo at the top right of the page pictured here (Click RED ARROW). an how it sounds in different treated rooms by pressing the MATT Test Tutorial immediately below the test signal demo. Here is the instructions that come with the Stereophile Test CD 2. Note: you can us a stop watch and calculate what frequency region you have articulation issues with. NOTE: It helps to use headphones to become familiar with how it should sound versus how it sounds after the room acoustics have affected it's reproduction. miketn
  10. Over four decades ago....!!! Audio DEC 1974 ad Which begs the question are there researchers developing measurements using music as a test signals..? Seems the only logical path forward to make real progress in audio reproduction..!!! Here is one example I found: "Emotion Recognition In Music Signals using AANN and SVM" Emotion Recognition in Music Signal.pdf miketn
  11. Try Contact @MetropolisLakeOutfitters To see if he can help on K510/K691
  12. Let me add this thought. Hi-Fi or Fidelity is one aspect we often desire and music and how we perceive it is a very personnel emotional experience and that means to me that we will to some degree always have subjective experiences that varies from person to person. So in some ways it's about fidelity to a sound but is it also not an emotional aspect as well that we are often trying to trigger and that is an aspect with many variables including personnel ones. Heck our perception changes with our moods. Perception changes with the number of times we have heard a recording. I can remember getting "goose bumps" during certain points from a vocalist in a song for example when hearing it the first few times but after repeated times the effect might not even occur I suspect because the first time it's new and totally a surprise that triggers the "goose bump response" but after multiple listening it becomes predicted in my mind. Also interesting is that multiple times of listening reveals details not noticed the first time a song is experienced. One other interesting observation to me anyway: In the days of my youth I listened to a lot of music through a juke box and as we all know it's not reproduction of the highest fidelity due to the many colorations of that "juke box sound" but I can tell you today if I hear that music over the stereo it's not the same emotional experience and doesn't take me back to the same emotional feeling that listening to it does if I listen to it again on my friends juke box because that juke box coloration brings back the good memories associated with that song and my youth. To hear a recording of my parents or brother's voice "who have passed on" can bring back feelings to a degree that a picture has never been capable of. miketn
  13. Travis, Heyser made a statement that I believe answers your question in an article published in Audio Magazine (June 1977). There will always be some range of human perception (since it is multi-dimensional and is influenced by these dimensions) that we all must fall into but we all share a lot of commonality as well. What Heyser taught me was that measurements are to be used in service of what we humans perceive in "Audio Reproduction" as well as other fields that are involved in human perception. Measurements are the results of tools that we have designed to take them and they are only good for and always limited by the limitations we have designed into them. It's the same thing with Mathematical Equations we use to describe, design and develop things and they have limitations that we may or may not recognize until they fail to give us the answers and solutions to what we are looking for then we realize they are incomplete or flawed for the purpose we have developed them for. It's not that Heyser would have us give up on measurements but instead he was calling our attention to their limitations as well as actively developing and demonstrating measurements that would be capable of describing (ie: by Mapping between multiple planes of view) what the listener would perceive. He was showing us that we were getting one-dimensional answers and were often mistakenly trying to us them to describe a multi-dimension event (ie: Audio Reproduction). They are useful but not sufficient (due to being a one-dimensional view) on there own for the goal of describing what we perceive(a Multi-Dimensional Experience). Heyser saw the need to correlate what we measured with what we perceive as the way to progress forward in improving all aspects of Audio Reproduction and he was showing mathematically as well as with measurements how with mapping between domains we could begin to correlate measurements with perception unfortunately after his untimely death it seems we have not progressed as much as he hoped we would..! Heyser was truly a man ahead of his times with visions reaching far into our futures..!!! miketn
  14. @dwilawyer have you read "Hearing vs Measurements" by Heyser I posted ..? That article was 30 years ago..... If he had not passed away I could only imagine how much more progress would have been accomplished. .!!! miketn
  15. So I'm asking in a nice way to share your experience but please leave the rudeness out of it... !!! It's simply uncalled for and derails the discussions and causes some members to not want to participate. Thanks, miketn