One of the best commentaries on sonic "accuracy" that I've seen

[tube fanatic]

http://www.stereophile.com/content/fallacy-accuracy#UyhPXLxwUlgTRzHD.97

 

 

Maynard

[willland]

Very nice take on the subject(ive).

Bill

[Chris A]

One of the best that I've seen:

 

 

Judging from what contact I have with the general public, though, I conclude that 99 percent of the general public doesn't even know what accuracy of reproduction is.

 

My company is for the one percent composed of perfectionists who buy these expensive speakers.

 

PWK

[mustang guy]

If you have the knowhow and the equipment to make an accurate speaker sound the way you want, you are better off than allowing all the people between you and the live recording make it sound the way they think you want it to sound. I think an accurate speaker has a better chance of sounding good with many different kinds of music because of it's flexibility.

[mikebse2a3]

If you have the knowhow and the equipment to make an accurate speaker sound the way you want, you are better off than allowing all the people between you and the live recording make it sound the way they think you want it to sound. I think an accurate speaker has a better chance of sounding good with many different kinds of music because of it's flexibility.

 

 

miketn

[WMcD]

Thanks for pointing us to the article.

The thoughts of several speaker designers are expressed there and in the dozens of comments, those of non speaker designers, who go off topic.

I'm with Mike, if I understand him correctly. For all the variables, we should agree that low distortion is big factor and with that dragon recognized and slain, we can look to the rest of the factors.

The commentators are for the most part discussing acoustics and a more fundamental question. We want to reproduce in our living room the original sound, but what is that original sound?

For pop and rock it is just a contrivance in a studio recording.

With symphonic orchestras where is the listener? Certainly not some feet above the orchestra with ears spaced like the microphones dozens of feet apart. Yet this gives good results, even if the microphones don't have patterns like our ears.

WMcD

[Grizzog]

An interesting discussion. I once read something where a reviewer described sound from speakers as "better than live." I think that hits at the article's intent. Not entirely sure how something could be better than live, but that's besides the point...

However, I'm about half and half on the subject. PWK did tests with a piano in the room, recorded it, and played it back on the Klipshorns. Is this not testing for accuracy? If I listen to a guitar, I want it to sound like a guitar. What guitar? All guitars can sound different. PWK also urged listening to unamplified live music to reorient your ears. I agree with this sentiment, but you are only aware of the event you experienced. Bodies of instruments, strings, bows, tunings - they are all different. If I sit 5 feet to the left of you, do we hear the same thing?

In reproduced music, we are always hearing some version of what the editor deemed appropriate. Live recorded music still goes through production. Wilson audiophile recordings are phenomenal, but are those tweaked in production? Are they straight from the mic to the cd? Then there's the response of microphones, placement, venue acoustics...

I feel as though we want something that portrays the accuracy of our minds. As I write this, the article makes more sense. My sense of reality matches with the sounds of the setups I have. Someone else may come in and determine something is missing from the exact same recording. Very thought provoking and interesting.

[mustang guy]

Better than live? For me it means these things:

• volume levels and my threshold of pain at very high db
• can put yourself center stage.
• can boost frequencies that your ears can't hear well
• can reduce frequencies that give you a headache

More accurate than live? Impossible.

Edited May 1, 2016 by mustang guy

[Deang]

The quality of amplified music, whether live or recorded - is determined by compression levels, EQ, and the mix - you get everything from great to just plain terrible. Large scale symphonic works (non-amplified) are not exempt from sounding subjectivity horrendous. So - live music isn't necessarily always going to be the thing that "sets the bar".

It's subjective - always. The goal is to create a pleasing experience - without strain or pain. I like my sound natural and relaxed - I don't care if it's Hendrix or Strauss.

[paul79]

Nice article for sure. Thanks for sharing!!

[efzauner]

"the studio's carefully dialed-in, super-calibrated monitor speakers"

WTF does this mean? I never understood "studio monitors". Why would they be different from other high end/ high quality speakers? Perhaps they can trade off some engineering criteria because they don't have to reproduce very loud in a large room? 

[Don Richard]

Take any loudspeaker and put it in two rooms and listen - it will measure and sound different. Room acoustics is the most important factor in what one hears. Treating the room and placing the speakers properly in that room are essential or the loudspeaker will never sound it's best.

 

BTW, changing amps or cables in an effort to solve this sort of problem will not correct acoustic issues. I suspect that many complaints concerning harshness are caused by untreated rooms and can be corrected with acoustic treatment.

[rgdawsonco]

Thanks for posting this, I enjoyed it.

 

When I first started getting serious about this hobby, I had this engineer friend who relayed a story to me that I have never forgotten.  He and a friend were listening to a live piano recital.  The other guy leaned over and said, "My stereo sounds better."  I had to think about that.  I knew he was right.

 

I know I can take my guitar and play in one room and it sounds one way.  I can go sit in another room and it sounds different.  Which is right?

 

I have played a lot with Audessey room correction in my system and I generally like it.  However, it is hard to argue that the sound coming out after room correction is applied is "accurate".  After all, if I was playing my guitar in that room, then the room would be part of the sound and therefore "accurate" for that room.  So if I wanted a guitar coming out of my speakers to sound like a guitar being played in that room, then I would say Audessey room correction is not accurate.

 

What this article teaches me is that there really is no such thing as perfect.  In the end, go with what you like best.

 

It is my opinion that Klipsch Heritage speakers have developed such a loyal and loving following, not because they are necessarily "accurate" but because they are so darn pleasing.  Often better than the real thing.

[rebuy]

What sounds "good" to me--you might find to be terrible.

Amps can and do make a difference.

On my last Two AVR's I had auto-calibration--while OK,  it didn't always work for my taste.

I found using a different AVR worked best for me because it sounds more

natural and dynamic but it didn't have the auto calibration. I don't miss it either.

This is the first system I've owned that didn't have all the bells and whistles

and I like it better that way.

Edited May 3, 2016 by rebuy

[rgdawsonco]

What sounds "good" to me--you might find to be terrible.

Amps can and do make a difference.

On my last Two AVR's I had auto-calibration--while OK,  it didn't always work for my taste.

I found using a different AVR worked best for me because it sounds more

natural and dynamic but it didn't have the auto calibration. I don't miss it either.

This is the first system I've owned that didn't have all the bells and whistles

and I like it better that way.

 

This is true.  And I have this ongoing dilemma with Audessey Room correction myself.  I wish I could tweak the results but I can't.  It's all or nothing and I like certain things with it and certain things without it.  As for which is "accurate", I don't know.  Without it, I know the results in my room could be accurate coming out of the speakers, but by the time it gets to my ears and the room has imparted its own sound on it, the results I hear are no longer "accurate" if accurate means sounding like the original sounded in the room it was played in.  My room has changed it.  With it (Audessey), the sound is also not "accurate" if accurate means sounding like the same instruments played in my room.  Audessey has changed it.  What is "accurate" then?  I have no idea.  In my case, the differences are small and I like it both ways, but I can't say, even theoretically, which is more "accurate".

[rgdawsonco]

I like acoustic guitar.  And I like to play it (through my stereo) louder than any real acoustic guitar could ever play.  Is that accurate?  Heck no.  No acoustic guitar could sound that way that loud.  But do I like it?  Heck yeah.

[WMcD]

This just shows how the subject has been hijacked.

Tweek speakers so that they sound "better" is one thing in the accuracy vs. realism genre. That was the start.

But I infer that rdg's and his engineering buddy were 30 feet or more from the piano in a hall. The buddy was comparing the experience to a recording where the microphones were six feet away from the piano. I don't doubt it was more enjoyable. It allows one to appreciate the technique of playing and the basic music.

The recording was not a realistic recreation of sitting in the hall. It was probably somewhat realistic to what the performer sitting at the keyboard was hearing. Though this has little to do with electronic equipment and even room treatment.

WMcD

Edited May 4, 2016 by WMcD

[dtel]

Though this has little to do with electronic equipment and even room treatment.

 

It goes all the way back, everything after the original instrument playing is involved, It's all just a big illusion. With so many adjustments along the way equipment and speakers are just a small part, then throw in the room. I guess in the long run low distortion is a high priority, then it comes down to what engineers call voicing, Guess that's a code word for making sense of the limitless changes that could be made.

 

And then throw in everyone hears differently and has there own opinion of what they like .

 

 

It's tough to nail down except for the basics. 

[mustang guy]

Imagine what this could do for realism. 

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/146368-REG/Neumann_KU_100_KU_100_Dummy_Head.html

 

Just take it with you as your date, and play the concert back any time. All you need is 8 grand and whatever the extra event ticket costs. Oh, and a laptop, some cable and extra batteries, and a wig.

Edited May 4, 2016 by mustang guy

[mustang guy]

Wait, these are cheaper, only $500:

 

http://3diosound.com/