Belle listening fatigue

[Marvel]

Dean, did you look at my post with a question for the chief? My K-400s have a ridge/overlap in the throat, almost in the middle. I've been filing it down (one horn at a time). It certainly can't hurt.

 

Bruce

Edit: I forgot you posted in it... I put in a picture showing some improvement

[Chris A]

2 hours ago, Deang said:

Great analysis Chris - man, you love to get into the weeds. I would have just said, "garbage in, garbage out." :-)

Well, the nature of the question posed by Travis isn't easy to answer in 10 words or less.  There's some common understanding that's needed--things that you and I take for granted that may or may not be commonly understood. I find it's easier to provide the background first.

 

On 9/11/2016 at 5:12 PM, dwilawyer said:

Is it known what causes "listening fatigue."  I have experienced it myself and know what it is, however,  I have found it isn't necessarily tied to a particular set of speakers.

 

Doesn't the source and type of music have to be factored in (Chris)?  Does lack of DR in the recording contribute to "listening fatigue."...Is "listening fatigue" pretty much understood to be the result of the speaker, or do you also have to look upstream?

I wanted to recap the questions sent my way:

 

1) The source music is a big part of listener fatigue--perhaps the biggest factor.  I described how music is typically compressed above, and how it is equalized to actually contribute to listener fatigue.

 

2) Lack of DR (dynamic range) is nowadays probably the most significant factor in complaints of listening fatigue.  Most people wind up turning the volume control down until the music is almost in background.  It seems to me that if you've spent major bucks on a stereo or multichannel setup, turning the music down seems like a alternative of last resort.  The music should sound good enough to entice the listener to keep turning the volume control up if everything is as it should be.  It turns out that you can do something about the music you play to reduce its fatiguing compressed state.  The question is: are you motivated enough to fix it--once and for all.  That's a question that the listener can only answer.  I've found a lot can be done with most music, not the least of which is finding source versions of your favorite music albums with the highest inherent DR ratings, then de-clipping them and un-EQing the tracks to remove the source of the discomfort.  The success of results doing this has caused me to unmaster my entire music collection. YMMV.

 

3) The loudspeakers are a significant part of listener fatigue...but only if there are unresolved issues with them that haven't been fixed.  Once you make a selection of music to play with good sound quality and high dynamic range, what remains is the sound reproduction system and the room acoustics performance. 

 

I've described the answer that's specific to the Belle above in my first response--because I've found that's the default focus of this forum's membership.  However, room acoustics and loudspeaker placement within the room are at least as strong a factor as the loudspeakers and electronics, particularly in fatigue situations where there are resonances of room modes and unbalanced-sounding loudspeakers due to strong early reflections competing with direct sound arrival. 

 

Chris

[djk]

+1 on the comments of lack of dynamic range and fatigue.

 

I still own a DBX 3bx, makes most CD's listenable.

[Deang]

Impossible to not agree, a lot of stuff is damn near unlistenable. Additional attenuation is a band aid of sorts, but it does help. 

 

Yes Bruce, I've been following the thread. I'm trying to score some K-401s - I don't have the energy for all of that filing business. :-)

[mikebse2a3]

On ‎9‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 6:12 PM, dwilawyer said:

Is it known what causes "listening fatigue."  I have experienced it myself and know what it is, however,  I have found it isn't necessarily tied to a particular set of speakers.

 

"Room acoustics can affect the overall quality of a sound reproduction system. This should go without saying. Yet, it happens some times that a fine music system is installed in poor environment and the system is blamed."  PWK  Dope From Hope, Vol 1, No 4  Dec 16 1960

 

PWK had developed one of the least fatiguing loudspeakers in the form of the Klipschorn and early on he obviously ran into problems with room acoustics and recognized that for someone to realize it's full potential they would need to pay attention to the rooms acoustical properties.

 

" The convex cylindric surfaces afford maximum diffusion of sound; the decay is more nearly logarithmic than for simple rooms with plane parallel surfaces; absorption of the cylinders is greater for the bass and less for the treble ranges, and this in combination with sorptive materials may be used to afford desirable bass-treble reverberation: a "room response which is nearly flat" can be obtained"  PWK Dope From Hope, Vol 5, No 1  February 24 1964

 

"Since the room is perhaps the second most important or critical entity in achieving good audio, music listeners would do well to expend as much effort on the room as on the selection of the dynamic acoustic elements like loudspeakers."  PWK Dope From Hope, Vol 5 No 1  February 24 1964

 

Travis I specifically wanted to reference PWK's comments because he was well aware that his loudspeakers were being blamed of problems that in reality were due to poor acoustics of the listening rooms they had been installed and IMHO based on observations from this forum many are still doing it even today and are trying to fix the problem with the wrong tools and I'm afraid few will ever find a lasting satisfaction taking that path.

 

 

miketn

[mikebse2a3]

On ‎9‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 6:12 PM, dwilawyer said:

What about amp topology, SS v. Valve (Dean, Mike)?  

 

Well designed amplifiers of SS or Tube should add very little to "listening fatigue" especially compared to room acoustics IMO.

 

miketn

[Travis In Austin]

38 minutes ago, mikebse2a3 said:

 

"Room acoustics can affect the overall quality of a sound reproduction system. This should go without saying. Yet, it happens some times that a fine music system is installed in poor environment and the system is blamed."  PWK  Dope From Hope, Vol 1, No 4  Dec 16 1960

 

PWK had developed one of the least fatiguing loudspeakers in the form of the Klipschorn and early on he obviously ran into problems with room acoustics and recognized that for someone to realize it's full potential they would need to pay attention to the rooms acoustical properties.

 

" The convex cylindric surfaces afford maximum diffusion of sound; the decay is more nearly logarithmic than for simple rooms with plane parallel surfaces; absorption of the cylinders is greater for the bass and less for the treble ranges, and this in combination with sorptive materials may be used to afford desirable bass-treble reverberation: a "room response which is nearly flat" can be obtained"  PWK Dope From Hope, Vol 5, No 1  February 24 1964

 

"Since the room is perhaps the second most important or critical entity in achieving good audio, music listeners would do well to expend as much effort on the room as on the selection of the dynamic acoustic elements like loudspeakers."  PWK Dope From Hope, Vol 5 No 1  February 24 1964

 

Travis I specifically wanted to reference PWK's comments because he was well aware that his loudspeakers were being blamed of problems that in reality were due to poor acoustics of the listening rooms they had been installed and IMHO based on observations from this forum many are still doing it even today and are trying to fix the problem with the wrong tools and I'm afraid few will ever find a lasting satisfaction taking that path.

 

 

miketn

Thank you for the responses Mike and Chris.  It is kind of what I expected. 

 

I have seen time and time again people like magazine writers, bloggers, audio salesmen, etc. try and answer the question presented in the OP by saying "it's because you own horns.  Horns are fatiguing, everyone knows that. "  

[NOSValves]

With the Scott gear you mentioned you power the Belle's with I'd be suprised if the problem is not with some other part of your system or room unless of course the Scott's ate not working properly...Scott gear like most vintage gear usually never causes fatigue. The reverse is usually the description...I'd suspect the room first..

[Chris A]

9 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

...It is kind of what I expected...I have seen time and time again people like magazine writers, bloggers, audio salesmen, etc. try and answer the question presented in the OP by saying "it's because you own horns.  Horns are fatiguing, everyone knows that. "  

I've recently been reviewing a source on the design of horns (sometimes referred to as "waveguides" but this is actually an attempt at branding of one author, Dr. Earl Geddes).  Here is an excerpt from a discussion on "higher order modes" (HOMs) of horns:

 

"HOMs will be generated to some extent in any device with non-straight walls. In essence [HOMs} are the diffraction of the throat wave around the curves in the walls."

 

Some points that I think are important to note that are related to "listener fatigue" and HOMs of horns:

 

1) Most of these discussions are usually focused on horns that reproduce midrange frequencies.

 

2) HOMs emerge from the horn's mouth at a frequency that's related to its throat diameter.  For 2" horns with non-straight walls, that occurs at or above 4 kHz, for 1" diameter horns, it's ~8 kHz and higher.  The closer that you cross over to these frequencies with horns that have non-straight walls, the more that you'll notice that "frying bacon" sound (for horns with slots in their throats) or "horn sound" for horns that have smooth interior walls but that have curved side walls.

 

3) For HOMs created below this "cut-on frequency" (i.e., HOMs emerging from the horn's mouth) these HOMs are called "evanescent modes", and don't directly emerge from the horn's mouth. But the HOMs are reflected back to the horn's compression driver where they interact with the compression driver diaphragm to produce complex interactions which result in the creation of added distortion which is especially audible at higher SPLs.

 

3)  The K-510 and K-402 horns have flat walls (except near their mouths where they roll out tangent at the horn's mouth using a tractrix curve--which prevents the "waistbanding" of the horn's polar coverage just above the lowest frequencies that the horn can support before losing its polar control).  These straight-sided horns are extremely clean sounding and have no "horn sound" relative to exponential horns such as the K-400, K-500, etc. 

 

The point here is that there is something qualitatively different about the K-510 and K-402 horns in terms of the cleanness of their sound and freedom from listener fatigue.  That's why I recommend the "JuBelle" configuration from Klipsch if listener fatigue is a factor for the owner.

 

I think that a lot has been learned in the past 20-25 years (since the early 1990s) about exactly why different horn profiles sound different and perform differently in terms of their hi-fi performance.  I recommend using these type of midrange horn profiles instead of those having curved side walls.

 

Chris

[Max2]

I owned a set of Belles about 20 years ago and to me they sounded better sitting a little further off than the other Klipsch I have owned.  The shorter,smaller mid horn made them sound more direct to me.  After I sold them, I never got back to the Heritage line until I picked up a set of LaScalas. You have a few "bolt on" options here that would really help the congestion.

[jwc]

So.

 

The OP is happy with his stock Belles with -3dB of the midrange.  Or did I miss a step?

[Chris A]

Note also that the KLF series, Chorus II and Forte II models also use the same straight-sided horn philosophy (called "modified tractrix" by Klipsch).  I believe that you also see it used in virtually all the HT series of horns, albeit these horns have much smaller mouths and cross over to direct radiating woofers at higher frequencies than the Heritage series.  In other words, since the mid-1990s, the loudspeaker models designed have been using this newer straight-sided horn profile.

 

As an upgrade to the Belle, and especially for reduction of listener fatigue, I recommend the 2" diameter throat K-510 (or K-402 if you can handle its size) and a 2" compression driver to lower the distortion levels. Since these newer horns are "controlled directivity", they require EQ.  That's an additional reason why I recommend a digital crossover that can be used to EQ these newer lower-distortion horns.

 

Chris

[jwc]

Are there active XO settings with delays and EQ for that setup provided by Klipsch?  Or did Roy scratch up a passive for that combo?

[Chris A]

I don't know about a passive for the JuBelle or the JubScala.  Perhaps Roy can let us know.

 

EDIT: I can recommend the active settings that I used for the Jubelle.  It turns out that the midrange and tweeter delays for the JubScala are almost exactly a half millisecond less than the JuBelle delay, due to the slightly longer K-400 horn that better matches the delay of the La Scala bass bin. 

 

I know that a lot of folks are stuck on passive circuitry, but that makes the loudspeaker-amplifier circuits sensitive to changes in driver or amplifier impedance changes, including voice coil heating. There is the appearance of simplicity using these types of crossovers, but in reality, they create as many problems as they solve, since they need to also do parametric EQ for straight-sided horns, and really need to correct the delays so that the timbre of the loudspeaker is not affected by their use. (An all-pass filter can be used if the loudspeaker is using a full-range multiple entry horn design - like the Danley Synergy and Unity horn designs.)

 

For me, it's much, much easier to use one digital crossover per stereo pair--or even surround sound applications since these units are now available with 4-in, 8-out (or even more outputs).  One crossover can do the lot if the loudspeakers use two-way architectures.

 

Chris

[jwc]

I like passives as first choice if available.   I've done the digital stuff and I'm not against it....I just wouldn't choose it first. 

 

The Belles have a nasty peak at 125Hz-150Hz.  The earlier XO's for it.... don't address this.  The last made Belle XO had some notches in the LF filter.  If you price out the parts to put in the notch, you'll find it cheaper to put in line an "Equalizer".

[Deang]

Seeing that peak, why did PK choose to do nothing about it? He even designed a filter for the Belle that had no low pass section - he ran the woofer straight out. The LaScala and Klipschhorn have a similar issue. I don't know for how long he did this, but PK did the same thing with his Klipschorns - no low pass - just two caps and the autoformer. What led to this thinking, and why did it stay in place for so long? Just seems weird to me.  

 

 

[Chris A]

1 hour ago, jwc said:

...The Belles have a nasty peak at 125Hz-150Hz.  The earlier XO's for it...don't address this.  The last made Belle XO had some notches in the LF filter.  If you price out the parts to put in the notch, you'll find it cheaper to put in line an "Equalizer".

 

21 minutes ago, Deang said:

What led to this thinking, and why did it stay in place for so long? Just seems weird to me.  

Perhaps some of the following will address Dean's question, but it's a fairly odd situation, in my estimation.  This is something that I've found in other loudspeaker models and types, and also in room modes/resonances...but quite by accident. 

 

As I was unmastering music and sharing the results with a few others, I noticed that there were comments about "too much midbass", "too tubby" and "too dull sounding".  When I dropped out some energy in the 100-200 Hz band (...the band most affected by corner bass traps, by the way), I noticed that the complaints basically ceased. I also see a great many recordings with this band attenuated, and since I had earlier calibrated my corner loudspeakers and room for flat response in that octave by placing the corner bass traps in the near field to control the "RT60" (reverberation time) in that mid-bass octave, I found that these recordings sounded much better when I put that attenuated 100-200 Hz SPL back into the recordings. 

 

Now it becomes clear to me what's been happening.  Most people are apparently not using bass traps and EQing their loudspeaker flat in the 100-200 Hz band.  So they have mid-bass boom issues that some mastering engineers have been adjusting for them, without actually fixing the source of the problem.  I highly recommend corner bass traps and EQing your loudspeakers flat in the 100-200 Hz octave--it will make a huge difference in the sound.

 

Note that the best recordings that I have don't attenuate that 100-200 Hz octave...

 

Chris

[jwc]

My DBX EQ with two frowny faces between 100-200Hxx

 

 

[jwc]

16 minutes ago, Deang said:

Seeing that peak, why did PK choose to do nothing about it? He even designed a filter for the Belle that had no low pass section - he ran the woofer straight out. The LaScala and Klipschhorn have a similar issue. I don't know for how long he did this, but PK did the same thing with his Klipschorns - no low pass - just two caps and the autoformer. What led to this thinking, and why did it stay in place for so long? Just seems weird to me.  

 

 

I know you aren't talking to me.......

 

But ........  yes with the 3 fully horn loaded Heritage speakers they have the peak 100-200Hz.    When I had the La scala for years, I never "heard that peak" or it was just not getting on my nerves for some reason.  I only recently have any experience with the Belle.  There is a "spike" at 125 that I can hear and makes the music "unenjoyable".

 

I could argue that if I was playing with flea amps at low listening levels......It may not bother me.  I don't know.

[Deang]

Hey, I'm talking to anyone that will listen.

 

Like Chris inferred, a room can exacerbate an issue. 

 

PK either didn't think it was a big deal, or didn't know how build a notch filter - and he was no fan of equalizers.