Short But Sweet Article

[Ducatista47]

http://www.soundandcommunications.com/audio-envelope/

If only there was real progress on the interdiscipline communication discussed here. Common language and terminology indeed. PRaT exemplifies the huge divide between engineers and audiophiles. Is one listener's essential spec another's poster child for horsecrap? You bet. Since the STEM people will - or will not - produce the real improvements we desire, a common lexicon to describe audio would be of huge value. I am in favor of using the engineering language, but the audio equipment reviewers would have an arrow aimed at my heart if I became vocal about it.

[tomt]

' John Mayberry 'is calling for an advancement in the state of the art.

and less than happy, that so few are willing to do so.


the digital winter has been a letdown ...

I wouldn’t be too surprised if there were more hot dog vendors than industry veterans who attend the lot.

having worked in the tradeshow industry, this speculation is quite true.

[audiomagnate]

MLB comes to mind. Their systems IMO come close anyway.

[Ducatista47]

MLB comes to mind. Their systems IMO come close anyway.

They use one approach, namely throwing boxcar loads of money at the quest. Their customers are obligated, of course, to do likewise. After comparing their result with the King speakers, I feel MLB has the dynamics down, but their sonic quality - fidelity if you will - is not the best far less money can buy. Just my opinion. I admit few speakers I have heard sound as good.

I have yet to find an example of electrostatics not being the only exception to high speaker efficiency being necessary for the best fidelity. The advent of cheap amplification watts has retarded the development of fidelity for decades. As sweet an idea as class D may end up being, in that respect it may kill any remaining chance the development and wide acceptance of efficient transducers might have otherwise had. I fell in love with big JBLs for their effortless efficient, low distortion reproduction of dynamics and tone. The cost of putting this type of product on the market today assures its rarity.

I have managed to put together a system that makes me happy, but of course it is imperfect. I do like it better than the MLB systems (read that as it does what is important to me better) and I could afford it. I can enjoy music without noticing the equipment or worrying about the cost. What more could I ask for? I believe everything I presently use in that system was designed in this millenium.

[1audiohack]

I'm not even sure what he's trying to get at;



"For all the billions of dollars spent on audio, has any research lab, commercial entity or private individual really run the table creating a system that can actually perform to the limits of human listening extremes?"


? I suppose the prase "run the table" means to go all the way, straight through, with no interuptions or diversions and to use the very best equipment on all stages regardless of when, how, or who produced it? Who gets to decide all that? How would you?


"Ignore for a moment our traditional definitions of sound. Let’s throw in the entire gamut of vibration and sensory experience, from gut-wrenching infrasound to EKG igniting ultrasound, from the quietest experience of vanishingly low noise levels to loudness levels inducing pain. A system with an impulse response bordering on the fantastic where any part of the audio envelope can be accurately analyzed in its entirety. An entirely integrated system where time, energy and frequency are all reproduced as accurately as possible given existing technology and materials."



As an example, you can cover most of the above with some of the current Danley Sound Labs Synergy Horns and subs. I have heard them and seen the measurements and measured some of them myself. They do a lot of things right. Ultra HF, no. The best sounding stuff I have ever heard? Not for home use. By the way, love you Tom and Doug!


"Many of the piece parts exist, but I’m fairly sure they’ve never been put together in one place at any one time. Now there is this guy in Wisconsin who converted his kitchen into a subwoofer enclosure…but I stray."


Stray? Do you? When the same person ranting about the lack of all out quality audio systems jokes about someone who goes to extremes in an attempt to go all out, he lost his own argument in my book. To me here is where most of this artical and the topic of these type of discussions/laments break down. Here's why, if you asked any professional acoustician, and in using that description, I mean a person who is sucessfully educated in, and who has been employed in the sucessful design and implementation of theaters, studios and other small room acoustics realated work, they will tell you that the room is somewhere in the top three and usually second only to the loudspeakers contribution in importance to the overall quality of the sound one will experience in an acoustically small room. For wide range music, the large room - small room is defined by Manfred Schroeder 250,000 cubic feet. Clearly the vast majority of us experience the majority of our music in smal rooms.


So, what percentage of audio affectionados go much further than putting the electronics somewhere by a convenient outlet and the speakers somwhere that we can live with them, to coexist with plants and furniture? The majority for sure. Sure some of us move stuff around and experiment with elevation and such but even that puts us in the minority. Build a proper and dedicated room? 1%?



Where is the driving force for industry to attempt to create the very best of anything when the one percent who really chase it can't even agree on what to chase or what's most important? I am however grateful for the ones who do pursue and create the great the exceptional pieces parts for what ever reason, for themselves and for us.



"I suspect it really boils down to what emotionally moves an individual most effectively,.."


I suspect that's right.


"Conflict Between Audiologists, Artists, Audio Engineers and Audiophiles: You’d think the goals for all four groups should be the same. Suffice to say, they often coincide less than one might hope, and there’s less communication between these groups than would seem prudent, given the similarity of purpose."


Don't they agree? Now I admit that I don't personally know any audiologists but I imagine their biggest single concern is our not abusing and or damaging our hearing. I am interested in the how we perceive what and why but it's not high enough on my list to make a study of it.

Beyond that, on what do we dissagree? I have never heard an artist, engineer or audiophile exlaim that they wanted it to sound bad. So what do we/they disagree on? How to get there? What sounds good? That comes back to what emotionally moves us personally.


What I do need is and appreciate is the companies and people who make available to me, the tools, products and knowledge that allows me the pursuit of audio pleasure, one of the pursuits of happiness.

"There must be a few unique individuals who transcend the individual groups to better understand the communal needs and expectations. If nothing else, it would be good to use common language and terminology some day in the future."


What community? Common language and terminology? That would be nice.

I am in favor of using the engineering language, but the audio equipment reviewers would have an arrow aimed at my heart if I became vocal about it.

I don't know why we can't use that language, or more of it anyway, Sigmund Freud and his disciples borrowed heavily from the descriptions and engineering terms used in metallurgy. Sound does not have it's own language yet. Several years ago I was (privileged to be seated) at a table with the creator of SynAaudCon and several of the old guard / early notable members and Doug recalled how at one time they had worked to see how many words in the English language they could find that had not been borrowed from other disciplines but were only used for the description of sound. They thought they had found seven, however at the time we could only come up with three or four.

In the end, I am grateful for what has been made available to me so that I may pursue my audio nirvana. Why doesn't someone make a perfect and complete system for me or you? Would they even know where to start?

[honkytonkwillie]

...the room is somewhere in the top three and usually second only to the loudspeakers contribution in importance to the overall quality of the sound one will experience in an acoustically small room.

Why doesn't someone make a perfect and complete system for me or you? Would they even know where to start?

Ah-HA! They need to start selling rooms with their systems!

I'm certain the manufacturers know how critical the listening space is to the quality of sound. The customer's room is simply not a design variable within their control. The best they can hope for is offering suggestions: against the front wall, away from the front wall, away from the side walls, tweeters at ear level, on 14-18" stands, 6-12' apart, etc.

It's difficult to imagine how the industry could push customers into desiring/acquiring/creating better rooms, but that would be a start.

[1audiohack]

I'm certain that most of them get it too.

I once worked with a guy that would freak out if you spray painted anything inside the shop because it was so bad for you. He was a heavy smoker and I just couldn't/wouldn't take him seriously. This is the same story to me, asking why no one has made the "single super duper all the way sound system" when nearly no one on the consumer end does anywhere near their best to get the best out of what is currently available.

I don't mean to jump the rails but when I read that little article I just thought that as small as a market audiophiles are, we are damn lucky to have what we have. There is some really great audio gear out there.

[Mr. Widget]

...but when I read that little article I just thought that as small as a market audiophiles are, we are damn lucky to have what we have. There is some really great audio gear out there.

I couldn't agree more!


Widget