![]() |
Ludspeakers: How do you judge "neutrality"?
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 10:03:54 -0400
"Arny Krueger" wrote: An STC or Coles 4038 is a good mic for the recording. As you say, many top notch studio mics haven't got a flat response. Much of the current art of audio production is dedicated to getting a preferred sound that may be nothing like the live performance. Out of interest, how are the 'response curves' for various speakers made? do they just use a super-linear microphone, or is there some other technique used, perhaps measuring harmonics? I'd like to be able to make profiles of various speakers, so it would be interesting to see how its done... -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
Ludspeakers: How do you judge "neutrality"?
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:42:24 +0100, Ian Molton wrote:
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 10:03:54 -0400 "Arny Krueger" wrote: An STC or Coles 4038 is a good mic for the recording. As you say, many top notch studio mics haven't got a flat response. Much of the current art of audio production is dedicated to getting a preferred sound that may be nothing like the live performance. Out of interest, how are the 'response curves' for various speakers made? do they just use a super-linear microphone, or is there some other technique used, perhaps measuring harmonics? They use measuring microphones, which are generally flat to better than 1dB over the audio range, and are also supplied with an individual calibration curve, so that even that small response error can be calculated out. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
Ludspeakers: How do you judge "neutrality"?
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:42:24 +0100, Ian Molton wrote:
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 10:03:54 -0400 "Arny Krueger" wrote: An STC or Coles 4038 is a good mic for the recording. As you say, many top notch studio mics haven't got a flat response. Much of the current art of audio production is dedicated to getting a preferred sound that may be nothing like the live performance. Out of interest, how are the 'response curves' for various speakers made? do they just use a super-linear microphone, or is there some other technique used, perhaps measuring harmonics? They use measuring microphones, which are generally flat to better than 1dB over the audio range, and are also supplied with an individual calibration curve, so that even that small response error can be calculated out. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
Ludspeakers: How do you judge "neutrality"?
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:58:12 GMT
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: They use measuring microphones, which are generally flat to better than 1dB over the audio range, and are also supplied with an individual calibration curve, so that even that small response error can be calculated out. where would I get one, and how much would it cost? -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
Ludspeakers: How do you judge "neutrality"?
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:58:12 GMT
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: They use measuring microphones, which are generally flat to better than 1dB over the audio range, and are also supplied with an individual calibration curve, so that even that small response error can be calculated out. where would I get one, and how much would it cost? -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
Ludspeakers: How do you judge "neutrality"?
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ... In article , Keith G wrote: "RPS" wrote in message ... This is inspired by the recent discussion on possible replacement for my Spendor BC1's (thanks for all the comments in that thread): Many of you have commented on a speaker being more or less neutral/accurate than others. If you were not present at the original recording session, with good memory, how can you judge the accuracy of the reproduction? You can't. I would put that slightly differently. :-) I'd say that you can make judgements upon the accuracy or neutrality of the reproduction, but have to accept that such judgements may not always be reliable. :-) OK, I'll qualify that (if it makes you happy) to: 'You can't, with any degree of certainty.....' My experience is that some speakers give me a sound that seems to me much more like the sound I hear when I go to concerts. I am talking here of 'classical' music, listened to in various venues, on a number of occasions, over many years. This does not necessarily mean, of course, that the speakers *are* more accurate, just that they sound more accurate to me, using my own experience. Since I want a sound that seems to me close to what I think I hear when at a real concert, or when listening to real human voices, this seems to me to be a reasonably adequate method for my purposes. Coming through loud and clear. - Agree entirely, but it reinforces my own view that one man's 'accuracy' is another man's 'coloured'.... I have no problem with the term 'accuracy' when it is used to describe the way electronic/electro-mechanical devices handle a signal, but AFAIAC it falls on it's arse when it reaches the speakers and gets out into the room. Then we are most definitely in the domain of the human ear and whatever psychoacoustics may or may not apply. I mean, I can tell that Spendor, Proac, and Dynaudio are sounding different, but don't I need to be familiar with the actual original sound to judge which one is accurate or uncolored? Yes, of course, how else will you know? Well, you need to have some familiarity with the types of sounds involved. However this may not mean you had to be present for that specific concert. Just work on a statistical basis, having visted that venue many times and grown accustomed to how it tends to sound when people play the works you are listening to. Then extend that to a number of venues. If the speakers give a 'convincing impression' for many venues and items of music you have some familiarity with, that seems a fair approach to me. The OP is mentioning 'the actual original sound' which implies a degree of specificity - generally, it is important that an audio system portrays the sound of, say, a piano in a way we recognise and 'agree with', but when it comes to, say, a sackbut or shamisen we (many of us, that is) will have little to go on other than whether or not we simply *like* the 'sound'. The temptation to tell anyone forget 'accurate' - concentrate on 'nice' is always strong..... ;-) (Interesting to see that one or two of the worst 'accuracy tub thumpers' hearabouts are finally managing to get some of the dots joined up.....) |
Ludspeakers: How do you judge "neutrality"?
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ... In article , Keith G wrote: "RPS" wrote in message ... This is inspired by the recent discussion on possible replacement for my Spendor BC1's (thanks for all the comments in that thread): Many of you have commented on a speaker being more or less neutral/accurate than others. If you were not present at the original recording session, with good memory, how can you judge the accuracy of the reproduction? You can't. I would put that slightly differently. :-) I'd say that you can make judgements upon the accuracy or neutrality of the reproduction, but have to accept that such judgements may not always be reliable. :-) OK, I'll qualify that (if it makes you happy) to: 'You can't, with any degree of certainty.....' My experience is that some speakers give me a sound that seems to me much more like the sound I hear when I go to concerts. I am talking here of 'classical' music, listened to in various venues, on a number of occasions, over many years. This does not necessarily mean, of course, that the speakers *are* more accurate, just that they sound more accurate to me, using my own experience. Since I want a sound that seems to me close to what I think I hear when at a real concert, or when listening to real human voices, this seems to me to be a reasonably adequate method for my purposes. Coming through loud and clear. - Agree entirely, but it reinforces my own view that one man's 'accuracy' is another man's 'coloured'.... I have no problem with the term 'accuracy' when it is used to describe the way electronic/electro-mechanical devices handle a signal, but AFAIAC it falls on it's arse when it reaches the speakers and gets out into the room. Then we are most definitely in the domain of the human ear and whatever psychoacoustics may or may not apply. I mean, I can tell that Spendor, Proac, and Dynaudio are sounding different, but don't I need to be familiar with the actual original sound to judge which one is accurate or uncolored? Yes, of course, how else will you know? Well, you need to have some familiarity with the types of sounds involved. However this may not mean you had to be present for that specific concert. Just work on a statistical basis, having visted that venue many times and grown accustomed to how it tends to sound when people play the works you are listening to. Then extend that to a number of venues. If the speakers give a 'convincing impression' for many venues and items of music you have some familiarity with, that seems a fair approach to me. The OP is mentioning 'the actual original sound' which implies a degree of specificity - generally, it is important that an audio system portrays the sound of, say, a piano in a way we recognise and 'agree with', but when it comes to, say, a sackbut or shamisen we (many of us, that is) will have little to go on other than whether or not we simply *like* the 'sound'. The temptation to tell anyone forget 'accurate' - concentrate on 'nice' is always strong..... ;-) (Interesting to see that one or two of the worst 'accuracy tub thumpers' hearabouts are finally managing to get some of the dots joined up.....) |
Ludspeakers: How do you judge "neutrality"?
In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote: As you say, many top notch studio mics haven't got a flat response. Much of the current art of audio production is dedicated to getting a preferred sound that may be nothing like the live performance. Absolutely, and nothing necessarily wrong in that. After all, a photo doesn't always capture a scene better than a painting. -- *I went to school to become a wit, only got halfway through. Dave Plowman London SW 12 RIP Acorn |
Ludspeakers: How do you judge "neutrality"?
In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote: As you say, many top notch studio mics haven't got a flat response. Much of the current art of audio production is dedicated to getting a preferred sound that may be nothing like the live performance. Absolutely, and nothing necessarily wrong in that. After all, a photo doesn't always capture a scene better than a painting. -- *I went to school to become a wit, only got halfway through. Dave Plowman London SW 12 RIP Acorn |
Ludspeakers: How do you judge "neutrality"?
"Ian Molton" wrote in message
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:58:12 GMT (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: They use measuring microphones, which are generally flat to better than 1dB over the audio range, and are also supplied with an individual calibration curve, so that even that small response error can be calculated out. where would I get one, and how much would it cost? The most common models in general use are shown on these web pages: http://www.behringer.com/02_products...M8000&lang=eng http://shop.store.yahoo.com/eawsia/microphones.html http://www.core-sound.com/dpa4006.html |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:33 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk