What is it supposed to sound like?

[Ajani]

No this again. Who are audiophiles kidding. You not even remotely close to the original sound.

If that was the case, the music would be unrecognisable.

6 Flat sounding systems are for those who look for well recorded & mastered music as suppose to those who just enjoy any music.

I enjoy most genres of music, but prefer systems that measure well. No idea why you would assume that you can't enjoy the music on a system that measures well.

So the question now is at what price point would you get a cd player, amp & speakers to measure flat. Can any of these items do flat on the cheap. If they can, then what would be the point of going expensive.

What's the point of buying any luxury item? Better fit and finish, pride of ownership, features, modest performance improvements etc.

Make measurement of the recorded sound in the studio then do the same at home then make a graph & compare. I think you going way out of what was my intended point.

If you enjoying all music on a flat system your basically saying all music is well recorded or in other words you enjoy not very well recorded as well. If everything thing sounds good on your system then it can not be flat sounding, that was my point.

Everything won't sound good on a coloured system either. Simple example - the speakers have a rolled off treble to compensate for bright recordings. That might sound better than a flat system with bright recordings. But play recordings that aren't overly bright and that rolled off treble will start to sound like what it is. In that case the flat system will sound better.

 

[ChrisIRL]

A debate in which no one answer is ever going to be correct due to the massive variation in recording quality. Recording quality variation has kept the hifi industry going more than the hifi industry has.

 

[Native_bon]

No this again. Who are audiophiles kidding. You not even remotely close to the original sound.

If that was the case, the music would be unrecognisable.

6 Flat sounding systems are for those who look for well recorded & mastered music as suppose to those who just enjoy any music.

I enjoy most genres of music, but prefer systems that measure well. No idea why you would assume that you can't enjoy the music on a system that measures well.

So the question now is at what price point would you get a cd player, amp & speakers to measure flat. Can any of these items do flat on the cheap. If they can, then what would be the point of going expensive.

What's the point of buying any luxury item? Better fit and finish, pride of ownership, features, modest performance improvements etc.

Make measurement of the recorded sound in the studio then do the same at home then make a graph & compare. I think you going way out of what was my intended point.

If you enjoying all music on a flat system your basically saying all music is well recorded or in other words you enjoy not very well recorded as well. If everything thing sounds good on your system then it can not be flat sounding, that was my point.

Everything won't sound good on a coloured system either. Simple example - the speakers have a rolled off treble to compensate for bright recordings. That might sound better than a flat system with bright recordings. But play recordings that aren't overly bright and that rolled off treble will start to sound like what it is. In that case the flat system will sound better.

Well it does on mine. I think its all about believability. A system can sound believable yet not measure flat.

 

[Native_bon]

A debate in which no one answer is ever going to be correct due to the massive variation in recording quality. Recording quality variation has kept the hifi industry going more than the hifi industry has.

Very well said.*i-m_so_happy*

 

[Frank Harvey]

David, when was the last time you wrote a review about an album online? Or written a movie review?

This is my hobby, not my job, so I can argue all I want, all day. I don't have a hi-fi store in my nickname.

My "nickname" is as it is to try and get across who I am - I'm sure many will remember...

I don't really get time to write up film or music reviews (I'd rather listen/watch), but I am on various foums where I will post up what I'm listening to, and log what I watch on Letterboxd, with a rating and a few thoughts about it - I also take part in the film thread set up by BBB. I used to recommend and write about various bands/albums on our blog and forum. I'll happily discuss music round these parts, but it rarely seems to happen.

Which leads me to a spin off aspect of what I mentioned - many will take part in threads about systems etc, but very few get involved in discussing the material itself. If people who claim they are fans of films were really fans of films, they'd be discussing movies rather than the equipment. Obviously I will be involved in both.

 

[Ajani]

No this again. Who are audiophiles kidding. You not even remotely close to the original sound.

If that was the case, the music would be unrecognisable.

6 Flat sounding systems are for those who look for well recorded & mastered music as suppose to those who just enjoy any music.

I enjoy most genres of music, but prefer systems that measure well. No idea why you would assume that you can't enjoy the music on a system that measures well.

So the question now is at what price point would you get a cd player, amp & speakers to measure flat. Can any of these items do flat on the cheap. If they can, then what would be the point of going expensive.

What's the point of buying any luxury item? Better fit and finish, pride of ownership, features, modest performance improvements etc.

Make measurement of the recorded sound in the studio then do the same at home then make a graph & compare. I think you going way out of what was my intended point.

If you enjoying all music on a flat system your basically saying all music is well recorded or in other words you enjoy not very well recorded as well. If everything thing sounds good on your system then it can not be flat sounding, that was my point.

Everything won't sound good on a coloured system either. Simple example - the speakers have a rolled off treble to compensate for bright recordings. That might sound better than a flat system with bright recordings. But play recordings that aren't overly bright and that rolled off treble will start to sound like what it is. In that case the flat system will sound better.

Well it does on mine. I think its all about believability. A system can sound believable yet not measure flat.

Sure. A system can sound subjectively pleasing and measure poorly. However, why would you assume that a system that measures well won't sound good or would only sound good on the best quality recordings?

 

[Native_bon]

No this again. Who are audiophiles kidding. You not even remotely close to the original sound.

If that was the case, the music would be unrecognisable.

6 Flat sounding systems are for those who look for well recorded & mastered music as suppose to those who just enjoy any music.

I enjoy most genres of music, but prefer systems that measure well. No idea why you would assume that you can't enjoy the music on a system that measures well.

So the question now is at what price point would you get a cd player, amp & speakers to measure flat. Can any of these items do flat on the cheap. If they can, then what would be the point of going expensive.

What's the point of buying any luxury item? Better fit and finish, pride of ownership, features, modest performance improvements etc.

Make measurement of the recorded sound in the studio then do the same at home then make a graph & compare. I think you going way out of what was my intended point.

If you enjoying all music on a flat system your basically saying all music is well recorded or in other words you enjoy not very well recorded as well. If everything thing sounds good on your system then it can not be flat sounding, that was my point.

Everything won't sound good on a coloured system either. Simple example - the speakers have a rolled off treble to compensate for bright recordings. That might sound better than a flat system with bright recordings. But play recordings that aren't overly bright and that rolled off treble will start to sound like what it is. In that case the flat system will sound better.

Well it does on mine. I think its all about believability. A system can sound believable yet not measure flat.

Sure. A system can sound subjectively pleasing and measure poorly. However, why would you assume that a system that measures well won't sound good or would only sound good on the best quality recordings?

Er, we getting somewere now. If it is really a flat sounding system then it should play back the sound of it is, be it bad or good. I could honestly say there are far more bad recordings out there than good ones.

 

[Ajani]

No this again. Who are audiophiles kidding. You not even remotely close to the original sound.

If that was the case, the music would be unrecognisable.

6 Flat sounding systems are for those who look for well recorded & mastered music as suppose to those who just enjoy any music.

I enjoy most genres of music, but prefer systems that measure well. No idea why you would assume that you can't enjoy the music on a system that measures well.

So the question now is at what price point would you get a cd player, amp & speakers to measure flat. Can any of these items do flat on the cheap. If they can, then what would be the point of going expensive.

What's the point of buying any luxury item? Better fit and finish, pride of ownership, features, modest performance improvements etc.

Make measurement of the recorded sound in the studio then do the same at home then make a graph & compare. I think you going way out of what was my intended point.

If you enjoying all music on a flat system your basically saying all music is well recorded or in other words you enjoy not very well recorded as well. If everything thing sounds good on your system then it can not be flat sounding, that was my point.

Everything won't sound good on a coloured system either. Simple example - the speakers have a rolled off treble to compensate for bright recordings. That might sound better than a flat system with bright recordings. But play recordings that aren't overly bright and that rolled off treble will start to sound like what it is. In that case the flat system will sound better.

Well it does on mine. I think its all about believability. A system can sound believable yet not measure flat.

Sure. A system can sound subjectively pleasing and measure poorly. However, why would you assume that a system that measures well won't sound good or would only sound good on the best quality recordings?

Er, we getting somewere now. If it is really a flat sounding system then it should play back the sound of it is, be it bad or good. I could honestly say there are far more bad recordings out there than good ones.

I prefer to say measures well or accurate, since flat really just refers to frequency response. Anyway, sure an accurate system should sound like the recording. But how would an inaccurate/coloured system make everything sound better? I could possibly see it masking the details of really bad recordings, but it would do the same for good quality recordings as well. So it would make the bad sound less bad, but make the good sound mediocre.

 

[Native_bon]

No this again. Who are audiophiles kidding. You not even remotely close to the original sound.

If that was the case, the music would be unrecognisable.

6 Flat sounding systems are for those who look for well recorded & mastered music as suppose to those who just enjoy any music.

I enjoy most genres of music, but prefer systems that measure well. No idea why you would assume that you can't enjoy the music on a system that measures well.

So the question now is at what price point would you get a cd player, amp & speakers to measure flat. Can any of these items do flat on the cheap. If they can, then what would be the point of going expensive.

What's the point of buying any luxury item? Better fit and finish, pride of ownership, features, modest performance improvements etc.

Make measurement of the recorded sound in the studio then do the same at home then make a graph & compare. I think you going way out of what was my intended point.

If you enjoying all music on a flat system your basically saying all music is well recorded or in other words you enjoy not very well recorded as well. If everything thing sounds good on your system then it can not be flat sounding, that was my point.

Everything won't sound good on a coloured system either. Simple example - the speakers have a rolled off treble to compensate for bright recordings. That might sound better than a flat system with bright recordings. But play recordings that aren't overly bright and that rolled off treble will start to sound like what it is. In that case the flat system will sound better.

Well it does on mine. I think its all about believability. A system can sound believable yet not measure flat.

Sure. A system can sound subjectively pleasing and measure poorly. However, why would you assume that a system that measures well won't sound good or would only sound good on the best quality recordings?

Er, we getting somewere now. If it is really a flat sounding system then it should play back the sound of it is, be it bad or good. I could honestly say there are far more bad recordings out there than good ones.

I prefer to say measures well or accurate, since flat really just refers to frequency response. Anyway, sure an accurate system should sound like the recording. But how would an inaccurate/coloured system make everything sound better? I could possibly see it masking the details of really bad recordings, but it would do the same for good quality recordings as well. So it would make the bad sound less bad, but make the good sound mediocre.

Our senses cannot judge sound accuracy very well except its done through measurement. Hence a believable system may sound better than an accurate one. Pleasing sounding yet very believable. Again Flat is good but the reason why I would not judge a system on just the ability to sound flat is the same reason as before. Too many bad recordings out there.

 

[pyrrhon]

I am bemused by some of the comments. It was shown in the 19th century by Fourier that any waveform is simply the sum of a series of sine waves. The whole of our digital music world is based on this as it underlies how you get a piece of music back from a sampled digital signal - if it wasn't true it wouldn't work! (Google "Fourier Transform" if you want the details.)

So a perfect amplifier and a perfect speaker, ie those with a completely flat frequency response, in a perfect room will perfectly reproduce the recording. There is nothing else guys! If you believe there is something else you might as well believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, which maybe you do.

Chris

I can only smile. Look I'll take time to dig fourier. But you better be right

 

[pyrrhon]

Chis ,

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/sound/timbre.html#c2

Great stuff! Not too technical.

If I'm not mistaken we could do fourier transformations at a time x of a measured wave and expose harmonic. Harmonic determine quality of sound or tone.

Then fourier is my new fairy tale! Now I want some speakers test tools to compare the Harmonic content. We could submit speakers to piano, violon, voice harmonics fourier analysis and see were fourier leads us, can it show some harmonics fidelity?

This might be how we can explain why so many people think some hifi lack something aka sound flat? There could be some harmonic missing.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Amusing....

How many of you are familiar with 'the creative' process?

Thing is it all starts in an individuals head. They hear it, visualise it perfectly, they hear space, timbre instrument placements, harmonies pitch they see/hear it all perfectly

The final result is often filled with compromise or contaminated with the ideas of others.

Which one of those classical guys was deaf?

Wrote his last peaces without actually hearing them....was it Mozart? - anyway he was deaf.

Only one person will know 'what it was supposed to sound like' all the rest of us can do is appreciate the finished product....or not.

 

[matt49]

Which one of those classical guys was deaf?

Wrote his last peaces without actually hearing them....was it Mozart? - anyway he was deaf.

Oh no, here we go again. *help*

 

[tonky]

was a musical genius. He composed within his head. I don't think DACs - flat frequency responses et al bothered him at all. He was THE source.

tonky

 

[Native_bon]

Chis ,

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/sound/timbre.html#c2

Great stuff! Not too technical.

If I'm not mistaken we could do fourier transformations at a time x of a measured wave and expose harmonic. Harmonic determine quality of sound or tone.

Then fourier is my new fairy tale! Now I want some speakers test tools to compare the Harmonic content. We could submit speakers to piano, violon, voice harmonics fourier analysis and see were fourier leads us, can it show some harmonics fidelity?

This might be how we can explain why so many people think some hifi lack something aka sound flat? There could be some harmonic missing.

This is the questions we should be asking. Do we really know how to measure sound in all its totality? Sounds like a good test. If wave forms from the original recording are replicated in our listening enviroment does this mean that is all that really matters?

I think bass accuracy is fundamental to getting the harmonics of voices or instrument to sound real. Ability for frequencies to come in & go out at the right times. If the human ear is involved then it can never be totally trusted. I think we have yet to master how sound behaves in its totality.

 

[Frank Harvey]

Only one person will know 'what it was supposed to sound like' all the rest of us can do is appreciate the finished product....or not.

I'll go with that.

 

[Andrewjvt]

I suppose a very subjective question.  You might say the sound should please you.  But, if you wanted to reproduce the sound that was intended by the artist, how would you know how close you were?  How, for example, would you know if you have too little or too much bass compared to what the artist recorded?  Is there a way to measure what you are playing and compare it against a known standard?

A neutral amp and speakers with a flat curve with no bumps and a room that behaves

?

Does that basically mean that you don't enable any feature on your amp or receiver that would shape the sound and you have all equalization settings for each frequency range set to zero? ?

In these case of my receiver, I would zero out all settings, or I could select Direct or Pure Direct.

Is that what you mean?

My amp has no features. Not even tone controls.

But what i meant is an amp that is neutral ie: does not add or subtact anything or distort.

Speakers that have a flat fq responce also

So that nothing is added or subtracted from the original recording.

I think what you are talking about as in most av recievers you have dsp functions like in yamaha when you can select live, concert hall, stadium, sports etc theae functions change the sound to give the impression of being actually at the venue but these while can be enjoyable to the listener do colour the presentation away from the original.

Hope this helps as i feel this is further from your original question as to how do we know we are hearing the recording as 'close' to how it sounded in the recording studio.

 

[lindsayt]

LT, please look up the two long threads Ajani started few weeks ago. I posted graphs, videos, explained my opinions, repeated myself multiple times.

Clarity? You mean lack of distortion. So it's OK for a speaker to screw up the tonal balance (timbre, balance) completely as long as the bass has lower THD? And imaging and realism is matter of dispersion, also part of FR. There is very little that isn't encompased as part of a FR set of measurements.

I'm saying you get the flat FR right first, then everythig else. That is the only way to come closer to the original sound without having a reference of it. If a speaker isn't neutral there is no point bothering with it further, regardless what other qualities it has. If anything it is a good indication of foul play or sheer ignorance by the speaker designer. If the FR is daft, the sound is no longer faithfull to the original recording and that is the whole point of this high fidelity thing. If I want effects that will fool me into higher immersion or more pleasurable listen, anything goes. In such case if I subjectively like something, then it doesn't matter if it is a Cerwin-Vega!, Zu Audio or Revel they are all equal because there is someone out there who will prefer one over the other.

But if I do, I no longer can walk around and say this speaker is accurate. No, that is the objective aspect with measurements. Now I have to say "I was fooled by this speaker more than I was fooled by that speaker". Then we might change the deffinition of what audiophile is to "People who like to be fooled into believing they are hearing the original recording despite having no reference how it sounds".

Oh wait a minute. That may be the current deffinition actually.

Vladimir, the graph you included in your post is a joke.

1 it's not flat from 20 hz to 20 khz. Not within +/- 1 db

2 we don't know what exactly it's a graph of. It's not labelled as, for example "Speaker X, anechoic 2.83 volts input, averaged across..." It's not clear if that is an actual graph of an actual JBL speaker that we can buy. It's not clear if equalisation was used for that graph.

3. The graph does not come from a reputable independent source.

I don't know why you bothered posting that graph?

I'm still waiting for you to post links to speakers with a flat frequency response from 20 hz to 20 khz +/- 1 db, measured by an independent reputable source.

Yes, I know what you're saying. But I am not obsessed with frequency response charts. Frequency response is merely one of several facets of sound reproduction in an audio system. For sure it has some importance to me. But so do the other important aspects.

Let's take one example. Devialet Phantoms. I've not seen frequency response charts for these yet, but for my ears they sound like they have a pretty flat frequency response chart. And so they should when they are equalised to high heaven. It's quite possible that the Phantoms have a flatter overall response chart than the speakers I compared them against. Trouble is, the Phantoms sounded bad with the test tracks given them. There's no way that the original recording sounded like or was supposed to sound like what came out of the Phantoms.

 

[lindsayt]

I enjoy most genres of music, but prefer systems that measure well. No idea why you would assume that you can't enjoy the music on a system that measures well.

Ajani, can you please tell us what your main system is? As in the best system that you own?

 

[Vladimir]

Vladimir, the graph you included in your post is a joke.

1 it's not flat from 20 hz to 20 khz. Not within +/- 1 db

2 we don't know what exactly it's a graph of. It's not labelled as, for example "Speaker X, anechoic 2.83 volts input, averaged across..." It's not clear if that is an actual graph of an actual JBL speaker that we can buy. It's not clear if equalisation was used for that graph.

3. The graph does not come from a reputable independent source.

I don't know why you bothered posting that graph?

I'm still waiting for you to post links to speakers with a flat frequency response from 20 hz to 20 khz +/- 1 db, measured by an independent reputable source.

Yes, I know what you're saying. But I am not obsessed with frequency response charts. Frequency response is merely one of several facets of sound reproduction in an audio system. For sure it has some importance to me. But so do the other important aspects.

Let's take one example. Devialet Phantoms. I've not seen frequency response charts for these yet, but for my ears they sound like they have a pretty flat frequency response chart. And so they should when they are equalised to high heaven. It's quite possible that the Phantoms have a flatter overall response chart than the speakers I compared them against. Trouble is, the Phantoms sounded bad with the test tracks given them. There's no way that the original recording sounded like or was supposed to sound like what came out of the Phantoms.

Yeah, I knew I shouldn't bother posting anything. 4 decades and milions of dollars in R&D by a reputable university and company all equal as a joke to lindsayt.

Carry on.

 

[chebby]

Which one of those classical guys was deaf?

Wrote his last peaces without actually hearing them....was it Mozart? - anyway he was deaf.

Yes that's right, Vincent Van Beethoven bit Mozart's ears off during a bar fight over a prostitute (then cut his own off in a fit of remorse afterwards).

There is evidence that the prostitute - an impoverished music student called Joanne Bach - actually wrote Mozart's 'last peaces' for him.

 

[lindsayt]

Yeah, I knew I shouldn't bother posting anything. 4 decades and milions of dollars in R&D by a reputable university and company all equal as a joke to lindsayt.

Carry on.

In the context of this thread it's a total joke.

Look at the area from 20 hz to 80 hz. It's not flat. Not to the +/- 1 db that you claimed.

Look at the lack of labelling from the website you pulled the graph from. It doesn't explicitly say what that graph is actually showing. Could that be, because if they claimed it was of their speakers and a publication like Stereophile reviewed those speakers, JBL - Harman could be made to look very silly when Stereophile came up with a different chart?

This wouldn't be the first time in the history of hi-fi that a company has made a misleading claim for marketing purposes. Which is why any specification produced by the manufacturer only should be treated as a provisional specification. It may be true or it may be misleading.

Vladimir, you haven't addressed the 3 major points that I made in my previous post. You've instead made an irrelevant statement about JBL's R&D time and money.

The amount of time and money that JBL - Harman have spent on R&D is irrelevant. Think about it. How could JBL - Harman come up with a speaker with as flat a frequency response as the one shown, from 80 hz to 20 khz from a 2 way design when no other company has been able to get anywhere near as close - without equalisation?

 

[Vladimir]

I never put the criteria of 20Hz to 20kHz, you simply presumed it. Look up my posts. I'm not insane to ask speaker manufacturers to have -+1dB 20Hz-20kHz as a required feature. That is something for the high end and top pro equipment. All that is needed is for hi-fi to be aspirational within budget limitations. Make 80% of the range flat, that is a wonderfull start for an affordable speaker. 6dB margin of error at all frequencies is just taking a pi$$er. Even more with a $3000 speaker like this Zu Druid.

And that graph in my previous post (not smoothet out, it's an active speaker) was to illustrate that there is more to FR than just on-axis measurments, but those that truly want to learn should look the two similar threads by Ajani (click on his profile and look them up). I posted all material there.

As for this thread I'm done with lindsayt's primary school debate club shenanigans.

 

[Ajani]

I enjoy most genres of music, but prefer systems that measure well. No idea why you would assume that you can't enjoy the music on a system that measures well.

Ajani, can you please tell us what your main system is? As in the best system that you own?

Why? So you can insult it/me? No thanks, I'll pass.

 

[Jeff]

I suppose a very subjective question. You might say the sound should please you. But, if you wanted to reproduce the sound that was intended by the artist, how would you know how close you were? How, for example, would you know if you have too little or too much bass compared to what the artist recorded? Is there a way to measure what you are playing and compare it against a known standard?

A neutral amp and speakers with a flat curve with no bumps and a room that behaves

Does that basically mean that you don't enable any feature on your amp or receiver that would shape the sound and you have all equalization settings for each frequency range set to zero?

In these case of my receiver, I would zero out all settings, or I could select Direct or Pure Direct.

Is that what you mean?

My amp has no features. Not even tone controls.

But what i meant is an amp that is neutral ie: does not add or subtact anything or distort.

Speakers that have a flat fq responce also

So that nothing is added or subtracted from the original recording.

I think what you are talking about as in most av recievers you have dsp functions like in yamaha when you can select live, concert hall, stadium, sports etc theae functions change the sound to give the impression of being actually at the venue but these while can be enjoyable to the listener do colour the presentation away from the original.

Hope this helps as i feel this is further from your original question as to how do we know we are hearing the recording as 'close' to how it sounded in the recording studio.

Disabling the MultEQ XT, Dynamic EQ, and all of the other various features in my receiver is the closest I can come to that.

I don't really know how flat my receiver is. But let's say that it adds a little at some frequencies ands subtracts a little at other frequencies. Let's also say that my speakers add a little at some frequencies and subtracts a little at other frequencies. I doubt that my room doesn't add or subtract at some frequencies, and at different volumes. Now you have errors in more than one place that either offset or compound upon one another. Is it possible to apply electronic equalization that would work equally well for any music or movie you throw at it or would you be having to constantly apply equalization adjustments for different music or movies?