Nothing will be changed... (BD-Design)

by PeterSt. , Netherlands, Wednesday, March 07, 2007, 15:48 (6270 days ago) @ Bert

Hi Bert,

I am not offended, I have an easy cure if that might happen. Did you ever
get banned?

I'm often close to it.

If the harmonically low bass frequency is audible reduced and the sense of
feeling is still the same then the signal is cleaner or stripped from its
harmonics, the bass becomes less "rich"...

Thank you Bert. This might be a good explanation to keep in mind at further investigating. It wouldn't cope with what;s audible in the higher regions.
Note : But things may be mutually exclusive. My scratched "reasoning" started to have parts of that, hence things extrapolated from the higher regions to the lower, don't seem to be consistent (not for my reasoning, and not for what we hear). So at this point I rather stop with babbling, and instead workout things first.

Otoh, there is too many similarities for the matter of energy and separation.
The whole thing just becomes additionally interesting when we see that a room so-called adds low frequency (what this topic indirectly still is about); Unless under very specialized and controlled conditions like in a horn speaker, this can be about anomalies only.
When I am right at this, we should be glad that a situation only starts (I'm sure of that) to emerge where we just can get rid of those anomalies, and let the waves emerge from the controlled environment instead (out case : the BD15 with cabinet including horn). Your own very good example : do you hear the body coming from the woman her voice at mounting the horn. Well, as you know, when the cabinet is outside, there wouldn't be body whatsoever, so the room does it to you. Uncontrolled ...

Everyone is entitled to disagree, but the less bass I hear at tweaking everywhere but speakers (with the amp as a dangerous option), the more glad I am. Note this is relative to any before situation. I wouldn't like to be without bass obviously !
So far, it never happened that better overal "quality" of sound, didn't come together with less bass.
Stupid theory in my mind is also : when the standing waves have really really gone, them disappearing by means of better quality, there must be a next step, we just couldn't predict. I say (without proof yet) this is it. The bass is going to behave more anechoic with a theoretical infinity of improving, because the walls are there and they remain; the reflections will be less and less pronounced though. The theoretical goal to achieve, is how the speaker behaves in open air, but small problem, it was made for in-room behaviour, counting in room reflections, or my micro collisions coming from that.

When -as you suggest- harmonics are disappearing, or maybe worst : when fundamentals are disappearing and the harmonics remain, this is obviously not good. However, the upper regions prove just the opposite : a whole new worlds of harmonics emerged. Strangely enough, they emerge in mid air and you can pinpoint them (like the "buzzing" of a nylon string). They ARE right, because I kow a guitar. But *I* personally never heard such a thing from speakers and it doesn't even need an Orphean to do it !
Okay ... going offtopic again. Sorry. But I just so much wish to prove that from the one thing we can hear/judge, can be derived that the other thing which is so much more difficult to hear and judge (bass) behaves the same.

This is not about subjtectiveness, this is about "what is good and what is not".
Is in-room response good for a subwoofer ? Yes, it is good for adding low frequencies it in fact does not produce.
No, that same phenomenon is not good for a clear sound. It is about fuzzyness we can't use for music playback. More low and more fuzzy. Both definitly come together.
When this is true, the other way around counts just the same.

The only thing which is required to see that it really can happen that a speaker gets better anechoic behaviour in a room, is the belief that better reproduced sound can take away the standing waves for starters. I think this has been proven enough. Now start to believe in the next step, just in case that is true too. This might mean, try to hear unwanted harmonics in the bad case, instead of missing "good ones" in the good case.

You are assuming that the response of the bass is rolling of too soon, are
you sure? Did you measure this in your room? Which frequencies are we
supposed to feel instead of hearing?

You are waaay too fast. I assumed exactly nothing. I try to find arguments for what we hear, assuming what we hear is right. This is dangerous, because if half of us assume that what we hear is wrong, we'd have to define "wrong".

As you know, my feeling about your present tuned subwoofers is still the
same. Generating more "noise" than they should...

In theory agreed. A bit of a pitty that it counteracts 100% to what we hear, and that subwoofers producing more energy do not produce lower bassy sound. That is the whole point I guess; it works out kind of opposite.
But I know your thoughts about subwoofers, and obviously I agree at them being too slow -in theory- to follow fast transients.
[scratched away again]

Huh? When did I complain about that? 30Hz is way down deep enough for me!

No no, we are mixing subjects here. You complaint is in the area of richness, as you just told. Has othing to do with Hzes. It looks like, however, that there's less richness at the low end, which can easily be translated into frequency. I did that, and is probably not right, out of some context or something else I am not aware of.

Yes, but it does not help much to theorize too much about specific things
if the rest isn't more clear, if you ask me that is... :wink:

Too much is too much indeed. Theorizing might be different from reasoning though. From that follows theory, and from that might follow scientific proof. Next thing is apply it.

Your main mistake is selling me those speakers. :kiss:

Peter

Tags:
0