Doug Kanter wrote:
"Jim," wrote in message
...

Doug Kanter wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...


On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:05:41 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ snippage ~~



But, I disagree about one thing: You can come closer to theoretical
perfection with the bass frequencies than you can with higher
frequencies.

Ok, why?

Later,

Tom


I'll get back to you in a little while on this. My phones are ringing.
Damned customers don't understand that they're getting in the way of our
discussion here. :-)

Poster for your shop

http://www.despair.com/ap24x30prin.html


So that's the problem! I treating them too well! :-)



Brouse the bunch -- here's one that should fit several GOP posyrtd here

http://www.despair.com/flattery.html

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:05:41 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

But, I disagree about one thing: You can come closer to theoretical
perfection with the bass frequencies than you can with higher frequencies.

Ok, why?

Later,

Tom

OK, here we go. Think of the following bass-capable instruments playing a
series of notes ranging from 40 cycles (open E on an electric bass) to 80
cycles: Electric bass, upright bass, pipe organ, grand piano. Subtract two
things from all these notes: The harmonics native to each instrument, and
the attack (how the string instruments are plucked, how the keys are struck,
which pedals, if any are in use). What you PRETTY MUCH have left is the
purest bass tones you can expect to be aware of in music, but not as pure as
a tone generator, which is irrelevant anyway because nobody listens to
those. Even synthesizers have SOME sort of color added to them when played.
OK...maybe Keith Emerson was an exception.

With those remaining tones, you can work on a speaker's design until you've
PRETTY MUCH eliminated any serious hot spots or dead spots in the speaker's
response, short of those created by specifics of the instruments or their
users. Without the harmonic overtones, which exist in the mid to high
frequencies, the listener notices nothing objectionable if the speaker is
correctly designed, just as the listener doesn't notice much directionality
in bass notes if the higher frequencies are filtered out.

Now, add whatever speakers you choose for reproducing the harmonics and the
attack, along with higher instruments and human voices. Do a lousy job with
this aspect and you introduce what is MORE noticeable to the human ear:
Maybe you add too much mid range, so the higher notes on a bass guitar end
up sounding too fat and boomy. Or, you add lousy tweeters and the harmonics
of the piano give you a headache. Keep in mind that you've added dubious
features to a speaker that was designed to sound perfect at 80 cycles and
below.

The problem with the mid & high frequencies is that at least for home
speakers, the designers have to take into consideration things like
separation, which leads to a million different competing approaches. Some
designers believe skinny speakers enclosers work best, so the tweeters'
output doesn't bounce off too big a flat area. Look at KEF 207s, for
instance:
http://www.kef.com/kefamerica/produc...207_image.html

Their pitch is that they wanted the high frequencies to emanate from a shape
most similar to a human head, or the openings of instruments like saxophones
& flutes. Doesn't quite match the soundboards of acoustic guitars, violins &
cellos, though, does it? Whattya gonna do, though? Unless you design a
speaker to reproduce just one instrument, everything is a compromise.

Add electric instruments to this question and you have a complete mess.
Because every player has a preference with regard to amplifiers, any home
speaker design has an ice cube's chance in hell of being physically shaped
like whatever amp Clapton might've played at one concert vs another. Was the
album made by miking the amp for some of its effects,and mising that with a
direct feed to the recorder for the rest? Who knows? Did he play a big, wide
Marshall amp for one gig, and a much smaller box at another? At least with
non-electric instruments, they're all the same size & shape. A viola is a
viola.

Visit real audio stores, listen to a dozen decent-to-excellent speakers, and
unless the listening room is phuqued up, you'll usually find you're OK with
the bass reproduction. It's the higher frequencies that'll have you
switching demo disks a million times, trying to decide whether you like the
one that reproduces female voice the best, or the one that best handles
flutes, high piano notes, guitar, mandolin.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:57:52 GMT, "Jim," wrote:

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:05:41 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ snippage ~~


But, I disagree about one thing: You can come closer to theoretical
perfection with the bass frequencies than you can with higher frequencies.

Ok, why?

I'll get back to you in a little while on this. My phones are ringing.
Damned customers don't understand that they're getting in the way of our
discussion here. :-)

Poster for your shop

http://www.despair.com/ap24x30prin.html

Before Ma Bell was broken up, my neighbor who worked for Ma Bell had a
bumper sticker on his car - "We don't care - we don't have to".

The funny thing is, when you drove by the Bell System office in
Worcester, 3/4 of the cars had that exact same bumper sticker.

Later,

Tom

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:25:45 GMT, "Jim," wrote:

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Jim," wrote in message
...

Doug Kanter wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
m...


On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:05:41 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ snippage ~~



But, I disagree about one thing: You can come closer to theoretical
perfection with the bass frequencies than you can with higher
frequencies.

Ok, why?

Later,

Tom


I'll get back to you in a little while on this. My phones are ringing.
Damned customers don't understand that they're getting in the way of our
discussion here. :-)

Poster for your shop

http://www.despair.com/ap24x30prin.html


So that's the problem! I treating them too well! :-)



Brouse the bunch -- here's one that should fit several GOP posyrtd here

http://www.despair.com/flattery.html

You've never been to a Democrat convention have you?

Later,

Tom

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:01:22 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ very interesting tech note snipped ~~

Visit real audio stores, listen to a dozen decent-to-excellent speakers, and
unless the listening room is phuqued up, you'll usually find you're OK with
the bass reproduction. It's the higher frequencies that'll have you
switching demo disks a million times, trying to decide whether you like the
one that reproduces female voice the best, or the one that best handles
flutes, high piano notes, guitar, mandolin.

Actually, you'd hit on a rather hot button issue for me.

I'm not big on faithfully reproducing bass level sound. Bass level
sound is just percussion really even if produced on a string. All the
subtle and nuance is in music is not produced at low frequencies but
rather at the mid to low high frequencies.

You and I agree that it is much easier to faithfully reproduce low
frequency sound - I just don't like it.

Later,

Tom

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:01:22 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ very interesting tech note snipped ~~

Visit real audio stores, listen to a dozen decent-to-excellent speakers,
and
unless the listening room is phuqued up, you'll usually find you're OK
with
the bass reproduction. It's the higher frequencies that'll have you
switching demo disks a million times, trying to decide whether you like
the
one that reproduces female voice the best, or the one that best handles
flutes, high piano notes, guitar, mandolin.

Actually, you'd hit on a rather hot button issue for me.

I'm not big on faithfully reproducing bass level sound. Bass level
sound is just percussion really even if produced on a string. All the
subtle and nuance is in music is not produced at low frequencies but
rather at the mid to low high frequencies.

You and I agree that it is much easier to faithfully reproduce low
frequency sound - I just don't like it.

Later,

Tom

Tom....you've gone mad. Have you ever listened to the bass work of Phil Lesh
or Jack Casady on a REAL stereo, with no other noise going on in the house?
20-odd years ago, these guys and their bands financed a little company
called Alembic, specifically to give them instruments which sounded as
crystal-clear as pianos. Amazing, and PLENTY of mid range.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 20:47:20 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:01:22 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ very interesting tech note snipped ~~

Visit real audio stores, listen to a dozen decent-to-excellent speakers,
and
unless the listening room is phuqued up, you'll usually find you're OK
with
the bass reproduction. It's the higher frequencies that'll have you
switching demo disks a million times, trying to decide whether you like
the
one that reproduces female voice the best, or the one that best handles
flutes, high piano notes, guitar, mandolin.

Actually, you'd hit on a rather hot button issue for me.

I'm not big on faithfully reproducing bass level sound. Bass level
sound is just percussion really even if produced on a string. All the
subtle and nuance is in music is not produced at low frequencies but
rather at the mid to low high frequencies.

You and I agree that it is much easier to faithfully reproduce low
frequency sound - I just don't like it.

Tom....you've gone mad.

Why yes - yes I have.

Thank you for noticing.


Have you ever listened to the bass work of Phil Lesh or Jack Casady on
a REAL stereo, with no other noise going on in the house?

Of course I have. Of course, then I don't have a "real" stereo what
with the bi-amped Mac 50's to Bozak Concert Grands passed through a
PAT-4 pre-amp - I suppose I should improve my stereo somewhat.

20-odd years ago, these guys and their bands financed a little company
called Alembic, specifically to give them instruments which sounded as
crystal-clear as pianos. Amazing, and PLENTY of mid range.

Can't change my opinion - nope, can't. Uh - uh - never. :)

Later,

Tom

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 20:47:20 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:01:22 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ very interesting tech note snipped ~~

Visit real audio stores, listen to a dozen decent-to-excellent speakers,
and
unless the listening room is phuqued up, you'll usually find you're OK
with
the bass reproduction. It's the higher frequencies that'll have you
switching demo disks a million times, trying to decide whether you like
the
one that reproduces female voice the best, or the one that best handles
flutes, high piano notes, guitar, mandolin.

Actually, you'd hit on a rather hot button issue for me.

I'm not big on faithfully reproducing bass level sound. Bass level
sound is just percussion really even if produced on a string. All the
subtle and nuance is in music is not produced at low frequencies but
rather at the mid to low high frequencies.

You and I agree that it is much easier to faithfully reproduce low
frequency sound - I just don't like it.

Tom....you've gone mad.

Why yes - yes I have.

Thank you for noticing.

****. Sorry...now everybody knows. :-)



Have you ever listened to the bass work of Phil Lesh or Jack Casady on
a REAL stereo, with no other noise going on in the house?

Of course I have. Of course, then I don't have a "real" stereo what
with the bi-amped Mac 50's to Bozak Concert Grands passed through a
PAT-4 pre-amp - I suppose I should improve my stereo somewhat.

Well, that's what I meant!


20-odd years ago, these guys and their bands financed a little company
called Alembic, specifically to give them instruments which sounded as
crystal-clear as pianos. Amazing, and PLENTY of mid range.

Can't change my opinion - nope, can't. Uh - uh - never. :)

Later,

Tom

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:01:22 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ very interesting tech note snipped ~~


Visit real audio stores, listen to a dozen decent-to-excellent speakers, and
unless the listening room is phuqued up, you'll usually find you're OK with
the bass reproduction. It's the higher frequencies that'll have you
switching demo disks a million times, trying to decide whether you like the
one that reproduces female voice the best, or the one that best handles
flutes, high piano notes, guitar, mandolin.


Actually, you'd hit on a rather hot button issue for me.

I'm not big on faithfully reproducing bass level sound. Bass level
sound is just percussion really even if produced on a string. All the
subtle and nuance is in music is not produced at low frequencies but
rather at the mid to low high frequencies.

You and I agree that it is much easier to faithfully reproduce low
frequency sound - I just don't like it.

Later,

Tom

Suggest you catch this months Playboy Adviser. Supposedly the Clitoris
of a 150 pound female will respond to 33 cycles -- as the weight goes
up, so does the frequency.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

Ahem - cough, cough... :)

The science is only a guide. Sound, and fidelity which is a concept
that seems to have escaped into the ether these days, is entirely
subjective. Being subjective, what may sound good to you will not
sound good to me.

I take your point but you go too far in that it's not "entirely
subjective". 20% distortion will sound less accurate than .01%. As an
electric guitar player I understand that some kinds of distortion are
more pleasing than others in sound creation but you weren't discussing
violins or guitar amps. In sound reproduction accuracy is the goal.
Todays instruments can measure the audible spectrum well beyond what
human ears can discern in amplitude, frequency, or phase.

-rick-