The biggest secret has been revealed?!

Here is a piece of basswood (pronounced like the fish) under the edge of my preamp. It reduces the bass a bit and tightens it up. This is changing the vibration of the equipment similar to the way Shunyata dampens the panels of the Denali. The bass wood lessens the bass a bit and gives a bit more highs. Damping the panels increases the bass a bit and smooths the highs. There is not a right way or wrong way, it always depends on what the listener wants and/or needs.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20210224_141944748_HDR.jpg
    IMG_20210224_141944748_HDR.jpg
    52.9 KB · Views: 64
TheOctopus said:
Current world record is 113dB singing and 121dB shouting/yelling. Both females. The human voice has a frequency range from 85Hz to nearly 5KHz. So from the softest whisper that can be heard just above the noise floor of the room to potential 121dB. Can your recordings and system match that?
Click to expand...

Great deflection, but that’s not what we were talking about. You just switched gears from someone speaking in a monotone voice and claiming a monotone voice which by definition has zero DR has more DR than 1,000 songs. Now you are talking about how dynamic the human voice can be. Pick your argument and stick to it.
 
mep said:
Great deflection, but that’s not what we were talking about. You just switched gears from someone speaking in a monotone voice and claiming a monotone voice which by definition has zero DR has more DR than 1,000 songs. Now you are talking about how dynamic the human voice can be. Pick your argument and stick to it.
Click to expand...

You lost me there. Monotone voice has zero dynamic range? I just pulled my iPhone out of my pocket and used an SPL app on my monotone voice. With 39dB of registered ambient noise floor of my room, I can easily go up to 102dB with my voice without straining my vocal cords. That’s over 60dB of dynamic range.

Our best recordings, which have little to do with theoretical and anecdotal max dynamic range of say 77dB for analog master tape are typically in the teens for dynamic range. Rarely are they over even 20dB.
 
TheOctopus said:
You lost me there. Monotone voice has zero dynamic range? I just pulled my iPhone out of my pocket and used an SPL app on my monotone voice. With 39dB of registered ambient noise floor of my room, I can easily go up to 102dB with my voice without straining my vocal cords. That’s over 60dB of dynamic range.

Our best recordings, which have little to do with theoretical and anecdotal max dynamic range of say 77dB for analog master tape are typically in the teens for dynamic range. Rarely are they over even 20dB.
Click to expand...

Serge- You are confusing loudness with DR. Of course you can speak at a whisper or you can scream. If you are speaking in a monotone voice, by definition you aren’t changing the DR of your voice.
 
stereogeek said:
Here is a piece of basswood (pronounced like the fish) under the edge of my preamp. It reduces the bass a bit and tightens it up. This is changing the vibration of the equipment similar to the way Shunyata dampens the panels of the Denali. The bass wood lessens the bass a bit and gives a bit more highs. Damping the panels increases the bass a bit and smooths the highs. There is not a right way or wrong way, it always depends on what the listener wants and/or needs.
Click to expand...
Nice preamp!

Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk
 
mep said:
Serge- You are confusing loudness with DR. Of course you can speak at a whisper or you can scream. If you are speaking in a monotone voice, by definition you aren’t changing the DR of your voice.
Click to expand...

In that sense yes. I understand what you meant by “monotone” now. A continuous sound without changing pitch. But neither the conversations, nor music are typically monotone.

A dynamic range comparison of all genres calculated as the difference between the 99th and 30th percentile. According to this analysis, speech is generally largest in dynamic range in all frequency bands followed by the classical genres, jazz, and the modern genres. Speech is only locally surpassed by chamber music in the lowest two frequency bands ([110 Hz to 140 Hz]; [140 Hz to 177 Hz]) and by orchestra and opera in the lowest band.

If you are interested in the article, that I referenced from above, here it is. SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research
 
TheGemState said:
Nice preamp!
Click to expand...

And CD player! ;)

TheOctopus said:
…Samples from modern genres such as pop, rap, rock, and schlager generally had the smallest dynamic range, followed by samples from jazz and classical genres such as chamber, choir, orchestra, piano, and opera.
Click to expand...

Undeniable that especially in rock and roll there is a lot of misery in the recordings.

Stehno said:
Good point. But have you considered the possibility that the audible impact of unchanging distortions (think a playback system's much raised electronics-induced noise floor) become more easily apparent with greater dynamic / complex passages? The very same reason many cannot listen to their system near or at live performance volume levels?
BTW, I'd like to discuss what you've got going on with your cabling. Could you pm me or at least point me to your most detailed posts about the subject? Thanks,
Click to expand...

Yes, I thought so. It is natural that a good system exposes the worst recordings and highlights the good ones. But, in my opinion (but there´s not a final opinion i must confess) there is a lot of this discrimination that is done for lack of some fine-tuning in the system.
I'll tell you another story. After the honeymoon ended with my Sonus Faber Grand Piano Home (3 to 4 months after purchase – year 2001), I started to realize that many (too many) records were spinning on the shelf because they are now impossible to hear. The sound became compressed, and when I tried to pull up the volume it got a little worse.
I then had a Copland csa28 amplifier, a hybrid with a wonderful sound, as long as i didn't pull too hard for it.
I went to the dealer and complained about the compression. Immediately he connected some speakers like mine, but with Krell amplification and Nordost cables (*). In fact, the lack of signs of compression led the seller to say, "this is what you need to get them to sing". Right, when it comes to dynamics and decompression, but I didn't want that aggressive and dry sound. But I realized that the problem was not with the speakers.
I quickly went looking for another amplification and exchanged the Copland for a Classé Cap Cap 150 that came to give me some of the dynamics and openness I was looking for. And so on and so on.
And from trial and error in fine-tuning, I was convinced that even a revealing system has to reveal the bad recording but it must play it, even at high volumes (**).

I leave an example of a bad recording. Sounds almost all at the same level, strange timbres (unrecognizable drums), blurry sound without texture. But still, play!

Death Magnetic.mp4 on Vimeo

(*) cables can be responsible for compression. It is not by chance that there is a multitude of audiophiles that bet on low capacitive ones (thin diameter) and distance between the condutors as a way to escape this negative effect (Nordost; Tellurium, etc)
By the way, talking about cables, do you want me to reveal my biggest secret? :D :D
Okay. Just give me a time to do the description

(**) Yes, many use the volume too carefully
 
TheOctopus said:
In that sense yes. I understand what you meant by “monotone” now. A continuous sound without changing pitch. But neither the conversations, nor music are typically monotone.

A dynamic range comparison of all genres calculated as the difference between the 99th and 30th percentile. According to this analysis, speech is generally largest in dynamic range in all frequency bands followed by the classical genres, jazz, and the modern genres. Speech is only locally surpassed by chamber music in the lowest two frequency bands ([110 Hz to 140 Hz]; [140 Hz to 177 Hz]) and by orchestra and opera in the lowest band.

If you are interested in the article, that I referenced from above, here it is. SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research
Click to expand...

Someone speaking in a normal volume in a conversation is never going to come close to the DR of well recorded music. It’s a loser argument for you. You need to try something else.
 
mep said:
Someone speaking in a normal volume in a conversation is never going to come close to the DR of well recorded music. It’s a loser argument for you. You need to try something else.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are trying to prove really but I take it you are the type that needs to feel like you have outwitted and outsmarted your opponent? Well, let's go then.

The dynamic range of music as normally perceived in a concert hall does not exceed 80 dB, and human speech is normally perceived over a range of about 40 dB. FACT. Dynamic range - Wikipedia.


Your turn. Now the burden of proof is on you. Let's see some actual examples of recordings of dynamic range greater than 40dB....
 
TheOctopus said:
Not sure what you are trying to prove really but I take it you are the type that needs to feel like you have outwitted and outsmarted your opponent? Well, let's go then.

The dynamic range of music as normally perceived in a concert hall does not exceed 80 dB, and human speech is normally perceived over a range of about 40 dB. FACT. Dynamic range - Wikipedia.


Your turn. Now the burden of proof is on you. Let's see some actual examples of recordings of dynamic range greater than 40dB....
Click to expand...

Really? We have no recordings that exceed 40 dB of dynamic range???? I need to prove that to you??
 
There is a new standard by the way for measuring loudness in audio. LUFS

LUFS are the new way to measure loudness in audio.

This new measurement scale is an important development for many issues in music production.



But understanding LUFS can be pretty difficult at first. They’re different from the ways you’re probably used to measuring your signals.

Even so, these new units are being used all over the audio world. It’s important to know how they work to understand the role of loudness in audio production.

In this article I’ll go over everything you need to know about LUFS. What are LUFS? Loudness Metering Explained | LANDR Blog
 
Spock said:
And CD player! ;)



Undeniable that especially in rock and roll there is a lot of misery in the recordings.



Yes, I thought so. It is natural that a good system exposes the worst recordings and highlights the good ones. But, in my opinion (but there´s not a final opinion i must confess) there is a lot of this discrimination that is done for lack of some fine-tuning in the system.
I'll tell you another story. After the honeymoon ended with my Sonus Faber Grand Piano Home (3 to 4 months after purchase – year 2001), I started to realize that many (too many) records were spinning on the shelf because they are now impossible to hear. The sound became compressed, and when I tried to pull up the volume it got a little worse.
I then had a Copland csa28 amplifier, a hybrid with a wonderful sound, as long as i didn't pull too hard for it.
I went to the dealer and complained about the compression. Immediately he connected some speakers like mine, but with Krell amplification and Nordost cables (*). In fact, the lack of signs of compression led the seller to say, "this is what you need to get them to sing". Right, when it comes to dynamics and decompression, but I didn't want that aggressive and dry sound. But I realized that the problem was not with the speakers.
I quickly went looking for another amplification and exchanged the Copland for a Classé Cap Cap 150 that came to give me some of the dynamics and openness I was looking for. And so on and so on.
And from trial and error in fine-tuning, I was convinced that even a revealing system has to reveal the bad recording but it must play it, even at high volumes (**).

I leave an example of a bad recording. Sounds almost all at the same level, strange timbres (unrecognizable drums), blurry sound without texture. But still, play!

Death Magnetic.mp4 on Vimeo

(*) cables can be responsible for compression. It is not by chance that there is a multitude of audiophiles that bet on low capacitive ones (thin diameter) and distance between the condutors as a way to escape this negative effect (Nordost; Tellurium, etc)
By the way, talking about cables, do you want me to reveal my biggest secret? :D :D
Okay. Just give me a time to do the description

(**) Yes, many use the volume too carefully
Click to expand...

Why sure. I'd appreciate your revealing your biggest secret. So long as it's related to things audio. :)
 
TheOctopus said:
There is a new standard by the way for measuring loudness in audio. LUFS

LUFS are the new way to measure loudness in audio.

This new measurement scale is an important development for many issues in music production.



But understanding LUFS can be pretty difficult at first. They’re different from the ways you’re probably used to measuring your signals.

Even so, these new units are being used all over the audio world. It’s important to know how they work to understand the role of loudness in audio production.

In this article I’ll go over everything you need to know about LUFS. What are LUFS? Loudness Metering Explained | LANDR Blog
Click to expand...

You should have put quotes around your post because you lifted every word directly from the link you posted. Measuring loudness levels in a new way is not tied to the discussion you were trying to create about dynamic range. You are still confusing loudness levels with dynamic range. Anyone who posts that someone speaking in a monotone voice has more dynamic range than jazz recordings has zero credibility on this topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top