2. speakers
  3. 1240748267

"Frightening" or "Relaxing" sound quality?

What do I mean by that?
Not that I wish to start a new controversy --- knowing some of the usual contributors, it may not be entirely avoidable, so let’s see what gives.

Following some of the threads on the –ultimate- ‘phase-coherent’, 'time-coherent' or yet better, both, 1st order up to steep slopes, an so on, cross-over opinions, I have these notions. So let me explain.

One quite well known ‘maverick’ (done some picking on some other well known reviewer, posting it on his site...), somewhere he states: a good speaker must have the ability 'to frighten you' --- his words, and I can see/hear what he means, at least I think so.

Some other dealer in Wilson’s marvellous products (he's around my place), tells me he can only listen for about ½ hour than he is 'exhausted' --- i.e. too intense to do any longer listening…

Nobody is talking about ‘listening fatigue’ actually, it is more an emotional fatigue, as far as I get it.

Now me, I go to a life orchestra listening and emerge pretty well ‘up-lifted’, never had any fatigue (maybe my bottom, when it got a bit too lengthy) never mind emotional fatigue! Gimme Mahler, Stravinsky, Mussorgsky, heavy (classical) metal, whow --- upliftment. Never occur to me run away, get uneasy, GET FRIGHTENED!

I clearly get ‘emotional fatigue’ listening to some types of speakers!
What were they?
I think they had one thing in common: They all where, in some way, VERY realistic, but they also had something else in common, --- they did not, as it seems, stick too well to a reasonably flat amplitude response… ah ha.

What this design regimen seems to produce during listening to keep on making you jump? Apparently always something rather unexpected in happening! Now we do also know what makes us (as humans) ‘jump’: it is some unexpected ‘something’ coming ‘out of the bush’ a snapping branch, some sort of VERY REAL sound, that does not quite go along with the general set of the acoustic environment.

Now take some ‘benign, dumb’ kind of speaker, it has so little in REALISTIC sound to offer, it just can’t frighten you. You (your instinct, subconscious) just don’t ‘buy’ into it.
Now take a VERY realistic sound-producer (the ones that can make you jump) and mess with the amplitude response, what you are getting is this on the edge of your seat reaction. The VERY opposite of what a lot of music has as its intention. (Not like AV ‘Apocalypse now’ kind of chopper going to attack you from any old angle, top, behind, etc.)

Lastly, has this something to do with why lots of folks perhaps shy away from these sort of designs?
I have listened to my share and I shy away, because as REAL everything seems to be in the reproduction, it keeps me in a state of inner tension, apprehension --- even listening to some Mozart Chamber music, as there is ALWAYS something very REAL, but somehow unsettling going on.

It might just explain why some of these designs don’t ‘cut the mustard’ and not survive in the long run. Unless, and open to opinion, that we are (most of us anyway) so messed up and transistor-radio-sound-corrupted that we seem ‘unworthy of these ‘superior’ audio-designs.
I honestly don’t think so, but you may have it otherwise, as they say YMMV.

I thought it is of value to bring this up, since it does not ever seem to be part of any of the more ‘technical’ discussions ---- the human ‘fright/flight’ element in ignoring proper FLAT amplitude response in favour of minimal insertion losses, or proper impedance compensation, notch filtering, et al, just so to obtain this form of stressful realism.

It might be also something to do with age, a much younger listener (in my experience) likes to be stirred up, and emotionally knocked all over the place ---- listening to Baroque music like bungee jumping?!
Maybe.
It be interesting to hear if it is just my form of ‘over-sensitiveness’ that brings forth this subject.
Best,
Axel
axelwahl

Showing 3 responses by dan_ed

dan_ed
2,451 posts
 
You put it right there: IF! --- they are indeed in the recording.
I concede they ARE NOT, and are made-up by an amplitude response issue.

Now I do not understand you either. Do you mean that the details you heard on these unnamed speakers weren't really in the recording? Or, are you saying that the details I hear in my own system are not really in the recording?

If it is the former I don't see how we can discuss what you heard because I didn't hear what you refer to.

If it is the latter then I'm afraid you have no basis for such a statement since you haven't heard my system.
dan_ed
2,451 posts
 
Ah, ok. I see what you were up to and why you couldn't just come out and explain it. That would have tainted your experiment.

Hi IQ or not, the guy sounds like a total whack job. ;-)
dan_ed
2,451 posts
 
I was going to post some thoughts but Atmosphere beat me to the point I was going to try to make. If I understand the theme of this topic this is something that I refer to as the "startle factor". To me this doesn't just refer to amplitude peaks but also full harmonics, speed of the dynamics, and correct timbres. These are the details of the music that I want my system/speakers to render IF they are indeed in the recording.

Axelwahl, I fear you are close to committing the same sin as many others. You are simply imparting your own preferences to what you heard from a certain pair, or pairs, of speakers. We all do it and then argue over what sounds the most "real". What you hear as frightening may make the next guy giggle with delight.

Another thing I was thinking while reading your comments on flat response is which response are you referring to? The anechoic figures published by speaker manufacturers or the in room response?

More to discover