@bahston - why not both? Artwork can be quite a different experience with some o' that tea, just like music is! But who is Jim Ignatowski?
Sonic correlations with art in the listening space
I’ve been doing some serious listening room optimization lately and wanted to share some findings that I think will genuinely move the needle for people.
I started with a Van Gogh Starry Night print on the front wall. The effect was immediately apparent — the soundstage became more active and forward, treble took on an aggressive, almost agitated quality, and there was a swirling, turbulent energy in the upper midrange that I can only describe as "post-impressionistic." Bass was present but restless. Not unpleasant, but fatiguing over long sessions.
I swapped in a Monet Water Lilies — same frame, same wall position, same listening chair. The transformation was remarkable. Highs rolled off beautifully, the whole presentation became more diffuse and liquid, with a kind of shimmering quality in the upper frequencies that never hardened. Soundstage depth increased noticeably. Jazz and classical particularly benefited. Vocals floated with an almost pond-like serenity.
I’m currently experimenting with a Rothko — early results suggest a warm, enveloping midrange with somewhat ill-defined edges, though the color temperature of the piece may be a confounding variable. A Mondrian is on order and I’m expecting tight, articulate bass with excellent channel separation.
Has anyone else explored this? I feel like the art/acoustics interaction is seriously underexplored in this hobby. Would love to hear other findings. Measurements welcome but I’m not sure the Klippel can capture this yet.
P.S. But seriously – I AM curious about the effect of decor on your overall listening experiences. I am making a joke above, but I do spend time tweaking my lighting and other things and seeing how impacts of visual art on mood effect listening experience.
- ...
- 49 posts total
To some, room treatments may be aesthetically objectionable, but I believe with proper selection and placement, they can enhance the room's visual appeal. Although I have no artwork, many of the diffusers and absorbers have a bit of design intrigue to them. The only comments I have ever received were along the lines of, "Wow, this is so cool!" I do think this is important since visual satisfaction only adds to the aural one. There should be consonance between the two. It is hard to not be distracted by ugliness. |
@larsman Christopher Lloyd is Jim Ignatowski in the tv series “Taxi”. Check out the YouTube vid short on Taxi, “Jim and Latkas cookies”. He was genius. |
I quickly counted 21 paintings in the living room listening area (discounting numerous sculptures and painted plates such as "Wally does Sushi -w- Godzilla" along with 300+ vintage Russian nesting dolls). The only painting that affects SQ as far as I can discern is from the 60's depicting a blond girl in a TuTu standing in front of The Watt's Towers.
DeKay |
I'm often surprised at how indifferent to visual surroundings many audiophiles are. You've probably seen photos or videos of Michael Fremer's listening room. Horrible mess—not to mention that the acoustics can't possibly be any good. Synesthesia is a thing, even if you don't hear colors (like the pianist Helene Grimaux). Conscious experience is a synthesis of inputs. A friend once hosted a listening party in which wines were paired with music! (No one thought this worked.) Our home is full of art we've made ourselves, and that includes the living room / listening room. But of course, attention to the acoustic properties of the space is paramount. As for having a view, Jim Smith, in Get Better Sound, suggests that looking through a window while listening tends to create a psychoacoustic effect of glare. Not sure I agree, but it's possible. In my space, there is a huge picture window with a gorgeous view of mountains and valley BEHIND me as I listen. |
- 49 posts total