I enjoyed your joke!
Personally, I wouldn't want anything on the wall that would distract me from focusing on the music.
,
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
So far there's a strong tilt into 20th C art exhibited in y'alls' taste, which I assume nicely coordinates with equipment selection on the aural activity front.... Visual art only effects music when presented in a video format, or live onstage, IOurHOs'. We had a good dose of that Tues. 12th in Durham @ David Byrnes current tour with 'mobile musicians' and projected backdrops.......and this was pretty much was just whatcha' got v. the static band typical... Fun. *S* Catch it if you can.... |
Your headphones should sound like whatever they are reproducing. If you are reproducing a YouTube video of my system, they should sound like my system. If they are reproducing someone else's system, they should sound like their system. If they are reproducing the direct transfer to whatever media, they should sound like the direct transfer. The closer they can get to what is on the recording/media, (i.e., no sound of their own) the better. Wouldn't you agree? This is not a case where one would want to "sweeten" the sound, but rather reproduce it as is. Certainly there are those cases and a totally flat sound can be really unappealing. |
@toddalin @hilde45 Isn't it obvious that listening to "your system" on Youtube will sound like the system you listen to it through? (Granted, "for the most part"; the differences among the three systems on Youtube toddalin posted are apparent, but that's due more to the parameters of the recordings, and the limitations of Youtube audio, than to the systems themselves.) To make this point as simply as possible: I'm now listening to SRV's "Tin Pan Alley" on CD on my system, and it absolutely blows away all three of those Youtube videos. But I'm willing to grant that all three of those Youtube systems sound at least as good as mine in person.
|
- 49 posts total