Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Is phase errors audible?

Expand Messages
  • Lars Boman
    REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want
    Message 1 of 26 , Jun 8, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.

      How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)

      The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".

      It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.

      It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.

      The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.

      YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!

      Lars Boman
    • mm
      I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at
      Message 2 of 26 , Jun 8, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.

        Yip

        --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@...> wrote:
        >
        > REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.
        >
        > How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)
        >
        > The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".
        >
        > It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.
        >
        > It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.
        >
        > The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.
        >
        > YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!
        >
        > Lars Boman
        >
      • Robert
        As noted in my review on www.regonaudio.com they were and are one of the few speakers that in the right set-up really had nothing happen to do them when they
        Message 3 of 26 , Jun 8, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          As noted in my review on www.regonaudio.com
          they were and are one of the few speakers
          that in the right set-up really had nothing
          happen to do them when they were DSP corrected
          by Sigtech in particular.
          They really do work not just in the abstract
          but in the room.
          Times change, but speaker design evolves slowly.
          Still a great speaker by any standard except
          the ability to play hugely loudly(as if any
          sensible person cared).
          Jim Boyk once said to me of them
          "Not perfect. But they are good enough
          that one can get on with one's work"

          [working on music, that is, this was in the
          context of a speaker for checking how one
          sounded.]
          Then we went on to add that very few speaker
          actually were good enough that one could
          just get on with one's work!

          REG

          --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@...> wrote:
          >
          > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
          >
          > Yip
          >
          > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
          > >
          > > REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.
          > >
          > > How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)
          > >
          > > The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".
          > >
          > > It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.
          > >
          > > It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.
          > >
          > > The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.
          > >
          > > YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!
          > >
          > > Lars Boman
          > >
          >
        • Lars Boman
          Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds. What I do is a
          Message 4 of 26 , Jun 8, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds.

            What I do is a lot more than DCR or digital EQ. Only with phase linear digital crossover is it possible to reduce time smearing significant. If I change to minimum phase digital crossover, the "magic" disappears and the sound is more like "normal" speakers.

            Lars Boman



            --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@...> wrote:
            >
            > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
            >
            > Yip
            >
          • Robert
            It is easy to check what the effect of phase linearizing speakers is. Actually, I have a gadget that does this for SP1/2s. More magic? Not much really. Small
            Message 5 of 26 , Jun 8, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              It is easy to check what the effect
              of phase linearizing speakers is.
              Actually, I have a gadget that does
              this for SP1/2s. More magic? Not much really.
              Small change ues, big deal no.

              Anything can come to seem really important
              if you want to worry about it and direct your attention
              at it. That does not mean it is really a big deal.
              The Spendor SP1/2s have one driver over
              the bulk of all the frequency range--
              from bass up to crossover point 3kHz.
              Anyone that thinks that straightening out
              phase for a speaker like that is a huge deal
              music have strange priorities to my mind and/or not
              tried it under controlled conditions.

              But mostly the tone of this message to YMM is
              REALLY OBNOXIOUS.

              Whether or not YMM has head the Spendors
              linearized, he has heard and hears all the time
              live music of the most exalted kind, more than almost
              anyone here outside the musicians. To sound
              patronizing towards him because he has not
              tried some particular phase linearizer is
              seriously unpleasant and also very foolish.

              Comes to that, the BBC loudspeakers were developed
              in direct comparison to live music. This ought
              to give people pause about dismissing them
              for not being phase linear.

              And then there is the Gradient test--with
              nonphase linear speakers.

              The audio world is full of people who get
              all bent out of shape out of some particular
              thing that they act as if they discovered--
              when of course the serious audio world has
              been working on the issue for decades and decades
              as often as not.

              Here we go again. Anything that is audible can
              become an obsession. And phase linearity is audible.
              So what?

              As to dismissing all the tests that show that
              phase linearity is marginal as a consideration
              in most speaker designs... just exactly how
              was that dismissal justified? Were all those
              BBC designers out to lunch? Was Peter Walker
              crazy when he said that the phase linearity of the
              Quads really hardly mattered and just turned up
              by accident as a result of making them reasonably flat?

              I agree with YMM that the Spendor SP1/2s sound remarkably
              like real music.

              REG

              PS If phase linearity above say 2k were such a big deal, how
              could Telarc recordings have ever gotten anywhere?

              PPS There seems in Boman's posts to be some
              condirable confusion between phase linearity
              of the speakers themselves(not much of an effect
              to most people especially when there is one crossover
              at 3kHz!- though audible) and phase matching between the channels--
              very significant for stereo imaging. These issues are
              far from the same. They are not even closely related.
              This is not to mention that the ideas of how phase nonlinearity
              arises are all wrong. Not every True Believer understands the
              theology.

              --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@...> wrote:
              >
              > Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds.
              >
              > What I do is a lot more than DCR or digital EQ. Only with phase linear digital crossover is it possible to reduce time smearing significant. If I change to minimum phase digital crossover, the "magic" disappears and the sound is more like "normal" speakers.
              >
              > Lars Boman
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
              > >
              > > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
              > >
              > > Yip
              > >
              >
            • Robert
              Message below is BAD BAD MANNERS. This type of message stops soon or byebye Boman. You do not know what YMM has heard in audio and there is no excuse for this
              Message 6 of 26 , Jun 8, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Message below is BAD BAD MANNERS.
                This type of message stops soon or byebye Boman.
                You do not know what YMM has heard in audio
                and there is no excuse for this obnoxiousness
                in any case since if you have followed
                this group at all you know that
                YMM has heard an enormous amount of live
                music of the highest quality--which is what counts as a comparison
                sample.

                REG

                --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@...> wrote:
                >
                > Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds.
                >
                > What I do is a lot more than DCR or digital EQ. Only with phase linear digital crossover is it possible to reduce time smearing significant. If I change to minimum phase digital crossover, the "magic" disappears and the sound is more like "normal" speakers.
                >
                > Lars Boman
                >
                >
                >
                > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
                > >
                > > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
                > >
                > > Yip
                > >
                >
              • mm
                Anyway, for me that s good enough to have transported me temporarily to the recital halls where the solo cello and the string quartets had performed. I did
                Message 7 of 26 , Jun 8, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Anyway, for me that's good enough to have transported me temporarily to the recital halls where the solo cello and the string quartets had performed. I did not have any alcoholic drinks or am I high prior to listening. Dead sober.

                  Yip

                  --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds.
                  >
                  > What I do is a lot more than DCR or digital EQ. Only with phase linear digital crossover is it possible to reduce time smearing significant. If I change to minimum phase digital crossover, the "magic" disappears and the sound is more like "normal" speakers.
                  >
                  > Lars Boman
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
                  > >
                  > > Yip
                  > >
                  >
                • Robert
                  I suppose one has to grant people their own views of what counts in music. I am similar to YMM, but if some other things mean a lot to other people, that is
                  Message 8 of 26 , Jun 8, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I suppose one has to grant people
                    their own views of what counts in music.
                    I am similar to YMM, but if
                    some other things mean a lot to other
                    people, that is fine. I just do not
                    want people to get aggressive about
                    expressing the idea that they are in
                    possession of some unique listening viewpoint
                    of universal validity.

                    Phase linearity is audible under certain
                    conditions. That is not in question./
                    So if it means a lot to one,
                    fine. But to many people it means almost
                    nothing--even though everyone can hear it
                    on the right signals.
                    Whether it means something in musical
                    terms is thus a personal matter.

                    Like YMM, I really like the Spendors.
                    I never ever listen to them and think
                    "Well it is ok but it would be so much
                    better if they were phase linear".
                    [And I do know what the sound like
                    phase linearized]. I know from experience
                    that the sound
                    would change slightly--but to me it
                    is not important in musical terms.
                    Not in this case.
                    The fact that one driver covers almost
                    the whole range of the fundamentals of music
                    before any phase considerations really arise
                    perhaps makes this so.

                    Anyway, to each his own. We all know
                    what we listen for in music. The Spendors
                    are one of the very few speakers where
                    for example I would feel comfortable
                    evaluating a violin from a good recording
                    of it(not for purchase--for that you have to
                    play it,too, since they can sound mch the same but
                    play differently and how they play is
                    important --to the player!). One really
                    knows what instruments sound like with these
                    speakers--except maybe woodblocks! (where
                    phase linearity changes timbre a good bit!)

                    Different strokes as we used to say back in
                    the 1960s.

                    REG

                    PS One curious thing about the SP1/2s is
                    that they might seem like primarily a classical music
                    speaker, but as I recall Corey Greenberg, who
                    was I think mostly a rock person, really really liked
                    them!

                    --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Anyway, for me that's good enough to have transported me temporarily to the recital halls where the solo cello and the string quartets had performed. I did not have any alcoholic drinks or am I high prior to listening. Dead sober.
                    >
                    > Yip
                    >
                    > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds.
                    > >
                    > > What I do is a lot more than DCR or digital EQ. Only with phase linear digital crossover is it possible to reduce time smearing significant. If I change to minimum phase digital crossover, the "magic" disappears and the sound is more like "normal" speakers.
                    > >
                    > > Lars Boman
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
                    > > >
                    > > > Yip
                    > > >
                    > >
                    >
                  • barnet.feingold
                    Lars, Although your speakers and mine are quite different (as noted in another string, I have Harbeth M40s) and we use different means to reduce phase errors
                    Message 9 of 26 , Jun 8, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Lars,

                      Although your speakers and mine are quite different (as noted in another string, I have Harbeth M40s) and we use different means to reduce phase errors (I'm using Thuneau's Phase Arbitrator), the effects of reduced phase error in our systems appear to be similar. I, too, experience increased detail, more dramatic transient response, and clearer imaging. Note, however, that both of us have put significant effort into tonal balance and management of room effects.

                      Barney

                      --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.
                      >
                      > How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)
                      >
                      > The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".
                      >
                      > It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.
                      >
                      > It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.
                      >
                      > The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.
                      >
                      > YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!
                      >
                      > Lars Boman
                      >
                    • Robert
                      One begins to be curious whether these effects were verified under blind conditions. Also, about this clearer imaging-- are you talking about lining up the
                      Message 10 of 26 , Jun 8, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        One begins to be curious whether these
                        effects were verified under blind conditions.
                        Also, about this clearer imaging--
                        are you talking about lining up
                        the channels to have the same phase
                        behavior as each other(which would
                        surely effect imaging) or
                        phase linearizing the speakers
                        individually--which would have much
                        more subtle effects(if any) on imaging?
                        The distinction is really important...
                        REG

                        --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Lars,
                        >
                        > Although your speakers and mine are quite different (as noted in another string, I have Harbeth M40s) and we use different means to reduce phase errors (I'm using Thuneau's Phase Arbitrator), the effects of reduced phase error in our systems appear to be similar. I, too, experience increased detail, more dramatic transient response, and clearer imaging. Note, however, that both of us have put significant effort into tonal balance and management of room effects.
                        >
                        > Barney
                        >
                        > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.
                        > >
                        > > How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)
                        > >
                        > > The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".
                        > >
                        > > It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.
                        > >
                        > > It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.
                        > >
                        > > The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.
                        > >
                        > > YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!
                        > >
                        > > Lars Boman
                        > >
                        >
                      • Charles Daniell
                        How close is the Harbeth C7ES II to the Spendor SP 1/2 ? I would think the design goals were similar. Charles Daniell From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                        Message 11 of 26 , Jun 9, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment

                          How close is the Harbeth C7ES II to the Spendor SP 1/2 ?

                           

                          I would think the design goals were similar.

                           

                          Charles Daniell

                           

                           

                          From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert
                          Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 9:23 PM
                          To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Is phase errors audible?

                           

                           

                          I suppose one has to grant people
                          their own views of what counts in music.
                          I am similar to YMM, but if
                          some other things mean a lot to other
                          people, that is fine. I just do not
                          want people to get aggressive about
                          expressing the idea that they are in
                          possession of some unique listening viewpoint
                          of universal validity.

                          Phase linearity is audible under certain
                          conditions. That is not in question./
                          So if it means a lot to one,
                          fine. But to many people it means almost
                          nothing--even though everyone can hear it
                          on the right signals.
                          Whether it means something in musical
                          terms is thus a personal matter.

                          Like YMM, I really like the Spendors.
                          I never ever listen to them and think
                          "Well it is ok but it would be so much
                          better if they were phase linear".
                          [And I do know what the sound like
                          phase linearized]. I know from experience
                          that the sound
                          would change slightly--but to me it
                          is not important in musical terms.
                          Not in this case.
                          The fact that one driver covers almost
                          the whole range of the fundamentals of music
                          before any phase considerations really arise
                          perhaps makes this so.

                          Anyway, to each his own. We all know
                          what we listen for in music. The Spendors
                          are one of the very few speakers where
                          for example I would feel comfortable
                          evaluating a violin from a good recording
                          of it(not for purchase--for that you have to
                          play it,too, since they can sound mch the same but
                          play differently and how they play is
                          important --to the player!). One really
                          knows what instruments sound like with these
                          speakers--except maybe woodblocks! (where
                          phase linearity changes timbre a good bit!)

                          Different strokes as we used to say back in
                          the 1960s.

                          REG

                          PS One curious thing about the SP1/2s is
                          that they might seem like primarily a classical music
                          speaker, but as I recall Corey Greenberg, who
                          was I think mostly a rock person, really really liked
                          them!

                          --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Anyway, for me that's good enough to have transported me temporarily to the recital halls where the solo cello and the string quartets had performed. I did not have any alcoholic drinks or am I high prior to listening. Dead sober.
                          >
                          > Yip
                          >
                          > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds.
                          > >
                          > > What I do is a lot more than DCR or digital EQ. Only with phase linear digital crossover is it possible to reduce time smearing significant. If I change to minimum phase digital crossover, the "magic" disappears and the sound is more like "normal" speakers.
                          > >
                          > > Lars Boman
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
                          > > >
                          > > > Yip
                          > > >
                          > >
                          >

                        • mm
                          Hi Charlie, Not very familiar with that Harbeth model but they are from the BBC stable, so sound should be close. I find the SHL 5 a shade brighter ( open?) in
                          Message 12 of 26 , Jun 10, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hi Charlie,

                            Not very familiar with that Harbeth model but they are from the BBC stable, so sound should be close. I find the SHL 5 a shade brighter ( open?) in sound than the old Spendor SP1/2. But the strength of the Harbeth M series and the SP1/2 is the seamlessness of sound from bass to highs.

                            BR
                            Yip

                            --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Charles Daniell <cfd@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > How close is the Harbeth C7ES II to the Spendor SP 1/2 ?
                            >
                            > I would think the design goals were similar.
                            >
                            > Charles Daniell
                            >
                            >
                            > From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert
                            > Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 9:23 PM
                            > To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                            > Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Is phase errors audible?
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > I suppose one has to grant people
                            > their own views of what counts in music.
                            > I am similar to YMM, but if
                            > some other things mean a lot to other
                            > people, that is fine. I just do not
                            > want people to get aggressive about
                            > expressing the idea that they are in
                            > possession of some unique listening viewpoint
                            > of universal validity.
                            >
                            > Phase linearity is audible under certain
                            > conditions. That is not in question./
                            > So if it means a lot to one,
                            > fine. But to many people it means almost
                            > nothing--even though everyone can hear it
                            > on the right signals.
                            > Whether it means something in musical
                            > terms is thus a personal matter.
                            >
                            > Like YMM, I really like the Spendors.
                            > I never ever listen to them and think
                            > "Well it is ok but it would be so much
                            > better if they were phase linear".
                            > [And I do know what the sound like
                            > phase linearized]. I know from experience
                            > that the sound
                            > would change slightly--but to me it
                            > is not important in musical terms.
                            > Not in this case.
                            > The fact that one driver covers almost
                            > the whole range of the fundamentals of music
                            > before any phase considerations really arise
                            > perhaps makes this so.
                            >
                            > Anyway, to each his own. We all know
                            > what we listen for in music. The Spendors
                            > are one of the very few speakers where
                            > for example I would feel comfortable
                            > evaluating a violin from a good recording
                            > of it(not for purchase--for that you have to
                            > play it,too, since they can sound mch the same but
                            > play differently and how they play is
                            > important --to the player!). One really
                            > knows what instruments sound like with these
                            > speakers--except maybe woodblocks! (where
                            > phase linearity changes timbre a good bit!)
                            >
                            > Different strokes as we used to say back in
                            > the 1960s.
                            >
                            > REG
                            >
                            > PS One curious thing about the SP1/2s is
                            > that they might seem like primarily a classical music
                            > speaker, but as I recall Corey Greenberg, who
                            > was I think mostly a rock person, really really liked
                            > them!
                            >
                            > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "mm" <yipmangmeng@<mailto:yipmangmeng@>> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Anyway, for me that's good enough to have transported me temporarily to the recital halls where the solo cello and the string quartets had performed. I did not have any alcoholic drinks or am I high prior to listening. Dead sober.
                            > >
                            > > Yip
                            > >
                            > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                            > > >
                            > > > Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds.
                            > > >
                            > > > What I do is a lot more than DCR or digital EQ. Only with phase linear digital crossover is it possible to reduce time smearing significant. If I change to minimum phase digital crossover, the "magic" disappears and the sound is more like "normal" speakers.
                            > > >
                            > > > Lars Boman
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "mm" <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
                            > > > >
                            > > > > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Yip
                            > > > >
                            > > >
                            > >
                            >
                          • Charles Daniell
                            Thanks, Yip. Sometimes I wonder if I should try to find a pair. Charlie From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                            Message 13 of 26 , Jun 10, 2012
                            • 0 Attachment

                              Thanks, Yip.

                               

                              Sometimes I wonder if I should try to find a pair.

                               

                              Charlie

                               

                              From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mm
                              Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 4:25 AM
                              To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Is phase errors audible?

                               

                               

                              Hi Charlie,

                              Not very familiar with that Harbeth model but they are from the BBC stable, so sound should be close. I find the SHL 5 a shade brighter ( open?) in sound than the old Spendor SP1/2. But the strength of the Harbeth M series and the SP1/2 is the seamlessness of sound from bass to highs.

                              BR
                              Yip

                              --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Charles Daniell <cfd@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > How close is the Harbeth C7ES II to the Spendor SP 1/2 ?
                              >
                              > I would think the design goals were similar.
                              >
                              > Charles Daniell
                              >
                              >
                              > From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert
                              > Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 9:23 PM
                              > To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                              > Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Is phase errors audible?
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > I suppose one has to grant people
                              > their own views of what counts in music.
                              > I am similar to YMM, but if
                              > some other things mean a lot to other
                              > people, that is fine. I just do not
                              > want people to get aggressive about
                              > expressing the idea that they are in
                              > possession of some unique listening viewpoint
                              > of universal validity.
                              >
                              > Phase linearity is audible under certain
                              > conditions. That is not in question./
                              > So if it means a lot to one,
                              > fine. But to many people it means almost
                              > nothing--even though everyone can hear it
                              > on the right signals.
                              > Whether it means something in musical
                              > terms is thus a personal matter.
                              >
                              > Like YMM, I really like the Spendors.
                              > I never ever listen to them and think
                              > "Well it is ok but it would be so much
                              > better if they were phase linear".
                              > [And I do know what the sound like
                              > phase linearized]. I know from experience
                              > that the sound
                              > would change slightly--but to me it
                              > is not important in musical terms.
                              > Not in this case.
                              > The fact that one driver covers almost
                              > the whole range of the fundamentals of music
                              > before any phase considerations really arise
                              > perhaps makes this so.
                              >
                              > Anyway, to each his own. We all know
                              > what we listen for in music. The Spendors
                              > are one of the very few speakers where
                              > for example I would feel comfortable
                              > evaluating a violin from a good recording
                              > of it(not for purchase--for that you have to
                              > play it,too, since they can sound mch the same but
                              > play differently and how they play is
                              > important --to the player!). One really
                              > knows what instruments sound like with these
                              > speakers--except maybe woodblocks! (where
                              > phase linearity changes timbre a good bit!)
                              >
                              > Different strokes as we used to say back in
                              > the 1960s.
                              >
                              > REG
                              >
                              > PS One curious thing about the SP1/2s is
                              > that they might seem like primarily a classical music
                              > speaker, but as I recall Corey Greenberg, who
                              > was I think mostly a rock person, really really liked
                              > them!
                              >
                              > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "mm" <yipmangmeng@<mailto:yipmangmeng@>> wrote:
                              > >
                              > > Anyway, for me that's good enough to have transported me temporarily to the recital halls where the solo cello and the string quartets had performed. I did not have any alcoholic drinks or am I high prior to listening. Dead sober.
                              > >
                              > > Yip
                              > >
                              > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                              > > >
                              > > > Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds.
                              > > >
                              > > > What I do is a lot more than DCR or digital EQ. Only with phase linear digital crossover is it possible to reduce time smearing significant. If I change to minimum phase digital crossover, the "magic" disappears and the sound is more like "normal" speakers.
                              > > >
                              > > > Lars Boman
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "mm" <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
                              > > > >
                              > > > > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Yip
                              > > > >
                              > > >
                              > >
                              >

                            • ymm
                              Hi Charlie, My pair is 17 year old and this is the tropics. I am sure they keep better in your climate.  Besides, the old rubber surround can be made better
                              Message 14 of 26 , Jun 10, 2012
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Hi Charlie,

                                My pair is 17 year old and this is the tropics. I am sure they keep better in your climate. 

                                Besides, the old rubber surround can be made better with application of brake oil - DOT 40 or 30 - when it becomes somewhat stiff.

                                I do not have this problem.

                                Yip


                                From: Charles Daniell <cfd@...>
                                To: "regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com" <regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com>
                                Sent: Sunday, 10 June 2012, 19:06
                                Subject: RE: [regsaudioforum] Re: Is phase errors audible?

                                 
                                Thanks, Yip.
                                 
                                Sometimes I wonder if I should try to find a pair.
                                 
                                Charlie
                                 
                                From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mm
                                Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 4:25 AM
                                To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Is phase errors audible?
                                 
                                 
                                Hi Charlie,

                                Not very familiar with that Harbeth model but they are from the BBC stable, so sound should be close. I find the SHL 5 a shade brighter ( open?) in sound than the old Spendor SP1/2. But the strength of the Harbeth M series and the SP1/2 is the seamlessness of sound from bass to highs.

                                BR
                                Yip

                                --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Charles Daniell <cfd@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > How close is the Harbeth C7ES II to the Spendor SP 1/2 ?
                                >
                                > I would think the design goals were similar.
                                >
                                > Charles Daniell
                                >
                                >
                                > From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert
                                > Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 9:23 PM
                                > To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                                > Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Is phase errors audible?
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > I suppose one has to grant people
                                > their own views of what counts in music.
                                > I am similar to YMM, but if
                                > some other things mean a lot to other
                                > people, that is fine. I just do not
                                > want people to get aggressive about
                                > expressing the idea that they are in
                                > possession of some unique listening viewpoint
                                > of universal validity.
                                >
                                > Phase linearity is audible under certain
                                > conditions. That is not in question./
                                > So if it means a lot to one,
                                > fine. But to many people it means almost
                                > nothing--even though everyone can hear it
                                > on the right signals.
                                > Whether it means something in musical
                                > terms is thus a personal matter.
                                >
                                > Like YMM, I really like the Spendors.
                                > I never ever listen to them and think
                                > "Well it is ok but it would be so much
                                > better if they were phase linear".
                                > [And I do know what the sound like
                                > phase linearized]. I know from experience
                                > that the sound
                                > would change slightly--but to me it
                                > is not important in musical terms.
                                > Not in this case.
                                > The fact that one driver covers almost
                                > the whole range of the fundamentals of music
                                > before any phase considerations really arise
                                > perhaps makes this so.
                                >
                                > Anyway, to each his own. We all know
                                > what we listen for in music. The Spendors
                                > are one of the very few speakers where
                                > for example I would feel comfortable
                                > evaluating a violin from a good recording
                                > of it(not for purchase--for that you have to
                                > play it,too, since they can sound mch the same but
                                > play differently and how they play is
                                > important --to the player!). One really
                                > knows what instruments sound like with these
                                > speakers--except maybe woodblocks! (where
                                > phase linearity changes timbre a good bit!)
                                >
                                > Different strokes as we used to say back in
                                > the 1960s.
                                >
                                > REG
                                >
                                > PS One curious thing about the SP1/2s is
                                > that they might seem like primarily a classical music
                                > speaker, but as I recall Corey Greenberg, who
                                > was I think mostly a rock person, really really liked
                                > them!
                                >
                                > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "mm" <yipmangmeng@<mailto:yipmangmeng@>> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > Anyway, for me that's good enough to have transported me temporarily to the recital halls where the solo cello and the string quartets had performed. I did not have any alcoholic drinks or am I high prior to listening. Dead sober.
                                > >
                                > > Yip
                                > >
                                > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds.
                                > > >
                                > > > What I do is a lot more than DCR or digital EQ. Only with phase linear digital crossover is it possible to reduce time smearing significant. If I change to minimum phase digital crossover, the "magic" disappears and the sound is more like "normal" speakers.
                                > > >
                                > > > Lars Boman
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "mm" <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
                                > > > >
                                > > > > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
                                > > > >
                                > > > > Yip
                                > > > >
                                > > >
                                > >
                                >


                              • mm
                                http://www.dejavuaudio.com/SPEAKERS-SPENDOR-SP1-2.HTM
                                Message 15 of 26 , Jun 10, 2012
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  http://www.dejavuaudio.com/SPEAKERS-SPENDOR-SP1-2.HTM

                                  --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, ymm <yipmangmeng@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Hi Charlie,
                                  >
                                  > My pair is 17 year old and this is the tropics. I am sure they keep better in your climate. 
                                  >
                                  > Besides, the old rubber surround can be made better with application of brake oil - DOT 40 or 30 - when it becomes somewhat stiff.
                                  >
                                  > I do not have this problem.
                                  >
                                  > Yip
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > >________________________________
                                  > > From: Charles Daniell <cfd@...>
                                  > >To: "regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com" <regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com>
                                  > >Sent: Sunday, 10 June 2012, 19:06
                                  > >Subject: RE: [regsaudioforum] Re: Is phase errors audible?
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > 
                                  > >Thanks, Yip.
                                  > > 
                                  > >Sometimes I wonder if I should try to find a pair.
                                  > > 
                                  > >Charlie
                                  > > 
                                  > >From:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mm
                                  > >Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 4:25 AM
                                  > >To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                                  > >Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Is phase errors audible?
                                  > > 
                                  > > 
                                  > >Hi Charlie,
                                  > >
                                  > >Not very familiar with that Harbeth model but they are from the BBC stable, so sound should be close. I find the SHL 5 a shade brighter ( open?) in sound than the old Spendor SP1/2. But the strength of the Harbeth M series and the SP1/2 is the seamlessness of sound from bass to highs.
                                  > >
                                  > >BR
                                  > >Yip
                                  > >
                                  > >--- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Charles Daniell <cfd@> wrote:
                                  > >>
                                  > >> How close is the Harbeth C7ES II to the Spendor SP 1/2 ?
                                  > >>
                                  > >> I would think the design goals were similar.
                                  > >>
                                  > >> Charles Daniell
                                  > >>
                                  > >>
                                  > >> From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert
                                  > >> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 9:23 PM
                                  > >> To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                                  > >> Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Is phase errors audible?
                                  > >>
                                  > >>
                                  > >>
                                  > >> I suppose one has to grant people
                                  > >> their own views of what counts in music.
                                  > >> I am similar to YMM, but if
                                  > >> some other things mean a lot to other
                                  > >> people, that is fine. I just do not
                                  > >> want people to get aggressive about
                                  > >> expressing the idea that they are in
                                  > >> possession of some unique listening viewpoint
                                  > >> of universal validity.
                                  > >>
                                  > >> Phase linearity is audible under certain
                                  > >> conditions. That is not in question./
                                  > >> So if it means a lot to one,
                                  > >> fine. But to many people it means almost
                                  > >> nothing--even though everyone can hear it
                                  > >> on the right signals.
                                  > >> Whether it means something in musical
                                  > >> terms is thus a personal matter.
                                  > >>
                                  > >> Like YMM, I really like the Spendors.
                                  > >> I never ever listen to them and think
                                  > >> "Well it is ok but it would be so much
                                  > >> better if they were phase linear".
                                  > >> [And I do know what the sound like
                                  > >> phase linearized]. I know from experience
                                  > >> that the sound
                                  > >> would change slightly--but to me it
                                  > >> is not important in musical terms.
                                  > >> Not in this case.
                                  > >> The fact that one driver covers almost
                                  > >> the whole range of the fundamentals of music
                                  > >> before any phase considerations really arise
                                  > >> perhaps makes this so.
                                  > >>
                                  > >> Anyway, to each his own. We all know
                                  > >> what we listen for in music. The Spendors
                                  > >> are one of the very few speakers where
                                  > >> for example I would feel comfortable
                                  > >> evaluating a violin from a good recording
                                  > >> of it(not for purchase--for that you have to
                                  > >> play it,too, since they can sound mch the same but
                                  > >> play differently and how they play is
                                  > >> important --to the player!). One really
                                  > >> knows what instruments sound like with these
                                  > >> speakers--except maybe woodblocks! (where
                                  > >> phase linearity changes timbre a good bit!)
                                  > >>
                                  > >> Different strokes as we used to say back in
                                  > >> the 1960s.
                                  > >>
                                  > >> REG
                                  > >>
                                  > >> PS One curious thing about the SP1/2s is
                                  > >> that they might seem like primarily a classical music
                                  > >> speaker, but as I recall Corey Greenberg, who
                                  > >> was I think mostly a rock person, really really liked
                                  > >> them!
                                  > >>
                                  > >> --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "mm" <yipmangmeng@<mailto:yipmangmeng@>> wrote:
                                  > >> >
                                  > >> > Anyway, for me that's good enough to have transported me temporarily to the recital halls where the solo cello and the string quartets had performed. I did not have any alcoholic drinks or am I high prior to listening. Dead sober.
                                  > >> >
                                  > >> > Yip
                                  > >> >
                                  > >> > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                                  > >> > >
                                  > >> > > Of course do you enjoy your Spendor SP1/2 speakers without DCR or digital EQ - you have never heard how a fully digital corrected system sounds.
                                  > >> > >
                                  > >> > > What I do is a lot more than DCR or digital EQ. Only with phase linear digital crossover is it possible to reduce time smearing significant. If I change to minimum phase digital crossover, the "magic" disappears and the sound is more like "normal" speakers.
                                  > >> > >
                                  > >> > > Lars Boman
                                  > >> > >
                                  > >> > >
                                  > >> > >
                                  > >> > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com>, "mm" <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
                                  > >> > > >
                                  > >> > > > I have been listening to my 17 year old Spendor SP1/2 speakers on the Spendor stands for three evenings now . The subwoofer is the REL Stadium. I am amazed at what these speakers can still conjure up at their age. No DRC or digital EQ used.
                                  > >> > > >
                                  > >> > > > Yip
                                  > >> > > >
                                  > >> > >
                                  > >> >
                                  > >>
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  >
                                • barnet.feingold
                                  Hi REG, (1) All phase corrections were applied to both of my main speakers. Thus, any phase differences were uncorrected. (2) My guests observations were made
                                  Message 16 of 26 , Jun 11, 2012
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Hi REG,

                                    (1) All phase corrections were applied to both of my main speakers. Thus, any phase differences were uncorrected.

                                    (2) My guests' observations were made under single-blind conditions. I asked only open-ended questions when inquiring about what they heard to avoid "leading them." I didn't record their comments. However, I recall two statements that I interpreted as referring to imaging: "It sounds like they [a small jazz ensemble] are in the room [with phase correction on]" and "The positions of the musicians are more definite [with phase correction on]. As one would expect, none of my listeners indicated that the positions of the musicians changed.

                                    My own observations (not made under blind conditions and thus subject to expectancy-related bias, despite my best efforts to remain objective) is that it's a bit easier to determine where the performers are as well as how far they were from microphones, reflecting surfaces, etc. Their sonic images also seem more compact and solid.

                                    If you'd like, I'll set up as carefully controlled test as I can to determine whether I'm fooling myself.

                                    In the absence of data that challenge the validity of my observations, my experience suggests that -- at least in my system -- phase correction is best characterized (for me) as "icing on the cake." It's darn nice icing, but it's not a substitute for satisfying cake.

                                    Respectfully,

                                    Barney

                                    --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > One begins to be curious whether these
                                    > effects were verified under blind conditions.
                                    > Also, about this clearer imaging--
                                    > are you talking about lining up
                                    > the channels to have the same phase
                                    > behavior as each other(which would
                                    > surely effect imaging) or
                                    > phase linearizing the speakers
                                    > individually--which would have much
                                    > more subtle effects(if any) on imaging?
                                    > The distinction is really important...
                                    > REG
                                    >
                                    > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > Lars,
                                    > >
                                    > > Although your speakers and mine are quite different (as noted in another string, I have Harbeth M40s) and we use different means to reduce phase errors (I'm using Thuneau's Phase Arbitrator), the effects of reduced phase error in our systems appear to be similar. I, too, experience increased detail, more dramatic transient response, and clearer imaging. Note, however, that both of us have put significant effort into tonal balance and management of room effects.
                                    > >
                                    > > Barney
                                    > >
                                    > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                                    > > >
                                    > > > REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)
                                    > > >
                                    > > > The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".
                                    > > >
                                    > > > It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Lars Boman
                                    > > >
                                    > >
                                    >
                                  • Robert
                                    This sounds fair enough. I changed the lead line here, because once and for all please: PHASE LINEARITY OR LACK THEREOF IS AN AUDIBLE EFFECT. It is important
                                    Message 17 of 26 , Jun 11, 2012
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      This sounds fair enough.
                                      I changed the lead line here, because
                                      once and for all please:
                                      PHASE LINEARITY OR LACK THEREOF IS AN AUDIBLE EFFECT.
                                      It is important in talking about audio
                                      not to act as if one were discovering something new.
                                      Phase has been known to be audible under some
                                      circumstances for a very long time. In the
                                      19th century for a brief time, it was believed
                                      not to be. This was however about harmonics of pure tones in particular ("Ohm's Law").
                                      But that was a long time ago and no one in psychoacoustics
                                      today would claim that phase was inaudible on complex
                                      material with broad spectrum.
                                      The issue is not audibility but signficance in practice.

                                      People can listen for themselves. And of course
                                      a lot depends on WHERE the crossover points are
                                      the crossover being the source of phase nonlinearity
                                      (most of the source anyway). It is also important
                                      to note that, because "phase linearty" is not
                                      a sort of on off switch--phase non linearity comes
                                      in lots of different forms! And the frequency range
                                      where things are changing in nonlinear ways and
                                      how fast the change is happening make a big difference
                                      to how important it is. (big changes occurring over short
                                      frequency intervals are far more audible than slow changes from
                                      (say) bottom to top, the latter being of very limited audibility if any while the former makes demonstrable timbre alterations)


                                      Anyway, with DSP it is pretty easy to check it out.
                                      for your particular speaker.

                                      REG

                                      --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > Hi REG,
                                      >
                                      > (1) All phase corrections were applied to both of my main speakers. Thus, any phase differences were uncorrected.
                                      >
                                      > (2) My guests' observations were made under single-blind conditions. I asked only open-ended questions when inquiring about what they heard to avoid "leading them." I didn't record their comments. However, I recall two statements that I interpreted as referring to imaging: "It sounds like they [a small jazz ensemble] are in the room [with phase correction on]" and "The positions of the musicians are more definite [with phase correction on]. As one would expect, none of my listeners indicated that the positions of the musicians changed.
                                      >
                                      > My own observations (not made under blind conditions and thus subject to expectancy-related bias, despite my best efforts to remain objective) is that it's a bit easier to determine where the performers are as well as how far they were from microphones, reflecting surfaces, etc. Their sonic images also seem more compact and solid.
                                      >
                                      > If you'd like, I'll set up as carefully controlled test as I can to determine whether I'm fooling myself.
                                      >
                                      > In the absence of data that challenge the validity of my observations, my experience suggests that -- at least in my system -- phase correction is best characterized (for me) as "icing on the cake." It's darn nice icing, but it's not a substitute for satisfying cake.
                                      >
                                      > Respectfully,
                                      >
                                      > Barney
                                      >
                                      > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > One begins to be curious whether these
                                      > > effects were verified under blind conditions.
                                      > > Also, about this clearer imaging--
                                      > > are you talking about lining up
                                      > > the channels to have the same phase
                                      > > behavior as each other(which would
                                      > > surely effect imaging) or
                                      > > phase linearizing the speakers
                                      > > individually--which would have much
                                      > > more subtle effects(if any) on imaging?
                                      > > The distinction is really important...
                                      > > REG
                                      > >
                                      > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Lars,
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Although your speakers and mine are quite different (as noted in another string, I have Harbeth M40s) and we use different means to reduce phase errors (I'm using Thuneau's Phase Arbitrator), the effects of reduced phase error in our systems appear to be similar. I, too, experience increased detail, more dramatic transient response, and clearer imaging. Note, however, that both of us have put significant effort into tonal balance and management of room effects.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Barney
                                      > > >
                                      > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > Lars Boman
                                      > > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > >
                                      >
                                    • barnet.feingold
                                      Hi REG, For what it may be worth, I entered this conversation because I was surprised by the improvement the Phase Arbitrator made in my system. It struck me
                                      Message 18 of 26 , Jun 11, 2012
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Hi REG,

                                        For what it may be worth, I entered this conversation because I was surprised by the improvement the Phase Arbitrator made in my system. It struck me as a relatively simple and inexpensive way to improve sound that had already benefited from my best efforts to reduce coloration and increase resolution (using the resources at my disposal).

                                        I, for one, didn't believe I was discovering a new and important to-be-eliminated coloration. In fact, phase correction seems to be the most subtle of the improvements I've made in my system. In addition, I suspect that its effects are readily masked by less subtle sources of coloration.

                                        At his second birthday party my son said, "I love cake, Dad . . . except for that bready part underneath." His taste has matured since. I'd like to think mine has, too.

                                        Barney

                                        --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > This sounds fair enough.
                                        > I changed the lead line here, because
                                        > once and for all please:
                                        > PHASE LINEARITY OR LACK THEREOF IS AN AUDIBLE EFFECT.
                                        > It is important in talking about audio
                                        > not to act as if one were discovering something new.
                                        > Phase has been known to be audible under some
                                        > circumstances for a very long time. In the
                                        > 19th century for a brief time, it was believed
                                        > not to be. This was however about harmonics of pure tones in particular ("Ohm's Law").
                                        > But that was a long time ago and no one in psychoacoustics
                                        > today would claim that phase was inaudible on complex
                                        > material with broad spectrum.
                                        > The issue is not audibility but signficance in practice.
                                        >
                                        > People can listen for themselves. And of course
                                        > a lot depends on WHERE the crossover points are
                                        > the crossover being the source of phase nonlinearity
                                        > (most of the source anyway). It is also important
                                        > to note that, because "phase linearty" is not
                                        > a sort of on off switch--phase non linearity comes
                                        > in lots of different forms! And the frequency range
                                        > where things are changing in nonlinear ways and
                                        > how fast the change is happening make a big difference
                                        > to how important it is. (big changes occurring over short
                                        > frequency intervals are far more audible than slow changes from
                                        > (say) bottom to top, the latter being of very limited audibility if any while the former makes demonstrable timbre alterations)
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Anyway, with DSP it is pretty easy to check it out.
                                        > for your particular speaker.
                                        >
                                        > REG
                                        >
                                        > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > Hi REG,
                                        > >
                                        > > (1) All phase corrections were applied to both of my main speakers. Thus, any phase differences were uncorrected.
                                        > >
                                        > > (2) My guests' observations were made under single-blind conditions. I asked only open-ended questions when inquiring about what they heard to avoid "leading them." I didn't record their comments. However, I recall two statements that I interpreted as referring to imaging: "It sounds like they [a small jazz ensemble] are in the room [with phase correction on]" and "The positions of the musicians are more definite [with phase correction on]. As one would expect, none of my listeners indicated that the positions of the musicians changed.
                                        > >
                                        > > My own observations (not made under blind conditions and thus subject to expectancy-related bias, despite my best efforts to remain objective) is that it's a bit easier to determine where the performers are as well as how far they were from microphones, reflecting surfaces, etc. Their sonic images also seem more compact and solid.
                                        > >
                                        > > If you'd like, I'll set up as carefully controlled test as I can to determine whether I'm fooling myself.
                                        > >
                                        > > In the absence of data that challenge the validity of my observations, my experience suggests that -- at least in my system -- phase correction is best characterized (for me) as "icing on the cake." It's darn nice icing, but it's not a substitute for satisfying cake.
                                        > >
                                        > > Respectfully,
                                        > >
                                        > > Barney
                                        > >
                                        > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > One begins to be curious whether these
                                        > > > effects were verified under blind conditions.
                                        > > > Also, about this clearer imaging--
                                        > > > are you talking about lining up
                                        > > > the channels to have the same phase
                                        > > > behavior as each other(which would
                                        > > > surely effect imaging) or
                                        > > > phase linearizing the speakers
                                        > > > individually--which would have much
                                        > > > more subtle effects(if any) on imaging?
                                        > > > The distinction is really important...
                                        > > > REG
                                        > > >
                                        > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Lars,
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Although your speakers and mine are quite different (as noted in another string, I have Harbeth M40s) and we use different means to reduce phase errors (I'm using Thuneau's Phase Arbitrator), the effects of reduced phase error in our systems appear to be similar. I, too, experience increased detail, more dramatic transient response, and clearer imaging. Note, however, that both of us have put significant effort into tonal balance and management of room effects.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Barney
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > Lars Boman
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                      • mm
                                        Hi Barney, Thanks for giving us the tip on the Phase Arbitrator. I am sure some of us who have reached the stage where final tuning of their audio system is
                                        Message 19 of 26 , Jun 11, 2012
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Hi Barney,

                                          Thanks for giving us the tip on the Phase Arbitrator. I am sure some of us who have reached the stage where final tuning of their audio system is needed are already thinking hard about the purchase of that software or have already placed their orders.

                                          best,
                                          Yip

                                          --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > Hi REG,
                                          >
                                          > For what it may be worth, I entered this conversation because I was surprised by the improvement the Phase Arbitrator made in my system. It struck me as a relatively simple and inexpensive way to improve sound that had already benefited from my best efforts to reduce coloration and increase resolution (using the resources at my disposal).
                                          >
                                          > I, for one, didn't believe I was discovering a new and important to-be-eliminated coloration. In fact, phase correction seems to be the most subtle of the improvements I've made in my system. In addition, I suspect that its effects are readily masked by less subtle sources of coloration.
                                          >
                                          > At his second birthday party my son said, "I love cake, Dad . . . except for that bready part underneath." His taste has matured since. I'd like to think mine has, too.
                                          >
                                          > Barney
                                          >
                                          > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                                          > >
                                          > > This sounds fair enough.
                                          > > I changed the lead line here, because
                                          > > once and for all please:
                                          > > PHASE LINEARITY OR LACK THEREOF IS AN AUDIBLE EFFECT.
                                          > > It is important in talking about audio
                                          > > not to act as if one were discovering something new.
                                          > > Phase has been known to be audible under some
                                          > > circumstances for a very long time. In the
                                          > > 19th century for a brief time, it was believed
                                          > > not to be. This was however about harmonics of pure tones in particular ("Ohm's Law").
                                          > > But that was a long time ago and no one in psychoacoustics
                                          > > today would claim that phase was inaudible on complex
                                          > > material with broad spectrum.
                                          > > The issue is not audibility but signficance in practice.
                                          > >
                                          > > People can listen for themselves. And of course
                                          > > a lot depends on WHERE the crossover points are
                                          > > the crossover being the source of phase nonlinearity
                                          > > (most of the source anyway). It is also important
                                          > > to note that, because "phase linearty" is not
                                          > > a sort of on off switch--phase non linearity comes
                                          > > in lots of different forms! And the frequency range
                                          > > where things are changing in nonlinear ways and
                                          > > how fast the change is happening make a big difference
                                          > > to how important it is. (big changes occurring over short
                                          > > frequency intervals are far more audible than slow changes from
                                          > > (say) bottom to top, the latter being of very limited audibility if any while the former makes demonstrable timbre alterations)
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > Anyway, with DSP it is pretty easy to check it out.
                                          > > for your particular speaker.
                                          > >
                                          > > REG
                                          > >
                                          > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Hi REG,
                                          > > >
                                          > > > (1) All phase corrections were applied to both of my main speakers. Thus, any phase differences were uncorrected.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > (2) My guests' observations were made under single-blind conditions. I asked only open-ended questions when inquiring about what they heard to avoid "leading them." I didn't record their comments. However, I recall two statements that I interpreted as referring to imaging: "It sounds like they [a small jazz ensemble] are in the room [with phase correction on]" and "The positions of the musicians are more definite [with phase correction on]. As one would expect, none of my listeners indicated that the positions of the musicians changed.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > My own observations (not made under blind conditions and thus subject to expectancy-related bias, despite my best efforts to remain objective) is that it's a bit easier to determine where the performers are as well as how far they were from microphones, reflecting surfaces, etc. Their sonic images also seem more compact and solid.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > If you'd like, I'll set up as carefully controlled test as I can to determine whether I'm fooling myself.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > In the absence of data that challenge the validity of my observations, my experience suggests that -- at least in my system -- phase correction is best characterized (for me) as "icing on the cake." It's darn nice icing, but it's not a substitute for satisfying cake.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Respectfully,
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Barney
                                          > > >
                                          > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > One begins to be curious whether these
                                          > > > > effects were verified under blind conditions.
                                          > > > > Also, about this clearer imaging--
                                          > > > > are you talking about lining up
                                          > > > > the channels to have the same phase
                                          > > > > behavior as each other(which would
                                          > > > > surely effect imaging) or
                                          > > > > phase linearizing the speakers
                                          > > > > individually--which would have much
                                          > > > > more subtle effects(if any) on imaging?
                                          > > > > The distinction is really important...
                                          > > > > REG
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > Lars,
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > Although your speakers and mine are quite different (as noted in another string, I have Harbeth M40s) and we use different means to reduce phase errors (I'm using Thuneau's Phase Arbitrator), the effects of reduced phase error in our systems appear to be similar. I, too, experience increased detail, more dramatic transient response, and clearer imaging. Note, however, that both of us have put significant effort into tonal balance and management of room effects.
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > Barney
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Lars Boman
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > >
                                          >
                                        • Robert
                                          Phase linearity is a funny thing. As noted, it is definitely audible on certain types material. But there are things that worry me about the description,
                                          Message 20 of 26 , Jun 11, 2012
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Phase linearity is a funny thing.
                                            As noted, it is definitely audible
                                            on certain types material.
                                            But there are things that worry me
                                            about the description, because the
                                            things described are not in fact what
                                            struck me most strongly when I
                                            was experimenting with this(which
                                            I had done a good bit).
                                            With the Holm unit, phase and amplitude are
                                            both fixed, so one cannot separate out
                                            the effects. But earlier I had a unit
                                            from Audio Alchemy that did phase only
                                            (or amplitude only or both).
                                            [The Arion/Essex unit also does both
                                            phase and amplitude but with the SP1/2
                                            the amplitude correction is not much--
                                            though there is a little, but the Audio
                                            Alchemy unit did phase only]

                                            What struck me had nothing to do with stereo
                                            imaging--indeed, I cannot see any reason
                                            at all why stereo imaging would improve,
                                            since it is all based on interchannel differences
                                            rather than absolute anything.
                                            This makes me wonder if something else is not
                                            happening.

                                            But the phase linearization was quite conspicuously
                                            audible as timbre shifts on certain types of material.
                                            Wood blocks stick in my memory. AAs people had
                                            some demo material on the effect which featured
                                            wood blocks. And a good choice it was.
                                            As John Dunlavy(who was a big advocate
                                            of phase linearity of course) used to say,
                                            phase nonlinearity makes tics into tocks.
                                            This is a quite good description.

                                            But what makes me quite sceptical is all
                                            this generalized description, of the musicians
                                            being in the room in front of you and so on.
                                            Never mind that that is very much not what I
                                            personally consider the goal of audio(which
                                            in my view ought to be about your being there
                                            not they being where you are). It is too generalized
                                            to be convincing.

                                            The effects I encountered were very specific:
                                            Broadband transients changed character. And
                                            as it happens choral music got a little extra
                                            definition of the individual singers.
                                            Very specific effects, no generalized audiophile
                                            chit chat.

                                            No offense, but generalized effects are always less
                                            convincing to my mind in description than are specific
                                            ones.

                                            Also, it makes me rather nervous that many many tests
                                            (from Gradient and many other people) show that
                                            outside of specific instances of the sort I just
                                            described, the effect is hardly audible at all.
                                            If you are a wood block player , better
                                            get a phase linear speakers because otherwise
                                            you won't hear your instrument correctly.
                                            Ditto marimba(I just heard as a member of the accompanying
                                            orchestra the Sejournee Marimba Concerto--beautiful
                                            piece. And because the marimba does a lot of cadenza
                                            work while the orchestra is silent, I got a good
                                            chance to listen hard. Talk about a complex sound!
                                            And wonderful.)

                                            Of course, it is fairly easy to do with DSP.
                                            But the description made me wonder if maybe something
                                            else was going on, or whether there were
                                            things going on in the descriptions that were
                                            not really there. It would be interesting
                                            to try ABX double blind comparisons.

                                            Believe me, on woodblocks or marimbas
                                            one can nail it every time.
                                            On other things, it gets harder. Of course
                                            the extent of the change depends on the speakers.
                                            (The Spendors have no crossover below 3k so
                                            they might not be so indicative as three-way
                                            speakers with higher order crossovers).
                                            One thing that I wonder about is whether the
                                            phase linearization program used might not alter
                                            the frequency response is some way, without meaning to.
                                            This would not have to happen of course, but
                                            I do wonder.

                                            As a practical matter, why not experiment.
                                            But as a theoretical study, I wonder about the
                                            effects as described.

                                            If you get a program for this, try some woodblocks
                                            or marimba music. You might be surprised.

                                            REG


                                            --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            > Hi Barney,
                                            >
                                            > Thanks for giving us the tip on the Phase Arbitrator. I am sure some of us who have reached the stage where final tuning of their audio system is needed are already thinking hard about the purchase of that software or have already placed their orders.
                                            >
                                            > best,
                                            > Yip
                                            >
                                            > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                            > >
                                            > > Hi REG,
                                            > >
                                            > > For what it may be worth, I entered this conversation because I was surprised by the improvement the Phase Arbitrator made in my system. It struck me as a relatively simple and inexpensive way to improve sound that had already benefited from my best efforts to reduce coloration and increase resolution (using the resources at my disposal).
                                            > >
                                            > > I, for one, didn't believe I was discovering a new and important to-be-eliminated coloration. In fact, phase correction seems to be the most subtle of the improvements I've made in my system. In addition, I suspect that its effects are readily masked by less subtle sources of coloration.
                                            > >
                                            > > At his second birthday party my son said, "I love cake, Dad . . . except for that bready part underneath." His taste has matured since. I'd like to think mine has, too.
                                            > >
                                            > > Barney
                                            > >
                                            > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                                            > > >
                                            > > > This sounds fair enough.
                                            > > > I changed the lead line here, because
                                            > > > once and for all please:
                                            > > > PHASE LINEARITY OR LACK THEREOF IS AN AUDIBLE EFFECT.
                                            > > > It is important in talking about audio
                                            > > > not to act as if one were discovering something new.
                                            > > > Phase has been known to be audible under some
                                            > > > circumstances for a very long time. In the
                                            > > > 19th century for a brief time, it was believed
                                            > > > not to be. This was however about harmonics of pure tones in particular ("Ohm's Law").
                                            > > > But that was a long time ago and no one in psychoacoustics
                                            > > > today would claim that phase was inaudible on complex
                                            > > > material with broad spectrum.
                                            > > > The issue is not audibility but signficance in practice.
                                            > > >
                                            > > > People can listen for themselves. And of course
                                            > > > a lot depends on WHERE the crossover points are
                                            > > > the crossover being the source of phase nonlinearity
                                            > > > (most of the source anyway). It is also important
                                            > > > to note that, because "phase linearty" is not
                                            > > > a sort of on off switch--phase non linearity comes
                                            > > > in lots of different forms! And the frequency range
                                            > > > where things are changing in nonlinear ways and
                                            > > > how fast the change is happening make a big difference
                                            > > > to how important it is. (big changes occurring over short
                                            > > > frequency intervals are far more audible than slow changes from
                                            > > > (say) bottom to top, the latter being of very limited audibility if any while the former makes demonstrable timbre alterations)
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > > Anyway, with DSP it is pretty easy to check it out.
                                            > > > for your particular speaker.
                                            > > >
                                            > > > REG
                                            > > >
                                            > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > Hi REG,
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > (1) All phase corrections were applied to both of my main speakers. Thus, any phase differences were uncorrected.
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > (2) My guests' observations were made under single-blind conditions. I asked only open-ended questions when inquiring about what they heard to avoid "leading them." I didn't record their comments. However, I recall two statements that I interpreted as referring to imaging: "It sounds like they [a small jazz ensemble] are in the room [with phase correction on]" and "The positions of the musicians are more definite [with phase correction on]. As one would expect, none of my listeners indicated that the positions of the musicians changed.
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > My own observations (not made under blind conditions and thus subject to expectancy-related bias, despite my best efforts to remain objective) is that it's a bit easier to determine where the performers are as well as how far they were from microphones, reflecting surfaces, etc. Their sonic images also seem more compact and solid.
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > If you'd like, I'll set up as carefully controlled test as I can to determine whether I'm fooling myself.
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > In the absence of data that challenge the validity of my observations, my experience suggests that -- at least in my system -- phase correction is best characterized (for me) as "icing on the cake." It's darn nice icing, but it's not a substitute for satisfying cake.
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > Respectfully,
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > Barney
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > > One begins to be curious whether these
                                            > > > > > effects were verified under blind conditions.
                                            > > > > > Also, about this clearer imaging--
                                            > > > > > are you talking about lining up
                                            > > > > > the channels to have the same phase
                                            > > > > > behavior as each other(which would
                                            > > > > > surely effect imaging) or
                                            > > > > > phase linearizing the speakers
                                            > > > > > individually--which would have much
                                            > > > > > more subtle effects(if any) on imaging?
                                            > > > > > The distinction is really important...
                                            > > > > > REG
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > Lars,
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > Although your speakers and mine are quite different (as noted in another string, I have Harbeth M40s) and we use different means to reduce phase errors (I'm using Thuneau's Phase Arbitrator), the effects of reduced phase error in our systems appear to be similar. I, too, experience increased detail, more dramatic transient response, and clearer imaging. Note, however, that both of us have put significant effort into tonal balance and management of room effects.
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > Barney
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                                            > > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > > REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.
                                            > > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > > How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)
                                            > > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > > The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".
                                            > > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > > It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.
                                            > > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > > It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.
                                            > > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > > The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.
                                            > > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > > YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!
                                            > > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > > > Lars Boman
                                            > > > > > > >
                                            > > > > > >
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > >
                                            >
                                          • Peter Allen
                                              In a recent post about subwoofers, I tipped my hat to Audioholics, which I think does an unusually thorough job of actually measuring performance rather
                                            Message 21 of 26 , Jun 12, 2012
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                               
                                              In a recent post about subwoofers, I tipped my hat to Audioholics, which I think does an unusually thorough job of actually measuring performance rather than just reporting on the number of carats each golden ear has.
                                               
                                              Here's a link to their subwoofer testing methodology:  http://www.audioholics.com/education/loudspeaker-basics/subwoofer-measurement-data 
                                               
                                              Peter
                                            • Robert
                                              This of course makes sense about subwoofers, which (except for a very few dipole ones) have omni radiation pattern so that it is clear what to measure.
                                              Message 22 of 26 , Jun 12, 2012
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                This of course makes sense about subwoofers,
                                                which (except for a very few dipole ones)
                                                have omni radiation pattern so that it is
                                                clear what to measure.

                                                However, the situation is less clear about speakers
                                                in general. Obviously, I do --and like to see--
                                                measurements. But the interpretation of speaker
                                                measurements is a highly vexed matter, and not
                                                an easy one. I invite people to read through this
                                                http://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/1008har
                                                carefully to see how vexed it is. By the end of this
                                                controversy, one is baffled by some of the statements made.
                                                For example, what kind of an argument is it against
                                                anechoic measurements(in the bass) to point out that people
                                                do not listen in an anechoic environment.
                                                Of course they do not, but the anechoic environment
                                                gives uniform and transferrable information.
                                                It is entirely normal in science and engineering to
                                                measure things in isolation
                                                and then transfer the information suitably to their
                                                actual environment. No one measures the tensile strength of
                                                steel after the bridge is erected.

                                                The totally fuzzy excuse making here about the problems
                                                of close miked woofer response is not encouraging.
                                                And this goes on and on. (And never mind that except for
                                                the 1k prominence the inroom response of the M40.1 in
                                                Atkinson's room is really quite good, pretty much a
                                                decent target curve for an inroom response, a point which is ignored in comparison with the usual boom dip measurements of speakers which are praised for their low end).

                                                I really like measurements. If I had my way in this world,
                                                every speaker would come with NRC measurements(including a power response measurement, not easy to do but useful).
                                                But one has to know how the measurements are done and
                                                what they mean. Anyone can push buttons on a measurement
                                                program. Interpreting what comes out is the trick.

                                                REG

                                                --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Peter Allen <alcomdata@...> wrote:
                                                >
                                                >  
                                                > In a recent post about subwoofers, I tipped my hat to Audioholics, which I think does an unusually thorough job of actually measuring performance rather than just reporting on the number of carats each golden ear has.
                                                >  
                                                > Here's a link to their subwoofer testing methodology:  http://www.audioholics.com/education/loudspeaker-basics/subwoofer-measurement-data%c2%a0
                                                >  
                                                > Peter
                                                >
                                              • Uli Brueggemann
                                                Robert, how to properly measure corner woofers? As a corner is a part of the woofer design I wonder how an anechoic measurement gives reasonable results to
                                                Message 23 of 26 , Jun 12, 2012
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Robert,

                                                  how to properly measure corner woofers?
                                                  As a corner is a part of the woofer design I wonder how an anechoic measurement gives reasonable results to predict the woofer behaviour in a corner.
                                                  It seems that just a measurement in free field with but with a corner is the only solution. What do you think about?

                                                  Uli

                                                  On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Robert <regtas43@...> wrote:
                                                   


                                                  Of course they do not, but the anechoic environment
                                                  gives uniform and transferrable information.
                                                  It is entirely normal in science and engineering to
                                                  measure things in isolation
                                                  and then transfer the information suitably to their
                                                  actual environment.


                                                • HM
                                                  Measuring close to woofers still clearly indicate room resonances, measuring at the seat shows Allison effects at listening position too. The sonic differences
                                                  Message 24 of 26 , Jun 12, 2012
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Measuring close to woofers still clearly indicate room resonances, measuring at the seat shows Allison effects at listening position too.

                                                    The sonic differences of corner woofers that are pushed snugly to the adjacent walls or pulled away few centimeters is clearly audible, I mean 1-5 cm (1"-2").

                                                    Any other woofer placement further apartfrom room boundaries than 1/4 crossover frequencies wavelength will affect frequency response.
                                                    Cancellations come with severe phase shifts, I believe, these degrade the soundstage imaging.

                                                    How much subwoofers depend on minor distance from room boundaries can be easily tested by turning the woofer chassis to the wall and allow it to fire under an angle of 30°-45° against the wall into a short conical horn.
                                                    Extras like better damping will affect resonant frequency positively, it will be lowered. Its transient response (tonebursts) will become better. This is not only so in physics, it happens with woofers audibly.
                                                    I dont see how the anechoic response can tell anything about aforementioned reasonable aspects of setting up woofers. It covers only one of the many aspects that matter audibly.

                                                    Flushmounting inwall speakers may solve some problems but the seat position in the room remains with all related (Allison + room reflections) problems. One has to find a good wellbalanced sweet spot in the room modes and compensate the remaining problems with speaker placement in the room. This will keep timing /phase problems at minimum too. Any frequency response issue can be addressed by fine EQ or digital room correction systems.
                                                    BR HM

                                                    >
                                                    > Robert,
                                                    >
                                                    > how to properly measure corner woofers?
                                                    > As a corner is a part of the woofer design I wonder how an anechoic
                                                    > measurement gives reasonable results to predict the woofer behaviour in a
                                                    > corner.
                                                    > It seems that just a measurement in free field with but with a corner is
                                                    > the only solution. What do you think about?
                                                    >
                                                    > Uli
                                                    >
                                                    > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Robert <regtas43@...> wrote:
                                                    >
                                                    > > **
                                                    > >
                                                    > >
                                                    > >
                                                    > > Of course they do not, but the anechoic environment
                                                    > > gives uniform and transferrable information.
                                                    > > It is entirely normal in science and engineering to
                                                    > > measure things in isolation
                                                    > > and then transfer the information suitably to their
                                                    > > actual environment.
                                                    > >
                                                    >
                                                  • barnet.feingold
                                                    (1) Thanks, Yip! (2) Robert: I d be more than willing to post the phase and frequency responses of my system if anyone wants to see them. If there s a way to
                                                    Message 25 of 26 , Jun 12, 2012
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      (1) Thanks, Yip!
                                                      (2) Robert: I'd be more than willing to post the phase and frequency responses of my system if anyone wants to see them. If there's a way to do so on this forum, I'd appreciate instructions. If not, I'm open to suggestions.

                                                      --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "mm" <yipmangmeng@...> wrote:
                                                      >
                                                      > Hi Barney,
                                                      >
                                                      > Thanks for giving us the tip on the Phase Arbitrator. I am sure some of us who have reached the stage where final tuning of their audio system is needed are already thinking hard about the purchase of that software or have already placed their orders.
                                                      >
                                                      > best,
                                                      > Yip
                                                      >
                                                      > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Hi REG,
                                                      > >
                                                      > > For what it may be worth, I entered this conversation because I was surprised by the improvement the Phase Arbitrator made in my system. It struck me as a relatively simple and inexpensive way to improve sound that had already benefited from my best efforts to reduce coloration and increase resolution (using the resources at my disposal).
                                                      > >
                                                      > > I, for one, didn't believe I was discovering a new and important to-be-eliminated coloration. In fact, phase correction seems to be the most subtle of the improvements I've made in my system. In addition, I suspect that its effects are readily masked by less subtle sources of coloration.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > At his second birthday party my son said, "I love cake, Dad . . . except for that bready part underneath." His taste has matured since. I'd like to think mine has, too.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Barney
                                                      > >
                                                      > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > This sounds fair enough.
                                                      > > > I changed the lead line here, because
                                                      > > > once and for all please:
                                                      > > > PHASE LINEARITY OR LACK THEREOF IS AN AUDIBLE EFFECT.
                                                      > > > It is important in talking about audio
                                                      > > > not to act as if one were discovering something new.
                                                      > > > Phase has been known to be audible under some
                                                      > > > circumstances for a very long time. In the
                                                      > > > 19th century for a brief time, it was believed
                                                      > > > not to be. This was however about harmonics of pure tones in particular ("Ohm's Law").
                                                      > > > But that was a long time ago and no one in psychoacoustics
                                                      > > > today would claim that phase was inaudible on complex
                                                      > > > material with broad spectrum.
                                                      > > > The issue is not audibility but signficance in practice.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > People can listen for themselves. And of course
                                                      > > > a lot depends on WHERE the crossover points are
                                                      > > > the crossover being the source of phase nonlinearity
                                                      > > > (most of the source anyway). It is also important
                                                      > > > to note that, because "phase linearty" is not
                                                      > > > a sort of on off switch--phase non linearity comes
                                                      > > > in lots of different forms! And the frequency range
                                                      > > > where things are changing in nonlinear ways and
                                                      > > > how fast the change is happening make a big difference
                                                      > > > to how important it is. (big changes occurring over short
                                                      > > > frequency intervals are far more audible than slow changes from
                                                      > > > (say) bottom to top, the latter being of very limited audibility if any while the former makes demonstrable timbre alterations)
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > Anyway, with DSP it is pretty easy to check it out.
                                                      > > > for your particular speaker.
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > REG
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > Hi REG,
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > (1) All phase corrections were applied to both of my main speakers. Thus, any phase differences were uncorrected.
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > (2) My guests' observations were made under single-blind conditions. I asked only open-ended questions when inquiring about what they heard to avoid "leading them." I didn't record their comments. However, I recall two statements that I interpreted as referring to imaging: "It sounds like they [a small jazz ensemble] are in the room [with phase correction on]" and "The positions of the musicians are more definite [with phase correction on]. As one would expect, none of my listeners indicated that the positions of the musicians changed.
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > My own observations (not made under blind conditions and thus subject to expectancy-related bias, despite my best efforts to remain objective) is that it's a bit easier to determine where the performers are as well as how far they were from microphones, reflecting surfaces, etc. Their sonic images also seem more compact and solid.
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > If you'd like, I'll set up as carefully controlled test as I can to determine whether I'm fooling myself.
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > In the absence of data that challenge the validity of my observations, my experience suggests that -- at least in my system -- phase correction is best characterized (for me) as "icing on the cake." It's darn nice icing, but it's not a substitute for satisfying cake.
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > Respectfully,
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > Barney
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > One begins to be curious whether these
                                                      > > > > > effects were verified under blind conditions.
                                                      > > > > > Also, about this clearer imaging--
                                                      > > > > > are you talking about lining up
                                                      > > > > > the channels to have the same phase
                                                      > > > > > behavior as each other(which would
                                                      > > > > > surely effect imaging) or
                                                      > > > > > phase linearizing the speakers
                                                      > > > > > individually--which would have much
                                                      > > > > > more subtle effects(if any) on imaging?
                                                      > > > > > The distinction is really important...
                                                      > > > > > REG
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "barnet.feingold" <barnet.feingold@> wrote:
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > Lars,
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > Although your speakers and mine are quite different (as noted in another string, I have Harbeth M40s) and we use different means to reduce phase errors (I'm using Thuneau's Phase Arbitrator), the effects of reduced phase error in our systems appear to be similar. I, too, experience increased detail, more dramatic transient response, and clearer imaging. Note, however, that both of us have put significant effort into tonal balance and management of room effects.
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > Barney
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Lars Boman" <larsbmadsen@> wrote:
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > REG is mostly focussing on the frequency response, and he is absolutely right about that. But the phase, or the time behaviour, is also important, if we want to reproduce the musical instruments as faithful as possible. As we all know music is very far from steady state signals, and time smearing destroys all the fine details. I know that almost all test of audibility of phase errors concludes that phase errors is not audible, but if you reduce time smearing in loudspeaker reproduction it is clearly audible.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > How can we reduce time smearing? I use Uli's Acourate to measure and generate linear phase crossovers, correction files and the correct time delay between loudspeaker units. My main speakers are modified Quad ELS-63 placed on top of a homemade dipole woofer with two 12 inch Scan-Speak units. I use a target curve that is flat from 20 Hz to about 500 Hz and a slight roll of to 20000 Hz (I have got a lot of inspiration to my target curve from REG writing about correct frequency response)
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > The sound from my system is precise, clear and detailed, and especially the acoustical instruments is reproduced much more faithful than on "normal" speakers, the voices are much better than in any system I have ever heard. You can hear transients, decays and details you have never heard before on that recording. People often ask me, when I play a well known number, if I use a special version, and I can answer "No, it is the ordinary CD".
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > It is a new experience to hear such a system, the singer is exactly in the middle, not diffuse as in ordinary systems, and the stereo image is almost holographic, every singer/instrument is placed precisely and "comes out of the speaker" in a most wonderful way.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > It does not mean the all records sounds perfect, I can only influence the reproduction, not the recording.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > The combination of phase linear digital crossover, amplitude and phase correction (Acourate), modified ELS-63 placed 2½ m from the rear wall, with appropriate damping material between, and a open/dipole woofer linear down to 20 Hz gives a sound reproduction that is clearly better than what any commercial speaker system can do.
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > YES - time smearing/phase errors does mean something in loudspeaker reproduction!
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > > > Lars Boman
                                                      > > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > > >
                                                      > > > > >
                                                      > > > >
                                                      > > >
                                                      > >
                                                      >
                                                    • Robert
                                                      The issue was whether one should measure anechoically or use Keele s close miked woofer response method. The latter is a poor substitute for the former. It is
                                                      Message 26 of 26 , Jun 12, 2012
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        The issue was whether one should measure anechoically
                                                        or use Keele's close miked woofer response method.
                                                        The latter is a poor substitute for the former.
                                                        It is quite true that if one places speakers very
                                                        close to the wall, then there are loading effects
                                                        which are not part of the omni character, eg
                                                        if a driver is up against a wall.
                                                        The discussion in question was about a speaker
                                                        which is intended for free space mounting
                                                        where close-boundary loading effects are not part
                                                        of the situation--though of course Allison effects
                                                        remain so.

                                                        REG

                                                        --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "HM" <hmartinburm@...> wrote:
                                                        >
                                                        > Measuring close to woofers still clearly indicate room resonances, measuring at the seat shows Allison effects at listening position too.
                                                        >
                                                        > The sonic differences of corner woofers that are pushed snugly to the adjacent walls or pulled away few centimeters is clearly audible, I mean 1-5 cm (1"-2").
                                                        >
                                                        > Any other woofer placement further apartfrom room boundaries than 1/4 crossover frequencies wavelength will affect frequency response.
                                                        > Cancellations come with severe phase shifts, I believe, these degrade the soundstage imaging.
                                                        >
                                                        > How much subwoofers depend on minor distance from room boundaries can be easily tested by turning the woofer chassis to the wall and allow it to fire under an angle of 30°-45° against the wall into a short conical horn.
                                                        > Extras like better damping will affect resonant frequency positively, it will be lowered. Its transient response (tonebursts) will become better. This is not only so in physics, it happens with woofers audibly.
                                                        > I dont see how the anechoic response can tell anything about aforementioned reasonable aspects of setting up woofers. It covers only one of the many aspects that matter audibly.
                                                        >
                                                        > Flushmounting inwall speakers may solve some problems but the seat position in the room remains with all related (Allison + room reflections) problems. One has to find a good wellbalanced sweet spot in the room modes and compensate the remaining problems with speaker placement in the room. This will keep timing /phase problems at minimum too. Any frequency response issue can be addressed by fine EQ or digital room correction systems.
                                                        > BR HM
                                                        >
                                                        > >
                                                        > > Robert,
                                                        > >
                                                        > > how to properly measure corner woofers?
                                                        > > As a corner is a part of the woofer design I wonder how an anechoic
                                                        > > measurement gives reasonable results to predict the woofer behaviour in a
                                                        > > corner.
                                                        > > It seems that just a measurement in free field with but with a corner is
                                                        > > the only solution. What do you think about?
                                                        > >
                                                        > > Uli
                                                        > >
                                                        > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Robert <regtas43@> wrote:
                                                        > >
                                                        > > > **
                                                        > > >
                                                        > > >
                                                        > > >
                                                        > > > Of course they do not, but the anechoic environment
                                                        > > > gives uniform and transferrable information.
                                                        > > > It is entirely normal in science and engineering to
                                                        > > > measure things in isolation
                                                        > > > and then transfer the information suitably to their
                                                        > > > actual environment.
                                                        > > >
                                                        > >
                                                        >
                                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.