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

Toole

Expand Messages
  • Robert
    Just to be clear, it is not so much that I think Toole is wrong as such. Rather it seems to me that he has simply not addressed questions that I(and I am
    Message 1 of 2 , Mar 1, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Just to be clear, it is not so much
      that I think Toole is wrong as such.
      Rather it seems to me that he has simply
      not addressed questions that I(and I
      am supposing most of us) find interesting.
      For example there is really no direct information
      at all on to what extent EQ can be used to
      make the sound at one listening position exactly
      neutral--nor for that matter what this would
      mean exactly.
      Toole is definitely of the opinion that one
      NEEDS reflections in stereo and quite a lot
      of them to make the stereo summation error less
      obvious and to generate spaciousness and envelopment.
      You can try it for yourself and see what you think.
      It is hard to say this is wrong. As Hardwood says,
      in the end you have to pick what you think sounds
      right.
      REG
    • Robert
      PS The other thing that he seems to differ from my/our viewpoints on is that he seems to feel that one is obligated to have a lot of high frequency energy in
      Message 2 of 2 , Mar 1, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        PS The other thing that he seems to differ
        from my/our viewpoints on is that he
        seems to feel that one is obligated
        to have a lot of high frequency energy in playback--
        even though one of the very first substantial
        things he says is that recordings are too bright on
        account of close miking.
        This seems to me strange.
        REG
        --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@...> wrote:
        >
        > Just to be clear, it is not so much
        > that I think Toole is wrong as such.
        > Rather it seems to me that he has simply
        > not addressed questions that I(and I
        > am supposing most of us) find interesting.
        > For example there is really no direct information
        > at all on to what extent EQ can be used to
        > make the sound at one listening position exactly
        > neutral--nor for that matter what this would
        > mean exactly.
        > Toole is definitely of the opinion that one
        > NEEDS reflections in stereo and quite a lot
        > of them to make the stereo summation error less
        > obvious and to generate spaciousness and envelopment.
        > You can try it for yourself and see what you think.
        > It is hard to say this is wrong. As Hardwood says,
        > in the end you have to pick what you think sounds
        > right.
        > REG
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.