On a lighter note,
Timbre is French in origin, which is apparent in its pronunciation: it is often pronounced \TAM-ber\ and, with a more French-influenced second syllable, \TAM-bruh\.
While timber is measured as herebelow:
Any objective measurements available for Audio Products ( eg Indiq audio)
- Thread starter Vineethkumar01
- Start date
On a lighter note,
Timbre is French in origin, which is apparent in its pronunciation: it is often pronounced \TAM-ber\ and, with a more French-influenced second syllable, \TAM-bruh\.
While timber is measured as herebelow:
sorry my bad, I wrongly intepreted you earlier statement as better imaging at cost of soundstage and vice versa.
Imaging and soundsatge are complimentary.
With well made speakers, the aim is to achive close to point source output out of multiway designs.
There are bound to be deviations but our ears controlled by the most complex processor called the brain is capable of balancing out phase differencs or coherance between the speakers to certain degree and extent.
Our two ears, often do not age equally but we hardly ever notice it in our day to day life unless the differences are beyond a limit.
While we so much talk about speaker designs, hardly we ever measure to see if both our ears are matched.
Each instrument has its own timbre based on the material used and how it resonates. The black center of a tabla sounds like a bell while the outer harder surface has a different timbre. Similar are the sonic differences between sets in a drum which define their timbre.
Western music characterices 5 types of timbres in vocals namely soprano, messo, tenor etc. with subsects like baritone. I am not aware of similar differenciation in Indian music.
Now a speaker which is made of a fixed or a composite material has to reproduce all these timbres as a music can comprise of mix of these timbres generated by various materials.
To achive that is naturally impossible, but our GOD givdn ears are adept to do that by experience. That is one of the reason many say listening to ACOUSTIC live sessions can help train your ears to decipher timbre of various instruments and voices and that makes music from two speakers more enjoyable as these tones (timbres) are already registered in your neurons. While listening back from speakers our brain just recalls them better that untrained ears.
Just plainly equalting measurements to music has its own fallacies due to the complexities involved.
Vineethkumar01
Well-Known Member
I agree regarding using one's ears to make judgements about speakers, especially purchase decisions. I used to frequently go to Carnatic classical concerts during the 6-7 years I spent for my research. I also used to go attend live shows by certain bands whenever one came up in Bangalore and I was free. I can play a bit of guitar and bass guitar or at least I could, in the past. So those experiences are my own reference points regarding the kind of music I like/prefer and how I like them to be heard on speakers.
But at the end of everything, I am an engineer. So I am more than interested in also studying and verifying the kind of engineering that goes into the speakers I am interested in. For that I need to look at measurements and analyze them to the extent I understand about them. They is no way around that at least for me. Hence my own personal insistence on looking at measurements. I personally have found them to be really useful in my audio journey. And I am sure many others will find them to be as useful or more.
Absolutely. Without proper engineering one cannot design good sounding speakers. Many manufacturers also outsource drivers from well regarded bulk manufacturers either to their specs or from what is available. These come with detailed specs based on which speakera are built.
Vineethkumar01
Well-Known Member
Enkay78
Well-Known Member
If the spinorama of two speakers are exactly same, they wI'll sound same in the same room, with same acoustic treatment, same placement of the speakers, at the same listening position, listening to the same source ; same amplification and same songs/music.
This is science. All these videos showing difference of same measuring speakers are talking about different scenarios and permutations/combination with a single control factor of measurement (probably they mean FR on axis). But when the on axis, off axis, reflections, directivity are same in a controlled acoustic environment, the bias is reduced .....and only the physical characteristics of the two speakers remains the deciding factor. And hence will sound similar if they measure same. (There remains no confounding factors).
All these debates and confusions are due to the many factors ...not only of the speakers themselves, which effect the perception of music from them.
A speaker will/can sound different in morning when the listener is in good mood compared to when he is in an angry mood in evening. The same speaker can sound different when weather is moist and rainy compared to when weather is dry and hot. Attributes of air, mood, age of listener, profession , training in critical listening etc etc plays a role.
However when denied of confounding factors (eg anechoic chamber etc), if spinorama are same, both wi sound same because it's physics.
This is science. All these videos showing difference of same measuring speakers are talking about different scenarios and permutations/combination with a single control factor of measurement (probably they mean FR on axis). But when the on axis, off axis, reflections, directivity are same in a controlled acoustic environment, the bias is reduced .....and only the physical characteristics of the two speakers remains the deciding factor. And hence will sound similar if they measure same. (There remains no confounding factors).
All these debates and confusions are due to the many factors ...not only of the speakers themselves, which effect the perception of music from them.
A speaker will/can sound different in morning when the listener is in good mood compared to when he is in an angry mood in evening. The same speaker can sound different when weather is moist and rainy compared to when weather is dry and hot. Attributes of air, mood, age of listener, profession , training in critical listening etc etc plays a role.
However when denied of confounding factors (eg anechoic chamber etc), if spinorama are same, both wi sound same because it's physics.
Noob question: would this apply to different mdf boards, different woofer materials, etc?
Enkay78
Well-Known Member
Different materials will cause difference in measurements. (Internal echoes and reflections).
Different sizes of speakers are also factors. But again they will not have same spinorama.
Vineethkumar01
Well-Known Member
I personally am fed up of giving arguments and counter arguments with some hope of clearing some of the non sense being spread around in the name of 'science', 'physics', and 'objectivity'. Some physicists might be rolling in their graves.
Anyway, since you asked this question about whether different materials used in cabinet construction and driver membrane construction will contribute to sound, the answer is yes, per my limited knowledge. This is because the natural resonant frequencies of above mentioned structures will depend on their dimensions, stiffness, damping properties etc. Stiffness differs between materials. So an MDF panel, a plywood panel, and an aluminum panel of the same dimensions may resonate at different frequencies and may also 'sound' different to our ears when given an equal amount of excitation.
How long we will be able to hear that sound will depend upon how fast that panel is able to dissipate/damp the energy acting it. To capture this behavior using measurements, one would need to look at cumulative spectral decay (CSD) plots and not the frequency response (similar to what is shown by a spinorama). Spinorama kind of plots will show the relative 'tonal balance' across a range of frequencies and a measure of how the sound is radiated into 3D space. It doesn't tell about the energy decay, for which we need to simultaneously look at time and frequency domains.
Check out this site regarding how different cabinet construction materials will 'sound' like: http://www.picosound.de/D_gehmat.htm
The site is in German but google translate makes it a non-issue to understand. Even if you don't read the material, download the sound clips at the end and listen to them. It is not the most accurate comparison but it will give a 'feel' for what I tried to tell above.
If you find it interesting/like to learn more, check out the measurements of different drivers here: https://hificompass.com/ru/speakers/measurements
Compare between waterfall plots of different drivers of same diameter. Though it is an apples to oranges comparison (since even the wieghts of membranes differ between drivers), you will see resonances occurring at different frequencies and that they last for different durations for a paper cone vs aluminum cone vs polypropylene cone vs other exotic material membrane drivers..
Last edited:
Enkay78
Well-Known Member
Well ruminating again this Sunday.
Off topic: I feel this thread is one of the best intellectually stimulating thread. And yes the equine flogging seems repeated and unending......but man, this adds value to the journey.
On topic:
I just want it clarify that when I mentioned same measuring speakers - I meant, theoretically, all the measurements including the internal reflections/echoes/resonances of the speaker box in addition to the drivers. And yes I don't know whether the pinnacle of audio measurements has been reached or not, but I do fine the predictive information from a spinorama a most helpful tool(e) for me
I do confess, I have not heard any 'high end ultraexpensive speakers like the Magico .....heck even the B&W nautilus. I can only 'audition' on video reviews and 'subjective' reviews. However my interest in this hobby does not reach to that level to even want to listen to those speakers Magico et al (maybe I am not an audiophile enough).....or to even want to own an ultraexpensive amps/dacs/cable.
But I do prefer and like hi-fidelity. And with my ongoing interests and research, have come to find out the science of audio. And with this enlightenment, I am happy to find so much early in my journey how to enjoy my music with what I feel is a commensurate investments (time, interest, money). Hence I prefer measurements to measure the fidelity of what I buy.
Speaker measurements do seem complex. But if I have to surmise, the research is almost done. And for 99.9% of Earth's population it can be easily predicted they want.
0.1% persist the drive for perfection. Which is good.
In the beginning of my journey I was highly tuned to stereo (2 channel) music. My decisions, preference are all towards getting the best sounding stereo.
But lately I am now into multichannel. Stereo is pass for me......except listening through headphones (when I want a reverie of solitude). All these soundstage, directivity are passe for me.
I never imagine myself to ape Mr Toole
On a reflective note, I do find the engagement very stimulating.....even if it is flogging the horse to the bones and morsels.
Off topic: I feel this thread is one of the best intellectually stimulating thread. And yes the equine flogging seems repeated and unending......but man, this adds value to the journey.
On topic:
I just want it clarify that when I mentioned same measuring speakers - I meant, theoretically, all the measurements including the internal reflections/echoes/resonances of the speaker box in addition to the drivers. And yes I don't know whether the pinnacle of audio measurements has been reached or not, but I do fine the predictive information from a spinorama a most helpful tool(e) for me
I do confess, I have not heard any 'high end ultraexpensive speakers like the Magico .....heck even the B&W nautilus. I can only 'audition' on video reviews and 'subjective' reviews. However my interest in this hobby does not reach to that level to even want to listen to those speakers Magico et al (maybe I am not an audiophile enough).....or to even want to own an ultraexpensive amps/dacs/cable.
But I do prefer and like hi-fidelity. And with my ongoing interests and research, have come to find out the science of audio. And with this enlightenment, I am happy to find so much early in my journey how to enjoy my music with what I feel is a commensurate investments (time, interest, money). Hence I prefer measurements to measure the fidelity of what I buy.
Speaker measurements do seem complex. But if I have to surmise, the research is almost done. And for 99.9% of Earth's population it can be easily predicted they want.
0.1% persist the drive for perfection. Which is good.
In the beginning of my journey I was highly tuned to stereo (2 channel) music. My decisions, preference are all towards getting the best sounding stereo.
But lately I am now into multichannel. Stereo is pass for me......except listening through headphones (when I want a reverie of solitude). All these soundstage, directivity are passe for me.
I never imagine myself to ape Mr Toole
On a reflective note, I do find the engagement very stimulating.....even if it is flogging the horse to the bones and morsels.
A very balanced post and I agree with you on some areas especially the science will only keep improving but in the end the product will follow the market. If the majority of the market moves towards the measured approach to equipment the product manufacturers have no option ut to do so.
Although perhaps these days the market and not just about audio but as a culture, is more and more about branding and audio with discerning buyers ( either by spec or ear) sadly reducing in nos.
Not sure on the 99.9, but again its not an area I am worried about since by its own Principle science will only keep on improving and we will never know 100% about anything since the more we learn about something the more we discover is left to learn.
Although perhaps these days the market and not just about audio but as a culture, is more and more about branding and audio with discerning buyers ( either by spec or ear) sadly reducing in nos.
Not sure on the 99.9, but again its not an area I am worried about since by its own Principle science will only keep on improving and we will never know 100% about anything since the more we learn about something the more we discover is left to learn.
Hi @Enkay78 ,
I did not know this was possible or being done.
Grateful, If you can share a good link on this process.
Enkay78
Well-Known Member
The Spinorama takes into account all these.
And from it we can have a reliable prediction of how the speaker can sound.
(Toole et al)
Some of you may find this interesting
keith_correa
Well-Known Member
Thank you Prem
I came across this on the ASR on speaker design via shape and topology.
(Just trying CPR on the horse)
audiosciencereview.com
(Just trying CPR on the horse)
Simulation Overview - Loudspeakers Design via Shape and Topology Optimization
-Introduction- May 20 I will give a presentation on the COMSOL Acoustics Day on state-of-the-art loudspeaker simulation techniques, and I will give ASR readers a little sneak peek here. As always, feel free to ask away in the thread, and I will try and answer as best I can. -Loudspeaker...
audiosciencereview.com
Enkay78
Well-Known Member
To me it's not CPR, but rather 'lifting of veil/curtains'I came across this on the ASR on speaker design via shape and topology.
(Just trying CPR on the horse)
Simulation Overview - Loudspeakers Design via Shape and Topology Optimization
-Introduction- May 20 I will give a presentation on the COMSOL Acoustics Day on state-of-the-art loudspeaker simulation techniques, and I will give ASR readers a little sneak peek here. As always, feel free to ask away in the thread, and I will try and answer as best I can. -Loudspeaker...
Limahl!!!
Wharfedale Linton Heritage Speakers in Walnut finish at a Special Offer Price. BUY now before the price increase.
Similar threads
