13 ms·

If you perform an objective analysis of sound reproduction, it quickly becomes apparent that once you reach a certain price/performance threshold in speakers, t

If you perform an objective analysis of sound reproduction, it quickly becomes apparent that once you reach a certain price/performance threshold in speakers, the most critical element -- the element that has the greatest influence on the overall sound quality -- is room acoustics. But it's so much easier to sell expensive cardboard boxes containing obscure brand electronics; there is so much more markup in homeopathic rolls of copper wire, than there is in convincing someone to ruin their marriage over living room decor. Plus, it's just not a sexy investment, and requires expertise to be done properly. It has become the industry's inconvenient truth.

twerquie 12y ago
What about testing these systems with headphones then?
- sjwright 12y ago
  Headphones are great for minimizing issues of room acoustics, but they are not eliminated. Many people swear by various headphone amps and DACs, but the magnitude of difference these components could possibly impart are still pitiful compared to the improvements made possible by controlling the noise floor of the room you're listening in. This is why in any situation with ambient noise (e.g. planes, trains and open plan offices) the highest quality audiophile headphones on the market right now are the Bose QuietComfort series.
  - corv 12y ago
    Active noise cancelling headphones are hardly an audiophile's first pick. Almost all NC headphones introduce audible white noise. They are also ineffective at blocking voices in the background. Earplugs are significantly cheaper and more effective at blocking noise. That said, Bose does make the best NC headphones.
    - wodenokoto 12y ago
      The point is that the sum of added and reduced noise is smaller in the noise cancellation than in non-noise cancellation, unless you are in an optimized environment.
      - corv 12y ago
        The problem is that voices or crying babies will be more audible in a noisy environment when using active noise cancelling headphones because they only effectively attenuate low frequencies.
        sjwright 12y ago
        In a room with a crying baby, all pretense of an audiophile experience is gone, no matter what.
  - anentropic 12y ago
    you're not going to hear the 'room acoustics' on headphones surely. you may hear some ambient noise from the room if it's not sound-proofed, but that's not the same thing at all
    - sjwright 12y ago
      Acoustic treatments also involve sound insulation. An acoustically poor room can also accentuate environmental noise through excessive reflection and transmission.
  - PascLeRasc 12y ago
    Active noise-cancelling is counterproductive to a neutral, balanced sound, which is what audiophiles are seeking. The noise produced to cancel out background sounds will also cancel out the music. It is better to just try to use isolating headphones (Beyerdynamic, V-Moda, higer-end Audio-Technica, Mad Dogs, etc).
    - davidgerard 12y ago
      > neutral, balanced sound Sounds good! I assume you have tests to this effect?
    - sjwright 12y ago
      > Active noise-cancelling is counterproductive to a neutral, balanced sound NOISE is counterproductive to a neutral, balanced sound. FTFY.
lotsofmangos 12y ago
I have been looking at the idea of doing lots of small speakers with microphones on them attached to a fat lump of computer hardware, that you stick all over and they bleep each other and build an acoustic model of the space they are in, then adjust for it properly. Would basically be a self-modifying ambisonics system. It looks doable, though possibly a bit expensive.
- e12e 12y ago
  I believe there are some products in this space. It might be made simpler by integrating dac/dsp and amplifier in the speakers (and the just stream lossless digital audio for playback) -- rather than try and adapt to traditional speakers. It might be the kind of thing that the radical commoditization and continued price drop in hw will make feasible. Cinemas (and concert venues) do calibrate their sound, here's a sample link that touches on what's involved: http://education.lenardaudio.com/en/17_cinema_7.html http://education.lenardaudio.com/en/17_cinema_7.html I'm not sure a combined mic/speaker system makes much sense -- it would appear easier to just model what's important: how the sound sounds where the listener is -- which is typically anywhere other than on top of the speaker. Model a human head w/ears, but mics in each -- and hook that up to a system that plays/records/compares audio. While dynamically adapting (noise-cancelling when there's construction next door, the garbage truck rolls by?) -- I'm not sure that makes much sense. We're used to acoustics changing a bit -- but having a half-decent base-line would probably be great.
  - lotsofmangos 12y ago
    Putting them in the speakers just limits the amount of extra things you you have to install, the idea is that in initial setup each speaker goes through a test pattern while the other speakers stay silent, and this gives you position of all the speakers and the acoustic properties of the space they are in. Though if you also have some extra microphones, then you can do dynamic adjustments on top and even account for people moving through the space so that they do not block sound or even so a stereo recording follows them around.
    - 12y ago
trimble-alum 12y ago
This is why most car systems tend to be money pits (or status symbols for an ability to set cash alight by remote control). As it so happens, I inherited a car with an $8k USD system in 1987 dollars, which included ADS speakers and amps, Nakamichi head unit and so on nonsense excuses as to why we couldn't go on vacation that year. So fuck audiophilia and their anti-intellectual, placebo unicorns. Thanks HN for letting me resolve that adolescence issue, you've been a great sport.
mindslight 12y ago
I've come to realize there is a good amount of inherent subjectivity with respect to speakers - spatial dispersion isn't something that can be easily quantified, and as you say is going to vary significantly based on the room. So it kind of makes sense that listening tests are the only way to compare. But for amplifiers, it seems that THD, frequency response, and phase response would capture everything you need to know to fully characterize the component. What else is there? It's also odd to me that reviewers will sum up their conclusions as a piece of gear being "bright" or "bassy" - isn't that just an EQ setting? It seems that frequency response isn't really an important part of device characteristics since it can always be compensated for (within the physical limits of the driver), while the non-adjustable parts of response are (like, do speakers even give THD specs?). I would think a better methodology would be to use a reference microphone to calibrate the entire amplitude response to flat (or the reviewer's preference), and subjectivize from there. Then again, a large part of the industry seems to be based around convincing people to spend 10x and try out several pieces of gear (pre-qualifying the price to themselves on their favorite), so I don't expect straight objectivity will ever be a high priority.

twerquie 12y ago

What about testing these systems with headphones then?

sjwright 12y ago
Headphones are great for minimizing issues of room acoustics, but they are not eliminated. Many people swear by various headphone amps and DACs, but the magnitude of difference these components could possibly impart are still pitiful compared to the improvements made possible by controlling the noise floor of the room you're listening in. This is why in any situation with ambient noise (e.g. planes, trains and open plan offices) the highest quality audiophile headphones on the market right now are the Bose QuietComfort series.
- corv 12y ago
  Active noise cancelling headphones are hardly an audiophile's first pick. Almost all NC headphones introduce audible white noise. They are also ineffective at blocking voices in the background. Earplugs are significantly cheaper and more effective at blocking noise. That said, Bose does make the best NC headphones.
  - wodenokoto 12y ago
    The point is that the sum of added and reduced noise is smaller in the noise cancellation than in non-noise cancellation, unless you are in an optimized environment.
    - corv 12y ago
      The problem is that voices or crying babies will be more audible in a noisy environment when using active noise cancelling headphones because they only effectively attenuate low frequencies.
      - sjwright 12y ago
        In a room with a crying baby, all pretense of an audiophile experience is gone, no matter what.
- anentropic 12y ago
  you're not going to hear the 'room acoustics' on headphones surely. you may hear some ambient noise from the room if it's not sound-proofed, but that's not the same thing at all
  - sjwright 12y ago
    Acoustic treatments also involve sound insulation. An acoustically poor room can also accentuate environmental noise through excessive reflection and transmission.
- PascLeRasc 12y ago
  Active noise-cancelling is counterproductive to a neutral, balanced sound, which is what audiophiles are seeking. The noise produced to cancel out background sounds will also cancel out the music. It is better to just try to use isolating headphones (Beyerdynamic, V-Moda, higer-end Audio-Technica, Mad Dogs, etc).
  - davidgerard 12y ago
    > neutral, balanced sound Sounds good! I assume you have tests to this effect?
  - sjwright 12y ago
    > Active noise-cancelling is counterproductive to a neutral, balanced sound NOISE is counterproductive to a neutral, balanced sound. FTFY.

lotsofmangos 12y ago

I have been looking at the idea of doing lots of small speakers with microphones on them attached to a fat lump of computer hardware, that you stick all over and they bleep each other and build an acoustic model of the space they are in, then adjust for it properly. Would basically be a self-modifying ambisonics system. It looks doable, though possibly a bit expensive.

e12e 12y ago
I believe there are some products in this space. It might be made simpler by integrating dac/dsp and amplifier in the speakers (and the just stream lossless digital audio for playback) -- rather than try and adapt to traditional speakers. It might be the kind of thing that the radical commoditization and continued price drop in hw will make feasible. Cinemas (and concert venues) do calibrate their sound, here's a sample link that touches on what's involved: http://education.lenardaudio.com/en/17_cinema_7.html http://education.lenardaudio.com/en/17_cinema_7.html I'm not sure a combined mic/speaker system makes much sense -- it would appear easier to just model what's important: how the sound sounds where the listener is -- which is typically anywhere other than on top of the speaker. Model a human head w/ears, but mics in each -- and hook that up to a system that plays/records/compares audio. While dynamically adapting (noise-cancelling when there's construction next door, the garbage truck rolls by?) -- I'm not sure that makes much sense. We're used to acoustics changing a bit -- but having a half-decent base-line would probably be great.
- lotsofmangos 12y ago
  Putting them in the speakers just limits the amount of extra things you you have to install, the idea is that in initial setup each speaker goes through a test pattern while the other speakers stay silent, and this gives you position of all the speakers and the acoustic properties of the space they are in. Though if you also have some extra microphones, then you can do dynamic adjustments on top and even account for people moving through the space so that they do not block sound or even so a stereo recording follows them around.
  - 12y ago

trimble-alum 12y ago

This is why most car systems tend to be money pits (or status symbols for an ability to set cash alight by remote control). As it so happens, I inherited a car with an $8k USD system in 1987 dollars, which included ADS speakers and amps, Nakamichi head unit and so on nonsense excuses as to why we couldn't go on vacation that year. So fuck audiophilia and their anti-intellectual, placebo unicorns. Thanks HN for letting me resolve that adolescence issue, you've been a great sport.

mindslight 12y ago

I've come to realize there is a good amount of inherent subjectivity with respect to speakers - spatial dispersion isn't something that can be easily quantified, and as you say is going to vary significantly based on the room. So it kind of makes sense that listening tests are the only way to compare. But for amplifiers, it seems that THD, frequency response, and phase response would capture everything you need to know to fully characterize the component. What else is there? It's also odd to me that reviewers will sum up their conclusions as a piece of gear being "bright" or "bassy" - isn't that just an EQ setting? It seems that frequency response isn't really an important part of device characteristics since it can always be compensated for (within the physical limits of the driver), while the non-adjustable parts of response are (like, do speakers even give THD specs?). I would think a better methodology would be to use a reference microphone to calibrate the entire amplitude response to flat (or the reviewer's preference), and subjectivize from there. Then again, a large part of the industry seems to be based around convincing people to spend 10x and try out several pieces of gear (pre-qualifying the price to themselves on their favorite), so I don't expect straight objectivity will ever be a high priority.