Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > rec.audio.high-end > #9771

Re: Attenuate highest highs?

Show all headers | View raw

On 15/02/2020 5:32 am, Peter Wieck wrote:
> I think you are missing the point. If too much energy is being dissipated by the speakers in the high range, then too much energy is being dissipated in the high range.

**Unlikely. Assuming nothing is broken is the system (as suggested by 
Dick), then it is almost certainly a room problem. Room and speaker/room 
interaction *IS*, by a very considerable margin, the dominant factor is 
perceived audible problems in an audio system.


  And, the brute fact of the matter is that there is not a whole lot 
going on above 15 kHz anyway. So if the OP perceives that his speakers 
are overly bright, we should start there.

**Well, again: Assuming there is nothing broken in the speaker (which, 
obviously, should be checked first, to ensure correct functioning), then 
the room is the next item to check.


> 
> I agree that attenuating the high range is not the answer. But neither is tweaking room acoustics. We need to work with the Human Ear and how we perceive sound at various volumes.

**And trust me on this: The room is, by a very considerable margin, the 
dominant factor in audible problems with systems.

> 
> Which is why balancing the speaker output does seem to be an answer, especially given that one does not normally blast music in an office. At low volumes, in general, not enough energy gets to the bass driver(s) to balance the treble, especially as speaker efficiency drops. These are 88 dB speakers, not horrible, but not great either.

**I am making several assumptions in my diagnosis:

1) That the speakers have been professionally and correctly designed and 
constructed. Either of these things may not be true. I don't know. Sony 
is a proper brand, so I assume design and construction has been done to 
decent standards.

2) That the amplifier is not broken.

Therefore, the room is the problem. Room treatments can be challenging 
to apply, but they can be very, VERY cost-effective.

The room will be the problem. Too many hard surfaces is most likely.


> 
> Eschew needless complexity. If the electronics have a "Loudness" function, start there.

**No. Tone controls (and loudness controls) are very much a hit and miss 
treatment. Without proper measurements and controls, tone controls are 
pretty much a waste of time.


  If they have tone-controls try *BOOSTING* the bass - again that nasty 
issue of low-volume weak bass is more at-issue than excess treble (at 
low volume). Failing both these things, is it possible to relocate the 
speakers, moving them more towards room corners, or closer to the floor, 
or similar so as to help 'boost' the bass response. However, this might 
sacrifice sound-stage.

**The speakers should be placed in a location where they have been 
designed for. Any other location will deliver unpredictable results.

> 
> Only after the obvious fixes have failed should we push towards more heroic measures.
> 

**Room treatments are hardly heroic measures. Room treatments are 
FUNDAMENTAL to the proper operation of a sound reproduction system. In 
fact, I would posit that the STARTING point of a sound reproduction 
system is the room. Everything else is secondary. And, when I say 'room 
treatments' I do include speakers and speaker location as part of the 
process. However, since the speakers are already chosen and, presumably, 
located appropriately, then room treatments (damping materials) is the 
next approach to take.

-- 
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Back to rec.audio.high-end | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-13 01:19 +1300
  Re: Attenuate highest highs? Unsteadyken <unsteadyken@gmail.com> - 2020-02-13 16:59 +0000
    Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-14 12:18 +1300
  Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-14 04:11 -0800
    Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-18 18:05 +1300
      Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-18 06:45 -0800
        Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-19 14:21 +1300
  Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-15 04:18 +1100
    Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-14 10:32 -0800
      Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-17 04:58 +1100
        Re: Attenuate highest highs? dpierce.cartchunk.org@gmail.com - 2020-02-17 14:27 -0800
          Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-19 06:35 +1100
      Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-18 17:28 +1300
        Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-19 06:41 +1100
          Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-19 09:14 +1100
            Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-19 15:02 +1300
              Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-20 08:44 +1100
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-20 13:05 +1300
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-21 05:01 +1100
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-21 04:37 -0800
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-22 06:57 +1100
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-21 12:48 -0800
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-23 05:37 +1100
          Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-19 14:28 +1300
            Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-20 08:57 +1100
              Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-20 13:46 +1300
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-20 05:18 -0800
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-24 09:46 +1100
    Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-18 16:18 +1300
  Re: Attenuate highest highs? dpierce.cartchunk.org@gmail.com - 2020-02-14 13:05 -0800
    Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-18 17:48 +1300
  Re: Attenuate highest highs? "Mat Nieuwenhoven" <mnieuw@zap.a2000.nl> - 2020-02-17 08:50 +0100

csiph-web