Sean Olive Interview

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hello Ian

I think it's a step in the right direction. The last interface we all have to deal with, and in many cases live with, is what actually happens in our listening rooms. No amount of anechoic or quasi anechoic is going to predict what's going to happen there.

That will never change. Not going to address DSP based systems that can ping the room and adjust accordingly. Sticking to passive systems or actives without adjustable DSP.

Spinorama allows us to get an accurate DI curve. I think the DI curve is important WRT predictability of room interaction but it can't directly address where the room dominates.

It's a mixed bag.

Rob

I agree in that measurement approaches have advanced. To my mind it needs simplifying down from to how well a loudspeaker translates to a nirvana experience of a tune at home. It’s the inverse of what happens in the mixing and mastering of a tune. The recording engineer is only interested in how well it translates. Thats their terminology and l think it’s a good way of understanding a loudspeaker.

But in terms understanding what to measure and how to interpret it all and then applying it correctly is beyond any mortal music lover or HiFi enthusiast. For the average consumer and even a seasoned amateur loudspeaker builder it’s quite complicated with lots of variables and can end up being a snake chasing its tail for way too long.

So if the loudspeaker system translates what you like with the tunes you like to play that’s all that really matters.

Continued in my next post

[Ian Mackenzie]

Continuing from my last post -:

This whole business of measurements reminds me of the measurement race between amplifier brands back in the 1970’s. As we know what they were doing wasn’t well enough understood and it lead to a lot of controversy. The manufacturers then moved away from that approach to marketing. They got better and designing and manufacturing and we now have better amplifiers. It’s the same with PC’s. No body thinks about what CPU is in a PC these days. If you’re a hard core gamer it might be a consideration.

I think people can get too wrapped up in focusing on one facet of sound reproduction like imaging for example. Or they think they need everything perfectly correct and loose sight of what makes them really happy in their listening experiences. For example if they play genres like heavy rock, metal and so on then to translate correctly without too many errors the bass, the tonal balance, dynamics and the overall output has to competent. It also has to be resilient and reliable as a system.

That’s what drives the emotion connection. Does it need razor sharp imaging. Not at the expense of the other key attributes. The laws of Mother Nature always prevail.

This is where a well appraised subjective review that points to a particular recording is useful. The reviewer is translating to you their subjective listening experience.,Not all consumer reviews publish measurements. A well prepared consumer review is useful if your only option is to buy a system sight unseen.

On the other hand if you’re more interested in vintage analogue two mic recordings of a symphony orchestra then the translation of musical instruments as images with minimal errors is going to be key to your emotional enjoyment along with other key attributes.

But if you say l need a loudspeaker that translates imaging without too many errors then you need to understand what types of recordings and which genres are going to be translated? In other words the music lover has the responsibility to understand what it is they need in the translation and what types of recording are going to deliver that.

Popularising by media of a particular topic is a natural occurrence. But it isn’t necessarily a good thing if you don’t actually understand what’s important to you.

I’ve changed the narrative in this post because l believe there needs to be holistic understanding of the subject in order to make sense what you need out of the listening experience and the hobby.