[JerryLove]

Ok. So these two are the same song. The top one is from the CD and the bottom one is from a video game. (the song, BTW, is "My Apocalypse" from Metallica). The problem on my system is that, on the CD, much of the dynamic range is missing. The loudest notes are not as far above the average notes as they would be in reality (or as they are in the game).

What "tuning" can I do to my system to get this dynamic range to reappear?

I'd also still be very interested in knowing what will cause a 2khz waveform from the DAC to play at a frequency other than 2khz on the speaker and what physical changes you would make to alter the frequency back to 2khz (to "change the tuning").

[michael green MGA]

Yep, I've had the Tull thing brought up before and have walked people through it. So I'm totally open and looking forward to digging into this stuff.

First though do you guys really not understand how I have my systems set up? Some thought that I was avoiding the question but I gave the layout and for tuning these in I will be using the simple set up.

[michael green MGA]

Ok. So these two are the same song. The top one is from the CD and the bottom one is from a video game. (the song, BTW, is "My Apocalypse" from Metallica). The problem on my system is that, on the CD, much of the dynamic range is missing. The loudest notes are not as far above the average notes as they would be in reality (or as they are in the game).

What "tuning" can I do to my system to get this dynamic range to reappear?

I'd also still be very interested in knowing what will cause a 2khz waveform from the DAC to play at a frequency other than 2khz on the speaker and what physical changes you would make to alter the frequency back to 2khz (to "change the tuning").

Awesome, thanks, tell me what your system is from the fuse box to the room, or do you have a link?

[JerryLove]

If you have a bad sounding CD in your collection of a name brand studio like warner bros or EMI or any of the mainstreams recording companies you send that CD to me and I'll give you a list of things that your system may be doing incorrectly.

I have provided you with a CD (technically I've provided you with the name of an easily accessible CD and a graph of one of its songs).

And then I've told you what sounds wrong to me ("the volume difference between the peaks and average is not as great as it is in a real performance")

Please give me a list of things my system may be doing incorrectly by playing the volumes as they are recorded on the CD rather than as they sounded in reality (or as they sound on the video game with the same song with a higher dynamic range master).

Also: I'd really like to know what would cause a 2khz waveform to play at a frequency other than 2khz from a speaker (out of tune) and what physical changes you would make to get it to play at 2khz again (tuning).

tell me what your system is from the fuse box to the room

Moving goalposts?

There is no fusebox.

The system from the PDU / breakerbox to the room is copper wire. I can track down the exact make from my electrician's invoice if you like.

[michael green MGA]

Ok, just put on Agualung. Going to let it burn in over night.

One of the problems that people have with Tull, and if you guys want to name a few more is the way they did the compression. They crammed a lot of sound into a small space. If your soundstage is not setup as a big one it will sound very cluttered and squeezed. Farfield listeners usually have a ton of problems with Tull. So the first question I have for people listening to Tull with me is, are your speakers close to the front wall?

[michael green MGA]

I have provided you with a CD (technically I've provided you with the name of an easily accessible CD and a graph of one of its songs).

And then I've told you what sounds wrong to me ("the volume difference between the peaks and average is not as great as it is in a real performance")

Please give me a list of things my system may be doing incorrectly by playing the volumes as they are recorded on the CD rather than as they sounded in reality (or as they sound on the video game with the same song with a higher dynamic range master).

Also: I'd really like to know what would cause a 2khz waveform to play at a frequency other than 2khz from a speaker (out of tune) and what physical changes you would make to get it to play at 2khz again (tuning).
 
Moving goalposts?

There is no fusebox.

The system from the PDU / breakerbox to the room is copper wire. I can track down the exact make from my electrician's invoice if you like.

Jerry, no offence but as people are trying to help me relate to you guys the same will have be done the other way. So if you could amp it down a notch or 2 we might be able to get on the same page and move forward. Your coming across a little like I'm on trial, know what I mean.

"And then I've told you what sounds wrong to me ("the volume difference between the peaks and average is not as great as it is in a real performance")"  It's a recording why would you think it would be live sounding?

Your asking two different sources to sound the same?

You keep bringing up the 2k question, and I'm thinking you didn't understand my reply the first time so I don't understand why you would bring it up again. What I did in an earlier post was to convert the frequency into a note, did you get that part? Then I played the note through different baffles and they all sounded different, then I played different pianos through the same speaker playing that same note and they all sounded different even though they all measured the same. Did you get that part? My point being even though they measured the same they sounded different (a tests that has been done forever with the same results). Now I'm trying to figure out where we are missing each other on the page?

[JerryLove]

Jerry, no offence but as people are trying to help me relate to you guys the same will have be done the other way. So if you could amp it down a notch or 2 we might be able to get on the same page and move forward. Your coming across a little like I'm on trial, know what I mean.

Consider the likelihood that you are.

Though if we wish to discuss "coming across" consider your emphatic phrasing "Wrong!"

You are making extraordinary claims. I've tried to make it easy by picking a single one and a single concrete example that should be easy to address. You've not addressed it

I have a feeling, having been around the block, that this is about the point in the conversation where there's an attempt to deflect into an adhominem or something similar. I sincerely hope I'm wrong.

"And then I've told you what sounds wrong to me ("the volume difference between the peaks and average is not as great as it is in a real performance")"  It's a recording why would you think it would be live sounding?

Because you said

That CD is horrible!

Wrong! If you have a bad sounding CD in your collection of a name brand studio like warner bros or EMI or any of the mainstreams recording companies you send that CD to me and I'll give you a list of things that your system may be doing incorrectly.

But you are putting words in my mouth. I didn't say "live sounding", I said "volumes [...] as they sounded in reality". I asked narrowly about the difference in SPL between the loudest sounds and average sounds in a recording. This is to prevent confusion and give you one simple issue to address.

I ask because I do, in fact, understand the problem... dynamic compression (used to be called "hot mastering").

I've literally done dynamic compression myself deliberately to A/B in the past. It's easy to compress but essentially impossible to de-compress.

Which is where your statement rings untrue. Since a loss of dynamic range sounds bad, and since EMI and WB are releasing CDs with significant dynamic compression, the source material clearly is at fault. No speaker will re-add dynamic range (and one which did would have too much dynamic range on a properly mastered CD, simply shifting the problem).

There are any number of other things that could be done wrong to mess up a master; but I'm trying to make your job easy by picking only a single one which I can clearly describe and demonstrate.

You keep bringing up the 2k question, and I'm thinking you didn't understand my reply the first time so I don't understand why you would bring it up again. What I did in an earlier post was to convert the frequency into a note, did you get that part? Then I played the note through different baffles and they all sounded different, then I played different pianos through the same speaker playing that same note and they all sounded different even though they all measured the same. Did you get that part?

They would not all measure the same. This is speakerbuilding 101 (literally: this is covered in the book "speakerbuilding 101").

When you enlarge the baffle, you lower the frequency range at which baffle diffraction starts to occur.

If you change the shape of the baffle (cupping your hands over the driver) you change the shape of the pulse of the diffracted waves.

Then you can also have issues of resonance of the baffle itself, and boundary diffraction; but let's not muddy the water.

What you have *not* done is change the frequency itself in any way.

It has not come "out of tune". A high G is still a high G and a 2khz wave is still a 2khz wave.

And as I mentioned at the beginning: they absolutely would not measure the same (the SPL/F graph would not: the actual frequencies are the same). They do not measure the same. On or off-axis. This is why the crossover has a baffle-diffraction step.

[brooklyn]

While I do agree with some points like less is better then more in an audio system,
and anything you put under a component will in fact change the sound for better or
worse but the vagueness of the OP tells me this is a lot of BS.

I'm the biggest skeptic in the world so if there is a point to all of this, I would like to
hear it. 

[michael green MGA]

Wow guys,

Really Aqualung? This didn't take long at all. I haven't started doing anything with the electronics yet and this is pretty darn good. A couple of negatives first. The CD I have is on the low side so I turned it up some. I also needed invert the polarity. I am setup nearfield but not extreme nearfield and the stage goes well outside the room on both sides. The side stage is pretty even with my ears and not yet flowing to the back of the room behind me but is pretty healthy to the sides and front. One major plus already is a completely full soundstage with no holes at all. This recording is thick. So far a little on the dark side, but I'll fix this tomorrow hopefully. #6 is huge with things running through the room. With this system right now the recording is like I said a little dark but also very warm and so far no brittle highs. Nothing is sticking to the speakers and the front to back stage from maybe 8' on either side of me to maybe 10' deep (I'm in the small room) without any stage curves or placement problems (instrument placement is really good). I do get a sense that this is a bit on the cloudy side as if they had a hard time in the studio and maybe got some dampening in there to help calm things down cause there are two parts to the acoustics in this recording. One being great space and the other being a blanket effect. I'll try to find out tomorrow if the blanket can be lifted without any tilt.

So based on this so far, if you have any sound in the speakers you have some heavy equipment that needs set free. And if there is a curve in the stage let me know. Also if your stages are anything less than a full past wall to wall stage let me know. I don't think using rubber products on this recording would be a good thing cause I can hear where this could get cloudy real fast with drapes, carpet or rubber feet or even a cloth sofa near by. Also I should talk about the bottom to top balance. I do not hear any peaks at all anywhere. It's very smooth and full of bass energy, but again I want to clean up that bit of blanket.

Oh also want to add for anyone who has been following my thread, I know this can be better cause when I leave the sweet spot the sound runs a little into the speaker which tells me the system has a ways to go.

[sts9fan]

Ok, just put on Agualung. Going to let it burn in over night.

What do you mean by this?

[thunderbrick]

"...............if you have any sound in the speakers you have some heavy equipment that needs set free"

Free-range equipment?  That's an interesting concept.

[Diamond Dog]

Mike, this is all very interesting , the way you slowly build the pitch and all, but can we just cut to the chase ? I know you're eventually going to start pulling that " musically tuned plywood " and such out of the back of your wagon I mean off your website  { http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t75-the-tunable-room }  and start flogging it to all us hoople-headed rubes so let's just get on with it, huh? I've got a plane to catch.
Just gimme a coupla bottles of Dr. M.Green's Fantazmagorical Magic Curative Elixir and I'll be on my way, mmmkay? I love that shit - it's got a kick like a mule!

Thanks a bunch! 

D.D.

[bummrush]

No clarity it's muffled no dynamics

[michael green MGA]

What do you mean by this?

When I tune in a piece of music I let it play continuously. As a system settles on a piece of music it opens up quite a bit. By this I can tell what the music is doing at different stages and what a piece of equipment or even a part does while the harmonics are forming. Many systems take a very long time to settle in. The more complexed the recording the harder it is for over dampened systems to sound good with it (in most cases). For example with this piece "Aqualung" when I saw that I would be tuning it in, I was in contact with one of the guys in Chicago and he put on the recording as well so we can compare notes on how both of the systems sound. We compare all kinds of variables. Soundstage placement, tonality, musical pace abunch of stuff so nothing is just a guy talking. The Tunees are a pretty serious gang of listeners and are all over the planet so we are able to compare results on a large scale. It also helps when one of the guys here's something the others don't. In this case we can all raise the listening bar together and make our system go further than just one guy and one system.

[bummrush]

The Aqualung cd.   It is just horrid and lifeless I'm not big on audio talk all I can do is go with what I have said

[bummrush]

I listen near field ,speakers only a foot out or so.i sit about 4 ft away the best thing is that even though im sitting really close is that yhe sound is not in your face its still clear and spacious.I have Clements speakers and have been very happy with them.

[michael green MGA]

Mike, this is all very interesting , the way you slowly build the pitch and all, but can we just cut to the chase ? I know you're eventually going to start pulling that " musically tuned plywood " and such out of the back of your wagon I mean off your website  { http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t75-the-tunable-room }  and start flogging it to all us hoople-headed rubes so let's just get on with it, huh? I've got a plane to catch.
Just gimme a coupla bottles of Dr. M.Green's Fantazmagorical Magic Curative Elixir and I'll be on my way, mmmkay? I love that shit - it's got a kick like a mule!

Thanks a bunch! 

D.D.

  I hear ya! Hopefully as time goes on you guys will see that there are other audio friends and techniques to add to your arsenal of listening tricks that's all. Just a bunch of extreme listeners who belong to audio clubs around the globe, and compare and tweak like you guys. Over on TuneLand, both the archive and newer forum there are a lot of systems and guys like you who have been exploring these "crazy :icon_lol:ideas" and have contributed to a lot of guys taking their systems to new heights. They also get down to what is real or not. Believe me as much as you guys are rolling your eyes at them they are probably doing some eye rolling of their own. I think that's just guys getting to know guys. Some of them have been members here for a while and others readers.

Here's an interesting thing though that I and some of the guys have noticed. We are wondering why a few of you guys seem threatened by another group of guys joining in with you. You have a lot of different circles here and a lot of different taste. I would think you guys would embrace folks that have even more info to offer to the mix. The snake oil talk gets old after a while. If you want to experience tuning "do it" it's not that big of deal to get going down this path. Your obviously curious cause I see you coming over to view things and obviously we are interested in you cause I'm here and their reading. I have also asked to be a sponsor and pay my dues. I personally don't understand the BS types of comments. If you think it's BS don't bother with it. If your curious, try it. The audiophile world should not be based on skeptics only, but also based on converted skeptics. We all learn that way, but as you can see we who are doing the tune already are kind of beyond the "BS" thing. If it's something we want to try we do it, if not we pass. I think it makes a lot of sense personally to do a circle here and invite people who want to explore tuning to hang out. Talk about being up front and straight you guys should just tell us if we are part of the audio community in your eyes or not. I will tell you this, some of your members are thinking this is a pretty cool thing seeing the tune up here, and think it is needed and even adds to the completeness of the body of audiophiles here. You have many people and many walks, we are just one of them and are wondering if you guys are interested enough to make us a part of your whole.

Why and how could "music Ply" potentially be a negative? It's wood voiced like a musical instrument. Isn't that right up your alley? Shouldn't you be welcoming people who love music and want to share like you do?

If you see me being here as an ad, so? All of us promote what we love and do every day. I will promote the tune whether I'm here or not and a lot of you will visit us whether you do it in private or not, so? What's the big deal? We're extreme listeners, big deal. We just take things a lot further in different ways than some of you, big deal. We have owned what you do and have found ways to take it other places. I would think this would be of interest not met with the "BS" attitude. We're not picking on you we are sharing with you. We are doing nothing different than any of you do according to the posts I read. You get excited and talk about the audio things that make you excited. We're doing the same thing, big deal. we learn from you and you learn from us.

So lets say you guys tell me and us to leave. Then with me making more of a push these days we again become all the rage. Does this mean that when you then all of a sudden grow an interest we tell you see ya? That's not sharing and that's not the definition of a "forum". I have seen audio circle grow and I have seen it become more open minded as time goes on. That's a good thing not a negative. You have become so open minded that I'm spending my time here. So I make Aqualung sound good, is that a bad thing? Ian would think not, and so would the millions of people who have this CD.

Guys, making things sound good, or better is a good thing. It's not "BS" and you don't have to get out your skeptic meter to see if the water is warm or not. We have a bunch of people saying the waters find come on in. That's a good thing. It opens audio circle up to yet another flavor, another personality. If that's not what you want than have the heads of Audio Circle tell me. And if you decide you do want us here take a pill of music enjoyment cause that's what we're about. Just as much as you love music we do as well. we love it so much that we want to drain every ounce of it out of a system, any thing wrong with this?

Honestly if you guys could make your system sound twice as good wouldn't you be all over that?  We on here have a member that says Aqualung sucks, and another member me jamming to it as we speak. Isn't that a good thing or I'm I in the wrong hobby and this is not a forum about making things sound good?

Well you couldn't have done that? Well I did and have been for 30 some years now. Well that's BS? Really! your not saying cool how do I get there? Your saying BS.

All day long I have people telling me that they have never heard that piece of music like like that before. I can't believe it's the same recording. It is so real (don't believe me go read it). Why would this type of thing not be of interest? Boggles the mind how such a possitive thing like music can be so negative.

"BS" really guys?

[michael green MGA]

I listen near field ,speakers only a foot out or so.i sit about 4 ft away the best thing is that even though im sitting really close is that yhe sound is not in your face its still clear and spacious.I have Clements speakers and have been very happy with them.

Right on, do you want to put Aqualung on now and we'll walk through the sound together? I was a Clements dealer know them well.

[michael green MGA]

I listen near field ,speakers only a foot out or so.i sit about 4 ft away the best thing is that even though im sitting really close is that yhe sound is not in your face its still clear and spacious.I have Clements speakers and have been very happy with them.

So your saying the clements are a foot away from the front wall, and you are 4 feet from the speakers. how many feet behind you to the rear wall?

[michael green MGA]

So that you can picture my nearfield setup. In my small room the speakers are 7' from the front wall, 34" from the center plain to my ears, a SAM (movable wall) right behind my head, and to the back wall another 4'. On Aqualung if I start moving my speakers closer to the front wall I hear the soundstage start to collapse fast. 3' from the wall it sounds like it is in a can and a foot from the wall absolutely terrible. It's not until I get in that 7' off the front wall that it really opens up. And right now it is really open with not a lot of the darkness left.