[jose]

Given at the British Section of the Audio Engineering Society. You can listen to a recording of the lecture on the web site of the UK AES:

http://www.aes.org/sections/uk/meetings/a0711.html

The PowerPoint slides can be downloaded from Linkwitz's web site:

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/AES-London'07/stereo-loudspeakers-room-1.ppt

[acd483]

Thank you Jose, that was excellent.

[darrenyeats]

Yes I listened to and read through this the other day. I recommend it highly too.

I'm happy to put on record my view that the Linkwitz Orion is overall the best sounding system I've heard, ever.
Darren

[csero]

"Two-channel playback in a normal living space can provide an experience that is fully satisfying. Loudspeakers and room disappear and the illusion of listening into a different space takes over."

This is definitely not true. I've never met anybody (except a copuple of over enthusiastic audiophiles who need a strong reality check) who would confuse the sound of any stereo in any normal living space with the sound of a real concert hall.
And this is not because of  "insufficient dynamic range" or "inadequate polar response of typical box loudspeaker designs" or whatnot. This is fundamentally impossible with stereo reproduction.

[Housteau]

"Two-channel playback in a normal living space can provide an experience that is fully satisfying. Loudspeakers and room disappear and the illusion of listening into a different space takes over."

This is definitely not true. I've never met anybody (except a copuple of over enthusiastic audiophiles who need a strong reality check) who would confuse the sound of any stereo in any normal living space with the sound of a real concert hall.
And this is not because of  "insufficient dynamic range" or "inadequate polar response of typical box loudspeaker designs" or whatnot. This is fundamentally impossible with stereo reproduction.

I actually agree with those statements with an exception being "in a normal living space".  Change that to a dedicated listening space properly set up and I agree with that completely.  I have absolutely no problem experiencing this illusion in my room.  There are many venues besides large concert halls that can be reproduced to degrees relative to the care taken in a system set-up.

In my experience, I have found that many (certainly not all) that turn to multichannel music reproduction are doing it for three main reasons.  First, a primary reason is in an interest in home theater and a wish to try and combine them for both music listening and film viewing.  Second, they do not have a dedicated, or good listening space and setting up a proper two channel system is just not possible for them.  Third, for whatever reason they have not been able to set up a good two channel system with the focus and soundstage that they know should be there, and so resort to a center channel to help create it.

[nathanm]

Sigfried has some of the nicest handwriting I've ever seen.



I'm jealous...

[sunshinedawg]

In my experience, I have found that many (certainly not all) that turn to multichannel music reproduction are doing it for three main reasons.  First, a primary reason is in an interest in home theater and a wish to try and combine them for both music listening and film viewing.  Second, they do not have a dedicated, or good listening space and setting up a proper two channel system is just not possible for them.  Third, for whatever reason they have not been able to set up a good two channel system with the focus and soundstage that they know should be there, and so resort to a center channel to help create it.

These are all the wrong reasons to use multichannel. A few of us, and I mean a very few, I'm talking of maybe 10 people I know, are doing it because it is the correct way to approach recreating a live event. Two channel has way too many intrinsic problems to overcome to ever sound real or create an illusion of being there.

[acd483]

"Two-channel playback in a normal living space can provide an experience that is fully satisfying. Loudspeakers and room disappear and the illusion of listening into a different space takes over."

This is definitely not true. I've never met anybody (except a copuple of over enthusiastic audiophiles who need a strong reality check) who would confuse the sound of any stereo in any normal living space with the sound of a real concert hall.
And this is not because of  "insufficient dynamic range" or "inadequate polar response of typical box loudspeaker designs" or whatnot. This is fundamentally impossible with stereo reproduction.

You're not really giving Linkwitz enough flexibility in his use of the english language. I don't think he's saying "my speakers recreate the concert hall" but rather "my speakers give you a fully satisfying experience that makes you imagine you're not in the same living room".

Having listened to the Orions I can say this is a true statement. Do they sound "live"? No. Do they create a satisfying illusion? Yes.

[ctviggen]

In my experience, I have found that many (certainly not all) that turn to multichannel music reproduction are doing it for three main reasons.  First, a primary reason is in an interest in home theater and a wish to try and combine them for both music listening and film viewing.  Second, they do not have a dedicated, or good listening space and setting up a proper two channel system is just not possible for them.  Third, for whatever reason they have not been able to set up a good two channel system with the focus and soundstage that they know should be there, and so resort to a center channel to help create it.

These are all the wrong reasons to use multichannel. A few of us, and I mean a very few, I'm talking of maybe 10 people I know, are doing it because it is the correct way to approach recreating a live event. Two channel has way too many intrinsic problems to overcome to ever sound real or create an illusion of being there.

And how would you and those 10 people being doing this in such a way as to create a live event (particularly since most multichannel music doesn't set out to do this)? 

Personally, I much prefer two channel over multichannel music.  When I start hearing people playing behind me (where they shouldn't be), I immediately get turned off.  At least with two channel, I don't have that.  I also totally -- and I mean totally -- disagree with "Two channel has way too many intrinsic problems to overcome to ever sound real or create an illusion of being there."  In fact, that's why I like two channel music:  I actually feel as if Johnny Cash is sitting in my room and giving a personal performance. 

[acd483]

Who wants to go sit in a windowless room full of treatments and completely devoid of soul and character to listen to music? How pretentious that is! I congratulate Linkwitz for designing speakers that are meant to be played in normal living rooms, where we, uh, live.

[Housteau]

Who wants to go sit in a windowless room full of treatments and completely devoid of soul and character to listen to music?

Me  .  Actually I do have one window, due to some arm twisting by my contractor, and I think a dedicated listening room can have a lot of soul and character.

[Daygloworange]

"Two-channel playback in a normal living space can provide an experience that is fully satisfying. Loudspeakers and room disappear and the illusion of listening into a different space takes over."

This is definitely not true. I've never met anybody (except a copuple of over enthusiastic audiophiles who need a strong reality check) who would confuse the sound of any stereo in any normal living space with the sound of a real concert hall.
And this is not because of  "insufficient dynamic range" or "inadequate polar response of typical box loudspeaker designs" or whatnot. This is fundamentally impossible with stereo reproduction.

I'll echo acd483's comments here.

In a properly treated room, with a really good high resolution, and full range system, you can get frighteningly close to real.

When I was studying classical in college, I had the opportunity to attend dozens and dozens of classical performances in our school's auditorium (which was excellent). When I listen to a good classical recording with the room darkened, if I close my eyes for a few moments and really listen to the music, it's frighteningly like being there.

I actually attended a performance of the Yamato Drummers of Japan at Roy Thompson Hall in ( a really great acoustic venue here)Toronto last Saturday. During the course of 2 hours, I spent much of it listening with my eyes closed, paying close attention to the soundstage and localization of instruments.
 
I was sitting in the 2nd balcony, and aside from some late reflections (late echoes) that are always very prominant with sharp percussive sounds, I think that a good stereo recording done from somewhere on the floor would have been even more impressive to listen to than the live event. There wasn't as much low end extension in the hall as I expected from where I was sitting. Dynamics were not as impressive as I've heard on recordings either.

The other thing that you really notice as well is the noisefloor. That many people breathing, rustling in their seats, whispering, and so forth makes a noticeable noisefloor that can be eliminated during a closed recording session. You can also eliminate the air conditioning to lower the noise floor even more.


Yamato Drummers of Japan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZO47QxV-iY

Cheers

[Housteau]

The interesting part of the lecture to me is that he has turned conventional thought on room acoustics upsidedown.  The live end/dead end approach, where the speakers are on the dead end was the popular thought not long ago.  Some still listen this way to their great satisfaction.  This approach evolved to just absorbing, or diffusing the primary reflections.  This is the method that I am using, and would guess that most others currently are as well.  Linkwitz is advocating the live end/dead end approach once again, but this time the speakers are on the live end.  This is a 180 degree shift, very interesting.

[JLM]

I haven't heard/viewed the lecture, but:

In theory the more channels of information should sound better, if properly done.  "Properly done" is the rub, we're all at the mercy of the recording.  As the number of channels increase the chance of achieving a "proper" recording goes down.

That is an old school engineer's handwriting/sketching.

To characterize a dedicated listening room (or those who have one) is more than a stretch.  My room was left over space in the basement and cost about $400 extra to fit-out as a listening room while being built.  As my "man-cave" it is furnished in tasteful but affordable jazz, impressionist, and sailing posters/lithographs.  To spend thousands on equipment that can't be properly set up in a less than ideal room which is shared with others is much more pretentious IMO.

Dipole speakers react quite differently to the room behind/beside the speakers.  In fact, if you were to listen to dipoles outdoors you'd simply lose half the output and they would sound like direct radiating speakers.  So I'd reserve his ideas of LEDE to dipole speakers.

[acd483]

Who wants to go sit in a windowless room full of treatments and completely devoid of soul and character to listen to music?

Me  .  Actually I do have one window, due to some arm twisting by my contractor, and I think a dedicated listening room can have a lot of soul and character.

For me, light and nature speak to my character/soul much more than the objects I surround myself with. Not to mention the weather greatly impacts my mood and musical taste. In short, windows (lots of 'em) are essential to my listening space. I plan on marrying my studio space with a great hi-fi as I listen to music while I work.

[acd483]

To spend thousands on equipment that can't be properly set up in a less than ideal room which is shared with others is much more pretentious IMO.

Sharing music in a space where people naturally gravitate to is not pretentious. Putting expensive equipment on display in a living space for its own sake is pretentious...especially if it doesn't reproduce music well.

[Housteau]

I haven't heard/viewed the lecture, but:

Dipole speakers react quite differently to the room behind/beside the speakers.  In fact, if you were to listen to dipoles outdoors you'd simply lose half the output and they would sound like direct radiating speakers.  So I'd reserve his ideas of LEDE to dipole speakers.

That has been my rule of thumb over the years having owned several sets of dipoles, Infinities, Martin Logans and now the VMPS.  I have always been able to control the wall and room space directly behind the speakers with a mix of diffusion and some absorption to steer the sound.

However, as a part of his lecture he has two sets of speakers set up in his listening room.  One pair are dipoles, but the other are point source types.  He makes a consistant point that both sound and function the same within his room due to the reflections.

[bushbison]

Thanks SO much, Jose; very cool. 

If you ever come across other stuff like this, that even a lay-person like me can understand (i.e. not too much physics , or numbers!!!!  When this happens I just start drooling and haze over ), please share!

At the very least guys, neat stuff to think about no??

We don't all have to agree... but the man IS bright!!

Take care all.

[goskers]

I haven't heard/viewed the lecture, but:

Dipole speakers react quite differently to the room behind/beside the speakers.  In fact, if you were to listen to dipoles outdoors you'd simply lose half the output and they would sound like direct radiating speakers.  So I'd reserve his ideas of LEDE to dipole speakers.

That has been my rule of thumb over the years having owned several sets of dipoles, Infinities, Martin Logans and now the VMPS.  I have always been able to control the wall and room space directly behind the speakers with a mix of diffusion and some absorption to steer the sound.

However, as a part of his lecture he has two sets of speakers set up in his listening room.  One pair are dipoles, but the other are point source types.  He makes a consistant point that both sound and function the same within his room due to the reflections.

Just to make a point rather clear, SL's point source is actually omni-directional.  The advent of this whole lecture comes from the birth of a design called 'Pluto'.  This speaker uses drivers costing much less than the Orion's which are often mentioned.  When the pluto's were first built he liked them more than the orion's!!  This is how the development of the rear firing tweeter came back into the equation.

I don't feel that Multi-channel reproduction is ready for prime time, yet.  There aren't a whole lot of recording engineers that are doing just that.  Heck, it seems as though getting redbook two channel correct is still coming into fashion.  Taking the recordings out of the equation leaves you with yet more 'things' to get right in your listening environment.  More refections, more speakers, more equipment, more things that, well, could go wrong.  I find SL's approach to breaking new ground rather refreshing.  He doesn't even break new ground but seems to shed some different light on subjects which he finds potential resolve for. 

Linkwitz is one of the few people who are truly studied up on the most important factors when it comes to reproduction.  Speakers, electronics, acoustics and auditory perception.  It intrigues me that he looks at every possible piece of the puzzle from nuts to bolts.  It is important that we all keep in mind that we are always talking about reproducing music.  I am still at odds to whether reproduction of a recorded event should ever truly be used as judge.  Any recorded event uses a bunch of items that would make us all cringe; pro sound equipment, mics, processing, cables, the list goes on.  A live event, unfortunately, is the only judge we have to criticise a reproduced event.

I think Linkwitz should keep going.  The majority of people that refute his claims has typically never heard his crowning design, the orion.

[Housteau]

For me, light and nature speak to my character/soul much more than the objects I surround myself with. Not to mention the weather greatly impacts my mood and musical taste. In short, windows (lots of 'em) are essential to my listening space. I plan on marrying my studio space with a great hi-fi as I listen to music while I work.

To spend thousands on equipment that can't be properly set up in a less than ideal room which is shared with others is much more pretentious IMO.

Sharing music in a space where people naturally gravitate to is not pretentious.

The beauty of our hobby is that we can each set up our own ideal listening environment that may not even remotely resemble someone elses.  As different in methods and in the ways we all listen to our music, who is to say that one way is the correct way?  I have no doubt that just because someone may do things differently doesn't mean that they enjoy the experience any less.

For example:  My room is built for a single purpose where listening to two channel music from an ideal single location is the primary focus and activity.  It is the only activity and suited for a single listener in the sweet spot.  That is where the magic and full illusion is created for me.  Anything less than this and the purpose for the room and the sort of gear I have inside would have been a complete waste of money.  I could have gotten by with much less if my listening habits were a bit different.  Yes it sounds very good out of the sweetspot, but a lot of systems and rooms costing much less can do exactly the same.    

You appear to approach things differently and enjoy your music as a normal fabric of your daily life, and as a social activity at times.  This is reflected in how you choose to set up your room and system.  It can serve as more of a background music experience with friends, or while you are working, as well as for single listening as I do.  However, compromises are made as we all cannot have everything.  It just isn't that easy .

The big price I pay for my room is that it is not a social club and only one person can really fully appreciate what is happening in there at one time.  So, it becomes much harder to share my experiences with someone else.  Your price is that you may never experience the very best of what your system is capable of.  The illusion you are able to create may be very good, but it will not be nearly as convincing as it could be.  But, the quality of that experience may be higher than mine just due to the fact someone else is able to enjoy your music with you at the same time.  There is something to be said about that.

That does bring up one of the side benefits of multichannel music.  With a center channel you can field a number of off center primary listeners that will be able to enjoy a decent soundstage presentation.