Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site tellab1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!tellab1!etan
From: etan@tellab1.UUCP (Nate Stelton)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: Re: Tighter bass and edgeless piano
Message-ID: <597@tellab1.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Sep-85 14:09:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: tellab1.597
Posted: Mon Sep 23 14:09:06 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 24-Sep-85 23:41:00 EDT
References: <1636@druxu.UUCP>
Reply-To: etan@tellab1.UUCP (Nate Stelton)
Organization: Tellabs, Inc., Lisle, IL
Lines: 43
Summary: 

In article <1636@druxu.UUCP> tlz@druxu.UUCP (ZrustTL) writes:
>                                                    What is
>meant by tigntening bass and taking edges off of piano as it relates
>to things that happen to the specifications of audio equipment?
>Since something must happen (changes can be heard by the "finest
>and most sensitive instruments -- OUR EARS") then this obviously
>MUST be measurable by any reasonable test equipment (which clearly is
>less subjective and EVEN MORE SENSITIVE then our ears.  

tightening the bass:
To me this refers to damping.  When the bass player mutes his string, the
speaker cone, due to inertia, does not come to a complete stop, like the bass
string did.  It tries to, though.  There are damping specs on speakers and
power amplifiers that reflect this.  (Perhaps some kind expert could post
some guidelines as to what the ranges to shop for are.)  Poor damping results
in mushy (i.e. "not tight") bass sound.  No EQ in the world can correct this.

taking the edge off the piano:
Now this sounds to me like an EQ function.  Doing this usually requires a
thin notch filter set to the "edgy" frequency.

Here's a different one for you:  Can you hear the stick hit the cymbal?
This is not always answered the same for every 20-20k system.  I have 2
cassette decks that have the same freq ranges, but a cymbal hit by a stick
sounds like a "tick" as recorded by one and "sshh" by the other.  This is
transient response, and can be illustrated by inputting a 20kHz square wave
into the equipment in question and observing the output's rise time.  Look
for slew rate specs; a high number means that, among other things, a piano
will sound more like the real thing.

I could continue with phase, TIM, and harmonic distortion, and then on to
room acoustics and still only scratch the surface concerning the measurable
virtues of a good-sounding sound system that have nothing to do with frequency
response.  All can be measured with today's test equipment and be attributed
to such things as mushy or smeary sound, or poor imaging or detail.

>Is there another domain of sound reproduction that has escaped 
>detection by electronic instruments but is be obvious to the ear?  

I doubt it.  Some people (including myself) are just not always able to
relate these measurable parameters to what they hear.

                          -etan