| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Audio Discussions » Simpson Microphones thread. (46 posts, 3 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 1 of 2 (46 items) Select Pages:  1 2 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  The elusive “absolute tone”...  Breeze......  Playback Listening  Forum     24  153404  07-28-2005
  »  New  Tweeter for Vitavox S2. High-sensitively ribbons?..  Correction: Townshend Ribbon and sensitivity....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     64  598554  10-19-2006
  »  New  The best audio system: my secrets are partially out...  Kin-Dza-Dza's review.......  Playback Listening  Forum     1  18828  07-06-2007
10-21-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 1
Post ID: 5692
Reply to: 5692
Simpson Microphones thread.
 morricab wrote:
Hi Romy,
I have found that the Apogee loudspeakers ribbon drivers can quite successfully reproduce correct tone.  The reason why is this:  They have very little coloration from the driver materials themselves (no nasty resonances as the resonance is at only a few Hz), They are very linear (very low harmonic distortion), and are in an open baffle (so they do not excite cabinet resonances).  The planar magnetic bass driver in Apogees is slightly more colored but it gets the fundamentals (since it handles up to around 500 Hz) pretty correct.  If driven within its limits (depends on the size of the Apogee) the distortion is extremely low, again no box coloration, and very low noise from the driver itself.  One can get some idea of how colored a speaker will sound if on looks at the on and off axis response, the harmonic distortion, and the waterfall plot of a speaker.  An ugly waterfall plot nearly always guarantees a colored sound as all that stored energy is being released. 

I think ribbons are capable of the purest tone and this also is the case in recording technology.  The most realistic tone I have ever heard on a recordings comes from ones that I know were made with ribbon microphones.  Normal condenser mics (ie. electrostatic) are good but they tend to wash the intensity of the tonal color a bit.  Ribbons preserve this intense natural color better and preserve very subtle dynamic contrasts.
.....

You raise an interesting point regarding ribbons but are missing the bigger picture.

With Romy's permission, I would like to invite you (and any other members) to listen to some recordings on my site: www.SimpsonMicrophones.com

These show 'the ribbon sound' more than any ribbon mic - violin is a key instrument.
After you have listened I will be glad to explain why.

In answering why, I will give some reasons why the horn loaded speaker is superior to the ribbon (which is direct-radiating).

I do not expect to find customers in a loudspeaker community - only enthusiasts with whom I might discuss some principles of audio. Romy - if this is not appropriate, please delete.

Best regards,

Andy
10-21-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 2
Post ID: 5694
Reply to: 5692
Listening awareness and microphone

 Andy Simpson wrote:

You raise an interesting point regarding ribbons but are missing the bigger picture.

With Romy's permission, I would like to invite you (and any other members) to listen to some recordings on my site: www.SimpsonMicrophones.com

These show 'the ribbon sound' more than any ribbon mic - violin is a key instrument.
After you have listened I will be glad to explain why.

In answering why, I will give some reasons why the horn loaded speaker is superior to the ribbon (which is direct-radiating).

I do not expect to find customers in a loudspeaker community - only enthusiasts with whom I might discuss some principles of audio. Romy - if this is not appropriate, please delete.

Andy, you do not need to be apologetic, I have no rules against anyone to pull any commercial or marketing agenda – as long as you natural interest are noble then whatever you do is fine – well, you just need to be prepared to live with consequences if your natural interests are otherwise… :-) BTW, I moved your post into own thread, I hope you do not mind.

I know a lot about microphones but there is subject in the microphones that fascinated me tremendously and that has very direct influence to the audio that I practice. Human hearing can concentrate to specific sound, microphone can’t. To get “concentration” people bring microphone closer to the source, in some instances locating the microphone way within the reverberation radius (distance what direct sound  is equal to reflected sound). However, this positioning severely fucks up (I can’t find another word) harmonic content of sound and I HATE the recording with up-close microphones. I know, the audio-idiots and the industry warships the recordings with microphones stacked into the singer’s throat or into the violin deck but I’m so sick of them that it is hard to express, even with me flourishing semantics…

So, I wonder if exist any microphonic techniques that might position mics at significant distance, have tremendous transient capacity but at the same time would allow the listening awareness to “depth-observing” the recording event?

Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-21-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 3
Post ID: 5695
Reply to: 5694
Further thoughts.....
 Romy the Cat wrote:

 Andy Simpson wrote:

You raise an interesting point regarding ribbons but are missing the bigger picture.

With Romy's permission, I would like to invite you (and any other members) to listen to some recordings on my site: www.SimpsonMicrophones.com

These show 'the ribbon sound' more than any ribbon mic - violin is a key instrument.
After you have listened I will be glad to explain why.

In answering why, I will give some reasons why the horn loaded speaker is superior to the ribbon (which is direct-radiating).

I do not expect to find customers in a loudspeaker community - only enthusiasts with whom I might discuss some principles of audio. Romy - if this is not appropriate, please delete.

Andy, you do not need to be apologetic, I have no rules against anyone to pull any commercial or marketing agenda – as long as you natural interest are noble then whatever you do is fine – well, you just need to be prepared to live with consequences if your natural interests are otherwise… :-) BTW, I moved your post into own thread, I hope you do not mind.

I know a lot about microphones but there is subject in the microphones that fascinated me tremendously and that has very direct influence to the audio that I practice. Human hearing can concentrate to specific sound, microphone can’t. To get “concentration” people bring microphone closer to the source, in some instances locating the microphone way within the reverberation radius (distance what direct sound  is equal to reflected sound). However, this positioning severely fucks up (I can’t find another word) harmonic content of sound and I HATE the recording with up-close microphones. I know, the audio-idiots and the industry warships the recordings with microphones stacked into the singer’s throat or into the violin deck but I’m so sick of them that it is hard to express, even with me flourishing semantics…

So, I wonder if exist any microphonic techniques that might position mics at significant distance, have tremendous transient capacity but at the same time would allow the listening awareness to “depth-observing” the recording event?

Romy the Cat


Romy,

You are asking at least two questions at the same time.

Firstly, when you hear a sound in life, your eyes give you primary depth cues which enable your brain to use secondary depth cues from the ears to cross-reference & filter (tune into) the important information ('cocktail party effect').
This is certainly an important factor in listening clarity even in poor acoustic spaces with high noise-floor.

This effect would help you pick the bad phrasing played by your good friend in the second row of 20 violins during a loud crescendo where the whole orchestra is playing. You look at your friend and hear his mistake clearly. Your neighbour is watching the conductor and hears no mistake whatever (but he does hear the conductor's batton whistling through the air).

For recording, things are more difficult as the visual cues are not there 'to help'.

As far as I am concerned the 'distance from source' parameter in sound is not yet understood or researched, so, although we can record (using stereo) left-right dimension, front-back dimension is merely implied with reflection & 'distance/air losses' type cues - ie. if a sound is far away it is quieter, it's extreme frequencies are reduced and the ratio of direct-to-indirect (reverb) sound is tipped in favour of indirect.

Point of fact - it is impossible to image a sound significantly in front of the speaker. Make it louder, drier, brighter it never comes forward any further than the distance from you to the speaker.

When we can do that, we are making real progress.

However, at present, the best we can do is present a soundfield which extends backwards from the speakers in as realistic way as possible. Good enough for orchestra, which is usually placed at a good distance with no sources coming close(r than the speaker) to the listener.

For me, I am primarily interested in the most basic resolution of the microphone - as you are the speaker. To improve this is to improve every possible aspect of reproduction, from timbre to dynamics to spatial cues to musicality. (Absolute sound?).

This does however address your requirement of tremendous transient capacity at a great distance - which you will hear in my recordings - and this results in a different balance of dynamics, where the ear is more assured that it will be delivered sound that will not offend.

Whether or not you & the other people here claim authority to criticise recordings, you can certainly listen to my clips and observe whether I tell the truth or not. Essentially, you will hear an order of magnitude greater dynamic freedom - very very very much like the difference between a direct-radiating speaker and a horn-loaded speaker.

Clarity is not in 'frequency response' but in information, which is primarily time-domain.

An uneven frequency response does not remove information, it simply alters the balance/presentation. But an uneven time-response actually distorts/loses information, and this cannot be brought back with equalisation or any other processing.

All horn listeners know this intuitively, even those with quite bad horn systems.

Anyway, microphone explanations after listening......

Best regards,

Andy
10-21-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
CO
Posts 37
Joined on 11-18-2005

Post #: 4
Post ID: 5697
Reply to: 5695
The eyes tell a different story than the ears
I also have the experiance that the eyes tell a different story than the ears. Sounds are much closer than they look.

Even outdoors with very little reflections/obstructions. I once cheched this with a bird in a tree at about 20meters distance. Closing my eyes it was very hard to say how far away the bird was but i would say about half closer than it really was.

Now i still have to listen to the recordings.

Rgds, Collin
10-21-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 5
Post ID: 5699
Reply to: 5695
Human ears/mind vs. “flat” microphones…

Andy 

1)    Actually the most interest was in the fact that I was not asking two questions but one question at the same time as I see both of the questions are inner-related. I was under presumption that in my asking I automatically eliminate the visual contribution of audible image as it would make the answers too easy.

2)    In most of recordings the requirement for tremendous transient capacity and instantaneousness of dynamic change is substituted with artificial proximity and insultingly-extended HF

3)    “Clarity is not in 'frequency response' but in information, which is primarily time-domain.” – Good bless you – you know already about loudspeakers more then 99% of people who build them. However, the “clarity” is way more complex quality then just time-domain perfection. I have writhen an article about “audio clarity” a month ago but I did not post it as do not feel that it will be properly understood. Prior to posting it I am planning to post another one-two articles – about the nature of my inters in audio subjects. Sometimes when I have time I will do it…

4)    I do not “get” your association between dynamic freedom of direct-radiating speakers and horn-loaded speakers. There are very dynamic performing low-sensitivity direct-radiating speakers and there are anti- dynamic horns – it is all upon implementation and various “contingent upon”…

5)    Might I ask: what would be if an active element of a microphone were loaded to active load? What would be if the load would wary according to some kind of algorithm? Purely hypothetically: we have a source of signal and 3 microphones – one at 1 meter, another at 5 meter and the third at 10 meters. The second microphone actually record but the first and third used to subtract the signal of first microphone, to analyze relationship between volume and harmonics and to modify the loading/magnetizing characteristics of the second microphone. Perhaps it all has no sense but my interests to see if a microphone, or the microphone/preamp interface can be taught to react to loud, soft, close or far signals differently, similar to what human ears/mind does.

Rgs,
Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-22-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Bud
upper left crust united snakes
Posts 87
Joined on 07-07-2005

Post #: 6
Post ID: 5700
Reply to: 5699
Something must be done about this and soon
Andy,
These are sensationaly deep recordings, just as you said they would be. DYNAMICS from a distance, and no artificially sick or flat notes, or hidden masses of groaning monsters.

Romy you need to help this man, put his recordings on your broadband site, so we can send other parties in to learn about this...please?

Bud
10-22-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 7
Post ID: 5701
Reply to: 5699
....questions of clarity....
 Romy the Cat wrote:

Andy 

1)    Actually the most interest was in the fact that I was not asking two questions but one question at the same time as I see both of the questions are inner-related. I was under presumption that in my asking I automatically eliminate the visual contribution of audible image as it would make the answers too easy.

2)    In most of recordings the requirement for tremendous transient capacity and instantaneousness of dynamic change is substituted with artificial proximity and insultingly-extended HF

3)    “Clarity is not in 'frequency response' but in information, which is primarily time-domain.” – Good bless you – you know already about loudspeakers more then 99% of people who build them. However, the “clarity” is way more complex quality then just time-domain perfection. I have writhen an article about “audio clarity” a month ago but I did not post it as do not feel that it will be properly understood. Prior to posting it I am planning to post another one-two articles – about the nature of my inters in audio subjects. Sometimes when I have time I will do it…

4)    I do not “get” your association between dynamic freedom of direct-radiating speakers and horn-loaded speakers. There are very dynamic performing low-sensitivity direct-radiating speakers and there are anti- dynamic horns – it is all upon implementation and various “contingent upon”…

5)    Might I ask: what would be if an active element of a microphone were loaded to active load? What would be if the load would wary according to some kind of algorithm? Purely hypothetically: we have a source of signal and 3 microphones – one at 1 meter, another at 5 meter and the third at 10 meters. The second microphone actually record but the first and third used to subtract the signal of first microphone, to analyze relationship between volume and harmonics and to modify the loading/magnetizing characteristics of the second microphone. Perhaps it all has no sense but my interests to see if a microphone, or the microphone/preamp interface can be taught to react to loud, soft, close or far signals differently, similar to what human ears/mind does.

Rgs,
Romy the Cat


Romy,

Of course your questions are related but I felt it better to break it down a little bit.

Answers

(1) Yes, the visual part of the equation should be removed but also understood that it is quite critical to clarity in bad acoustic spaces. - Perhaps a photograph from the microphone perspective would serve.....(but this is beside the point)

(2) Yes, in most recordings - which are unlistenable - multiple microphones are used in close proximity in order to artificially generate 'clarity'. The side effects (as you noted) are massively exagerated (but uncontrolled) dynamics, confusion, etc and these problems are much worse simply because the microphones used are bad enough at distance but terrible close.
Almost as bad is where a single pair of the same usual condenser microphones are situated at 'audiophile' distance, where there is no dynamcs or clarity and recorded at the highest possible bandwidth. At least there is less distortion but still the same class of problem.

(3) I would be interested to read your post on 'clarity'. However, I again restate that clarity is information and in sound information is time-domain (perfection). However, from my research, this 'perfection' comes partly from a place which you have not considered yet - at least not directly - which I will get to later.

(4) Regarding my association between dynamic freedom and horn-loading - this will be addressed (as mentioned above) in due course. There is no direct radiator which can match the best horn-loaded - but you know this. Of course, implementation is everything.....

(5) To my way of thinking, it would make little sense creating a microphone whose transfer function depends on source loudness. If we are talking about the non-linearities of the ear (which I think we are) then I aim to make the microphone (& speaker) linear and let the ear be non-linear at playback (ie. playback at performance SPL, where the ear will react properly to the SPL).

Best regards,

Andy
10-22-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 8
Post ID: 5702
Reply to: 5700
....monsters......
 Bud wrote:
Andy,
These are sensationaly deep recordings, just as you said they would be. DYNAMICS from a distance, and no artificially sick or flat notes, or hidden masses of groaning monsters.

Romy you need to help this man, put his recordings on your broadband site, so we can send other parties in to learn about this...please?

Bud


Yes, my 'server' is very very slow.... this would be fine with me.

Best regards,

Andy
10-22-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 9
Post ID: 5703
Reply to: 5701
They all are juts microphone fantasies…

 Andy Simpson wrote:
  (2) Yes, in most recordings - which are unlistenable - multiple microphones are used in close proximity in order to artificially generate 'clarity'. The side effects (as you noted) are massively exagerated (but uncontrolled) dynamics, confusion, etc and these problems are much worse simply because the microphones used are bad enough at distance but terrible close. Almost as bad is where a single pair of the same usual condenser microphones are situated at 'audiophile' distance, where there is no dynamcs or clarity and recorded at the highest possible bandwidth. At least there is less distortion but still the same class of problem.

Interesting that you omitted in your response the “insultingly-extended HF”. I feel it one of the biggest problems as luck of “transients from distance” people foolishly substrates with a presents of bogusly-supplemented and artificially-presented HF.

 Andy Simpson wrote:
  (3) I would be interested to read your post on 'clarity'. However, I again restate that clarity is information and in sound information is time-domain (perfection). However, from my research, this 'perfection' comes partly from a place which you have not considered yet - at least not directly - which I will get to later.

In my article about 'clarity' I did not give any recipe of 'clarity' but debated that currently dominating definition of audio 'clarity' is a synthetic, industry-contrived idiocy.

 Andy Simpson wrote:
  (4) Regarding my association between dynamic freedom and horn-loading - this will be addressed (as mentioned above) in due course. There is no direct radiator which can match the best horn-loaded - but you know this. Of course, implementation is everything.....

I would not buy it “as is”. Implementation is everything but… there are many different aspects of dynamic. As I have written before I recognize not one phrase “dynamic” but at least 4 different aspects of dynamics. I would not say that horn-loading is by it’s nature excel in all aspects of dynamics. It is not to mention that there is expressed dynamic and perceived dynamic…

 Andy Simpson wrote:
  (5) To my way of thinking, it would make little sense creating a microphone whose transfer function depends on source loudness. If we are talking about the non-linearities of the ear (which I think we are) then I aim to make the microphone (& speaker) linear and let the ear be non-linear at playback (ie. playback at performance SPL, where the ear will react properly to the SPL).

The point was not to fight with non-linearities of the ear but to mimic the way how brain proposes the heard. For instance sound, relatively slow traveling in space will reach first microphone sooner than the second and it will be a constant delay. If the microphone #2 has an electro-magnetizing filed, electro-damping and active load then it would be possible to pre-stricture the microphone #2’s characteristics to be optimum for registering the signal of the very given amplitude. Sure, they all are juts fantasies…

Rgs, the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-22-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 10
Post ID: 5705
Reply to: 5700
The mushrooms, the smoke and the lack of my expertise.

 Bud wrote:
These are sensationaly deep recordings, just as you said they would be. DYNAMICS from a distance, and no artificially sick or flat notes, or hidden masses of groaning monsters.

Romy you need to help this man, put his recordings on your broadband site, so we can send other parties in to learn about this...please?

Bud,

I disagree. I do not like those recordings. The “events” are very disconnected and are popping up out of space with the organization of mushrooms in forest after a rain. To me the recording sound as an images that where up-sharpened many times and lost own continuity of grade’s fractions.  It is also ironic that different recording that where presumably recorded at different concert halls but they sound the same acoustically – not the same but with the same style – I call it coloration - or a constant common denominator devastating discrimination.  Whaen I listen this Sound I would like to take a large breathe in of cigar’s smoke or inhale the morning fog and to inject it to the sound.

I certainly would not necessary balm the Andy’s microphones. My expertise in microphones equal to nothing and I am not trained to recognize reasoning and conciseness of recording techniques. I know that something is not right. Jim the Smith, are you reading it? You have a lot if recoding experience; can you pass your observations? I will soot an email to Jim, inviting him in….

Andy, I have no problems to upload your files to my server, though my server is not as fast as it should be. However, I would NOT suggest you not link the files from you site to my server. Since you are looking for the “industry recognition” then be advised that you will come across to some industry idiots, whose attention you will be seeking, who will not be happy with the fact that your files are linked to the Romy the Cat’s server.

Rgs,
Romy the caT


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-22-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 11
Post ID: 5706
Reply to: 5705
....mushrooms....
 Romy the Cat wrote:

 Bud wrote:
These are sensationaly deep recordings, just as you said they would be. DYNAMICS from a distance, and no artificially sick or flat notes, or hidden masses of groaning monsters.

Romy you need to help this man, put his recordings on your broadband site, so we can send other parties in to learn about this...please?

Bud,

I disagree. I do not like those recordings. The “events” are very disconnected and are popping up out of space with the organization of mushrooms in forest after a rain. To me the recording sound as an images that where up-sharpened many times and lost own continuity of grade’s fractions.  It is also ironic that different recording that where presumably recorded at different concert halls but they sound the same acoustically – not the same but with the same style – I call it coloration - or a constant common denominator devastating discrimination.  Whaen I listen this Sound I would like to take a large breathe in of cigar’s smoke or inhale the morning fog and to inject it to the sound.

I certainly would not necessary balm the Andy’s microphones. My expertise in microphones equal to nothing and I am not trained to recognize reasoning and conciseness of recording techniques. I know that something is not right. Jim the Smith, are you reading it? You have a lot if recoding experience; can you pass your observations? I will soot an email to Jim, inviting him in….

Andy, I have no problems to upload your files to my server, though my server is not as fast as it should be. However, I would NOT suggest you not link the files from you site to my server. Since you are looking for the “industry recognition” then be advised that you will come across to some industry idiots, whose attention you will be seeking, who will not be happy with the fact that your files are linked to the Romy the Cat’s server.

Rgs,
Romy the caT


Well, I leave it up to you about the server - it was the request of Bud. I didn't have any intention of linking my own site to your server but I am happy for you to have my recordings here.

Here in Poland we collect mushrooms in the forest weekly and they are very nice pickled or fried (depending on your patience).

Best regards,

Andy
10-22-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 12
Post ID: 5707
Reply to: 5706
Simpson Microphones audio files.
http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Audio_Files/SimpsonMicrophones_1.wav  (34 Meg)

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Audio_Files/SimpsonMicrophones_2.wav   (26 Meg)

Save them on your machine before playing.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-22-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 13
Post ID: 5708
Reply to: 5703
....deeper....or too deep....
 Romy the Cat wrote:

(1)

Interesting that you omitted in your response the “insultingly-extended HF”. I feel it one of the biggest problems as luck of “transients from distance” people foolishly substrates with a presents of bogusly-supplemented and artificially-presented HF.


(2)

I would not buy it “as is”. Implementation is everything but… there are many different aspects of dynamic. As I have written before I recognize not one phrase “dynamic” but at least 4 different aspects of dynamics. I would not say that horn-loading is by it’s nature excel in all aspects of dynamics. It is not to mention that there is expressed dynamic and perceived dynamic…


(3)

The point was not to fight with non-linearities of the ear but to mimic the way how brain proposes the heard. For instance sound, relatively slow traveling in space will reach first microphone sooner than the second and it will be a constant delay. If the microphone #2 has an electro-magnetizing filed, electro-damping and active load then it would be possible to pre-stricture the microphone #2’s characteristics to be optimum for registering the signal of the very given amplitude. Sure, they all are juts fantasies…

Rgs, the Cat


(1)
Yes, I forgot to mention the HF exagerating which occurs in recordings, but it was a simple forgotten point among many.

Usually, this is a _time-domain_ artefact of microphone diaphragm resonance, made worse by excessive proximity. It is not generally achieved by equalisation, nor can it be removed with equalisation. People often consider this form of distortion to be 'detail' but it usually falls over most badly on bowed string instruments such as violin, where diaphragm instability causes painful recordings.

(2)
Of course, I don't expect you to 'buy it' 'as is'! However, as I said, there is a very good reason for horn-loading which I will get to in due course.

(3)
Well, I still do not see any reason why we should try to take the brain or ear into account if we produce a linear record->playback chain. The non-linear ear expects a linear input.

In any case, there is the physical function of the ear, the reasons for non-linearity and the nervous system, all of which are interconnected.

There are many aspects of the overall transfer function of the ear which are discretely significant and we can hardly expect to discuss them all at the same time.

First we have the basic time-domain resolution of the ear - within the well known bandwidth, nominally ~20hz-20khz.

Second we have the amplitude non-linearity of the ear.

Third we have the acoustic transfer function of the outer-ear - based on source location, wave-front, etc.

Then, finally and most horribly, we have the brain, which can chaotically ignore, reinterpret and mistake the input from such amazing sensory organs (please! don't get me started on suspension of disbelief).

These are all critical to 'sound reproduction' in their way but are actually easily considered as discrete systems and not all necessary for our purposes - or within the scope of our possibilities (two channel, non-'binaural').

Regarding the physical ear, the most interesting aspect for me (at present) is the fluid 'damping' of the cochlea. Possibly one reason for the incredible time-domain resolution of the ear.

I believe that this is important to addressing the most basic issue of 'resolution' - ie. time-domain. I address it in microphones and you in speakers (whether directly or not).

Finally, let us dismiss the term 'dynamics' - as you mentioned, it is clearly an undefined marketing term and of no use here.

I prefer impulse response or time-domain response, as these two terms encompass sound _information_ within the audible band. In any case, it is impossible to improve time-domain response without improving all aspects of the dismissed term 'dynamics' - whatever it may mean. :-)

Perhaps, if we keep our first discussion to this discrete area, we can make progress which will inform related areas later.

Best regards,

Andy
10-22-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 14
Post ID: 5709
Reply to: 5708
Let practice more applied audio.

 Andy Simpson wrote:
Usually, this is a _time-domain_ artefact of microphone diaphragm resonance, made worse by excessive proximity.

Very interesting!

 Andy Simpson wrote:
Then, finally and most horribly, we have the brain, which can chaotically ignore, reinterpret and mistake the input from such amazing sensory organs (please! don't get me started on suspension of disbelief).

Actually I do not feel that it is most “horribly” but rather that set everything in the “real interesting mode”…

 Andy Simpson wrote:
Regarding the physical ear, the most interesting aspect for me (at present) is the fluid 'damping' of the cochlea. Possibly one reason for the incredible time-domain resolution of the ear.

Actually the most interesting subject in physicality of ear to me is not the cochlea damping but the fact that brain and ear are liquid decoupled and whatever brain hears is transmitted through a liquid pressure wave. Of course it is the case if a person is not a Bush-republican… BTW, is it possible to do liquid damping/decoupling with diaphragm in order to kill the “artefact of microphone diaphragm resonance, made worse by excessive proximity”?

 Andy Simpson wrote:
Finally, let us dismiss the term 'dynamics' - as you mentioned, it is clearly an undefined marketing term and of no use here.

I would agree. There is a lot of confusion about dynamic and the term is grossly misused. Unfortunately I do not know how to use it properly as well…

 Andy Simpson wrote:
…first discussion to this discrete area, we can make progress …

Andy, let be a let bit more practical as it is what I uselessly try to do in audio. Would you comment on my feedback above about your recordings?

Also, all of your recording has very idiosyncratic, very shallow and very noisy midbass, there is no lower bass weight in any of the recordings (I was listening only classical recording - I do not care about others). I initially thought that “no bass” was the properly of the recording environment but then I decided that it is something in your recording chain – microphones, preamps, A/D or whatever. Can you comment on it? Your bass basically does not exist below I would say 45Hz and whatever is near 45Hz is very purely defined and very badly articulated. Andy, are you using ported monitor to conduct your listening experiments?

Rgs, Romy the caT


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-23-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 15
Post ID: 5710
Reply to: 5709
....some answers and more questions.....
 Romy the Cat wrote:

Actually the most interesting subject in physicality of ear to me is not the cochlea damping but the fact that brain and ear are liquid decoupled and whatever brain hears is transmitted through a liquid pressure wave. Of course it is the case if a person is not a Bush-republican… BTW, is it possible to do liquid damping/decoupling with diaphragm in order to kill the “artefact of microphone diaphragm resonance, made worse by excessive proximity”?

I thought that eventually you would take my hint.... liquid damping in microphones is something I have given some thought to - especially given that air comes under 'fluid dynamics' - but I will get to my own solution shortly.....

Andy, let be a let bit more practical as it is what I uselessly try to do in audio. Would you comment on my feedback above about your recordings?

Also, all of your recording has very idiosyncratic, very shallow and very noisy midbass, there is no lower bass weight in any of the recordings (I was listening only classical recording - I do not care about others). I initially thought that “no bass” was the properly of the recording environment but then I decided that it is something in your recording chain – microphones, preamps, A/D or whatever. Can you comment on it? Your bass basically does not exist below I would say 45Hz and whatever is near 45Hz is very purely defined and very badly articulated. Andy, are you using ported monitor to conduct your listening experiments?

Rgs, Romy the caT


I did comment. I like mushrooms.

But seriously, there is not much to be gained by directly answering your comments about smoke or air or mushrooms. Sounds 'popping up like mushrooms' implies many things but you will have to be clear about your criticism in order to be answered with any value.

I will say that you could not (in your wildest dreams) imagine worse pre-amps, converters & cables which my poor microphones were connected to (Jim has some details).
Also, with these microphones (as I will elaborate upon later) there is the issue of 'callibration'. More later....

For now, my replies will be very slow over the next few days as I will be in Germany presenting my work and may not be able to reach a computer or have time to reply.

Also, if you are hosting a few of my files, you might also put one of the string quartet recordings there too - firstly, as this is the only recording which represents a 'wet' acoustic and secondly, as this is a very clear example of strings recorded without resonance on sustained notes (constant excitation resonance) - something no other microphone can do to this extent. More on this critical subject later too.

Best regards,

Andy
10-23-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 16
Post ID: 5712
Reply to: 5710
So, far you juts prove the Ribbon’s problems.

 Andy Simpson wrote:
I thought that eventually you would take my hint.... liquid damping in microphones is something I have given some thought to - especially given that air comes under 'fluid dynamics' - but I will get to my own solution shortly.....

The liquid dumpling in tonearms do works very nicely – eats transients though… BTW, let me to make it very generally… the certain thing are already done and successfully used in this direction buy the peoples I know but unfortunately I’m not at liberty comment on it further.
 

 Andy Simpson wrote:
But seriously, there is not much to be gained by directly answering your comments about smoke or air or mushrooms. Sounds 'popping up like mushrooms' implies many things but you will have to be clear about your criticism in order to be answered with any value.

I will say that you could not (in your wildest dreams) imagine worse pre-amps, converters & cables which my poor microphones were connected to (Jim has some details).
Also, with these microphones (as I will elaborate upon later) there is the issue of 'callibration'. More later....

Well, Andy, if you present your files as demonstration of “anything” then you need to make them presentable, otherwise - what are you doing?  Your files have absolutely removed all harmonics – juts the spikes of isolated notes. I can get the same sound if I load the output tube of my Milq not to 1000R but to 10.000R - when the plate is almost idle it does the same “quality”. The irony is that the many idiots in the industry do consider that time of sound as “quality” and the industry do move toward to this punchy direction. I do not if it was your objective or it was just a result of bad amplification and AD processing.  I think you need to demonstrate a result that would send a message what you consider “Simpson’s level of recording”. The files that you send do not do it, and in a way laughable. Perhaps if I were a person who is accustomed to recognize the contribution of microphones then I might be able to recognize in your files something that you intended to say but I am blind to the microphone’s discrimination.

 Andy Simpson wrote:
Also, if you are hosting a few of my files, you might also put one of the string quartet recordings there too - firstly, as this is the only recording which represents a 'wet' acoustic and secondly, as this is a very clear example of strings recorded without resonance on sustained notes (constant excitation resonance) - something no other microphone can do to this extent. More on this critical subject later too.

I did not download anything else after the first two files.

One more thing. My personal interest in the entire subject is the “Ribbon Saga”. The last year I dived into the Ribbon Story with Aleksandar Radisavljevic from Serbia built for me the “Water Drop” tweeter. (You might get in touch with Alex BTW as he is a very well educated scientist who spent a lot of years learning and experimenting with ribbons and you might find an interesting collaborator). My experiments with my ribbon driver indicated that a ribbon transducer is losing its attractiveness with each hertz.  At HF ribbon has a lot of advantages but as we move down to frequency range a ribbon is losing dynamic, transients and got desensitized tonally. Frankly it was exactly what you demonstrated in your recordings.

Alex, disagree with me and he feel it is possible to with Ribbon down, and I wish him luck to try it. I feel that an any lower frequency ribbon get removed from it perfect ultimate position of flux’s dead spot and all games are off. There are many other reasons in wish I would like do not go now. Still. You your recording you perfectly illustrate the concept. We can disregard the pure pre-amps, converters & cables. Pay attention that “rightness” of sound in your recording is gradually decries with frequency range doing down. At sub ~700Hz sound do practically annoying and got completely evaporated from the bottom. Call it as my prejudice but it is what I would expect from a ribbon transducer that filtered to work full range. Here is the 3D oscillograph of your orchestral piece.  There is not typical LF "warps" in there…

Rgs, Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-23-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 17
Post ID: 5713
Reply to: 5712
....interesting....not a ribbon mic though....
 Romy the Cat wrote:

 Andy Simpson wrote:
I thought that eventually you would take my hint.... liquid damping in microphones is something I have given some thought to - especially given that air comes under 'fluid dynamics' - but I will get to my own solution shortly.....

The liquid dumpling in tonearms do works very nicely – eats transients though… BTW, let me to make it very generally… the certain thing are already done and successfully used in this direction buy the peoples I know but unfortunately I’m not at liberty comment on it further.
 

 Andy Simpson wrote:
But seriously, there is not much to be gained by directly answering your comments about smoke or air or mushrooms. Sounds 'popping up like mushrooms' implies many things but you will have to be clear about your criticism in order to be answered with any value.

I will say that you could not (in your wildest dreams) imagine worse pre-amps, converters & cables which my poor microphones were connected to (Jim has some details).
Also, with these microphones (as I will elaborate upon later) there is the issue of 'callibration'. More later....

Well, Andy, if you present your files as demonstration of “anything” then you need to make them presentable, otherwise - what are you doing?  Your files have absolutely removed all harmonics – juts the spikes of isolated notes. I can get the same sound if I load the output tube of my Milq not to 1000R but to 10.000R - when the plate is almost idle it does the same “quality”. The irony is that the many idiots in the industry do consider that time of sound as “quality” and the industry do move toward to this punchy direction. I do not if it was your objective or it was just a result of bad amplification and AD processing.  I think you need to demonstrate a result that would send a message what you consider “Simpson’s level of recording”. The files that you send do not do it, and in a way laughable. Perhaps if I were a person who is accustomed to recognize the contribution of microphones then I might be able to recognize in your files something that you intended to say but I am blind to the microphone’s discrimination.

 Andy Simpson wrote:
Also, if you are hosting a few of my files, you might also put one of the string quartet recordings there too - firstly, as this is the only recording which represents a 'wet' acoustic and secondly, as this is a very clear example of strings recorded without resonance on sustained notes (constant excitation resonance) - something no other microphone can do to this extent. More on this critical subject later too.

I did not download anything else after the first two files.

One more thing. My personal interest in the entire subject is the “Ribbon Saga”. The last year I dived into the Ribbon Story with Aleksandar Radisavljevic from Serbia built for me the “Water Drop” tweeter. (You might get in touch with Alex BTW as he is a very well educated scientist who spent a lot of years learning and experimenting with ribbons and you might find an interesting collaborator). My experiments with my ribbon driver indicated that a ribbon transducer is losing its attractiveness with each hertz.  At HF ribbon has a lot of advantages but as we move down to frequency range a ribbon is losing dynamic, transients and got desensitized tonally. Frankly it was exactly what you demonstrated in your recordings.

Alex, disagree with me and he feel it is possible to with Ribbon down, and I wish him luck to try it. I feel that an any lower frequency ribbon get removed from it perfect ultimate position of flux’s dead spot and all games are off. There are many other reasons in wish I would like do not go now. Still. You your recording you perfectly illustrate the concept. We can disregard the pure pre-amps, converters & cables. Pay attention that “rightness” of sound in your recording is gradually decries with frequency range doing down. At sub ~700Hz sound do practically annoying and got completely evaporated from the bottom. Call it as my prejudice but it is what I would expect from a ribbon transducer that filtered to work full range. Here is the 3D oscillograph of your orchestral piece.  There is not typical LF "warps" in there…

Rgs, Romy the Cat


....quickly before I leave for Germany....

Interesting plot, thanks for sharing.

Which file this is? Which section of music is it from? From a tympani section? Did you do a plot for the other file?

It could shed some light on the matter.....

To restate - this is _not_ a ribbon microphone - as I thought I had made clear.

Also, it is a great shame if you didn't try the quartet recordings - you are missing the only interesting acoustic..... these are very illustrative regarding other issues I mentioned (constant excitation resonance for example).

If you have any violin recordings as clean, please post clips with details - I'd like to hear them.

Best regards,

Andy
10-23-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 18
Post ID: 5716
Reply to: 5713
The quartet recordings
 Andy Simpson wrote:
Also, it is a great shame if you didn't try the quartet recordings - you are missing the only interesting acoustic..... these are very illustrative regarding other issues I mentioned (constant excitation resonance for example).
Yes, I agree. I just listened it and I do found the first quartet recording way more interesting then the first two files. Still, there is a sense of thinness when the frequencies going down. Better instruments are open it’s harmonic richness up from distance, still there is no needs to stick the overtones into the body of sound. I still found the quartet recording too bright and too lean, the room is bright as well but it would not bother me if it was “life”, still it does bother me in the recording. I think if in that recording you have has more LF mass then it would be more balanced. Try an RL filter with “open bottom” (this is VERY critical – do not close the notch – it will kill Sound) – I think it migh be beneficial in your case. If you wish to get an example of the tonal balance that I am trying to hear then look how the Switzerland company DivoX records chamber music. I do not agree with everything they do – they record too close and too hot. However, their balance is very much not “thin” and they do not go “#” in their recording tone.

Rgs, Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-23-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Jim Smith
Atlanta, GA
Posts 11
Joined on 10-31-2006

Post #: 19
Post ID: 5718
Reply to: 5716
Questions sent to Andy
I have been in contact with Andy.

He replied to my first e-mail but for some reason, not to my e-mail with basic questions, reprinted below.

I seem to have misunderstood about the mic capsule being a ribbon.  But most of the questions were still valid.

I asked:

Hi Andy,

I had almost no luck getting your server to download. 

It took entirely too long and I have high speed service here.

Therefore, I didn't get to hear the string sound of the quartet recording.

I did finally manage to hear the symphonic selection with ORTF technique. 

I assumed the mics used were cardiod patterns simply because that's what's called for with that technique.

May I ask a few very simple questions?

What is the diameter of the ribbon element?
(This was my mistake re ribbon mics - but the diameter of the mic capsule is still very relevant)

How much latitude does the ribbon give with vertical/horizontal mic angle?  I mean - assuming placement in front of the orchestra - do you have to aim exactly at some point, say, at just above the strings, etc, the percussion section, etc. 
(The high frequencies were rolled off - almost progressively as if the mics used large diaphragm capsules and were too far off-axis)

How far back and how high over the stage was the ORTF mic array on the symphonic piece?
(I was wondering if the mics were too far back [reduced presence and life], and therefore too far off-axis, resulting in reduced high-frequency energy)

When you say ORTF, what is the included angle and separation of capsules?
(Similar thoughts to above - I know the answer - I just wanted to see what he said)

Do you strictly employ the original Radio France standard, or something else (such as a variant of NOS)?
(Again, similar)

Do you also make the ribbon available as a figure eight?
(My ribbon mistake again)

Do you introduce bass eq post recording? 
(Here I was wondering if the roll-off in response at 50 Hz or so was due to the cardiod pattern, or if he had some other thoughts.  It's a pretty safe statement to say that only ominis have flat response all the way down in the bass. I wonderd if he thought he had corrected for the cardiod bass roll-off.)

Who engineered this recording?
(I admit that I wasn't enamoured with the recording and simply wondered if it was done by someone with little experience with ORTF techniques)



Jim Smith
10-23-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 20
Post ID: 5719
Reply to: 5713
Juts for a sake of illustration
Andy, here is an example of full-range recording of a string quartet.  It is not the way I would prefers to record it (to close) but it is what it is. If you can’t hear the LF deficiency (I am not talking even about quality but quantity) of your recording then attention that the oscillograph of the recording below  has very typical "warps"  that go all the way down.

Below is a fragment from my Tchaikovsky's Second Quartet, I have no idea why it is not being play frequently – I love the piece. It was recorded by “Belcanto String” (not by the today's Calgary Quartet but by German group in begin of 90s). They are not there anymore and the recording is imposable to get. It is the most interesting play of the Tchaikovsky Second Quartet I even heard….

http://www.mediafire.com/?n5ljywxdizm  (31Meg, 44/16)




"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-30-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 21
Post ID: 5766
Reply to: 5719
....some light on the subject....

Before I answer some of the points raised....

I have recently updated my website with details of the microphone - pictures will tell much of the story.

This will answer some questions and raise some more.

The short version of the concept is this: by acoustic impedance matching a greater level of damping is achieved without impeding freedom of movement.

Or it can be viewed as a greater level of freedom of movement without reduction of damping (among other perspectives).

Quite clearly this concept applies to the horn-loading of speakers but in this case the motivation is simple 'damping', within the frequency band of greatest human hearing acuity.

However, the issue of 'damping' is not simply a question of resonance control but rather of basic time-domain (impulse response) - so dynamics, resolution, etc AND resonance are all positively affected.

Regarding the specific implementation in my microphone, this is slightly more complicated as a 'full range' horn would be impossible for many reasons.
So, the microphone is designed to be effective within the previously mentioned critical band of human hearing and, owing to the basic acoustical properties of the design, the microphone is designed to be post-equalised, hence some issues with incorrect post-eq callibration.

In (simplified) theoretical terms, the less time-domain distortion present, the more transparent post-equalisation should be. My clips illustrate this quite well, I think.

Best regards,

Andy

10-30-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 22
Post ID: 5771
Reply to: 5766
Ah, they are horn-loaded after all !!!
Andy, is conical shape and the flange around the moth is just the rational for cheap manufacturing? When a horn acts s a transducer the flange is not a positive thing… It would be very interesting how you select horns characteristics for your microphones.

BTW, a lack of LF in your recording is because of horn crap it off? BTW, do you know that I have horn-microphones in my room for years? I have high resolution db meters attached to Macondo’s horns and when the system is off and somebody talks in the room the meters run almost full scale – the 109dB sensitively and a small room is not a joke…


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-29-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 23
Post ID: 7318
Reply to: 5771
Some further examples, recorded at higher sample rate

Regarding the string quartet recording & accompanying graph - an example of 'full range recording' - as I said in the email, this recording shows the hallmarks of a compressed/saturated, close/multi-mic recording.

I would also say that I would be surprised if those sub-frequency LF 'spikes' were anything other than physically transmitted 'rumbling' from the players sitting on the floor (or even passing traffic), transmitted via the microphone stands.

As I said in the email, my microphones are mechanically isolated so that this effect will not be in my recordings.

Also, as I said in my email, the SPL used for playback governs the perceived spectrum - courtesy of the 'equal loudness contours', first published by Fletcher & Munson a long time ago.

My recordings are made for playback at performance SPL, not optimized for small scale speakers at quiet volumes.

In any case, I have recently made some further recordings which might be of interest:

Orchestra A - Orchestra       96/24 44/16 mp3

Orchestra B - Solo piano      96/24 44/16 mp3

Gregorian choir                   96/24 44/16 mp3

Classical Indian ensemble     96/24 44/16 mp3

Tabla                                96/24 44/16 mp3

Sitar                                 96/24 44/16 mp3

Drum kit                            96/24 44/16 mp3


Andy

07-09-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Andy Simpson
Posts 42
Joined on 10-21-2007

Post #: 24
Post ID: 7786
Reply to: 7318
Crapped-off bass

Romy - as it turned out, the 'crapped off bass' that you refered to was in part due to the consumer pre-amp I was using.

I attach an mp3 from a recent session where I recorded using a DAV BG1 into Mytek stereo96 converters. In making the recording with the upgraded mic-amp & converter I noticed immediately that the bass went much lower.

The mic-amp/converter upgrade was a direct result of my customers telling me that their own recordings made with my microphones were far better than my samples (they had similar complaints to yours).

This recording was monitored live in the hall with the orchestra at performance SPL via a pair of Mackie SRM450 speakers and was quite close to the actual sound.

mp3

Andy

07-10-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,511
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 25
Post ID: 7787
Reply to: 7786
You should not self-incriminate yourself like this

 Andy Simpson wrote:

Romy - as it turned out, the 'crapped off bass' that you refered to was in part due to the consumer pre-amp I was using.

I attach an mp3 from a recent session where I recorded using a DAV BG1 into Mytek stereo96 converters. In making the recording with the upgraded mic-amp & converter I noticed immediately that the bass went much lower.

The mic-amp/converter upgrade was a direct result of my customers telling me that their own recordings made with my microphones were far better than my samples (they had similar complaints to yours).

This recording was monitored live in the hall with the orchestra at performance SPL via a pair of Mackie SRM450 speakers and was quite close to the actual sound.

Andy, come on,

was it a joke or you are serious? Are you trying to present this Sound as something that has any more or less proper bass? I do not know at witch level of your recording/mastering chain it came to you but this Sound has absolutely revolting bass – juts a pieces of syntactic rubber garbage, sorry to say it. Also, it was incredibly boring play of Tchaikovsky IV. You shell not record music like this.

Rgs, Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 1 of 2 (46 items) Select Pages:  1 2 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  The elusive “absolute tone”...  Breeze......  Playback Listening  Forum     24  153404  07-28-2005
  »  New  Tweeter for Vitavox S2. High-sensitively ribbons?..  Correction: Townshend Ribbon and sensitivity....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     64  598554  10-19-2006
  »  New  The best audio system: my secrets are partially out...  Kin-Dza-Dza's review.......  Playback Listening  Forum     1  18828  07-06-2007
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts