Linn Forums

Current time: 2017-10-23, 01:47 Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Linn Forums / Linn Music Systems & Hi-fi Separates / Network Music Players & Music Streamers / Space Optimisation v / New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.

Post Reply 
New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
2017-03-29, 19:08
Post: #31
RE: New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
(2017-03-29 18:45)Paulssurround Wrote:  If I understand correctly, his Linn speakers have been measured in a generic way. Linn have measured a number of Katans, Ninkas, Espeks, Keilidhs, 140's and so on, to get an average reading.

Perhaps I ought to remember, but I do not recall which speakers Mea Culpa has. As some recent posts have reminded us, a few Linn speaker models have not been measured at all, even generically; I thought Mea Culpa was referring to those. In that case, I assume that you follow Linn's guidance as to what to do if your speakers are not on the list, which is to select "other speaker".

David

Main system: [Basik/Basik+/K5/Lejonklou Gaio >][Roksan Kandy Mk III >] KEDSM > Akurate Exaktbox 10 > Linn Silvers> A4200 x 2 and A2200 > K600 > Akubariks
Second system: Kiko
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-03-29, 19:15
Post: #32
RE: New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
(2017-03-29 13:00)Phil Budd (Philbo) Wrote:  
(2017-03-28 15:56)Baba Yaga Wrote:  Hmm, concerning the argument, a mic based approach would measure speaker + room and by this be inferior.

Not sure I understand it. Isn't the combination of speakers in my room what matters anyway? If I were to improve the sound of the speakers only I'd agree, but SO is about improving the sound of the speaker in my room, isn't it?

Guess I don't understand the logic in this argument.

BY

Our point is that you bought the speakers because you liked the way they sound.

If we measure (using a microphone) the result of your room and speaker together we will end up 'correcting' the whole system, normally to a theoretically ideal flat response, this may not be ideal.

Space optimisation models the system, both with and without the room, and then optimises based on the difference. This effectively removes the sonic design of the speaker from the optimisation and only fixes issues with the room.

Phil.

Thanks Phil,

this is interesting (and new to me) that you model with and w/o room and optimise based on the difference.

Not sure though how you can optimize w/o a room?
Are you doing this just using the speaker and listening positions?

Reminds me somehow of the Exakt approach to deal with measured driver tolerances and deviations from the ideal drivers.

BY
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-03-29, 19:38
Post: #33
RE: New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
(2017-03-29 19:15)Baba Yaga Wrote:  
(2017-03-29 13:00)Phil Budd (Philbo) Wrote:  
(2017-03-28 15:56)Baba Yaga Wrote:  Hmm, concerning the argument, a mic based approach would measure speaker + room and by this be inferior.

Not sure I understand it. Isn't the combination of speakers in my room what matters anyway? If I were to improve the sound of the speakers only I'd agree, but SO is about improving the sound of the speaker in my room, isn't it?

Guess I don't understand the logic in this argument.

BY

Our point is that you bought the speakers because you liked the way they sound.

If we measure (using a microphone) the result of your room and speaker together we will end up 'correcting' the whole system, normally to a theoretically ideal flat response, this may not be ideal.

Space optimisation models the system, both with and without the room, and then optimises based on the difference. This effectively removes the sonic design of the speaker from the optimisation and only fixes issues with the room.

Phil.

Thanks Phil,

this is interesting (and new to me) that you model with and w/o room and optimise based on the difference.

Not sure though how you can optimize w/o a room?
Are you doing this just using the speaker and listening positions?

Reminds me somehow of the Exakt approach to deal with measured driver tolerances and deviations from the ideal drivers.

BY

It is easy to explain how, Linn can optimize without a room.

They are simply thinking, outside the box. TongueRolleyesTongue

Exakt Surround 5.0:
Katalyst Akubariks, AEDSM, Akurate Exaktbox 6/4200 for 225 Centre, Majik Exaktbox I for 212 Surrounds, OPPO 105 on StillPoints.
Power: Environmental Potentials 2460, Shunyata Triton, Zitron Cobras, Alpha Digitals
Room Acoustics: SPACE, SubDude HT's, Acoustic Panels
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-03-29, 19:40
Post: #34
RE: New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
(2017-03-29 19:08)DavidHB Wrote:  
(2017-03-29 18:45)Paulssurround Wrote:  If I understand correctly, his Linn speakers have been measured in a generic way. Linn have measured a number of Katans, Ninkas, Espeks, Keilidhs, 140's and so on, to get an average reading.

Perhaps I ought to remember, but I do not recall which speakers Mea Culpa has. As some recent posts have reminded us, a few Linn speaker models have not been measured at all, even generically; I thought Mea Culpa was referring to those. In that case, I assume that you follow Linn's guidance as to what to do if your speakers are not on the list, which is to select "other speaker".

David

My speakers are the Custom 106C (Sekrit in-wall) which have not been measured at all so Linn advise choosing "Other" and setting as a point source model.

I find it irritating that the list of supported speakers has plenty of models from various manufacturers and not all of Linn's own speakers are included.

I wonder whether I'm wasting my time with Space Optimisation. I was expecting some pretty dramatic sonic differences with and without Space Optimisation, perhaps my expectations are too high.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-03-29, 20:48
Post: #35
RE: New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
(2017-03-29 19:40)MeaCulpa Wrote:  
(2017-03-29 19:08)DavidHB Wrote:  
(2017-03-29 18:45)Paulssurround Wrote:  If I understand correctly, his Linn speakers have been measured in a generic way. Linn have measured a number of Katans, Ninkas, Espeks, Keilidhs, 140's and so on, to get an average reading.

Perhaps I ought to remember, but I do not recall which speakers Mea Culpa has. As some recent posts have reminded us, a few Linn speaker models have not been measured at all, even generically; I thought Mea Culpa was referring to those. In that case, I assume that you follow Linn's guidance as to what to do if your speakers are not on the list, which is to select "other speaker".

David

My speakers are the Custom 106C (Sekrit in-wall) which have not been measured at all so Linn advise choosing "Other" and setting as a point source model.

I find it irritating that the list of supported speakers has plenty of models from various manufacturers and not all of Linn's own speakers are included.

I wonder whether I'm wasting my time with Space Optimisation. I was expecting some pretty dramatic sonic differences with and without Space Optimisation, perhaps my expectations are too high.

The following is pure speculation, and I am prepared to be wrong.

Space Optimization is designed to improve the interaction of the room modes produced by the low frequency response of the speakers and how they interact with the room.

The 106C, speakers do not produce the low bass notes that would benefit as much from Space Optimization, compared to other speakers that do.

Given the size of your room, the 106C's may not excite the room as much, to create large interfering room modes.

However, the 106 C's should still benefit nicely from Space Optimization, and I am sure I could get a lot more out of them.

One thing you can do is to make sure that all the 106C's fastening bolts and screws are torqued properly and have not come loose over time. This can improve sound quality.

The more solid the speakers and their drivers are anchored can make a difference.

Exakt Surround 5.0:
Katalyst Akubariks, AEDSM, Akurate Exaktbox 6/4200 for 225 Centre, Majik Exaktbox I for 212 Surrounds, OPPO 105 on StillPoints.
Power: Environmental Potentials 2460, Shunyata Triton, Zitron Cobras, Alpha Digitals
Room Acoustics: SPACE, SubDude HT's, Acoustic Panels
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-03-29, 21:19
Post: #36
RE: New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
The sound is much better when standing near the speakers. I'm pretty sure that the room is problematic with harsh mid-high frequencies.

Given that Space Optimisation deals with bass frequencies, how would you go about getting the best of the system?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-03-29, 21:56 (This post was last modified: 2017-03-30 05:05 by Paulssurround.)
Post: #37
RE: New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
(2017-03-29 21:19)MeaCulpa Wrote:  The sound is much better when standing near the speakers. I'm pretty sure that the room is problematic with harsh mid-high frequencies.

Given that Space Optimisation deals with bass frequencies, how would you go about getting the best of the system?

If I were working on your system, and tackling harshness in the highs, I would be focusing on the room modes between 60-80 Hz.

I would adjust the calculated frequencies up or down for each room mode.

I would add gain, -21.3 to -20.3 and so on.

Then narrow the bandwidth, all using reference music tracks.


If the sound quality is harsh, consider the following:

I would also do some investigation into the power supply of the electronics, to check the quality of the power source, check whether the power cords are touching the speaker wires and interconnects.

If you are using a cheap power bar, remove all other things plugged into the power bar that is not audio related, such as your TV, HD box, BluRay player and so on.

And lastly, you have a room more than 7 meters long, so I am not sure if your speakers are big enough to cover the room properly?
The 106C may not disperse the music widely enough to cover the room properly?

Exakt Surround 5.0:
Katalyst Akubariks, AEDSM, Akurate Exaktbox 6/4200 for 225 Centre, Majik Exaktbox I for 212 Surrounds, OPPO 105 on StillPoints.
Power: Environmental Potentials 2460, Shunyata Triton, Zitron Cobras, Alpha Digitals
Room Acoustics: SPACE, SubDude HT's, Acoustic Panels
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-03-29, 22:06
Post: #38
RE: New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
Where reference tracks only work if you have heard a lot of systems and can remember what you liked where.

Tin can telephone system.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-03-29, 22:24
Post: #39
RE: New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
(2017-03-29 13:00)Phil Budd (Philbo) Wrote:  
(2017-03-28 15:56)Baba Yaga Wrote:  Hmm, concerning the argument, a mic based approach would measure speaker + room and by this be inferior.

Not sure I understand it. Isn't the combination of speakers in my room what matters anyway? If I were to improve the sound of the speakers only I'd agree, but SO is about improving the sound of the speaker in my room, isn't it?

Guess I don't understand the logic in this argument.

BY

Our point is that you bought the speakers because you liked the way they sound.

If we measure (using a microphone) the result of your room and speaker together we will end up 'correcting' the whole system, normally to a theoretically ideal flat response, this may not be ideal.

Space optimisation models the system, both with and without the room, and then optimises based on the difference. This effectively removes the sonic design of the speaker from the optimisation and only fixes issues with the room.

Phil.

"Our point is you bought the speakers because you like the way they sound" - most people here will have bought their speakers based on the sound in a dealer show room or a home dem. Most will have been bought without SPACE or room correction so on this basis they shouldn't use SPACE as it will make them sound different to the way they sounded when they bought them. That does not make any sense at all.

I think the arguments against a MIC based measurement are very weak. To me the only one with merit is the possibly unknown calibration state of the microphone. To me if you measure then adjust the frequency reponse using a calibrated microphone placed where you normally listen then this is going to give the best chance of a pure flat reponse. Linn's approach is similar by defining the listening postion in SPACE. It is not a listening area that is defined. The microphone response is going to take the whole room and all its furniture into account, SPACE won't. In my view the microphone analysis is likely to be more accurate.

CJ

Main: Michell Orbe/SME V/Lyra Delos/CA 640p Oppo105 Marantz AV8801 Linn 5125 Dynamik Focal Diablo Utopia III Komponent106 Komponent104

Profession: Owner of Krescendo HiFi - Specialist in second hand Linn and Naim
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-03-29, 23:25
Post: #40
RE: New Space Optimisation Blog - Why We Dropped The Mic.
CJ1045 I suspect that if you use a microphone there has to be both calibration and quality issues to deal with. Without understanding the science sufficiently I could/would believe that microphones have limitations. Intuitively I would think these are manageable enough to get the vast majority of situations 'reliably close'. But intuition and assertion are easy from my sofa. Smile

The costs of developing an effective system are likely a significant R&D cost and if at the end of it they are not confident of success I might understand why they might choose to pass when there are other targets/priorities. The article is more of a surprise because it makes any subsequent turnaround very difficult in the future.

It's absence makes any serious volume of sales difficult due to the heavy reliance upon a dealer network and the onerous time overhead for those dealers.

It's a multi layered problem and maybe it's just easier/pragmatic to leave it alone. They certainly have more facts than we do Smile
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)