How loud do you play?

Jim

Over the years the average loudness level I play and listen at has reduced.  Could be because I'm getting older, my system is better at lower levels, my musical tastes have changed or what have you?

I've heard systems where the owner has wanted "realistic" sound levels and it's been uncomfortable to say the least.  I've also heard systems where I could whisper louder.  But I've heard very loud systems that sounded fantastic.  In fact, for me, one of the strengths of a very good system is it's ability to play loud but not sound loud if that makes any sense.

So, how loud do you play?

Discuss.

uglymusic

Having heard my system, how loud do you think I play?

Jim

On average probably a shade higher than me but not by much.

Why do you play at that level?

uglymusic

Primarily I want the visceral kick that comes from drums, bass etc. The majority of the music I listen to isn't polite and painterly, and I know exactly what it sounds like live.

I'd probably go a bit higher if I lived in a mansion in its own grounds!

Jim

OK, supplementary question for discussion. How often do you sit in front of speakers to listen as opposed to, say, wandering round the house or flat doing other things.

Since moving to our new place I now only listen while sitting in front of the system. The house layout means I can't be in the kitchen or anywhere else while listening.

uglymusic

I'd say 80% of the time the big rig is on, I'm sitting in front of it, perhaps more. I have an Airport Express and active speakers in the kitchen and the office system.

Docfoster

Quite loud if alone in the house. The pots on my P90SA are 4 clicks past 12 o'clock. Not that that means much outside the context of my power amp, speakers and listening distance I suppose...
I've got a dB meter somewhere, I could measure levels at my listening position.
When I had a speaker bakeoff last year the 2 guests (Jason and Mick) wanted the levels a bit higher than I'd go for (at 6 clicks past 12).
I do find I can easily enjoy music at lower levels if circumstance decrees. When alone, I find the volume creeps up quickly though. I always want more, More, MORE!
To their credit, NVA amps seem to have low distortion, so they do not always sound 'loud' in the conventional distorted sense. Which is obviously a good thing.

Brain_Dead

It depends on the Music and if Kathy allows, but on rock I like to feel the thump and with opera gentleness soft, and piano silent is best Alan for me.

The room is small and we have neighbours that are farmers so level also depend on time of day.

But how loud can a 20W amp go on Ruarks.

Jim

@Ben

Do you think you're trying to achieve realistic levels? Serious question.  I'm interested in why people play loud.  I do on occasion and I'm not sure why I do.

@Colin

If it depends on the music would I be right in saying you are trying to recreate live levels?  So, say, folk or baroque music is played quieter than rock or full orchestral?

Further discussion:

How does the sound quality change at higher levels?  All systems do, it's a matter of how.

PAC

I play less loudly now that I'm using Class A amplification as there's less discernible drop-off at frequency extremes than with previous amps.  That said, my average listen level is still around an average of 90dBA (measured) with peaks of well over 100.  I like the visceral quality of "being there" on some performances, but strangely, less so on Classical these days as the dynamic swings can be enormous, so that's usually turned down to more sensible levels to accommodate the peaks. I don't like background music unless it's the radio on in the background (often punctuated by inane chatter).  Also depends on the time of day.  Like many people, I listen at quieter levels at night time as background noise is lower.  Having permanent tinnitus in my left earlug doesn't help and the audiologist suggested that playing music loud would probably help reduce the impact of the constant ringing!  Loud music isn't what caused the problem...that was shooting.  

Mervyn

Jim

I play moderately loud but not so loud your senses are overloaded and you cannot hear the music. My Royds just don't do loud anyway. The system just seems to create a bigger window allowing more insight into the music. I find this is not dependant on music type - they all sound better played a bit louder. Not sure if this is just a NVA thing but it is as Ben says the NVA is still very capable doing loud and still keep a coherent sound.

Jim

So are we really talking dynamics and not loudness or volume level? I've heard systems described as very dynamic but have been anything but, just a loud noise.

Brain_Dead

" Loud music isn't what caused the problem...that was shooting. " What the last amp.

Jim I think it is Dynamic I listen for i.e. the garage door test.

I did some work for a "Audium" a few years ago and they found a white paper produced by a French scientist that did some tests on students and found the the level were from 100mW - 10W with pk to 25W was the normal I try and find my copy and post it.

Jim

Coming to that conclusion Colin. I think a system can sound dynamic but doesn't have to be loud. But being loud doesn't make it dynamic IMV. Haven't heard the garage door test in years, Tony F IIRC?

Be interesting to read the white paper. Cheers for that.

uglymusic

I'd go along with that - loud vs dynamic can be like chalk and cheese.

WTH is the garage door test?

Jim

Exactly what it sounds like. A very live and dynamic recording of an up and over style garage door being slammed shut. Frightening on the right system!!

Mervyn

Yes dynamics makes sense - too quiet or too loud kills the dynamics but somewhere in between sounds right ?

Good trivial pursuit question though - what is the connection between hi-fi and garage doors ????

 

Brain_Dead

Good clear dynamics with a solid bass and a non sybulent top end and the removal of piano is the closes to the real world as long as you not a plane spotter and love Concorde, 

In most cases low power fast wide bandwidth amplification and speakers will do unless you live in a barn or the Albert Hall.

A few days ago we did some tests on damping effects of amps, with a DF of 100 the sound was clear and precise, at the same levels we tried a amp same basic circuit with a DF of 8, I preferred the DF 100 but the others preferred the 8, saying the bass was rich ok less detailed but warm and nice (yuk). But they all said it sounded less loud, odd. We also added 85dB of distortion to the same set of test on second run, then the DF 8 amp sounded much louder. Ears can be fooled I believe by careful manipulation of the signal heard.

The fun now will be to test them with % THD increases. 

And the phase angle changes. I do love Guinea Pigs.  

Brain_Dead

"Good trivial pursuit question though - what is the connection between hi-fi and garage doors ????"

Denon, Hi-fi News, HFN003, Mike Skeet, Saturn Sound, MC, RAPPER, PRODUCER, ARTIST, SINGER, SONGWRITER, MUSICIAN, POET, ETC. not a clue sorry.

Jim

Agree Mervyn. Some speakers can overdo dynamics making everything sound like a German Oompah Band. It's very hard to reproduce natural dynamics properly. I've only heard a few horns do it remotely closely. But they brought other problems to the table.

Jim

Thanks Colin, I'll read that properly later.

That's him, Mike Skeet not Tony Faulkner.

Docfoster

@Ben

Do you think you're trying to achieve realistic levels? Serious question.  I'm interested in why people play loud.  I do on occasion and I'm not sure why I do.

Yes. Absolutely. I can easily enjoy music at lower levels, but ultimately I feel that for me, realistic dB levels lend reproduced music greater congruence.

Also, in my limited experience recorded music is mastered in the studio at loud/realistic levels. Does psycho-acoustic frequency response change at different dB levels? (Eg does perceived bass level roll off to a disproportionate degree as dBs reduce...?). If so, then could the eq (and overall mix) of a piece of music 'suffer' if listened to at a level different to that at which it was mastered? I don't know. Just thinking.

Brain_Dead

Sorry about this, here you will find garage door test, keep the volume down please.

http://www.facebook.com/telluriumq.cables

Jim

Our ability to hear frequencies does indeed change with dB level.  We hear logarithmically whereas sources, amps and speakers produce a linear response (we hope).  Years ago amps used to have a loudness button which would increase the bass response when the volume level was low. My granddad's music centre in the '60s had one and he explained it to me - it was years before it made sense to me!

Alan

My rig has inefficient speakers, so I need a certain volume to 'wake things up'. Otherwise, I can see the need for the 'bass boost button'. (Thanks for your points on that Jim, really interesting)

I like a 'decent' volume but I find dynamics are more important than absolute loudness; this might be because I use iddy-bitty little monitor type speakers. I am used to (what I perceive to be) an accurate but scaled down facsimile of the real thing, so absolute volume isn't the main thing - it's the reality of the facsimile.

WRT loudness in general, I have found that as my system has evolved and improved, loudness has become more 'invisible'. I can talk and be heard over fairly decent volumes without particularly raising my voice and endure very little fatigue having listened for quite a time.

I have also found I enjoy a little more volume this last few months, as I seem to be developing tinnitus which can be obtrusive at low to medium volume. Happily, my wife finds the volume less objectionable as the quality of the system improves.

Jim

Talkin over the sound is a good test IMV. It is a fairly accurate detector of distortion in the midrange. It should be possible to speak and hear up to fairly high volume levels.

But it's not just the system that adds distortion, the room will mercilously reinforce and amplify any system distortion.

PAC

" Loud music isn't what caused the problem...that was shooting. " What the last amp.

No.  A very big gun.  

Jim wrote:

Talkin over the sound is a good test IMV. It is a fairly accurate detector of distortion in the midrange. It should be possible to speak and hear up to fairly high volume levels.

But it's not just the system that adds distortion, the room will mercilously reinforce and amplify any system distortion.

Intersting PoV Jim.  Why do you think that mid range distortion is present if you cannot hear someone speak at 85dB music loudness? (or am I missing something).  I did quite a bit of work (industrial research) on sound levels in the workplace a few years back as part of a H&S drive.  Any sustained background noise levels of 85dB will result in having to raise your voice to be heard at 1m distant, distortion or no, so I guess it depends on the music, since most music (with the exception of dynamically compressed recordings) don't stay static at one level for long.  I'd agree that you should be able to talk over peaks of 85dB.  Can you expand on where the distortion bit comes in?

Jim

Valid questions.

I was making the general point that all systems distort, particularly in the midrange.  I didn't and wouldn't put any dB numbers on it as there are so many factors that affect the situation.  Hence my "fairly high levels".

The room will reinforce/amplify the signal, it's unable to discriminate between signal and distortion.  Given that we are trying to listen to music we are unfortunately very able to detect distortion (except Naim users ;-) ).  Any distortion will be very obvious particularly when the room makes it worse with reflections getting to our lugs - which as they weren't in the original signal qualify as distortion in my book.  Also, depending on amplitude, items in the room will add their own 'tune' - radiators, windows, rattling picture frames, ornaments etc etc. And, unsurprisingly, it's not just low bass that shakes things.

PAC

I see where you're coming from now Jim.  Its a bit like being in a pub that has fashionably removed flooring and wall finishes and has re-tiled with stone slabs and exposed stone walls.  Just a few people in the pub these days talking loudly seems to create so many reflections and reinforce the vocal range frequencies that it's hard to be heard to to hear anything once a few people get into the room.  I guess that's a bit of an extreme case but in the event of listening room distortion, yes I agree with you.  It's sometimes all too easy to pin something on the hifi (particularly the loudspeakers) when what we actually need is room acoustic treament.  I need bass traps and some diffraction panels but have been putting it off for a long time as its a living room as well as a music room and don't want it looking like a recording studio, but will shortly be taking the plunge as it's often the best way of achieving upgrades without spending much money.

We often concentrate far too much on phase shift within the minutia effects of cables and circuits, when the greatest distortion and ruination of sound quality is the 'speaker/room interaction itself. 

Jim

That's just what I was getting at. 

I'm not for a minute suggesting that sources and amps are perfect - far, far from it.  But all decent electronics have minimal distortion figures and therefore produce a fairly accurate output compared to the input.

Speakers on the other hand have appalling distortion - even really posh expensive ones.  Add to that what the room is doing and well, it's a wonder we put up with it actually.

But battening down the hatches, so to speak, can cure a lot of the grossest problems.

Alan

The whole room treatment 'thing' seems so random; often one can read on forums of someone declaring their newly installed room treatments transforming their system, and that this has been the most cost effective change they have ever made.

Yet, they rarely explain what particular room problem they have treated, or how the specific treatment they have installed effects certain issues and not others - they deal in terms of simple bass, midrange and treble. I wonder how much understanding there is about this.

I would want to understand exactly what I was trying to treat first before trialling different treatments - yet every primer on the subject I have seen is from room treatment experts and retailers who advocate extreme applications and installations. Also, this seems to be a technical area, and there is often little patience with the novice who wants first to see how involved this is going to get.

Jim

Good points Alan.

I was trying to emphasise that it's worth dealing with what's currently in the room that may be rattling/shaking/resonating etc.

Once that's sorted then there may be a need for "room treatment".

As to understanding what you're doing, one way to approach it is to regard the sound as light and make sure nothing that may reflect or absorb is directly in front or to the sides of the cabinets.

It's all too easy to get bogged down in the "science".  Sound is either absorbed or reflected - there is no other state, really.

Too much reflection is heard as a phasey and over live sound.  Too much absorption is heard as a dulling or softening of transients - simplified but close enough.

Alan

Simplification like that is a perfect starting point to newbies like me, I will think further on it when I return home. I reckon that treating a room should come before EQ, as it addresses the room itself which is responding to stimulation.

EQ is turning certain things down a bit - which surely helps, but it seems to me (in my ignorance) that it complements a bit of physical treatment.

Barry Diament, a mastering engineer, posted somewhere that if a room is "ringing", it needs to treated rather than simply attenuating the problem frequencies. This seems to make sense to me.

PAC

There's two ways to approach the subject Alan.  One is to consider the design of a bespoke listening room.  It wouldn't be that different from constructing a recording studio!  Avoidance of parallel surfaces, sloped ceilings, bass traps on every corner intersection and the use of room analysers to determine where absorption and diffraction panels are cited, what their thickness should be etc etc.  That's a bit extreme for most enthusiasts, so there is a far easier way which is simply trial and error as we have to work with what we've got.  I did write an article on the subject which you can find here in which I attempt to offer some general advice but it's far from a thorough scientific approach.  Nevertheless, what's said is perfectly valid and was intended as guidance for those who want to understand the basics and how to approach room treatment.

Alan

Thanks for the link, Paul - I will have a good look when we get back later this week. I feel that absorbing (no pun intended) all I can on the generalities of the subject is the best way to get a handle on this - so the less scientific - the better!