When having a conversation with a person in a noisy environment or with someone who is not speaking clearly, we can usually make sense of what they are saying. If we had to do it all day, it would be irritating and tiring, but for odd occasions, it is fine.
I am describing the operation of our brain’s built-in sonic error correction that has been helping us make sense of the world of sound all our lives.
The whole edifice of MP3 replay of music is built upon our brains’ inbuilt sonic error correction, working hard to fill in the holes stripped out of the recording by the algorithm originally in the name of saving space on storage media.
Years of research backed by an understanding of psychoacoustics went into producing Music Protocol 3, which launched in 1991. Despite now being obsolete for its original purpose, it is still very much in use (MP3 uses lossy data-compression to encode data using inexact approximations and the partial discarding of data – Wikipedia) so that a recognizable piece of music takes up far less space. Yes, it is quite recognizable, but as Neil Young pointed out:
“I spend months in a studio creating a masterpiece then encoding it in MP3 throws most of it away.”
Try the same compression with a famous oil painting or a TV picture, which invariably means a blocky, ill-defined image. Our eyes do not have the same error correction neurology, nor indeed the resolution, but I hope you see the analogy.
Fans of MP3 at this point may cry foul, as I have failed to mention the sampling rate, which admittedly at higher rates improves the listenability. In no way, however, can any of it be termed high fidelity.
We have mentioned the shortcomings of MP3 to draw a parallel with what has been happening for years with conventional loudspeakers.
Due to the manner in which most crossovers damage the harmonic structure of a signal and, of course, are never mentioned by speaker manufacturers, who want us to believe their speaker produces the perfect sound, plus how spherical wave fronts lose energy on their way to the listener, creating the sweet spot, to mention just two.
Our built-in sonic error correction is subconscious, so like our heartbeat, we cannot choose not to use it.
As mentioned earlier, the harder it has to work, the more fatiguing and irritating the listening, but frequently we are completely unaware of what is happening until it is not there, and we happily tolerate the mediocrity as our ever-vigilant error correction takes up the slack.
It is only when error correction’s necessity is diminished by far more accurate sound quality and superior speaker engineering that the listener feels more relaxed and engaged with the sound. Oddly, sometimes we cannot even tell why, but we know instinctively, especially if we are familiar with live music, that it sounds right.
This is the major issue when auditioning a loudspeaker, as we have to almost prove a negative, especially if we are not used to hearing live music.
In other words, we have to be aware when something is not there. It almost sounds like the Emperor’s New Clothes; however, unlike the Hans Anderson story, this is all very real, particularly when we hear the damage to harmonics and spatial cues that have happened for years with conventional speakers taken away.
We have many error correction systems in our brain that help us make sense of the world and keep us safe. When we walk, pick up a glass of water, throw a piece of paper into a waste bin, before we move, our brain has already calculated all we need to not make a mess of it.
Of course, we give all this little thought and take it all for granted.
There is the issue when buying a pair of loudspeakers, sonic memory is very fickle and short-lived.
Most people do not sing in a choir, play in an orchestra, or hear live (not electrically amplified) music at least once a week. They, therefore, have no baseline to judge the quality of a sound reproduced through loudspeakers. This comment may raise eyebrows, but to be honest, does anyone know how ‘Stairway to Heaven’ is supposed to sound unless you are Robert Plant, Jimmy Page, John Paul Jones, or a member of the original recording team?
Of course, you may prefer your favorite with more bass or less treble, which is probably how your current speakers present it. I would argue that it is like going to an art gallery and looking at a favorite painting with glasses that enhance the blue colors!
The issue is that the problem is not as crude as too much bass or treble.
Even when reproduced on the best conventional equipment, reproduced sound is full of anomalies that our sonic error correction battles with to present us with a recognizable sound. Try as it might, it cannot sound live, as vital parts are damaged and moved in time.
So if you consider that and throw into the mix our brains’ excellent sonic error correction, thinking that the sound of a conventional loudspeaker is fine is not at all surprising. So the question, “Does this sound real?” when buying a loudspeaker is very difficult for most people.
This is often complicated by playing a favourite track, which is frequently the product of massive manipulation during its recording and post-production via a mixing desk. So what is it supposed to sound like? How much reverb, how much treble cut, etc.?
Playing a recording of a well-recorded solo double bass, violin, cello, trumpet, or even drum will give the listener a much better idea of what unwanted elements the speakers are adding to the recording and whether the resulting sound suspends your disbelief into thinking you are in the room with the performer. I use the term “in the room” for a reason. It is one thing to reproduce the sound of a solo instrument, but quite another to include it in a believable way, so one can emotionally engage with the performance and share the original acoustic the artist was sitting or standing in.
To hear what I mean, listen to Janos Starker’s 1963-65 famous Mercury Living Presence recording of the Bach Solo Cello works, track one. Mercury at the time was battling RCA for the best sound reputation. They smashed the ball out of the field by, instead of using standard recording tape, building a bespoke machine based on 35mm film stock turned into a magnetic tape. Despite being nearly sixty years old, the dynamics and detail in this recording are astonishing.
Before the artist even starts playing for a second or two, you should be very aware of the space the original recording existed in. When the music starts, you are also very aware of the sound of his fingers on the neck of the cello, his breathing, and the sound of the strings made by the bow, the body of the instrument, and the decay of the sound in the original room. You can even sense him moving in his seat during the piece.
All these elements, if reproduced properly, let our sonic error correction turn right down and contribute to the feeling that we are hearing this for the first time as if it is live and we are in the same space.
Now I know that classical chamber music is not to everyone’s taste, but the point is, if the loudspeakers you are auditioning can do this well, when you play ‘Stairway to Heaven’ you can be pretty sure you are hearing the authentic recording with as little added by the system as possible.
The problem is exacerbated by the fact that we are and have been surrounded by reproduced sound all our lives. In our car, on our phone, on our TV, on our radio, at the cinema, and even at a concert or in the theatre. Having been to a number of ‘concerts’ both indoors and out during the last few months, to say I have been disappointed with sound quality is an understatement. At one indoor major gig, which will remain anonymous, it was so bad that not one word of one song could be understood. The artist could have been singing in Polish! We accept 110dB plus, but the bass is so out of control, not playing any discernible notes, and most of those lasted far too long with the shocking bass overhang. The sound engineers actually get paid for this! Does it really have to be so bad? I think not.
All these sounds during our lives have come to be regarded as normal and almost virtuous.
As in our piece on loudspeaker crossovers, I am not casting aspersions at my fellow loudspeaker manufacturers. However, it is recognized that conventional speakers are still the largest contributor of distortion in the whole audio chain by a factor of over 50 times compared with the amplifier.
For over 60 years, there was no alternative, and our inbuilt error correction has attempted to come to the rescue. However, we always knew that we were listening to a speaker.
At William Eikos, we like to explain the features of our products that solve issues which have dogged conventional equipment for decades. But on this occasion, this is more about us, the listeners, and less about our loudspeakers. These explanations can be of a technical nature and are perhaps not for everyone, but we hope they will enlighten you as to why our products are special and represent a major technical leap forward in bringing you closer to your music, therefore aiding you in making an informed choice when choosing a loudspeaker.
Currently there are four explanations in the series.
We are very aware of how new and perhaps tedious reading this is , however …. We would hope that if you were to purchase a completely new form of transport, you would perhaps familiarize yourself with the manual before taking it on the road?