People often go in circles trying to pin down what the subjective quality of dynamics is and how to achieve it.
The key is that as the volume of a sound source goes up, so does the difference between the loudest and softest parts. The sound source itself changes because the db range is different.
In a large space, speakers like arrays and horns can cover this range easier and with less distortion, and so sound more vivid and dynamic.
The larger room reverberates the sound and creates the sense of depth. Even at a distance and a perceived lower volume, the ear can pick up the intensity of the source.
So you can never really have dynamics without volume. At low volume there is always less of a difference between the loud points and silence. And then you need a large room and a speaker/amps that can go loud without distortion.
A speaker itself can't be dynamic. But large multi way speakers, horns and arrays in particular, are very good at reproducing a dynamic signal without distortion. Subwoofers help as well to reduce cone excursion and distortion. Well braced cabinets and proper stands all help to reduce the noise and vibration.
The key is that as the volume of a sound source goes up, so does the difference between the loudest and softest parts. The sound source itself changes because the db range is different.
In a large space, speakers like arrays and horns can cover this range easier and with less distortion, and so sound more vivid and dynamic.
The larger room reverberates the sound and creates the sense of depth. Even at a distance and a perceived lower volume, the ear can pick up the intensity of the source.
So you can never really have dynamics without volume. At low volume there is always less of a difference between the loud points and silence. And then you need a large room and a speaker/amps that can go loud without distortion.
A speaker itself can't be dynamic. But large multi way speakers, horns and arrays in particular, are very good at reproducing a dynamic signal without distortion. Subwoofers help as well to reduce cone excursion and distortion. Well braced cabinets and proper stands all help to reduce the noise and vibration.
Last edited:
i've always qualified dynamics as a speaker systems performance with respect to transient response.
if the rise time and decay are fast and the system can do so over a large volume range and equally at all frequencies it's "dynamic"!
P.S.i don't fully agree with the idea that certain types of systems are better than others with respect to transient response that's a false generalization.
if the rise time and decay are fast and the system can do so over a large volume range and equally at all frequencies it's "dynamic"!
P.S.i don't fully agree with the idea that certain types of systems are better than others with respect to transient response that's a false generalization.
Last edited:
At high volume it will sound impressive. At low volume the pleasure is the same with less distortion. I don't lack any dynamics at low volume in my system, sorry for you.
Open baffles 'sound' more dynamic, then closed box, then ported designs.
It is only because the way they pressurize the room. To me, horns and transmission lines are the worst at both dynamics and fidelity because of the amplification tunnel in which the bass has to go through before entering the room.
Open baffles 'sound' more dynamic, then closed box, then ported designs.
It is only because the way they pressurize the room. To me, horns and transmission lines are the worst at both dynamics and fidelity because of the amplification tunnel in which the bass has to go through before entering the room.
I used to erroneously think that speakers could pressurise the room until I was made to think about it
I was looking for some agreement as to what dynamics is. It seems that a good definition is the ability to play a dynamic signal without distortion.
Even at a distance the ear can judge the intensity of a sound and tell it is more dynamic.
Last edited:
Just to be clear, I meant compression drivers with horns, definitely not full rangers.
Yes! Music sounds loud to enable people to listen in construction sites or highway driving. Dynamics are removed.
Just wondered. There seem to be a lot of threads in the section with abstract questions. Not really DIY, not building, no real practical questions.
Now if you're asking how to achieve good dynamics, what sort of drivers to use, cabinets, design parameters, etc. - that's a different thing.
Now if you're asking how to achieve good dynamics, what sort of drivers to use, cabinets, design parameters, etc. - that's a different thing.
Dynamics is the difference between the loudest signal a recording and\or system reproduces and the softest. The loudest and softest can be a recording of a single instrument. The softest can be details imparted with a loud instrument.
The easiest way to explain it is if people are watching a movie and the dialog is quiet and a listener says "hey turn up the volume" but then a car chase or explosion is part of the scene then a listener says "hey turn that down".
In music the concept can be harder to explain because any individual performer can be mixed louder than the accompanists. In simple but dynamic recordings ambience and studio noise can be heard, performer breathing, string noise, pedal creaks and of course instrument sounds and timbers are low in the mix but still clearly heard.
Sometimes I think people can be confused. Say on one system string noise of a given performer is clearly heard but on another its quieter but still clear. To me the second system is more dynamic but to someone else the first is.
The easiest way to explain it is if people are watching a movie and the dialog is quiet and a listener says "hey turn up the volume" but then a car chase or explosion is part of the scene then a listener says "hey turn that down".
In music the concept can be harder to explain because any individual performer can be mixed louder than the accompanists. In simple but dynamic recordings ambience and studio noise can be heard, performer breathing, string noise, pedal creaks and of course instrument sounds and timbers are low in the mix but still clearly heard.
Sometimes I think people can be confused. Say on one system string noise of a given performer is clearly heard but on another its quieter but still clear. To me the second system is more dynamic but to someone else the first is.
Good point, the trouble is the word dynamic on it's own is meaningless, it should be dynamic range, and when used alone in a sound context implies loud, when in fact in your first example the dynamics are compressed. Of course the dynamics could also be unrealistically expanded and this would be equally undesirable if the aim was to reproduce the dynamic range of acoustic instruments.
I don't think the first point describes compressed dynamics. The dialog is low but explosions loud. If dialog and explosions were the same level that would be compressed.
This is like listening at lower volumes, ie, not a realistic level, if the dynamics are still well balanced everything should be able to be heard the same in a relative loudness but it would sound farther away or actually smaller because if it was really farther away the tonal balance would have changed (probably, although that would also depend on the directionality either of the speakers, the sound being reproduced or both)
There are, of course, two domains to the question of audio dynamics. The easier, and well defined one of the two, is the objective domain. The more difficult to answer, however, is the subjective domain, which sometims only seems to loosely correlate with the objective domain. This is a dichotomy that typically exists with every aspect of music reproduction, as many(most?) of us have experienced.
Regarding the subjective domain, one of the best everyday examples of live audio dynamics which I can readily think of is silverware crashing to the floor in a restaurant. The perceived sound is startling, and can even sound shattering if one is close enough. It just seems to cut through, rise above, or whatever, the background noise in the restaurant. Seeming to psychoacoustically mask the noise. I wonder what is the measured peak SPL of such sounds, as it can hit the discomfort threshold, if just for an instant.
I find it interesting that such highly dynamic sound often doesn't sound overtly bright in tonality. Lower frequency instruments, such as a kettle drum being struck, can also present great percieved dynamic event. The common thread between them obviously doesn't appear to be prominent high-frequency content, but more like acoustic power envelope rise time, along with the more difficult to achieve envelope settling time. Reproduction system dynamics may be a challenging multi-dimensional task, requiring linearity versus a wide range of acoustic power levels, and accurate acoustic waveform tracking with respect to both power envelope rise and settling times.
In objective measurement terms, dynamic range is the ratio between the maximum output level, without incurring significant distortion, and the level of the noise floor. Usually, expresssed in dB. My experiences of hearing crashing silverware on tile floors in otherwise noisy restaurants, however, makes me wonder actually how important is the minimization of an system's noise floor to the human perception of dynamics.
P.S. - It occurs to me that crashing silverware in an quiet church would indeed be more startling than the same in an noisey restaurant. So, the quieter the acoustic noise floor, obviously, the better for percieved dynamics. Duh!
Regarding the subjective domain, one of the best everyday examples of live audio dynamics which I can readily think of is silverware crashing to the floor in a restaurant. The perceived sound is startling, and can even sound shattering if one is close enough. It just seems to cut through, rise above, or whatever, the background noise in the restaurant. Seeming to psychoacoustically mask the noise. I wonder what is the measured peak SPL of such sounds, as it can hit the discomfort threshold, if just for an instant.
I find it interesting that such highly dynamic sound often doesn't sound overtly bright in tonality. Lower frequency instruments, such as a kettle drum being struck, can also present great percieved dynamic event. The common thread between them obviously doesn't appear to be prominent high-frequency content, but more like acoustic power envelope rise time, along with the more difficult to achieve envelope settling time. Reproduction system dynamics may be a challenging multi-dimensional task, requiring linearity versus a wide range of acoustic power levels, and accurate acoustic waveform tracking with respect to both power envelope rise and settling times.
In objective measurement terms, dynamic range is the ratio between the maximum output level, without incurring significant distortion, and the level of the noise floor. Usually, expresssed in dB. My experiences of hearing crashing silverware on tile floors in otherwise noisy restaurants, however, makes me wonder actually how important is the minimization of an system's noise floor to the human perception of dynamics.
P.S. - It occurs to me that crashing silverware in an quiet church would indeed be more startling than the same in an noisey restaurant. So, the quieter the acoustic noise floor, obviously, the better for percieved dynamics. Duh!
Last edited:
Very good point Ken.
Brings to our attention the dynamic noise floor of a system.
Can be the sum of the speakers THD + Amp THD + Amp power supply noise which is considerably higher during playback vs simple THD analysis.
Brings to our attention the dynamic noise floor of a system.
Can be the sum of the speakers THD + Amp THD + Amp power supply noise which is considerably higher during playback vs simple THD analysis.
Not hard to see why there is ambiguity, as 'dynamic' when related to audio, is just a catchword.
Dynamic = motion
Similar to using 'impact' when 'affect' is what is intended.
Dynamic = motion
Similar to using 'impact' when 'affect' is what is intended.
its why I have a DBX 3BX daisy chained to an Aphex Aural Exciter for dubbing some CD, tape and LP to hard drive (using headphones to monitor) There's thermal compression to consider with loud speakers on the upper end. Some speakers seem to obscure the softer parts (my hearing has not been in good shape at lower levels for nearly 50 years)
early digital recordings were sometimes alleged to be missing the lower dynamics
early digital recordings were sometimes alleged to be missing the lower dynamics
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.