An Interview with Andrew Jones ELAC's speaker designer formerly of KEF & TAD
- Thread starter TitaniumTroy
- Start date
So, I have watched the video a few times and am struggling to understand what he is trying to say - mostly because I developed my ears and skills from the opposite end of the field than Mr. Jones. I developed my understanding of the art of reproducing music from the music creation world where the goal is to attempt to get the art to the listeners in spite of the reproduction systems varying greatly across the buying customers. For music producers there are two aspects of listening: 1) Exactly what audio information is in the signal so I can make sure nothing is distracting or missing (ultra-accurate reproduction)?, and 2) How can we make the music sound mostly good across the widest range of reproduction systems which fail to be as accurate as the reference system?
People who have developed a sense of hearing the music performance first tend to be like me - the systems are known limitations on reproducing the original content. Mr. Jones is discussing the music as some sort of reference signal which somehow has a reference sound - it doesn't. The music recording is not a test signal, and there is no reference perfect way to reproduce it (except in a few very rare instances, such as a couple of Zappa LPs from the 1980s where he listed the speakers, reference level, and listening distance used while mastering the music). Music recordings are a form of art with the goal of providing entertainment to as many people as possible. Mr. Jones seems is perceiving the entire audio reproduction process as something which can be perfect.
HOWEVER, the goal in my world is to create a reproduction system which adds or removes as little from the signal in the music recording as possible and still be pleasing. Accuracy in all areas, like amplitude frequency response, phase/group delay, power response, dynamic response, lack of distortions, and an absence of gaps, among other things, are all measurable in the right conditions with the right gear. Add to that the acoustic space and how the speaker in question fills the room with sound, things like echo, reverb, frequency reinforcements and gaps, and you can get an idea of what is least detrimental to the reproduction of the music.
Since using good drivers and simple tools things like frequency response and power response are not difficult to get close to the ideal, in my recent design work I am focusing on the micro energy storage and reflection issues such as edge diffraction, passive crossover components, amplifier modules, and the earliest room reflections. The result is palpable and everyone who has experienced my work first hand appreciates this design work, but it is hard to discuss and even harder to comprehend because it is fraught with reactive characteristics where reducing one nonlinearity can increase a seemingly unrelated other nonlinearity. Easily accessible measurement tools don't exist to quickly and easily capture and represent these issues. And, in my case, 80% of the design work is done in my head and not on paper where it could be more easily shared with engineers interested in learning what I am thinking.
But, this concept of a reference experience where one can acquire a specific speaker and recording and somehow recreate exactly what the artist intended is not likely to ever happen - the closest you can get is music recorded and mastered on headphones (like binaural recordings). But even that is impossible because your ear canal is not acoustically identical to the artists' ears (one of the main reasons talented trained listeners don't agree on which are the best headphones).
In my experience, and this is my perception of perfection, the best music reproduction systems instantly vanish when listening to music. When everything is perfect, the experience of listening to a recording is one where you forget there are speakers in a room and all you think you are hearing is the recording. At no point while the music is playing do you think to yourself that the tweeters are a little bright, the midrange is a tad wonky, the room reverb is slightly distracting, or any of those things. You are tricked into virtually disappearing into a world where all that exists is you and the music.
How often have any of us experienced anything like that?
People who have developed a sense of hearing the music performance first tend to be like me - the systems are known limitations on reproducing the original content. Mr. Jones is discussing the music as some sort of reference signal which somehow has a reference sound - it doesn't. The music recording is not a test signal, and there is no reference perfect way to reproduce it (except in a few very rare instances, such as a couple of Zappa LPs from the 1980s where he listed the speakers, reference level, and listening distance used while mastering the music). Music recordings are a form of art with the goal of providing entertainment to as many people as possible. Mr. Jones seems is perceiving the entire audio reproduction process as something which can be perfect.
HOWEVER, the goal in my world is to create a reproduction system which adds or removes as little from the signal in the music recording as possible and still be pleasing. Accuracy in all areas, like amplitude frequency response, phase/group delay, power response, dynamic response, lack of distortions, and an absence of gaps, among other things, are all measurable in the right conditions with the right gear. Add to that the acoustic space and how the speaker in question fills the room with sound, things like echo, reverb, frequency reinforcements and gaps, and you can get an idea of what is least detrimental to the reproduction of the music.
Since using good drivers and simple tools things like frequency response and power response are not difficult to get close to the ideal, in my recent design work I am focusing on the micro energy storage and reflection issues such as edge diffraction, passive crossover components, amplifier modules, and the earliest room reflections. The result is palpable and everyone who has experienced my work first hand appreciates this design work, but it is hard to discuss and even harder to comprehend because it is fraught with reactive characteristics where reducing one nonlinearity can increase a seemingly unrelated other nonlinearity. Easily accessible measurement tools don't exist to quickly and easily capture and represent these issues. And, in my case, 80% of the design work is done in my head and not on paper where it could be more easily shared with engineers interested in learning what I am thinking.
But, this concept of a reference experience where one can acquire a specific speaker and recording and somehow recreate exactly what the artist intended is not likely to ever happen - the closest you can get is music recorded and mastered on headphones (like binaural recordings). But even that is impossible because your ear canal is not acoustically identical to the artists' ears (one of the main reasons talented trained listeners don't agree on which are the best headphones).
In my experience, and this is my perception of perfection, the best music reproduction systems instantly vanish when listening to music. When everything is perfect, the experience of listening to a recording is one where you forget there are speakers in a room and all you think you are hearing is the recording. At no point while the music is playing do you think to yourself that the tweeters are a little bright, the midrange is a tad wonky, the room reverb is slightly distracting, or any of those things. You are tricked into virtually disappearing into a world where all that exists is you and the music.
How often have any of us experienced anything like that?