Brightness update

[Confused]

Having read this thread with some interest this week and having a little free time this morning, I too thought I'd try the Womaz sibilance top 10....  My observations:

Tini Tempah Miami to Ibiza - Yes!  Some sibilance in the vocals, also the higher notes from the synth sound harsh.  (great drop bass though!)  My conclusion, not a particularly well recorded track with respect to anything over about 1khz!  (the word scratchy comes to mind)

The Maccabees - Marks to Prove it - Believe it or not, and in stark contrast to your comments, I thought this sounded fine!  OK, not the last word in audiophile recordings but if I'd causually come across this track, I wouldn't have noticed anything particularly bad at all.

Oasis - Supersonic - With one, I am far more aligned with your observations.  The symbols don't sound particularly natural, I suspect the symbols were poorly recorded and then boosted up in the final mix.  It was ok though, the symbols were not so bad as to make the track unlistenable.  Having said that, the vocals were, but I think this had more to do with Liam Gallagher than sibilance.  Oddly enough, I have two versions of this track, one is the re-mastered version, and respect to the symbol mix, this is the worst of the two!

Birdy - Skinny Love.  This one's simple, there is a lot of sibilance and other nasty artefacts in what appears to be a poorly recorded vocal.  No excuses for this mr recording studio man!  This is essentially a vocal track.

Kasey Chambers - These Pines - Not too bad this one, I thought.  (nowhere near as bad a the Skinny Love track.)

Earlier this morning I was listening to some of my own stuff and came across La Femme's "Oh Baby Doll".  If your system is a little bright in the sibilance affected frequency range, I bet this one would really annoy you!  Perhaps similar to the Birdy track, poorly recorded vocals.  It's bad in some respects, but on my system not so bad that it stops me enjoying what is otherwise quite a jolly track.  Give it a whirl, I bet it will drive you bonkers!

My conclusion is that either you system is indeed a little bright, or maybe perhaps you are sensitive to this brightness.  Maybe a combination of both.  The majority of the tracks you have highlighted as problematic, appear to my ears and system to maybe have issues in this area, so this exacerbates the effect.

Another thing is that I have perhaps noticed the odd issue with sibilance in recordings this morning, far more than normal, even before listing to your problematic playlist.  Why? Because having read your thread I'm thinking about it.  It's that hifi thing, it gets in your head and can send you bonkers!  So you have your slightly bright system with your sensitive ears, add a poorly recorded vocal and a touch of insanity and then bingo!  Panic! .....

[Womaz]

Unfortunately I don't have that track or any streaming services now so won't be able to listen to it.
I also note your comments and I think it's a bit of both. I think my system is a little bright, and I am maybe a little sensitive to it. I am hoping that the little bit of room treatment I am going for will help it

You are also right that if you listen for it you will hear it more. Similar to the placebo effect too.

It won't send me bonkers as loving listening to my music at present, I just feel the sound I have now is the best I have ever had and I am just looking to tame the occasional brightness. You are right though it's only certain tracks which really bother me , but it is evident on quite a lot of my music.

Great post and thank you again

[alandbush]

Ok I get you now, you think my problems could be solved by using equalisation. I think I have more or less decided to put some bass traps on the back wall to see if this improves things. I was recommended to do more, but I dont really want my living room looking like a recording studio.,so 4 fairly large bass traps on the back wall is where I will start.
I am also keen not to dull the music too much as like I said I do like a lively presentation i think. For me its all a bit of a risk and an experiment so thanks for all the help on this post

Interesting although seemingly counter intuitive.  Were these treatments recommended by an appropriate company?

I would have thought adding treatments to absorb/scatter the high frequencies above 6kHz would be more appropriate.  I am sure there are better internet sources (not to mention books) but try the following website for the section 'The sources of unwanted reflections' as well as the following section.
Soundonsound
You can very cheaply treat reflection points with foam and hear the results and then, if they help, replace as appropriate with more aesthetic versions.

These panels or diffusors might not look out place in a modern environment.

[Womaz]

I will read these also. The links you have provided are the same firm that I am using. They have been very helpful indeed so far with all of my questions answered. The point you raise above also had me thinking too. I did ask them why bass traps when i was worried about the brighness in my system. This is the reply I got

Qoute
They are called bass traps as they go lower in frequency and thus offer a more even absorption.

They do work the same towards higher frequencies and make sense in this position



I will now double check this before I order because i had been on their website before I contacted them and had picked out exactly the same products that you have highlighted. I do not want to alter my bass at all as I love the bass with the Devialet and PMCs.
They recommended that I do the back wall with bass traps, 244 panels, and the side walls and ceiling with 242 acoustic panels. However I do not want to have all of these in my room and i am only comfortable in treating the back wall

[thumb5]

Hmm...definitely worth double-checking, I'd say. From what I've read, treating the back wall is typically to reduce the excess of bass that's usually found when you're listening close to the back wall.

[Antoine]

In general: the thicker the absorption the more acoustic energy it will absorp over a broader frequency range. Thin sheets of absorption will do little to nothing for the lower mid/bass frequencies and only some for higher frequencies. Thicker sheets will absorp more highs and at a certain point also become more effective at mid/bass frequencies. This is the exact reason it is so hard to battle room modes, you need a lot of absorption material and thus space to tame those. There's other solutions to "trap bass" as well like my RPG Modex panels which are "spring loaded" sheets of metal against a softer absorber. These are specifically tuned/designed to absorp small band bass frequencies only. Above applies most to the soft, foamy materials.

Professional manufacturers will supply charts of absorption coefficients for their products. These will display how effective they are in absorbing the the different frequency bands, at least between 125Hz and 8kHz.

As an example and to just illustrate what I mean have a look at this datasheet: http://www.primacoustic.com/pdf/EDS/prim...oadway.pdf

Earlier I wrote that I hired an acoustics expert who measured my room and then modeled it to simulate the required type of materials and their locations. I'd still advise that for a complete approach instead of a point solution or a trial and error approach. Of course one can do it for himself but without modeling upfront and measuring while you go you're in the dark. Key to good acoustics is the right amount of absorption and diffusion and balance to acquire an even broadband absorption over the whole frequency scale. But of course in an entirely untreated room without much "natural" absorption almost anything will help.

[Antoine]

I just noticed there's a great amount of articles on the mentioned Gik website covering most of the topics surrounding acoustics. http://gikacoustics.co.uk/articles/

[rwjr44]

Back wall being the wall behind the listener? Yes!

[Womaz]

Back wall being the wall behind the listener? Yes!

Yes that's correct, I have no choice but to listen there , I am about a foot from the back wall

[thumb5]

I'm more than ready to be corrected, but I'm a little sceptical that treating the back wall (i.e. just behind your listening position) will have much effect on perceived brightness.