Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › How is timbre in sound represented electronically or digitally?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How is timbre in sound represented electronically or digitally? - Page 4

post #46 of 49
Originally Posted by xabu View Post

Just by telling the speaker to play this frequency with that amplitude does not mean that it is able to do that.

I like this comment. No audio system in the world can play the exact frequencies at the exact timings it's told to. Of course, some systems are way better than others, but basically, every audio system ever made is colored compared to the original sound source (recording studio session). What type of color and how much is what pleases your ears and is the audio system you prefer.

post #47 of 49

"Timbre matching" is the act of using speakers with the same flaws.

post #48 of 49

in simplest words ever: "timbre" is sound signature / tonality difference between various instruments and quality of its presentation.


For instance, a guitarist solo-ing down to low end to a point where it reaches same pitch as the bass guy. at that time, though same notes are hit. you would still be able to tell the bassist from guitarist. in an extreme example, suppose the guitairst's distort pedal / overdrive / effects creates almost same tonality as bass, at that time a good headphone will still resolve the very very fine tonality difference when same notes are hit on that guitar and its bassist counter part.


And what a coincidence, talking about timbre as I am listening to daft punk's Random access memories through my dubstep and gym headhphones - "The V-Moda crossfade LP2" which is, by far best in the deep, rumbly, almost vibrating in your ear bass department.

Coming back to that track, exactly at 3:43 when classic 80s square wave synth tone mixes into vocoder-ed robot vocal hummings,  a good headphone like this will resolve the tonality difference with great detail and separation.


I have literally seen headphones, in the frequency range they are weak at, to screw up instrument timbre and almost echo / muffle up and mess up everything if something really complex is going on in frequency spectrum / region which they are weak at.

some do that in midrange, some in bass, there is not a lot of timbre resolution job at hi-hat / sibliant  freqnuencies anyways,, not that i have seem.

post #49 of 49
I always use timbre when comparing the same instruments to each other. Hmmm. I'd say on that basis, a loudspeaker of a certain level of quality can let me distinguish one piano from another, if the same pianist plays the same song.

Since everything audio is frequecies, one can say timbre is frequencies, but that is sort of not covering the entire picture.

So, skull candy iems vs lcd2 is not a fair comparison, and no eq can help you. The skull candy are just sub-par. Not hifi (pulling out that old standard here, yes I am)

But, I'd say T1, 800 and lcd 2 can be matched pretty darn closely by eq. Not exactly, because I agree that different drivers do different things at different frequencies. But good enough is good enough.
Edited by ev13wt - 7/11/13 at 1:55pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › How is timbre in sound represented electronically or digitally?