[Sonnycz]

Yes but I was tolerant to it because the one in the shop wasn't burnt in properly yet so I thought the bass was likely to be stronger 100 hours in. Now that I'm reading the opinions, I'm reconcidering that assumption.

 

[cel4145]

I said the most dynamic classical music has at most 30 dB of dynamic range. Most music has far less DR than that.

If the peak is 30 dB, would it be 30 dB on top of the softest parts in the music, 30 dB on top of the average SPL in the song, or something else?

Dynamic range means softest to loudest.

 

[Music Alchemist]

Dynamic range means softest to loudest.

 
Yes, so how do you calculate the SPL the dynamic peaks in the music will reach? If your average listening level for the song is, say, 80 dB, and the softest parts in the song are much softer, that still doesn't seem to give enough info to know how loud the loudest part will be.

 

[cel4145]

Yes, so how do you calculate the SPL the dynamic peaks in the music will reach? If your average listening level for the song is, say, 80 dB, and the softest parts in the song are much softer, that still doesn't seem to give enough info to know how loud the loudest part will be.

You need to start your own thread about this.

 

[Music Alchemist]

You need to start your own thread about this.

 
I thought you had the answers. Oh well...

 

[tomb]

 

You need to start your own thread about this.

 
I thought you had the answers. Oh well...

 
I think it's more complicated than that.  What you're really looking for is what is the dB level of the softest passage that you can hear.  The dynamic range would be the difference between that level and the peaks.  I mentioned some numbers in a previous post.  The actual threshold of human hearing and pain has been referenced at about 135dB.
 
A general average is about 50dB for the lowest levels to 120dB for popular music.  Classic orchestral music might be 20 dB for the quietest passages and about 110+dB for the peaks.  That's about a 90dB range, which is probably why they established Redbook CD was OK way back when (~96dB, I think).
 
A lot of this is subjective in terms of how much dynamic range you really need.  I was only responding earlier when someone was trying to over-trivialize the voltage requirements for a 600 ohm Beyer.  In any event, some say an 80dB range is needed, others say almost 120dB.  However, I think the dynamic range required for the headphone and the amp is still the difference between those two ends, not something in the middle and then the difference above and below it.
 
It all depends on what you're looking for: every ounce of detail and peak, or something that's "good enough."  There's a wide range of possibility between those two bounds, too. 

 

 

[Music Alchemist]

  I think it's more complicated than that.  What you're really looking for is what is the dB level of the softest passage that you can hear.  The dynamic range would be the difference between that level and the peaks.  I mentioned some numbers in a previous post.  The actual threshold of human hearing and pain has been referenced at about 135dB.
 
A general average is about 50dB for the lowest levels to 120dB for popular music.  Classic orchestral music might be 20 dB for the quietest passages and about 110+dB for the peaks.  That's about a 90dB range, which is probably why they established Redbook CD was OK way back when (~96dB, I think).
 
A lot of this is subjective in terms of how much dynamic range you really need.  I was only responding earlier when someone was trying to over-trivialize the voltage requirements for a 600 ohm Beyer.  In any event, some say an 80dB range is needed, others say almost 120dB.  However, I think the dynamic range required for the headphone and the amp is still the difference between those two ends, not something in the middle and then the difference above and below it.
 
It all depends on what you're looking for: every ounce of detail and peak, or something that's "good enough."  There's a wide range of possibility between those two bounds, too. 

 

 
Thanks for the info.
 
A link I found online says 30 dB is the maximum dynamic range you would ever add. That's on top of your listening SPL (be it the softest part in the music, or something in the middle; I dunno), though -- not the total SPL after you add the DR.
 
Thoughts?

 

[tomb]

 

  I think it's more complicated than that.  What you're really looking for is what is the dB level of the softest passage that you can hear.  The dynamic range would be the difference between that level and the peaks.  I mentioned some numbers in a previous post.  The actual threshold of human hearing and pain has been referenced at about 135dB.
 
A general average is about 50dB for the lowest levels to 120dB for popular music.  Classic orchestral music might be 20 dB for the quietest passages and about 110+dB for the peaks.  That's about a 90dB range, which is probably why they established Redbook CD was OK way back when (~96dB, I think).
 
A lot of this is subjective in terms of how much dynamic range you really need.  I was only responding earlier when someone was trying to over-trivialize the voltage requirements for a 600 ohm Beyer.  In any event, some say an 80dB range is needed, others say almost 120dB.  However, I think the dynamic range required for the headphone and the amp is still the difference between those two ends, not something in the middle and then the difference above and below it.
 
It all depends on what you're looking for: every ounce of detail and peak, or something that's "good enough."  There's a wide range of possibility between those two bounds, too. 

 

 
Thanks for the info.
 
A link I found online says 30 dB is the maximum dynamic range you would ever add. That's on top of your listening SPL (be it the softest part in the music, or something in the middle; I dunno), though -- not the total SPL after you add the DR.
 
Thoughts?

 
JMHO, but as discussed earlier - I think that assumes compressed music and the generally available dynamic range from most studio productions.  Life-like is something else altogether.
 
I listen to pop music all the time, it's actually my favorite (power pop to be specific), but that's a studio and producer's construct.  Back in the day, I used to despise live albums.  The sound quality was always worse and never as good as the studio version.  It was always so with live rock concerts, too, although there were some exceptions.  Maybe I'm out of it these days, but my memory of most rock concerts (I went to quite a few in my day) was overbloated guitars, synthesizers and other instruments, while the vocals were completely unintelligible and overwhelmed.
 
These days, recording tools and instruments are so much better that I've heard live CD's that are sometimes better than the studio versions.  At the same time, I don't often listen to recorded classical, but relish the opportunity for orchestral concerts every chance I get.  Both are the exception from the paragraph above.  You will hear dynamic range much greater than the 30 dB you reference.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  JMHO, but as discussed earlier - I think that assumes compressed music and the generally available dynamic range from most studio productions.  Life-like is something else altogether.
 
I listen to pop music all the time, it's actually my favorite (power pop to be specific), but that's a studio and producer's construct.  Back in the day, I used to despise live albums.  The sound quality was always worse and never as good as the studio version.  It was always so with live rock concerts, too, although there were some exceptions.  Maybe I'm out of it these days, but my memory of most rock concerts (I went to quite a few in my day) was overbloated guitars, synthesizers and other instruments, while the vocals were completely unintelligible and overwhelmed.
 
These days, recording tools and instruments are so much better that I've heard live CD's that are sometimes better than the studio versions.  At the same time, I don't often listen to recorded classical, but relish the opportunity for orchestral concerts every chance I get.  Both are the exception from the paragraph above.  You will hear dynamic range much greater than the 30 dB you reference.

 
I believe it is referring to the maximum dynamic range possible, in the context of adding it to your listening level, as opposed to the entire dynamic range from softest listening level to loudest listening level for the dynamic peaks in the song.
 

1. Highly Compressed Pop: –6 dB to –9 dB
2. Well Recorded Pop: –9 dB to –12 dB
3. Well Recorded Acoustic/Jazz: –12 dB to –18 dB
4. Wide Dynamic Range Classical: –18 dB to –30 dB

 
So, for example (and I could be wrong), a listening level of 70 dB plus the 30 dB of DR would give a highest dynamic peak of 100 dB.

 

[ToddTheMetalGod]

I'm not really interested in the conversation much in this thread, I was just skimming threads... but you guys are overestimating dynamic range. Look up some dynamic ranges in here: http://dr.loudness-war.info . Even Bach, Mozart, and others are below 20 dB maximum dynamic range. I've got Sessions From the 17th Ward by Amber Rubarth in my music library with 19 dB max DR and sometimes it's difficult to set the volume because of the loud peaks, let alone 30 dB.

 

[Music Alchemist]

I'm not really interested in the conversation much in this thread, I was just skimming threads... but you guys are overestimating dynamic range. Look up some dynamic ranges in here: http://dr.loudness-war.info . Even Bach, Mozart, and others are below 20 dB maximum dynamic range. I've got Sessions From the 17th Ward by Amber Rubarth in my music library with 19 dB max DR and sometimes it's difficult to set the volume because of the loud peaks, let alone 30 dB.

 
That's what I was thinking. So you don't need to add a whole lot on top of your listening level to get the SPL level you need to handle dynamic peaks.

 

[ToddTheMetalGod]

That's what I was thinking. So you don't need to add a whole lot on top of your listening level to get the SPL level you need to handle dynamic peaks.

Yeah. For me coming from a library of mostly probably 6-9 dB dynamic range, it's so much more relaxing and natural to listen to some 12 dB or higher DR music. But 20 dB just feels plain odd compared to the rest of my library, or maybe it's just that album. Most of my well recorded material is ~10 dB, not great but better than the typical ~6 dB. I have a lot of albums that have good dynamic range on the vinyl copy but terrible DR on digital (modern recordings, so the digital could easily have the same mastering). As a digital user it drives me nuts, I think it's a ploy by record companies to try to sell more physical media and prevent piracy... but maybe it's because typical consumers like compression.

 

[Me x3]

Hey, I have a song where there's the sound of a plane.
Plane turbines generate 160dB
 
As a compromise, I'm taking 145dB and I'm getting an amp capable of 1000 Vrms to drive my DTs.
 

(just a little joke!)

 

[cel4145]

Yeah. For me coming from a library of mostly probably 6-9 dB dynamic range, it's so much more relaxing and natural to listen to some 12 dB or higher DR music. But 20 dB just feels plain odd compared to the rest of my library, or maybe it's just that album. Most of my well recorded material is ~10 dB, not great but better than the typical ~6 dB. I have a lot of albums that have good dynamic range on the vinyl copy but terrible DR on digital (modern recordings, so the digital could easily have the same mastering). As a digital user it drives me nuts, I think it's a ploy by record companies to try to sell more physical media and prevent piracy... but maybe it's because typical consumers like compression.

This is why +15db above your listening level is often given as a good amount to estimate for amplifier power. And it happens to half of the 30db that Music Alchemist threw out there earlier.

 

[Me x3]

Some very relevant topics debated here deserve dedicated threads (in the Sound Science forum)