Listening via the Internet - volume level very critical

[David-G]

When I listen to Radio 3 via the internet, I find that the enormous dynamic range makes it hard for me to set a satisfactory volume level. Too low, and much of the music has no "presence". Too high, and the peaks are deafening. I can generally find a "perfect setting" in between, but there is very little leeway, and so the perfect setting is hard to find. Do other people have this experience? I have an Audiolab 8000A amplifier and Spendor BC3 speakers. I listened to Act 3 of "Die Walkure" this evening, and was turning the volume control higher, lower, higher, lower... When I finally found the perfect spot, the sound was magnificent.

[jayne lee wilson]

It's a bit late, maybe time for more later, but -

Do you experience anything similar with CD? If not, why d'you think that is?

The RAH is a great barn of a place; often the webcast balance is fairly set back, i.e. very quiet ppp and yes, huge climaxes.
(AS is well-known, FM will compress the dynamics resulting in louder ppp and quieter fff. In some domestic situations this can be more immediate, easier to cope with).
But I don't perceive R3 HDs here as very different from a wide dynamic range CD. Discs and webcasts all vary, and even the Proms balance isn't the same every night.

Even the best lossy codec, the 320 kbps/AAC stream used on HDs-Hi, will tend to carry more harmonic distortion than 16-bit or CD. You might hear this as an overbearing "deafening" quality on some climaxes.

[Beef Oven]

Classic FM does not have this problem. The climaxes are not too loud and the quieter passages are audible.

[johnb]

David-G,

Perhaps listening to FM would suit your tastes more. It has dynamic range compression applied by the (notorious) Optimod system.

A great deal depends on your preferred listening (volume) level. If you usually listen at fairly low volumes then dynamic range compression, as with FM R3 (or even more so with Classic FM), is very helpful. However, if you are listening at more realistic levels FM can be very frustrating indeed - if you set the volume so that the quiet passages are quiet, the climaxes are robbed of their impact and if your set the level so the climaxes sound as they should, the quiet passages boom out at you.

[Dave2002]

Classic FM does not have this problem. The climaxes are not too loud and the quieter passages are audible.

Sure, but there is audible distortion, and possibly the sound is sweetened. OK for listening in cars maybe, though the adverts are a pain. Sometimes it does have decent prrogramming.

[Beef Oven]

Sure, but there is audible distortion, and possibly the sound is sweetened. OK for listening in cars maybe, though the adverts are a pain. Sometimes it does have decent prrogramming.

There's a bit more to it than that, but I agree with what you say.

[Phileas]

One thing I find with R3 (on iPlayer - I haven't compared with FM) is the balance between the presenters' voices and the music is wrong. If I set the volume to suit the music, the presenters shout at me!

[amateur51]

One thing I find with R3 (on iPlayer - I haven't compared with FM) is the balance between the presenters' voices and the music is wrong. If I set the volume to suit the music, the presenters shout at me!

In the case of Mr Trelawny, that's his default Phileas

[johnb]

One thing I find with R3 (on iPlayer - I haven't compared with FM) is the balance between the presenters' voices and the music is wrong. If I set the volume to suit the music, the presenters shout at me!

I think this is because the presenters are balanced far too loud and because FM's Optimod dynamic range compression somewhat offsets that.

[David-G]

David-G,

Perhaps listening to FM would suit your tastes more. It has dynamic range compression applied by the (notorious) Optimod system.

A great deal depends on your preferred listening (volume) level. If you usually listen at fairly low volumes then dynamic range compression, as with FM R3 (or even more so with Classic FM), is very helpful. However, if you are listening at more realistic levels FM can be very frustrating indeed - if you set the volume so that the quiet passages are quiet, the climaxes are robbed of their impact and if your set the level so the climaxes sound as they should, the quiet passages boom out at you.

Thanks John - but you could not be more wrong! Until recently I have mainly listened on FM, and I have a good tuner (Arcam T31). But I have been simply astonished at the superior quality of the sound from the R3 internet stream (via my Arcam rDAC). The sound quality is of another order of magnitude compared with FM. Everything is more natural, more real, and the stereo image is so much clearer. And I do like listening at realistic levels.

But until yesterday I had a big problem with listening to R3 live via the HD stream. After 10 minutes or so, the stream would simply cut out. I am now fairly certain that the cause of this was that the wireless signal from the "rWave" USB dongle to the rDAC was interfering with the wifi transmission from the router to the laptop. I bought a 2 metre USB extension lead so that the rWave is further from the laptop, and that seems to have cured that problem.

But to return to the subject of listening levels. As I said, I do like listening at realistic levels. The BC3s are not short of power, and I can get enormous volume out of them. I live alone, the house is detached, and there are no troublesome neighbours, so there are no constraints on volume other than what is painful to the ear. In other words, while I like listening at realistic levels, I do not like to listen at "greater than realistic" levels. But what I find is that unless the volume is set so that the levels of the climaxes are really high, the quiet passages somehow have little impact. It is not that they are quiet, they are supposed to be quiet. But they sound too contained, too restrained, unnatural.

There seems to be a precise point on the volume control where all is well; the quiet passages sound fine, and the climaxes are not excessive (though they are still very loud!). But there is next to no leeway, and finding this precise point takes some effort.

I am wondering whether my experience may be akin to what Jayne described in another thread: "when I tried the ATC ASL 50 Speakers here, there was simply no limit to their dynamic ability, and no change to their balance as the level rose. But they're a bit insensitive - they needed a higher volume than I was comfortable with to "come out of the box". Amp and room could take it, ears couldn't (bank balance very relieved). But you never forget them. They put you "right there", in the hall or studio." I am not quite sure what Jayne meant by "come out of the box", but this sounds a bit like my experience in quiet passages. In other words, unless I turn the volume fairly high, the quiet passages don't "come out of the box". Anyway luckily unlike Jayne, my ears can take it as well as the amp and room - but only if I hit the precise spot on the volume control.

If anyone has any constructive thoughts on this, I would be really interested.

Jayne, thanks for your reply. I will respond separately.

[johnb]

David,

Apologies for misunderstanding the issue. I wonder, do you have similar problems with CDs or is this only with the R3 iPlayer?

If the problem only occurs with R3 iPlayer one possibility would be the nature of the iPlayer AAC encoding, but then Jayne hasn't flagged it as an issue.

I'm sure other people will know more than I do.

(I can't really comment at the moment as one of my ears is suffering from 'glue ear'.)

[cloughie]

In the case of Mr Trelawny, that's his default Phileas

Others gabble at whatever volume!

[jayne lee wilson]

David-G - what you have to understand about the ATC ASL50s is that their dynamic ability is of a different order of magnitude (or ) from my Harbeth C7iis or your Spendor BC3s (two classics from the same tradition!). They can really wallop you. But to get them "out of the box", i.e. to achieve a 3-D image detached from the cabinets, required here a peak level I wasn't comfortable with in bigger climaxes. I said somewhere else that the ATC's soundstage is "forward and down" where the Harbeths is "up and around and back". Spacious, deeper soundstages can make volume setting easier. With unrestrained ATC dynamics setting a volume can be really difficult, seeming too sensitive. With the RAH, the relatively distant soundstaging (A Good Thing overall) often used for big works can mean a subjective pushing of the volume, with those crushing climaxes as a result. I found this with the Siecles Le Sacre to some extent., though not with the Szymanowski 3 or the amazing Ades piece.

And it certainly can happen with CD - some BIS releases, or some of Rattle's earlier Warwick Arts tapings have very quiet (truthful!) ppps. So, the volume-challenge again...

The higher levels of harmonic distortion of some implementations of AAC 320 kbps (compared to CD) were analysed in Stereophile a while back.
Can't find the link now, will keep looking...

[David-G]

David,

Apologies for misunderstanding the issue. I wonder, do you have similar problems with CDs or is this only with the R3 iPlayer?

No apologies necessary! Jayne had the same thought about CDs. It is difficult to answer you, because I do not play CDs often; and at present my CD deck is defunct, and I have not yet bought a replacement. I may try some experiments using the computer CD drive and the rDAC. I do not remember having this dynamic range problem with CDs, but that might be because the CDs I typically played perhaps did not have such a great dynamic range. Perhaps I will try my recently acquired CD of the Berlioz "Grand Messe des Morts" with McCreesh. That should have a good dynamic range.

[OldTechie]

The higher levels of harmonic distortion of some implementations of AAC 320 kbps (compared to CD) were analysed in Stereophile a while back.
Can't find the link now, will keep looking...

Maybe this: http://www.stereophile.com/content/m...-vs-flac-vs-cd - though this is not about harmonic distortion, it's more about completely non-harmonic added rubbish.