Reflections increase sensitivity to low and mid-Q resonances in reproduced sound

Evidence

Figures 4.10 and 4.11 provide guidance, even though they were for isolated resonances in an otherwise flat response curve. It can be seen that this bump is several times higher than the detection threshold for the Q = 1 resonance, the closest match. The other medium-Q resonances in (a) are around the anechoic detection threshold, and in a reflective room the threshold will be even lower, so these may be audible in program. — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 399 (#expands, via linked claim)

The key idea being communicated in Figure 4.10 is that neither the amplitude of the peak in the frequency response nor the duration of ringing is a reliable clue to the audibility of the resonances, at least above the transition frequency. It is counterintuitive. Adding damping reduces the Q, and therefore the ringing. It also reduces the amplitude of the peak in the frequency response, all of which would seem to be good. But the peak is now much wider and is therefore more frequently energized by components of the program. This means that it will be more often heard; the threshold ends up being lower—this well-damped resonance is easily heard. In contrast, the Q = 50 resonance is energized only when a musical component is precisely at the right frequency and remains there long enough to allow it to accumulate energy—to build up—which is easily seen in the center column of data. — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 385 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Adding damping to a resonance paradoxically makes it more audible by widening its bandwidth; High-Q resonances are rarely heard but catastrophically audible when music hits their exact frequency; Resonances near anechoic thresholds become audible again in reflective rooms — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 399 (+9 more)

Related

• Resonances near anechoic thresholds become audible again in reflective rooms (similarity 0.92)
• Reverberation masks high-Q ringing but amplifies low-Q resonances (similarity 0.92)
• High-Q resonances are rarely heard but catastrophically audible when music hits their exact frequency (similarity 0.92)
• Adding damping to a resonance paradoxically makes it more audible by widening its bandwidth (similarity 0.92)
• Resonance Q reductions below about 16 are subjectively imperceptible (similarity 0.90)
• Low-Q resonance detection thresholds are remarkably low, making tonal changes easily audible. (similarity 0.88)
• Lower-Q resonances are more audible than high-Q ones despite seeming better-damped (similarity 0.88)
• Higher-Q resonances become less audible because music rarely energizes them (similarity 0.88)
• Complex high-Q objects multiply echoes while each weakens (similarity 0.88)
• Resonance detection thresholds rise with higher Q and lower frequency (similarity 0.87)
• Well-damped low-Q resonances are easier to hear than high-Q ones. (similarity 0.87)
• Room reflections improve the ear’s ability to hear resonances in playback. (similarity 0.87)
• Broad, low-Q resonances are the most audible transducer defects (similarity 0.87)
• Low-Q subwoofer resonances are audible mainly as spectral balance shifts (similarity 0.86)
• Sound field complexity does not change resonance detection thresholds (similarity 0.85)

Broader Connections

• Resonances near anechoic thresholds become audible again in reflective rooms #expands (0.80) — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 399
• Lower-Q resonances are more audible than high-Q ones despite seeming better-damped #corroborates (0.80) — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 385
• Sound field complexity does not change resonance detection thresholds #contradicts (0.75)
• Reverberation masks high-Q ringing but amplifies low-Q resonances #expands (0.70)