Reverberation masks high-Q ringing but amplifies low-Q resonances

Evidence

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 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Complex high-Q objects multiply echoes while each weakens; High-Q resonances are rarely heard but catastrophically audible when music hits their exact frequency; Reflections increase sensitivity to low and mid-Q resonances in reproduced sound (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Lower-Q resonances are more audible than high-Q ones despite seeming better-damped #expands (0.85) — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 385
• Low-Q subwoofer resonances are audible mainly as spectral balance shifts #expands (0.80)
• Narrow-band equalization causes audible ringing in the time domain #corroborates (0.75)