Siblence "S" Sounds

madmax

I have a little siblence (sp) these days, you know, when S's sound distorted. I've eliminated everything other than from the TT cartridge to the preamp. (Other sources fed to the preamp are fine). What actually causes this problem anyway?
madmax

Early B.

Google is your friend:

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=65750

http://www.htguide.com/forum/archive/index.php4/t-17607.html

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21626&goto=nextnewest

Phil Dawson

The siblence (sp) is indeed there from the recording. It can be removed with a notch compressor set to the correct frequency range for the individual performer. This plug in is called a de-esser. Short of setting your sound system as a monitoring device in a studio like setting (equipment wise) there isn't much you can do. There is most certainly a two channel compressor out there with a de-esser that you could put in line most likely between the source and the pre-amp - I'm just not sure that you wouldn't be opening up Pandora"s box although the more I think about it the more it makes sense. A good multi-band EQ could improve things too. But now we're getting into studio monitoring instead of home sound system stuff.
Good luck, Phil

Phil Dawson

Sorry I forgot this part. The s sounds made by the human voice have a great deal of energy so they register with more gain through the microphone. There is also a problem with the letter P that gives you P-pops. A pop screen or filter is used in recordings to avoid the P-pops. The compressor evens out the s sounds so that the sibilance is not heard.
Phil

dorokusai

I think its all that cheap equipment you're using.

hoosier21

new cartridge is in your future

Ricardo

I don't mind some sibilance here or there....

scottnbnj

madmax wrote: »

...What actually causes this problem anyway?

i've been tinkering with this in my room lately. i've had a problem where with some placements sibilance and image will draw toward one speaker as the note is held on some recordings.

i can change speaker toe and placement a fraction and it will improve the situation, put the grilles on for a little more, add a little diffusion or absorption in the right places for a little more. often when i notice an improvement i will also notice better clarity, a more even tonal balance, more stable image and so on at frequencies outside of the sibilance problem.

so, definitely, the room and placements can contribute to the problem a great deal.

)

reeltrouble1

Chuck,

Sibilance is caused by the person singing the vocal, some vocalists have more "problem" than others its just the way they do it when they sing an s sound, then some recording engineers just do not handle it well on the transfer, there is nothing wrong with the system. In the WoodShed I can easily demonstrate certain vocalists who just get sibilance in their singing, still sounds magnificent though, Ann Wilson comes to mind off the top. In neutral systems it just comes and goes with the vocalist.

RT1

F1nut

Chuck, you sent this to me awhile back after we'd had a few discussions on the topic.

"Negative feedback is the process of taking a portion of the output, electrically inverting it, and then feeding it back to the input. The purpose of negative feedback is to flatten the frequency response, reduce harmonic distortion, lower the output impedance, and also to reduce the effects of "parasitic oscillation" that can occur when parts of the circuitry cause an induced current to flow in other circuits where it is not wanted. However, too much negative feedback can sometimes be used to produce an artificially low harmonic distortion specification. Second order harmonics will be reduced, but fifth order harmonics will increase, and this odd ordered distortion is much more noticeable than the original second order distortion. A tell tale sign of too much negative feedback is an excess of sibilance in the human voice (the "s" is exaggerated)."

I don't agree that it's "on" the recording. Although, I think that "bad" recordings expose the issue more. I have one CD that has always presented terrible sibilance issues. After playing around with my set up to rid it of any and all sibilance I can now play that CD without a hint of sssssssssss.

You may want to consider those crossover upgrades and a new cart.

danger boy

i had sibilance for a while too. but then i increased the weight on the tonearm 1/4 turn and it made it go away...

reeltrouble1

Its the singer.

RT1

dorokusai

F1nut wrote: »

Chuck, you sent this to me awhile back after we'd had a few discussions on the topic.

"Negative feedback is the process of taking a portion of the output, electrically inverting it, and then feeding it back to the input. The purpose of negative feedback is to flatten the frequency response, reduce harmonic distortion, lower the output impedance, and also to reduce the effects of "parasitic oscillation" that can occur when parts of the circuitry cause an induced current to flow in other circuits where it is not wanted. However, too much negative feedback can sometimes be used to produce an artificially low harmonic distortion specification. Second order harmonics will be reduced, but fifth order harmonics will increase, and this odd ordered distortion is much more noticeable than the original second order distortion. A tell tale sign of too much negative feedback is an excess of sibilance in the human voice (the "s" is exaggerated)."

I don't agree that it's "on" the recording. Although, I think that "bad" recordings expose the issue more. I have one CD that has always presented terrible sibilance issues. After playing around with my set up to rid it of any and all sibilance I can now play that CD without a hint of sssssssssss.

You may want to consider those crossover upgrades and a new cart.

Negative feedback is moreso an amplifier design.

This is WAY too variable laden to say anything but **** blah blah.

Chuck -It's most likely in the recording as mentioned previously. I doubt its in your gear, or its in your ear and I'd be suprised if you find a solution from here. The problem for me is once you hear it, you always notice it.

reeltrouble1

its the singer.

Blah Blah Blah

its still the singer.

did I mention its the singer??

RT1

Ricardo

I think it might be the singer. (It sounds great on Diana Krall....)

Early B.

Hmmm. I can't recall ever having a problem with silibance.

madmax

I gave this some more thought last night after I got home. I have actually changed my preamp, phono preamp and cart since I first heard the sibilence so I think I can say those things are not the problem. (Unless of course the new ones happened to react the same as the old ones). I've been living with it but its really starting to bug me.

In any case, I determined there are only three things I have not changed since first hearing this problem, the cable/arm wiring going to the cartridge, the method I use to set up the arm and the particular media displaying the problem.

For what its worth, the main recordings I have this problem with (but not all) are the audiophile recordings I've obtained. Most of the other stuff seems fine. This makes the height of the arm suspect because most are thicker records.

I'm thinking I'll play with the arm height, the tracking force, use some caig on the connections and play with placement a bit. I think that covers most of what I read here.

F1, I can't believe you still had that. Its all still true but like most things I get into I knew about it at one time but had totally forgotten. Most of the equipment is touted as super low negative feedback but who knows. Its downstream of this problem though. Another thing I've read in the past is that a bad interconnect or speaker connection can cause sibilence too.

madmax

reeltrouble1

Its a new a day, and its still the singer........can you imagine Krall whispering with sibilance in your ear.......

Good Hunting Max.

RT1

dudeinaroom

It's the floor, pull out your floor and replace it:p I have only noticed the problem with some singers.

Face

I noticed this on my Tannoys when they were new. Certain guitar distortion would also cause a error of some sort. Now that they're broken in, the "S's" aren't as noticeable and the error is gone. I also agree that the recording can be a contributor in siblence, but I don't believe it's the only cause.

reeltrouble1

So sibilance goes away as gear breaks in???? Sure does'nt seem like sibilance would do such a thing, certain singers have it based on how they form certain sounds, I remember researching once and this was pretty much the basis of all sibilance. I think we are talking about what folks think sibilance is, no matter, if you can find away to eliminate it I suppose its better.

Ann Wilson in the Heart Live SACD I have has some in my Woodshed Rig the more gain the more I can notice it, but I actually don't mind it much with her as her voice is powerful and "chesty" to me, I suppose the live recording also has something to do with it. Alison Krausse on Live with Union Station has none in the same Rig, I have a couple Heart vinyl in which Wilson sounds different on so the media can definetely mater.

One thing for sure, if audio nuts complain about it, some enterprising company will come up with something claiming to eliminate it.

RT1

Ferres

Some sibilance effects are also the result of the high frequencies not getting enough power.

My first encounter was due to a weak/ non dedicated power outlet.

My last one was with the rmb1077 being used in bi-amp config. The extra channels were not as powerful as the main front channels. So I stuck with only the 2 front channels and the sibilance went away.

scottnbnj

scottnbnj wrote: »

...i've had a problem where with some placements sibilance and image will draw toward one speaker as the note is held on some recordings.

i can change speaker toe and placement a fraction and it will improve the situation, put the grilles on for a little more, add a little diffusion or absorption in the right places for a little more. ...

i was away. i'm back and i have a little more time to explain myself a bit better now.

my room and placements are not symmetrical. besides other room content type stuff, there is a vaulted ceiling within several feet of one speaker at it's closest point on the side that the image and sibilance draw toward. i've used temporary treatments in the past with some success, but more permanent treatments are out in that area for a variety of reasons. i've just been counting on remodeling finishing up elsewhere and getting my gear into another room, but i'm not there yet.

anyway, i believe that when i toe the speakers in it effectively shifts the point where reflections hit back and further away from the speakers. the relatively un-obstructive lsi grilles also add to this effect noticeably.

the lack of symmetry makes the problem and solutions obvious. there is no doubt that the room contributes. unfortunately, this is not the only problem and preference i have with placements in this room and the solutions i've found so far work against and are trade-offs in other aspects. this room is like riding a razor blade bareback.

)

scottnbnj

i gather there's some agreement here that some speakers and gear loosen up and change tonal balance with break-in. i don't see why anyone that has heard it or believes it's possible would doubt the character of sibilance and/or strength relative to the rest of the frequency spectrum could also change with that.

)

reeltrouble1

I would doubt it, as sibilance is caused by the singer I just cannot see speaker break-in having much effect on it, but its just my recommendation. Afterall, the Woodshed is a very broken in system and with certain tracks on certain discs with certain artistsits there on others its not.

RT1

dorokusai

Does that really mean it's an absolute? C'mon now.

reeltrouble1

Naw, I dont really think there are any absolutes in audio beyond needing gear some kind of power and some media to enjoy the music, well, I am absolutely sure sibilance is caused by the human voice in making the s, t and p sounds in English and that these sounds are on the recording, if someone feels moving things around helps someone's rig then it does and they should.

RT1

dorokusai

I'm not against the recording being the main culprit, as I've also found that most of it is recording based. I have some CD's I would LOVE to listen to again but its horrendous on anything but headphones.

That being said, you run MIT cables right? Regardless of whether it removed siblilance, you found a positive result, correct? So doesn't that mean, in effect, that an audible negative could be due to a mechanical device or connection?

reeltrouble1

I am certainly going to get around to some nice cans, seems like a side path worth attention and does not seem to be quite as costly, but I suppose one could spend the kings ransom if they chose too. I do not really think anything can improve upon the audio signal, only degrade it, sometimes folks (like me) may like this change, but that is not sibilance, I think we are talking about ways to possibly handle sibilance but I would not personally buy a cable to handle this as I suspect it would also alter the non-sibilant recording in some way, but that is just me.

And I highly recommend MIT cables, but then that is another story.

RT1

madmax

I don't think any of us doubt it is caused by the singer. The question is, once the singer releases the high energy on a recording how does our equipment handle/reproduce it. In my case it is coming out as a distorted mess and I'm sure if the original recording sounded that way it would have never gotten out of the studio. They have de-essers they run the source through and worse case they would make the artist re-do that area of the recording.
madmax

Phil Dawson

Blame the recording or rather the recording engineer for the presence of sibilance in a recording. It's not that hard to get rid of when you are mixing.
Phil