Audio Critique

[hopkins]

What Peter think is “a better audio device/system can reveal more contrast between records” or in the other words when you change a cable (for example) in a better audio system you will hear more contrast between cables.
More contrast means the system has less coloration (in subjective term not in objective measurements) and you receive more information.

Peter Q's remark is common sense, but when you get to "tweaking", like cables in your example, I am not so sure it is always that easy to hear which changes result in more contrast between recordings.

More contrast may not only be the result of less "coloration" - unless "coloration" is viewed as an umbrella term. Room acoustics, resolution, etc... all contribute.

 

[wil]

Tima
I do not say all audiophiles have wrong reaction to sound, I believe david @ddk and some other experts are very different to most of other audiophiles.
There are short term reaction and long term reaction to sound.
Peter (owner of Audio Note UK) was translating a book about this subject but not finished it yet, that book maybe useful.

Russian audiologist A. Likhnitsky’s published a book “Sound Quality: New approach to testing of the home audio equipment”. (P&K, 1998)

http://goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PageIndex=1&postID=50#50

Unfortunately Romy the Cat's tortured writing is too much a chore for me to plow through.
It reminds of the conventions of academic writing where convoluted run-on sentences predominate even though a clear, well constructed sentence would do the job (that is, to communicate) much better.

But I look forward to reading the Peter Q link.

 

[Amir]

Peter Q's remark is common sense, but when you get to "tweaking", like cables in your example, I am not so sure it is always that easy to hear which changes result in more contrast between recordings.

More contrast may not only be the result of less "coloration" - unless "coloration" is viewed as an umbrella term. Room acoustics, resolution, etc... all contribute.

You did not get the point, read the article again.
Coloration is not about objective measurements.

 

[Amir]

Unfortunately Romy the Cat's tortured writing is too much a chore for me to plow through.
It reminds of the conventions of academic writing where convoluted run-on sentences predominate even though a clear, well constructed sentence would do the job (that is, to communicate) much better.

But I look forward to reading the Peter Q link.

I have spend more than 20000 hours for audio and I am still student of Romy the Cat .
He is so smart and his audio ideas are 100% valid

 

[hopkins]

You did not get the point, read the article again.
Coloration is not about objective measurements.

I had read the article a while ago (I even mentioned it in my thread at some point - https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/hopkins-system.35850/post-938807). I don't know why you think I was suggesting things that could be measured. Also he does not even use the term "coloration", this is a term you introduce.

 

[Amir]

Why the “comparison by contrast” method is the right way to judge a component in subjective mode?
As you know objectivist claim the objective method (electronics/acoustics measurements) is scientific and also is independent to listeners and every subjective experience is dependent to listener but the key is “comparison by contrast” method is independent from any listener.
It means the listener tastes has no affect on the judgment.

 

[Amir]

I liked the sound of Living Voice OBX-RW and my friend liked the sound of Gryphon trident but both of us agreed the Living Voice clearly shows more contrast than gryphon.
This comparison method is independent to any listener.

 

[Amir]

How this method (comparison by contrast) works?
In electronics we can use mathematics for showing signal transfer between point A to B.
Every signal could be modeled by information (for example converting to digital information) .
for example one minutes of the music signal could be shown by X . X is the amount of information stored in music signal.
When you transfer music signal (for example between transport and pre) any filter (like DAC for example) can degrade the sound and it means the information stored in the music will decrease to Y.
Y is smaller than X.
If your component degrade less you will hear more contrast (more contrast is equal to more information) and vise versa.

this means the subjective method of “comparison by contrast” can tell you which component transfer more information in the record and harm less.

 

[Amir]

Does the “comparison by contrast” method close this chapter? No
Comparison by contrast is the first step in audio judgment and it is the necessary condition.
sometimes we hear overally equal contrast but the presentation is different. In this step the music type could play a role.
The key is in the step two the listener should turn-off analysing sound in his mind and relax and enjoy music. After listening to music in long term he should check which component help to have better music experience.

 

[PeterA]

How this method (comparison by contrast) works?
In electronics we can use mathematics for showing signal transfer between point A to B.
Every signal could be modeled by information (for example converting to digital information) .
for example one minutes of the music signal could be shown by X . X is the amount of information stored in music signal.
When you transfer music signal (for example between transport and pre) any filter (like DAC for example) can degrade the sound and it means the information stored in the music will decrease to Y.
Y is smaller than X.
If your component degrade less you will hear more contrast (more contrast is equal to more information) and vise versa.

this means the subjective method of “comparison by contrast” can tell you which component transfer more information in the record and harm less.

Amir, what about components that enhance, spotlight, or distort the original signal? In that case might not Y be greater than X? Listeners might mistake this enhancement for more information and greater contrast between two comparisons.

this is why I always ask myself when making comparisons, “which sounds more natural“.

Carry on, I enjoy reading your thoughts in this thread.

 

[wil]

I have spend more than 20000 hours for audio and I am still student of Romy the Cat .
He is so smart and his audio ideas are 100% valid

I think you're right. I just find ideas outpace his ability to communicate them in a way that's not painful to read.

 

[Amir]

Amir, what about components that enhance, spotlight, or distort the original signal? In that case might not Y be greater than X? Listeners might mistake this enhancement for more information and greater contrast between two comparisons.

this is why I always ask myself when making comparisons, “which sounds more natural“.

Carry on, I enjoy reading your thoughts in this thread.

Dear Peter,
Actually Y is allways smaller than X because every type of coloration or distortion hide/destroy the information. Some changes like frequency phase changes can add overshoot to the signal in time domain or some components like silver cable can add brightness in a system in these type of filters you will not hear more contrast between records.
For example imagine you have two 100% identical cables :
1) copper made cable
2) silver made cable
Both cables are 100% identical and just the meterial is different.
If you put silver cable and listen to 10 records you will not get more contrast between records in comparison by copper cable and you just get different presentation. As you see in post #209 I said if in step one both contrast was equal we go to next step and the next step is judging the sound in long term music listening. Me and you and David @ddk and Romy and Kevin (living voice) all believe in a reference system the copper is more natural than silver.

 

[Amir]

There are more examples,
AC filters may impress the listener but in comparison by contrast method you easily find the AC filters decrease the contrast (in a reference system).
Some speakers tend to highlight HF more to impress audiophiles and give them feeling of more transparency but these speakers fail to give you more contrast.
This method is very useful to understand which compoments/changes are destroying the signal.

I should say the first condition for right test is having reference system and the test condition should be perfect as I describe in start of this topic. Dead systems will not give you enough contrast so you need to test two compoments in a good system.

 

[Carlos269]

Dear Peter,
Actually Y is allways smaller than X because every type of coloration or distortion hide/destroy the information. Some changes like frequency phase changes can add overshoot to the signal in time domain or some components like silver cable can add brightness in a system in these type of filters you will not hear more contrast between records.
For example imagine you have two 100% identical cables :
1) copper made cable
2) silver made cable
Both cables are 100% identical and just the meterial is different.
If you put silver cable and listen to 10 records you will not get more contrast between records in comparison by copper cable and you just get different presentation. As you see in post #209 I said if in step one both contrast was equal we go to next step and the next step is judging the sound in long term. Me and you and David @ddk and Romy and Kevin (living voice) all believe in a reference system the copper is more natural than silver.

Oh my, what a mess and lack of understanding of the elements at play. This cesspool of descriptive words without any technical meaning is an exercise in futility. This is insane how you can make so many generalizations without lack of comprehension of the causes and dependencies. Even theories established through empirical evidence have sensitivities. You and Peter and David @ddk and Romy and Kevin (living voice) all believe in suppositions that support your products without any real understanding of the underpinnings: electrical, magnetic, acoustic, and psychoacoustic elements at work. It’s all physics and it can all be understood and orchestrated. No need to spend time and energy with meaningless words describing the symptoms, if their root causes are not understood.

 

[Amir]

To

Oh my, what a mess and lack of understanding of the elements at play. This cesspool of descriptive words without any technical meaning is an exercise in futility. This is insane how you can make so many generalizations without lack of comprehension of the causes and dependencies. Even theories established through empirical evidence have sensitivities. You and Peter and David @ddk and Romy and Kevin (living voice) all believe in suppositions that support your products without any real understanding of the underpinnings: electrical, magnetic, acoustic, and psychoacoustic elements at work. It’s all physics and it can all be understood and orchestrated. No need to spend time and energy with meaningless words describing the symptoms, if their root causes are not understood.

Please do not spread meaningless words and stop this conversation if you have no answer to this topic.

 

[Carlos269]

To

Please do not spread meaningless words and stop this conversation if you have no answer to this topic.

Go back and read everything you have stated on this thread and then lookup and read the meaning of the word “supposition”. You are making far reaching statements and great generalizations without explaining, in technical terms, why these are so. There is already so much misinformation in the audiophile world, there is certainly no need for more or to reinforce erroneous conclusion, unfounded theories, and misguided assertions based on lack of understanding.

 

[Al M.]

Dear Peter,
Actually Y is allways smaller than X because every type of coloration or distortion hide/destroy the information. Some changes like frequency phase changes can add overshoot to the signal in time domain or some components like silver cable can add brightness in a system in these type of filters you will not hear more contrast between records.
For example imagine you have two 100% identical cables :
1) copper made cable
2) silver made cable
Both cables are 100% identical and just the meterial is different.
If you put silver cable and listen to 10 records you will not get more contrast between records in comparison by copper cable and you just get different presentation. As you see in post #209 I said if in step one both contrast was equal we go to next step and the next step is judging the sound in long term music listening. Me and you and David @ddk and Romy and Kevin (living voice) all believe in a reference system the copper is more natural than silver.

What silly generalization and dogmatism.

And sure, you are free to believe whatever you want.

 

[Amir]

What silly generalization and dogmatism.

And sure, you are free to believe whatever you want.

Please do not spread meaningless words and stop this conversation if you have no answer to this topic.

 

[Lagonda]

And suddenly he was just talking to himself again !

 

[PeterA]

Dear Peter,
Actually Y is allways smaller than X because every type of coloration or distortion hide/destroy the information. Some changes like frequency phase changes can add overshoot to the signal in time domain or some components like silver cable can add brightness in a system in these type of filters you will not hear more contrast between records.
For example imagine you have two 100% identical cables :
1) copper made cable
2) silver made cable
Both cables are 100% identical and just the meterial is different.
If you put silver cable and listen to 10 records you will not get more contrast between records in comparison by copper cable and you just get different presentation. As you see in post #209 I said if in step one both contrast was equal we go to next step and the next step is judging the sound in long term music listening. Me and you and David @ddk and Romy and Kevin (living voice) all believe in a reference system the copper is more natural than silver.

Amir, I visited an audiophile a few weeks ago. He has a wonderful system, but the sound was a bit off. We spent an evening listening to a wide selection of music. The next day, David Karmeli and a couple of us basically removed all connections all footers a bunch of acoustic treatments, silver contact paste, and a bunch of other stuff. All wires were changed to the stuff that David brought with him. We listened again to the same music, and the system was completely transformed. The contrast between different records was increased, but more importantly, all the music sounded more natural. That is dynamic contrast improved, timbre was more accurate, and the system basically came alive. The new wires were all copper.