Audio Science: Does it explain everything about how something sounds?
- Thread starter PeterA
- Start date
- Status
Exactly, it's the dynamic nature of the signal & the co-lateral distortions that the processing of these signals in a non-linear audio reproduction device - that's where the devil resides - in these details. These are the sort of issues that auditory processing is so adept at perceiving, the dynamic relationship between aspects of the signal & so far, test regimes & measurements have not addressed. There's a good reason for this - it's damn difficult to do but that is no excuse for failing to admit this glaring oversight in what current measurements can & cannot do.
Knowing the limitations of measurements does give some badly needed perspective !!
Edit: And my sig says it all "The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance – it is the illusion of knowledge." (it doesn't matter who it is really attributed to)
Last edited:
Micro,
I wonder if people are mistaking "Natural" with flavorless 1:1 accuracy instead of transparency beyond/through the mechanical & electronic interface, because everything has character and color. Early tubed Neumann mics and pre come to mind, they're not flavorless but in the hands of a competent recording engineer they have an incredible ability to capture and convey the emotional as well as the sonic content of the original event. A "natural" sound is also one where the system takes a back seat a realistic connection to the original event. Of course a live or hall recording will be different from a multi tracked studio one, but there was an event that took place there. Sitting behind a console and recording through the glass has its own "natural" qualities that will conveyed too, doesn't mean that one will like every artist, music or recording...
david
Regarding those mic designs , would the naturalness not lay in the fact as to how the airresonance /electricity conversion takes place tube versus SS , i mean a wonderfull tubed neumanmike would probably sound even better if the tube used would have better overall FR response(bass region ?) , i simply mean the 2 can go hand in hand instead of fighting each other
No, "natural" does mean something. As a descriptor, "natural" means that something does not seem artificial or man-made. Does telling someone that a rose looks "natural" mean anything? Of course it does.
Yes, "natural" is a subjective term, and it can tell one a great deal about how something sounds, looks, feels, smells, etc.
No, if that specification is the only thing you are telling me about a speaker, I have no way of knowing if it will sound natural. It might very well, but then it might not. I would need to know more about it and also to listen to it. Telling me a rose is a precise shade of red with a certain temperature and saturation does not tell me if the rose looks natural or, for that matter, what it smells like. I would have to look at it and smell it.
I think frequency responses are great for the speaker designers, and such a flat response may indeed help the designer to develop an excellent speaker. Room response measurements can also be very helpful to the listener when addressing certain issues with his room and system. I have read, though, that a frequency response which very gently rolls off in the highs does sound more natural to many listeners.
I don't think relying on such a definitive view leads to a better understanding of what is a very complex subject. We need both objective information and subjective experiences to better understand things.
Last edited:
It's all about voicing in terms of which platter sounds best in a given system...each material has its own trade offs and two identically set AF1's will not sound the same on two different rooms/systems. Not only can you change the sound via different platter material, each platter will sound different if you use the poron platter mat or not. My stainless platter does not have the mat glued on so I am able to hear SS with and w/o the damping mat....I prefer w/o. That is one of the things I really like the AF1 over all other tables...you are not stuck with one sound flavor.
steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
I agree. His mat isn't glued down either. We played all genres of music and when all was said and done the Duralumin sounded better to both our ears.
'natural' is what your body says it is.
is it natural?...check.
or is it not quite natural?....something a little different.
we have our whole lives worth of experiences to help us learn to figure it out. we simply have to pay attention to it to 'get' it.
is it natural?...check.
or is it not quite natural?....something a little different.
we have our whole lives worth of experiences to help us learn to figure it out. we simply have to pay attention to it to 'get' it.
I haven't had my duralumin platter on for over a year now. I will have to try it again in the near future. I found the SS to be more lively in the treble and deeper in the bass than the dura platter working from memory. My room is quite damped as I have wall to wall medium pile carpet with pad and sheet rock walls and ceilings.
steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
I think you should try it. When I saw how easy it is to change the platter it would be a no brainer for me. The difference Christian all for the better was immediately heard. I think Jack also prefers the Duralumin. I know David was so impressed that he preferred leaving his on.
Wouldn't it sound overly bright w/o the mat? I know on my Nottingham I kept the mat as I found vinyl on stainless steel to sound ear-piercing.
Are you referring to interchangeable platters with the AF1 or mats or both? I think there are several TT's that have the same options, no?
steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
There are 3 option for the platter. IIRC the mat is the same.
Titanium
Duralumin
Stainless steel
The acrylic was discontinued.
Titanium
Duralumin
Stainless steel
The acrylic was discontinued.
Platter changes are easy and it's important every so often to clean the glass in the air chamber below the upper platter while your at it as dust does collect inside over time.
Its cartridge dependent Christian, I hadn't gone back to mine either since our conversations but I also preferred it to the SS when Steve was here, but not every cartridge is the Neumann. Its very simple to switch out and I think it all comes down to which cartridge in which system. Its really more of a tonal shift than anything else, the nature of the table remains the same. Its worth keeping both handy for further listening.
david
There are no hard and fast rules Johnny. The best answer I can give is...it all depends. There are now 4 platter materials and one style of mat, which is paper thin poron glued onto a thin sheet of Mylar. I have only two platters...Duralumin and Stainless. Stainless is the heaviest of all the platter materials. The newest platter material on the block is Titanium. I have no idea how it sounds...buying extra platters is not cheap....somewhere in the $3500.00 to $4000 range If my memory serves me right.
That's what I heard in my friend's recording studio too, the older tubed Neumann's were untouchable, even made digital recordings come to life and sound natural. Looking at what they're going for these days other people must have discovered the same...
david
I thought about it but I think I'm going to hold off for the AF-0, but you know how it goes Christian, might change my mind tomorrow
.david
- Status
Similar threads
