Fair enough, I've never investigated this and I'm sure it's true if you listen to the sound in a certain way. But I normally listen in a very casual way, out of the corner of my ear so to speak and this makes me very sensitive to subtle, low level distortion. Most systems leave me dead cold because I have to concentrate so hard to be able to switch out this distortion, so that's what I focus on sorting out ...Well, sometimes the entire soundstage collapses, and the imaging suffers greatly.
Yeah but Frank, which recordings do we know that are in-phase, and the others out-of-phase?
You know, that's an important point.
The implication of that is that harsh recordings are harsh because of FR manipulation, and that I disagree with. If I do my tweaking, it is reducing the level of non-linear distortion and only marginally affecting the response curve. Yes, recordings such as new wave pop have a very deliberate energy spectrum which is quite superb at eliciting unpleasant distortion in a lot of systems, but it is not the case that the recording is distorted in itself. If you EQ it on playback you are reducing that tendency to provoke distortion, which is a perfectly legitimate way of enhancing the listening experience. But it is not the only way of dealing with such recordings.
To follow through on the road analogy, there can be a road which is properly surfaced, no major imperfections in its makeup, but it has very severe bends, up and down undulations, and obstacles like trees dangling branches right up to the edge of the road. The BMW will thrive in such an environment, as will the Lotus.
The answer is, no, it is not a distortion in the normal sense that audio people think of such, because the recording itself doesn't have extra, significant harmonic content that was never there on the way into the mic -- assuming competent, professional recording gear -- called non-linear distortion. But it highly likely has linear distortion, a playing around with the energy spectrum.
Hey, I'm talking of a BMW at the level of an M3 say here, or a decent AMG MB as an alternative. Not a sloppier limousine version. Just ask Jack about this stuff!Unless you can effectively imagine that the big BMW is as precise and responsive as the Lotus. If you have that kind of imagination, and I know you do, God bless. More power to you. But on the severely bending, rolling, undulating...but perfectly surfaced road? The Lotus is going to kick the big beemer's butt every time. Your Civic? It won't hang past the first S, not even if you've welded the fuel injectors to the heads.
Just don't ever drive the Lotus on a good road and maybe you can keep your illusion alive.
Tim
Okay, linear distortion means altering the frequency and phase response, only. Something that every audio device does to some degree, and something that the ear/brain is very familiar with and has no trouble handling, it doesn't register as a problem, per se. But when you say "significant harmonic content" was added I'm not sure what you're talking about: are you referring to effects circuitry and processing being applied to the sound, in the same way as a foot pedal for guitar? If you're talking about such intentional manipulation that's fine, that's what the producer wanted, it's the unintentional altering that I worry about, that creates non-linear distortion, harmonics that the instruments and processing didn't generate, and the producer, and you, the listener, don't want to hear.
Just a poetic way of saying doing a bit of EQ'ng; if you bump up the upper mid-range then there will be more energy, in a pure measurement sense, in that part of the audio spectrum. Exactly what you do when you fiddle the settings before playing a "bright" recording.
Which is what it should be like. What I am saying is that you can go the next step, and have the recordings sound spectacularly good. There's a big difference there, and getting new wave right is a classic example of what's possible. In simple terms, that recording that Jack wants to dull down to MP3 sound because it's too in your face can be cajoled into becoming massive, the acoustic completely takes over the house and is not the slightest bit objectionable, it becomes an overwhelming sound experience. Exactly what the producer wanted, and what you, the consumer, want from your music playback ...
Frank, you're clueless, but relentless. I can't hang. You have the floor.Sorry to drive you to drink, Tim (but make sure it's a good one!), but now you have me confused. When you EQ you don't add in harmonics, frequencies that weren't there in the first place; all you're doing is altering the relative level of elements in the sound that are already there from the source of that sound, unless you go an extreme level of manipulation, and complete remove some frequency component. Which will require a lot of processing power. If you add in harmonics that were never there in the first place, no matter how low a level, before hitting the mic, then you are either mixing in an effect or unintentionally causing non-linear distortion. And it's the frequencies that have no right to be there, under any circumstances that cause the listening fatigue problems: it's unwanted, atonal muck.When I say "significant harmonic content" I'm talking about fooling around with the energy spectrum.
Tim
Very true. The joke is, for me, that some of my worst albums are from audiphile labels, because they have been so sterilised and the energy sucked out of them so they don't offend people with hyper sharp setups, that they sound like baby food. Classical albums with really, really dreary string tone, for example.
