Great article on "Analogue Warmth"

[Audiophile Bill]

URL Please?

Hi Frantz,

I have the app in my oppo 105d so streaming to my GG rather than using computer. Sorry - it is great though.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Hi Amir, the example is just a wrong one to use in this context, if you want to compare a piano go to a live show in the right seat. Live shows some can sound bad, but if you to a few right ones nothing will come close and will teach you much more than Harman tests, and that is not meant to be a dig

Or have a dad with a full grand in his music room and ask him to play something of your choice

 

[amirm]

Hi Amir, the example is just a wrong one to use in this context, if you want to compare a piano go to a live show in the right seat. Live shows some can sound bad, but if you to a few right ones nothing will come close and will teach you much more than Harman tests, and that is not meant to be a dig

Well, I am sure it is meant as a dig. But as always, I will share with you a story.

My chief designer grew up playing the piano. He then did live sound and went on tour with many bands. He then set up his recording studio and did that for years for many young artists. He was showing me a Neumann (?) mic that he said costs more than his car that was used for many famous Jazz recordings that we rave about. We were discussing amplifiers and M2 loudspeakers and he says that certain amps that you all hate and those JBL M2 loudspeakers are the most revealing system he has ever heard in his life. He is hearing things in his own recordings that he had never heard. And that Piano sounds better through this system than he has ever heard. Unlike you all, he lives in the world you say he should, and the world I say you should . Until such time that you actually sit through an test that removes all forms of bias, your opinion and advice doesn't have value to me.

With no reference as to what is real in the source of the recording, and lack of critical listening abilities to know what is and is not a distortion (see, I can hand out digs ), it is easy to get intoxicated with the colorations that these analog systems provide. Another story . When I bought my R2R from Ki, he brought in a sample tape. We played that and it was "jaw droppingly beautiful." I asked Ki where the recording came from and he said it was a copy of SACD!!! I asked him what the point was and he wisely said, "I like my women with lipstick!!!" I think of this line every time someone says "analog is better" when they have no idea what the original was.

So no, you can listen to live music all you want. It will NOT prepare you to hear artifacts or guard you against being fooled as I was in the above example. All the experiments we run to prove to ourselves that we have improved our systems are most likely faulty. We have a wrong reference for fidelity because none is provided to us. As Frantz said, we make one up on the fly and then pile on a ton of subjective bias and think we are advancing our knowledge of what fidelity is. It is all wrong.

But thankfully, very enjoyable....

 

[amirm]

But in the mind of this sweet little girl I bet she was thrilled to have had the experience.

Well, no, she bored to tears. It was a chore that mom and dad had put her through. Had to sit there for half hour for her turn. She played the tunes, did a very pretty bow, and ran off with relief.

This was a piano on a stone floor in the middle of an open mall. What did you expect?

That angels come and pull me to heaven based on what you all say?

 

[steve williams]

Well, no, she bored to tears. It was a chore that mom and dad had put her through. Had to sit there for half hour for her turn. She played the tunes, did a very pretty bow, and ran off with relief.


That angels come and pull me to heaven based on what you all say?

I guess you haven't experienced the epiphany then. The world's longest journey starts with the first short step. It's called tolerance

 

[bonzo75]

Or have a dad with a full grand in his music room and ask him to play something of your choice

Not sure about that. Keith has a piano in his room and his wife and kids play various stuff, but still...

His ears seem more developed by the bass he lets out on the sofa

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Not sure about that. Keith has a piano in his room and his wife and kids play various stuff, but still...

His ears seem more developed by the bass he lets out on the sofa

There are pianos and pianos, Ked. There are pianists and pianists (no disrespect to Keith's Mrs).

 

[Gregadd]

Well, I am sure it is meant as a dig. But as always, I will share with you a story.

My chief designer grew up playing the piano. He then did live sound and went on tour with many bands. He then set up his recording studio and did that for years for many young artists. He was showing me a Neumann (?) mic that he said costs more than his car that was used for many famous Jazz recordings that we rave about. We were discussing amplifiers and M2 loudspeakers and he says that certain amps that you all hate and those JBL M2 loudspeakers are the most revealing system he has ever heard in his life. He is hearing things in his own recordings that he had never heard. And that Piano sounds better through this system than he has ever heard. Unlike you all, he lives in the world you say he should, and the world I say you should . Until such time that you actually sit through an test that removes all forms of bias, your opinion and advice doesn't have value to me.

With no reference as to what is real in the source of the recording, and lack of critical listening abilities to know what is and is not a distortion (see, I can hand out digs ), it is easy to get intoxicated with the colorations that these analog systems provide. Another story . When I bought my R2R from Ki, he brought in a sample tape. We played that and it was "jaw droppingly beautiful." I asked Ki where the recording came from and he said it was a copy of SACD!!! I asked him what the point was and he wisely said, "I like my women with lipstick!!!" I think of this line every time someone says "analog is better" when they have no idea what the original was.

So no, you can listen to live music all you want. It will NOT prepare you to hear artifacts or guard you against being fooled as I was in the above example. All the experiments we run to prove to ourselves that we have improved our systems are most likely faulty. We have a wrong reference for fidelity because none is provided to us. As Frantz said, we make one up on the fly and then pile on a ton of subjective bias and think we are advancing our knowledge of what fidelity is. It is all wrong.

But thankfully, very enjoyable....

Amir you and I have had this discussion before to no avail.At least from my point of view.

!.We have no idea in reality what piano sounnds like.
2. We have no idea what was recorded .
Why are we here? What is the point of high fidelity?

If those two things are true how can anyone ever be wrong?

 

[amirm]

I guess you haven't experienced the epiphany then. The world's longest journey starts with the first short step. It's called tolerance

Something I hope you all with high-end systems and into subjectivity, demonstrate more of it in this coming new year.

I am going to go and enjoy some music as it gave me a headache posting the last two responses in this beautiful, sunny morning in the Pacific Northwest.

 

[Groucho]

Well, I am sure it is meant as a dig. But as always, I will share with you a story.

My chief designer grew up playing the piano. He then did live sound and went on tour with many bands. He then set up his recording studio and did that for years for many young artists. He was showing me a Neumann (?) mic that he said costs more than his car that was used for many famous Jazz recordings that we rave about. We were discussing amplifiers and M2 loudspeakers and he says that certain amps that you all hate and those JBL M2 loudspeakers are the most revealing system he has ever heard in his life. He is hearing things in his own recordings that he had never heard. And that Piano sounds better through this system than he has ever heard. Unlike you all, he lives in the world you say he should, and the world I say you should . Until such time that you actually sit through an test that removes all forms of bias, your opinion and advice doesn't have value to me.

With no reference as to what is real in the source of the recording, and lack of critical listening abilities to know what is and is not a distortion (see, I can hand out digs ), it is easy to get intoxicated with the colorations that these analog systems provide. Another story . When I bought my R2R from Ki, he brought in a sample tape. We played that and it was "jaw droppingly beautiful." I asked Ki where the recording came from and he said it was a copy of SACD!!! I asked him what the point was and he wisely said, "I like my women with lipstick!!!" I think of this line every time someone says "analog is better" when they have no idea what the original was.

So no, you can listen to live music all you want. It will NOT prepare you to hear artifacts or guard you against being fooled as I was in the above example. All the experiments we run to prove to ourselves that we have improved our systems are most likely faulty. We have a wrong reference for fidelity because none is provided to us. As Frantz said, we make one up on the fly and then pile on a ton of subjective bias and think we are advancing our knowledge of what fidelity is. It is all wrong.

But thankfully, very enjoyable....

Good post. What it says to me is that we need to have some stakes in the ground. An amplifier that is neutral because it has been designed to be that way, and measured to confirm it; as Peter walker would say, we don't need to listen to it to know it's working. A DAC likewise. Speakers that have been built without compromise (e.g. not trying to make them compact) and that have been corrected to iron out the inconsistencies. Only then should we start messing about with 'effects' - although we may find we don't need them.

 

[Gregadd]

Yep, the only reference for a recording is that the final amplified output is exactly the same as the input only louder. Two speakers can only attempt to convey realistically the amplified version of their two channels.

When someone here (well one guy proclaimed here he heard a system that sounded like the real thing once a few years ago) says that his or her system sounds like the real thing, then that would not be a reference system because two speakers in no way can pressurize a room the same way multiple live instruments project sounds in all kinds of directions at once., other than that, a reference system for an electronic system means that the output faithfully follows the input in every way.

Outside of that, we just get into preferences, dealing with how the music was recorded mixed and mastered and what our imperfect systems do to those two audio channels to allow for our preferences to be satisfied.

And it needs to be remembered that as a consequence of the un natural stereo system, messing about with the actual signal can be more satisfying to our preferences, such as the way vinyl process plays about with the two channels.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Amir .Why are we here? Maybe you can answer while Amir is soothing his acheing head

 

[thedudeabides]

FWIW, there were 128 posts on this thread in the last 10 hours and 34 minutes. Just shy of 1 post per every 5 minutes. Should set a record of some kind.

I do admire the passion.

Happy New Year to all.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

FWIW, there were 128 posts on this thread in the last 10 hours and 34 minutes.

I do admire the passion.

Happy New Year to all.

Exactly, Dude. Wbf should embrace diversity - it is a good thing.

 

[Ron Party]

"Are not."

"Am too."

"Are not."

"Am too."

"My opinion is more correct than yours."

"Why?"

"Because I said so."

"Do you have any proof?"

"Proof? Proof? I don't need no stinkin' proof. What I say is the gospel, and since I spent more money than you my gospel is the one and only. My hearing is an act of divine intervention."

Groundhog Day around these parts.

Seek peace, love, and a groove that makes you want to get up and shake it. It's New Year's Eve!

 

[treitz3]

I am going to go and enjoy some music as it gave me a headache posting the last two responses in this beautiful, sunny morning in the Pacific Northwest.

Okay, truth revealed.

Amir has a headache due to the lack of analogue warmth.

Tom

 

[microstrip]

I do believe that for many audiophiles the references has come to be what they hear in their systems and others'. Real music is not a s "nice" as many wants it to sound: Violin are strident. Trumpets are edgy , Trombones are throaty and edgy .. A tuba at a few meters is a loud rather hard instrument.. Brass in general are not that sweet, woodwinds OTOH often are.. Violins when massed (lot of them, 2 to 3 still sounds strident) lose some of their hardness... A cymbal crash is a loud, harsh and almost violent musical event. We, audiophiles often take as our reference the more interesting but far from reality reproduced version of many instruments . This is not limited to mid-fi systems , Mega Dollars/Euro Systems regularly commit this sin. Some sounds so syrupy as to make all and any music sounds sweet .. I am certain that Stravinsky never intended the Firebird to be a sweet sounding piece or Skostakovich's his Symphonyy 11 NOT to be a hard, bombastic and violent piece but some systems simply make a very nice presentation of whatever is sent to them and they are congratulated for being sweet, warm and "musical" .. Not life and death so if it floats your boats .. It would be only fair not to call it Realistic.

We must separate stridency or edginess existing in real conditions of listening from the stridency or edginess due to poor sound reproduction. IMHO they sound quite different.

I have listened live several times to Stravinsky Petrouchka and Shostakovitch Symphonies, they are violent and powerful, but never edgy or harsh - at less 15 meters away from the Orchestra. It is something that most of the time separates real from reproduced - it sounds powerful but not excessively loud.

I have listened to many syrupy and strident systems, but fortunately also to many systems that have an nice equilibrium between them. I will not write in name of audiophiles, but I disagree on your paternalistic and confessional "we, audiophiles".

BTW, we should also separate sounding realistic (usually used as meaning a facsimile of reality) from using the sound of real acoustic instruments as a reference. Most of the time we are debating semantics.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

"Are not."

"Am too."

"Are not."

"Am too."

"My opinion is more correct than yours."

"Why?"

"Because I said so."

"Do you have any proof?"

"Proof? Proof? I don't need no stinkin' proof. What I say is the gospel, and since I spent more money than you my gospel is the one and only. My hearing is an act of divine intervention."

Groundhog Day around these parts.

Seek peace, love, and a groove that makes you want to get up and shake it. It's New Year's Eve!

Ha. Nicely put, Ron.

 

[Blizzard]

Hi Blizz,

If the performance that many of us are currently experiencing / have experienced with the GG including a pro recording engineer on this very site is attainable with such a poor clock, I can only surmise the following:

> the GG must be absolutely extraordinary outside of the amanero interface

> that jitter is overhyped in terms of the overall bigger picture as to how a DAC will sound especially since Bruce B owns gear with monumentally good clocks yet still thinks that the GG "is the one to beat" for dsd

> that if you are right about the USB interface (and I am hoping so much that you are) ~$90 (for a new USB board) could make the GG far ahead of everything out there


Again if correct - I would like to see the option for an external clock input on the GG so for those of us so inclined, experimentation with a low femto second clock would be possible.

Bill,

The importance of clock jitter isn't a myth. And as I said before, it's even more critical with DSD. Also, although the $90 USB interface I suggested would be a big upgrade, it's still the caliber of interface you would find in $1-4K DAC's. For anything above that level, and certainly at the 20k level, you usually see a custom implementation. Something with clocks that have phase noise specs at least this good would be a good start.


Using the new XMOS Xcore-200 chip, even better as that's today's latest XMOS USB interface chip. It's much better than previous chips.

On most DAC's even if they use an interface of the Amanero or Jlsounds caliber, they slave it to a much better master clock after. But in the case of the GG, you don't use a master clock with the chipless DSD DAC side, and he's using the cheap 70 cent clock as the master for the PCM side.

 

[nc42acc]

One post to summarize an 87 plus page thread. Ron you are my hero!

"Are not."

"Am too."

"Are not."

"Am too."

"My opinion is more correct than yours."

"Why?"

"Because I said so."

"Do you have any proof?"

"Proof? Proof? I don't need no stinkin' proof. What I say is the gospel, and since I spent more money than you my gospel is the one and only. My hearing is an act of divine intervention."

Groundhog Day around these parts.

Seek peace, love, and a groove that makes you want to get up and shake it. It's New Year's Eve!

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Bill,

The importance of clock jitter isn't a myth. And as I said before, it's even more critical with DSD. Also, although the $90 USB interface I suggested would be a big upgrade, it's still the caliber of interface you would find in $1-4K DAC's. For anything above that level, and certainly at the 20k level, you usually see a custom implementation. Something that with clocks that have phase noise specs at least this good would be a good start.
View attachment 24591

Using the new XMOS Xcore-200 chip, even better as that's today's latest XMOS USB interface chip. It's much better than previous chips.

Hi Blizz,

I did not mean it was a myth. Just trying to understand how much it influences the final sound of the DAC. If it very substantially influences the sound, then all us GG'ers are in for an amazing treat.

I was looking at Bughead the other day and there is a mode that actually introduces jitter to increase bass? Any ideas?