If you reduce the synergy equation to these variables no dealer its needed - a simple spreadsheet or software program with the voltage transfer equations would immediately tell you everything you must know about building audio systems. Then the only subjective factor would be the acceptable limit for the attenuation.
Is There Such A Thing As "SYNERGY" Between Components In An Audio Chain?
- Thread starter RBFC
- Start date
If you reduce the synergy equation to these variables no dealer its needed - a simple spreadsheet or software program with the voltage transfer equations would immediately tell you everything you must know about building audio systems. Then the only subjective factor would be the acceptable limit for the attenuation.
I agreed with your first post. You lost me here, though. I think it was Chuck (audioguy) who said that in all the years he's worked in the business he has been in only 1 room that wouldn't benefit from room correction software.
Yes in the perfect world we should not need it. But as long as we're fantisizing, in the perfect world we wouldn't need room treatments either. While we're at it, in the perfect world there'd be no such thing as money, politics, or Paul Anka.
I don't use eq to correct my system. I don't even use it to correct my room. I use it to correct recordings. Perhaps "correct" is too strong a term. I use it to make them more listenable from my own perspective.
Tim
But P, I thought digital recordings are perfect. How do you improve upon perfection?
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Late to the party.... because this thread was started while I was totally consumed by RMAF.
I think that if we settle down to this meaning of synergy, then the combination of two excellent products like the Spectral/MIT combination, and Steve's Wilson/Lamm combination can and should be regarded as synergistic. We could even encompass the combination of two imperfect products that in combination result in the cancellation of the errors.
However, I would like to humbly like to suggest that synergy is the combination of two or more agents or forces so that the combined effect is greater than can be ordinarily explained by the sum of their individual effects.
I offer this because of the insight during RMAF. I exhibited together with Geoff Poor of Balanced Audio Technology. His entry-level tube product the VK-55SE and my entry-level speaker the G7.1f exhibited a synergy that seemed far more than either of us could explain. We kept saying to one another that it was a magical combination, because it exceeded his expectations, and it exceeded my expectations.
Of course, it could just be two proud fathers smoking their own dope.
Did anybody in the forum visit Rm9021?
I think that if we settle down to this meaning of synergy, then the combination of two excellent products like the Spectral/MIT combination, and Steve's Wilson/Lamm combination can and should be regarded as synergistic. We could even encompass the combination of two imperfect products that in combination result in the cancellation of the errors.
However, I would like to humbly like to suggest that synergy is the combination of two or more agents or forces so that the combined effect is greater than can be ordinarily explained by the sum of their individual effects.
I offer this because of the insight during RMAF. I exhibited together with Geoff Poor of Balanced Audio Technology. His entry-level tube product the VK-55SE and my entry-level speaker the G7.1f exhibited a synergy that seemed far more than either of us could explain. We kept saying to one another that it was a magical combination, because it exceeded his expectations, and it exceeded my expectations.
Of course, it could just be two proud fathers smoking their own dope.
Did anybody in the forum visit Rm9021?
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
IMHO that is system matching. As you mentioned, the electrical characteristics of hifi components are all over the place. Even the very well defined digital 75ohm interface between a transport and a DAC can be a common place where many audiophiles put in a "tone control" to an imperfect system to change the ultimate frequency response. Cable manufacturers know this (or they should) and they use this aspect to change the sound of systems for the better.
..... unless the amplifier designer is also the speaker designer. But then again, that is simply system matching. Not magical synergy.
Why Gary, I always thought proud fathers smoked cigars 
You mentioned something that hits the bullseye ......"exceeds expectations". We all know there are an almost infinite number of variables to contend with. Sometimes a couple of millimeters can provide that magical "locking in". A system is a system after all, electrically it can be viewed as one circuit and all interactions within the circuit applies. If this is the case, both good surprises and bad surprises should be common place. As we get to know a piece of equipment over time, that knowledge is still based on the context within which we've come to know it e.g. a familiar room, familiar ancillary equipment, familiar recordings. In any situation where there is a high level of unpredictability such as when something in the chain is replaced hence introducing another unknown or little known quantity, chance or even luck becomes a bigger factor. There is a saying in golf however that the better players get more breaks Same applies. You make your luck. Some bets just won't pay off like strapping a 45 SET to Genesis Ones. This is not to say Genesis Ones would not exceed expectations with anything in between your recommended amplifier specifications depending of course on among other things where they will be situated and the owner's intended use.
To make things worse, in an attempt to simplify things, many generalizations have sprouted up and have been accepted as truisms. One notable one is that larger rooms need more power. In most domestic situations this holds true. A smaller room does after all have higher levels of boundary support that raises a loudspeaker's in-room sensitivity, something lost as distance to boundaries increases. It must be noted however that while measurements would show an averaged frequency response, it will not make the distinction between the ratio of direct to reflected sound. Conversely, what if the room is just as large but built to be very quiet? Suddenly, one would find that one not need more power but might actually require less power and gain when it comes to bringing musical events above the noise floor into the range of distinguishable and identifiable audibility. Somewhere in between these two examples is where expectations can be met or even exceeded.
I believe it to be true electrically too. When working with ranges, there can always be a "sweet spot". The tough part is that "expectations" are a moving target.
You mentioned something that hits the bullseye ......"exceeds expectations". We all know there are an almost infinite number of variables to contend with. Sometimes a couple of millimeters can provide that magical "locking in". A system is a system after all, electrically it can be viewed as one circuit and all interactions within the circuit applies. If this is the case, both good surprises and bad surprises should be common place. As we get to know a piece of equipment over time, that knowledge is still based on the context within which we've come to know it e.g. a familiar room, familiar ancillary equipment, familiar recordings. In any situation where there is a high level of unpredictability such as when something in the chain is replaced hence introducing another unknown or little known quantity, chance or even luck becomes a bigger factor. There is a saying in golf however that the better players get more breaks
Same applies. You make your luck. Some bets just won't pay off like strapping a 45 SET to Genesis Ones. This is not to say Genesis Ones would not exceed expectations with anything in between your recommended amplifier specifications depending of course on among other things where they will be situated and the owner's intended use.To make things worse, in an attempt to simplify things, many generalizations have sprouted up and have been accepted as truisms. One notable one is that larger rooms need more power. In most domestic situations this holds true. A smaller room does after all have higher levels of boundary support that raises a loudspeaker's in-room sensitivity, something lost as distance to boundaries increases. It must be noted however that while measurements would show an averaged frequency response, it will not make the distinction between the ratio of direct to reflected sound. Conversely, what if the room is just as large but built to be very quiet? Suddenly, one would find that one not need more power but might actually require less power and gain when it comes to bringing musical events above the noise floor into the range of distinguishable and identifiable audibility. Somewhere in between these two examples is where expectations can be met or even exceeded.
I believe it to be true electrically too. When working with ranges, there can always be a "sweet spot". The tough part is that "expectations" are a moving target.
"Cable manufacturers know this (or they should) and they use this aspect to change the sound of systems for a difference.
"
Fixed it, surely.
We are talking about synergy, ie it is unknowable, unpredictable, just happens. The cable guys have NO idea where their cables will end up, so surely it is pot luck if it is a change for the better? After all, the magpie oops I mean audiophile cannot do anything but swap and 'see' (haha) so there is little help in prediction from that front (audio forums are good in creating the pre-suggestion tho)
Of course a huge leap in the argument to even suggest cables make an audible difference, but for the sake of this argument let's assume they do.
So we are back to the meaning of synergy as used by audiophiles (ie NOT the true undiluted english meaning) 'the alignment of cosmic forces due to the indulgence and whim of the audio gods'.
Hi
The term synergy although frequently used in the audiophile jargon doesn't seem to have a clear meaning. Be it as it may could anyone give me an example of such "synergy"... I hasten to repeat that Steve's system is not such an example the main part of his system the Lamm and the X-2 being gear of distinction by their whole selves ...
I am beginning to align with Terryj that the term seems to have the undertone of a random event that "locks" things in an happy state... Seems to me like playing lottery there ...considering the myriad of gear, thus possibilities... Fortunately simple technical compatibility is there to help ...
The term synergy although frequently used in the audiophile jargon doesn't seem to have a clear meaning. Be it as it may could anyone give me an example of such "synergy"... I hasten to repeat that Steve's system is not such an example the main part of his system the Lamm and the X-2 being gear of distinction by their whole selves ...
I am beginning to align with Terryj that the term seems to have the undertone of a random event that "locks" things in an happy state... Seems to me like playing lottery there ...considering the myriad of gear, thus possibilities... Fortunately simple technical compatibility is there to help ...
Sure Frantz. When the nice man who designed my system (his name is Martin) from the source up (I just feed it zeros and ones, Martin does the rest), he made sure the output of the DAC was compatible with the input of the preamp, whose output was compatible with the inputs of the four individual amplifiers (one for each tweeter/woofer) which were designed specifically for the loads presented by the drivers which were designed, along with all the aforementioned, to accomplish accurate, within their physical limitations, reproduction of the code back at the beginning of the chain. I gotcher "synergy" right here. Engineered synergy. Synergy by design. The other kind of synergy is audiophiles thrashing about in the dark. It's no wonder it so expensive and largely unsuccessful. I'm convinced that it only perseveres because for many, the search is the hobby and a guy like Martin is a killjoy.
Tim
Should we consider that jitter caused by a mismatched digital cable introduces a change in frequency response? I would expect the addition of some type of harmonic and non-harmonic distortions, but no frequency response change.
Do we have any reason to believe that jitter has any real audible effect on speaker system listening under normal conditions? Even the very thorough Amir has had to train himself to hear the effects of jitter, through reference headphones, at elevated listening levels. Is it possible to hear jitter through speakers? I suppose anything is possible. Is it a factor in "synergy?" I think we can look for synergy elsewhere.
Tim
Tim,
As you, many people believe that multi-amplification is the proper way to go - I am just thinking about the excellent active systems featured in the Tapeproject forum threads.
And you are now giving us something solid to debate. Can you elaborate in technical terms on what you mean by "designed specifically for the loads presented by the drivers "?
Not well, as I'm not an engineer. But to put it in simple terms I do understand, when the designer is choosing/designing the drivers, he knows exactly what he's dealing with - not just the nominal impedance of the speaker system to be driven by X amp (even that would be a step in the right direction), but the resistance characteristics of each individual speaker, and he can choose/design his amps accordingly, knowing that the amps are going to drive those individual speakers directly, not through a passive crossover network. It's not always done right, but an opportunity for performance and efficiency exists in such a design that simply isn't there when the speakers and amplifiers are designed separately, often by separate companies, and subjected to the compromise that is passive crossovers. There are some great passive speakers out there that, when coupled with sufficiently over-engineered amps, reproduce really well. But my experience/opinion says that what they do can be exceeded for a fraction money in active systems.
If you want the advantages in technical terms, there are plenty of links on the net, or we could call Sean Olive into the discussion. He has stated that he believes active is superior and wishes the high end would go that way.
Here's a couple of links for starters:
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_9_4/feature-article-active-speakers-12-2002.html
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/manufacture/0403/
Tim
Last edited:
Of course there is no magic. Even magicians have taken to calling themselves illusionists. What we are talking about is technical mismatches or matches. These technical deficiencies either compliment each other or exacerbate the problem
Curiously I had this discussion at RMAF in the Evolution Acoustics room.
IMO a system consisting of ,which I have posted on this site,Evolution Acoustics,Dartzeel and Playback Designs(At the show they added a Revox R2R playing a safety backup master tape) had simply gotten it right. I wanted to know how many people were buying the system as is. A surprising number were doing just that. It just occurred to me that so many of us buy the component of the month stick in our system and fail to get the desired results. There probably is some very basic technical reason why that happened. I heard two very prominent designers complain about poor results being achieved because "others think they know more about my product than I do."
Finally any one who is truly concerned about flat frequency response has to own an equalizer. IMO there are just too many variations in the playback chain to achieve it any other way.
Nothing really adds up to soemthing greater than the sum of its parts. There is just some variable for which you did not account.
Curiously I had this discussion at RMAF in the Evolution Acoustics room.
IMO a system consisting of ,which I have posted on this site,Evolution Acoustics,Dartzeel and Playback Designs(At the show they added a Revox R2R playing a safety backup master tape) had simply gotten it right. I wanted to know how many people were buying the system as is. A surprising number were doing just that. It just occurred to me that so many of us buy the component of the month stick in our system and fail to get the desired results. There probably is some very basic technical reason why that happened. I heard two very prominent designers complain about poor results being achieved because "others think they know more about my product than I do."
Finally any one who is truly concerned about flat frequency response has to own an equalizer. IMO there are just too many variations in the playback chain to achieve it any other way.
Nothing really adds up to soemthing greater than the sum of its parts. There is just some variable for which you did not account.
Now, you are making an engineering statement - the price quality of active speakers can be better than that of passive systems? I do not know, as the answer will depend on the target price and many other factors.
But the synergy that many active speakers builders promote is far beyond the electrical one - they will tune each amplifier in terms of subjective qualities for the chosen speaker units !
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
I think that anything is possible. The ear is so sensitive that theoretically if it were more sensitive, we would be driven mad by the noise we hear from the Brownian movement of the molecules of air next to our eardrums.
I did a couple of way-out demos on the system that I felt was so synergistic during RMAF. We could reliably hear the removal of the binding post nuts (I was using bananas at the speaker end of the cables), and we could reliably hear dither/no dither when listening to 16bit on a 24-bit DAC.
I will throw my hat in with Terryj - synergy is 'the alignment of cosmic forces due to the indulgence and whim of the audio gods'.
Anything else is good engineering and system matching.
Similar threads
- Sticky
