Is There Such A Thing As "SYNERGY" Between Components In An Audio Chain?

[silviajulieta]

1- "AHEE" doesn't teach us that. The science of human hearing system teaches us that. Your ear is most sensitive in that region. Getting that right *is* the most important. Here is the Fltecher-Munson graph:

Whatever level of distortion you strive for, it needs to be lower for the mid-range frequecies.


2- I have not heard a single person say that all music occurs in mid-frequencies. So let's not state the obvious and say you are correcting others. What people say is that they value the fidelity of mid-range. Per above, there is good science to back that.


3- Mid-range is mid-range. *It* doesn't depend on anything. The entire music spectrum has other frequencies but what your ear detects as mid-range, would be mid-range even if you chopped off everything else.


4- You are inverting the logic and expecting it to be true. Just because someone says they love good mid-range, doesn't mean they want to hear highs at 20% distortion. They are simply saying that their mid-range sounds better than other systems like it.


5- Again, you are misunderstanding the statement. Assume someone takes your system and improves its midrange performance. Are you going to say there is something wrong with it? Again, you keep inverting logic and expecting to be true. Just because they say they have good midrange, it doesn't mean they have bad highs and lows. I have heard Steve's system. Its midrange is wonderful. But it is also quite good in other areas.


6- Well, in case of Steve, he is using a sub for low-frequencies. So maybe that is the formula to get good performance across wider range of frequencies.


7- You are declaring something as proof. There is a higher bar for the latter . Check this scenario:

I take a DVD-Audio source and run it through a dedicated Mark Levinson Dac. Then I run it into two versions of Stax headphones: one transistor and one tube. The latter sounds better. Is it your contention that the above system was so fault that the tube managed to hide more of its faults? If so, I doubt it very much . I buy the sound is more colored way before I buy the theory that tubes by magic hide all sorts of distortions.

Dear Amirm: It is clear for me that your ignorance level is different from the ignorance level I have . Anyway these are my answers on your post questioning what I posted:


1- Last week-end Alonso was the winner in the Korea Formula One Grand Prix!

2- I can't ( just like you do it here. ) post what the other people not said.
Anyway there are at least two persons in the thread that posted that :

+++++ " The midrange is where the music is. The midrange is everything. " +++++, this was posted by Tim ( # 129 ) and in the #130 Steve posted that agree with.

3- I can't understand exactly what you mean but the same you could say on every frequency range. Now, a 500 hz tone depends on nothing as a 32 hz tone, so what? are you hearing just tones?, IMHO what we have at home when we are hearing the audio system tell us that all frequency ranges depend each to others for a good quality perfromance listening.
The mid-range ( as I posted ) is the easiest frequency range to achieve the one that put lower demand to the system, both frequency extremes put higher system demands that are really hard to full-fill and that affect not only to the whole performance but to the midrange that is between it.
It is true that normally our ears/brain is more sensitive through the midrange frequency range but this " can't say the midrange is the most important where the music belongs ". Some of us are trained on purpose to " make " that our ears/brain be sensitive at both extreme frequency ranges at the same level than in the midrange. No not any one can do it: you have to be trained on purpose to do it.

4 and 5 - IMHO I'm not inverting nothing. A home audio system quality performance IMHO must be on equilibrum where no frequency range put your attention other what are in the recording. Please re-read my posts on the whole subject, I don't want to be redundant here.

6- Yes, subwoofers help if you know what to do with, if not could make more harm. The subwoofer subject is complex one, in this link I explain my take in this delicate subject:
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1005-Multiple-Subwoofer-Placement/page2 , post # 16.


7- There are good and not so good audio item designs, who really can knows what happen with those Stax's set ups?. IMHO as an audio item ( like tubes designs. ) has higher distortions as more easy that that design hide other distortions that other designs ( SS) did not, this is not " by magic " but because the high limitations that " owns " tube technology.


Amirm, our each one level of ignorance in audio specific subjects is and was builded through our experiences, listening, reading, talking on audio, etc, etc. but some of us like to learn ( for different reasons ) on purpose some precise and specific audio subjects that our each one experiences ( it does not matters how wide/broader were it ) can't fill. To learn on a specific audio subject means an specific and in purpose training and only through this subject training you could understand in deep that specific audio subject.

Well, as some of you, I already have specific training in some audio subjects ( like the one about midrange. ) that permit not only understand in better way what is " happening " but to say that my level of ignorance is lower in that specific audio subject that the one of one person with out that in purpose training. For me the music/audio sound home reproduction is not only a great hobby but something else.

I know you are not on analog ( LPs reproduction ) but only as an example I already trained to detect quality performance minute deviations on cartridge/tonearm overhang and I can tell you that no one can do it but only the ones that were trained on this subject.

Right now I'm training on quality performance variations due to changes ( minute changes ) on cartridge/tonearm offset angle. This one as the " overhang " one extremely challenge subjects because we have to take in count that many differences in quality performance comes from VTF/VTA/SRA/AZ right cartridge set up and is extremely difficult to say which of those set up parameters was wrong and if we add overhang and offset angle well ..... only if you are trained.

To achieve these kind of audio subject targets/knowledge you have to have your own training process that you will " fine tune " through your experiences. This kind of training process made that you will be ( by your self ) the best " tool " you have on hand to improve your music home happiness.

One tool that help me a lot through each training process is that I already defined/choosed very precise LP normal music recordings tracks ( around 12. ) that I always and I mean always use it for any system subject audio training or any audio system ( and I mean not only mine. ) overall evaluation.


So I don't hope you agree with me, this is not the target of this post and what I already posted it is only what I know is " happening " and that sooner or latter will " happening " to you if you take that road.

Btw, I'm not alone in the midrange subject as you can read through other people posts there are other advocates that some way or the other agree with.

Yes, my ignorance level in several specific audio subjects is higer than yours and from other people: like digital source where I need to learn and " take " a training in the digital areas that could be of interest for me and yes there are many other subjects where I'm almost ignorant.

I always said that every single day is an audio learning one: especially through audio forums like this one with so many experienced people like you are.




Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[silviajulieta]

Dear JackD201: In a thread started by Phelonious Ponk I posted on the active/passive issue this that I still support about:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?895-Why-not-active/page4 , post # 37.


Both of you almost touch everything on the subject and I would like only to add something that IMHO is critical on both sides on speaker design:

it is not only important the speaker and electronic design by it self, it is not only important the layout design, it is not only important the parts selection, it is not only important the execution design but critical too the voicing of that passive speaker or active speaker, here IMHO it is not only that the voicing be wider/broader on what surround each design but here I think the designer could take advantage on a " listeners/audiophiles broad bureau " ( including him ) to make that " voicing " before the design comes out to the audio market.
IMHO this " voicing " could makes the " difference " as could do it the: design, selection "parts ", execution and control of that voicing process. .

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[amirm]

Dear Amirm: It is clear for me that your ignorance level is different from the ignorance level I have.
Raul.

Raul, I and I think some people have fair bit of language issue in discussing these topics with you. As an example, the word "ignorance" is an insult in English language. I assume you are not trying to insult me but that is how it reads.

Even putting the above aside, I still have a hard time understanding this one line. Are you saying that you know more than me or less? If you say more than me, that might be the case but I suspect you are just making a general assumption without checking out the facts. I am not a casual audiophile. Actually I don't know if I am an audiophile in the classic sense as many others here are . What I am is an Electrical Engineer who grow up designing analog electronics in 1970s and then went onto the digital path professionally. I have managed large audio/video groups at major companies whose job was to understand true nature of our hearing (and vision) systems to produce the best that possibly could. I have also spent years training myself to be an expert listener and became quite good at it. Alas, I am not sure how much of that skill I still have . But hopefully it is more than zero.

That said, there are a lot of things I have not done or have experience in. I am not speaker designer. I don't play LPs. etc. Hence the reason I am here to learn as much as contribute. For the good of the forum, I hope you are in the same boat as me: knowing some things but still open to learning. In that regard, I think your statements that your wisdom has risen above the rest of us, is not something that any of us will accept no matter how many times you say it . Demonstrate your knowledge and let that be an implicit conclusion on our part. After all, if you don't think you done a good enough job in doing that and have to resort to declaring it, surely you have lost the argument already .

 

[amirm]

2- I can't ( just like you do it here. ) post what the other people not said.
Anyway there are at least two persons in the thread that posted that :

+++++ " The midrange is where the music is. The midrange is everything. " +++++, this was posted by Tim ( # 129 ) and in the #130 Steve posted that agree with.

That is the language barrier again. They mean that "figuratively" not "literally." It is like me saying a car is lighting fast. That doesn't mean the car goes at the speed of light. But that it is fast relative to my expectations.

Here, you see people saying that mid-range fidelity is very important. They are not saying that there is no other frequencies in the music or that they like to listen to only mid-range. Reading that into it is the same as thinking the above car goes speed of light.

 

[silviajulieta]

Raul, I and I think some people have fair bit of language issue in discussing these topics with you. As an example, the word "ignorance" is an insult in English language. I assume you are not trying to insult me but that is how it reads.

Even putting the above aside, I still have a hard time understanding this one line. Are you saying that you know more than me or less? If you say more than me, that might be the case but I suspect you are just making a general assumption without checking out the facts. I am not a casual audiophile. Actually I don't know if I am an audiophile in the classic sense as many others here are . What I am is an Electrical Engineer who grow up designing analog electronics in 1970s and then went onto the digital path professionally. I have managed large audio/video groups at major companies whose job was to understand true nature of our hearing (and vision) systems to produce the best that possibly could. I have also spent years training myself to be an expert listener and became quite good at it. Alas, I am not sure how much of that skill I still have . But hopefully it is more than zero.

That said, there are a lot of things I have not done or have experience in. I am not speaker designer. I don't play LPs. etc. Hence the reason I am here to learn as much as contribute. For the good of the forum, I hope you are in the same boat as me: knowing some things but still open to learning. In that regard, I think your statements that your wisdom has risen above the rest of us, is not something that any of us will accept no matter how many times you say it . Demonstrate your knowledge and let that be an implicit conclusion on our part. After all, if you don't think you done a good enough job in doing that and have to resort to declaring it, surely you have lost the argument already .

Dear Amirm: Ignorance, an insult?, certainly that's not my attitude. For me ignorance is the other way around of know-how and certainly I'm not insulting you or any one and at the same time insulting my self with what I posted:

++++++ " Yes, my ignorance level in several specific audio subjects is higer than yours and from other people.... " ++++++

Ok, next time I will take the know how term instead ignorance. Btw, here in Mexico ignorant is someone that does not has know how on the subject but not an insult.

It is clear for me and I hope from every one in this kind of forums that many of us have different knowledge level. In some specific audio subjects my knowledge is higher than yours or than what some other persons have but in other audio subjects my knowledge is lower. Something wrong with that?

I'm here mainly to learn and I posted several times and I'm here too to share my audio experiences:

++++++ " I always said that every single day is an audio learning one: especially through audio forums like this one with so many experienced people like you are.
+++++ ", this is what I posted in the one you are given your answer and questioning. So you have the answer before you even have to ask about: I don't think any one in this forum feel he is in a different " boat ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[silviajulieta]

That is the language barrier again. They mean that "figuratively" not "literally." It is like me saying a car is lighting fast. That doesn't mean the car goes at the speed of light. But that it is fast relative to my expectations.

Here, you see people saying that mid-range fidelity is very important. They are not saying that there is no other frequencies in the music or that they like to listen to only mid-range. Reading that into it is the same as thinking the above car goes speed of light.

Dear Amirm: Now I see it.


Btw, almost always that any " decent " audio system performs not so good the problem ( mainly ) is because " faulty " quality performance at both frequency extremes ( by whatever trouble on that system/room. ) and when an audio system performs good ( mainly ) is because those frequency extremes are right on target. IMHO midrange is the " easy " part/role in this audio scenario/stage.

Anyway, I think that both of us already said on the subject what we had to say, don't you think?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[JackD201]

Hi Folks,

Regarding FR, there's a school of thought that our brain processes sound in a similar way we process color, which are differing frequencies as well strictly speaking. Just as there are complementary colors which enhance each other, it's a trick painters use to make let's say silver linings on clouds pop out,

So it is supposedly with audible frequencies. It could very well explain midband improvements when super tweeters and subwoofers are used. Having spoken with some audio designers in confidence, it is something taken into consideration when "voicing" their products.

I've not found hard studies on the subject because actually I never really looked for it. I will now however. Maybe somebody has made a complementary frequency chart like the one posted above for colors.

Could this be the basis for that elusive X factor? Finding the spots that push our buttons? Maybe, maybe not.


Jack

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I will admit not having read ALL the posts in this very interesting thread. THe last ones were about the importance of the midrange to which I already answered. The lasts posts especially that of tomelex hints at our hearing deficiencies in the extremes with respect to aging ... It would have been true save for the fact that such deficiencies manifest itself in everything we hear .. IOW if w listen to anything through the same filter... A system which try to correct for our deficiencies will sound , well, unnatural ..
I still believe the issue is that of balance ... great midrange without the rest in balance will not be perceived as good... I would grant the midrange contingent that our sensibility in the midrange, mandates that harmonic distortion in that region be kept to a minimum, whereas in the extremes it can be substantial and less perceived as objectionable ...

 

[JackD201]

I believe that your position would be applicable to the greater majority of music listeners as well Frantz, myself included. I don't know if it's the asian in me but seeking balance in all things is hard wired into my brain

 

[silviajulieta]

Hi Folks,

Regarding FR, there's a school of thought that our brain processes sound in a similar way we process color, which are differing frequencies as well strictly speaking. Just as there are complementary colors which enhance each other, it's a trick painters use to make let's say silver linings on clouds pop out,

So it is supposedly with audible frequencies. It could very well explain midband improvements when super tweeters and subwoofers are used. Having spoken with some audio designers in confidence, it is something taken into consideration when "voicing" their products.

I've not found hard studies on the subject because actually I never really looked for it. I will now however. Maybe somebody has made a complementary frequency chart like the one posted above for colors.

Could this be the basis for that elusive X factor? Finding the spots that push our buttons? Maybe, maybe not.


Jack

Dear Jack: I don't know if it is true but I remember that somewhere I read that when a person was hearing for years to home audio systems as he was loosing ears hearing frequency reesponse level his brain in someway or the other compensate/synthesize for a part of those frequencies that he can't really heard any more.

Maybe some of you could remember the FI ( USA ) magazine ( that disappear years ago ) where the Editor/owner ( I " lost " his name ) was " deaf " ( as a stone he said it. ) in one of his ears but even this he made reviews in the magazine and explained it how even that he was deaf on one ear he percieved the whole sound that permit him to made audio items reviews. Our brain possess several unknowed " functions " like this one.

Btw, Tomelex we have to take in count that we hear not only through our ears but through our whole body.


Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.

 

[silviajulieta]

+++++ " A system which try to correct for our deficiencies will sound , well, unnatural ..

Maybe yes, maybe no. If one is not afraid to use tone controls of whatever sort to make the music sound better to them, it just might sound better with more highs and lows and stuff. Sometimes, accuracy is not what we want, but emotion and power and dynamics. I could liken this to the energy of a certain part of your body in your youth verses older years. (well, if we can use color wheels, we can use other analogies...yikes!) Yes, balance, the razors edge in audio reproduction.

Tom

Dear Tomelex: My audio/music sound home reproduction experiences told me that we have more/higher good recordings that bad recordings or at least I own more good ones than bad ones.

In the good ones everything shows it in equilibrium and in the bad ones this equilibrium does not shows but I don't feel yet the necessity ( as you ) to use " tone controls " to meet that equilibrium each time I heard a bad recording. To use tone controls every time we heard a bad recording tell me that I have as second step to return/dial those tone controls to its original position and I want to hear more time music and don't take my time with the hardware in any way if I can do it.

Now, my experiences tell me too that as you lower your home audio system overall distortions as more listenable are all those bad recordings and as lower could be your necessity of " tone controls " each time.

Anyway, I respect your approach on the subject meanwhile I prefer to " work " trying to lower my system distortions to mantain or improve an accurate system equilibrium that permit enjoy " bad recordings " too.

Btw, some of those " bad recordings " seems to me that are not so bad per se, some of those " bad recordings " in reallity are at the very " edge/threshold " of a real " bad recording " status but when we add our system own distortions on playing our own system " help " to convert these at the edge " bad recordings " in true bad recordings.

That's why I posted that a main system target coul be try to lower distortions ( any kind ) in each audio link inside our system audio chain.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[microstrip]

THe last ones were about the importance of the midrange to which I already answered.

I can not find the exact statement anymore, but I remember that Peter Walker of Quad said something similar - if you get a proper midrange everything else comes much easier. As far as I remember his idea was that you should also balance the extremes - if you extend the treble, you must match it in the bass.

I owned ESL63 for twenty years - if it was not for the loudness limitations I would not need other speakers. As the great PW said : it is adequate for me and 95% of my customers, but not all of them.

 

[silviajulieta]

I can not find the exact statement anymore, but I remember that Peter Walker of Quad said something similar - if you get a proper midrange everything else comes much easier. As far as I remember his idea was that you should also balance the extremes - if you extend the treble, you must match it in the bass.

I owned ESL63 for twenty years - if it was not for the loudness limitations I would not need other speakers. As the great PW said : it is adequate for me and 95% of my customers, but not all of them.

Dear microstrip: I think that you need to re-read what Frantz, Tomelex and I posted about because certainly is not the same PW stated.

regards and enjoy the music,
raul.

 

[microstrip]

Dear microstrip: I think that you need to re-read what Frantz, Tomelex and I posted about because certainly is not the same PW stated.

regards and enjoy the music,
raul.

Raul,

Sorry, my mistake. I mixed the Tim's and Tom's of this thread. I was supporting Phelonious Ponk (Tim) view on midrange!
Thanks for pointing it out and enjoy the music,

 

[silviajulieta]

Dear Tomelex: Through my virtual system you could read my Phonolinepreamp measures that we did it. We make comparison passing a signal through this Phonolinepreamp against that same signal througha 25cm. wire. We made measures in my modified Levinson's. We made some measurements with a borrowed Audio Precision system 1 and other measurements with PC advanced especial measurement programs.

No, IMHO I don't build a system to my ears or a big " tone control " on purpose. I think I have a " universal " system accurate and with very low distortions.

I don't measure yet the last electrical supply direct system electronics connections but what I heard through my experienced ears only tell me that distoretions goes lower, I have no single doubt about but when time comes I will confirm with measurements.

Btw, someway or the other any home audio system is a big " tone control " with higher or lesser distortions and with higher or lesser accuracy.

Tom, my very first target is not decieve/foolish my self and I think I had and have success on this critical subject. I'm the more severe critic you can imagine on my system quality performance: I'm not married with any single audio item in my system and certainly I'm not married in anyway with my system, I have no compromise other than achieve EXCELLENCE level on music reproduction. If I need to re-think/change my today system to achieve that target then I for sure will do it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.

 

[Orb]

Hi Folks,

Regarding FR, there's a school of thought that our brain processes sound in a similar way we process color, which are differing frequencies as well strictly speaking. Just as there are complementary colors which enhance each other, it's a trick painters use to make let's say silver linings on clouds pop out,

So it is supposedly with audible frequencies. It could very well explain midband improvements when super tweeters and subwoofers are used. Having spoken with some audio designers in confidence, it is something taken into consideration when "voicing" their products.

I've not found hard studies on the subject because actually I never really looked for it. I will now however. Maybe somebody has made a complementary frequency chart like the one posted above for colors.

Could this be the basis for that elusive X factor? Finding the spots that push our buttons? Maybe, maybe not.


Jack

Hey Jack thats interesting,
I know of a study where they researched the processing of sound blind and sighted listeners to understand if blind people do have better hearing, and if so is the mechanism related to the brain or the ear.
What they identified was that the blind could use aspects of the visual cortex in the brain and it is this that improved their hearing, so improved hearing/listening can correlate with aspects relating to processing of vision.
Although Kal is probably the best one with knowledge and experience in explaining all this.

That said, actual music is linked to parts of the brain to do with linguistics.

Cheers
Orb

 

[silviajulieta]

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 ...

Dear Frantz: I think that for some of us attain synergy is a main system target. I don't think is a random process or something like a lotery and if it is true that there are a myriad of gear and posibilities about could be true too that if we " work " for system synergy we could be ( over time ) almost there, at random is like you say a lotery where maybe never could win the first prize.

Matching audio items with at least electrical inside parameters is a very good step to achieve synergy. This could be not easy when we talk of transducers like speakers or phono cartridges but even here matching component in a system help a lot to be on target.
With transducers could happen that we can have good matching but not good synergy.

So, IMHO audio system synergy is something that ( if we want it. ) we have to look for more than " wait " if at random we could achieve it. Synergy then IMHO is a process that needs some high knowledge level and where components match is a very important part of that synergy process. A complex subject I think.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[FrantzM]

Raul

Still I don't have a clear idea of what people mean by "Synergy" in the context of an audio system ... If it is compatibility why use another term? I still need an example of a "synegistic" system ...

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Raul

Still I don't have a clear idea of what people mean by "Synergy" in the context of an audio system ... If it is compatibility why use another term? I still need an example of a "synegistic" system ...

And if it is electronic compatibility, why not use the specific terms? I sometimes wonder if there is a significant subset of the audiophile community who really doesn't want these things to be clearly understood. If you gave them an outline, a clear, proven path for matching components within a system, would they reject it in favor of thrashing about through upgrades and changes until serendipity occurs? Is it simply that they enjoy the meandering journey so they reject the validity of GPS?

Tim

 

[silviajulieta]

Raul

Still I don't have a clear idea of what people mean by "Synergy" in the context of an audio system ... If it is compatibility why use another term? I still need an example of a "synegistic" system ...

Dear Frantz: I can't speak for others but I will try to explain through an example what means synergy for me:

there are some factors/parameters that we can take to made a cartridge/tonearm match, one of those parameters is the resonance frequency between the tonearm effective mass and the cartridge compliance that when you have a good cartridge/tonearm match that frequency been between 8 hz to 10 hz.

So, if you have a cartridge/tonearm combination that measure between that frequency range then you already achieve very good matching between cartridge and tonearm: could this very good matched items means you achieve synergy to achieve top quality performance?, certainly not.

To attain synergy between these to audio items you need that the complex relationship between those items made synergy.
What affect that you achieve that need it synergy or not?: tonearm build material, tonearm damping type design, cartridge body build material, etc, etc. It is when all those factors coincide that you can achieve synergy.

The main reason why I own so many tonearms is precisely to find out synergy between different cartridges/tonearms. Many of my cartridges match very well with 3-4 different tonearms but don't perform at the same quality performance level because the cartridge will shows at its best only when find out the right and precise tonearm where exist in between synergy.
So matching these audio items are not enough if you are looking for EXCELLENCE level you need to look for synergy between them.

Now, I would like to know what is synergy for you.


Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.