Live vs. Reproduced?

[fas42]

Your tweaks are the psychological trigger that allow your mind to believe what it must to tell your brain to perceive the unlikely to impossible. Mind/brain. The tweaks could be anything you would buy. None that you've described are substantial.

So you're saying I need to believe that a tweak has been applied to convince myself that the system is performing better; if an outside person were to somehow remove or cancel out the impact of the tweak without myself knowing I wouldn't perceive the sound not being as good anymore? If that's what you're saying, that's pretty bizarre, considering that at least half the things I try I very quickly reverse because they only make things worse ...

A Yugo will not become a Mini no matter how carefully you re-align the front end, and you and I will have to agree to disagree.

High quality components will normally sound much better than bottom of the barrel stuff, so, for example Roger's system is greatly superior to my Philips in raw form. Plus less will need to be done to get the better gear over the "palpability" hump. My HT system will never be as good as Roger's, will never sound exactly like Roger's, but there is a barrier, a hurdle to be surmounted, and if I throw enough expertise and willingness to experiment at it a good result will be got, it will sound real, and that's all I'm worried about ...

A frame of mind thing? That for now will have to be a "agree to disagree" too. If the system ain't right, it'll stay not right, day after day, week after week, until I get off my lazy bum and fix it ...

The only time the frame of mind thing comes in is if I have to endure someone else's not too brilliant setup, when I dose myself with whatever red liquid is available, till the numbing of the ear drums allows me some respite.

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

So you're saying I need to believe that a tweak has been applied to convince myself that the system is performing better

I can't say if it is absolutely necessary, but it sure seems to be helping.

if an outside person were to somehow remove or cancel out the impact of the tweak without myself knowing I wouldn't perceive the sound not being as good anymore?

As far as I can tell from your posts, the outside person is unnecessary. Your system seems to veer between on and off song on it's own. Your audible tweaks reverse themselves spontaneously, without explanation.

If that's what you're saying, that's pretty bizarre, considering that at least half the things I try I very quickly reverse because they only make things worse ...

Not at all. There is no reason to expect the illusion to only be positive. In fact, if it was always positive (and if your tweaks didn't spontaneously cancel themselves out) the whole thing would break down pretty quickly and you'd be left with nothing to do but enjoy the music, without your own psychologically essential participation and control.

My HT system will never be as good as Roger's

But when it is on song, your HT system, the speakers utterly disappear, the full reality of a symphony orchestra comes into your listening space...how could Roger's system possibly be any better, not just louder?

A frame of mind thing? That for now will have to be a "agree to disagree" too.

That's fine.

The only time the frame of mind thing comes in is if I have to endure someone else's not too brilliant setup, when I dose myself with whatever red liquid is available, till the numbing of the ear drums allows me some respite.

That's the thing about the frame of mind thing. If you know when it's the frame of mind thing, it isn't the frame of mind thing.

Tim

 

[mep]

Finally, Mark. Yes, the power supplies have been modded, and all the key components have not been changed, because in this case all the changes were additive: extra circuitry and components were brought in "assist" the existing circuitry, shall we say ...
Frank

Frank-You seem to have a problem telling the same story consistently. We now have 3 different versions of your power supply story:

Story 1:

Some very significant changes were made in key areas of the power supply functioning, these were key to getting a lot of the results, a lot of what I do is achieved through understanding derived from very precise modelling in Spice programs.

Story 2:

In other words, nothing has been done to change the intrinsic components of the machine to improve their capability, I have just given the parts within the best possible chance to perform at their best. And it does the trick ...

Story 3:

Finally, Mark. Yes, the power supplies have been modded, and all the key components have not been changed, because in this case all the changes were additive: extra circuitry and components were brought in "assist" the existing circuitry, shall we say ... Frank

Stories 1 and 3 are similar with story 3 being the most definitive in your un-definitive manner of not telling us exactly what we ask you. Story 1 says you used Spice in order to do some very precise modeling of your power supply which infers that you actually changed something. You can’t make “significant changes” in key areas of “power supply functioning” unless you changed the design of the power supply.

Story 2 says you have done nothing to change the intrinsic components of the machine to improve their capability which is diametrically opposed to Story 1. Also, Story 2 is typical of your normal posts where you say you have made something better, but you never provide any real details of exactly what it is you have done.

Story 3 makes a definitive statement that the power supplies have been modified and “extra circuitry and components” were brought in. Of course you don’t state what parts comprised that extra circuitry so those of us on this forum that understand electronics would know what you were up to.

Pinning you down on particulars is like trying to pin down jello. It just gushes out on the sides when you press down on it. It’s an exercise in frustration Frank. It reminds me of cotton candy. There is no real substance there. It’s just hot air and sugar and it blows up and looks like something when really, it’s not.

Which story is the real story Frank? If story 3 is the real story, please provide the details of exactly what "extra circuitry and components" you added and exactly where in the power supply. I'm getting tired.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

For anything regarding Frank's assertion of his HTIB recreating live music .. I refer everyone to terryj posts

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?3000-Live-vs.-Reproduced&p=46791&viewfull=1#post46791

and

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?3000-Live-vs.-Reproduced&p=46815&viewfull=1#post46815

Trolling can be pretty subtle at times ...If you wish to entertain him by all means continue ... I am off this line of discussion ...

 

[RogerD]

a) Ear/brain is close. Mind/brain is more like it. When I use my headphone system the level of "micro detail" (actually, just "detail" is sufficient) coming through is stunning, but I can still hear bad recordings. Back in the day, when I would spend time in studios listening back to tracks I'd just recorded, on high-end monitor systems in carefully designed rooms, I could sometimes hear myself shift the pick between my fingers (micro enough?) but I could still hear flaws in the recordings. That was actually the idea. Your tweaks are the psychological trigger that allow your mind to believe what it must to tell your brain to perceive the unlikely to impossible. Mind/brain. The tweaks could be anything you would buy. None that you've described are substantial.

b) A Yugo will not become a Mini no matter how carefully you re-align the front end, and you and I will have to agree to disagree.

(pssst...the illusion is illusive because it is an illusion. It depends on your frame mind, not the state of your electronics. You, my friend, are what is on or off song.)

Tim

I find this interesting in many ways. The headphones are a single driver or membrane,no complicated crossover like I have for my multi driver speakers. Now the recording studio no doubt is set up with a top notch ground scheme and Pro equipment is designed the same way,atleast my Ampex 350's are. So is it really a illusion or is it that the distortion level is so low that the signal is nothing but signal. As in the case of the headphones that design has to be operating at such a peak level just by the simplicity of design.

Psychoacoustics or mind/brain can be important,but I find it is very possible to achieve a headphone like experience with a multi driver pair with out my psychoacoustic circuit in place, with it the in place the sound just jumps up a magnitude in realism.

 

[mep]

Tim-you need to clean out your mailbox. I tried to send you a PM and it won't fly.

 

[DaveyF]

Tim, Frank really screwed up with the statement..."My HT system will never be as good as Roger's"
Your question to him is exactly what I was thinking
Frank, please do answer this....IF your system can create the exact sound of a 'live' symphony in a hall in ALL its glory...then how can it get any better????? What does Roger's system do better than yours
Remember Frank, you claimed that your system's sound reproduction and the real event's sound are one and the same:
Frank, maybe time to cut bait, eh!

I'm now with Frantz...off this line of discussion.
Back to my original thought/question

 

[mep]

Here are some Frankenisms:

While in this state I could rotate these tone controls from minimum to maximum, and to my amazement found it almost impossible to audibly pick that anything had happened!

That means your tone controls are broke too.

When my setup is working correctly this same phenomenon occurs: if I am 40 feet it will sound "big", and as I get closer it doesn't get louder, it just feels more intense, more enveloping, even when I am inches away.

To walk closer to a sound source and claim the sound doesn’t get louder defies all laws of physics.

A fully formed illusion would float the image of the orchestra completely separate of the speakers, they would appear to have no function in creating the sound; this illusion would be maintained even when moving around, and it would have a tremendous depth and width, and height to it.

These are all things a really good system can do except for the part about maintaining the illusion while walking around which is impossible. No Phillips HTIB will have tremendous depth, width, and height to the images it projects. A vivid imagination might lead one to think it does though.

All my drivers have been conventional dynamic units, and the key attribute they have is that for the treble content there is essentially an almost true point source. This means that it is very easy to locate one's ear directly in front; in other words treating the treble driver as if it was one side of a set of headphones. When the system is on song I can't pinpoint by ear that the sound is coming from that tweeter, in essence because there is no audible harshness coming from the driver's surface.

I’ve said it before, if you stick your ear up to any tweeter (and I don’t give a damn what speaker we are talking about here) and you can’t hear any sound coming from it, the tweeter is broken just like your tone controls must be.

Also agree about poor recordings, my philosophy is that there is NO bad recording, when one sounds not quite right to me it indicates that there is still a weakness causing enough audible distortion to be a problem.

I guess this is like Evelyn Woodhouse’s “No Bad Dogs” theory. Of course there are bad recordings. We all own some of them. Saying it’s your stereo’s fault doesn’t make it so.

 

[fas42]

Frank-You seem to have a problem telling the same story consistently. We now have 3 different versions of your power supply story:

Which story is the real story Frank? If story 3 is the real story, please provide the details of exactly what "extra circuitry and components" you added and exactly where in the power supply. I'm getting tired.

Mark, it's always good to have a good quality sparring partner, at the moment it's neck and neck between you and Tim. I've got the ratings up on the blackboard at the moment, and review them each evening, I even started to take a couple of bets on the winner ...

I have to say, very nice try to suck out the details. It would have been 100 points straightaway if that post had done the trick.

Again, most of what I have done just mimics what others have done in tweaking, except I am not satisfied with the situation until I have at least a rough idea of why something works. These second order effects are a killer, even experts in the field have a hard time always getting a handle on them.

Some of the latest stuff I would consider IP so I'm not going to spill the beans on that, the rest I'm happy to share. Power supply mods in earlier tweaking were conventional in nature and they also did the trick, so you don't have to use my latest ideas to get results. My first rounds in the Perreaux involved realising that the big fat lumps of capacitors used were a disaster, started by fiddling around them and ended up turfing them out completely, replaced by oodles of low ESR units. The second round was a DIY unit of own design, essentially a gainclone but using regulated supplies. At least 95% of the effort and effective board space went towards the power supply, the actual amplifier is just something that got thrown in at the last minute. The latest round is different again, but all these methods have achieved the results I'm after.

You keep missing the point though, in that you can't just blindly apply some tweak that someone has suggested and expect everything to fall into place for your system. Every system is different, every system has its own weaknesses, so all the things I have done for the Philips may be completely unnecessary for your setup; your components have their own set of peculiarities. If you carefully read Vince's and Roger's stories, they have done things completely differently from each other, and from myself. My techniques involve understanding, really coming to grips with what's likely to be troubling this particular configuration, and dealing with it appropriately.

At a last thought, when I mentioned intrinsic components I really had in mind at the time the actual processing componentry such as DAC, volume control, op amps, power amp section, rather than the power supply. Of course, if you want to pin me down in a court of law about my choice of words you may get somewhere ...

Frank

 

[fas42]

Tim, Frank really screwed up with the statement..."My HT system will never be as good as Roger's"
Your question to him is exactly what I was thinking
Frank, please do answer this....IF your system can create the exact sound of a 'live' symphony in a hall in ALL its glory...then how can it get any better????? What does Roger's system do better than yours

Hells, bells, DaveyF! Read what his posts say! He's got about 50 times the RMS power available compared to what the HT has. And I should turn around and say mine is as capable as his! C'mon now ...

And as another example, Tims' machine has at least 10dB headroom over mine; in a volume contest it would be a no-show; what we are talking about is how well all that headroom is used is used in reproducing the recording.

I have never claimed that "sound reproduction and the real event's sound are one and the same", just that the illusion of the event can be completely convincing -- those two are very different things. A normal hifi when the volume is turned up sounds just like that: a loud hifi system, it has a very different quality from the intensity and dynamics of a real event. What we are addressing is that quality difference; turning the hifi from just being loud to being intense and dynamic. The actual dB's measured in the room will barely vary, but the mind experience will be totally different ...

Finally, how my system can get better is to always be working at peak level, from the moment that I turn it on; to never be affected by outside interference; to be able to go louder in terms of dB's, I've guessed 105dB to be it at the moment; and best of all, to reduce the distortion apparent even more so the illusion can be even more "palpable" ...

Frank

 

[mep]

Mark, I have to say, very nice try to suck out the details. It would have been 100 points straightaway if that post had done the trick.
Frank

So once again you don't answer basic questions and all we get is more mumbo-jumbo. If I modified a piece of gear and claimed it made big improvements, I would share exactly what I had done. It's not like you are in the business of manufacturing audio gear and you have to keep your trade secrets to protect your livelihood. You are the cotton candy kid Frank. There is no there-there. I for one am convinced of it. You didn't modify the power supply, you did modify the power supply, you modified it but you have to keep it secret. It's all nonsense.

Amir had the right idea when he told you to start your own thread about driving out distortion demons so anyone who wanted to participate in your imagination could do so willingly. You quickly discovered it was a cold and lonely place and you had to abandon Frank's place so you could visit other threads and post your incredible experiences with a Phillips HTIB that no one believes except you.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Trolling can be pretty subtle at times ...If you wish to entertain him by all means continue ... I am off this line of discussion ...

It occurred to me long ago that Frank may be an elaborate hoax, Frantz, but at this point I'm entertaining myself. If he gets a kick out of it on the side, I'm fine with that. One of the best sources of amusement I'm getting from this is simply from noticing that Frank's claims, as unlikely, immeasurable, unsound, hazy, ellusive and over-the-top as they might be, aren't all that far afield from the kinds of "findings" that are logged on some audiophile boards every day, to a chorus of nodding heads. I don't think Frank's greatest sin is believing in magic. That's as common as toast in this hobby. I think his greatest sin is believing he's pulling the rabbit from such a cheap hat.

Tim

PS: Mark, my mailbox is empty.

 

[mep]

Tim-I've heard some audio tall tales in my day, but nothing that approaches what Frank has said. His tales are simply off the charts. If Frank was sitting on the fabled Liar’s Bench spinning his yarns, he would win hands down.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim-I've heard some audio tall tales in my day, but nothing that approaches what Frank has said. His tales are simply off the charts. If Frank was sitting on the fabled Liar’s Bench spinning his yarns, he would win hands down.

That's all a matter of point of view, Mark. Some of the most widely-accepted audiophile beliefs seem only a little less plausible than Frank's claims.

Tim

 

[mep]

Tim-You need to elaborate on what those widely accepted audiophile beliefs are that can come close to rivaling what Frank has said. If you take all of the power cord stories, speaker cable stories, cable elevator stories and multiply them by a factor of 1000, I don't think they would come close to the stories that Frank has told here.

 

[DaveyF]

Have to agree with Mark... Frank seemingly believes that his little Philips HT system..( modded in ways that aren't fully disclosed) is capable of sounding like a Marshall stack at full tilt and/or a 'live' symphony orchestra in a hall. He believes that the reproduction of these events is so accurate that his little system would fool most listeners into thinking they are listening to the real thing...at least that is the impression I have been getting from his initial posts until now!
He says 'the illusion of the event is completely convincing' Which if we give Frank the benefit of the doubt seems to true for him...OTOH, I very seriously doubt that this illusion would be sufficient for me and I doubt that it would do for any of the other a'philes here.

 

[fas42]

The tone of this thread at the moment is definitely veering too strongly into nastiness so it's probably time to close it down ...

Frank

 

[Steve Williams]

The tone of this thread at the moment is definitely veering too strongly into nastiness so it's probably time to close it down ...

Frank

I am inclined to agree

 

[Steve Williams]

Back by popular demand with everyone promising to maintain equanimity

 

[DaveyF]

Frank, I don't think it has to veer into nastiness...However,I do think that your perception of the reproduction of the 'live' event is different to mine and perhaps most if not all of the other posters. Nothing wrong in that, so long as we all realize that that is what is occurring here.
My original post was to see if we could comment on the areas that need to be improved in our systems in order to bring them closer to the 'live' event...