Quiet gear vs. dark backgrounds, and the "space between the notes"

[mep]

I've recorded analog and digital. I've digitized tape and vinyl. I've never missed anything. The noise floor -- electric, mechanical and room -- comes through to digital undiminished unless noise reduction is applied.

Tim

Tim-Could you please share with us what gear you used when you digitized tape and vinyl? What kind of tape deck were you using for playback? What type of tape was it and what was the playback speed? When you digitized vinyl, what turntable, arm, and cartridge were you using to play the vinyl that you digitized? Thanks.

Mark

 

[tony ky ma]

Do anyone hear the quiet difference of a "direct cut" vinyl in the open area between cuts and a regular vinyl one too ? I was supriced when I experienced, I almost thought my system was power off or not ? and I think that is most easy way to tast what call space between notes !
tony ma

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Do anyone hear the quiet difference of a "direct cut" vinyl in the open area between cuts and a regular vinyl one too ? I was supriced when I experienced, I almost thought my system was power off or not ? and I think that is most easy way to tast what call space between notes !
tony ma

i use an M&K Direct to Disk Lp of 'For Duke' as a system test record and reference. i have played it hundreds of times, i have 5 or 6 different pressings of it. i typically listen to track 1 'Take the A Train' and then into the second cut. between cuts there are seconds of quiet time and you can also hear pages turn. the perception is that you are in a room which is defined by the ambient clues of a foundation of energy. which is different than between tracks where there is no signal.

actually a better way to veiw this is when you hear the second or two on a lead-in groove before the music starts but after the recording starts the room will pressurize from ambient content.

 

[mep]

Lovely recording Mike and it sounds startling real as I have mentioned before in other threads.

 

[fas42]

between cuts there are seconds of quiet time and you can also hear pages turn. the perception is that you are in a room which is defined by the ambient clues of a foundation of energy. which is different than between tracks where there is no signal.

So is the sound of the ambience of the recording environment called the "black" or "dark" background, or is it the intertrack null signal? I am a bit confused with the use of terminology here. I certainly know the ambience, for me, creates a sense of space, which for want of a better word feels "black"; the null signal time feels exactly like nothing, as if I had instantaneously turned off the system ...

Frank

 

[microstrip]

For those who care about it, the so called "black background" can be often heard in life recitals in good auditoriums, even with with the audience unavoidable small noises. We only try to reproduce it our listening rooms.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

So is the sound of the ambience of the recording environment called the "black" or "dark" background, or is it the intertrack null signal? I am a bit confused with the use of terminology here. I certainly know the ambience, for me, creates a sense of space, which for want of a better word feels "black"; the null signal time feels exactly like nothing, as if I had instantaneously turned off the system ...

Frank

my perspective on these issues is that 'blackness' relates to the degree of the difference between musical elements and the ease at which you can identify and follow things. it's not that it's quieter between notes because that would indicate the absense of something.

like looking at a forrest at dawn; as the sun comes up it goes from an outline of trees to shapes and shadows, then to clear branches and limbs, then to individual leaves, then to seeing beyond those leaves to the trees behind the other trees....the colors also are slowly revealed. and yet once the sun is up the scene is natural; not spotlighted or stark like a floodlight.

in this sense the light of dawn relates to the 'blackness' in the decrease in the covering background noise.

is that decay easily followed all the way to it's natural end? or is it somewhat buried in the stew of congestion?

when i added my Equi=tech there was an obvious lowering of the noise floor and increase in the significance of every musical element.

lowering a noise floor to increase blackness is not the only way to improve detail. reasonance control also does the same thing by focusing the music for added definition and reduction in distortion. so blackness is not just a noise issue.

darkness to me refers to a tonal characteristic indicating not neutral. blackness is simply a lowered noise floor. the big issue for me is that when you lower the noise floor, does the software and source hardware have the stuff to reveal all there is to hear? which is why i've been a format junkie and what has led me to vinyl and tape. there is just more there once the reproduction chain gets out of the way.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim-Could you please share with us what gear you used when you digitized tape and vinyl? What kind of tape deck were you using for playback? What type of tape was it and what was the playback speed? When you digitized vinyl, what turntable, arm, and cartridge were you using to play the vinyl that you digitized? Thanks.

Mark

A friend did it for me at his studio, Mark -- a handful of out-of-print albums and some 15 ips tapes of my own stuff. The table wasn't terribly audiophile, but knowing Jay, if was very well set-up and maintained. A vintage Technics. The deck was a Studer. I'm not at all sure what kind of ADC he was using. But I honestly didn't notice anything missing. We compared them and marveled at how the digital sounded exactly as if we were still playing the vinyl, surface noise and all.

Tim

 

[vinylphilemag]

the big issue for me is that when you lower the noise floor, does the software and source hardware have the stuff to reveal all there is to hear? which is why i've been a format junkie and what has led me to vinyl and tape. there is just more there once the reproduction chain gets out of the way.

I love the way you worded that, Mike, especially that last sentence!

 

[mep]

Thanks Tim.

 

[fas42]

blackness is simply a lowered noise floor.

So this is all pointing to the quiet bits where the mics are picking up the acoustics, the ambient, whatever you want to call it -- not where the engineer has slide the faders to zero, and all you are theoretically hearing is tape hiss, vinyl rumble and pops,etc.

As Tim indicates, CD doesn't have trouble doing this, easily replicating the sound of the cartridge dragging along the groove. The big trick, of course , is to to get it to happen with "musicality" retained -- oops, excuse me, gotta get out of here, the rocks are coming down hard ...

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Any time. I may be the only owner of Illinois Speed Press CDs!

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Ooops. Wrong again. I just Googled it and there they are, remastered, even. How about Mason Proffit? Nope. Is there anything from the 70s that hasn't been digitally mastered?

Tim

 

[tony ky ma]

Guys do you find any noise level different from speakers between the cart's needle in the air and on the no signal area of a vinyl ? I found it is getting quiet after on play but without signal.
tony ma

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

So this is all pointing to the quiet bits where the mics are picking up the acoustics, the ambient, whatever you want to call it -- not where the engineer has slide the faders to zero, and all you are theoretically hearing is tape hiss, vinyl rumble and pops,etc.

As Tim indicates, CD doesn't have trouble doing this, easily replicating the sound of the cartridge dragging along the groove. The big trick, of course , is to to get it to happen with "musicality" retained -- oops, excuse me, gotta get out of here, the rocks are coming down hard ...

Frank

I won't drop rocks on you, Frank. Honest. Something occurred to me the other day that made me wonder if there isn't something to all this hearing of stuff that shouldn't be there and/or removal of stuff that shouldn't be removed. Someone asked, and I'm paraphrasing - if the highest possible fidelity to the input signal is the ideal, shouldn't speakers sound their best in an anechoic chamber? Good question. In theory, they should. In practice, they don't. But is it that room ambience is adding something that enhances realism, or is the anechoic chamber subtracting something from the signal?

I'd love to hear from someone who has measured speakers from a normal listening position in an anechoic chamber, but I suspect the answer is that the chamber is subtracting something. Why do I think that? It's simple: Headphones don't have that dead sound you get in an anechoic chamber.

So I suppose if an anechoic chamber can suck something out of the music, it's possible - not likely, but remotely possible - that a digital medium could somehow do the same thing. I don't hear it, but that's not evidence either.

Tim

 

[Mike Lavigne]

So this is all pointing to the quiet bits where the mics are picking up the acoustics, the ambient, whatever you want to call it -- not where the engineer has slide the faders to zero, and all you are theoretically hearing is tape hiss, vinyl rumble and pops,etc.

As Tim indicates, CD doesn't have trouble doing this, easily replicating the sound of the cartridge dragging along the groove. The big trick, of course , is to to get it to happen with "musicality" retained -- oops, excuse me, gotta get out of here, the rocks are coming down hard ...

Frank

i have to challenge the idea that we use Tim's representation as evidence that CD doesn't have trouble doing this replicating of the cartridge in the groove. i respect that he has an opinion, but i'm skeptical of the basis for that opinion. and it runs at 180 degrees contrary to my expereince. redbook, or in my experience, any PCM, does not (and likely cannot) replicate the detail retrieval of the vinyl media at the upper levels of vinyl's performance.

A friend did it for me at his studio, Mark -- a handful of out-of-print albums and some 15 ips tapes of my own stuff. The table wasn't terribly audiophile, but knowing Jay, if was very well set-up and maintained. A vintage Technics. The deck was a Studer. I'm not at all sure what kind of ADC he was using. But I honestly didn't notice anything missing. We compared them and marveled at how the digital sounded exactly as if we were still playing the vinyl, surface noise and all.

Tim

what was the tt? cartridge? specific Lps? source of the 15ips tapes? specific RTR deck?

i have no problem with Tim and respect that he wrote what he believes; but when he represents what vinyl is or is not capable of doing, and then we proceed to use that perspective as the basis to make points, i feel compelled to challenge it. i would not have written this post if Tim's opinion was not used as 'evidence' by Frank.

when i wrote about the recording session for the DTD Lp with the 3 pro audio guys in the 'demag'ing' thread, it was evident to 3 pro audio guys, Winston Ma, and myself, that 2 different hirez recording chains could not replicate properly the signal from my Rockport tt......over 12 hours of testing. my opinion about what PCM can or cannot do in terms of recording an Lp is pretty solid. and that was 176/24 and 352/32, not redbook as Tim is referencing.

and i have literally hundreds (maybe thousands) of examples of how a CD and Lp vary in replicating a master tape.

 

[amirm]

But is it that room ambience is adding something that enhances realism, or is the anechoic chamber subtracting something from the signal?

You are definitely right. It is unclear if we all like very flat response instead of boost in certain low frequencies which the room brings. In addition, whoever mixed the music also mixed it in a room and hence, had some amount of room gain. Take that away and we likely hear a mix with less bass in it than it would be there normally.

The other factor is the amount of amplification it takes to bring real volume when a speaker is in an anechoic chamber. Likely many systems lack such power and hence either sound too weak in the bass or get distorted.

Finally, I think many speaker companies now take into account that speaker will go in a real room, perhaps in the corners and optimize accordingly. While a few like Revel/Genelec, etc give you dials in the back to remove some of that built-in gain, from a marketing point of view building speakers that don't sound good in untreated rooms (95% of the installations), would be a bad thing.

I'd love to hear from someone who has measured speakers from a normal listening position in an anechoic chamber, but I suspect the answer is that the chamber is subtracting something. Why do I think that? It's simple: Headphones don't have that dead sound you get in an anechoic chamber.

Well, it may be a surprise but headphones far bigger of a response curve than speakers! If anyone knows the art of messing with the curve is the headphone companies. For the same reason as above, they know that if they don't, the headphone is liable to sound too flat. You can see the in-ear response of many headphones here: http://www.headphone.com/learning-center/build-a-graph.php?graphID[0]=2321&graphID[1]=&graphID[2]=&graphID[3]=&graphType=0&buttonSelection=Compare+Headphones

And an example for Sennheiser HD800 which retails for $1,500:

Then again, you may not want to go there as it is depressing that no headphone is close to having a flat response.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

there is a reason that headphones do not have a flat FR curve.

reprinted from;

http://north-america.beyerdynamic.com/headphones-headsets/faqs.html

What is diffuse-field equalisation?
Have you ever wondered why a frequency response curve is almost never included with headphones? I can let you in on the secret: they look terrible! Such an erratic frequency response graph would hardly encourage customers to make a purchase. What the customer wants in the end is something that is linear. Uncoloured. Solid.
But why do these frequency response curves look so horrible? And why do you not clearly hear these glaring leaps and drop-offs?

How we hear
From childhood on, humans are accustomed to perceiving acoustic events. We grow up with a variety of sound sources and get used to them. The baby rattle, the clatter of dishes from the kitchen, pedestrians on the street, music from loudspeakers, etc. – all of these sound sources have something in common: they are located relatively far from the ear.
Before the sound from these sources reaches our eardrum, it is coloured by the shape of our head and our ear. Depending on the angle, many frequencies are accentuated and others are attenuated. With time, we learn these frequency patterns and are able to do things such as recognise the direction in which the sound source is located. Therefore, we do not hear sound as it was produced at the source, but instead in coloured form.

Loudspeakers and headphones
When we listen to music over loudspeakers with a linear frequency response curve, we are actually hearing a spectrum that is influenced by the distinctive shape of our head. We perceive this as linear.
When listening with headphones, the headphones do not even try to generate any effects on the outer ear, since the sound source is so close to the ear. What comes out of the headphones arrives at the eardrum in relatively uncoloured form. In order for the headphones to still sound natural, the sound must be coloured so that it is as similar as possible to the colourations caused by the shape of the head and ear. In other words, the headphones must have the frequency response set so that it sounds like the sound is coming from a distant source.

Diffuse-field equalisation
In order to adjust headphones to our listening habits, we must first use technical means to measure the colourations caused by our head. For example, an artificial head with microphones in the ears is used. When this artificial head is exposed to sound, you can use the microphones to measure how the sound would be perceived by us instead of the artificial head.
So that the headphones do not have a sound that always seems to come from one direction, but instead can reproduce all sound directions equally, the artificial head must be exposed to sound from many directions and the result averaged. This does not perfectly reproduce any direction perfectly, but no direction is completely suppressed.
At beyerdynamic, there is an echo chamber for this purpose. It is a small, five-sided room with acoustic sails on the ceiling that looks quite bare and empty. The fascinating thing about it is that, although it is the size of child’s room, it sounds like a cathedral! An octahedron loudspeaker that radiates sound in eight directions is in one corner. If you are far enough away from the loudspeaker, the strong echo causes you to no longer be in the direct field, but instead in the diffuse field of the loudspeaker, i.e. the area in which the sound reflected off the walls is louder than the sound that is coming directly from the loudspeaker.
If artificial head measurements are carried out in this chamber, many sound directions overlap due to the echo, allowing us to obtain the required averaging. This averaging (the measurement in the diffuse field) gives diffuse field equalisation its name.
In order to equalise the headphones, they are placed on the artificial head and the frequency response is adjusted so that the measured frequency behaviour corresponds to that of the diffuse field.

Discussion
Since the mechanical and electronic options for changing the frequency response of headphones are limited, the equalisation cannot be carried out perfectly. Different headphones are also adjusted to various tastes. It is by no means the case that all diffuse-field equalised headphones sound the same. In addition, the frequency patterns for directional hearing depend on the shape of the head and ears. For this reason, they are a little different for everyone. Hence, measuring with an artificial head is a pretty arbitrary choice.
Diffuse-field equalisation is therefore an important part of improving localisation with headphones and avoiding “in-head localisation”, but it is not guaranteed to work and is no replacement for extensive test listening.

 

[vinylphilemag]

there is a reason that headphones do not have a flat FR curve.

reprinted from;

http://north-america.beyerdynamic.com/headphones-headsets/faqs.html

As Spock would say, fascinating!

 

[amirm]

Headphone.com also has a good write up and their testing methodology which includes using a human head and measuring from within (taken from a German company who I think built it for optimizing car audio).