Synergy?

[microstrip]

Cool. So all the technical guys, of which I am not one, tell us what specs matter to achieve compatibility between components. Why does that Arc sound different from that Krell? Is it "synergy" or simply the performance of the two preamps?


Tim

Tim,

WBF members do not have free access to published AES papers, but we expect designers to reveal their electronics secrets for free. Audiophiles are terrible!

And no, modern ARC equipment does not have the SET characteristic distortions you love to point (just anticipating your next question )

 

[Bill Hart]

Isn't the punchline that:
*measurements, as we know them, don't adequately describe or predict what we hear from various components, let alone how they will sound in combination with each other;
*even if a given manufacturer strives to make a neutral, full bandwidth device, it will inevitably have some sonic signature; that signature may be complemented with matching equipment from the same manufacturer, or may be highlighted, for better or worse, with equipment from another manufacturer;
*that 'synergy' as we are using the term here, is an attempt to match the sonic characteristics of the different parts of a system to make it sound 'better' (whatever your definition of 'better' is- more lifelike, truer to the original recording, etc.) overall, as a system?
I am not attempting to justify 'fixing' a "bright"-sounding amp by adding a "soft" or "dull"- sounding preamp. But, I can almost guarantee that picking a system of "bests" based on specs or reviewer accolades, is not going to sound as 'good' (see 'better,'above) as a system that is assembled as a system. And if that is art, not science, I guess we are still living in the dark ages. But, I don't think it is imaginary, or voodoo. I can't get the full measure of a piece of equipment unless I listen to it in a controlled setting, knowing the variables. And if it is for my home system, I ultimately have to listen to it in that system.
If I understood Ethan's post that started this thread, I took it to mean that he was speaking of an ideal. That is, there 'should' be no difference in the sound of equipment designed to be neutral in the first place. But that has not been my experience.

 

[jkeny]

Good post, Whart, it reflects my views also! I didn't read Ethan's post in that manner but now that you have stated it as such it makes sense & fits his particular world-view of audio so I imagine that your correct in your analysis. In that case I no longer agree with him. Phew, I was a bit uneasy about my agreement & was getting worried for a moment - thanks for relieving my anxiety

 

[MylesBAstor]

Myles, this goes back to my example - I think the AC line isolation actually is dealing with issues that we don't yet have a good handle on namely grounding, common mode noise, etc. Now it's possible to build better handling of these issues into individual products but there is a lack of knowledge & understanding about these issues so there is a wide variation among devices. Good AC line isolation probably globally deals with some of these issues so they become less critical in interactions between components.

And I think manufacturers have upgraded filtering and power supplies since the days of the original Tice Power Block. By comparison, the Tice today is very colored. But like you say, things such CMNR, TMNR, switching signals, reflections of the 60hz sine wave, RFI and EMI, etc. have been known for ages. Nd of course, God help you if you're on a manufacturing grid or at the end of a power grid!

And interestingly, I find digital, above all, extremely susceptible to AC line issues.

 

[JackD201]

I think Synergy is used with some artistic license. Compatibility means two or more components can be used together. Synergy is meant to imply that the components are allowed to perform at or near their individual potentials. For example, impedance matching will give you compatibility, gain matching along with that will give you more than that in both subjective and objective terms.

The thing is, we listen to systems, room included, and not individual components. Objectively, we measure a system from the listening positions when tuning and troubleshooting. It is a system thing. Again, using some license, a synergized system is one where the system reaches or approaches the performance targets. This can include corrections made by a component on another to do so. EQ, DRC, Acoustic Treatment, Autoformers, AC filters, AC Isolation Transformers, name it. In the end it's what we hear and measure not on the bench but in actual use.

 

[jkeny]

And I think manufacturers have upgraded filtering and power supplies since the days of the original Tice Power Block. By comparison, the Tice today is very colored. But like you say, things such CMNR, TMNR, switching signals, reflections of the 60hz sine wave, RFI and EMI, etc. have been known for ages. Nd of course, God help you if you're on a manufacturing grid or at the end of a power grid!

And interestingly, I find digital, above all, extremely susceptible to AC line issues.

Sure there is much more awareness of these factors but if AC power conditioning is still providing benefits then we are not fully there yet, I guess.
Agree about digital PS being critical - it's one of the reasons I use isolated power in all my devices. But even still we have to be careful about controlling external noise from entering the system. For instance I recommend using laptops as source computer but there is a notable sonic difference if the laptop is grounded through the laptop charger.

I have also become recently aware of the possible differences in input stage topology of amplifiers with regard to CM noise susceptibility & I suspect that not many designers know this based on the almost ubiquitous use of the LTP input stage topology!

 

[microstrip]

Good post, Whart, it reflects my views also! I didn't read Ethan's post in that manner but now that you have stated it as such it makes sense & fits his particular world-view of audio so I imagine that your correct in your analysis. In that case I no longer agree with him. Phew, I was a bit uneasy about my agreement & was getting worried for a moment - thanks for relieving my anxiety

Jkeny,
Welcome back to the dark side of audio!

 

[jkeny]

Jkeny,
Welcome back to the dark side of audio!

Thanks, the light was glaring & unnatural over there

 

[Steve williams]

Thanks, the light was glaring & unnatural over there

yeh I noticed that you paid a visit to the dungeon

 

[rockitman]

I think Synergy is used with some artistic license. Compatibility means two or more components can be used together. Synergy is meant to imply that the components are allowed to perform at or near their individual potentials. For example, impedance matching will give you compatibility, gain matching along with that will give you more than that in both subjective and objective terms.

The thing is, we listen to systems, room included, and not individual components. Objectively, we measure a system from the listening positions when tuning and troubleshooting. It is a system thing. Again, using some license, a synergized system is one where the system reaches or approaches the performance targets. This can include corrections made by a component on another to do so. EQ, DRC, Acoustic Treatment, Autoformers, AC filters, AC Isolation Transformers, name it. In the end it's what we hear and measure not on the bench but in actual use.

That's the way I like to think about the word Jack. Let's not banish "synergy" as a usuable adjective to describe a well sorted system. Perhaps a scientific dissection of "Well-sorted" is in order ?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim,

WBF members do not have free access to published AES papers, but we expect designers to reveal their electronics secrets for free. Audiophiles are terrible!

And no, modern ARC equipment does not have the SET characteristic distortions you love to point (just anticipating your next question )

You're assuming an awful lot. I only used Arc and Krell because they were the examples used in the post I was responding to. I've never heard and Arc amp and haven't a clue what they sound like. And I hardly think the specs that make components compatible are trade secrets.

Tim

 

[jkeny]

That's the way I like to think about the word Jack. Let's not banish "synergy" as a usuable adjective to describe a well sorted system. Perhaps a scientific dissection of "Well-sorted" is in order ?

Yea, I can understand where you're coming from & Synergy is a word that will continue to have usefulness when we have a situation where we don't know the underlying factors as to why a device works great in some systems but bad in others. However, I would always prefer to strive for a better understanding of the interactions at play here, otherwise we could end up with a system that is restricted in it's compatibility with other elements & our future expansion or changing of our system is significantly curtailed.

Something that I also picked up when visiting the dungeon is that it could also leave us at the mercy of charlatans & snakeoil salesmen with "magic" claims for their devices. I took an blood oath when in the dungeon to protect all you people from such magic .

 

[Bruce B]

Well someone touched on this earlier. Synergy is not only the equipment, but the room and all it's ancillaries as well. It's all cumulative.

 

[jkeny]

Well someone touched on this earlier. Synergy is not only the equipment, but the room and all it's ancillaries as well. It's all cumulative.

Yes, Bruce, synergy operates at micro to macro level - I guess my focus has been in the middle, at the device level, rather than the micro component or macro room level.

 

[treitz3]

Well to have synergy, you first need compatibility. I've never had it without it.

Hello, Bruce. Wise statement IMO. Either have I.

The thing is, we listen to systems, room included, and not individual components. Objectively, we measure a system from the listening positions when tuning and troubleshooting. It is a system thing. Again, using some license, a synergized system is one where the system reaches or approaches the performance targets. This can include corrections made by a component on another to do so. EQ, DRC, Acoustic Treatment, Autoformers, AC filters, AC Isolation Transformers, name it. In the end it's what we hear and measure not on the bench but in actual use.

Hey, Jack. Great minds must think alike. Personally, I could not agree more. I would even go so far as to add in IC's into the equation. I have had cases before to where even close metallurgy, length and build quality have either made or broke the synergy I have had in a particular system. A good friend of mine's favorite saying is that "Everything affects everything". I can not say that he is incorrect, especially when it comes to the synergy of a particular system.

Isn't the punchline that:
*measurements, as we know them, don't adequately describe or predict what we hear from various components, let alone how they will sound in combination with each other;
*even if a given manufacturer strives to make a neutral, full bandwidth device, it will inevitably have some sonic signature; that signature may be complemented with matching equipment from the same manufacturer, or may be highlighted, for better or worse, with equipment from another manufacturer;
*that 'synergy' as we are using the term here, is an attempt to match the sonic characteristics of the different parts of a system to make it sound 'better' (whatever your definition of 'better' is- more lifelike, truer to the original recording, etc.) overall, as a system?
I am not attempting to justify 'fixing' a "bright"-sounding amp by adding a "soft" or "dull"- sounding preamp. But, I can almost guarantee that picking a system of "bests" based on specs or reviewer accolades, is not going to sound as 'good' (see 'better,'above) as a system that is assembled as a system. And if that is art, not science, I guess we are still living in the dark ages. But, I don't think it is imaginary, or voodoo. I can't get the full measure of a piece of equipment unless I listen to it in a controlled setting, knowing the variables. And if it is for my home system, I ultimately have to listen to it in that system.
If I understood Ethan's post that started this thread, I took it to mean that he was speaking of an ideal. That is, there 'should' be no difference in the sound of equipment designed to be neutral in the first place. But that has not been my experience.

Nice post, whart. I hope you don't mind me highlighting some of the key areas that touch on the aspects of synergy with a system and not just system matching.

God (and my wife) knows I don't have all the answers, Micro, but given the way some people talk about "synergy," I do seriously wonder if they understand the specifications and know that have reached compatibility before they head down the path, in search of something "better."

I hope these folks are the exceptions, not the rule, but given some of the responses in this thread, I know they exist. A significant chunk of this conversation reads more like drug-addled philosophy than a discussion of component-matching in an electronic system.

Well, the thread is about synergy and not system or component matching. Related but definitely not the same IMO. I have heard matched systems that sounded rather bland to bad while at the same time, I have heard systems that were somewhat mismatched that actually had synergy and sounded great. This is not a plug and play type thing. One can not just go out and get all components that match on paper and expect to achieve synergy as soon as it's all hooked up.

Now, the above is just my opinion(s). It offers no scientific proof of synergy but it does include my observations over the course of my audio journey. Personally, I don't even know how one *could* scientifically prove what synergy is within an audio system.

Tom

 

[NorthStar]

One thing I know for sure, and nobody is gong to change my wordings;
in audio there's good synergy and there's bad synergy as well.

And it has to do with properly marrying anything that is related to Sound.
... Like a real couple in love for example.

And that's that! :b

 

[Bruce B]

Bob, that's called bad mojo... or bad juju!!

 

[NorthStar]

-----Good one Bruce!

 

[Mike Lavigne]

my goal in building my room, choosing gear, and doing set-up was never synergy per se....it was having a reproduction system that get's out of the way of the music. synergy to me is more a method of reaching a goal, not the goal. who cares about synergy? we want performance.

the idea of the room design was to allow the full energy of the music to come thru without limits to the degree i could. then i purchased speakers that had lots of adjustments in the bass to allow for optimal integration. it turned out the room was not ideal, and eventually i needed to make a few adjustments to achieve the level of integration i wanted.

as far as electronics; the darTZeel gear does have the type of performance and sonic character (or lack thereof) that i like, and the 'zeel' interface does take the performance a step beyond. my digital source and tape repro also use the 'zeel' interface, and the phono sections are integral in the dart pre.....so all the interfaces are the same. the dart amp has a modest 100 watts but the speakers are an easy load.

isolation transformer, wiring, duplex outlets, power cables, racks, footers, all seeking that 'get out of the way' approach of reducing distortion.

my thinking was not synergy, it was putting together gear with as little intrusion on the musical message as possible. the most linear and least distortion.

i think my direction is not unusual. i would think many have approached things in a similar way.

synergy between parts comes with assembling something that allows the music to flow.....according to my personal expectations. the only measurements i paid attention to in the process besides speaker and amp matching was in-room FR waterfall plots prior to my room tweaks, and then using an RTA to make speaker adjustments.

i do think that there is a synergy between the Evolution Acoustics speakers, the darTZeel gear, the 'zeel' interface, and even the Playback Designs digital. they are complimentary products with a certain viewpoint in common. my room was built prior to any of those products being ever combined, or even built (excepting the dart amp). but the sonic compass these products represent (and the design approach of my room) were present in my prior gear too. they are not accidental choices.

 

[JackD201]

Yes, I mean, we all should have realistic and realizable performance objectives from the outset simply so we don't go wandering about willy nilly. In my view "synergy" or degrees thereof is achieved when those targets are met. That's where it gets dicey since we may have differing targets. Even Ethan has said that when it comes to room treatment, it's his customers' calls. If there's nothing wrong with dealing with corrections in the acoustic realm, I see no reason why it can't be done in the electrical realm hence my mention of things like DRC or anything else. Tone controls? By all means. Bruce said it right, in my view. It's all cumulative.