The big sound

[fas42]

G'day, hj, welcome aboard!

most of the time the amps distort first ,not the speaker.

Yes, that has been my experience all the way through

on absolute terms analogue is more revealing / life like , at least i think, but you wont get those results from budget components .

I agree that it is easier to get non-fatiguing sound from analogue, whether it be vinyl or tape, but if you put enough effort and/or money into it all media can be fully satisfying and lifelike.

Cheers,
Frank

 

[fas42]

I don't know what you mean when you say the music doesn't change when you turn it down.

In general terms I am talking about the fact that for many systems there is an optimum volume for listening because the nature of the distortion varies per the acoustic output. The frequency-specific hearing thresholds you talk of I fully understand, and the ear/brain compensates beautifully for their behaviour

If you were listening up close to a live, fully acoustic band and then started to walk backwards away from the musicians, the volume would steadily drop, but your perception of the musical event would not alter; there wouldn't be a point where you would say to yourself, "This doesn't sound real, this is boring and bland, wallpaper music". But many systems seem to have this characteristic to some degree. In that sense I am saying the audio system should not change in character as the volume is decreased! And, of course the opposite is usually more obvious in that the amp begins to distort as you up the volume

the overwhelming bulk of the distortion happens where the system is challenged to convert acoustical energy into electrical energy and back again.

Yes, there may be considerable distortion but it is not obnoxious distortion! That is why I talk of "nice" and "nasty" distortion, and where the acoustics research people have a long way to go in investigating what is going on. They slap a nice, simple level of distortion as a number on something, and that is supposed to tell you whether a component is reasonable or not. It's complete nonsense, like issuing a number as a level of merit for cars. A Porsche is a 9.5, Honda is a 7, a Lada is a 4. What use is that in telling one about all the subtleties of the vehicles' characteristics?

Another thought experiment: a recording of water pleasantly hissing as it emerges from some opening, and another of the most disturbing and nauseating sound you can think of, say a fork drawn across a saucepan slowly. Both sounds have the same intensity by measurement. You mix these sounds at a low level with the recording of an opera singer, on 2 separate tracks. Both tracks have the "same" distortion by measurement, and now play them back. Would you suggest that an audience would respond equally to these two tracks, one with hissing water, and the other with scraping fork, that have equal distortion by measurement?

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

They slap a nice, simple level of distortion as a number on something, and that is supposed to tell you whether a component is reasonable or not. It's complete nonsense, like issuing a number as a level of merit for cars. A Porsche is a 9.5, Honda is a 7, a Lada is a 4.

No, it's not like that at all, it's like measuring the steering neutrality of the cars in question and applying a scale to them relative to that neutrality. These are, as they relate to audio, exactly the opposite thing - one is measuring audio and applying standardized metrics, specifications, to various parameters. The other is coming to a purely subjective evaluation and applying an arbitrary number that is personal and, therefore meaningless to anyone other than the individual who did the rating. It's an old audiophile argument, but it's not this one.

Another thought experiment: a recording of water pleasantly hissing as it emerges from some opening, and another of the most disturbing and nauseating sound you can think of, say a fork drawn across a saucepan slowly. Both sounds have the same intensity by measurement. You mix these sounds at a low level with the recording of an opera singer, on 2 separate tracks. Both tracks have the "same" distortion by measurement, and now play them back. Would you suggest that an audience would respond equally to these two tracks, one with hissing water, and the other with scraping fork, that have equal distortion by measurement?

Yes if I recorded a bubbling brook and put it in the background behind my music, it would be less disturbing than if I recorded fingernails on a chalkboard and did the same thing. But the two tracks would not have the same "distortion" by measurement, because you're not talking about a distortion, you're talking adding noise, raising the signal to noise ratio (a specific, verifiable, repeatable metric). Of course the nature of the noise is important. And so would be the nature of the distortion if you had addressed it. What's your point? Were you trying to get to this? --

Yes, there may be considerable distortion but it is not obnoxious distortion! That is why I talk of "nice" and "nasty" distortion

Have you spoken of "nice" and "nasty" distortion? I don't recall that, Frank, but if you have, in the context of the positions you've taken here you don't get which is which. The "small distortions" you're chasing through tweaking switches and wire and caps are barely audible, while poor driver control, puts more slop in the bottom and sizzle in the top than any properly-functioning cap in clock radio has a chance to; your small distortions are largely irrelevant while a poor mic choice for the job can make a cello sound like a bowed ukelele. I'm sorry to question your credibility so bluntly, Frank, but you've come here telling us you've discovered the trick that accomplishes the one thing that is the primary audio objective -- transparency, disappearing speakers -- and another that we all know is impossible -- perfect imaging from any position in the room -- and then you've made it clear that you haven't even addressed the fundamentals. I really have no choice but to question your credibility.

Tim

 

[FrantzM]

Frank, I don't know what you mean when you say the music doesn't change when you turn it down. But if you mean the only thing that would be meaningful - that as you turn down the music, the balance of the frequency response and, therefore, our ability to get the full impact of the art doesn't change, only the volume does - then I know, once again, that you're hearing what you want to hear, not what is there. How? The frequency-specific hearing thresholds of humans changes dramatically as volume decreases. That is a fact long ago established and often verified, that no amount of tweakng can alter. The same goes for the fact we've already talked about -- that in any competent, modern system, the overwhelming bulk of the distortion happens where the system is challenged to convert acoustical energy into electrical energy and back again. At the transducers. At the microphone, the phono cartridge, the speaker. And none of your tweaking has any impact there either. I know that you can't possibly be getting the transformative results you think you're getting because you're not even working on the right stuff. You're trying to tune a piano by polishing its feet, but you have yourself so utterly convinced of the efficacy of your methods that you hear perfect pitch from strings that have been left untouched.

I am awed by the power of the mind!

Tim

Was going to post along these lines .. Fletcher-Munson curves are firm and proven studies ... I wasn't aware they were urban myths ...

 

[mep]

All-I think by now that those of us who have read a few of Frank’s posts have come to the conclusion that the laws of physics don’t exist in Frank’s mind. The things that Frank has said are so outlandish that people can’t help themselves and feel compelled to respond (me included). It’s like the proverbial train wreck that you’re not supposed to watch and yet you do. Hence forth, I am not going to respond to any more posts that Frank writes and I would ask others to consider doing the same. It makes no sense to continually argue with those who make no sense.

 

[DonH50]

This is getting ridiculous. Any number of measurements over many years (decades) and thousands of speaker systems show clearly that the largest nonlinearity in any system, aside from us, is the speakers. Even at modest to moderate volumes. Yes, there are plenty of studies showing the large amount of headroom required in the signal chain to reproduce peaks, but by and large, day in and day out, the speakers set (dominate) the overall system's distortion. Underpowered amps can clip, amps with poor output imedance can fail to control the speaker, low SNR can add hiss and noise, but IMO above a fairly low level of amplifier performance the speaker sets the distortion.

Even the headroom argument breaks down with relatively modest power and modestly efficient speakers; in the real world, something often foreign to the audiophile world (yes, I have and shall live in both! ), those peaks fly by quickly and clipping is usually not noticed. And the power is usually fairly low -- how many tweeters will handle 500 W for any amount of time before departing for that great tweeter spot in the sky? (This being a forum, the listing will now begin.)

That is not to say a great amp can't help a system, but I would bet my old Maggies and cheap Emotiva amps will win a lot of distortion tests against significantly higher-priced competition when measured at the speaker's output. Again, before the roast begins, I am not claiming they are "best" nor that there aren't a myriad (or should that be plethora?) of other factors at play. Nor am I talking about psychoacoustics, just measured signal distortion with a mic in front of the speaker in near-field or an anechoic chamber.

All IMO, FWIWFM, YMMV, my 0.000001 cents, etc. - Don

p.s. No, I don't have a bunch of references to cite. Call me lazy, join the AES, or look for speaker reviews that include distortion measurements (few) over the years.

 

[mep]

Don-I'm in complete agreement with you. It's hard to argue against facts.

 

[muralman1]

Don H50 I understand what you are saying, but one should never get over impressed by measurements. Let your ears tell you what is good. I have heard lots of systems that can go loud without any noticeable clipping. In my own home, I have heard amps strain, and distort, at high dynamics. Boom boxes are notorious clippers. However, I must say, the best systems can go loud with total grace. It is all in the power reserves of the amps, and sturdiness of the speaker drivers.

 

[MylesBAstor]

You know how we like to post our order of precedence in what causes the most effect in the audio chain in the pursuit of excellence (ie with reasonable good gear).

For example:

room
speaker
signal source
amplification

Well, after Franks intial postings, it became evident to me that we all have expectations and ear/brain interfaces, so I added to my list, in order of precedence,

Listener expectations, for want of a better term as of now, thus:

Listener expectations
room
speaker
source
amplification

Frank and Vince can fully imerse themselves in their illusions, with two speakers, with plain old stereo, somehow. I call this listener expectation but maybe I need to work on that term to be more universally reveling of our ear/brain interface.

Stereo is a weak illusion by any standard, it is easily helped with all sorts of things, not the least of which is a center speaker to put some meat on the illusions bones.

Some of Franks comments do catch me by suprise, lastly , the one about if you are at a live event, up close, and as you leave it, although fletcher munson is in effect, it still does not sound less live. Interesting point. But, you know you are at a live event to start with. There is no illusion.

Tom

And multi-channel is best used for gee whiz bang HT systems. It is no better and in many ways, much worse than stereo at producing an illusion of the real event. To me it sounds like lots of cartoon ghosts flying around a room. It doesn't sound like any live music I've ever heard. OTOH, I can produce in a reasonable size room with master tapes a pretty darn convincing illusion of the original recording.

 

[mep]

Tom-I think we need to differentiate between illusion and delusion. I think that most of us who love two channel audio have no problem with the illusion it creates. And by that I mean the wall of sound two channel stereo generates. There is only a hole in the middle if you move the two speakers too far apart. So the image that a properly set up two channel stereo easily gives us doesn’t require any conscious effort on my part in order to “see” where the people and instruments are located on the soundstage. I hope that most of us can agree on that

I realize that you are particularly sensitive to two channel audio’s perceived shortcomings and you wish for something else to give you a better illusion like your beloved binaural. As we have previously discussed, for better or worse, stereo recording is the benchmark standard. I don’t know if multi-channel recording will ever become widely adopted by music lovers and I certainly have my doubts that it will. Consumers never took to it in mass during its previous incarnations that were brought to market. I know that it doesn’t interest me in the here and now.

 

[muralman1]

Tom, I don't mind being misunderstood. You can't know anything without listening. All Frank's posts makes me want to listen to what he has. I also wonder how he managed not to get flooded out.

I also wish you were with me that fateful day I wandered into Keith Yates fabulous sound room where I heard the Apogee Scintilla for the first time. My wife is a pianist, my daughter a string specialist, and I a lowly recorder player. Yet, I was fooled into being sure I was listening to a true piano performance in perhaps a nearby room.

 

[muralman1]

And multi-channel is best used for gee whiz bang HT systems. It is no better and in many ways, much worse than stereo at producing an illusion of the real event. To me it sounds like lots of cartoon ghosts flying around a room. It doesn't sound like any live music I've ever heard. OTOH, I can produce in a reasonable size room with master tapes a pretty darn convincing illusion of the original recording.

I can't agree with that. All I am seeing is in front of me. Having weak performing speakers to left and right, especially behind annoy me when watching a home movie. Sounds left and right and middle suffice as it frames the screen. The important thing in movie watching is to have a system capable of scaring you.

 

[mep]

Don H50 I understand what you are saying, but one should never get over impressed by measurements. Let your ears tell you what is good. I have heard lots of systems that can go loud without any noticeable clipping. In my own home, I have heard amps strain, and distort, at high dynamics. Boom boxes are notorious clippers. However, I must say, the best systems can go loud with total grace. It is all in the power reserves of the amps, and sturdiness of the speaker drivers.

Muralman-I don't understand the point of your post. Don never said that you can't play a system loudly because it will break up. Don's contention is that the largest contributor of distortion in a typical stereo system is the speakers and not the electronics and I agree (please correct me Don if I misstated what you meant). If you try hard enough, you can make any amp clip. Some amps you won't have to try hard at all if you make a bad match between speakers and amp. Let's say for instance an 8 watt SET hooked up to a pair of 87dB efficient speakers and you like to listen loud. If you properly match the amp to the speaker, distortion from the amp should never be a problem in your system assuming the amp was designed correctly.

 

[muralman1]

G'day, hj, welcome aboard!


Yes, that has been my experience all the way through


I agree that it is easier to get non-fatiguing sound from analogue, whether it be vinyl or tape, but if you put enough effort and/or money into it all media can be fully satisfying and lifelike.

Cheers,
Frank

You are correct, Frank. I find the easiest way to get a gratifying sound, is to use vinyl or reel to reel tape. I have heard a marvelous Aretha Franklin, albeit tiny, when listening to an Apogee Slant Six powered by tube amps. CD sound, in my experience, are the most difficult to get right. The reason there is still a big following of vinyl underlines the paucity of most CD players.

I believe in science making things right. Sorry to say, CD player engineers have not been following necessary scientific precepts. True good sound is reliant on a system that most sticks to quantum mechanics. Once I accepted this dictum, system building became easy.

 

[muralman1]

Muralman-I don't understand the point of your post. Don never said that you can't play a system loudly because it will break up. Don's contention is that the largest contributor of distortion in a typical stereo system is the speakers and not the electronics and I agree (please correct me Don if I misstated what you meant). If you try hard enough, you can make any amp clip. Some amps you won't have to try hard at all if you make a bad match between speakers and amp. Let's say for instance an 8 watt SET hooked up to a pair of 87dB efficient speakers and you like to listen loud. If you properly match the amp to the speaker, distortion from the amp should never be a problem in your system assuming the amp was designed correctly.

On this matter, Mep, I agree with you, except it is wrong to assume there are no amp/speaker matings that can go loud without breaking up. That problem does apply to most systems. For example, I had Pass x 600 amps powering 4 ohm speakers. Listening to Bolero that amazing final movement always sounded like Godzilla rather than instruments. All my systems failed there.... until my present system. Now, the beast is gone and the horns and all are in focus.

 

[mep]

Please name me one component used in stereo systems that was designed using quantum mechanics and please show the white paper that would surely accompany said component. And while we are at it, what necessary scientific precepts haven't CD player engineers been following and how did you come to that conclusion? Are we back to your NOS DAC and fast HEXFREDs in the power supply?

 

[mep]

On this matter, Mep, I agree with you, except it is wrong to assume there are no amp/speaker matings that can go loud without breaking up. That problem does apply to most systems. For example, I had Pass x 600 amps powering 4 ohm speakers. Listening to Bolero that amazing final movement always sounded like Godzilla rather than instruments. All my systems failed there.... until my present system. Now, the beast is gone and the horns and all are in focus.

I don't recall anyone saying that there are no amp/speaker matings that can go loud without breaking up. I don't know who you are attributing that statement to. It's quite easy to come up with a system that will play as loud as you could possibly stand it without breaking up. That's not a big deal at all. And I don't think it is a problem that applies to most systems that were thoughtfully put together with the goal of being able to play back at realistic levels.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Please name me one component used in stereo systems that was designed using quantum mechanics and please show the white paper that would surely accompany said component. And while we are at it, what necessary scientific precepts haven't CD player engineers been following and how did you come to that conclusion?

http://www.quantumqrt.com/

 

[mep]

http://www.quantumqrt.com/

Doesn't count because it is not an audio component, it's another power cleaning device. I took a quick look and I'm not sure if this company is a snake oil company or not. I didn't see any science used to explain how they are working their miracles at first glance.

 

[mep]

I just took another look Myles and I am pretty sure this is a snake oil company. They are generating fields that do magic things for your system. And the more of their boxes you buy and scatter around your room, the better the effect will be. And once again, only they know how to work this magic.