The relevance of distortion to achieving realistic sound

[fas42]

One problem with these forums is that we are grounded by descriptors. In terms of the journey, I don’t know who is farthest along at this point.

I would have to say Amen to that, it does make discussions so very difficult at times ...

Though I have to say, when I was looking around the forums, I was using the language used for clues. That's why I tuned in early to Vince, there was clue after clue in how he talked of experiences which resonated with me. Yourself I was sure had come a long way, and were very close.

you can reduce distortion down to Planck’s constant, and you will get an impressive sound that is Hi-Fi.

I know this place. It is the penultimate space before it suddenly snaps together, I think probably many people have got here at times and then fallen back, thinking they have gone in the wrong direction. Yes, just before you get it "right" it can sound very extreme, in your face, aggressive, PA like. The system has got tons of detail, but it feels like it's battering you to death with it.

I feel good when I get here. I know I have just that little bit more to go, it's really that you're 99% there, but it can be hard at times to nail that last 1%, extremely frustrating. My wife can vouch that I have gone around steaming for hours and days, because there's something not quite right, and I can't pinpoint it. Vince in a sense is very lucky, because it all suddenly fell together for him!

I keep pushing along on this never-ending journey to reach something that probably does not exist.

Worry not, grasshopper. Sorry, sorry, I am just trying to emphasise that it DOES exist. And you know it does, because you also said:

But I am looking for the sound that could none other be described as ‘right’. At times, there is a ‘correctness’ to what I hear. A perfect melding, the planets aligning. It sounds effortless and simple, and all the Hifi terminology falls by the waist side. The illusion is solid and sustained.

At that point you DID achieve it, even though it may have been fleeting. I have had that experience over and over and over again. Your problem at the moment is that there is something, somewhere not quite right that's holding your system back. I can't tell tell you what it is, because I have no idea what it is, but your goal is to track it down, because if you do then it will stay constantly in that "zone", all those words you used then to describe it will stay with your listening all through the day!

So, personally, I would not rest now until I found what those last weaknesses, defects, problems are because the rewards are so great ...

All the best,
Frank

 

[muralman1]

Robert: "I know you are steadfast in eliminating distortion and getting the ‘true’ sound. But I am looking for the sound that could none other be described as ‘right’. At times, there is a ‘correctness’ to what I hear. A perfect melding, the planets aligning. It sounds effortless and simple, and all the Hifi terminology falls by the waist side. The illusion is solid and sustained. Can I get all the fidelity and detail, and yet, pay no mind to it?"

I didn't get to that level until I acquired the 47 Lab Flatfish transport. With that one little addition, the music congealed into a living whole. All of a sudden, the music flowed easily. My previous transport had been highly modified by my amp builder. With those improvements, it compared quite favorably to lots of other high level transports. The problem is that transport and all the others were largely the same. They all had drawers. They all had extensive circuitry. They all dug deep int the CD, but compared to the flatfish, the music appeared dry and aloof. Now, the music flows liquidly without giving away any of the sharp transitions, violent sounds, crashes, and deep throaty organ notes.

I know folks here don't normally speak of their system components. Frank, you don't. I just can't get myself to do that. Honesty was drubbed into me by nuns. Also, I love the journey and like to share.

 

[muralman1]

Robert, any art is effectively indescribable. I remember having to describe my art pieces in college. Problem is my logical brain did not create it. I find it very hard to describe what I hear, because of the joy I have listening to it. That emotion wraps itself over my auditory senses. I am very happy you have attained a high satisfaction. Your route is your own. Frank is finding his way, and I am learning from it. My way pertains only to my peculiar amps. Perhaps parts of my discoveries can be transferred to unlike systems, such as the transport I am using.

 

[fas42]

Perhaps parts of my discoveries can be transferred to unlike systems, such as the transport I am using.

A key part of Vince's way, as he has mentioned many times, is to simplify as much as possible. Remove all extraneous components and circuitry from the setup, even cheap amps years ago had worked this out, they had a direct path switch for CD which always made a considerable difference.

The only reason it clicked for me the first time was that by instinct I had done the same thing: I had a good quality CD with digital volume, directly driving a high powered Perreaux amp, and good leads for the time, Van der Hul, driving some properly tweaked B&W DM10's. There, a little bit of gear glory ...

On the other hand, people with intrinsically very high quality gear like Robert with his Wadia and Avalons are in very good shape from the get go: theoretically they should have an easier run of things ...

Frank

 

[muralman1]

Robert, "I understand what you are saying about everything being on the recording. The theory is rational and makes sense. I’ve chased it for several years. My opinion now is that you can reduce distortion down to Planck’s constant, and you will get an impressive sound that is Hi-Fi. The reasons are not certain to me."

I love the fact you drew in Planck Constant. I am the lone wolf only howling at the moon with my fastidious bite on quantum mechanics. I really can't help it. Brilliant engineers devise chips that manipulate that which doesn't perform as predicted. Their oscilloscopes say things are ok. But, in practice, much is lost. So says my system.

 

[fas42]

I am the lone wolf only howling at the moon with my fastidious bite on quantum mechanics.

The trouble, Vince, is that other people think you're away with the fairies when you bring quantum mechanics in! A ding dong battle starts, and the thread of the discussion is lost, which is always a shame ...

Brilliant engineers devise chips that manipulate that which doesn't perform as predicted. Their oscilloscopes say things are ok. But, in practice, much is lost.

Actually, it's not lost, rather the performance of those chips is overwhelmed by the distortion elements that have been introduced both by the chips themselves, and surrounding circuitry and topology considerations. Get rid of those distortion mechanisms, and the chips WILL bring the good sound out.

A big problem is that design engineers don't appreciate enough, in their day to day activities, how crucial all the seemingly minor deficiencies in the components, etc, can all add up, and end up creating clearly audible distortion. They learn from textbooks and colleagues the "correct" method of checking for proper working, and don't go beyond this. Hence the massive underground industry in tweaking and enhancing technologies ...

Frank

 

[muralman1]

The trouble, Vince, is that other people think you're away with the fairies when you bring quantum mechanics in! A ding dong battle starts, and the thread of the discussion is lost, which is always a shame ...


Actually, it's not lost, rather the performance of those chips is overwhelmed by the distortion elements that have been introduced both by the chips themselves, and surrounding circuitry and topology considerations. Get rid of those distortion mechanisms, and the chips WILL bring the good sound out.

A big problem is that design engineers don't appreciate enough, in their day to day activities, how crucial all the seemingly minor deficiencies in the components, etc, can all add up, and end up creating clearly audible distortion. They learn from textbooks and colleagues the "correct" method of checking for proper working, and don't go beyond this. Hence the massive underground industry in tweaking and enhancing technologies ...

Frank

I can't agree. I think even if the CD and DAC producers would create short circuits the logarithm based math is still woefully inadequate. I will give you an example how easily the signal is distorted. My initial experiment with using ultra thin cables, I was faced with the problem of necking the 2" wide ribbon into a constricted spade. I cut the last 1.5" of the cable into little strips and braided those. The sound was so much better than my previous round wire SC, I didn't do anything to change things for some time. Then, I decided to make something more professional looking, and took on totally reworking my cables. Now, the insulated corners of the ribbon are rolled a few times to a point. The difference that one small change made was in boldness, clarity, and warmth.

 

[fas42]

Then, I decided to make something more professional looking, and took on totally reworking my cables. Now, the insulated corners of the ribbon are rolled a few times to a point. The difference that one small change made was in boldness, clarity, and warmth.

Vince, I agree with you 100%. And, to all those out there who are listening, this is EXACTLY the degree of fastidiousness you have to go to to get rid of those last crucial weaknesses!

Many will probably say, "Give me a break!! How the hell will changing the way you terminate the cable make such a difference!". I'm sorry, but that is just the way it is!

People will say, it's just equivalent to a piece of wire, close to a zero ohms thingy (good old Ohm's Law had to put an appearance in at some stage, didn't it! ). Wrong, to a RF engineer, it's an excellent antenna!! Look inside your cellphone, a little bit of wire or equivalent is doing an superb job of drawing in tons of interference, sorry, signal into the circuitry.

A weakness that kills the quality of sound can be as simple as that ...

Frank

 

[muralman1]

Vince, I agree with you 100%. And, to all those out there who are listening, this is EXACTLY the degree of fastidiousness you have to go to to get rid of those last crucial weaknesses!

Many will probably say, "Give me a break!! How the hell will changing the way you terminate the cable make such a difference!". I'm sorry, but that is just the way it is!

People will say, it's just equivalent to a piece of wire, close to a zero ohms thingy (good old Ohm's Law had to put an appearance in at some stage, didn't it! ). Wrong, to a RF engineer, it's an excellent antenna!! Look inside your cellphone, a little bit of wire or equivalent is doing an superb job of drawing in tons of interference, sorry, signal into the circuitry.

A weakness that kills the quality of sound can be as simple as that ...

Frank

That cell phone analogy was great. By the way, ICE amps are a study in micro circuitry. Being what you are finding, and I as of late, the tiny circuit of ICE may add greatly to it's performance.

We would have a lot of fun as neighbors. I could learn a lot from you. Obviously, you have evolved your sound to such perfection, that minor changes really do make a real difference. I know that is where my system is. I am going to miss it for a month or so.

We don't have any followers here. In fact, it is safe to say, since we are espousing DIY improvements, we **** off both the producer and the consumer minded folks. There are in house

 

[fas42]

We don't have any followers here. In fact, it is safe to say, since we are espousing DIY improvements, we **** off both the producer and the consumer minded folks.

Actually, Vince, I suspect part of it is because there is a bit of what we Australians call biffo going on elsewhere, strong disagreement between people, in regard to reviewers getting special deals from manufacturers!

I am going to miss it for a month or so.

So, Vince, I am still not quite clear why you can't keep participating. Could you possibly elaborate a bit more?

Cheers,
Frank

 

[muralman1]

Oh my God, the morality police are quite vigilant. I used a word you hear on tv news. Oh well, it is not me that is going away, it is my system's front end. I will have no music.

I can see your lively chat style, and I find it refreshing.

 

[fas42]

it is not me that is going away, it is my system's front end.

Oh dear, you poor fellow! You have my deepest, deepest sympathy!!

Tell what ... I'll package up some really fantastic source material, compress it into MP3 at 64 kbit/s and send it across. That should keep you happy for, hmmm, about, say 5 seconds ...

Frank

 

[fas42]

So, would you have a single recording that is still a problem in some way? If so, how? My current disks for testing are early 30's big band swing, a collection of Glen Miller's hits -- the original recordings, a very low level Odetta in concert, difficult string quartets, etc.

To keep the ball rolling, Vince, when you get back online, you didn't respond to my query earlier in the piece, as repeated here. Any thoughts or comment on this?

Also, I've rattled on and on about tweeters disappearing! You've effectively said the same thing, would you say this is the case with every recording you have, even your "worst"?

Frank

 

[muralman1]

Frank, my tweeters never have a problem, since they don't need springs, or liquid cooling of any sort. They make up for a soft response, by having meters of ribbon. That enables the tweeters to really crack the whip. A few discs, such as slack key guitar, cause cross ripple in my bass panel where the panel hums. The builders used pieced 2 ml Kapton backing, and a trapezoid shape in order to counter such anomalies. That is just a few discs, and the rest is great.

I use a variety of discs for testing, although I can tell straight off whether there is an improvement or not. New discs keep appearing that bring out the full potential of my system, as do Blu Ray discs. The latest greatest is a Nutcracker disc made in Russia. There is everything in that disc, save singing. I don't put much faith in using voice for system analysis, depending rather on more consistent sounds, such as string instruments.

There is one disc I have, a recording of an opera singer that curls the ribbons. Kathleen Battle is the singer. I have not played her on this present system. Now I can't for some time.

What about you? What are your speaker limitations, if any?

 

[fas42]

my tweeters never have a problem

I guess this is where it does become a bit difficult to compare apples and oranges. 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 think you have the same effect: if you put your ear right next to the ribbons generating the treble, no matter how loud the system, you are never aware of a harshness or unnaturalness, it's as if you are listening straight through the ribbon at that position to music coming from a distance. Would that be how it is for you, for any recording?

I don't put much faith in using voice for system analysis,

Interesting you say that, because I find that an excellent test! Odetta in concert is a very severe one here, and what I listen for is that the voice has to be completely convincing, no edginess, a natural, convincing warmth has to be there every time. Strangely enough, Status Quo, seemingly a bizarre choice, is very good as an overall system test, because the instruments drive the electronics and speakers hard, but the vocals have been recorded in a very relaxed, almost nonchalant way, and they should come through that way completely convincingly, perfectly encapsulated in their own little acoustic.

Agree entirely about strings, violins are excellent, should be very aggressive but sweet, just like the real thing.

What are your speaker limitations

I am never aware of them, apart from true deep bass not being there. Rather, it is always further back in the electronics where problems lie. The cheap speakers I currently use, the biggest headache has been loose bits inside rattling on certain notes ...

Frank

 

[fas42]

Another test I should have just mentioned, that I have already described before is using a true mono recording. With that on, if you led someone blindfolded, or eyes closed, to a foot away, off centre in front of the left hand speaker, just past the right hand edge edge towards the other speaker, and ask them to point to where they think the centre of the speaker was, would they be able to successfully do that?

Hopefully that makes sense ...

Frank

 

[muralman1]

Onward and forward

You aren't flooded are you?

I guess this is where it does become a bit difficult to compare apples and oranges. 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 think you have the same effect: if you put your ear right next to the ribbons generating the treble, no matter how loud the system, you are never aware of a harshness or unnaturalness, it's as if you are listening straight through the ribbon at that position to music coming from a distance. Would that be how it is for you, for any recording?

Point source effects were covered in another thread. Sitting middle, it is easy to locate each voice of a quintet, but they don't beam in. Does that make any sense to you?

Interesting you say that, because I find that an excellent test! Odetta in concert is a very severe one here, and what I listen for is that the voice has to be completely convincing, no edginess, a natural, convincing warmth has to be there every time. Strangely enough, Status Quo, seemingly a bizarre choice, is very good as an overall system test, because the instruments drive the electronics and speakers hard, but the vocals have been recorded in a very relaxed, almost nonchalant way, and they should come through that way completely convincingly, perfectly encapsulated in their own little acoustic.

The only reason I discount using voice is because I haven't listened to any of my recorded singers singing unamplified. I love the way they sound, warm and huggable (the women) but I cannot say for sure it is absolutely accurate. I truly believe they are. However, when Itzhak plays his violin the reality becomes clear. If he turns his bow edge on and pulls a note, it is silvery thin. When he opens the bow flat, the sound takes on a warm, more throaty sound. My daughter spent hours a day in her practicing playing the viola. I know I have it right.

Agree entirely about strings, violins are excellent, should be very aggressive but sweet, just like the real thing.

Yup!

I am never aware of them, apart from true deep bass not being there. Rather, it is always further back in the electronics where problems lie. The cheap speakers I currently use, the biggest headache has been loose bits inside rattling on certain notes ...

You know, that confession is raising eyebrows from the readers don't you.

Frank

Carry on sir!

Vince

 

[fas42]

Thanks, Vince, don't you just love being in a quiet place, having a pleasant chat with someone, no-one else disturbing the tranquillity of the spot ...

You aren't flooded are you?

Thanks for your concern! No, I'm up high in the hills in NSW, all the bad stuff at the moment is in other states; the reports should have conveyed how well us Aussies have pulled together to get a handle on the mess ...

Sitting middle, it is easy to locate each voice of a quintet, but they don't beam in. Does that make any sense to you?

Yes, now if you move sideways all the way to being directly in front of, but not closer to the speaker, as you do this the imaging and soundstage do not alter one iota. Would that be correct?

I discount using voice is because I haven't listened to any of my recorded singers singing unamplified. I love the way they sound, warm and huggable (the women) but I cannot say for sure it is absolutely accurate.

I don't care if they ARE accurate; to me, they feel accurate because, as I said, there is no edginess to the voice, no sense of some electronic fiddling with the quality of the tone. Every time I wander into a dealer or listen to an ambitious system, I grimace because it sounds like HiFI, there is some clever electronic device pretending to be a human but not quite getting it right.

that confession is raising eyebrows from the readers

Hell, these are speakers you would use as a doorstep in an emergency, can't expect too much from them ...

Old recordings with a huge upper bass bump were the problem. A very, very poor recording of Erroll Garner did it nicely, but judicious bits of damping materials cured the problem.

Speaking again of test recordings I've got a humdinger here: Harry James, Things Aint What They Used To Be, a million miles from an audiophile recording, this is a US Navy transcription of the radio show "The Harry James Show", 1948, '49. The first time I heard it, I thought, this is hard work!! But, it came good, when all the lights are go this creates a massive big band show in your house, forget about the room! People talk about PRaT, this is absolutely riddled with it, the band are going at a hundred miles an hour, every instrument is pumping up the energy as hard as they can, fantastic stuff!! A system not working right, you would beg for mercy!

Frank

 

[fas42]

You're taking the day off, or something, Vince? We've got to keep stirring the pot ...

Now that you're losing your front end, do you have something that you can put in its place? If you have, will you be doing that in the meantime? Either way, I would be interested if you do put in an (obviously inferior ) alternative mechanism, whether you could give me an accurate account of what that is doing to the sound. It will certainly help me understand better where your system is coming from ...

Would appreciate that, if possible ..

Thanks,
Frank

 

[muralman1]

When you are on permanent disability, every day is a day off. My wife added a changer to my system for family get togethers. I can't remember the make. Little matter, though. The sound is soft. The stage is miniaturized. Detail is only passable. It sounds Mid-Fi. My Blu-Ray Soni is far superior in sound. It is just as dynamic as my best source. Detail is fine. I still haven't run music through it. I have DVD music, and it is rather good.

My speakers are brutally truthful. They don't shy away from de-masking high-falluting stuff. You should have seen the dealers face when we hooked up Cardas's best SCs in. Compared to my SCs, the sound inserted a constant hush sound. It's as if the Scintillas are spiteful. It's obvious revulsion over oversamplers is so dramatic, you might think the speaker is punishing the listener.