Which companies have the deepest roots in science of audio?

[Ethan Winer]

According tho your opinion what are the "relevant parameters" for capacitors and resistors?

The "relevant" I meant was affected audio parameters. For example, noise for a MM preamp, or thermal stability in a balanced circuit meant to reject hum. But for the parts themselves, it's all down to the "mighty four" parameters I always harp on. For resistors what matters most is noise, absolute Ohms accuracy, and of course power handling. For many circuits all that matters is Ohms accuracy. For capacitors what matters is accuracy (microfarads), voltage rating, and distortion which is related to its dielectric absorption:

http://www.national.com/rap/Application/0,1570,28,00.html

Again, for all but the most critical low-noise circuits, 5% carbon film resistors are fine. For power supplies we use electrolytics for the heavy lifting, and disk ceramics for bypass. For capacitors in the signal path we use polystyrene or mylar etc. This is audio engineering 101.

--Ethan

 

[microstrip]

For capacitors what matters is accuracy (microfarads), voltage rating, and distortion which is related to its dielectric absorption:

http://www.national.com/rap/Application/0,1570,28,00.html
--Ethan

The reference you quote does not refer to audio distortion. It studies the effects of capacitor dielectric absorption in peak holders, reported in the literature much before this paper was written.

However, I am happy to know you acknowledge that capacitors can audibly distort audio signals, something we hear and the classical measures do not show why. Even the classical reference (Picking capacitors, Walter Yung and Richard Marsh, 1980) shows that the worst of all audio capacitors (the tantalum type) when used properly in critical places induces distortions of less than .02%.

 

[Gedlee]

I think that people would be surprised and frankly very disappointed to find out how litte science is actually done at any audio company. It makes very little difference in sales and what is done is mostly for marketing.

Floyd Toole previously of Harman, was the rare exception. Sean Olive is doing some good work, but he is not Floyd. Beyond that, well, not much.

 

[garylkoh]

Why do you think my Mackie HR624 speakers are not every bit as "revealing" (whatever that means) as an ML CLX? How do you know the Mackies are not even more revealing?

Eight years ago, I had four Mackies over at my house - Greg Mackie (the founder), Dave Firestone (ex-Mackie - I hired as President of Genesis), Jeff Hammerstrom (one of the designers of HR824/HR624 and I hired as designer for Genesis), and a pair of HR824's.

At that time, Jeff was trying to convince me that I didn't need Arnie Nudell, and he could do all the design. We had the Mackies in the house so that I could get a measure of them and some comparison to a small pair of Genesis (the Genre 2 which sold for about $700). Then, one evening I invited Jeff and Dave over to listen, and Dave brought Greg along.

I played a piece of jazz, first on the Mackies, and then on the Genesis'. During a double bass solo, you can hear the drummer keeping time and punctuating the solo with delicate brush strokes on one cymbal, and then another, and then on the high-hat, and then on a tom. Each stroke counterpointed a passage in the bass solo, sounded different, and added to the overall performance. Today, I can't remember which piece, or even which band it was. It was probably a Three Blind Mice recording.

Going back to the HR824, all those delicate strokes were missing. I queried Jeff, who admitted that he had a tin ear, and even he heard them. We all heard them, and going back and forth, we all heard them missing on the Mackies. I remember Greg telling me that pro-sound products and consumer products are designed for two very different markets. They make thousands of each product a month, and they can't put a cent into anything that does not result in better specifications or better reliability.

They hire engineers like Jeff with tin ears because they can design well-measuring, reliable, profitable products that they can sell in the thousands. That the Genesis is more revealing cannot be measured and cannot be quantified and hence such a design cannot be easily duplicated. The HR824 was at that time the best selling studio monitor of all time - I asked them how they can sell it to studios if the mastering engineers can't hear everything that they are putting on their recordings.

One of those guys, I think it was Greg, told me something that I remember to this day - If I've never heard it, I'll never miss it, and you'll never be able to convince me that I need it. And don't make me hear it, because then it will pain me that I don't have it.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Eight years ago, I had four Mackies over at my house - Greg Mackie (the founder), Dave Firestone (ex-Mackie - I hired as President of Genesis), Jeff Hammerstrom (one of the designers of HR824/HR624 and I hired as designer for Genesis), and a pair of HR824's.

At that time, Jeff was trying to convince me that I didn't need Arnie Nudell, and he could do all the design. We had the Mackies in the house so that I could get a measure of them and some comparison to a small pair of Genesis (the Genre 2 which sold for about $700). Then, one evening I invited Jeff and Dave over to listen, and Dave brought Greg along.

I played a piece of jazz, first on the Mackies, and then on the Genesis'. During a double bass solo, you can hear the drummer keeping time and punctuating the solo with delicate brush strokes on one cymbal, and then another, and then on the high-hat, and then on a tom. Each stroke counterpointed a passage in the bass solo, sounded different, and added to the overall performance. Today, I can't remember which piece, or even which band it was. It was probably a Three Blind Mice recording.

Going back to the HR824, all those delicate strokes were missing. I queried Jeff, who admitted that he had a tin ear, and even he heard them. We all heard them, and going back and forth, we all heard them missing on the Mackies. I remember Greg telling me that pro-sound products and consumer products are designed for two very different markets. They make thousands of each product a month, and they can't put a cent into anything that does not result in better specifications or better reliability.

They hire engineers like Jeff with tin ears because they can design well-measuring, reliable, profitable products that they can sell in the thousands. That the Genesis is more revealing cannot be measured and cannot be quantified and hence such a design cannot be easily duplicated. The HR824 was at that time the best selling studio monitor of all time - I asked them how they can sell it to studios if the mastering engineers can't hear everything that they are putting on their recordings.

One of those guys, I think it was Greg, told me something that I remember to this day - If I've never heard it, I'll never miss it, and you'll never be able to convince me that I need it. And don't make me hear it, because then it will pain me that I don't have it.

One of the keys to finding peace and balance in this life is to know yourself. I know myself well enough to realize that I am probably not the one to answer this post gently, so I'll leave it for now and go to work. But it sorely needs some very direct answering. I'll check in this evening and hope someone finds a more tactful way than the one I'm currently inclined toward to address:

- Brushes on a cymbal which could be heard on the author's speakers, but not a competitors, but could not be measured.

- "They hire engineers like Jeff with tin ears because they can design well-measuring, reliable, profitable products that they can sell in the thousands."

And for anyone who has ever spent more than a couple of hours in a recording studio:

- "If I've never heard it, I'll never miss it, and you'll never be able to convince me that I need it. And don't make me hear it, because then it will pain me that I don't have it."

ON EDiT: One other note worth mentioning, regarding the Mackie Engineer with "tin ears":

- "Jeff Hammerstrom (one of the designers of HR824/HR624 and I hired as designer for Genesis)"

Tim

 

[microstrip]

Going back to the HR824, all those delicate strokes were missing.

...

I remember Greg telling me that pro-sound products and consumer products are designed for two very different markets. They make thousands of each product a month, and they can't put a cent into anything that does not result in better specifications or better reliability.

Gary,

In Europe, during the middle-ages, you could be burnt after making such an heretic statement.

I think your brave post is of great value to our debates. We have really two separate entities, that aim at different targets, and we should not fight to find which is right or wrong, but looking for their similarities and differences can be enlightening.

 

[JackD201]

Uh oh. Fire extinguishers anybody?

 

[garylkoh]

It is a brave post - one that could get me banned from this forum, or burnt at the stake. But the post is not to show that any one side is better, it is that there are two views of the matter. I don't think that the Mackie HR824 is necessarily bad or the Genre 2 (which was a design from the previous company - Genesis Technologies) is necessarily bad.

What I wanted to show (with myself as scapegoat) is that this debate is as controversial as "There is God" and "There is no God".

 

[garylkoh]

- "Jeff Hammerstrom (one of the designers of HR824/HR624 and I hired as designer for Genesis)"

Tim

I let him go the next month and kept Arnie.

 

[RBFC]

Several points:

1. Jeff Hammerstrom may or may not have been involved in the portion of the design of the Mackie speaker in question. Unless we have specific information to that regard, it is pointless to assume that his participation at Mackie or Genesis would lead to inferior sound quality.

2. The price point of the two speakers being compared is certainly different. In that case, wouldn't you expect a more expensive speaker to demonstrate its value and superior performance?

3. Unless Jeff Hammerstrom registers and posts his account of the comparison, heated attacks over what is currently an anecdotal story are unnecessary.

Again, this is a hobby, a passionate pursuit. Systems and components are constantly reported to sound different, and I don't believe any of us have all the answers. Let's behave with respect in the discussions, please.

Lee

 

[garylkoh]

I'm sorry, Lee if my post came across as condescending or insulting.

I did not mean to disparage Jeff Hammerstrom - and just wanted to point out the results of one type of designer and another. Jeff was the Chief Engineer (Loudspeakers) for Carver Corp and he designed the Carver Amazing Loudspeaker and also the 48-inch ribbon. His systems distinguished Carver as a quality loudspeaker manufacturer in the '90s. The part of the HR824 he worked on as a team in Mackie was the transducers and the horn-loaded tweeter. This resulted in an extremely flat frequency response across a wide axis. That is one of the selling points of the HT824. Jeff was also Director of Research and Development at Dahlquist.

However, he and Arnie were opposite sides of the spectrum - like some of the people here on this forum. Jeff was proud that he thought that he had a "tin ear" and yet was able to achieve what he had done with good, solid engineering. Arnie had a long history of fine designs from Infinity to Genesis, but relied on specifications only at the first step, and then designed by ear.

I was stuck in the middle between them, and I had to decide one way or the other.

This is also why now I am still trying to find ways to measure and understand things that I think that I can hear but don't know how to measure.

 

[RBFC]

Gary,

I'm not offended, etc. by the post. It's just that an unsupported anecdote, while interesting, won't do anything to convince folks of a certain position. A first-hand report from the actual participant holds a bit more weight. Personally, I appreciate your continual efforts to understand and improve audio reproduction. I also appreciate your contribution to our forum! These topics often develop into heated debates, and it's my job to keep things from going too far. I hope you and everyone reading this thread understand how touchy this job can be.

Lee

 

[amirm]

I love to see an invited debate of Pro speakers vs. Home market. Gary, Ethan, Tim, any of you game to do that??? We can put your energy to good use there .

 

[JackD201]

What I'd like to see is an honest to goodness shootout. High Noon stuff between two closely priced, similarly configured loudspeakers. Heck, blind if need be.

The gauntlet has been thrown and talk is cheap. Hehehe.

 

[Ethan Winer]

The reference you quote does not refer to audio distortion. It studies the effects of capacitor dielectric absorption in peak holders

Yes, but when passing AC that same dielectric absorption can add distortion.

I am happy to know you acknowledge that capacitors can audibly distort audio signals

Where did I say the distortion added could be audible? Now, audible distortion is possible if a wholly inappropriate capacitor type is used in the signal path. But I don't accept that the distortion added by an appropriate cap will be audible. It can be measured, but it's way down in the noise and also reduced further by masking.

something we hear and the classical measures do not show why.

I'd need a DBT as proof that anyone can hear things that cannot be measured.

--Ethan

 

[Ethan Winer]

I think that people would be surprised and frankly very disappointed to find out how litte science is actually done at any audio company.

I know we've never formally met, but science is a big part of what my company does. I do agree that science is rarer than it should be, for the reason you mentioned. Too many customers just don't care, even though they surely should.

--Ethan

 

[Ethan Winer]

Going back to the HR824, all those delicate strokes were missing.

I was skeptical but still reading up to that point. And then this:

That the Genesis is more revealing cannot be measured and cannot be quantified

That's an extraordinary claim that demands extraordinary proof. Everything in audio can be quantified. Further, the word "revealing" means nothing to me because it's so vague. Anything that could be construed as affecting "revealing" falls under the standard four audio parameters:

Frequency response
Distortion
Noise (n/a with loudspeakers)
Time-based errors such as phase shift and ringing

If you have evidence that there's more to audio fidelity specs than this, I'm all ears. But I'll tell you that nobody has ever been able to show more than those four parameters, and a LOT of people have tried!

--Ethan

 

[Ethan Winer]

I love to see an invited debate of Pro speakers vs. Home market. Gary, Ethan, Tim, any of you game to do that??? We can put your energy to good use there .

I'm in, though I'd rather host (or be a witness to) an actual listening session so we can all decide if some brush strokes are really missing from my Mackie HR624 seakers.

--Ethan

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Eight years ago, I had four Mackies over at my house - Greg Mackie (the founder), Dave Firestone (ex-Mackie - I hired as President of Genesis), Jeff Hammerstrom (one of the designers of HR824/HR624 and I hired as designer for Genesis), and a pair of HR824's.

At that time, Jeff was trying to convince me that I didn't need Arnie Nudell, and he could do all the design. We had the Mackies in the house so that I could get a measure of them and some comparison to a small pair of Genesis (the Genre 2 which sold for about $700). Then, one evening I invited Jeff and Dave over to listen, and Dave brought Greg along.

I played a piece of jazz, first on the Mackies, and then on the Genesis'. During a double bass solo, you can hear the drummer keeping time and punctuating the solo with delicate brush strokes on one cymbal, and then another, and then on the high-hat, and then on a tom. Each stroke counterpointed a passage in the bass solo, sounded different, and added to the overall performance. Today, I can't remember which piece, or even which band it was. It was probably a Three Blind Mice recording.

Going back to the HR824, all those delicate strokes were missing. I queried Jeff, who admitted that he had a tin ear, and even he heard them. We all heard them, and going back and forth, we all heard them missing on the Mackies. I remember Greg telling me that pro-sound products and consumer products are designed for two very different markets. They make thousands of each product a month, and they can't put a cent into anything that does not result in better specifications or better reliability.

They hire engineers like Jeff with tin ears because they can design well-measuring, reliable, profitable products that they can sell in the thousands. That the Genesis is more revealing cannot be measured and cannot be quantified and hence such a design cannot be easily duplicated. The HR824 was at that time the best selling studio monitor of all time - I asked them how they can sell it to studios if the mastering engineers can't hear everything that they are putting on their recordings.

One of those guys, I think it was Greg, told me something that I remember to this day - If I've never heard it, I'll never miss it, and you'll never be able to convince me that I need it. And don't make me hear it, because then it will pain me that I don't have it.

i had a similar experience at Winston Ma's home about 5 years ago. a pro audio friend of Winston's sent him some pro monitors to try and compare to his Avalon Sentinels. Winston asked me to come, listen and comment.

it did not take long to hear what was missing from the pro audio speakers. and what was added. yep, not scientific. Winston did not ask me over to measure them. i'm the wrong guy for that.

can the detail and listenability of the Sentinel's compared to those pro audio speakers be exactly related to measurments? i don't know.

i'm no expert on how Avalon designs speakers. maybe there is lots of measureing going on. i'd only say that whoever thought those pro monitors were really good must lack a great reference. they sucked.

 

[garylkoh]

I love to see an invited debate of Pro speakers vs. Home market. Gary, Ethan, Tim, any of you game to do that??? We can put your energy to good use there .

I'd rather do a blind shootout. I don't want to get drawn into an "if you can't prove God to me, then God doesn't exist" type of debate. There will be no winners, and there will be a lot of hard feelings all round.

The problem is finding two pairs of speakers at around the same price. The Mackie HR624's are less than $500 and that's for an active loudspeaker. I don't know what audiophile loudspeaker would be considered a contender at that price? And then add the price of an amplifier and we have no contest. Unless Ethan thinks that the Mackie HR624 are the best loudspeakers available at ANY price, then I'll put forth my cheapest full-range design.

In the Pacific Northwest Audio Society, we have a DIY loudspeaker contest that is held every 2 years. This is always held blind - a curtain is drawn across the room between the judges and the loudspeakers. The judges get to choose their own music and make their own evaluation. The speakers are level-matched to some pre-set level and the shoot-out begins. We could use the rules that have been established and used for the past 10 years.