Are you expecting to get there? That would be a very funny system, that alters its transfer characteristic depending on the quality of the recording?
If you have a system that makes bad recordings sound good, that's a serious flaw.
Jan
If your goal is "high fidelity," yes, it's a flaw. If your goal is, "sounds nice to me even with crappy source," it's not. The latter sort of system won't ever be realistic (that's a second law violation), but it will be listenable if you're not after fidelity.
You've listened to my setup extensively, so you know which side I personally come down on.
My reality is when the 'illusion' appears that the musical source is in the room with you. Of course, it only happens over short intervals, but then I know we have success.
The 'emotional' part is also there, so if I hear a female singer 'singing in my ear' properly, some love song, and I get an emotional pang inside, then I sense success.
In designing audio equipment, I find that you have to reduce the distortion, without multiplying further the deviation from the ideal source.
We have ALWAYS had people argue that recordings are compromised, so why bother with quality playback? AND then someone else will say: Why should we make good recordings because the audio equipment is so bad? It is an endless circle, where you can only go forward by jumping in where you can, and improve things the best that you can. This is where reputations for producing 'audio quality' come from.
The 'emotional' part is also there, so if I hear a female singer 'singing in my ear' properly, some love song, and I get an emotional pang inside, then I sense success.
In designing audio equipment, I find that you have to reduce the distortion, without multiplying further the deviation from the ideal source.
We have ALWAYS had people argue that recordings are compromised, so why bother with quality playback? AND then someone else will say: Why should we make good recordings because the audio equipment is so bad? It is an endless circle, where you can only go forward by jumping in where you can, and improve things the best that you can. This is where reputations for producing 'audio quality' come from.
Last edited:
Good point Sy - but when details are rendered properly they don't sound like details they sound like music.
But this point raises another point and that is where our preferred listening position in a concert hall is and how the air, humidity & surroundings affect the sound as it travels away from the stage.
If you like to sit in the front row, right behind the conductor the "sound" will be different when compared with a seat 30 rows back, or with another in the gallery.
Where we choose to sit in a concert hall is a matter of personal preference and in a good concert hall, although different, the sound will still sound good in different places.
Similarly with Hifi, we might have different preferences that vary according to the individual but I believe within these preferences the sound can still be very good.
I really liked and appreciated the sound of Susan's system even though my personal preference was for a little more ( natural ) detail.
Does that make some kind of sense ?
But this point raises another point and that is where our preferred listening position in a concert hall is and how the air, humidity & surroundings affect the sound as it travels away from the stage.
If you like to sit in the front row, right behind the conductor the "sound" will be different when compared with a seat 30 rows back, or with another in the gallery.
Where we choose to sit in a concert hall is a matter of personal preference and in a good concert hall, although different, the sound will still sound good in different places.
Similarly with Hifi, we might have different preferences that vary according to the individual but I believe within these preferences the sound can still be very good.
I really liked and appreciated the sound of Susan's system even though my personal preference was for a little more ( natural ) detail.
Does that make some kind of sense ?
If your goal is "high fidelity," yes, it's a flaw. If your goal is, "sounds nice to me even with crappy source," it's not. The latter sort of system won't ever be realistic (that's a second law violation), but it will be listenable if you're not after fidelity.
You've listened to my setup extensively, so you know which side I personally come down on.
Bad recordings sound bad on your system - and that's a real compliment!
Good recordings sound superb on it.
jan
No - not with my current designs
Don't fully agree with this. I don't see the final goal of our endeavours as being to reach some kind of engineering perfection, rather I see it as allowing the listener to have a good experience.
If someone came to me and said they wanted a sound system that makes their classical recordings from 1940 - 1970 sound as good as possible, I might well suggest a Zeus kind of a zero FB design - why not - the customer doesn't give a hoot about engineering specs if his old recordings bring tears to his eyes and Susan's amp would excel in this regard.
Last edited:
You're tapdancing. The issue is not 'best possible sound', or 'the way I like it'. Your statement was that you could envision a systenm that makes bad recordings sound good. By definition, that is a system that alters the sound. Assuming this system also makes good recordings sound good, it's a system that changes it's behaviour depending on how good or bad the recording is. Trust me, you won't get there
Jan
You're tapdancing. The issue is not 'best possible sound', or 'the way I like it'. Your statement was that you could envision a systenm that makes bad recordings sound good. By definition, that is a system that alters the sound. Assuming this system also makes good recordings sound good, it's a system that changes it's behaviour depending on how good or bad the recording is. Trust me, you won't get there
Jan
Sorry Jan you seem to have misunderstood my colloquial English.
When I said "I'm not holding my breath" it means I expecting my current designs, that are aiming at accuracy, to make bad recordings sound good about as much as I'm expecting pigs to fly.
Hope this has clarified that.
Accurate. If a recording is bad, it will tell you that, and tell you exactly why it's bad. My home recordings, where I know what the original sounds like, let me know how accurate it really is. If a system can "prettify" lousy recordings (and that's a valid goal, just not *my* goal), it cannot, by definition and first principles, give a realistic result with good recordings.
Sy,
For the last three years I've been building a system with precisely the same goals as you.
Later on I have plans to try a "prettifying" zero FB amp but thought it would be best and more instructive to follow the discipline of doing an accurate design first.
I wonder which I will prefer in the long run.
For the last three years I've been building a system with precisely the same goals as you.
Later on I have plans to try a "prettifying" zero FB amp but thought it would be best and more instructive to follow the discipline of doing an accurate design first.
I wonder which I will prefer in the long run.
neat - but for prettifying u'll probably need iron and fancy capacitors
Kinda reminds me of the Arye V3 was it? And others. Lookin at the pics...
English would have been nice
English would have been nice
"The amplifier is connected to my more than 10 years of experience in the construction of power amplifiers HighEnd, verification of circuit topologies and countless listening tests.
Amplifier topology is complementary - differential and symmetrical from input to output. This means that both input and output are balanced. The output is not connected to earth. This topology allows a maximum suppress noise voltage penetrating the output of the power supply. Improved suppression of noise voltage to unbalanced output topology is about 30 dB.
Obvodobé solution is the MOSFET from input to output. These elements are all types of semiconductor greatest resistance to interference. The amplifier does not use feedback from output to input."
"Description
MOSFET stereo amplifier concept celosymetrická. Input: Balanced (XLR). Output: symmetrical. No overall feedback.
Parameters
Output Power: 2 x 100W / 4 ohm, 2 x 75W / 8 ohm
Input impedance 20kohm (symmetrical)
Frequency response 2 Hz - 65kHz (-3dB)
Gain 31 db
Dimensions 450 x 440 x 140 mm
Weight about 20 kg
There is a tight rope walk with this. Having a system that sounds the best with only the best recordings means you fell over to the side of audiophiledom; With a great system and what? a few dozen recordings to listen to. BTW home recordings is just the very beginning of knowing what the original sounds like.
Just another Caption Obvious post from me.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.