Similar in what way: dogness or maleness?Jay said:
Which one is what?
I'm not sure that posing riddles is getting us very far.
No, because all 3 amps are likely to have inaudible distortion so people will express preference based on some other criteria.
If distortion is low enough to be inaudible then that is inevitably true. If distortion is audible, then some listeners may identify it as such and not like it, while others may prefer it if it is not too audible and at sufficiently low orders.
Indistinguishability in ears-only testing is a necessary consequence of high fidelity. As amplifiers etc. get closer to being good reproducers they will sound more alike.
That may be true, but irrelevant. I don't insist on tiny distortion; inaudible distortion will satisfy me.
Not if these really are inaudible, and have been shown to be inaudible in ears-only tests. Why do people seem to imagine that inaudibility is set at some arbitrary threshold decided by these nasty engineers? No, it was properly conducted hearing tests which set the thresholds which engineers now use. As in all engineering a margin of error is included, so if most people cannot hear X amount of something then we may design to get the level down to 0.1X. That cannot take account of people who prefer 2X but they can always use a modified circuit - there are plenty of vendors aiming at their market!
Where you said "So it should be clear now that no distortion is good."
Distortion is unavoidable in a hifi system, from the recording all the way to the speaker output. I say choose the distortion that sounds most realistic or enjoyable to your ears.
Take the Elna Silmic vs Cerafine vs Panasonic FM. They all sound different when used in certain positions (coupling or feedback) Which one has the lowest distortion?
Misunderstanding... What I mean is none of any kind of distortion is good. This is in defending to the accusation that some people prefer certain kind of distortion (usually second order).
You are right that we chose the "better" kind of distortion when we are forced with compromises or trade-offs.
But second order can really give fake enjoyment! It is an easy and cheap trick to get enjoyment. There is a harder way to get enjoyment, which is better than fake enjoyment.
They will sound different. I believe I can hear them in ears-only test. But in term of distortion, they are too microscopic, that I prefer to say that they are all equal. For feedback I consistently use Sanyo Oscon. For power supply decoupling the type is not more critical than the right size. For signal coupling (input) none is good.
I would differ: relevant and not-relevant distortions. Some sounds ugly (ex: results of complementary-parts-pp, of many joints, of not-laqueured lace, of wooden-material ...), some sounds "good" (ex: k2, second order), and others do you not hear (ex: ?).
And: "cleanness" is not a kind of "taste". Hundred times I experienced: "I want the amp, that NOT does scratch, not does screech, not does veil, not does rumble, not does jolt ..."-))) NEVER the other way,-) (But everytime a result of face-to-face-comparision. In remembering, some days later, it is a little bit more difficult to decide: cleaner or not,-)
And: "cleanness" is not a kind of "taste". Hundred times I experienced: "I want the amp, that NOT does scratch, not does screech, not does veil, not does rumble, not does jolt ..."-))) NEVER the other way,-) (But everytime a result of face-to-face-comparision. In remembering, some days later, it is a little bit more difficult to decide: cleaner or not,-)
I think I see what the misunderstanding is. I class distortion as anything that changes or distorts the sound. Hence my Elna Silmic/Cerafine capacitor comparison.
At the end of the day, we are all aiming for the same thing pretty much (high quality, low distortion audio). Have fun I say
I suppose some would say the two go hand in hand.
If I had to choose, then I'd choose "enjoyable" everyday. I listen to music to stir the emotions. If I don't enjoy it then what would be the point? (unless you're mastering music). BUT the OCD side of me want the most realistic presentation and those two parts of my brain seem to fight all the time
Yes. But I think the issue is that some people compare the output from an amplifier with the input of the amplifier while some other compare the output of their speakers with their "prediction" of how the real performance would sound like... This is an unavoidable effect of imperfection in audio reproduction...
"Enjoyable" is a common characteristics of real performance. Even after being recorded and decoded into MP3, it usually still has this characteristics...
If you realize how this characteristics can be missing due to poor amplification, you will understand if people choose a compromise that differs with your definition of "reality" or "fidelity"...
"Enjoyable" is easy to define -- it's personal, we're all different... I play you something, tell you I enjoy it 100%. You may, or may not, like it. Fine. Enjoyable covers the type of music as well and the reproduction.
"Realistic" -- How would you define that? I can think of several differing ways...
"Realistic" -- How would you define that? I can think of several differing ways...
I know what you mean. But if we can understand the Physics of it, it will be VERY beneficial in audio design/building. For example, there is Physics of "consonance" and "dissonance" (which is not as subjective as you might think)...
If the schematic here is right then the one for the amp section below should be too, and a little easier to follow...
you might like to build a lm4766 from scratch with a $7 pcb from China you seem to have all the parts?
regards
james
you might like to build a lm4766 from scratch with a $7 pcb from China you seem to have all the parts?
regards
james
Attachments
Not sure what physics there is to consonance and dissonance, apart from their definitions?
Whether you *like* the sound of dissonance, for example, is purely subjective.
As to understanding the physics of "enjoyment" -- we are probably decades away from enough physics / neuroscience to be able to understand that.
I'm still interested in a working objective definition of "realistic" in the context of diy audio...
About consonance and dissonance?? I believe you already know that (High School Physics)...
My main point/idea is that every phenomenon can be formulated into Math or Science such that we can control the phenomenon, make it repeatable, or avoid it... Example: when we feel happy, there is certain hormone produced, then we can find things that will trigger the production of this hormone, such that when we feel unhappy we can do something such as drinking chocolate...
Regarding "enjoyment" when listening to music, we need to observe the parameters that trigger the enjoyment, and we also need to observe parameter(s) that prevent the enjoyment... This is the starting point of a long journey to reveal the "secrets"...
It is a huge topic. There is for example a (sub) topic about soundstage...
Oh, you asked for definition? LOL
I know that most of us can be fooled, if not all of us. I've got an embarrassing story I could tell but I'm not going to
Because most loudspeakers have such a wonky frequency response, you really have to 'voice' them to get them sounding at their best. And as a result you obviously have to trust your ears.
I personally find that quick A/B dems are only good for sorting out large differences. More subtle ones are found over time.
I don't fully trust my ears but I'm not as easily fooled as I once was (I hope not anyway).
It depends on what we do compare:
Big Accu - Big Krell = a little bit different.
Big se - Big multistage-pp = very very different.
In my experience the frequence-response of speakers is not as necessary as their/the "cleanness" (NOT frequence-response!!!).
The most compare big Accu with big Krell, or other ********, using horrible floorstand-wooden-multiway, and I wonder about "our level of self-delusion"-))) ,-)
Big Accu - Big Krell = a little bit different.
Big se - Big multistage-pp = very very different.
In my experience the frequence-response of speakers is not as necessary as their/the "cleanness" (NOT frequence-response!!!).
The most compare big Accu with big Krell, or other ********, using horrible floorstand-wooden-multiway, and I wonder about "our level of self-delusion"-))) ,-)
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.