It doesn't really matter- you're measuring the acoustic output and the electrical signal present at the speaker terminals. Any amp/cable effects are already "built-in."
The amount of favourable distortion produced by an electric guitar, in line with the distortion spectrum of amplifier X (0.001%) to amplifier Y (0.005%)......
Let's just say the electric guitar distortion I'd venture would be something like 20% in comparison to the sound of the electric guitar when it's turned off, i.e. an acoustic electric guitar.
In that light, the distortion produced by the electric guitar is very very high on a statistical scale, but this distortion does not blend at all with the distortion in amplifiers, they are in completely separate realms.
The evidence of the above is we can easily differentiate amplifier X to amplifier Y listening to an electric guitar solo.
The distortion within the music and within the studio is 'disconnected' to the playback equipment.
I recall an article by NwAvGuy writing that studios have "hundreds of NE5532's" in their equipment, as if to say "the music is already destroyed, so we don't need high-end equipment", however that was a wild statement and has nothing to do with reality.
In fact very noisy music can be quite revealing, due to reasons such as the entire frequency range is active at once, or the noisiness is indicting strain on the DAC / amplifier / transducer.
As a coherent example, yesterday I auditioned the new Grado SR325 e, I thought it had very nice layering.
You need layered music to hear that layering, likewise you need noisiness to hear the cavity of noise.
A key point. Poorer systems intermodulate their distortion with that of the recording - it becomes a mess, impossible for the ears to unscramble what's going on - it's a 'terrible' recording ...
A good test are the Robert Johnson recordings - these were recorded with primitive equipment, and the only surviving examples of the material are discs in many cases in very poor condition - the playback can sound like the worst of the worst transistor radios, a caricature of a song being played. But the remarkable thing is that in spite of the terrible degradation of the material enough of the audible cues to the underlying performance have been retained, still - a system in tip top shape can extract all that important fine detail and project it cleanly into the listening space; the ear/brain filters out the relevant information with comparative ease ... and Robert Johnson, the man, appears in front of you, a living, breathing musician - you can 'see' him performing in front of you, and the song has the full impact of a live performance of such ...
That's why it's worthwhile pushing a system to as far as one is capable - the satisfaction in experiences like the above is tremendous ...
Had rather an amusing time ... noted positive comments on the JBL M2 Master Reference Monitor, so thought, ahh, latest, 'professional', monitor speakers - should have plenty of information on how good they are! Silly boy, me ... about as much as one gets on a $200 ghetto blaster, including really significant information like, Ultra Low Distortion - note, in capitals, that makes a Really Big Difference ...
Finally, tucked away in a tiny corner, we see, Perfect Frequency Response, from 40-20,000Hz! Very impressive ... but hey, it uses powerful DSP to get there, so, yes, at one prime position we should get Perfect Sound ...
Nothing like seeing how the professionals do it ... oh, and BTW, what is the distortion performance of the unit ... ?
Finally, tucked away in a tiny corner, we see, Perfect Frequency Response, from 40-20,000Hz! Very impressive ... but hey, it uses powerful DSP to get there, so, yes, at one prime position we should get Perfect Sound ...
Nothing like seeing how the professionals do it ... oh, and BTW, what is the distortion performance of the unit ... ?
Last edited:
Yes, I think your concise comment could have the seed of truth in it I was kind of dancing around aimlessly.
When it comes to comparing fine differences in DAC's, or amplifiers, it doesn't really seem to matter very much what we're listening to, i.e. if it's an advanced studio recording or not.
If true, whatever distortion the studio has in their equipment, it doesn't seem to 'move forward' into the listening room equipment at all, rather it's just nullified anyway......, like the listening session...... pretty much always starts at inherently null distortion...... I could be in error here though.
Last edited:
Hi and sorry but this is very interesting comment at least for me.
i mean the mention of powerful DSP.
As i am evaluating also this option i would like to have your opinion.
Is DSP dangerous for the overall sound quality ?
For DSP i intend mainly a digital EQ, well only that actually.
Thanks a lot, gino
Remote Sensing in power amplifiers???
I'm familiar with this in power supplies but how is it used in audio power amplifiers? Ray
I'm familiar with this in power supplies but how is it used in audio power amplifiers? Ray
Assuming implementation issues aren't messed up (rounding and dither for example) then the issue when using DSP EQ is loss of dynamic range. If you implement a boost of 6dB then that's 6dB dynamic range (1bit) of your DAC thrown away (assuming you don't want to hear clipping) and the DAC is often the bottleneck in the audio system.
I was under the impression that most decent DSP runs at a internal resolution much higher than 16bit in order to avoid those problems
Hi and thanks for the reply. For DSP i meant a digital equalizer.
I think i could place it or after the digital source connected in digital or after the preamp
I saw an impressive demo on youtube ... there is even an autoeq button
The effect seems positive.
Thanks again, gino
gino, I have no issues with DSP at all, even less than abraxalito, . It is the ideal way to get the best possible frequency response from whatever speakers you use, if you come from the angle that optimum behaviour in frequency and phase is the answer to everything, . I don't believe it's an issue in the DACs, provided the latter are working correctly - which of course is Yet Another Issue.
The only downsides are that the DSP area of the electronics has to be well engineered so that no interference from the computer processing - which is what DSP is all about - affects the analogue parts of the circuitry in any way; and that speaker drivers may be pushed, by over-enthusiastic equalising, into misbehaving at times.
. It is the ideal way to get the best possible frequency response from whatever speakers you use, if you come from the angle that optimum behaviour in frequency and phase is the answer to everything, . I don't believe it's an issue in the DACs, provided the latter are working correctly - which of course is Yet Another Issue.The only downsides are that the DSP area of the electronics has to be well engineered so that no interference from the computer processing - which is what DSP is all about - affects the analogue parts of the circuitry in any way; and that speaker drivers may be pushed, by over-enthusiastic equalising, into misbehaving at times.
I have never had an issue, unlike many, with digital volume controls, which work on the basis of discarding bits being fed to the DAC. I was fortunate enough to start with a good quality implementation of one, in the top of the line Yamaha CD player in the mid 80's - I had this directly feeding the power amp, back then, and did many experiments of reducing the volume to miniscule levels, and sticking my ear hard up against the tweeter - never could I hear digital artifacts, any giveaways that something was not right. The only "problem" was a test track recorded at -60dB, with no added dither, played back at full gain, with my ear against the speaker - now I could hear digital "crap", but remarkably the music still came through cleanly, the content was not corrupted in of itself.
Ah now you bring up a specific implementation which looks to be one of Behringer's, I've not listened to this specific model. However when I inspected the innards of another of their digital boxes I was less than impressed with their noise/EMC control within the box itself. So I wasn't tempted to have a listen.
It's also different with frequency. Which frequency (or range of frequencies) is of interest here? Clearly, distortion should be low in the 1 kHz range (where the ear is most sensitive to distortion), but can be much higher in the 20Hz range (where the ear is virtually deaf to distortion).
PSU noise is generally constant with level, so it's the most problematic at low levels (which I think we all know).
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.