Yes, but you would probably not want to be fooled into thinking you had succeeded by a lying piece of gear.
Also, T., my friend, to stay out of trouble maybe wiser to express thoughts without allusions in relation to people and fingers, if you know what I mean.
This is interesting as you are in the case where there is a pollution source and clearly measurable changes. I look forward to any results.
I mentioned current clamping of the IC's and PC's for a good reason.
If you examine the ground loop path formed by the entire system, you note the LF audio will split return between the PC ground and the IC shields, ratio dependent on impedances back to source. (Single ended).
Amplifier haversine current draw at third line harmonic (modulated by output power and output polarity) as well as gated higher frequency draw, will depend heavily on the AC source impedance. Amp line draw is intimately physically tied to a portion of the source current grounding path, and will invariably couple at some level to the ground loop.
As well, any Y filter that returns line noise to the PC ground will as well.
Removing all the line noise physically prior to establishing the ground loop is the correct way to do this.
While differential is far better for inputs, it is not perfect either. A physical presence of shunted currents within any chassis rears the ugly head of coupling.
Edit: I tried to link to my gallery pic of ground loop calc, but don't know how to with the new forum software and an IPad.
Jn
Ps. Happy Father's Day.
If you examine the ground loop path formed by the entire system, you note the LF audio will split return between the PC ground and the IC shields, ratio dependent on impedances back to source. (Single ended).
Amplifier haversine current draw at third line harmonic (modulated by output power and output polarity) as well as gated higher frequency draw, will depend heavily on the AC source impedance. Amp line draw is intimately physically tied to a portion of the source current grounding path, and will invariably couple at some level to the ground loop.
As well, any Y filter that returns line noise to the PC ground will as well.
Removing all the line noise physically prior to establishing the ground loop is the correct way to do this.
While differential is far better for inputs, it is not perfect either. A physical presence of shunted currents within any chassis rears the ugly head of coupling.
Edit: I tried to link to my gallery pic of ground loop calc, but don't know how to with the new forum software and an IPad.
Jn
Ps. Happy Father's Day.
Last edited:
Don't you think any studio production is a lie, any microphone a lying piece of gear ?
As well as any monitors witch are your unique references ?
In fact, most of sound engineers use various pieces of gears for the "colors" they brings, rather looking for "fidelity". Many of them carry a case with their favorite mics, and even a couple of near field monitors they are used to.
If you are a sound engineer, you are supposed to have learned how to listen, and to figure out and compensate the drawbacks of the studio you are working-in.
(When I say "you", I do not point fingers at you, speaking in a general way ;-)
That is what we all do, when we listen to music in our cars ... Enjoy the moment, the trip, the music. And if i know a lot of musicians, I know few of them that are so interested in "Hifi".
A hifi system is an other quest on my point of view.
For me, it is (was) a quest for a reference to can judge the quality of my (and others) work in their smallest details.
It can be a desire to value oneself, I know some people that love to show their system, with always the same set of impressive (for them), but boring records. Like super cars.
It can be the desire to build a perfect system, trying to improve-it constantly.
It can be the desire to learn, can be, obviously for some, a (funny) quest of absolute in a so relative medium...
So many various combinations of motivations.
But I don't understand this question of "budget". We all have to live with our budgets limitations, the ratio we put in the system and in the music is question of our personal preferences. More music, you are a music lover, more gear, you are an Audiophile.
I just wonder why so many negative and aggressive messages about this AC filter tip, that Richard suggested in the unique goal to help us to improve our systems..
It is exactly the kind of thing that the poor audiophile should try. Improvements expected where it matters on a musical point of view (separation between instruments, little details, easy listening) for few bucks.
I am one of them (poor), like most of us, here, I imagine: Who like to spend time to build things by himself that he can buy all done, with less risk and a better look.
(Btw: I would love to have those JBL (I'm sure it is, at this time, the best speakers money can buy). But I'm not rich enough. I am just happy some can have them, I have sympathy for their good judgment and the accuracy of their choices, not jealous at all: it does not change anything that I have or don't have.)
Hi Tournesol.
And therein lies a problem, and this is mostly to do with the bass, the foundation of the whole illusion.
I find that when running system with well capable bottom end that there is great variation in the mastering level/eq in lower and bottom bass.
Self powered sub input level control and LP filter settings are very useful and indeed mandatory for getting the lows correct and then the rest (mids/highs) falls into place.
It is critical that mastering monitors are full band, and sadly it seems that much such monitoring speakers are not fully fit for purpose.
A big part of mastering skill is in getting the lows correct, and if the engineer/producer can't hear what's going on 'way down there' then the result is a crapshoot, as is evident in so many releases.
'Bandwidth challenged' systems may give the 'impression' of bass, but don't properly reveal the variations in bass end mastering, so the subjective result is much less variable/more uniform.
The likes of 8" two ways and lesser loudspeakers are fun but they don't tell the whole truth, and are essentially useless for critical mastering and critical playback.
Dan.
All true, but it means you are able to know what the end result is really going to be on the record, in particular that it will translate and sound good on many systems. All the other examples you gave were for people who didn't need to know, or care to know the factual truth of what is on the record (whatever artistic concoction it may be).
Mastering is supposed to be done in a purpose-built room, definitely with extremely accurate full-range speakers.
Now, if you are talking about problems with bass on phonograph records, the medium has its own limitations and or trade-offs.
For CDs there is no reason why the bass should be off unless somebody tried to do a DIY mastering job using an inadequate-for-the-purpose reproduction system. That being said, sometimes there are problems with bands, musical arrangements, and musicianship that work to create problems with bass. In such cases, often the artist refuses what would be necessary to fix the problem or can't afford what it would cost in time and money. In those cases the mix and mastering engineers may be stuck with task of 'turd polishing,' which nobody likes to do and may be impossible to do well.
Last edited:
Yes in the entire history of DIYaudio only Richard has tried to help people improve their systems. Everything else since 2003 on here is a total waste of everyone's time as it's not trying to help.Tournesol;5465178 I just wonder why so many negative and aggressive messages about this AC filter tip said:
You are trying to tell people what they will hear. How do you know that is what they will hear?
^^^^^^^^^^^
They have Y caps from hot to safety ground to start with. Then they have ferrite beads which seem to rarely work out well, so hard to know. Then there's a CMC or some kind that is probably saturating all the time during transients. They surely use a standard core which means saturation slowly sets in, and occurs earlier than you think, so they need to be oversized appropriately. There are other things I could talk about but I'll leave it at the fact that they seem to have a magical ability to just not sound good.
6 kids and no cards for me. Phooey.
Each time I look at those drawings I see something I missed and then my brain hurts. I have questions, will try and get them out coherently as this aspect of electron herding should be easy and oftern isn't
I never did. Must have happened, perhaps. But mostly, something didnt work and the dealer would exchange it. Or unit took lightning hit and disconnected and we get call thanking us for saving all their gear. Some would call because they were surprised at change. Most people didnt say anything if it did what they expected.
There were two types of buyer.... both needed more power outlets …. but lower cost models were sold to people who wanted to protect thier A-V investment. The higher priced units sold to people who wanted their sound system to be sound better with protection second consideration.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Granted, but I was more interested in what he said recording/mixing engineers said about monitor speakers and their foibles.........
I find this to be the case as well. Studio's usually have a small 2way near field AND a full range system to listen to... built into wall. This helps get the bass part right. But many garage recordings and even some studios with less experience.... and near field monitors … get the bass level wrong on playback at home with full range speakers. The bass is the most variable in recordings from a studio. and it is the area I put the most effort into getting it right.
THx-RNMarsh
How many people took their Bose 901's (when they cost 2-3x the competition) back for a refund?
He is correct that they sound different. it is because mastering speakers are near-Field speakers and living room speakers are listened to in the far field where the room dominates the sound . I pointed this out recently. It is why you ought to listen near-field and eliminate the room influence as much as possible. Then you will hear what the mastering eng hears. Assuming high quality spkrs.
THx-RNMarsh
How would I know? If they cared about sound quality and accuracy, I expect most of them would return them.
Studios dont use them for mastering.
My only position is an accurate reproduction. Not likes and sound affects like Bose.
I do agree that people have thier personal likes and dislike and can be sold on most anything. Fine. Thats not my stand though.
My belief and hope is that Hi-End ought to mean more than high price. It is about greater accuracy. Just because a company tries to be High-End, and is expensive has no relationship to whether it will be accurate... though accuracy requires precision and expense increases. So, we need to be more informed. Here at least, we can try harder than joe public.
-RM
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.