syn08 said:
Little logical connection, a non sequitur with the added taste of ad hominem. Which is your prerogative up to the point it's positioned as the 'scientific point of view'. Possible valid replies:
a) they knew details of the board layout and expectation bias set in
b) random variation
c) the products sounded different
Can we go back to the topic at hand ? Distortions in a preamp ?
Observation - the same people at Stereophile and Absolute Sound have waxed lyrically about tube gear that obviously has much higher distortion content than any of the numbers we're talkning about (120dB below). Some even had a surprising amout of very high harmonic distortion (the graph usually stops at about 20th harmonic, but spectrum was obviously continuing beyond that). It was still described as a seminal product.
Yet we are to trust those people are actually capable of hearing the improvements in layout, resulting in distortion figures several orders of magnitude below that ?
Observation - the same people at Stereophile and Absolute Sound have waxed lyrically about tube gear that obviously has much higher distortion content than any of the numbers we're talkning about (120dB below). Some even had a surprising amout of very high harmonic distortion (the graph usually stops at about 20th harmonic, but spectrum was obviously continuing beyond that). It was still described as a seminal product.
Yet we are to trust those people are actually capable of hearing the improvements in layout, resulting in distortion figures several orders of magnitude below that ?
rdf said:
d) editorial happenstance and politics of that moment.
e) I'm sure there's even more possible explanations.
Bratislav said:
Of course not. They are in the business of selling advertising. The ability to convincingly write entertaining prose that helps sell advertising greatly trumps any technical ability, knowledge of experimental design, or actual hearing acuity.
Peter Daniel said:
me too
But only from measuring purpose, I prefer a slight twist:
1.5 dB steps or 3 dB steps
as this -3dB and -6 dB is a general step for audio amplifier matters.
But for sound steps we can hear.
Yes, 2 dB someting is a very good value.
Regards, Peter
from
Lineup, Halojoy, Gromanswe
john curl said:I have make 4 separate, but related, audio designs that show that layout is important. 2 of these designs were made by an unknown layout person and worked, the other 2 were almost identical in topology and measured distortion, yet they got A ratings in 'Stereophile' and one got a 'product of the year award' in 'The Absolute Sound'. The first two got no ratings at all in 'Stereophile' or 'The Absolute Sound'. What was the difference?
Unfortunately, most of what I try to explain here is based on this difference, and people accuse me of supporting Voo Doo.
It's not Voo Doo, your understanding of the cause and effect, which sometimes is not covered in electronics 101 etc., requires actual experience (complete with motivation and a curious mind). It's a shame that people feel they can read the book and have it all figured out. Reality ain't that simple. I think the current term that applies is drilling deeper; also hands on with an open mind helps.
I was intrigued in 1978 when I built an exact copy of a preamp I couldn't afford (purchased the transformer, lineamp, and phono boards from the OEM) put it together using intuition and luck.
I got a chance to compare to the same highly regarded stock preamp. Pissed the owner off and set me thinking.
The execution is not snake oil and makes a huge difference.
syn08 said:
Actually the absolute sound!, especially through the 80's and part of the 90's has attempting to put what they experienced into words. This was very enlightening to student's of the art.
I could go on, but I won't.
If you're happy with where your at, cool. This doesn't mean there might not be more.
Mike
Bratislav said:
To be fair I rarely recall a common 'Stereophile perspective' on any particular equipment; for example Jonathan Valin's snipes at Greene for pronouncing the most recent - and excellent measuring - Benchmark DAC/Pre essentially 'perfect CD sound', or his cuts on the Stanton preference. The Wavac SH-833 was also entertaining.
Hence the 'possible' qualifier SY. I might not be a lawyer but...
Of more importance, a) through e) are all valid possibilities because of solid logical connection to the hypothesis, something not true of 'paper weight' dismissals. I usually avoid these debates nowadays but nothing still spins me out more than seeing a claim to scientific high ground defended with logical fallacies. Serves no one any good.
Geoff Kait finally got it wrong, I never thought I'd see the day, but this can never work. The real mechanisim to it is a Butterfly Cosmic Servo Feedback Effect, B.C.S.F.E(TM). You should hear only a Steady Baseline Tone, S.B.T.(TM) used for Continuous Real Time Calibration, C.R.T.C.(TM). There are several patents pending on these novel techniques. Obviously it must be continuous, and runs about 2.99 a minute.
The Ultra B.C.S.F.E, aka U.B.C.S.F.E(TM), will relay through a series chain of super sonic satellites in far orbit, S.C.S.S.S.I.F.O(TM). This works immeasurably better as there's no noise in space, and it increases the bandwidth of the B.C.S.F.E(TM), both combining to provide a Cleaner Continuous Real Time Calibration, C.C.R.T.C.(TM). It will forcibly be 10.99 a minute, but most normal users should be satisfied with vanilla B.C.S.F.E, where only very special cases indeed will find the U.B.C.S.F.E(TM) further beneficial.
Full 30 day return if not satisfied, but the process takes 90 days to reach steady state in most areas of the world under most atmospheric conditions for B.C.S.F.E(TM), and only 60 days to reach steady state for U.B.C.S.F.E(TM).
"An unexpected side effect is it also made my tap water clearer and fresher tasting"-Customer
"My grey hair went away"-Customer, turned bald after his wife left.
"It works best of all on my open loop amplifiers"-Customer
"I don't know how to extend enough thanks to you, my whole family has been regular all week, ever since they found out I signed up"-Customer
What a shame that Geoff Kait simply lacks the vision and inventiveness to have perfected this system.
The Ultra B.C.S.F.E, aka U.B.C.S.F.E(TM), will relay through a series chain of super sonic satellites in far orbit, S.C.S.S.S.I.F.O(TM). This works immeasurably better as there's no noise in space, and it increases the bandwidth of the B.C.S.F.E(TM), both combining to provide a Cleaner Continuous Real Time Calibration, C.C.R.T.C.(TM). It will forcibly be 10.99 a minute, but most normal users should be satisfied with vanilla B.C.S.F.E, where only very special cases indeed will find the U.B.C.S.F.E(TM) further beneficial.
Full 30 day return if not satisfied, but the process takes 90 days to reach steady state in most areas of the world under most atmospheric conditions for B.C.S.F.E(TM), and only 60 days to reach steady state for U.B.C.S.F.E(TM).
"An unexpected side effect is it also made my tap water clearer and fresher tasting"-Customer
"My grey hair went away"-Customer, turned bald after his wife left.
"It works best of all on my open loop amplifiers"-Customer
"I don't know how to extend enough thanks to you, my whole family has been regular all week, ever since they found out I signed up"-Customer
What a shame that Geoff Kait simply lacks the vision and inventiveness to have perfected this system.
SY said:
My favorite Stereophile review:
http://www.stereophile.com/tubepoweramps/704wavac/index5.html
150,000 (one hundred fifty thousands dollars and no cents) for the amazing sound of 10% (ten percent) distortions.
On the Absolute Sound. This is hearsay as I don't have any references, but it is my understanding that someone analysed all the reviews of electronics and compared the language used to describe the sound with the color of the front panels. Black paneled equip was described as "dark sounding". Brushed Aluminium sounded "bright" etc etc. Some equipment had a "golden hue". Anyone else heard of this?
myhrrhleine said:
May I suggest this amazing device for storing the optimal sound settings?
http://www.national.com/rap/files/datasheet.pdf
I hope you're not serious. Julian Hirsch gave audio measurement a bad name!Badge said:
Here is a confession: I helped design and build expensive consumer gear with inadequate measurements for years, though I finally got religion after finding out that my co-designer lacked the electrical and physical knowledge he claimed. I had to re-design nearly every part of our electronics. Now our stuff was safe, we did that part of our homework. Still, until recently I had forgotten some practical facts about electric fields in large, charged conductors that I had once learned in school. (I'm an electronic tech.) These were tube preamps and SS amps with fairly standard, solid topologies but silly-good parts.
Our company built the first generation of Shunyata products and played a heavy role in their design. Key elements, including the secret sauce which Shunyata came to call "Fe-Si 1000" (now patented for audio use) were completely done by Shunyata's founder Caelin Gabriel. I called the stuff "stardust" because it looked like itty bitty white pearls, and the customers liked the sound of that. He asked us to measure the conditioners but alas, we were too busy just staying afloat. That material was put around the insulators of the top power cords and around large, widely-spaced series copper plates in the Hydra power conditioners. Stardust/FeSi consists of, IIRC, ferrites encased in silica beads. Well, it seemed to work really well, far better sonically than using nothing, using a whopping isolation trafo, or any other accessory. We never tried just throwing beads on power cords, etc.
All the same, I dished out for a pair of their balanced interconnects (on clearance) a while ago, and they creamed...drumroll...Hosa!
True confessions for your reading pleasure.
rdf said:
To be fair, Stereophile perspective was drawn in only after John used it in discussion to augment his arguments.
I'm tired of shfting sands methodology applied in all these threads.
"We need to reduce distortion". "We need to reduce noise". "We need to reduce RF interference". All rather straightforward, logical statements that can be excellent starting point for the discussion.
We know for example, that we can significantly reduce noise floor in an active circuitry by cooling the electronics to couple of hundred degrees below freezing. It is a well known technique. If the same could be achieved by placing a few synthetic rocks around and wrapping the cables in a plastic bag, we'd see those not just in people's loungerooms but throughout the industry.
If we keep pulling the 'unknowns' out of a thin air, and describing the effecs in purely subjective terms, there could be no sane discussion. That is still fine, but lets not pretend.
(I am not agains the subjectivity at all. I just think it belongs to the medium - the artists, conductors, producers and like. Not electronics)
The human ear has some remarkable properties but also carefully weighted limitations according to nature`s overall purpose of maximum efficiency (as exceeding capabilities would be disturbing). The hearing is not linear in any aspect, essentially being evolved for one specific task: detection. It is supported by an outstanding time sensory system and a large dynamic range, with an especially sensitive area around the speech, 3-5KHz. (Emerging much later, rather the speech evolved to this area, primarily meant for other sounds). It is claimed that 0.1uS difference is distinctive in directional perception, in any case, it`s a well-documented ability (in fact an evolutionary prerequisite of becoming human), had a high survival value in the exposed life or death situation in the Savanna. THD had none.
The ear can easily spot even very slight time errors, while facing major problems with the distortions of amplitude. I continue to be perplexed by the general misinterpretation of harmonic distortion and the neglection of time-based distortions.
The ear can easily spot even very slight time errors, while facing major problems with the distortions of amplitude. I continue to be perplexed by the general misinterpretation of harmonic distortion and the neglection of time-based distortions.
Lumba Ogir said:
Maybe because those don't rate in a well designed simple electronic device (like preamp) ? Even worst of the lot will hardly have any measurable phase distortion in aforementioned band (<5kHz).
I'm all for pushing the boundaries of the art of audio reproduction, but these seem to me speaker/room related. And although I would dearly like to continue discussion along these lines, it really belongs to another thread.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.