Re: Re: Re: Must admit- I was deceived by my own ears
Thats always has been my biggest gripe. I want my system to sound exactly the same, all the time. All kinds of things can influence what audio equipment can do at any given moment.
All I need is an audio system that sounds great and is 100% stable, from head to toe. Stable with 80VAC at the power cord, and enough line noise to make it look like some kind of AM signal. Stable at the overvoltages too. A system that doesn't even blink at fluorescent lighting, dimmer switches, the neighbor’s computer, CB radios, and bad karma.
Have you ever referred to your tubes as a GS system? "Gaseous state".
Ken L said:
Thats always has been my biggest gripe. I want my system to sound exactly the same, all the time. All kinds of things can influence what audio equipment can do at any given moment.
All I need is an audio system that sounds great and is 100% stable, from head to toe. Stable with 80VAC at the power cord, and enough line noise to make it look like some kind of AM signal. Stable at the overvoltages too. A system that doesn't even blink at fluorescent lighting, dimmer switches, the neighbor’s computer, CB radios, and bad karma.
Have you ever referred to your tubes as a GS system? "Gaseous state".
Circlotron said:
Collorary to this is that if someone else makes the same chances you did, there no saying what the results may be - better, worse, no change.
Of course, independent of this, the someone can *perceive* that it is any of those three possibilities. My bet would be he/she perceives it as *better*, whatever the change.
Jan Didden
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Must admit- I was deceived by my own ears
I partly agree with this. I believe that your frame of mind, mood and receptiveness alter your perception of the music.
However, humidity, power level fluctuations, power grundge, temperature do enter into this.
My VAC 30/30 always sounded better after it warmed up, you could tell the difference after one CD.
I don't know about everybody else, but at age 58 I seem to go through periods where I hear better or worse. I know without doubt that some days the tinitus is better than others.
Plus some days I'm just plain better at hoping around on one foot _grin_
Regards
Ken L
janneman said:
I partly agree with this. I believe that your frame of mind, mood and receptiveness alter your perception of the music.
However, humidity, power level fluctuations, power grundge, temperature do enter into this.
My VAC 30/30 always sounded better after it warmed up, you could tell the difference after one CD.
I don't know about everybody else, but at age 58 I seem to go through periods where I hear better or worse. I know without doubt that some days the tinitus is better than others.
Plus some days I'm just plain better at hoping around on one foot _grin_
Regards
Ken L
Hi Ken,
I agree with much of what you said. Obviously there are some glaring differences in systems that *everybody* recognizes. It is when you enter the area of minute, *unmeasureable* differences that you can be easily fooled by yourself, especially if you have an obvious interest in the outcome. Having just spend, say, 300$ on two new coupling caps, it is very, very unlikely that you perceive no differences, independent of the fact if there are any.
What you say about varying sensitivity etc, true, but it is probably not so easy to decide that your hearing apparatus has an off-day, or that your mental disposition is biased or just not in the mood for concentrated listening. Compared to those variations, the variations because of air humidity are probably much less significant, but I am not sure about, just an educated guess.
Jan Didden
I agree with much of what you said. Obviously there are some glaring differences in systems that *everybody* recognizes. It is when you enter the area of minute, *unmeasureable* differences that you can be easily fooled by yourself, especially if you have an obvious interest in the outcome. Having just spend, say, 300$ on two new coupling caps, it is very, very unlikely that you perceive no differences, independent of the fact if there are any.
What you say about varying sensitivity etc, true, but it is probably not so easy to decide that your hearing apparatus has an off-day, or that your mental disposition is biased or just not in the mood for concentrated listening. Compared to those variations, the variations because of air humidity are probably much less significant, but I am not sure about, just an educated guess.
Jan Didden
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Must admit- I was deceived by my own ears
I think back to when I built some of my first systems over 30 years ago. I thought they sounded pretty exciting back then, but if I could listen to them today they would sound very ordinary indeed. So what has changed? My standard of what sounds good. After a while I get used to my latest project and begin to think that things always sounded that way.janneman said:
I've found, in many cases, that by listening for specific clues in recording I have selected as my standards, I can hear the effects of even some subtle changes to the system. Sounds like the foot steps of the person running in the airport on Pink Floyds DSOTM, the impact of the snare drum on the LA Four's Going Home and the ambient noises in the same LP will change in character, depth, position, and/or clarity when the system is changed.
Whether the changes are for the better or worse is a different issue. That is my subjective decision to make, but the point is that the change and it's effect on the sound is real and discernable.
Whether the changes are for the better or worse is a different issue. That is my subjective decision to make, but the point is that the change and it's effect on the sound is real and discernable.
Yes Rodd, you can train yourself to listen for specific clues. It takes an effort and doing it again and again, and even then it can be very hard, as I'm sure you have found out. One of my references is Paul Simon's 'Graceland' and 'I know what I know' with revealing rythms and pacing, also Mark Curry 'It's only time', the whole CD actually. Anyone remembers Ulla Meinecke 'Die Tanzerin' ?
Jan Didden.
Jan Didden.
roddyama said:
I do this too, but you have to be careful. The brain is incredibly good at associating memories with cues from the senses. I've found that once I've heard something for the first time on a new setup, it's quite easy to go back to an old setup and "hear" it again.
Stuff you can hear for the first time after making a change does probably indicate a genuine improvement, but it's still hard to turn that into an objective test.
Cheers
IH
TNT said:
Has anybody else done the following test: plumb in some EQ to your system, and make a dramatic change (e.g. a graphic EQ with the 500Hz slider all the way down, or +5dB treble boost). Leave it that way for a fortnight.
By the end of the fortnight, it might still sound a bit odd, but then take the EQ out: no way will it sound "normal" again! It takes some time before your ears readjust. (This shouldn't come as a particular surprise; your eyes do precisely the same thing with colour balance).
However, I'm not going to dismiss "burn-in", particularly of mechanical components, out-of-hand. I've measured some limited running-in effects on brand new loudspeaker drive units; it's real enough and isn't particularly surprising.
Cheers
IH
An add-on to this line of thought:
I have now had this several times - I make a change I believe will be beneficial (duh), and the first seconds sound somehow awful. Then I learn to appreciate the sound and conclude that it really improved. Only to find out days, weeks, months later, that my first 3 seconds impression were correct - that my change had a demonstrably negative effect, because I took a wrong component value, forgot a wire, whatever.
Conclusion: I now trust my first 3 seconds impression the most. All that comes after is tainted by adaptation and half-conscious denial
I have now had this several times - I make a change I believe will be beneficial (duh), and the first seconds sound somehow awful. Then I learn to appreciate the sound and conclude that it really improved. Only to find out days, weeks, months later, that my first 3 seconds impression were correct - that my change had a demonstrably negative effect, because I took a wrong component value, forgot a wire, whatever.
Conclusion: I now trust my first 3 seconds impression the most. All that comes after is tainted by adaptation and half-conscious denial
Regarding burnin- I'm a believer of burnin for speakers. My Pro audio system I bought pretty much brand new of EV components. The bass units (2 SB180 units with an 18" EVX180B driver in each) I used for the first few times and it was pretty inefficient. but when I pushed it hard a few times I could notice that there was some smell coming out of the speakers. I bet the voice coils were heating up and "breaking in" the speaker suspension. After a few more times the boxes got considerably more efficient and sounded better. I guess PA drivers must start out of the box pretty "tight" cause they're designed to be pushed far beyond anything in the home is.
However my house stereo, Magnepan also states "burn in" is required for that speaker as well. I bought mine used but I think the concept is the same, the planar-magnetic material (or mylar) has to be cycled with heat and power and physical excursion for it to properly stretch out and "burn in".
But for electronics, I'm 'unsure' and dont really have a strong opinion.
However my house stereo, Magnepan also states "burn in" is required for that speaker as well. I bought mine used but I think the concept is the same, the planar-magnetic material (or mylar) has to be cycled with heat and power and physical excursion for it to properly stretch out and "burn in".
But for electronics, I'm 'unsure' and dont really have a strong opinion.
roddyama said:
I have met audiophiles that claim themselves golden ears, and I can prove that I'm better at blind test. (And I can "trick" people simply by choosing specific sound to concentrate at
)But I will never say that one sound is better than the other only in a short period of listening. I have learned that the good sound must be able to make me enjoy the music consistently. What I need to learn is to recognize this sign while tweaking.
Our ears may be tired or something sometime and be subjective, but time will tell the truth. I can concentrate on my work on the laptop, but a good sound will stop me from working. A good sound will stop me from closing my eyes no matter how sleepy I am. I can go to sleep with my music turned on loud enough, a bad sound will wake me up and force me to turn it down as fast as possible. Wake up in the morning with "fresh" ear and brain is the most objective time.
What is the result of those time spent with building audio gears and listening to music? I don't want to know advanced theories (I don't think there is such as "advanced" theory in electronics
), what I need is to know what my brain want so I can please them.
janneman said:
Yes, I understand that, but what I'm talking about is what happened in tweakings. The same CD, the same song. And you know what? Someone once said that when a speaker is good for these types of music but bad for those then the speaker design is wrong. Of course, that statement is totally wrong if we think like a linguistic professor. But if we think differently, i.e. to understand what probably inside the head of the speaker, we will probably agree with his statement.
When I think I found a good crossover (or a good tweak), I will usualy try to find CDs that do not work well in my previous system. Not like you, I don't like music the way most people do. I always claim that I'm not a music lover, but an audio lover. I will surely not enjoy any music out of $20 kitchen radio. But it doesn't mean that you cannot build $20 system that I can enjoy. FM receiver is cheap. What you need is a good antena from cheap cable
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.