I think this was the article I was telling you about, Carlos
http://stereophile.com/news/011004ces/
"We also heard David Wilson's fascinating presentation of his conception of system hierarchy. He compared a pair of Wilson Sophias driven by a Parasound stereo power amplifier with a competitor's flagship speaker and an extremely powerful premium-priced amplifier. Not, as he explained, because he thought the Sophias sounded better, but to prove that meaningful comparisons could be made between systems assembled according to different priorities. This was a demo aimed at his hi-fi dealer clientele, after all (it's a trade show, remember?), but there's a kicker: after we all confirmed that we could hear meaningful differences, Wilson whipped a fake component shell off the digital source and revealed that with the Wilson speakers we weren't listening to the $20,000 CD player that had been used for the competitor's speakers, but an Apple iPod playing uncompressed WAV files!"
I guess it wasn't a $1,500 CD-Player that the was producing the garbage, it was a $20,000 one
I thought they had specifically discussed designing the system around a $10,000 price point, but I was wrong.
http://stereophile.com/news/011004ces/
"We also heard David Wilson's fascinating presentation of his conception of system hierarchy. He compared a pair of Wilson Sophias driven by a Parasound stereo power amplifier with a competitor's flagship speaker and an extremely powerful premium-priced amplifier. Not, as he explained, because he thought the Sophias sounded better, but to prove that meaningful comparisons could be made between systems assembled according to different priorities. This was a demo aimed at his hi-fi dealer clientele, after all (it's a trade show, remember?), but there's a kicker: after we all confirmed that we could hear meaningful differences, Wilson whipped a fake component shell off the digital source and revealed that with the Wilson speakers we weren't listening to the $20,000 CD player that had been used for the competitor's speakers, but an Apple iPod playing uncompressed WAV files!"
I guess it wasn't a $1,500 CD-Player that the was producing the garbage, it was a $20,000 one
I thought they had specifically discussed designing the system around a $10,000 price point, but I was wrong.
motherone,
If untight bass comes out of the source component (a very common problem with "jittery" digital players, which is to say most of them), there's no speaker that can correct that.
Well... if the speaker has no bass at all...
Do you know what always happens when the bass is not defined, tight, precise?
It robs all the detail on the midband and treble, it masks subtler sounds behind the mix, it makes them unperceptible.
If the problem is in the signal, you can't correct it with a super-duper powerful amp, and you can't correct it with the best speaker in the world.
Who fails to understand this will never be able to build a good system.
This is not directed to you, so don't take me wrong.
It's to everyone.
If untight bass comes out of the source component (a very common problem with "jittery" digital players, which is to say most of them), there's no speaker that can correct that.
Well... if the speaker has no bass at all...
Do you know what always happens when the bass is not defined, tight, precise?
It robs all the detail on the midband and treble, it masks subtler sounds behind the mix, it makes them unperceptible.
If the problem is in the signal, you can't correct it with a super-duper powerful amp, and you can't correct it with the best speaker in the world.
Who fails to understand this will never be able to build a good system.
This is not directed to you, so don't take me wrong.
It's to everyone.
carlosfm said:motherone,
If untight bass comes out of the source component (a very common problem with "jittery" digital players, which is to say most of them), there's no speaker that can correct that.
Well... if the speaker has no bass at all...
Do you know what always happens when the bass is not defined, tight, precise?
It robs all the detail on the midband and treble, it masks subtler sounds behind the mix, it makes them unperceptible.
If the problem is in the signal, you can't correct it with a super-duper powerful amp, and you can't correct it with the best speaker in the world.
Who fails to understand this will never be able to build a good system.
This is not directed to you, so don't take me wrong.
It's to everyone.
I agree. However, aren't your primary speakers Epos ES-11's? I've never heard them, but since they're 2 ways, I'm guessing they don't go plunging much below 40hz?
I've mainly been tweaking my DAC via headphones. My speakers are decent, but probably not up to snuff (Acoustic Research AR-17 minimonitors and AR-11 3-ways). I've been keeping my eye out for a nice set of Triangle's, Epos or possibly the Infinity Intermezzo 2.6.
It's too bad you're on the other side of the world, Carlos. It'd be fun to listen to your system to see what it's all about. Text really doesn't convey the experience to me. Plus, I really can't stand audiophile adjectives, so hearing is the best way for me to understand.
motherone said:
Yes, more than enough to compare two cd players and clearly detect which one is good and which one just killed the whole sound of my entire system.
motherone said:
I don't know how much you would be willing to spend.
Epos still makes some very good speakers.
And I like the Rega Ela speakers very much too.
If you can't buy new, buy second-hand.
motherone said:
I couldn't agree more.
I love to listen to music with good company.
Specially when it sounds good.
carlosfm said:
Most likely I'll be buying used. Most of the gear I want isn't available new any more. I've thought about the Epos ES-11 and 14. Those go for $500-700 in the states. The one I'm leaning towards right now for my "compact" system is a pair of Triangle Titus 202s. Those generally go for $350ish.
The speakers that I'd love to get the most are the Infinity Renaissance 90's ... But those are out of my hi-fi budget for right now. Even used and 10-15 years old, they still command $2000+.
carlosfm said:
I couldn't agree more.
I love to listen to music with good company.
Specially when it sounds good.
It would be good times! Thankfully there's forums like this one where all of us can come and argue and compare and learn
It is interesting that while many of you place great emphasis on dollar value of components and which is the critical component in the chain, which clock jitter reduction technology is the best, you all seem to forget the without-a-doubt MOST important item in the chain.
All of you take this component for granted and then feverishly try to justify and argue the perceived differences in sound quality with differing setups, cables, sources, amps, speakers and the like...
But how many of you have actually had this particular component tested, measured, calibrated??? I suspect few if any!!! Do you even know what I am referring to?
So I suggest you go and get this item tested. You will learn why you like a particular system, or why you can hear something extra in a particular setup.
The item I am referring - the human ear.
I know exactly what my ears behave like... do you?
All of you take this component for granted and then feverishly try to justify and argue the perceived differences in sound quality with differing setups, cables, sources, amps, speakers and the like...
But how many of you have actually had this particular component tested, measured, calibrated??? I suspect few if any!!! Do you even know what I am referring to?
So I suggest you go and get this item tested. You will learn why you like a particular system, or why you can hear something extra in a particular setup.
The item I am referring - the human ear.
I know exactly what my ears behave like... do you?
apollyon25 said:
More important than that:
On a real listening test you can clearly distinguish the experienced listeners from those that can be very easily fooled.
This is really what's important when evaluating a system.
To be a good listener, as audio goes, is not just to be able to listen up to 20Khz.
Some young children can listen to those frequencies.
But the most experienced listener can be the 80 year old man who can now just listen up to 10 Khz.
He can still evaluate transparency, soundstage, dynamics, and he has the experience and the trained ear to do so very consistently.
Anyway, listening experience doesn't come with age, it just comes with... experience.
Experience in evaluating, listening to all kinds of gear, from the best to the worst, from the cheap to the ultra-expensive, being put to the test on a daily basis.
The best listener I know sells hi-fi (and high-end, expen$ive) equipment.
What do human ears have to do with specs?
Reducing music listening to specs is, again, stealing the emotion out of the music listening experience and instead stick a scope there and evaluate.
If you know exactly how you ears behave like (!)
, you must be the single human in the world that knows exactly what he's going to listen before you actually listen.
I agree with your comment "if you think it sounds good, it is good" which was sort of my point...
My point was that if you have the nuances of your hearing mapped, you can then make a more OBjective analysis of a system. And listening tests are inherently and entirely SUBjective.
So what do I care if some reviewer (or you for that matter) says it sounds great with all their waffle about perceived-by-them imaging, dynamics and soundstage... I dont have his ears...
"Listening Experience" does not solve this... unless I have his ears.
Slightly off my point, but Carlos, you asked "What do human ears have to do with specs?" and made mention that "Reducing music listening to specs is, again, stealing the emotion out of the music listening".
I think that picking transparency, soundstage, dynamics etc out of a system isnt really listening to the music either. It is creating immeasurable specs from a flawed measurement device, which is exactly the same 'stealing the emotion' you claim you get from specifications.
btw, I have both a scope and an analyser...
My point was that if you have the nuances of your hearing mapped, you can then make a more OBjective analysis of a system. And listening tests are inherently and entirely SUBjective.
So what do I care if some reviewer (or you for that matter) says it sounds great with all their waffle about perceived-by-them imaging, dynamics and soundstage... I dont have his ears...
"Listening Experience" does not solve this... unless I have his ears.
Slightly off my point, but Carlos, you asked "What do human ears have to do with specs?" and made mention that "Reducing music listening to specs is, again, stealing the emotion out of the music listening".
I think that picking transparency, soundstage, dynamics etc out of a system isnt really listening to the music either. It is creating immeasurable specs from a flawed measurement device, which is exactly the same 'stealing the emotion' you claim you get from specifications.
btw, I have both a scope and an analyser...
apollyon25 said:
We agree here.
Don't trust anyone, don't trust a review from a mag.
Too often I get shocked when I listen to a much raved product.
If you wanna know what it's worth, you must listen for yourself.
But if you know someone who you can trust to give you an oppinion, if that someone has proven you many times, that he does know how to evaluate, then trust him/her.
When I say if you know someone, I mean personally.
The internet is a shot in the dark.
Anyone can trust my or your oppinion if he/she wants, it's a matter of faith or a matter of reading posts and making your decisions on who's oppinions you think you can trust.
for what it is worth:
i bought mags for the pics, not for the stories.
20 years ago my pants dropped from reading tech details the audio mag "expert" journalist wrote, and it seems little has changed since.
Looked to me like those guys knew/know Sheet ! about audio electronics, and i have read all of them, in any lingo.
The only one so far that is accurate is the French "La Nouvelle revue du son" , mainly because Jean Hiraga is the main editor is my hunch.
(i just wonder how many of their print is read abroad ? )
Je m'on Fou !
i bought mags for the pics, not for the stories.
20 years ago my pants dropped from reading tech details the audio mag "expert" journalist wrote, and it seems little has changed since.
Looked to me like those guys knew/know Sheet ! about audio electronics, and i have read all of them, in any lingo.
The only one so far that is accurate is the French "La Nouvelle revue du son" , mainly because Jean Hiraga is the main editor is my hunch.
(i just wonder how many of their print is read abroad ? )
Je m'on Fou !
opa....Biasing to class A?
Hi,
Well I got my adapters and tried the 627 in my parasound preamp and the difference was almost as great as teh step up going from ad712 to opa2134 to opa627. Both BB's sound really good to me.
How does one go about biasing an opamp to run in class A? To Bypass the power with caps, I need poloraized caps and need to feed the power through them (in the + and out the - to the + leg of the opamp, right?)
Thanks for the input.
God bless...
Mark
Hi,
Well I got my adapters and tried the 627 in my parasound preamp and the difference was almost as great as teh step up going from ad712 to opa2134 to opa627. Both BB's sound really good to me.
How does one go about biasing an opamp to run in class A? To Bypass the power with caps, I need poloraized caps and need to feed the power through them (in the + and out the - to the + leg of the opamp, right?)
Thanks for the input.
God bless...
Mark
Re: opa....Biasing to class A?
To bias into Class-A, you would either need a cascoded jfet or a current regulating diode. The simplest way is with a resistor, but I can't remember what the detrimental side of it is. Go to http://www.tangentsoft.net and read his section about biasing op-amps into Class-A.
For bypassing the opamp, you could go with a small electrolytic (maybe 10uF) bypassed with a .1uF ceramic should work. You'll need to run one opamp between the positive supply and the ground (+ terminal on electro to positive rail, - to ground), and the other between the negative supply and ground (+ on electro to ground, - to negative rail).
That's pretty much all there is to it. Some guys might dispute the amount of bypassing capacitence you need. Others might say to just go with a high value film cap (say a 3.3uF or 6.6uF metallized poly). It probably doesn't matter as long as it's properly bypassed. If you do use an electrolytic, go with a low ESR cap (Nichicon HE(M), Panasonic FC/FM, Elna Cerafine or any number of Black Gates).
Htguy said:
To bias into Class-A, you would either need a cascoded jfet or a current regulating diode. The simplest way is with a resistor, but I can't remember what the detrimental side of it is. Go to http://www.tangentsoft.net and read his section about biasing op-amps into Class-A.
For bypassing the opamp, you could go with a small electrolytic (maybe 10uF) bypassed with a .1uF ceramic should work. You'll need to run one opamp between the positive supply and the ground (+ terminal on electro to positive rail, - to ground), and the other between the negative supply and ground (+ on electro to ground, - to negative rail).
That's pretty much all there is to it. Some guys might dispute the amount of bypassing capacitence you need. Others might say to just go with a high value film cap (say a 3.3uF or 6.6uF metallized poly). It probably doesn't matter as long as it's properly bypassed. If you do use an electrolytic, go with a low ESR cap (Nichicon HE(M), Panasonic FC/FM, Elna Cerafine or any number of Black Gates).
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.