PMA said:
Well, the engineer in you surely agrees about the role of pre/amplifier ? That is, "straight wire with gain" ? Or are we supposed to be acting as producers, by coloring the signal ? If former, it is relatively easy to conclude what constitutes the limit of audibility (plenty of studies around. And I mean studies, not the cr@p in audio press). If later, there is nothing we can discuss.
My two penneth for what it's worth.
The HiFi mags of the 80,s used to say walking into a room wearing a digital watch with a piezo buzzer "caused significant blurring etc of sound ). Wiping speaker leads with snake oil "significantly improved sound, the list goes on and on.
Think of all the components the audio signal has been through to get to your speakers, components and topologies over which you have zero control.
In this day and age where we can measure down to the the nth degree, I defy anyone to identify a change in a resistor that is of "good" quality and whose physical attributes ( size etc ) are not in themselves causing an unwanted interaction or effect.
In audio people advocate long warm up times ? It doesn't sound "it's best" untill it's been on a week. Have the components been "run in". It's madness.
Scientific equipment is cooled to minimize noise and maximise performance !
I will guarantee that a change in humidity or moving a piece of furniture or pulling the curtains a couple of inches causes far more audible effect than a resistor change.
Rant over
The HiFi mags of the 80,s used to say walking into a room wearing a digital watch with a piezo buzzer "caused significant blurring etc of sound ). Wiping speaker leads with snake oil "significantly improved sound, the list goes on and on.
Think of all the components the audio signal has been through to get to your speakers, components and topologies over which you have zero control.
In this day and age where we can measure down to the the nth degree, I defy anyone to identify a change in a resistor that is of "good" quality and whose physical attributes ( size etc ) are not in themselves causing an unwanted interaction or effect.
In audio people advocate long warm up times ? It doesn't sound "it's best" untill it's been on a week. Have the components been "run in". It's madness.
Scientific equipment is cooled to minimize noise and maximise performance !
I will guarantee that a change in humidity or moving a piece of furniture or pulling the curtains a couple of inches causes far more audible effect than a resistor change.
Rant over
You cannot sit on a bench and change resistors and say one sounds better than the other because your brain will automatically bias itsef towards one or the other because of the other input its getting: visual.
I dont' have acces s to the articles you refer to John, but I hope they were done double blind plus th e measurements you mention.
My wife is a pschycologist and we had a discussion about the effect known as observer bias the other day. Lets just say this: things are not quite as simple as they seem - the brain does some crazy things.
Only way to make a subjective assessment more objective is a double blind test.
Going back to your articles - if it was measurable then I'll go with the fact that it could make a difference in the sound but I guess it would be quite small.
For similar reasons cited above, we should also not trash IC's or discretes (depending on your persuasion of course). Again, observer bias will not allow you to make a wholly accurate assessment.
I dont' have acces s to the articles you refer to John, but I hope they were done double blind plus th e measurements you mention.
My wife is a pschycologist and we had a discussion about the effect known as observer bias the other day. Lets just say this: things are not quite as simple as they seem - the brain does some crazy things.
Only way to make a subjective assessment more objective is a double blind test.
Going back to your articles - if it was measurable then I'll go with the fact that it could make a difference in the sound but I guess it would be quite small.
For similar reasons cited above, we should also not trash IC's or discretes (depending on your persuasion of course). Again, observer bias will not allow you to make a wholly accurate assessment.
Hey Mooly, you're obviously another deaf objectivist with inferior "system" and no "relevant" experience
Too bad that 99.9% of music we listen to are recorded/mixed/produced using mundane resistors, IC's and (horror) electrolytic or even tantalum capacitors ! I have a copy of this 1942 recording of Furtwangler conducting Beethoven's 9th, you wouldn't believe how obvious is they used carbon resistors throughout
Too bad that 99.9% of music we listen to are recorded/mixed/produced using mundane resistors, IC's and (horror) electrolytic or even tantalum capacitors ! I have a copy of this 1942 recording of Furtwangler conducting Beethoven's 9th, you wouldn't believe how obvious is they used carbon resistors throughout
Let me dig a bit around ... would that be the same "HiFi News" that wrote in 8/1991 about Nelson's SA3.9E (complementary push-pull, rated 60W class-A) : "large number of of parallel output devices operating in semi class-A mode, biased to a standing current of 2A. This allows for a fine class-A output of 16W. As in recent Krell reviews, I dispute ... claims for class A operation". Obviously, very knowledgeable about "audio testing".
Bratislav said:Hey Mooly, you're obviously another deaf objectivist with inferior "system" and no "relevant" experience
Too bad that 99.9% of music we listen to are recorded/mixed/produced using mundane resistors, IC's and (horror) electrolytic or even tantalum capacitors ! I have a copy of this 1942 recording of Furtwangler conducting Beethoven's 9th, you wouldn't believe how obvious is they used carbon resistors throughout
Hello Bratilav
What part of the recording process are you familiar with .
Bratislav said:Hey Mooly, you're obviously another deaf objectivist with inferior "system" and no "relevant" experience
Too bad that 99.9% of music we listen to are recorded/mixed/produced using mundane resistors, IC's and (horror) electrolytic or even tantalum capacitors ! I have a copy of this 1942 recording of Furtwangler conducting Beethoven's 9th, you wouldn't believe how obvious is they used carbon resistors throughout
I thought that would ruffle some feathers. Let me say at the off, that audio is extremely subjective, I know, I have spent all my working life in electronics and have been over the years swayed by this argument or that.
In the end, to me, it's the reproduction of the music that matters, and how well a system recreates just "a little something" of the original.
I havn't got the Furtwangler recording but do listen exclusively to classical. As a (very amateur) pianist, I do know how real instruments sound, and a friend who is a very accomplished amateur musician ( and has played as piano soloist with local orchestra ) commented that my system was "without doubt, the finest domestic replay I have heard".
A piece of wire with gain is no good if you are constantly searching for something better, it's obviously not doing it's job at reproducing music and creating a believable impression of "being there"
Is your system so "technically perfect" that it's spoiling your enjoyment of the Furtwangler, are you not able to hear "through" to the music. This is a major failing I find, you have to ask yourself, what do I really want from my audio system. I want a system that sounds as believable as possible with as much music as possible, not a system where I am constantly "listening" for imperfections. I made that leap years ago.
Audio is so subjective there is no "one size fit's all", my system has evolved and been tweaked to suit me, and to work well in my listening environment.
Which has strayed a little from the original topic I guess
I would like to list the results of the listening test in 'Hi Fi News' back more than 20 year ago.
Vishay VSRJ was first at 94%.
Holco was at 88%
Resista was at 82%
Corning NK3 was 71%
Phillips MRS16 was 75%
Neohm LR1 73% (metal film)
Neohm CFR50 77.5% (carbon film)
Commercial 5% carbon film, Japan 80% ( clearer and less grainy than average)
Vishay VSRJ was first at 94%.
Holco was at 88%
Resista was at 82%
Corning NK3 was 71%
Phillips MRS16 was 75%
Neohm LR1 73% (metal film)
Neohm CFR50 77.5% (carbon film)
Commercial 5% carbon film, Japan 80% ( clearer and less grainy than average)
I have found from READING articles from 'Hi Fi News' by Martin Colloms and Ben Duncan many new insights about caps and resistors. AND they learned from Walt Jung (even Scott Wurcer) and me, and have given us credit for this.
If anyone is really interested, learn how resistors are actually made, what separates the marginal ones from the really good ones, and what leads and end caps they use. Then you will have the knowledge to comment intelligently on these issues.
If anyone is really interested, learn how resistors are actually made, what separates the marginal ones from the really good ones, and what leads and end caps they use. Then you will have the knowledge to comment intelligently on these issues.
rtate said:
Hi rtate. Having fun yet? One recommendation is put a single toe in the water first. Try the PRPs available from Partsconnexion at ~$0.40 a pop. Some hate 'em, some love 'em (count me among the latter), neither is important. If PRPs make an audible difference in your circuit compared to off the shelf generics, for you it's worth chasing resistors. If it makes none, you'll have ventured little financially and gained a sense of style. PRPs look great.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.