Sound Quality Vs. Measurements

Status
Not open for further replies.
I remember reading people who claimed stereo was more or less imagination . Doing a little research made me think perhaps they have a point . Take the 15 db typical separation one might get on a good day back then . If you listen to good mono it is hard to say it's not stereo . This happens in real Life .Gibert Briggs said it well .We have two ears , two speakers makes sense . I shorten and change a little his words . One Garrard 301 . 1 x Williamson amp , 2 x Quad ESL ( 1 if getting there ) . Does it get better ? When the Beatles came perhaps we did need more ? Hi Fi became a genuine part of the music .

I was told Mr K had badges he gave out . One said the company name and one BS . It all depended what you said . I liked the Forte 2's
 
Last edited:
Mark Levinson is a good promoter. He interviews with a mixture of concern for the art of music reproduction and self-interest. It is hard to separate the two, unless you might have known him and worked with him over the years.
John Meyer, of Meyersound, saw through Mark, way back in 1975, when I first gave Mark the JC-3 power amp design. John warned me not to trust the guy, and guess what? He was right.
However, when Mark is 'on track' he speaks as a humble, concerned 'patron of the arts' concerned with 'selflessly' doing good for the reproduction of music. Behind the scenes, he grabs the money, and spends it on himself, leaving the rest of us out. That is why virtually everyone who first worked for him, left his company, either voluntarily or were fired. That doesn't sound like the guy in the interview, does it?
In my case, he refused to pay me further for the JC-2 preamp, saying that he had modified it, and it was not mine, anymore. I got $10 a unit, with NO previous funding for my efforts. When sales got larger, he saw that giving that $10/preamp to me was taking profits away from him, so he cut me off. He DID ask if he could still use MY initials on the product, and I threatened to sue him if he did, so the JC-2 became the ML-1, I am sure at some lawyer's suggestion. As well, the JC-3 became the ML-2, and I never received a penny in compensation for that amp design. And so it goes.

John, you're older than me, so it's not right for me to give you advice, but I will say this - greed in the end consumes EVERY man.

Look where he was, and look where he is now. Now he's a Whiter Shade of Pale in comparison with his heyday.

Personally, I have almost the excat opposite approach. When one of my employees asked me about what were my goals for his salaray, I gave it to him straight - my goal is for you to have as big a salary as the business can afford to give you. He was stunned. I told him that he was thinking about it the wrong way - if his salary was say €1,000, 2.5 times the average local salary, imagine wha MY salary was. And I can't have a big salary if my employees are unhappy and making mistakes, because my warranty will easily eat it all up if things go sideways.

A pity you never got to work with me, John. I'm the nutcase who has never in his 59 years of life done any of these two things: 1) I never once took out a loan, or a credit, or a leasing whatever, I always spent only as much as I made, true of my business and personal life, and 2) I never ever owed anyone any money on any basis - and design work is work, it's not natural that it should not be paid, at least if you want to keep working with that person.

I'm the long haul guy by nature, I still keep in touch with quite a few people I went to high school with, which I graduated in 1971.

Of copurse, I got burned a few times like you did, and it's good that I have, one nevers learns faster than when he's stung. The really only good thing I can say about myself is that I never made the same mistake twice.
 
I remember reading people who claimed stereo was more or less imagination . Doing a little research made me think perhaps they have a point . Take the 15 db typical separation one might get on a good day back then . If you listen to good mono it is hard to say it's not stereo . This happens in real Life .Gibert Briggs said it well .We have two ears , two speakers makes sense . I shorten and change a little his words . One Garrard 301 . 1 x Williamson amp , 2 x Quad ESL ( 1 if getting there ) . Does it get better ? When the Beatles came perhaps we did need more ? Hi Fi became a genuine part of the music .

I was told Mr K had badges he gave out . One said the company name and one BS . It all depended what you said . I liked the Forte 2's

Not nearly that simple, Nige. True, it's our ears which pick up the physical sound, but we actually listen with our brains even more than with our ears. We fill in gaps, we automatically filter out this or that, or have increased sensitivity for this or that, etc.

Since we have just one brain, why do we need the second speaker? :D
 
In his interviews, Mark Levinson stated something that I completely agree with.
That is, that records, especially OLD records, from the '50's and '60's sound exceptionally good on decent audio reproduction equipment. It is like we have LOST how to make a quality recording, because the more recent ones are 'overproduced', that is there is nothing 'natural' about them. This is why people can make even an amateur recording that sounds better than most of what you can buy today.
In the earlier days, it was difficult to do a lot of editing, almost impossible with vinyl, possible but time consuming with analog tape, and now relatively easy with digital. No wonder music is 'overproduced', that is something a normal person can do, today.
 
I hoped I would find the reference in Toole and sure enough: Steinberg, J. C., and Snow, W. B., [1934]. "Auditory perspective---Physical Factors, " Electrical Engineering, vol. 33, pp. 12-17.

See, for commentary, the section in Toole, Sound Reproduction, particularly 15.2 "The Birth of Multichannel Audio", pp. 273-276.

Thanks, this book has for too long been on my to-order list by now, so finally going to get it.
 
In his interviews, Mark Levinson stated something that I completely agree with.
That is, that records, especially OLD records, from the '50's and '60's sound exceptionally good on decent audio reproduction equipment. It is like we have LOST how to make a quality recording, because the more recent ones are 'overproduced', that is there is nothing 'natural' about them. This is why people can make even an amateur recording that sounds better than most of what you can buy today.
In the earlier days, it was difficult to do a lot of editing, almost impossible with vinyl, possible but time consuming with analog tape, and now relatively easy with digital. No wonder music is 'overproduced', that is something a normal person can do, today.

My most prized LP is from around 1960 or 1961, and it's still in mono. Harry Belafonte singing spiritual music, in a church, backed up by an "orchestra" of 60+ voices.

I am far from being mute, but I don't know how to describe that one, you just have to hear it to believe that is possible, such ambience, such outstandingly good music.

After that one, I have never in my life heard another LP which took me so much "there".

Not even Decca Phase 4 Stereo, which I consider among the best, are that good.

My dad bought it in Ankara, Turkey, around 1965, from a second hand shop. It's scratched, but once it gets going, you just don't hear it any more.
 
Last edited:
In his interviews, Mark Levinson stated something that I completely agree with.
That is, that records, especially OLD records, from the '50's and '60's sound exceptionally good on decent audio reproduction equipment. It is like we have LOST how to make a quality recording, because the more recent ones are 'overproduced', that is there is nothing 'natural' about them. This is why people can make even an amateur recording that sounds better than most of what you can buy today.
In the earlier days, it was difficult to do a lot of editing, almost impossible with vinyl, possible but time consuming with analog tape, and now relatively easy with digital. No wonder music is 'overproduced', that is something a normal person can do, today.


I am working to change that . Was talking to someone today about cutting a record for a new group of kids . We will use strict analogue . Don't mind if some processes are digital . Not the cutting . We might do a 78 version . It costs about $5000 to do the minimum .

This is not my work below . However I think me taking every opportunity to say it helps . 78 RIAA microgroove of some of their stuff .

Kitty, Daisy & Lewis - Smoking In Heaven (sampler streams) | Totally Fuzzy Blog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNf7Y7Z5Jq8&feature=related
 
Last edited:
why 78 , 45 would work ....

I did some cuts . 45 was a disappointment and was not really better than 331/3

We didn't spend much time at it on 45 granted . It was Led Zeppelin Stairway to Heaven . Burst out at 78 is a big problem . We were using acetate and not DMM . It was very close to the master . We were A/B in real time . It only got done because I begged . SD 83061-1

That company re cut some Belafonte . It was in 3 channel stereo . The No 3 channel was difficult to get back into the mix I was told .

http://www.discogs.com/Harry-Belafo...gie-Hall-The-Complete-Concert/release/2978376
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.