John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

[john curl]

Please, everyone, a cheap dynamic mike in MONO is good enough to convey the EMOTIONAL content of the music. Listen to the songs of Little Richard, Chuck Berry, etc! You can even get a bit of it through digital, but not the whole thing.

[PMA]

Originally Posted by Johnloudb

Well, that wouldn't explain why SACD sounds good with good recordings.

To me, SACD is also the best signal source. Maybe, just maybe, the nature of DSD noise helps? Plus very fast, not ringing step response.

[PMA]

Originally Posted by janneman

IOW, the emotional impact of music on listeners has almost no relation to the technical perfection of the reproduction system.

You are saying the same in other words, Jan.

[PMA]

That's right. I mean that LP, which is not perfect at all, may bring 'something' that is more acceptable to human ear than technically clinically reproduced sound. Both are far away from original sound, but LP may have imperfections that are more tolerable (for human perception) than plain technically correct reproduction.

Edit: wow, the post I answered disappeared

[hhoyt]

Certainly the last few posts show that when dealing with anything surrounding 'emotion,' context is God.

If the context is 'emotion' referring to an artists deliberate emotional intent, then the accuracy of the transmission media, be it AM radio, Shortwave, or cell phone cannot keep the emotion from conveying, especially if the emotion is encoded in words. Spoken language is a code which to a native speaker has high intelligibility at poor signal to noise ratios.

If the context of 'emotion' refers to that emotion a listener attaches to a specific song due to their history with it, you don't even need the work of art to be playing anywhere but in the persons head!

For the most part in these contexts, High Fidelity is not a prerequisite. So what emotional context does depend on the accuracy or some other attribute of the transmission media?

I contend that melodic emotion is not nearly as efficient an encoding and requires a higher signal to noise ratio to convey with the same degree of accuracy. Therefore instrumental music in general, and even sung melodies, and thier inherent emotional content is far more dependent on 'fidelity'...what ever that may mean.

However, I have a feeling that what is being probed around for here is none of the above, it is more some 'emotion' or feeling attached to a specific sonic attribute, not anything specific to the actual program content. In this context personal preference would seem to be a factor as well, so I don't think all of us will ever agree on what the 'best sound quality' is.

Wow, and I always wondered what Pandora's Box looked like...

Howard Hoyt
CE - WXYC-FM 89.3
UNC Chapel Hill
www.wxyc.org
1st on the Internet

[pooge]

A couple of months ago, I posted about one researchers explanation for the difference between CD and vinyl. Since this subject keeps coming back around, that post appears to be on point again:

John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

The simple circuitry is shown for anyone who wants to try it. The output needs to be buffered into an input impedance >100kohms. The output impedance of the previous stage should be as low as possible, or the 10k resistors lowered in value by the same amount as the output impedance of the preceding stage.

It supplies an argument for vinyl adding "pleasing distortions".

[Joshua_G]

Indeed, some people say that those people who prefer vinyl prefer it because it adds pleasant distortion.

My view is more like PM's and JC's view, that the faults of vinyl are more tolerable by the human ear than those of digital media. This isn't a general rule, since some people seem to actually like digital media, they hear no fault in it.

As for capturing emotions. There are few different phenomena.

One is the emotions that certain peace of music stirs in us, sometimes. Generally speaking, this has nothing to do with the sound quality of the reproduction system.

The second is the feeling that the reproduced sound sounds closer to live performance. For some people it definitely has an impact on the listening experience.

The third is an emotional experience that is present sometimes in live performance, but is never there when listening to reproduced music. Sometimes the conductor may be elated by the music, sweeping with him the orchestra and the audience. That elation, those emotions aren't expressed in sound waves and cannot be reproduced by electronic gear. At least not at present.

[Soundminded]

Originally Posted by john curl

Please, everyone, a cheap dynamic mike in MONO is good enough to convey the EMOTIONAL content of the music. Listen to the songs of Little Richard, Chuck Berry, etc!

Is nausea an emotion?

[scott wurcer]

Originally Posted by Soundminded

Is nausea an emotion?

[john curl]

"Slippin' and a slidin'!" ;-)