John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

[fas42]

Originally Posted by abraxalito

But not the love of money, rather the compulsive need of it.

I am talking of "impure" love, so in that sense we are in complete accord ...

Frank

[abraxalito]

Ah, thanks - yes perfectly in accord

[fas42]

Originally Posted by Kindhornman

When I am listening to live music with these same high frequencies that we are talking about here, the very top of the cymbals or the blat of a horn I don't perceive that as distorted and don't want to go running from the room. But play that same passage back over many loudspeakers and it won't be long before I am feeling ear fatigue, what is that about? Something in the reproduction is not matching the original sound, there is a distortion mechanism at work there.

Yes, that is precisely the problem, from my POV. Where I differ from just about everyone else is that my experiements, fiddlings, have shown me that this is problem of electronics, not transducers. I have been able to get the most miserable of speakers to give me that horn blat realistically, but only after I've worked over, and worked over, and worked over everything earlier in the chain.

Frank

[abraxalito]

You are certainly not alone Frank, David Griesinger found precisely that (I linked to him a few pages back) - its the electronics, duh!

[RNMarsh]

Its percieved as loud noise and thus unpleasant.

[Esperado]

About treeble limitation, i'm not sure most of the soft dome reproduce anything else than they own distortion: some hf noise triggered by the signal :-) At least, this is the impression they give to me.
Personal experience. When i was a young sound engineer, i was in trouble with the cymbals. Always trying to give them more treble, while i was envious about the cymbals of some old engineers. One of them explained me that, with age and less ability to hear trebles, he was correcting them at low frequencies, removing Hf instead of increasing them, searching for 'body'.
With age, my customers told-me my cymbals were very nice. And i have no more problem to isolate and equalize them.
An other anecdote: At home, i use a 1" horn, it is limited at 16Kz. With a lot of power handling. I had never so beautiful trebles, very natural. And each time i had tried to add a tweeter up to 40KHz, i failed to get something coherent or agreeable.
I don't make any conclusion.

.

[john curl]

As requested, I think that slightly over 40 were made.

[SY]

Originally Posted by scott wurcer

I was at a play in Harvard Square some ten or so years ago and this very tall person was sitting next to me. It turned out it was Jonn Kenneth Galbraith. I was at a loss for any pithy questions.

"How can you be so famous when you've been so consistently wrong?"

[gpapag]

Originally Posted by SY

"How can you be so famous when you've been so consistently wrong?"

Ha ha
This quote could fit 99.99% of all famous influential people.
They probably would all answer:”Who, when and where is your “correct” one and on what metrics you base your comparison?”

But contrary to other economists (and Nobel laureates), John Kenneth Galbraith ideas haven’t (yet and as far as I know) any active association with ruined economies either on a small or on a large scale.

George

[Jakob2]

Originally Posted by kgrlee

Would you care to tell us what "positive controls" you think they should used?

In this kind of experiment the experiementer is not able to show the internal validity of the test if he refuses to use positive controls.
If the experimenter does not know any specific effect in his experimental sounds then it is a good idea to use small level differences as a positive control.

IMHO, the Oohashi et al & Nichigushi et al methods are rather less stringent than Meyer & Moran. Only my $0.02 as a (pseudo?) Blind Listening Test guru

Their research goal was different; i mentioned these as a basis of comparison to get an idea which essential informations were missing in the Meyer/Moran article.

If one player had slightly poor low level linearity, what about the other players used in the test? Are you suggesting they were faulty too?

What i am suggesting is that mandatory checks for equipment quality were obviously omitted .

If this was a sighted test, do you think the "slightly poor low level linearity" would have affected the results? In the case of JC, I don't think so as he doesn't even have to listen to come to his conclusion.

Not that I would attribute such rare skills to anyone else on this august forum.

I am sorry, but normally scientific studies were done to rely less on something "I" feel, think or believe.

It may be exaggerated a bit, but in this experiment a unknown number of participants of unknown detection abilities (under test conditions) did listen to an unknown subset (maybe, we don´t know) of a total of 19 records with unknown content (technically spoken wrt to frequency range) over a reproduction chain with unknown overall properties.

The result of the experiment was that the null hypothesis could not be rejected, but no further conclusions could be drawn about reasons