Sound Quality Vs. Measurements - Page 140 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Member Areas > The Lounge

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 25th January 2012, 07:42 PM   #1391
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
Sin Bin
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThorstenL View Post
Hi,



Amplifier, details of it's design and how it fared in subjective evaluation, the whole Stereophile article is here:

Goldmund Mimesis 8 power amplifier | Stereophile.com

Having heard an Amplifier from this generation (not sure if it was a Mimesis 8 or Mimesis 9 though - I suspect a 9 though) I have to say I liked it by far better than most solid state amplifiers I had the chance to hear. It is one of the few SS Amplifiers I'd be willing to live with.

It way bettered big ML Monoblocks we had for comparison in all areas but it played second fiddle to an open-loop tube amplifier (845 Single Ended), so personally I'd probably take a Kondo Ongaku or Baransu if I could have ANY Amp I liked but only one.

Speakers during this evaluation where quite high efficiency I might add (15" PHL Woofer & 2" Compression Driver/Horn giving around 98dB/W/m), which does play a role.

Ciao T
It appears avg at best on the test bench and sonically. I would suggest the weak sloppy bass was due to the small PSU and miniscule output stage, well vs the rest ...
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2012, 07:54 PM   #1392
tvrgeek is offline tvrgeek  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Md
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
The HCA1200 was built in Taiwan, very different from mainland China, the factory looks like one might look in Silicon Valley. Don't worry too much, you will just break something.
I shall be respectful.

Yes, the island is very different. I stand corrected.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2012, 08:08 PM   #1393
diyAudio Member
 
john curl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
Your Rotel was probably made in the same factory. '-)
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2012, 08:15 PM   #1394
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: At the output stage
Send a message via Yahoo to mr_push_pull
this is probably my preferred subject but I wonder why I imagined that it will turn into anything but few people fighting over personal obsessions.

we're fighting over SS vs tubes, FB vs NFB, PP vs SET but we somehow forget that our auditory system does not care about these but only on the final result.

any, and I repeat ANY discussion about audio is absolutely irrelevant if psychoacoustics are ignored. I wish there were more serious studies on this (correlation of perception with measurements) but my personal research showed that real scientists seem to be uninterested in it.

I'm somehow tired of reading assertions from self-proclaimed gurus when could use science.
__________________
we all love a good ol' stereotype until it's against us
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2012, 08:18 PM   #1395
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: At the output stage
Send a message via Yahoo to mr_push_pull
PS: I would add that the few designers which are also interested in the way our ear/brain system works seem to consistently deliver good, widely recognized products
__________________
we all love a good ol' stereotype until it's against us
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2012, 08:20 PM   #1396
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
The problem is, the final result depends on topology. That means, for different topologies different weak points need to be considered, so proper measurement of them would lead to better final result.
__________________
The Devil is not so terrible as his math model is!
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2012, 08:29 PM   #1397
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: At the output stage
Send a message via Yahoo to mr_push_pull
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
The problem is, the final result depends on topology. That means, for different topologies different weak points need to be considered, so proper measurement of them would lead to better final result.
see? that's exactly what I was talking about.

IMO, this a random assertion. and unless it's backed up by some research it stays that way.

what needs to be studied (and for some reason isn't) is what makes a specific topology sound better.
__________________
we all love a good ol' stereotype until it's against us
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2012, 08:33 PM   #1398
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
Sin Bin
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_push_pull View Post
this is probably my preferred subject but I wonder why I imagined that it will turn into anything but few people fighting over personal obsessions.

we're fighting over SS vs tubes, FB vs NFB, PP vs SET but we somehow forget that our auditory system does not care about these but only on the final result.

any, and I repeat ANY discussion about audio is absolutely irrelevant if psychoacoustics are ignored. I wish there were more serious studies on this (correlation of perception with measurements) but my personal research showed that real scientists seem to be uninterested in it.

I'm somehow tired of reading assertions from self-proclaimed gurus when could use science.
You do realize we are talking about an subjective evaluation of the science, problem is most scientist can't hear . so they discount what they do not understand.

Getting a group of inexperienced listeners together who are easily fooled, rigging the results is not science ...

Just saying ...................

Last edited by a.wayne; 25th January 2012 at 08:36 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2012, 08:36 PM   #1399
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
Sin Bin
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
The problem is, the final result depends on topology. That means, for different topologies different weak points need to be considered, so proper measurement of them would lead to better final result.
Ask before , so i will sneak it in again , why no Hybrids, seems it would be the best compromise between all topologies, so why not more Hybrids...?
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2012, 08:44 PM   #1400
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: At the output stage
Send a message via Yahoo to mr_push_pull
Quote:
Originally Posted by a.wayne View Post
You do realize we are talking about an subjective evaluation of the science, problem is most scientist can't hear . so they discount what they do not understand.

Getting a group inexperienced listeners together who are easily fooled, rigging the results is not science ...

Just saying ...................
I totally agree with this.

I've read many papers on various aspects of psychoacoustics. most of the times, nothing is mentioned about: the subjects used (are they trained listeners? are they average listeners? are they young, old, proven to have good hearing etc?), used gear, listening room etc. also, short sound samples are often used (isolated piano, sax you get the idea), while things can largely change with real music. also, many aspects of perception seem to be deliberately ignored (transient portion of notes is ignored, only the steady-state portion is analyzed).
it kinda makes sense, why would a scientist having all the meas at hand (most likely working for a corporation) be interested in something that appeals to a small percentage of the public? well... it's sad.
__________________
we all love a good ol' stereotype until it's against us
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Quality Control differences = variations in sound quality? KT Class D 3 4th June 2014 01:02 AM
Sound Card for Measurements Marik Solid State 2 2nd January 2012 09:59 PM
Sound Card Recommendations (For Audio Measurements) dchisholm Equipment & Tools 5 16th July 2011 10:40 AM
How to protect sound card during amp measurements? okapi Everything Else 13 2nd September 2008 04:06 PM
Sound cards - test and measurements jackinnj Everything Else 2 5th July 2003 04:02 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:09 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2