Sound Quality Vs. Measurements - Page 228 - 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 12th February 2012, 08:38 PM   #2271
diyAudio Member
 
john dozier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: columbia sc
BBC +10! They have forgotten more about recording than most people have ever known Their broadcast transcriptions were superb-the best LPs ever pressed. Available only to broadcasters and had to be destroyed after a certain number of plays and if memory serves you had to certify their destruction. I must confess that I did not tell the truth and kept the discs. Regards
__________________
Evil looms. Cowboy up. Kill it. Get Paid.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2012, 08:42 PM   #2272
diyAudio Member
 
john dozier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: columbia sc
I always found the Phase 4 lps to be somewhat bright, but they certainly had extreme clarity. A matter of taste I suppose. Regards BTW I loved the liner notes on "Pass in Review" A dixieland band is followed by a Salvation Army Band "sternly admonishing the hosts of Satan that have gone before". Regards
__________________
Evil looms. Cowboy up. Kill it. Get Paid.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2012, 08:50 PM   #2273
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
I bet, distortions VS sugar is exactly wrong, confusing analogy. They don't sound like a sugar, they sound like garbage. Well, when they are low order and increase with loudness, they are perceived like increased loudness, so people claim it is "too loud" instead of "too distorted".
No, when something is very slightly louder than another thing (we're talking a few percent, not 50%), people think the louder one is more detailed, open, clearer. Try a DBT where the person who's taking the test thinks you're comparing amps when what you're really doing is changing level by 0.2 or 0.3dB. See what descriptors they use.

A lot of literature on this, that is why level-matching is vital in honest comparisons.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2012, 09:47 PM   #2274
DF96 is offline DF96  England
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by john dozier
BBC +10! They have forgotten more about recording than most people have ever known
Sadly, the BBC have (sometimes) now forgotten about recording. It now seems to be pot luck whether a particular live concert has a good sound engineer or an incompetent one. Best to stay with 1970s and 80s BBC recording, when they still knew how to do it and Angus McKenzie would quickly tell them on the few occasions they got it wrong.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2012, 10:21 PM   #2275
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvv View Post
Also, could you comment on Decca Phase 4 stereo series of LPs, I am very curios, as I hold them to be the best stereo I have ever heard in standard LP fare (although their choice of recorded material leaves something to be desired - Mantovani?), i.e. not some special edition, or a product from a small, ultra purist company?
I have read about Decca classical recordings before. They were the opposite of 'minimal':

Quote:
Even after stereo became standard and into the 1970s, Decca boasted a special, spectacular sound quality, characterised by aggressive use of the highest and lowest frequencies, daring use of tape saturation and out-of-phase sound to convey a lively and impactful hall ambiance, plus considerable bar-to-bar rebalancing by the recording staff of orchestral voices, known as "spotlighting." In the 1960s and 1970s, the company developed its "Phase 4" process which produced even greater sonic impact through even more interventionist engineering techniques.
Decca Records - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They did sound good, though! Thorsten, would you expect to be able to hear the difference between interconnects, mains cables etc. when listening to these LPs?

Last edited by CopperTop; 12th February 2012 at 10:23 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2012, 10:24 PM   #2276
tvrgeek is offline tvrgeek  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Md
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
You can wait forever, if don't start looking at valid points in others' opinions. No matter were strawman "conventional measrements" beaten to death, they still pop up like the major proof of "wire with gain".

wire with gain must not add dynamic distortions. If it does, no matter how small "beaten strawman distortions" are, it is not a wire with gain

Edit: our perceptions are adaptive. Go to the room, close eyes, ask somebody change something while your eyes are closed. Open eyes and tell what's the difference. I bet, the longer you wait before opening your eyes, the worse is the result. See if something is moving when your eyes are open. The slower it moves, the less you see changes.
Dynamic matters!
But it is about vision. Hearing relies on dynamics even more. Take piano sound, change attack/sustain/decay phases, and you can't tell what is the instrument. I know hat well, because I experimented with such dynamics a lot designing synthesizers.
That's why tiny changes in sounds caused by sag of PS and poor PSRR, change of nature of distortions when different stages are differently driven, and so on, is much more audible than some 0.01% f 2'nd order distortions added on steady sine tone. Dynamic matters

Now we are getting to things that may matter but aren't part of the "traditional," as in slick sheet, measurements. They can be understood and measured. They even pass the sniff test!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2012, 10:31 PM   #2277
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvrgeek View Post
Now we are getting to things that may matter but aren't part of the "traditional," as in slick sheet, measurements. They can be understood and measured. They even pass the sniff test!
No they don't when you know where, when and what for to sniff.
__________________
The Devil is not so terrible as his math model is!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2012, 10:32 PM   #2278
bcarso is offline bcarso  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Canoga Park, California
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvrgeek View Post
Now we are getting to things that may matter but aren't part of the "traditional," as in slick sheet, measurements. They can be understood and measured. They even pass the sniff test!
Can't resist with that setup: I laughed heartily reading the latest Stereophile's Fremer review of the gargantuan MBL 9011 power amplifier, which MF hooked up with some kind of exotic interconnect, left the room, and came back to smell burning electronics. He found that the unit still functioned and proceeded with the review, but one rather wonders what effect the burning component(s) had on the performance. A second choice of interconnect caused the amp to shut down immediately. Oy!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2012, 10:34 PM   #2279
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
No, when something is very slightly louder than another thing (we're talking a few percent, not 50%), people think the louder one is more detailed, open, clearer. Try a DBT where the person who's taking the test thinks you're comparing amps when what you're really doing is changing level by 0.2 or 0.3dB. See what descriptors they use.

A lot of literature on this, that is why level-matching is vital in honest comparisons.
You mean different thing. I don't mean higher level of sound, I mean higher level of low order distortions that are perceived as increased loudness that causes instinctive desire to turn volume a bit down.
__________________
The Devil is not so terrible as his math model is!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2012, 10:40 PM   #2280
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcarso View Post
As John Dozier pointed out, there have been (and continue to be) recordings made with some wonderful gear, and not beaten to death in the post-processing --- even if these amount to a tiny fraction of recordings.

But also: even with ghastly source material, one can become very familiar with it. So it may not be such a stretch that the alterations attendant on different playback systems will be audible.
I'm sure there are people who use minimal recording techniques, but there's no way that the simplest recording doesn't rely on several op amps in the recording chain, and probably a few SMPSs. I doubt many of them worry about what mains cable they use. Their (balanced) interconnects will not be cotton covered, and will be tens of metres long in total; they will not use a special type of weave.

Of course the nonlinearities in the final amplifier in the chain are applied to the entire mixed down signal, whereas the individual tracks that went into the recording could, to some extent suffer from distortion without causing IMD between them. And the power amplifier has a more difficult job to do than line level mixers etc., so it is important. But I still think that worrying about the final 0.5m of interconnect cable into the amp seems, on the face of it, to be absurd.
  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 12:02 AM
Sound Card for Measurements Marik Solid State 2 2nd January 2012 08:59 PM
Sound Card Recommendations (For Audio Measurements) dchisholm Equipment & Tools 5 16th July 2011 09:40 AM
How to protect sound card during amp measurements? okapi Everything Else 13 2nd September 2008 03:06 PM
Sound cards - test and measurements jackinnj Everything Else 2 5th July 2003 03:02 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:21 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