No doubt about better systems sound better. But the observed phenomenon is more typical to loudspeaker system.
Simple. Your amplifier has low PSSR or do not have sufficient protection against EMI or has oscillation, etc. Those problems will have more impact to listeners having speaker with flat response to 40kHz.
But I suspect, there are situations where speakers are just plain wrong, but is considered better because it uses more expensive parts (which of course will be impressive in a few area). So when it sounds terrible with marginal recordings, the recording is to blame not the speaker.
It's like moving bottleneck (weak link), e.g. from speaker to electronics. At the end of the day (of the weak links removal process) you may not be able to accept opamp
Seriously.Lynn and many others in this thread have more experience with tube than I do. I had a long period cannot accept tube in my system, until I did a no-compromise effort on the heater power supply. It was easy to fall into thinking that heater power supply is not that important (at least almost all projects on the net are using cheap regulation on the heater).
I'm afraid those with tube system have more concern regarding sound "purity". Volume control (which is a must) has often become a big issue and now Tone Controls? What is the minimum tone control type and requirement you would suggest for those group?
With commercial electronics having default tone control, I have never had a preference to activate them even if I have problem with sound balance.
Personally I think the fear of tone controls is just another buggy-man audiophile sickness. Some so called golden eared people try and blame a simple circuit for wrecking the sound, it is crazy. Since the Fletcher Munson curves came up that is exactly why they come in handy, a simple boost or cut for the highs and lows. The reality is that many older tube preamps had tone controls and many had a bypass switch so they were completely out of the circuit besides the switch. I just think there is just to much of a purist type of thinking going on, it is just silly. There were switchable tone controls where you could choose between different curves coming in at different point top and bottom. McIntosh, Fisher, Harmon Kardon, they all had tone controls. Audiofools seem to rather play with expensive cables trying to get this effect rather than doing something that makes much more sense. The bottom line is every recording you have ever heard has used adjustable EQ, it is the same concept.
Saying a speaker will only sound correct at one output level shows how silly this is. If I built a speaker that only sounded great at one level I would just give it up, I would call that a failure in design. If you take all adjustment out of the equation you have just placed an unrealistic limitation for no other reason than a false belief system in my eyes. This is why so many of the real designer of equipment really don't want to have anything to do with audiophiles, they just shoot in the dark and haven't a clue of reality it seems.
I moved away from tube equipment a long time ago, not because I didn't think that a vacuum tube system can't sound good, I just was tired of having to change tubes and set bias levels. hum settings on old Mac gear. I would never consider a SE amp, I think they are the worst of the tube designs, high powered tube amps have been around forever. I would never pay let's say $7,000 for 7 watts of usable power, this is the audiophile industry at it worst.
Saying a speaker will only sound correct at one output level shows how silly this is. If I built a speaker that only sounded great at one level I would just give it up, I would call that a failure in design. If you take all adjustment out of the equation you have just placed an unrealistic limitation for no other reason than a false belief system in my eyes. This is why so many of the real designer of equipment really don't want to have anything to do with audiophiles, they just shoot in the dark and haven't a clue of reality it seems.
I moved away from tube equipment a long time ago, not because I didn't think that a vacuum tube system can't sound good, I just was tired of having to change tubes and set bias levels. hum settings on old Mac gear. I would never consider a SE amp, I think they are the worst of the tube designs, high powered tube amps have been around forever. I would never pay let's say $7,000 for 7 watts of usable power, this is the audiophile industry at it worst.
Last edited:
I also have no interest in tone controls - for the simple reason that when the replay quality is sufficient then adjusting them has no discernible impact, for me - strange but true!! And if they're included in the system then they are a potential weakness, if analogue - the only way I would do it would be using a full blown DSP solution.
Speakers, and systems should sound right at all volumes, no "sweet" levels for me - at the point of completely becoming inaudible, the lowest volume setting, all the detail and fullness of the soundscape should still be apparent - it's just a long, long way away ...
Speakers, and systems should sound right at all volumes, no "sweet" levels for me - at the point of completely becoming inaudible, the lowest volume setting, all the detail and fullness of the soundscape should still be apparent - it's just a long, long way away ...
Frank,
No way. If the bass balance is right at high volume at low volume it is just going to be weak, you can not get around the way our ears work, you are talking nonsense. You are saying that the Fletcher Munson curves are not real, that our ears do not change sensitivity at different levels, you are just plain wrong on that point.
I get your point about wanting to make things as good as is reasonable, but you want to take things to an absurd level, you seem to say rip out all the connectors and hard wire everything. I just don't see people hard wiring their speaker connections and every interconnect. If that was true there would never be a good recording ever made, there must be hundreds or even thousands of interconnection in a recording studio, you my friend are just P*ssing in the wind.
No way. If the bass balance is right at high volume at low volume it is just going to be weak, you can not get around the way our ears work, you are talking nonsense. You are saying that the Fletcher Munson curves are not real, that our ears do not change sensitivity at different levels, you are just plain wrong on that point.
I get your point about wanting to make things as good as is reasonable, but you want to take things to an absurd level, you seem to say rip out all the connectors and hard wire everything. I just don't see people hard wiring their speaker connections and every interconnect. If that was true there would never be a good recording ever made, there must be hundreds or even thousands of interconnection in a recording studio, you my friend are just P*ssing in the wind.
Steven, go back to what I said about live instruments - bloke on a stage, out in the open, is playing electric bass, and you're a few hundred yards away from him, then you steadily walk towards him while he keeps playing the instrument, until you can touch the stage. The quality of the low bass will alter as you approach, your ear hears a natural change of tonality depending on the apparent loudness of the instrument - all I'm saying is that an audio system should mimic that same characteristic, and then it will always sound realistic.
As regards connections, two things: proof's in the pudding, try it for yourself and see if you can pick the difference; and, things get worse when power amplifiers enter the equation, something which doesn't happen when doing actual recording.
You see, I didn't suddenly decide that this was a smart thing to do - I experimented, got positive results, and have continued to do so using this approach - in the end this is merely a way for making sure my ears enjoy what they hear - if they're not happy, I'm not happy!
As regards connections, two things: proof's in the pudding, try it for yourself and see if you can pick the difference; and, things get worse when power amplifiers enter the equation, something which doesn't happen when doing actual recording.
You see, I didn't suddenly decide that this was a smart thing to do - I experimented, got positive results, and have continued to do so using this approach - in the end this is merely a way for making sure my ears enjoy what they hear - if they're not happy, I'm not happy!
Frank,
Where I think of your example of hearing a live performance at a distance and moving closer, with distance the high frequencies are attenuated to a much greater proportion if I remember ii is a square or cube root loss with distance at high frequencies. This does not happen to that extent in a room and changing the volume of the playback does not follow the same type of attenuation that you have in a live performance. I think this is the mistake in that analogy, it doesn't track.
I'm not going to solder my speaker cables directly to the speaker lead out wire or directly to the internal wiring of an amp. I have had some Monster cables, no I don't think they are anything but junk but I will tell you they are so tight that they will pull the RCA connectors apart trying to pull them off, I think that is as close to gas tight as I want to get! As far as switches go if you are that concerned then move them every time you use your equipment, cycle them a few times every time you use your system.
Just think of all the ribbon connectors inside of a computer that have to pass data streams at high frequency with very low current, do you have to take them off and clean them all the time so you don't have problems sending those signals? I would think this would be much more critical when things are working at the MHz level where data transfer has to be perfect or you would get a Blue screen. I don't see them hard-wiring all those ribbon cables.
Where I think of your example of hearing a live performance at a distance and moving closer, with distance the high frequencies are attenuated to a much greater proportion if I remember ii is a square or cube root loss with distance at high frequencies. This does not happen to that extent in a room and changing the volume of the playback does not follow the same type of attenuation that you have in a live performance. I think this is the mistake in that analogy, it doesn't track.
I'm not going to solder my speaker cables directly to the speaker lead out wire or directly to the internal wiring of an amp. I have had some Monster cables, no I don't think they are anything but junk but I will tell you they are so tight that they will pull the RCA connectors apart trying to pull them off, I think that is as close to gas tight as I want to get! As far as switches go if you are that concerned then move them every time you use your equipment, cycle them a few times every time you use your system.
Just think of all the ribbon connectors inside of a computer that have to pass data streams at high frequency with very low current, do you have to take them off and clean them all the time so you don't have problems sending those signals? I would think this would be much more critical when things are working at the MHz level where data transfer has to be perfect or you would get a Blue screen. I don't see them hard-wiring all those ribbon cables.
Last edited:
The analogy may not be perfect, but the subjective impact, for me, follows it well enough. I have never felt that I'm suffering from a lack of bass, I have no trouble getting the sense of richness from that part of the spectrum, whether it's electric bass, or pipe organ - many ambitious systems I find overcook this area, and for me they're just plain irritating to listen to.
With regard to those Monster plugs, isn't that story telling you something about the quality of the RCA connectors themselves,? The latter are the first things to be ditched, for that very reason ...
Integrity of digital information is a completely different ball game, the signals have appalling S/N ratios, intrinsic in the operation of the circuits - so long as they work, there are no problems. Analogue OTOH is hunting for maintaining accuracies of the order of 1 part in 10,000, or 100,000 - that's not so easy.
With regard to those Monster plugs, isn't that story telling you something about the quality of the RCA connectors themselves,
? The latter are the first things to be ditched, for that very reason ...Integrity of digital information is a completely different ball game, the signals have appalling S/N ratios, intrinsic in the operation of the circuits - so long as they work, there are no problems. Analogue OTOH is hunting for maintaining accuracies of the order of 1 part in 10,000, or 100,000 - that's not so easy.
hey guys I just found something in a friend website that looked interesting to me so I looked everywhere in the forum to find a good place to post it but no luck at all. I think it's not totally irrelevant to this thread. sorry if it's off topic.
actually it's a plot to evaluate the sound of a speaker based on hearing impression. I just took a snapshot and you can brows it here as it's a live line chart: link
I think this could be done in MS Excel so everyone could use it.
actually it's a plot to evaluate the sound of a speaker based on hearing impression. I just took a snapshot and you can brows it here as it's a live line chart: link
I think this could be done in MS Excel so everyone could use it.
Attachments
Come on Frank, One missed bit in a computer program and it will crash.
I would never use those Monster cables again, you needed all the strength you could muster to pull those damned things off, way to tight a fit. Of course balanced XLR connectors are much nicer but when you look at it the surface area really isn't any more than an RCA in contact area.
I would never use those Monster cables again, you needed all the strength you could muster to pull those damned things off, way to tight a fit. Of course balanced XLR connectors are much nicer but when you look at it the surface area really isn't any more than an RCA in contact area.
Of course it will crash, but there's a very large safety margin - theoretically it can happen if a high energy particle hits a crucial spot, cosmic rays, nuclear explosion radiation - but these are nominally rare incidents, . We're talking major, major noise factors there ...
Surface area is not as critical as the pressure at the contact points - as close as possible to a cold weld is ideal, as in wire wrap connections. I would suggest that the shape of the XLR pins and sockets leads to greater metal upon metal force.
. We're talking major, major noise factors there ... Surface area is not as critical as the pressure at the contact points - as close as possible to a cold weld is ideal, as in wire wrap connections. I would suggest that the shape of the XLR pins and sockets leads to greater metal upon metal force.
I'd be hard pressed to convince myself that there exists the possibility that a single system over a wide range of volume can meet all the variables a recording, room , and listener subjectivity can present. Subjectivity alone being such a powerful mechanism when we listen for enjoyment makes the entire premise seem folly.
........but I'd agree with those that subscribe to high efficiency, LOW power compression systems as the closest one can come to that 'being there' experience that CAN transcend the shortcomings of a particular recording or composition. Bob Dylan would still make my skin crawl if he was sitting next to me strumming and singing!
........but I'd agree with those that subscribe to high efficiency, LOW power compression systems as the closest one can come to that 'being there' experience that CAN transcend the shortcomings of a particular recording or composition. Bob Dylan would still make my skin crawl if he was sitting next to me strumming and singing!
Fear and dislike are 2 different things.
Adding preamp or tone control with its own power supply will at least add (1) more noise (2) more distortion.
One simplest gain stage (i.e. 1 transistor) will add distortion more or less proportional to its gain. The more the gain, the more the distortion. But rarely a TC or preamp consists only one transistor. Usually, one opamp
Then like usual, it will end up with the audibility debate. And like usual, it is hard for some people to understand that some people can hear small amount of distortion easier than others
Fletcher & Munson & Loudness Button. Loudness button is intended to be used at low SPL, where our ears are not sensitive to LF & HF.
So without Loudness Button, most people require high volume level so they can feel the musical balance. But we cannot go too high, because most system will have more distortion with more volume. And more so with speakers than with amps (we rarely clip the amp but we listen to "clipped" speaker all the time).
Consequently, this "sweet" output level does not seem to be a complete myth?
There are many types of tone control circuits, some are more acceptable than the others.
LF is probably more important than HF. I think one parametric type to combat room mode could be nice. But I would prefer to hard code the EQ based on my room and speaker.
When I talked with an audio shop owner whom mentioned that he found tone controls often useful. I also watched a bassist using a sample of my speaker and tuned the eq on a Mac such that he felt all the vocals were well balanced, and the position he EQed was right where a light dip was measured to exist. So I felt it would be reasonable to implement some form of tone control in an amplifier if you know specifically when it is best applied.
The idea of having a volume control that would vary to ear sensitivity curves as the volume is changed was in my mind for a while, but there were two reasons why I did not pursue it:
1. Recording levels have no standard, and you never know when the sweep spot SPL volume setting is.
2. Did not find a way to keep stage input impedance constant enough for my liking.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The idea of having a volume control that would vary to ear sensitivity curves as the volume is changed was in my mind for a while, but there were two reasons why I did not pursue it:
1. Recording levels have no standard, and you never know when the sweep spot SPL volume setting is.
2. Did not find a way to keep stage input impedance constant enough for my liking.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"V"-shaped equalization is very popular. Also, Lynn has noticed a great discontinuity in multi-way speakers...
I think the reason is (not just Fletcher-Munson but) because most drivers are not capable of reproducing midrange without excessive distortion.
Especially in a 2-way of 8"+1", the tweeter has to work too hard, at least for short term dynamics transient.
The are a few things I will say. First of all very few commercial speakers have linear output as level goes up above a few watts, it is inherent in the motor top plate designs and the coil lengths that are so often chosen. Without going into details I would say it is a very small number of drivers that will work outside of a very small excursion limit without becoming nonlinear in nature.
Second thing is to say that because you are using more than one transistor the distortion is multiplied N to a power number of devices is to ignore circuit design and modern feedback circuits. If you believe that then stick with single ended tube designs with one power tube and have all the distortion you like. More audiophile witchcraft and silly stuff.
I'll bow out of this conversation at this point, we are into all of the audio myths at this point. And the bs that only some people can hear this is also a canary in the mine idea. If you can not measure distortion with a proper scientific analysis then you fall for the same nonsense where the audio reviewers can not do a test unless they can see the brand name of the piece under test. BS
Second thing is to say that because you are using more than one transistor the distortion is multiplied N to a power number of devices is to ignore circuit design and modern feedback circuits. If you believe that then stick with single ended tube designs with one power tube and have all the distortion you like. More audiophile witchcraft and silly stuff.
I'll bow out of this conversation at this point, we are into all of the audio myths at this point. And the bs that only some people can hear this is also a canary in the mine idea. If you can not measure distortion with a proper scientific analysis then you fall for the same nonsense where the audio reviewers can not do a test unless they can see the brand name of the piece under test. BS
They look a great job, with lightness and yet robust, while meeting the Le Cleac'h profile with roll over.
Well, the bassist was testing the speakers in my avatar. He was so amazed with the bass in a small room that he was wondering what it would sound like hooked to his bass guitar. I also showed him how the bass would sound different if the polarity was inverted. I try to stay with full range as much as possible which is also the reason why a larger full range driver is in development. Actually Dr. Klippel did point out the surround might be causing a problem when he looked at some scanning data of the 3" full range driver, after looking at the CSD as well, a -40db resonance was found to be associated with what was showing in the scan data. When the problem was reduced, the sound was really a lot cleaner.
But these really are related with volume settings.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, and Dr. Klippel has a few papers on this. I have tried some circuits that had the effect of making this more linear which impressed me a very long time ago. Work is being done to improve on it. The only thing is consumer education and demonstration is really important because now the amplifier is not going to have good distortion numbers by itself.
BTW there are lots more measurements than distortion that are related what we hear. They are just not seen in public literature.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited: