I heard that LSD helps. Not only to hear differences, but even similarities and connectivities between everything, and even the Whole Essence of the Universe.
I already said that many times, let me repeat again: my experience tells that as soon as the person hears significantly more real sound reproduction that he/she ever heard, his/her criteria changes, even if he/she before preferred something distorted. There were exceptions, when people value opinions of "experts" more than own feelings, but even then the experience caused uneasiness.
Yes, I'm sure that's how it happens for most - again, I was fortunate enough to be bowled over, through accidently achieving a high enough sound standard decades ago, and have experienced much frustration in the following years in being able to elicit that performance on demand, and coming across other people who "got it" ...
“Yep, very difficult to do , especially with a point source speaker ...”
Technical point here, a real point source (because it radiated from a single point in time and space) is the only type of acoustic source which can preserve the time envelope of the radiated energy over a larger area (more than just one spot).
Larger acoustic sources which radiate as a line, plane, arrays of individual sources, or the nether regions all (if driven with an impulse) have a range of distances from the radiators to ones ear (or microphone) and so what arrives is a train of energy begins at the closest source and ending with the farthest source. Instead of the original, one has energy spread out in time. To be clear, this is independent / on top of whatever the loudspeaker and it’s electronics do in the conventional sense, this is spatial radiation distortion of sorts.
Even with all the limitations, it is the lower level of time / spatial distortion that makes a simply radiating small full range driver on flat baffles so good at producing a stereo image etc.
Fwiw, an accurate amplifier, cable or loudspeaker is one which is able to pass a number of generations in a generation loss test, without more audible degradation than takes place in a direct loop back test (which open can easily conduct in parallel).
We used this generation loss testing in the beginning at work as reality check. Whatever it is that prevents the item under test from faithfully pass the musical track, is exaggerated on each generation and with most loudspeakers, within a VERY few generations are unlistenable not just screwed up a little.
For loudspeakers, we did these on a tower to attenuate the ground reflection (the great outdoors, a semi anechoic condition). Funny too, once you heard a flaw after it was exaggerated, you could often then hear it live when you didn’t notice it before.
Best,
Tom Danley
Tom,
While I completely understand the use of the multi-generation process for looking at a speaker or even an electronics chain I am at a loss as to how you would do this type of test for a cable and know it was simply the cable causing a problem? How do you as A.Wayne has asked quantify a cable as being neutral? I understand many factors have been covered by both JNeutron and Scott about testing for different factors pertaining to a cables LCR and emi properties I still don't see how you can qualify a cable by itself as neutral?
While I completely understand the use of the multi-generation process for looking at a speaker or even an electronics chain I am at a loss as to how you would do this type of test for a cable and know it was simply the cable causing a problem? How do you as A.Wayne has asked quantify a cable as being neutral? I understand many factors have been covered by both JNeutron and Scott about testing for different factors pertaining to a cables LCR and emi properties I still don't see how you can qualify a cable by itself as neutral?
Thank you for this in depth explanation.
This helped me understand a few things more from Scott’s screenshots.
Although my thought for comparing delays is proven wrong, comparing the amplitudes of a stream of return pulses may still be feasible.
I will not abandon the TDR idea but I need first to build a test jig (inspired by your coaxial resistor set) for impedance testing so I can have a reference to make comparisons. I hope I will finish it tomorrow, I will post some pictures.
Sony XDR-F1HD ?
What you describe sounds to me as weak RF signal
For mono you need a bare minimum signal of 7-10dBuV with this chip.
For stereo, aim for at least 40 dBuV.
If they were specifying for the standard -50db quieting, these minimum signal levels would go some 20 dBuV higher.
Input impedance is ~4kOhm
SL is working on the same architecture for years now. Everything past the front end is now good. Digital IF is the way to go.
Wavebourn, well comeback.
George
Last edited:
I do agree with you Tom on point source in the time domain, listening near-field, controlled dynamics, point-source is hard to beat, unfortunately it is not enuff to overcome the advantages of a linesource when it comes to dynamics and distortion in the farfield conditions, even in a domestic environment (4-6 M listening distance ).
I fail to see how a degeneration test will show up a cable , unless you are talking bench measurements only ...
I'm not about to explain anything else to someone who states, "cables as well as speakers will sound differently even with "flat response""
Speakers? Well of course. Cables? Not hardly. I give up.
As far as I am concerned, you are a lost cause.
Speakers are made from cables, so it stands to reason that both follow similar physics.
I myself have a hard time digesting two cables measuring the same yet sounding different. I suppose I need to experience the comparison.
However that will never let that happen. You can't have two identical sized awg cables made of different materials that perform the same.
Silver is always going to be a touch more conductive then copper, both are substantially more conductive then aluminum.
Why don't you guys come and visit me? We can watch some movie, talk, have some tea... I can make my famous almond cookies...
You have to measure more than one parameter to draw any conclusion, he only gave one and refused to expound on his procedure , because he has none. Audio is about objective and subjective evaluation, he qoutes FT, yet misses the irony
Of the evaluatory process ...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.