I really care about digital/optical minutiae, because that is really the only way to make digital completely acceptable to those, like me, who find it still wanting. However, today, I just got my Marantz 10 running again, after perhaps 5 years of non-operation. I still remember its sound, compared to every other tuner I have ever tried. WHY? Because it was a design without obvious compromise, at least for its time, and it sounds that way, also, when working properly.
Its all about sound in recording. For instance guitar amps are really not classic amplifiers but amplified tone generators. Same thing with mic type and to a greater degree, and becoming a lost art, mic placement.
I have said before I have not heard a home system sound like a live band ever. so all the talk about optics etc pertains to that.
Though I do know of two professional keyboard players dying for a amp that will play the whole piano range in live venues and in recordings. I do know of several sax players that use audio amps so their horns wont clip.
I have said before I have not heard a home system sound like a live band ever. so all the talk about optics etc pertains to that.
Though I do know of two professional keyboard players dying for a amp that will play the whole piano range in live venues and in recordings. I do know of several sax players that use audio amps so their horns wont clip.
Much of quality of live sound is that the attack of the note is perfectly formed, since it is the "real" thing. Attack is the correct term to use, in sound module devices it is one of the parameters of the waveform shape, to quote from the manual of our keyboard instrument: "how fast the sound reaches maximum level after a key is pressed". IME many systems and especially sound reinforcement setups cripple the attack part of the note - the "bite" of the sound, that comes from that part of the volume envelope is neutered to some degree. This is why piano reproduction so rarely makes the grade, the attack is not sufficiently cleanly reproduced, thus the echos in the listening space from that part of the waveform are not right, and hence to the ear the sound of the whole note over its audible duration doesn't convince.
The keyboard we have is an excellent demonstration of this behaviour - from cold the acoustic piano sound is quite atrocious, it sounds quite ridiculous in fact; only after very thorough conditioning is everything sufficiently stabilised and optimal, such that high volume piano playing from a 'script', MIDI file, falls into place - it then does sound like a proper piano; the attack of the note rings true, and is highly authentic.
The keyboard we have is an excellent demonstration of this behaviour - from cold the acoustic piano sound is quite atrocious, it sounds quite ridiculous in fact; only after very thorough conditioning is everything sufficiently stabilised and optimal, such that high volume piano playing from a 'script', MIDI file, falls into place - it then does sound like a proper piano; the attack of the note rings true, and is highly authentic.
Last edited:
Conrad Hoffman 9th of August
"I do agree these effects are not huge, but at the same time, something must account for different sounding interconnects"
Today
"I did some more testing, constructing a small switch board so I could instantly and silently connect and disconnect.
Unless I did something really wrong, always possible, the results were crystal clear:
None, zero, zip and nada"
Yet another victim succumbs to the switchy switch switch effect.
"I do agree these effects are not huge, but at the same time, something must account for different sounding interconnects"
Today
"I did some more testing, constructing a small switch board so I could instantly and silently connect and disconnect.
Unless I did something really wrong, always possible, the results were crystal clear:
None, zero, zip and nada"
Yet another victim succumbs to the switchy switch switch effect.
Yes, but if they're inside of a preamp, and the external markings say "Source," then they're OK.
To overcome that objection in my coupling capacitor tests, I used a Cinema Engineering switch of heroic construction, more than suitable for a six-figure-priced fashion product.
The second one.
Instantaneous switches can make certain different sounds, sound the same.
|
|
Last edited:
You need to empty your echoic memory bank for starters and rewind the track, yes.
Echoic memory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"This particular sensory store is capable of storing large amounts of auditory information that is only retained for a short period of time, 3–4 seconds"
You're talking here about the way the mind "fills in the gaps" - if you go from superior to inferior sound the following sound will be mentally 'interpolated' to match the previous. The only way to get around this, I've found, is to use sounds, or parts of the track that don't come across as music, that are poorly rendered usually - the mind doesn't try to "make it fit", much easier to pick what's going on ...
Wow such a brutal group, no appreciation for the SOTA ....
While the Momentum is really cool looking, from what I see it is not state of the art in anything but Industrial Engineering, Oh I almost forgot, also in the butt ugly approach to marketing anything high-end. The upscale car manufacturers have fostered this approach to the point of embarrassment. If it looks striking (wierd) it sells great for all the reasons people with means purchase stuff like this for! Sound? Yeah it sound OK, I guess. Just my humble opinion based on it being presented as SOTA.
There's little doubt that we need some time to perceive various aspects of reproduced sound.
A particular recording at a particular point explores only a small fraction of the sounds that are possible.
You can't evaluate the deep bass capability by the sound of a piccolo. Also, sometimes we simply need to listen
for a while before things "jell" in our minds, at least I do. A good test will allow plenty of time for the subject
to reach a conclusion.
Last edited:
Err, well that is your theory at least,...... yes.
______
Actually, I don't think it's interpolation, it's deletion.
It's deleting unnecessary sound so we don't k1ll ourselves.
Unfortunately as a side-effect, it makes everyone fail ABX tests as well.
[SIZE=+2]Auditory attention causes visual inattentional blindness[/SIZE]
Silvia Pizzighello, Paola Bressan
Received 27 November 2006, in revised form 31 October 2007
When engaged in a visual task, we can fail to detect unexpected events that would otherwise be very noticeable. Here we ask whether a common auditory task, such as that of attending to a verbal stream, can also make us blind to the presence of visual objects that we do not anticipate. In two experiments, one hundred and twenty observers watched a dynamic display while performing either a visual or an auditory attention task, or both simultaneously. When observers were listening to verbal material, in order to either understand it or to remember it (auditory task), their probability of detecting an unexpected visual object was no higher than when they were counting bounces of moving items (visual task), although in the former case the observers’ eyes and attention could move around the display freely rather than remaining focused on tracked items. Previous research has shown that attending to verbal material does not affect responses to lights flashing at irregular intervals, suggesting that driving performance is not hampered by listening. The lights, however, were expected. Our data imply that listening to the radio while driving, or to a portable audio player while walking or biking, can impair our reactions to objects or events that we do not expect.
Yeah, but... Where are the people who care about improving audio as an art form, you know, making listening to interesting recordings more involving, realistic or even musically involving? It seems that creating statement products that touch all of the bases is more important, and in the case of the Momentum. cross the barrier between expensive watch technolgy and oppulent construction and striking visuals (buttt ugly)! there is nothing about the technical vision that is implied by the cool see through images that speak of SOA, my point.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.