Sound Quality Vs. Measurements

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok, I'll elaborate. The ones like are 16" x 16" x 4" thick. They are mounted on a wooden stand 17" apart and are center hinged so that I can swivel the top and bottom panels separately. This allows me to tune the amount of reflection the mic gets from the front or back.
 

Attachments

  • untitled.jpg
    untitled.jpg
    67.5 KB · Views: 150
Ok, I'll elaborate. The ones like are 16" x 16" x 4" thick. They are mounted on a wooden stand 17" apart and are center hinged so that I can swivel the top and bottom panels separately. This allows me to tune the amount of reflection the mic gets from the front or back.

I use deep carpet on the floor. It is enough. http://wavebourn.com/female_sample.mp3
 
Administrator
Joined 2004
Paid Member
For people like me who firmly believe that the major obstacle in sound reproduction (given the paradigm of stereo) is the source material...
That would certainly not be me. Sure, there are plenty of poor recordings on the market, but most recording contain far for info and musical enjoyment than most people suspect. Yes, even on CDs. You just have to get it out. :)
 
That would certainly not be me. Sure, there are plenty of poor recordings on the market, but most recording contain far for info and musical enjoyment than most people suspect. Yes, even on CDs. You just have to get it out. :)

agreed +1

but... and this is a big BUT, having a really good system can reek havoc on a cd collection. I have some old cd's that I loved in the 80s but now with a real sound system I just hear the poor production... sigh.

edit: not that I don't get CD's now that are also dissapointing.
 
Last edited:
Your recoding has much less room tone than SYs, but wasn't the mic closer?

No, I put panels around. It was a home concert, with amp and speakers. She was on a distance approximately 1-2 feet to the mike. The mike was a large diaphragm condenser (cardioid), with Chinese copy of German capsule, 2SK170 input. I made speakers flat using 31 band EQ, by my method of multiple iterations with feedback rejection by EQ and spectrum indicator.

Panels were made from plywood and memory foam covered by blankets. Without panels of course ambience would be louder, amplified by amps and speakers.

Here is another example, without panels, and no carpet on the floor: http://wavebourn.com/music/kuzmin/velosipedist.mp3
 
'back emf' is just an inductor or LC resonator equivalent.

Is this strictly true? For example, if I were simulating the driving of the motor of an electric car with regenerative braking, I couldn't simply model the back emf as a simple circuit of L and C. A speaker may or may not be more 'model-able', but it's not a linear device in any case is it?
 
Last edited:
AX tech editor
Joined 2002
Paid Member
Jan
"If you want to decouple 'good sound' and 'purchase decision', I am all in agreement, because in actual real life they are only loosely coupled at best. Even a very cursory view of the market will confirm that."

My naive view is the amp should not "sound" at all. What I have been asking all along is why some sound "bad". If I wanted to make the signal sound different, I would call that a signal processor, i.e. those who insist on a tube buffer between their CD and preamp to intentionally change the sound.

Purchase decisions we can agree are totally another topic!

One problem is that you're never sure whether two amps really do sound different. I believe that some reports of audible differences are true, but many others cannot be substantiated. There's no way to know which are genuinely audible under controlled circumstances and which will be shown not to be audible under controlled circumstances.
So if you are foolish enough to follow all such reports as genuine, you're chasing ghosts or your tail or both.
If we had some sort of system to isolate the genuine audible difference reports and do some serious work on it, we might be able to actually forward the state of audio reproduction.

jan
 
One problem is that you're never sure whether two amps really do sound different. I believe that some reports of audible differences are true, but many others cannot be substantiated. There's no way to know which are genuinely audible under controlled circumstances and which will be shown not to be audible under controlled circumstances.

'Controlled' is most relevant here, and not just 'controlled blind'. The 'sound' of an amp is most certainly context-dependent because amps don't produce sounds, they produce signals and hence rely on other system components. The mains supply purity could be different under two listening conditions and the resulting 'sound' difference might mistakenly be attributed to the amp. Without comprehensive controls, its really hard to separate the wheat from the chaff.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.