Sound Quality Vs. Measurements

Status
Not open for further replies.
"no battery powered devices will ever be affected" - strange, I wonder how your typical portable radio works, :) ...

Electricals may, or may not, be sensitive to some factor in their environment - first step, don't assume anything; do some simple experiments to try and discover if there is a linkage - and go from there. I do this all the time, that's how progress is made ...

Current example - we have a good quality electronic keyboard, but it's affected by the cordless and mobile phone signals in our house. Nothing overt, it doesn't make rude noises or anything - but the audio quality degrades significantly when they are operating. So, need a strategy to deal with that ...

If PCs are involved with retrieval of music source then the level and type of processing within the box alters the pattern of interference; there are vast reams of discussion on how to deal with this all over the Internet, and "solutions" you can buy.
 
Silly me, I thought the entire idea was to make the replay chain impervious the power line conditions and all other external influences?:confused:

Cheers, ;)
That may be the intention, but how successful were you? 100%, 99.5%, 95%, ...?? I could assume everything was "perfect" - but then again, maybe I'm assuming too much ... ;)

Edit: I did some simulations, some time ago, of how sensitive realistic, typical power supply circuits were to nasties coming down the line - not very pretty, I'm afraid ...
 
Last edited:
Implementation doesn't mean anything. Take an Intel i3 chip and show me how to implement it to perform like an Intel i7.

Implementation doesn't mean quite so much on a purely digital chip, that's for sure. However a DAC chip isn't purely digital.

Never going to happen, ever. Yes you can say overclock but the i7 will overclock much better, so even that isn't valid.

Nonsense, that's just moving the goal posts. Liquid cooling is implementation and does make a difference to purely digital chips in that it allows them to run faster.
 
In reply to question of Hiraga being modern or ancient Kastor.

No one can answer that question except you. Some of the most ancient amplifiers sound very modern. John Curl added to my conjecture the other day to say the 1928 amp of Harold Black might have sounded very good. I agree. What the very simple designs like Hiraga give is insight. This dose require great thought as to speakers. The insight is sensing the music before you hear it. Like in real life. The most dramatic amp of a similar type was the Croft OTL. So vibrant as to make all other things seem wrong. I have to suspect 3rd harmonic distortion. I never owned one. I supect I would have grown tired of it.

Hiraga was a writer I followed for many years, sometimes in French when my skills were better. What I liked was his searching mind and simple logic . His conjecture that the difference between harmonics would be more important than absolute levels made good sense.

Mr Gregg was saying about voice quality. The seemingly simple thing the voice is very hard to reproduce . I refereed to film sound as intimate and not stage sound. Then the microphone colours things. Also the microphone colours the space. Conversely my dreadful bathroom radio does a convincing clock chime. It's a Topsy-turvy world hi fi.
 
diyAudio Senior Member
Joined 2002
Hi,

Edit: I did some simulations, some time ago, of how sensitive realistic, typical power supply circuits were to nasties coming down the line - not very pretty, I'm afraid ...

I'm well aware of and that's precisely why it is so important to make the PSU as good as possible. No one (not me anyway) wants his sound to change along the vagaries of the grid, right?

The most dramatic amp of a similar type was the Croft OTL. So vibrant as to make all other things seem wrong. I have to suspect 3rd harmonic distortion. I never owned one. I supect I would have grown tired of it.

No you wouldn't.
As it happens I still have a set of his 100W mono blocks which still serve as reference amps to this day.:)

Then the microphone colours things. Also the microphone colours the space

Dave Wilson from Wilson Audio (US sound engineer better know for his speakers) once issued a recording made in a church in the wee hours where one side was recorded with AKG (?) capsules the other with Neumann(?).
On a decent system the different mike sound/signature could clearly be heard.


It's a Topsy-turvy world hi fi
Wot? Croft and Mike Leigh in a single post? You made my day.

Cheers, ;)
 
Last edited:
Yes, evil exists because of free will but it is only a minor inconvenience for an english gentleman.
I am not english but i got a lot of my education there.

So well said. When people insist on a theological debate I point that out. How can the ultimate arbiter give free will then take it away. This is why prediction is nonsense ( Revelation ) . This is studying the maths ( paradox ) of theology and no comment on the various books that exist.

Very well said Joachim. If only the appointed experts had worked this out.
 
Implementation doesn't mean quite so much on a purely digital chip, that's for sure. However a DAC chip isn't purely digital.

Nonsense, that's just moving the goal posts. Liquid cooling is implementation and does make a difference to purely digital chips in that it allows them to run faster.


The context of implementation commentary is saying that the core components of a system, like heart, lungs, eyes...... are less important since it's only the net result which actually counts.

It may pay respect to what a fantastic meal a top chef can make with dogfood, some garden herbs and a microwave oven...... but by far and wide it's nonsensical self-advertisement and number / human limit theory.

For example, if 0.1% THD is the mission parameter to fulfill, I'm sure someone out there can achieve it with dogfood.

If sky-is-limit is the mission parameter then componentry is absolutely everything and implementation is just the photoshop airbrushing
 
So well said. When people insist on a theological debate I point that out. How can the ultimate arbiter give free will then take it away. This is why prediction is nonsense ( Revelation ) . This is studying the maths ( paradox ) of theology and no comment on the various books that exist.

Very well said Joachim. If only the appointed experts had worked this out.

There is a scientific university study, which some think is evidence that we don't have free will.

Keyword here is some.
 
Last edited:
"no battery powered devices will ever be affected" - strange, I wonder how your typical portable radio works, :) ...

My comment was referring to electricity in power lines and huge electromagnetic fields, which can make you dizzy, yet not affect audio equipment, try to listen harder.


Electricals may, or may not, be sensitive to some factor in their environment - first step, don't assume anything; do some simple experiments to try and discover if there is a linkage - and go from there. I do this all the time, that's how progress is made ...

Current example - we have a good quality electronic keyboard, but it's affected by the cordless and mobile phone signals in our house. Nothing overt, it doesn't make rude noises or anything - but the audio quality degrades significantly when they are operating. So, need a strategy to deal with that ...

If PCs are involved with retrieval of music source then the level and type of processing within the box alters the pattern of interference; there are vast reams of discussion on how to deal with this all over the Internet, and "solutions" you can buy.


Transparency is very fixed and dictated by your amplifier, DAC, transducer and various peripherals.

These components don't have any kind of cross-inter-linked poker game of transparency, it's fixed.

What your neighbour does with his wwII sonic weapon directed at your house may mess up the sound but there is no mysterious Shakesperian exchanges of prose from your media player into your tweeter. They are fixed yet may "suffer" due to environmental conditions.
 
So well said. When people insist on a theological debate I point that out. How can the ultimate arbiter give free will then take it away. This is why prediction is nonsense ( Revelation ) . This is studying the maths ( paradox ) of theology and no comment on the various books that exist.

Very well said Joachim. If only the appointed experts had worked this out.

Nigel and Joachim, I think you will appreciate the English gentleman on youtube "Rupert Sheldrake", look up his name with "Ted talk".
 
@M Gregg

I'd like to point out two differences betwenn now and way back then which I feel are far too seldom mentioned.

1. In those days, semiconductors were incomparably less well developed like those pf the present day. There were fewer of the around, hence people tended to use the same models often and had time to accumulate knowledge about them and share that knowledge with others, resulting in better general understanng of those parts. Today, there's a new devce every day, they are dirt cheap and nobody has time to get to knoe them well before they are changed, and

2. Because of this, and general manufacturing reasons, audio was a hobby of the few, while today it's the hobby of the masses. Because the masses cannot afford expensive gear, and because audio comes after cell phones, tablets, Blue Ray, TV and the PCs, the general industry trend has been to make the price as samll as possible, in parallel with raiding the number of "features". Thus, less money is dedicated to design in general, and of what there is, a bigger proportion is dedicated to "features", remote contrs and whatnot, and ever less is dedicated to audio circuit design and development. Before, manufacturers competed on sound quality, today they comepete mostly on price and "features".

Both premises would explain rather well how is it possible that my Marantz 170DC power amp, made in March 1978, manages to sound better than most gear made these days in its power class, which would be 80-100 WPC into 8 Ohms. It simply sounds more real and convincing that what I've heard of the present day production.

And it's hardly alone. Try listening to an old Sansui AU-7900 integrated amps, which has been refreshed by having its 35 year old capacitors replaced with modern ones - chances are you'll be begging to take it home with you, believe me. Simple, straightforward circuitry, but no false cost cutting, done competently. There are quite a few other examples.

Think how is it that many (but not all) Toshiba integrated and power amps, sold as Toshiba or Aurex, sound so life-like and convincing. Who knows their semiconductors as well as those who designed them?
 
Frank (fast42), I am sorry, but there's no way an initially poor quality recodring will ever sound good unless it's artificially coloured. In which case what you call excellent is in fact coloured, and therefore by default not true to life.

Especially so when the bad recording is simple low level chamber music, and the good recording is a "tutta forza" symphonic orchestra, far more difficult to capture and reproduce. Most amps and CD players will tend to do better with simpler music than with more complex one, I hope we'll agree on that.
 
Implementation doesn't mean anything. Take an Intel i3 chip and show me how to implement it to perform like an Intel i7.

Never going to happen, ever. Yes you can say overclock but the i7 will overclock much better, so even that isn't valid.

You could not be more wrong than the idea that implementation doesn't mean anything, in fact, it means most of everything.

Ask any designer worth his salt how he goes about selecting the devices he needs to use - does he do that by reading their data sheets, ot does he choose those he is well acquainted with? Does he do it on a whim, or does he consider their place and their role, and therefore their mode of operation in specifically the circuit he wants them in?

Should he use a high voltage, or a high current devce?

Should it be specifically low noise, or it doesn't really matter? If low noise, how much voltage and current will it need to use, 1 or 3 mA of current, at 30 or 65V? If 30V, then a BC 550 B is a good choice, but if 65, 2SC2240 is the viable choice, etc.

Your above comparison between i3 and i7 has no bearing on audio. Nobody in their right mind would ever use BC small signal family transistors as output devices, for that he'd go straight away to the BDx series, or MJ/MJL from Motorola, or several families from Japan , etc. The requirements are so vastly different one HAS to combine, and when combining, how it's done is everything.
 
A tutta forza with plenty of imaging, layering and constant frequency activity from 20 Hz - 20 kHz is of course more difficult to display than a solo instrument.

Oh wait, the noise masks the "inner detail" in the solo instrument, sigh.

Fast forty-two, you said earlier you put the recording on a pedestal and the rest is secondary, that is an interesting attack angle, but the resulting synergy interplay angle is just confusion, imho.

I once showed an Italian friend Andrea Bocelli in my system, now that was fun =)

My first Sabre ESS DAC and stereo redirected to four / five channels in those days.
 
AX tech editor
Joined 2002
Paid Member
You could not be more wrong than the idea that implementation doesn't mean anything, in fact, it means most of everything.

Could not agree more. In my experience, if there are audible differences between amps, they have more to do with (bad) implementations in wiring, grounding, physical layout, even the relative orientation of the output inductor, than topology and parts.

These are of course very important, but give the same schematic and parts bin to different designers and for sure they all measure different, and sometimes even sound different.

Jan
 
There is a scientific university study, which some think is evidence that we don't have free will.

Keyword here is some.

We certainly don't. It is call co operation and it is far superior.

Making dog food into good hi fi was a challenge of mine. That was a competition only allowing 2N3055 NE5532/34 and some nice transistors. I would hope some would use all discrete if so.

The point I often make is much hi fi is no better than dogs food , yet it has top grade components. Often this comes down to the art of PSU design. What is an amplifier but a modulated PSU ? When class B it is almost a pendulum swinging between the source resistance of the house electrical supply and the loudspeaker resistance (impedance) . The electronics are like nice cogs. Any wobble in the PSU due to high impedance or noise will vibrate the cogs. Class A " should " be more forgiving . If classic designs maybe not. Class B/D more dynamic. The mains electricity has a quality not unlike damping factor when speakers. Some shower cable to replace the usual 2.5 mm or whatever and good sockets might give an extra sense of realityfor very little money.

Do not overlook that the Hiraga amp is class A. it is a different animal.
 
A tutta forza with plenty of imaging, layering and constant frequency activity from 20 Hz - 20 kHz is of course more difficult to display than a solo instrument.

Oh wait, the noise masks the "inner detail" in the solo instrument, sigh.

...

That depends on your cartridge and phono RIAA stage. They are anything but all the same, in fact, some of the greatest differences between preamps will be phono RIAA stage.

Also, the matching between the cartridge and phono input is truly critical if the cartridge has specific requirements which the phono stage cannot meet adequately. Sibilance, muddy bass and screeching or complete lack of treble are the usualy signs.

For example, my Ortofon cartridge expects to be met with 47k impedance and 400 pF total capacitance. If the capacitance is too low, there will be excess treble and noise in the 12-20 kHz region, if there's too much capacitance treble will be lacking, although it may sound more extended. That's the way they are, Ortofin is quite clear about it.

Now, my total capacitance cartidge-connecting cable end is 220 pF, so when I switch my Luxman C-03 preamp cartridge selector to "CAP 2" position, my total capacitance is 420 pF, a very small and I believe quite inaudible error of 5%. But then, sending nominally 100W/8 Ohms into my speakers produces barely audible noise. Since the phono RIAA stage uses dual 2SK240 FETs, there are no coupling capacitors, only the one in the NFB loop, which is a better solution than having them, in terms of sound quality. But not all such stages are made that way.
 
Could not agree more. In my experience, if there are audible differences between amps, they have more to do with (bad) implementations in wiring, grounding, physical layout, even the relative orientation of the output inductor, than topology and parts.

These are of course very important, but give the same schematic and parts bin to different designers and for sure they all measure different, and sometimes even sound different.

Jan

Agreed.

The only reason why I didn't even mention that is because that's a true can of worms begging a discussion all on its own, but outside the scope of the problem at hand.

In terms of topology, the only real mistake one can make is to use a device for a job it is not qualified for, either in terms of voltage, current, power dissipation or just its basic characteristics. But I consider that to be a gross mistake, I don't think anyone serious would make it, although a total amateur might do even that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.