Hi,
I think we (us humans, that is) prefer a pleasant sounding distortion spectrum over no distortion at all.
It is as if we perceive this as being more natural whereas the opposite, no distortion at all, seems sterile, lifeless and unnatural.
Cheers,
It would seem impossible to claim or deny this, neither of us having had the opportunity to listen to a perfect recording played back with no distortion at all.
I believe this greatly depends on how was zero distortion achieved.
But Russ, think of it this way - typical tube gear distorts widly by transistor standards, yet a good many people prefer it to transistor devices, which demonstrate far less distortion.
This leads me to believe that it's not so much the amount of distortion, but rather its distribution and probably type. Harmonic is one thing, intermodulation another.
But Russ, think of it this way - typical tube gear distorts widly by transistor standards, yet a good many people prefer it to transistor devices, which demonstrate far less distortion.
This leads me to believe that it's not so much the amount of distortion, but rather its distribution and probably type. Harmonic is one thing, intermodulation another.
Absolutely agreed, Pavel, however this is, at this time, not possible, AFAIK. There is always some residue which messes things up.
Another thing is, I wonder how come my HK 680 integrated amp, declared as having 0.08/0.3 % THD 20-20,000 Hz, at rated power of 85/130W into 8/4 Ohms, but having oly 12 dB of global NFB, manages to sound better than many others in its price/power class. Not ideal, not perfect, but better to my ears than its competitors with much better distortion figures.
And, until we do have a perfectly natural sounding device, all discussion is not pointless.
Last edited:
Of course I do, I did not mean to imply that THD is all we need to worry about, I only used it as an example for illustration purposes.
Ultimately, if we knew how to measure everything just the way is should be measured, we'd all be making perfect audio devices.
This does introduce a measure of relativity to what we do know and to the measurements we make.
Ultimately, if we knew how to measure everything just the way is should be measured, we'd all be making perfect audio devices.
This does introduce a measure of relativity to what we do know and to the measurements we make.
What do you guys use as reference recordings? One of my most favorite is Linn records CKD308, Mozart Symphony No.41 (Jupiter), last movement Molto allegro.
No mp3 samples allowed as reference. When I hear the mp3 sample of the same track it sounds like mockery.
Linn Records - Mozart Symphonies 38 - 41
No mp3 samples allowed as reference. When I hear the mp3 sample of the same track it sounds like mockery.
Linn Records - Mozart Symphonies 38 - 41
Last edited:
So, still no advances on how to measure distortion more intelligently,
I am sure we can measure very well nowadays.
Reference recordings? Myriads, used for assessing different areas ... three, of highly contrasting style:
* Status Quo, 12 Gold Bars - Vertigo 800 062-2 ... one of the originals, driving pop sound: quality of the cymbals; soft vocals appear in a separate acoustic space, mixed in with hard driving guitars
* The Essential Odette - Vanguard VCD-43/44 ... very sparse sound, at Carnegie Hall, extremely low level recording: humanness of the voice
* Franck/Faure, The Medici String Quartet - Nimbus NI 5114 ... Ambisonic recording, the piano sounds like it's half a mile away,: size of acoustic, should be enormous; string tonality
* Status Quo, 12 Gold Bars - Vertigo 800 062-2 ... one of the originals, driving pop sound: quality of the cymbals; soft vocals appear in a separate acoustic space, mixed in with hard driving guitars
* The Essential Odette - Vanguard VCD-43/44 ... very sparse sound, at Carnegie Hall, extremely low level recording: humanness of the voice
* Franck/Faure, The Medici String Quartet - Nimbus NI 5114 ... Ambisonic recording, the piano sounds like it's half a mile away,
: size of acoustic, should be enormous; string tonality
Hi,
That pretty much reflects the design philosophy expressed by Jean Hiraga and some others as well.
IMHO, this is were valves have an advantage over semi-conductors; they're very simple devices allowing for far more straightforward amplification blocks.
Naturally nothing's perfect but it would be great if somehow a semiconductor could be invented that retained all the advantages of valves without it's shortcomings....
Cheers,
That pretty much reflects the design philosophy expressed by Jean Hiraga and some others as well.
IMHO, this is were valves have an advantage over semi-conductors; they're very simple devices allowing for far more straightforward amplification blocks.
Naturally nothing's perfect but it would be great if somehow a semiconductor could be invented that retained all the advantages of valves without it's shortcomings....
Cheers,
Disagree. Transistors are fine, just that more care is needed in the implementation when using them, to prevent the type of distortion that causes people to prefer valves - I have not heard a tube system in the last 30 years that has made me the slightest bit interested in using this technology ...Naturally nothing's perfect but it would be great if somehow a semiconductor could be invented that retained all the advantages of valves without it's shortcomings....
Cheers,
So, still no advances on how to measure distortion more intelligently,
The info is out there, plenty of research on how we hear and also what effects fidelity...The stuff I have worked on is not in the public domain.
Personally though I am quite satisfied with my system, and don't get hung up to much listening to the system and convincing myself that it is flawed (it is but I enjoy the sound) as I have said before most times I listen to the music. it is only when building something new or adding something do I listen to the SYSTEM...And to be quite honest I have given up on that at the moment as trying to sort the wheat (what will make a real audio difference) from the chaff (yourself and others postulating every little thing affects the sound digitisis etc.) is hard these days due to the noise level, so I just sit back enjoy the music and take photos instead (usually of plants, they are more co-operative than the grandkids).
Frank, I still have somewhere my original mono 45 of "Matchstick Men" played >100 times with a nice heavy crystal cart. You can still CRANK IT UP.
Hi,
That pretty much reflects the design philosophy expressed by Jean Hiraga and some others as well.
IMHO, this is were valves have an advantage over semi-conductors; they're very simple devices allowing for far more straightforward amplification blocks.
Naturally nothing's perfect but it would be great if somehow a semiconductor could be invented that retained all the advantages of valves without it's shortcomings....
Cheers,
Right or wrong, but the most meaningful measurements to me are square wave performance and THD peroformance out to 100 kHz, with the accent on the rate and shape of harmonic decay.
Frankly, I don't give a damn what my THD specs are like if they are below 0.1% worst case, but I pay much attention at how the harmonics decay. For example, I don't want to see the say 3rd harmonic drop down, but have the 4th and 5th harmonic go up - something is wrong with that circuit. It will likely sound at least a bit harsh, a bit hard.
I don't like to see long and - God forbid! - messy settling times. Or excellent rise times, but with unwanted ringing. Long decay times usually mean loss of finer musical details, in my experience, although they may not be the only reason.
And no matter what anyone says, I like to see a wide open loop bandwidth, my absolute bare minimum is 40 kHz at full blast into 4 Ohms. I usually do better than that. That allows me to use lower overall NFB rates, ideally 20-26 dB, no more. If I can't meet that criteria, I'm doing something very wrong.
As for valves/tubes, I am not a great fan, although I must admit to having heard a few preamps and amps based on valves which were really good, way above the average. But then, so were their prices. In general, they sound a little syrupy, sweet and sticky to me, and many do not have complete control of the signal, this mostly regarding power amps. I think this is why tube gear is so often demonstrated with slower, less complex music, like a chamber quartet, or an easy jazz jam session.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.