Oh dear! Is that your idea of hi-fi? If so, I am not surprised that you want something different.Jay said:
Well that is (sort of) true, but who thinks otherwise? The main things which affect distortion in the speaker are speaker issues, while those which affect distortion in the amplifier are amplifier issues. About the only thing which affects both is the value and linearity of the amplifier output impedance. The total distortion heard is the vectorial sum of both sources of distortion.
Do you? Why don't you measure the right thing, like real engineers do?
If you have ever listened to a single microphone mono recording it often sounds like it is in a tunnel. That is from the path length bounces and phase cancellation. You don't hear this live as the path to each ear is slightly different and it combines to present a fuller spectrum.
Yes of course. Why not. That is the case. But words is only words. There are things that cannot be transferred (easily) through words. That's why, we have to use "structured" way of putting things on the table. Whatever that means
That would clearly be sufficient, but it is not clear that it is necessary. Fortunately our ears/brain seem to be quite good at coping with a different acoustical environment, provided that most of the original Fourier components are present (i.e. sufficiently high bandwidth) and not too many new ones are introduced (i.e. sufficiently low nonlinear distortion), plus avoidance of pathological issues such as a 2 second differential time delay between sub-1kHz and super-1kHz frequencies.Jakob2 said:
Actually the variation in loudspeaker impedance coupled with interconnect resistance creates much of the response variation in most modern amplifiers. The measurement standard is for the test cable to have a resistance of 5% of the rated loudspeaker impedance, which can be twice the minimum measured over the frequency range. Now many home setups have even more than the 5%.
Now most well designed loudspeaker divers today have 1% or less distortion mostly second harmonics, maybe some thirds but usually not much higher.
The overlooked issue is how a bit of third from the amplifier can become ninth harmonic after the loudspeaker reproduces it. When you look at threshold of hearing sensitivity and the spectrum of typical music it becomes clear that with most of the energy below 200 hertz second harmonics under 400 hertz are much less an issue than ninth harmonics that approach the most sensitive part of our hearing mechanism.
(BTY the correct method to test for resistor values is by smell, the stronger the odor the higher the value.)
a picture of a block of colour, with next to it 'this is x' would seem to work well. I perceive colour differently than you do, but there would be no problem with us coming up with a common understanding based on using words and things readily available in the natural world.
I personally cannot see sound being any different.
Now I agree you cannot describe a symphony to someone who has never heard music and expect them to understand it, but to anyone who has, the words have meaning. If they didn't the snake oil peddlers would not be able to sell dreams of veils and soundstage.
I personally cannot see sound being any different.
Now I agree you cannot describe a symphony to someone who has never heard music and expect them to understand it, but to anyone who has, the words have meaning. If they didn't the snake oil peddlers would not be able to sell dreams of veils and soundstage.
Oh dear, I thought I have said I have no idea what people have in mind. What do you have in mind, BTW? Why did you think I'm confusing enjoyment with hi-fi? To tell you the truth, I have never thought of this word "hi-fi". It sounds like gimmick in cheap boomboxes.
Sounds good to me. So how do you define "hi-fi"? If 2 preamps is given to you, i.e stock OPA627 and DCB1, which one is "more" hi-fi to you? (Sorry I have never thought in this hi-fi way).
I did. Not amplifiers as I don't have precision tools for that, and because I found speaker is still the weakest link so I don't have the "needs" to see measurement result. If I want to publish my stuff, I think I will have to measure everything so it looks cool. Isn't it?
I think deciding what are gross and not gross differences should be quite self evident.
For example, I believe we would all agree that the difference between a V8 and jet engine is gross and therefore easily distinguishable.
Fine differences fall at or just below the threshold of audibility and I think that's what we are discussing here, and that's where DBT of ABX testing can help determine the limits of our perception easily and with a statistically significant result. My wife was always doing stats when she was studying and subsequently teaching/lecturing - so in the psychology profession, and especially when studying human perception, you always test a hypothesis statistically. There is no wiggle room.
So, with audio, let's not make claims that under scientific scrutiny don't stand up.
That of course does not mean we cannot say an amplifier sounds 'put your own descriptive subjective phrase in here' - that's fine. But then don't make a subjective statement and then tell us it was because your circuit uses x or y component when in a properly conducted test you would get a null result. Ditto for distortion also by the way. Humans really struggle below 0.1%, with the threshold of detectability much higher for most of the population.
As a wise man said a while back, 'objectivist fantasy vs. subjective reality' to which I say 'show me a statistically significant result please'.
Remember the Carver test . . .
For example, I believe we would all agree that the difference between a V8 and jet engine is gross and therefore easily distinguishable.
Fine differences fall at or just below the threshold of audibility and I think that's what we are discussing here, and that's where DBT of ABX testing can help determine the limits of our perception easily and with a statistically significant result. My wife was always doing stats when she was studying and subsequently teaching/lecturing - so in the psychology profession, and especially when studying human perception, you always test a hypothesis statistically. There is no wiggle room.
So, with audio, let's not make claims that under scientific scrutiny don't stand up.
That of course does not mean we cannot say an amplifier sounds 'put your own descriptive subjective phrase in here' - that's fine. But then don't make a subjective statement and then tell us it was because your circuit uses x or y component when in a properly conducted test you would get a null result. Ditto for distortion also by the way. Humans really struggle below 0.1%, with the threshold of detectability much higher for most of the population.
As a wise man said a while back, 'objectivist fantasy vs. subjective reality' to which I say 'show me a statistically significant result please'.
Remember the Carver test . . .
Last edited:
No and yes. Yes you can use words, but "what is in the words?". The message can get through or not, whatever the words. People can even communicate without words. When a General is telling the Colonel to "take care" the man, taking care means killing, finishing. But it cannot mean the same thing if the General was ordering a Private. Because words is only words.
Hehehe. For some people, reading between the lines is important. Because the "point" is often "hidden" between the lines. In this case, it is not about military action.
I like to "see" colour and sound from the same perspective, which is from the emotion they convey. I like a sound system that can show fine detailed of emotion of the singer/performer. Same with TV colour. Most "TV girls" have high sex appeal that you can see only in face-to-face, or in good colour TV
So that's it. The one who brings and receives the message should have similar experience, then even a blink is understandable.
The clue is in the name. A 'hi-fi' preamp is one whose output closely resembles an amplified copy of the input, apart from well-placed LF and HF filters.Jay said:
Measurements for the purpose of looking cool are likely to be either irrelevant measurements or badly-performed/analysed measurements. Much better to measure as an aid to debugging, or to reassure that theory has been correctly applied and so measured behaviour corresponds to calculated behaviour.
If the speaker has mainly 2nd order distortion (as you said) then 3rd from the amp will produce mainly 6th at the speaker, not 9th. Of course, in real life all orders will be present.simon7000 said:
Description only no picture to go with it....
Remember Telly Savalas crooning his one and only hit (I hope)
In university, most of the students from far away area rent a room near campus. I have one room where when I rent it the owner asked me not to stick any nail on the wall and I said okay.
So when my close friend came by I told him that "I need a hanger but unfortunately I already promised the room owner not to stick nails on the wall" then I told him that I wanted to go out for a moment.
When I came back, the hanger was already done. Perfect communication as expected. But when I think about it, what is the difference with me directly breaking the promise. But legally I didn't.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.