Are you really interested in 'Hi-Fi'?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#383
Markw4 said:
It's simply that in science in engineering there is a need to quantify. Its the old, if you can't measure it then it doesn't exist. You can't design a product to a vague spiritual feeling standard. Or maybe call it, an internal subjective mental experience standard, if that's a better way of putting it.
Click to expand...

Except that you might be surprised to discover that some who professionally design objectively excellent measuring HIFI equipment operate to a significant extent with "an internal subjective mental experience standard."

This was certainly the case with some of the people I worked with at a large and notorious audio company, as well as many I met from other local audio companies over time.

BTW readily admit I am guilty of both meter reading and blatantly catering to my own subjective preferences. I think I am rational within the range of objectives and technical preferences I labor under.. Bill may have some comments on that.. lol
 
#384
scott wurcer said:
I have to admit there is a fuzzy element here, the "sound" has to include room/speakers, etc. I find it easier to separate the fidelity problem into the electrical/signal issue and the mechanical reproduction issue.
Click to expand...

It definitely does complicate matters. I have a marked preference as many here know for very simple tube amplifiers** with remarkably high output impedance which means I have to design the speakers both to work with those amplifiers, and the room in which they reside.

**Note this does not mean I like high distortion or non flat frequency response or any specific "sound" in fact very much the reverse. An oxymoron perhaps? And I believe in and use parametric room EQ, interestingly I don't need much. 😉
 
#385
kevinkr said:
Except that you might be surprised to discover that some who professionally design objectively excellent measuring HIFI equipment operate to a significant extent with "an internal subjective mental experience standard."
Click to expand...

Didn't mean to imply that audio design should not include listening tests. I think it should.

But I don't think listening preferences are something that can't be measured.
 
#389
Many of my "bargains" need to find new homes.. LOL I've sold off half of my phono cartridge collection, but I have of course kept the most insane ones.. I still want a Jan Allaerts, maybe some day..

I'm in throws of test equipment upgrades because I am reaching the point where I am having trouble measuring distortion and noise with what I have - in addition to the fact that I am getting lazier and want more and easier to use capability. I'm going to buy one Jens audio analyzers when the group buy opens up.
 
#394
Markw4 said:
But you like slightly to very slightly audible distortion? Lots of people do.
Click to expand...

I haven't quite figured out the answer to that question, but in general it appears that I don't. I have gone to Souther linear trackers (significantly modified by me) on all of my turntables because their improved geometry made for an immediately audible reduction in tracing distortion. (They also have some issues - so trade offs are definitely involved)

I take it as a complement when someone comments that my system does not sound anything like the typical tube system they've heard.

I have to remeasure the amps after the interstage and input transformer upgrades to determine their baseline performance at this point in time. Previously they were under 0.4% at 1W, and 1% at 10W, and 2% at 20W. Oddly at 100mW the distortion was still 0.4% and not noise dominated - 3 discrete spectra were visible. (2nd, 3rd, and 4th) The IT upgrade was intended to reduce this, whether I succeeded I don't know yet - I do like the result otherwise. (Note that the IT was identified as the primary source of distortion at levels below 10W.)
 
#398
scott wurcer said:
That DAC is just something I have sitting around, the truth is almost any will do when you just want to listen to the music.
Click to expand...

Same for mic preamps when you want to record with? For opamps used to play music? I used to think that it couldn't matter too much, as long as noise and distortion were reasonably good, they didn't have to be great. But as it happened when I tried it, it did turn out to matter to me, for all those things including DACs. Maybe we differ on this.

Reminds me, I used to wonder how the other kids ever were able to do their homework in junior high without going up to the blackboard after class to write down the assignment. Eventually, I started to suspect that there might be a problem with my vision. Man, was I amazed when I put on my first pair of glasses and discovered that you can see individual leaves on a tree from more than a few inches away.
 
#400
kevinkr said:
3 discrete spectra were visible. (2nd, 3rd, and 4th) The IT upgrade was intended to reduce this, whether I succeeded I don't know yet - I do like the result otherwise. (Note that the IT was identified as the primary source of distortion at levels below 10W.)
Click to expand...

Not all distortion is particularly likable. A little bit of low order harmonics can sound good though. But, that's for the overall system transfer function. If each piece of gear is adding some, then its not so good. Too much build up. You might find if your reduce it too much, you might want to believe you are making it better intellectually, but if you ABX test you just might find you like a little of it.

Or, perhaps you suspect your speakers perform best driven from a very particular source impedance? If so, then wouldn't you need to measure the distortion coming out of the speakers and see what you're doing to it? Maybe trying to lower that would make it sound even better, if low distortion is what you really like?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom