You really can't separate format and recording. It's not *just* the recording, it's the mastering as well. Hardly any source media has the same master between vinyl & digital to start with (let alone from one release to another on vinyl), and even within the digital they vary.
Good speakers cannot save a bad sounding source (DAC/phono/etc).
A good room cannot save bad sounding gear. But good sounding gear in a bad room is still pleasurable.
Define adequate amplifier... Same goes for a DAC. If you think just a THD measurement is enough, you're obviously very wrong as shown by the entire history of playback.
Everything you've been writing reads like some kind of wet-dream for people that really have no idea how circuits work - or speakers. There are so many choices in design that it isn't very realistic to just "make the best". Who determines what's best when the measurements don't direct you or when you get one thing but not the other? The reality is that in general I think people like this dream because it means things will cost less and they'll have less responsibility in the equation - and I suppose more steam to blow at people who don't give a ****. But they totally ignore the fact that it's entirely dependent on listening to music that is perfect, and not the music that speaks to them. You might as well set your TV to greyscale since you can't objectively get the perfect color... if you're that into a narrow minded idea of perfection. The rest of the people - especially the ones that buy products - will remain vested in emotional connection. Objectionist make up a very small amount of people in the general populous - although many pretend to be because it fits their economic ability.
so far this discussion has moved back into LIKES and in far field room affect listening situations. The safety of habit?
If there was anything which could be told, if it is accurate, it is by measurements. The HW/SW is now available to do this to any degree of accuracy and to any psycho acoustic parameter desired. AND, then to adjust for it to be as perfect as needed or budget allows at the listeners ear.... near-field.
The new generation of reference mastering monitor speakers for near and mid listening distance with wave guide controlling dispersion and directivity, is here and now (and for awhile already) . Pick on the converters or DSP chip used or PA topology but the future is here. All the parameters I listed can and are being addressed Now. So, now the choice is to find that monitor which fits your budget, output, specs. Of course, it still needs high quality drivers with low distortion and high dynamic range without compression.
Then, experience what greater accuracy in reproduced music can do to your enjoyment.
THx-RNMarsh
If there was anything which could be told, if it is accurate, it is by measurements. The HW/SW is now available to do this to any degree of accuracy and to any psycho acoustic parameter desired. AND, then to adjust for it to be as perfect as needed or budget allows at the listeners ear.... near-field.
The new generation of reference mastering monitor speakers for near and mid listening distance with wave guide controlling dispersion and directivity, is here and now (and for awhile already) . Pick on the converters or DSP chip used or PA topology but the future is here. All the parameters I listed can and are being addressed Now. So, now the choice is to find that monitor which fits your budget, output, specs. Of course, it still needs high quality drivers with low distortion and high dynamic range without compression.
Then, experience what greater accuracy in reproduced music can do to your enjoyment.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Everything is tool, and so it's valid to talk about the technical side of anything in audio. But it's pretty pointless to assume that it can all be summed into some uber system that is all that is right and just in the most objectionist terms possible, or that anyone besides some egotistical internet surfers actually want that. For example someone that likes a 1W SET amp may greatly prefer a horn that is as linear as possible. Pick and choose battles and goals to fit emotional desires, not to try to erase them under a blanket of "correctness".
Any kind of blind test is utter nonsense. I buy audio components that sound good in my system, my room, and to my ears. Period. I don't listen with my scope, I listen with my ears. Some of you here should try it sometime. And I don't need my dog to give a reaction of approval or anyone/anything else for that matter. Nor do I need to record crickets in my back yard and compare to how they sound like in my system. I trust my ears. And I'm not deaf.
Who suggested that blind testing involved anything but ears only? Are you laboring under some elaborate misconception?
Probably should not be an issue of one extreme or another. People can listen with varying levels of skill and ability, people can measure with the best equipment they have access to. To the extent we can both measure and listen, all information taken together should make sense or something is wrong and we should figure out what it is.
Also, it is well-known that humans trust their senses. They naturally tend to believe what their own eyes and ears tell them. We now know of course that eye-witness testimony in court has moved from being the gold standard to one of the least sure ways of knowing what happened in some event. The sense of accuracy in hearing is just as illusory as vision, but it sure seems like reality and the feeling of confidence that goes along with it can be very strong. Yet, confidence is nothing more than another feeling that is subject to its own distortions.
It is true that humans can become more skilled listeners in several ways with training and practice, and by using certain techniques. To the extent those things help and to the extent we may want to use humans as another form of instrumentation, we should work to optimize performance as we do with our test equipment. Try to make everything we use as accurate and reliable as possible.
Also, it is well-known that humans trust their senses. They naturally tend to believe what their own eyes and ears tell them. We now know of course that eye-witness testimony in court has moved from being the gold standard to one of the least sure ways of knowing what happened in some event. The sense of accuracy in hearing is just as illusory as vision, but it sure seems like reality and the feeling of confidence that goes along with it can be very strong. Yet, confidence is nothing more than another feeling that is subject to its own distortions.
It is true that humans can become more skilled listeners in several ways with training and practice, and by using certain techniques. To the extent those things help and to the extent we may want to use humans as another form of instrumentation, we should work to optimize performance as we do with our test equipment. Try to make everything we use as accurate and reliable as possible.
Last edited:
At the same time, measurements are a common ground. I generally get nothing out of anyone's listening impressions. Exception being speakers and descriptions of how they perform in a room, which is almost giving their radiation pattern.
Last edited:
Hi ridikas,
These days, if a component measures certain ways I already know I don't want to listen to it. If you have test equipment that is any good, you should learn how to operate it. It might really help the quality of your posts! 🙂
ridikas, of all the members here, you make a lot of negative assumptions about everyone else. It doesn't look good on you. Are you unhappy in your life? Is there anything someone can do to make you feel better? You should talk to a professional about this, it might help you.
-Chris 🙂
Do you have a scope? What sound does it make?
Try what, listening normally like any other human does? Because I have test equipment, does that barr me from enjoying the music in my living room? My bench? The car?
These days, if a component measures certain ways I already know I don't want to listen to it. If you have test equipment that is any good, you should learn how to operate it. It might really help the quality of your posts! 🙂
My dogs were actually pretty good judges of sound quality. You need to pay attention to your surroundings. If I build or work on anything, I will have other folks listen to it for me. They know to be brutally honest and I often just send them home with an item. I keep myself on track that way. I have a tendency of being too hard on myself.
How do you know if you have never tried this? It would seem that you are more closed in and closed minded than most here. You really ought to try recording some nature and trying that on your best system. Oh, I'm sorry, you can't afford a recording device and mics?
ridikas, of all the members here, you make a lot of negative assumptions about everyone else. It doesn't look good on you. Are you unhappy in your life? Is there anything someone can do to make you feel better? You should talk to a professional about this, it might help you.
-Chris 🙂
Folk likes pictures with fair amount of color in them. Food? Doesn't taste good? Put some salt on it. With sound ,high amount of simpatetic distortion goes well. Measure a good sounding SET and find -35dB THD. That's what you get if trusting your ear.
Modern dacs generally sound good, as long as one avoids esoteric "audiophile" solutions. The only reason I can see for using vinyl is if one likes the cover art or if one has a huge collection of vinyl records that one can't do without.
Fully agree.
I think there may be slight audible differences between dacs and amplifiers (or rather the amp/speaker-interaction). Subjectively, I have experienced differences between amps (only in non-controlled sighted comparisons), never between dacs. But I trust people who tell me that they have heard differences between dacs as well. But still, it's very hard to get really bad sounding solid state amps or dacs these days, unless one builds or buys esoteric audiophile stuff. The Behringer A500 or Yamaha P2500s amps both sound good. The Yamaha WXC-50 streamer/dac is close to transparent. Beyond that the improvements become ever more marginal.
I think people make this too complicated. It ain't so hard, if the goal is wire with gain. Low THD in electronics is general is a good goal post (and not too difficult these days), and it's even more important to avoid higher-order harmonics than lower-order harmonics, as Mark pointed out. With speakers, it obviously becomes complicated and difficult. But the goal shouldn't be too complicated here either. Smooth frequency response, good impulse/time/phase behavior, even dispersion with frequency, excellent dynamics, low distortion. If you achieve all of that, you have the perfect speaker. I'm not aware of any speakers that achieves it all at the moment. But speakers can be farther or closer from the ideal. (but when it comes to speaker dispersion, I don't think that there's one correct way of doing it)
Of course, I don't have anything against people using tube amps or vinyl or whatever floats their boat. But if the goal is accuracy? In principle, it's not that hard.
I don't think anyone truly has the goal of accuracy. Fact is studios don't record music in a way that makes pure accuracy an ideal goal. Feedback is almost taboo because it can sound so bad on so many albums. That's a problem from the studio, and the people listening to the music are doing what (little) they can to make it sound appealing.
Most goals of people are to have the sound of live music - once they start spending more $ than a Bluetooth speaker.
I'll forever refer to the engineer that posted in here about how the tapes and vinyl sound the same, but everyone could tell when digital was played back. The biggest joke is how bad so many newer vinyl releases are, at least by companies like Mobile Fidelity or Indie labels without a f******* clue. It's very sad but the old stuff sounds better almost entirely. There are some releases that defy that, but not even close to how many I'd want (forget any new CCR release). It's really sad because future generations are going to have to suffer through the garbage that'll be available.
If you think it's hard to find bad sounding DACs or amps, you've never been to an audio show. It's shocking. The guy with the plant speakers that shows in the hallway often has better sound than 90% of the rooms - but it does sound like the band is playing from below the floor.
When it comes to speakers there are a lot of factors involved in quality that directly conflict with one another. Excellent dynamics with an ability to really push out the SPL isn't very kind to a broad and flat frequency response and low distortion. Pro drivers in contrast have limited bandwidth and are able to keep distortion pretty good, while being very loud. There is basically nothing short of a 3 way to accomplish this, which for home uses means 6 amplifier channels, and a big DSP, and intrusively sized boxes because none of the pro stuff tries to get sub frequencies out of anything but 12-18in drivers. So whether you live in an airplane hanger or have an alien for wife that can tolerate your audio lunacy, you're probably going to be doing a little picking & choosing between attributes.
Most goals of people are to have the sound of live music - once they start spending more $ than a Bluetooth speaker.
I'll forever refer to the engineer that posted in here about how the tapes and vinyl sound the same, but everyone could tell when digital was played back. The biggest joke is how bad so many newer vinyl releases are, at least by companies like Mobile Fidelity or Indie labels without a f******* clue. It's very sad but the old stuff sounds better almost entirely. There are some releases that defy that, but not even close to how many I'd want (forget any new CCR release). It's really sad because future generations are going to have to suffer through the garbage that'll be available.
If you think it's hard to find bad sounding DACs or amps, you've never been to an audio show. It's shocking. The guy with the plant speakers that shows in the hallway often has better sound than 90% of the rooms - but it does sound like the band is playing from below the floor.
When it comes to speakers there are a lot of factors involved in quality that directly conflict with one another. Excellent dynamics with an ability to really push out the SPL isn't very kind to a broad and flat frequency response and low distortion. Pro drivers in contrast have limited bandwidth and are able to keep distortion pretty good, while being very loud. There is basically nothing short of a 3 way to accomplish this, which for home uses means 6 amplifier channels, and a big DSP, and intrusively sized boxes because none of the pro stuff tries to get sub frequencies out of anything but 12-18in drivers. So whether you live in an airplane hanger or have an alien for wife that can tolerate your audio lunacy, you're probably going to be doing a little picking & choosing between attributes.
Oh it isnt that bad any more. And, there is the credit card ! So what if you pay for the next 5 years for it. You'll get a lot of free flyer miles. 🙂
Many here havent bought an up-to-date and more accurate speaker in a lot more than 5 years.
THx-RNMarsh
Many here havent bought an up-to-date and more accurate speaker in a lot more than 5 years.
THx-RNMarsh
You really just want to beat up the Met7 crowd, don't you?
What is the crossover point for them?
What is the crossover point for them?
Last edited:
A great many strong opinions around here show a degree of innocence or inexperience with making really good audio designs that can be misleading. It is very difficult to make really good audio electronics, and almost impossible to design really great loudspeakers. I still think that the challenge is there, big time, with loudspeakers still.
We have learned to make pretty good electronics, although not perfect. You might be surprised that the best electronic designs usually use the same parts, you know: Almost impossible to get complementary jfets, etc, and often similar topologies, and certainly the bigger the heatsink, the better. There is no free lunch, and even if a company has good parts available to them, the board layout, passive parts selection, and general preparation of the passive and active devices can make a difference. I find it a real challenge to keep up with my contemporaries, like Nelson Pass, and Bascom King. You would too if you had to put your designs up against theirs. This is where I know from experience, what many of you don't know, as I have been competing with these guys and other designers for the last 40 years or more, and I don't always win, or even come out as good. Frankly, however, I am rather lazy compared to the late Charley Hansen who cryoed his polystyrene Rel-Caps. I just clean the leads. That is the sort of extra care that makes a remarkable audio product and not just a good enough one. Oh well, enough from me. '-)
We have learned to make pretty good electronics, although not perfect. You might be surprised that the best electronic designs usually use the same parts, you know: Almost impossible to get complementary jfets, etc, and often similar topologies, and certainly the bigger the heatsink, the better. There is no free lunch, and even if a company has good parts available to them, the board layout, passive parts selection, and general preparation of the passive and active devices can make a difference. I find it a real challenge to keep up with my contemporaries, like Nelson Pass, and Bascom King. You would too if you had to put your designs up against theirs. This is where I know from experience, what many of you don't know, as I have been competing with these guys and other designers for the last 40 years or more, and I don't always win, or even come out as good. Frankly, however, I am rather lazy compared to the late Charley Hansen who cryoed his polystyrene Rel-Caps. I just clean the leads. That is the sort of extra care that makes a remarkable audio product and not just a good enough one. Oh well, enough from me. '-)
Those strong opinions can also show degree of experiences with components that should show top performance, but are often only very expensive and with very poor objective performance. 😉
You got it. 🙂 😎
And there are plenty now available. I chose the JBL M2 speaker system because it meets all the requirements I listed. But there are other's-- lower and higher in price. If you dont want an accurate playback, I am not sure what we are doing here.
Studios and Mastering dont have to have accurate monitors but they try to .. the rest is making/creating music and sounds by the producer and musicians. On playback we dont Make the music Or should not be making it with our speakers and room acoustics and listening position/distance.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
In principle I agree we want accuracy. That begs the question accuracy to what? Natural sounds recorded outside seem to be a good test, I don't hold with the idea that we should accurately reproduce what the engineer heard at the mixing desk, where is the validity in that?
Agree that there are almost always trade-offs with speaker design! At least with the driver technology we've had until now. But DSP technology makes it much easier, I think. But as mentioned, I'm not aware of any speaker which is the master of everything to an equal degree.
Disagree that multichannel and DSP means very big and bulky boxes though... For my coming living room setup I will use a Driverack box (Venu360) for DSP duties, and a Crown multichannel amp with fan mods for powering six channels. Neither box is particularly big. I already have a cupboard in place where I can hide it away.
(I'm playing with building some simple amps myself these days, but it's mostly to learn who it works - I don't expect to be able to beat Crown's technological know-how)
- Status
- Not open for further replies.