And they will try to "prove" that you are wrong.You've never done an objective amp or DAC sound comparison. All your speculations and claims of sound characteristics of those components come from non-scientific subjective auditioning.
What research? 🙄
He is dealing with all the positional based non linearities. Quite well, I might add, but not what I speak of.
Jn
Jn
For completeness Klippel should not only have considered the relation voltage input versus sound reproduction, but also with current as the input signal. That would have simplified his models quite a bit and have resulted in less distortion.
Hans
It was obvious in my mind. Just underlined the important word.
Even at limited speed, it is more difficult to keep a constant distance with a Beetle behind a super car that fully accelerate than with a more powerful super car ;-)
To be correlated with the influence of the amp slew rate on the speaker's accelerations during transients.
Attachments
Even if the super car remains within the beetle's capabilities, the control system still needs a finite time to spool up.
Feed forwards tell the beetle driver "push the pedal this hard this fast as the car in front is going to do "this". As opposed to looking at the distance and adjusting. With visual feedback, the system gain is how hard the beetle driver stomps the gas...too hard, collide or oscillate, too soft, distance grows. Assume the beetle driver has learned the optimal pedal play.
As both cars go up a rapidly steepening gradient, the beetle driver has to learn a different level of pedal play as the car is changing it's vertical acceration quickly. For an unchanging gradient, pedal play may be identical but with a bias in position.
Jn
Feed forwards tell the beetle driver "push the pedal this hard this fast as the car in front is going to do "this". As opposed to looking at the distance and adjusting. With visual feedback, the system gain is how hard the beetle driver stomps the gas...too hard, collide or oscillate, too soft, distance grows. Assume the beetle driver has learned the optimal pedal play.
As both cars go up a rapidly steepening gradient, the beetle driver has to learn a different level of pedal play as the car is changing it's vertical acceration quickly. For an unchanging gradient, pedal play may be identical but with a bias in position.
Jn
Thanks for this very convincing demonstration.
(strange from a "non believer" scientifically correct objectivist, don't you think ?)
Just try this: Copy outside of your preamp, in digital, a musical tune played at your lowest level of audibility. (The levels of your recorder to be tuned for correct at normal power).
Reproduce-it after analog amplification up to normal listening level. Come-back and share with us your listening impressions.
I know all the argues you will oppose against this evidence. They will be based on YOUR audibility threshold. The fact exists as obvious.
Is-it important ? Depend on what you focus on during your listenings.
Now, if you are not sensible to those artefacts, lucky you are. Your hifi life is probably easier than mine ;-)
This said, why the hell the "legendary" Bruno Putzeys is-it considered as an absolute guru on this forum ? (My use of "legendary" is on purpose).
Noise floor is lower in the Ncore and Purifi than anything else other than the Benchmark AHB2. So the running out of bits theory just doesn't work. It's amazingly linear on the published tests. At low power the Benchmark is impressively better and as far as I can tell in a league of its own but loses out at higher power levels.
Only you and Mark have this decay tail fetish. I've not seen it in print anywhere (but happy to be wrong). So the two of your are chasing something that is even less codified than most textual descriptions of sound. Maybe you are on to something, or maybe you listen for different things due to years in a studio stressing over something that really doesn't matter to me personally. I suspect the latter.
Claiming Sterile is a lack of resolution is just such of those myths surely?
I don't recall anyone calling Bruno an 'absolute guru' but he is one of the few actually trying to move the state of the art* forwards with products like the Kii speakers. His amplifiers measure well and review exceedingly well so why should I not question when someone has a negative view to try and tease out what is considered wrong. Sadly I am no closer to what causes 'sterile'. But I like to look forwards rather than be stuck in 1972 forever.
*And sadly some audiophiles would be so horrified by the idea of an integrated DAC/amp/speaker with huge amounts of feedforward and feeback linearisation that they would not even consider them. Others would be put off with only 2 boxes where 8 can be carefully synergised.
Last edited:
You are talking of a form of feedback? Motional feedback with a wideband driver doesn't seem possible due to cone flexing?
You may have quite some practical experience with (horn)speakers, but analog and digital signal processing are obviously not your world.
Hans
Last edited:
In my systems, I am talking about changing the gain based on the amount of force being used on the load. More magnetic force means I can increase the gain without hitting the phase margin limits. As force reduces, gain must be lowered as phase margin will drop.
Jn
For a short while I saw my name mentioned at the start of this block, but then you removed it corectly.
I fully agree that it always deserves all egards when people are trying to conquer new land, seeking to set new standards.
Hans
I believe current technology and processing power of common PC is enough to realize a system wide correction to allow us commoners enjoy true High Fidelity, it is the software that is lagging. Bruno's way of doing it should minimize design effort.
Seems to me you were here when I posted the link and told the story about noticing the reverb tail loss myself which happened not long before the article on it was pointed out to me.
No idea what I did with the link to the article since it was awhile ago. Basic story was an audiophile wanted to understand if dacs are accurate. He bought some master tapes for some records and the tape machines they were mastered on. He compared the sound of the tapes to SD dacs including Benchmark DAC-3 and IIRC a low performance ladder dac (Border Patrol? that was reviewed in Sterophile, and roundly panned here). Ladder dac got the reverb tails like the tape playback, DAC-3 didn't.
He wrote to Sterophile and complained to them about throwing praise on dacs when they were losing low level reverb tails that a cheap ladder dac chip could reproduce.
I wrote about reverb tails after reviewing a very low cost ladder dac designed by our own Abraxalito in his thread. His dac reproduced reverb tails better than DAC-3 and I said so. He is the one that first posted a link to the article I described above which is what brought it to my attention. I reposted it and the story here in blowtorch.
Just to be sure I was clear, I independently noticed reverb tail loss before finding out about the article on it. I only mentioned it to others after Abraxalito told me about the link to article.
That starting to ring any bells?
EDIT: Found it: Audio Fur and the Border Patrol DAC | Part-Time Audiophile
Last edited:
That the absolute position of a membrane do not produce any sound ;-). Only speed and acceleration maters.
+Me
Be happy: "In addition to improved attack, there was now more generous sustain and decay and an overall sense of natural musical relaxation, though instrumental attacks and overall transient performance remained the best I've heard from a solid-state amplifier."
That's a harsh way to express a very fundamental notion: a musical note is made of a pitch (frequency domain) and an envelop (time domain: attack/sustain/decay), and both components interact. Note that it's a lot easier to write pitch on a musical sheet, as it is easier to do measurements in the frequency domain.
Yeah sorry, I noted a reply notification email come in whilst I was writing and didn't spot where the quote ended so goofed there. I should remember to never take plain text emails as a reference 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.