That is not at all clear to me. In my view, measurments and numbers tell the whole story, only some people choose not
to believe them. I don't understand what it is that makes some people think that audio has properties which cannot be
explained by physics and math.
IMO "measurements and numbers" Do Not tell the "whole story" because our ears have sensitivities to phenomenon yet unexplored by "physics and math"
to believe them. I don't understand what it is that makes some people think that audio has properties which cannot be
explained by physics and math.
IMO "measurements and numbers" Do Not tell the "whole story" because our ears have sensitivities to phenomenon yet unexplored by "physics and math"
Re: ppl
AD8610 is a top modern chip, no doubt about it but I have no personal experience of it. The data is certianly impressing!
Pan said:
AD8610 is a top modern chip, no doubt about it but I have no personal experience of it. The data is certianly impressing!
hitsware said:
I believe strongly in measurements BUT they have to get relevant results! Data doesn't tell you all and this comes from I, who don't believe in listening to different caps, resitors etc. The ears and the hearing are complicated things. Why do you think so many people are involved in research? Read JAES, then you can get a small idea of how difficult it is to create good measuring models. These models are sometimes (very often!) very deep.
Measurements and numbers
are science. Science (IMO) is humans trying to describe and understand moder nature.
So.. science aren´t better than the person that "invents" it.
Man do faults, man learn, and science improves as time goes by.
Nature has been there a quadrazillion of years, we have been around and evolved for a couple of hundreds millions of years.
Hifi and measurments has been around for decades. Surely we will improve our way of loking at nature and our way of explaining and "exploring" hifi and science.
In the meantime, I trust simple logic and my fantastic ears that have evolved for those millions of years 🙂.
Of course everything that we hear, we can also measure, BUT.. maybe we should try to realise what amazing those ears of ours are. We can hear the sound of air molecules moving in room temp.
I think I read somewhere, that if the eardrum are excited with an amplitude equal to the size of an atom (N) we sense a sound.
Now, I think this part of this thread started of about feedback, and look how nice the THD numbers are on opamps after feedback. Before feedback opoamps are so non-linear it´s sickening (so I´m told). Lookin at the 2134/627 family, the distortion rises allready at 1000Hz, why? Obviously the opamp has problem with high frequencys well within the audioband.
Loking at the AD825 family, the distortion are much more linear in relation to the freqeuncy. Which is most important, the lowest distortion or the most linear distortion???
Sure we want both. As far as I understand, the sound of an feedback amp gets better and better the higher the bandwith and the shorter settling time. That seems to be the reason AD825 became so popular, it was one of the best in that regard, don´t know which are the best today. This type of opamps are almost neutral, but still not there yet.
This (I believe) is also the reason feedback power amps suffer relatively much from the feedback artifacts, they are not fast enough to settle in the circuit (please correct me if I´m wrong).
And therefor FM distortion, IM and DIM makes the sound loose low level details, especially in the highest octaves. Jitter in CDP makes similar harm to the signal it seems.
I´m sure all of this can be measured and explained, we just need to understand that THD measurements only are one way of measuring one type of distortion. Different topologys create different distortion types and some are worse than others. Also we should know that we can hear distortion down to very low levels.
The best electronics I have heard are still no-feedback topologys. That goes for heaqdphone driver, CD/SCD analog stage and power amps. All my circuits are class A and no-feedback and they are the most natural I have heard to date. I would love to find something better though, only because I like to move forward, me tinks zats a funny part of life 🙂
/Peter
are science. Science (IMO) is humans trying to describe and understand moder nature.
So.. science aren´t better than the person that "invents" it.
Man do faults, man learn, and science improves as time goes by.
Nature has been there a quadrazillion of years, we have been around and evolved for a couple of hundreds millions of years.
Hifi and measurments has been around for decades. Surely we will improve our way of loking at nature and our way of explaining and "exploring" hifi and science.
In the meantime, I trust simple logic and my fantastic ears that have evolved for those millions of years 🙂.
Of course everything that we hear, we can also measure, BUT.. maybe we should try to realise what amazing those ears of ours are. We can hear the sound of air molecules moving in room temp.
I think I read somewhere, that if the eardrum are excited with an amplitude equal to the size of an atom (N) we sense a sound.
Now, I think this part of this thread started of about feedback, and look how nice the THD numbers are on opamps after feedback. Before feedback opoamps are so non-linear it´s sickening (so I´m told). Lookin at the 2134/627 family, the distortion rises allready at 1000Hz, why? Obviously the opamp has problem with high frequencys well within the audioband.
Loking at the AD825 family, the distortion are much more linear in relation to the freqeuncy. Which is most important, the lowest distortion or the most linear distortion???
Sure we want both. As far as I understand, the sound of an feedback amp gets better and better the higher the bandwith and the shorter settling time. That seems to be the reason AD825 became so popular, it was one of the best in that regard, don´t know which are the best today. This type of opamps are almost neutral, but still not there yet.
This (I believe) is also the reason feedback power amps suffer relatively much from the feedback artifacts, they are not fast enough to settle in the circuit (please correct me if I´m wrong).
And therefor FM distortion, IM and DIM makes the sound loose low level details, especially in the highest octaves. Jitter in CDP makes similar harm to the signal it seems.
I´m sure all of this can be measured and explained, we just need to understand that THD measurements only are one way of measuring one type of distortion. Different topologys create different distortion types and some are worse than others. Also we should know that we can hear distortion down to very low levels.
The best electronics I have heard are still no-feedback topologys. That goes for heaqdphone driver, CD/SCD analog stage and power amps. All my circuits are class A and no-feedback and they are the most natural I have heard to date. I would love to find something better though, only because I like to move forward, me tinks zats a funny part of life 🙂
/Peter
Pan,
what speakers are You listening to ?
I believe the most limiting part of the chain is the tweeter.
A 2143 or whatever as a headphones driver is just the wrong thing in the wrong place.
Not specified for the low impedance.
Greets, Bernhard
what speakers are You listening to ?
I believe the most limiting part of the chain is the tweeter.
A 2143 or whatever as a headphones driver is just the wrong thing in the wrong place.
Not specified for the low impedance.
Greets, Bernhard
Bernhard
I use my own construction.
It´s a dipole with Accuton/Thiel&Partner C23 in the topp,
2x 7" C92 as bass mids and Scan Speak 8565-01 10" in the lows.
Premium x-over components in a nice "homebrew".
I used the Esotar earlier, listened to many others Focal, also the DDD driver I used for a while (no fun response in the topp I can say, even though it sounded.. ok and.. fun).
Nothing I have heard can match the C23.
Haven´t heard the Diamond or Ravens though.
/Peter
I use my own construction.
It´s a dipole with Accuton/Thiel&Partner C23 in the topp,
2x 7" C92 as bass mids and Scan Speak 8565-01 10" in the lows.
Premium x-over components in a nice "homebrew".
I used the Esotar earlier, listened to many others Focal, also the DDD driver I used for a while (no fun response in the topp I can say, even though it sounded.. ok and.. fun).
Nothing I have heard can match the C23.
Haven´t heard the Diamond or Ravens though.
/Peter
- Status
- Not open for further replies.