I am inclined to the view that the term no longer applies given where we are now. We have come a long way since the recording session at the Wezy in the film Oh Brother Were Art Thou.
It is but that cannot always be the case. There are times when there was never an analogue original created by a physical instrument. A significant chunk of what I listen to is electronically generated.
Probably meaning that my reasoning only applies when the DACs under test use different op-amps.
At least Almeg69 doesn't post dozens of irrelevant posts that only reiterate the same message, like you've done from page 4 onwards.
Extraordinary claims do still require extraordinary evidence
Given the justifications you have given over the years for using NS-10 as your reference no it's not obvious to me. But as I have stated before the performance of my DACs is very very low on my priority list for things to improve in my personal system that I use for enjoyment of music. I like different music on different speakers in a different room than you and focus on different aspects of the reproduction. As such we will have vastly varying sensitivities to things.
NS-10s driver by Benchmark AHB2 are pretty revealing and the speakers are cheap. In any case, not using those at the moment. The main system is not using Sound Lab electrostats.
Also, as I think I explained before it wasn't the speakers that made sorting the opamps so hard, it was the old Bryston 4B power amp. Electronics distortion sounds different than speaker distortion, and speaker distortion does not mask electronics distortion as Earl Geddes has pointed out more than once.
The explanation being that speaker distortion is higher for low order harmonics but lower for high order harmonics?
I concur. I own NS-10s as a benchmark for midrange neutrality and revelation. I also have Rogers LS35a's (not that revealing) stacked Quad 57 electrostats with Decca Ribbons (all dismantled), and variant other speakers and "things". What has been the case is that distortions that began as being attributed to "speakers" turned out related to amplification or reactions between them, this including reactive artifacts caused by wiring.
Oops! Confusing typo. Should have read: The main system is now using Sound Lab electrostats.
But for music NOT intended to be played on transistor radios how does that give a satisfying experience?
As an aside, speaking of the old Bryston 4B, I used this to assist in a research project to acoustically levitate solid particles (apparently too corrosive not to suspend). This was inside a clear vertically held cylinder. The principle was to hold the particles on the compression layers of the acoustic wave.
At the bottom was a circular resonant capacitance plate tuned to around 18KHz. The reactive Q was so high that it required phase locking for reasons that the heat changed the frequency of the plate and couldn't be hand set to approach resonance. Once near resonance the phase locking mechanism was turned on and the resonance built up like an acoustic laser. The Bryston 4B was chosen for its unconditional "lifetime warranty"... this after blowing up several other then "renowned" multi-hundred watt power amplifiers attempting full power into this 18KHz reactive load.
Normally I can't hear 18KHz... though under these circumstances my ear protectors didn't seem to function at all. Fortunately the researchers saw through this ill-conceived and imminent "naughty" inducing and "finger wagging" response by "health and safety" and terminated the experiment after the Bryston torched the resonator (instead of itself).
The NS10's shed light in a small window of the whole... as can be likened and/or limited to a transistor radio sound. Sound engineers use this information (for better or worse) in conjunction with other broadband reproducers to create some form of intended musically satisfying experience for us. In many ways the NS10's are just so bad their good.
Measurement, then, is the only way to check fidelity, I don't see where subjectivity enters the equation.
If you can forgive another aside -- the Bryston 4B does seem pretty hard to kill. I tortured a pair of them for several years in a series of local and regional bands .. one of them does emit a slight chirp a few seconds after power off now, but no failures .. yet -- 43 years.
Sorry, couldn't help myself,
Cheers
Sorry, couldn't help myself,
Cheers
Last edited:
Well it is certainly better than any DBX test. That being said, AP, R&S and the like can only test fidelity to the input test signal which which is not unlike ground test mode in avionics. However, there is no equivalent flight test mode.
If it is a question of either measurements or listening tests, most people would be wise to go with measurements. Jam might be an exception, but I don't think he would like to release a product without any measuring. He certainly wouldn't release one without listening.
For most starting-out/diy audio designers, I'm sure people like Jam Somasundram, John Curl, John Westlake, etc. would all strongly recommend to both measure and listen.
For most starting-out/diy audio designers, I'm sure people like Jam Somasundram, John Curl, John Westlake, etc. would all strongly recommend to both measure and listen.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.