fdegrove said:
See strange enough even though I use 4 speakers I am actually still talking about stereo. But only as a delivery format and not the projected format. 2 Mics is sufficient to capture realism imo but 2 speakers is not sufficient to project that image.
Anyway this whole conversation reminds me of this video by Alan Watts. "Alan Watts oh know we have a hippy mystical objectivist on our hands" Yeah I am a walking talking contradiction I know.
Zen Reproduction.avi - 27.55MB
fdegrove said:
Hi Frank,
US 6780360 has a description of the usual process in the introduction. "Drip" might be a little poetic license but it definately starts as a slurry coated on the wire, quite interesting.
BTW Teflon occupies one end of the Triboelectric potential chart, meaning you can rub just about anything against it and get some charge.
rdf said:
Yes it is! It's so often easy to tell. Dynamics has to be a lot of it, but certainly not all. It's a big subject.
Good radio transmissions is tops 
I have often experienced recordings I had previously trashed find later on to sound quite good with lots of fine sonic information
Prviously distorted recordings may suddenly sound very fine and smooth
And its all due to the crossover
Based on these experiences I often have my doubts when people complain about poor recordings, clinical digital sound, or whatever
But sure, we all have our different preferences as to what we like
I have often experienced recordings I had previously trashed find later on to sound quite good with lots of fine sonic information
Prviously distorted recordings may suddenly sound very fine and smooth
And its all due to the crossover
Based on these experiences I often have my doubts when people complain about poor recordings, clinical digital sound, or whatever
But sure, we all have our different preferences as to what we like
Good posts on live versus recorded sound, I do agree that bad recordings are holding us back, speakers also. I would leave out cables though. On those beautiful sounding recordings, I just can't buy the idea that the recording would have been just so so if they had used normal cables during the recording process.
Live music signals are less correlated than reproduced ones is why, I think.
Recorded music played in a big room sounds more 'live' than when it's played in a smaller space. The signals have more space and time to decorrelate before arriving to the listener.
This assumes an really clean signal because linear and non-linear distortion correlate to the musical signal giving it a characteristic 'reproduced' sound.
The phase shift at low frequencies could well be part of the "live" deal that we just don't get right; I wouldn't discount that at all.
I also wonder if "playing to the room" doesn't have a lot to do with it.
Musicians are sensitive to the acoustic that they are playing in. They have to be, that's how they hear themselves. But if we record in one room and play back in another......
Musicians are sensitive to the acoustic that they are playing in. They have to be, that's how they hear themselves. But if we record in one room and play back in another......
This is the thing. With only two speakers directly to the left and to the right of your head are nothing but errors. You really need side speakers imo.
If you wished to perform a meaningful comparison outside a room with no indirect sound then you should record without the addition of the normal room effects, place the microphone at the same angle as the listener will be to the instrument (tonal balance as well loudness varies with directivity) and process to correct for the influence of the ground or else it will be heard "twice". A normal stereo signal contains all sorts of cues related to the indirect sound that are incorrect for this situation.SY said:
The brain is good at locking onto sound if it is presented with something reasonably approximating what it is used to hearing. This can be demonstrated by using a pair of small cheap microphones at the entrance to your ear canal and a pair of small cheap ear buds in a similar position. The transfer functions are not going to be perfect but are often close enough for the brain to lock on. It demonstrates that in terms of "liveness" the bulk of the difference between live sound and stereo reproduced sound is usually not the quality of the transducers but the quality of the indirect sound.
analog_sa said:
Good on you for giving it a go!
The effects will wear off over time.
Magnitude of any changes using this is system dependent.
analog_sa said:
My simple understanding of the process is that it demagnetises the system.
If there are no magnetisable components then probably there would be little or no audible change.
As to how long the effect will last, I simply don't know.
IME the re-magentising of my system it is a gradual process and I'm usually unaware of it.
I do notice the change each time I run the demag tone.
Key said:
Cable cooker? - no. Demagnetiser? - maybe.
In my system it makes an audible change for the better - and it's free.
Cheers,
Alex
metallurgy ot not
Cable wonks need to leave metallurgy to the metallurgists. To suggest individual metal crystal grains "chumming up" or some sort of "demagnetizing" of systems during "burn in" is an arrogance of naivete' beyond belief. So much hogwash, it's laughable. Litterally billions of dollars have been spent characterizing metallic behavior over the last hundred years or so, the "unknowns" in metallic properties are well past "grain boundary friendliness" and have nothing to do with music reproduction through cables. Stop buying into the marketing BS and gibberish.
So many obvious holes are left out of the purported support for "special" physical causes of hearing differences in well built ordinary vs. pricey and/or exotic cable constructs it's pathetic... and very telling that psychological causes (expectation bias, sampling errors, etc.) are vehemently dismissed as "calling names" rather than given the obvious merit they deserve under critical scrutiny.
Cable wonks need to leave metallurgy to the metallurgists. To suggest individual metal crystal grains "chumming up" or some sort of "demagnetizing" of systems during "burn in" is an arrogance of naivete' beyond belief. So much hogwash, it's laughable. Litterally billions of dollars have been spent characterizing metallic behavior over the last hundred years or so, the "unknowns" in metallic properties are well past "grain boundary friendliness" and have nothing to do with music reproduction through cables. Stop buying into the marketing BS and gibberish.
So many obvious holes are left out of the purported support for "special" physical causes of hearing differences in well built ordinary vs. pricey and/or exotic cable constructs it's pathetic... and very telling that psychological causes (expectation bias, sampling errors, etc.) are vehemently dismissed as "calling names" rather than given the obvious merit they deserve under critical scrutiny.
Re: metallurgy ot not
Now what is it with you?
Do you really think that bringing in basic physics, will change anybody's mind 😀
Magura 🙂
auplater said:
Now what is it with you?
Do you really think that bringing in basic physics, will change anybody's mind 😀
Magura 🙂
Re: metallurgy ot not
You learnt guys make it real tough on us simple folks to choose wire. Not everyone can afford your gold plated stuff no matter how great you claim it sounds. I was saving money to order SY's recommended orange from Home Depot but now he's suddenly upgrading to something even more extravagant
Who can catch up with these moving goalposts?
auplater said:
You learnt guys make it real tough on us simple folks to choose wire. Not everyone can afford your gold plated stuff no matter how great you claim it sounds. I was saving money to order SY's recommended orange from Home Depot but now he's suddenly upgrading to something even more extravagant
Who can catch up with these moving goalposts?
Hey I just bought a nice blue 12 AWG 50 foot cord on sale at Lowes.
And I measured it. It does have rising impedance above 2Khz. Will post soon.
And I measured it. It does have rising impedance above 2Khz. Will post soon.
SY said:
That's what I am getting these days from JC and his buddies. If only they could let go of PIM as a cause. Sub 50Hz PIM is incredibly small.
panomaniac said:
Should look pretty close to 50uH in series with 0R2.
That's a pretty long cable! Might want to go thicker.
scott wurcer said:
PIM, who cares? I was thinking more of the shift because of the LF rolloff. When I extended my subs to an f3 of 12Hz, it made many things sound much more realistic to my ears and brain.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.