I cannot seem to find a reference to the Holly Cole recording being mentioned. I assume it is buried somewhere on this thread. Can someone please provide particulars?
Bud
Bud
Well I have recently yes. But I think I can also physically emulate it with DSP and get the same exact effect. To the point where I am not sure I really like the multi mic - mainly because the ambient mics FR does not match the direct mics where this is no problem with dsp. And a lot of why I like certain mic placements seems to be FR dependent and based on the proximity effect. But yeah I will admit it is tricky and easy to find your self in the "uncanny valley".
AJinFLA,
I don't get "excited" by anything you say. What you're interpreting as excited is actually my loathing & repugnance of you, a human I consider to be very emotionally & mentally sick! Afterall what other type of human would sink so low to make sexual remarks about my wife & the El Pipo subwoofer while we were debating audio? What the heck did sex, my wife and the El Pipo subwoofer have to do with anything audio related? The answer is nothing! You made that comment to provoke me, period! Now your back playing the same games you played on Audio Asylum that got you permanently banned. For some reason you delight in constantly attempting to provoke me by belittling me & disparaging my audio equipment. To anyone here who doesn't believe this is true, please look at how AJinFLA responds to other members and then look how he responds to me!
I have just returned to posting on diyaudio.com after recovering from what was a very close to life-threatening and very painful case of pseudomembranous colitis. I got this from taking the anti-biotic Clindamycin for a badly infected tooth. SY welcomed me back and commented how I was the only participant ---{who believes wires sound different <<< added by TG1954}--- here who has made a decent attempt to do a blind test and validate my beliefs. AJinFLA immediately made a negative comment about me so he responded with this: "Any observers/witnesses to this claimed test, to corroborate the protocols/procedures/statistics? (post-#9716) Why did AJ need to imply that I lied with his comment "claimed?" It was totally uneeded and mean-spirited. SY (post-#9718) and terry j (post-#9719) both noticed this and commented about it in their own way.
AJinFLA continued in his mean-spirited attack of my tests by making demands for proof (post-#9720) the test was actually done! I'm terrible with remembering dates and times but, these tests, as well as other eralier ones, were done in Connecticut between the late 80's & early 90's (IIRC) At that time I didn't believe wires could sound different and was absolutely amazed when I actually heard a difference after using Audioquest emerald ICs and whatever their equivilent Audioquest speaker wires were in my system!
Unfortunately for AJ, these tests I did were done to convince myself I was genuinely hearing the differences in wires I thought I heard and I wasn't just fooling myself. They weren't done for anyone else but me and a couple of friends who were present. How the heck am I supposed to provide proof of these tests some 20 years later? I didn't think at that time that I should keep my results in case someone on the internet some 20 years later demanded proof these tests were actually done! Now contrast AJ's behavior with that of SY, Key & terry j (post-#9722, 9723, 9724) They were all wishing my earlier offer (before I got sick) to do a proper DBT with witnesses could somehow get done. terry j was excited that it could possibly happen! Even with all that excitement AJinFLA's next post continued in his mean-spirited vein by belittling of me with his implications I lied about these tests (post-#9725) with this comment about the wires supposedly tested?
To the moderators and other members I want you to know that I don't want nastiness continuing. However I don't believe AJinFLA should be allowed to go on unreigned belittling people here or disparging their systems when he doesn't agree with their views on audio. I just noticed AJ did that to Panicos K (see quote in post-#9823) where AJ mockingly described Panicos system as: "Perhaps you can acquire this pristine CD, listen to it on your ultra resolving high resolution detail uninhibited system" I'm asking the moderators to please tell AJinFLA he must be respectful when commenting to or about me or other members. I'll openly admit to loathing AJinFLA as a person for making sexual remarks about my wife & the El Pipo subwoofer. That said, I'll state publically "if" AJ treats me respectfully, I'll do the same to him. This is an audio forum we should be discussing audio!
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
Last edited:
🙂 I agree.A "musical whole" is for me too, preferable to "monitor analysis".
I like my system now as it allows me to listen to music for as much time as I want,without becoming tiresome and annoying.I don't feel there is a lack of detail either,but as you said when the envelope is right,music sounds "complete".Preference to the more analytical kind of systems is a point from where most go through.The more "matured"you become as a listener,the less important you find this super analysis,realizing it has not much to do with the real music enjoyment.I would be surprised if someone needs to move from a system like this (righ envelope.....)to a more "monitor/super detailed" one.
I also agree that the system must be judged after using a wide range of music,LP's or CD's in order to make you feel more certain that it is well balanced and away from "traps"🙂 Cheers
I would add recordings using just two mics to your comments🙂
I have no doubt you can have a very convincing result with DSP.And if it sounds good,then for me it is good.So,in one way or another,the effect is recorded.That is why- in I don't know how many posts before-I did not agree with comments that such elements(soundstage,harmonic richness,ambience, etc...) in music reproduction automatically mean "euphonic colorations" or "distortions" from the system.These elements absence on the other hand,automatically points to a system that fails to show correct details,by presenting music in a more "fast,tight,direct,clear,detailed....."way.
Well yeah but I was using something different than stereo and more close to wave synthesis though.
Haha yeah my thing is I think most audiophiles and some engineers are chasing very small improvements in a lot of these areas when all they really need to do is add 2 speakers and the right decoder. And I myself being an advocate of the stereo to surround approach will have to fight off the same purist claims of euphonic distortions.
With my experimentations I am all about injecting distortions that are somehow realistic or at least more pleasing than the unaltered. And this is where I see how people can fool themselves with this stuff by finding something that sounds better.
With a lot of the things I find I think they should be variable or liquid and kept on the creative recording and mixing side of things. The thing about the mics and wave synthesis and me emulating it with DSP is actually something I have wondered about. The purist in me thinks it really should be on the mixing end but I have listened to it on other peoples recordings to solve a small problem I see with psychoacoustics and stereo. But it's way too close to like a sony reciever with "soundfield" preset just I am sneaky and make it "inaudible".
Haha yeah my thing is I think most audiophiles and some engineers are chasing very small improvements in a lot of these areas when all they really need to do is add 2 speakers and the right decoder. And I myself being an advocate of the stereo to surround approach will have to fight off the same purist claims of euphonic distortions.
With my experimentations I am all about injecting distortions that are somehow realistic or at least more pleasing than the unaltered. And this is where I see how people can fool themselves with this stuff by finding something that sounds better.
With a lot of the things I find I think they should be variable or liquid and kept on the creative recording and mixing side of things. The thing about the mics and wave synthesis and me emulating it with DSP is actually something I have wondered about. The purist in me thinks it really should be on the mixing end but I have listened to it on other peoples recordings to solve a small problem I see with psychoacoustics and stereo. But it's way too close to like a sony reciever with "soundfield" preset just I am sneaky and make it "inaudible".
True - mainly because once the quality of the sound system reaches a certain level, what separates the "great" listening experience from the just "good" is the source material: how the music been recorded and mixed.
And, of course, cables can't turn bad recordings into good ones. The best we can hope for is accurate reproduction of whats in the source, with loudspeakers that can recreate the sound fields that help the eye/brain combination create realistic phantom images (the depth, width stuff). Provided, that is, they are in the source in the first place to be reproduced.
Meanwhile I have a hard time finding CDs that don't sound great played through my decoder in ASIO on a very affordable firewire PC soundcard. (Sure some need a little EQ)
Amazon, $6, delivered in 3 days. Bit tougher internationally, or at least to SA?
Thanks for the tip. Part of the reason I like it is the simplicity (vs say a fully symphonic orchestra) and my up close familiarity with live piano and DB. Her voice is quite nice also.
My system is a HD>optical>DEQ2496>analog>MSB pre>200w Tripath amp>BMSpro dipole 12"coax, 4 15" TC sound dipole woofers, 2 Rythmik Servo + 4 Peerlesss 12" XLS subs. Mogami IC's and 10ga Belden 5000 for the speaker wires ( I also have Canare Star quad, Dayton SCP, etc.).
Do you see any limitations here/suggested alternatives?
Quote someone saying differently.
No one does.
The question is not whether you hear "it". The question is can you, when just listening to soundwaves, neither peeking at nor knowing the source?
Well you're in luck (Here you go BudP) Holly Cole Trio-Dont Smoke In Bed-200 Gram Vinyl LP | Acoustic Sounds
We need some repeatability in our testing, so some common reference (among others) would be nice.
So basically you are saying that you haven't tested on your current system.
The very reason why I declined to come over. Now you want SY and Key to travel all the way to your home to do a test, when you haven't even verified that you can hear wires on your current setup/system?
Since we are rapidly running out of time, I would strongly suggest (just as Randi does), that you test your abilities with your current setup/surroundings, prior to SY or Key coming over. I doubt either would disagree with me on that one.
Btw, do you have the Holly Cole (Don't smoke in bed) cd?
Hehe I can't deny I hate EQ lifts that are on most CDs. Once I figured out how to take that crap out most of my beef with CDs goes away truth be told. I don't know if I can even blame compression or a lot of the things I used to think were the causation of fatigue anymore. I do love vinyl and generally I think records are mastered without as much of a high end lift compared to the average CD. But I honestly can't say that CD itself has a deficiency beyond the retards that clip the hell out of the signal and try to deafen you with EQ.
Once you rip things to your hard drive with EAC so that it's an exact copy that can be played buffered through ASIO a lot of those audiophile phobias and variables become a non issue - especially if you use a hard drive with no moving parts. You can measure your outputs and inputs easily and just use which ever samplerate works best and upsample to a higher sample rate at 24-bit or above with an advanced SRC like SoX.
Last edited:
Ripped to drive and played back through my Audiophile Firewire (AISO) >> AKG 701s or various hardware and software players feeding a breathed-on Benchmark DAC1, the bulk of modern CDs still sound like sonic poo here. EQ might might soften the effect of modern production techniques but the damage is permanent.
At it's best it's a very enjoyable format, few at the creation end seem to care any longer and treat its dynamic ceiling like broadcast radio.
**2How does that Benchmark benchmark? Not very much impressed by dollar signs.
I think adding 2 more speakers might have helped me as well. I find myself not driving my speakers to insane levels trying to get immersion because it's already there even at low levels.
I think adding 2 more speakers might have helped me as well. I find myself not driving my speakers to insane levels trying to get immersion because it's already there even at low levels.
Of course I want it all if possible.🙂 Anyway I completely agree with your thoughts but wonder just where "Cables" fit in with this, as in my experience they don't have any real effects in this respect. People talk of tuning their systems with cables.........man they must be closer to perfection than I have ever been. 😕
I once edited some holiday Video8 camcorder footage of a band playing Suzie Q outdoors at Disney Land. The guy just kept the record button on as he walked quite a distance towards the band so I had a long continuous sound track with a moving directional mic. I used this audio under shots he took that day, only briefly showing the band closeup. The sound was really awesome (I was surprised) and brought the pictures alive. Later I used a song off a CD under other shots and no surprise it just sounded flat by comparison.
Now I have heard that you can buy acoustic enviroments. Someone fires a starting pistol in a certain location and records the decay/echoes. You buy this and then any dry sound you have can be be processed and heard as if it occured at that distant location as all the echoes are identical. I believe this is used in the film industry, have you encountered this?
Yeah, you can capture rooms reverbs with an impulse response an omni mic and a flat response. You then isolate the reflections from the tone to be used on your dry recording. I think this does seem to get closer to being realistic but not sure anything exactly is going to make reverb and recording an easy issue. It's kind of like art that way as soon as an easy answer comes along it can quickly be overused. I use a mixture of both synthetic and impulse responses in my mixing and I like to mix them to where they are just on the edge of being heard. You can feel it more than hear it. Also just sending the signal into the room with a speaker and then micing that up and mixing it with the original has always worked.
Foobar2000 has a free convolution plugin which you can use to do these things. I measured it and it seems to be just as good as any of the expensive ones. Also there is a convolution module that is free for SynthEdit VST maker software. So basically you can make your own VST that does the reverb thing for free. I measured a bunch of them they all seem to benchmark as good as Sony's as long as you keep the bitdepth high. http://www.savioursofsoul.de/Christian/se-modules/dsp-modules/ Maybe I will just put up mine for free. The main problem is convolution is very hard on processors so only fast computers can really use it to mix non-destructively.
Foobar2000 has a free convolution plugin which you can use to do these things. I measured it and it seems to be just as good as any of the expensive ones. Also there is a convolution module that is free for SynthEdit VST maker software. So basically you can make your own VST that does the reverb thing for free. I measured a bunch of them they all seem to benchmark as good as Sony's as long as you keep the bitdepth high. http://www.savioursofsoul.de/Christian/se-modules/dsp-modules/ Maybe I will just put up mine for free. The main problem is convolution is very hard on processors so only fast computers can really use it to mix non-destructively.
Last edited:
As a kid my local AM station used the stairwell on sat nights for the hit parade show. As far as film sound goes one mic the correct distance is the best, but not always possible. Despite all the electronic gizmos and talent Foley sound still sounds fake, as it is. I like Jean-Luc Godard the french film maker who had a thing about ambient sound, he used it no matter what.
Anyway I'm getting OT. cheers 🙂
In my case,when I got final decision about the system,I have tried 3-4 cables.After choosing speaker and interconnects,that was it.No more playing with cables,unless I'm curious to see🙂)) what some cables do in the system.Tuning the system with cables,for me means the small differences we are talking all this time.They may be $50 or $500,but that's it.Music enjoyment is what matters after that.Funny,I'm 50 and changed cables three times,and ironically my interconnects are yellowish,the colour I hate🙂
Speaker cables are nice black solid cores,and......touching the floor🙂
TO ALLTo:AJinFLA
I will try to get the album,although what I enjoy in music has not always have to do with 180 or 200gr.Many times I use even 50's recordings to "check" my system and ....myself😉
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.