Basically, in well designed system, the speakers (and lets not forget the room) are really the only impact. By this I mean that swapping out anything but the room and the speakers with other "well designed" pieces will yield "no perceptable change" (in a DBT of course). If this is not the case then it is a straightforward task to find out why this has occured and to identify which piece is "correct" and which is not.
Swaping rooms and or speakers is always such a major effect that it is difficult to determine the "why". Because of this completely one sided situation, most people regularly swap out the unimportant components and call even the most miniscule "real" differences profound and inaudible differences "significant". In fact they are completely ignoring - because it is inconvenient or inexpedient - the only two things that really do make a difference.
Everyone ignores the room, I think it's why business has been so slow lately, lol.
Well, I am going to try to once again put my' 2 cents' in about cables and their place in audio. They should be a minor contributor to the overall sound. After all, they have little measured distortion (apparently), contribute little signal loss, and have relatively flat frequency response. Then WHY is it that they are considered important to a great number of serious audiophiles?
Well, in working with cable differences for more than 30 years, it seems that they add to the sound quality, like the quality of the frosting on a cake. They contribute, but the cake should be high quality as well. In this metaphor, the frosting might cover a defect in the quality of the cake, or it might enhance the overall impression of the cake by not making itself anything but a contributor to the cakes' quality, or it might spoil the cake by being excessively sweet, or made with an artificial sweetener, that tastes 'wrong'.
Now, some people seem to obsess over the 'frosting' and seem to want to try a different 'frosting' each month, and others are happy with standard 'frosting' and use it because it is inexpensive, convenient, and they are used to it.
Where does this leave us with cables? Well, since cables measure well in the areas that are the USUAL tests for differences. Therefore, it is almost impossible to denote any differences in a 'properly run' double blind test, and therefore all cable differences will be discredited by 'scientists and engineers' because of these results. Still, people will hear the differences between cables in their home system, and some will still be enthusiastic enough to make even more comparisons, because it becomes an obsession to them and fun too, and they probably have too much money and want to spend some of it. Others, will pick a cable and stick with it (that's me), and still others will demand that those who hear differences that cannot be 'proven' by DB tests, are tainted psychologically, mesmerized by sales advertising or some other of evil plot to separate people from the money.
Well, this is where we stand: Cable differences, just like many other subtle differences in audio components, either as parts or assemblies, just get lost in a DB test, yet they still remain consistently important in making successful audio systems. Ignore it, and usually you will not win a listening contest, no matter how much you think that you have done 'right' to make a successful audio system. That has been my experience, and I will stick by it.
Well, in working with cable differences for more than 30 years, it seems that they add to the sound quality, like the quality of the frosting on a cake. They contribute, but the cake should be high quality as well. In this metaphor, the frosting might cover a defect in the quality of the cake, or it might enhance the overall impression of the cake by not making itself anything but a contributor to the cakes' quality, or it might spoil the cake by being excessively sweet, or made with an artificial sweetener, that tastes 'wrong'.
Now, some people seem to obsess over the 'frosting' and seem to want to try a different 'frosting' each month, and others are happy with standard 'frosting' and use it because it is inexpensive, convenient, and they are used to it.
Where does this leave us with cables? Well, since cables measure well in the areas that are the USUAL tests for differences. Therefore, it is almost impossible to denote any differences in a 'properly run' double blind test, and therefore all cable differences will be discredited by 'scientists and engineers' because of these results. Still, people will hear the differences between cables in their home system, and some will still be enthusiastic enough to make even more comparisons, because it becomes an obsession to them and fun too, and they probably have too much money and want to spend some of it. Others, will pick a cable and stick with it (that's me), and still others will demand that those who hear differences that cannot be 'proven' by DB tests, are tainted psychologically, mesmerized by sales advertising or some other of evil plot to separate people from the money.
Well, this is where we stand: Cable differences, just like many other subtle differences in audio components, either as parts or assemblies, just get lost in a DB test, yet they still remain consistently important in making successful audio systems. Ignore it, and usually you will not win a listening contest, no matter how much you think that you have done 'right' to make a successful audio system. That has been my experience, and I will stick by it.
joaquim,
I had to manually edit your post that attempted to circumvent the language censor. 34 points expiring in one month. 100 is auto bin time.
The biggest absolute deviation from neutrality perhaps, but the plus/minus 10+ dB room response doesn't make a 2 dB tweeter level control worthless.
I would expect the musicians to be the artists, the job of the recording/mixing/mastering engineer should be to make a faithfull copy of that. (Talking about recordings of acoustical instruments of course.)
Luckily there are still some of those recordings you can use to evaluate a system. I for one do not believe in 'adding' anything but I do appreciate realistic sounding recordings.
Pride. 😉
If you want to make it complicated then OK but by 'good measurements' I'm only suggesting more than acceptable FR, THD and whatever specs that are normally shown.
No it was intended as two questions. Since you don't trust your ears or published specs, I was trying to figure how you decide what equipment to buy.
Hi,
Care to spill the beans, SY?
For John C. it's cake, to me it's beer, to you it's wine? 😀
Either way, I feel the same way as J.C. but that you knew already...🙂
Ciao, 😉
Care to spill the beans, SY?
For John C. it's cake, to me it's beer, to you it's wine? 😀
Either way, I feel the same way as J.C. but that you knew already...🙂
Ciao, 😉
Hi,
From your POV the recording engineer is an artist (granted, some are)?
I think that's indeed where it all went wrong and art turned into products.
So, when a recording engineer pulls out his brush and adds some changes it's O.K.? When the recording is manipulated with equalizers and god knows what else, it's O.K.
But when the guy that buys the stuff does the same at home to suit his taste all of a sudden it is not O.K.?
Oh, and how does one know what the guys at the desk intended?
Maybe one day all those brilliant producers will use different different cables to obtain different shades of whatever painting they had in mind?
Quo vadis, domine? 😕
Cheers, 😉
From your POV the recording engineer is an artist (granted, some are)?
I think that's indeed where it all went wrong and art turned into products.
So, when a recording engineer pulls out his brush and adds some changes it's O.K.? When the recording is manipulated with equalizers and god knows what else, it's O.K.
But when the guy that buys the stuff does the same at home to suit his taste all of a sudden it is not O.K.?
Oh, and how does one know what the guys at the desk intended?
Maybe one day all those brilliant producers will use different different cables to obtain different shades of whatever painting they had in mind?
Quo vadis, domine? 😕
Cheers, 😉
Hasn't anyone here diy'ed any equipment that measure similar and sound different?If they all measure and sound the same in a given system,then this is not a hobby,it is pure masochism.
It is this end result the recording engineer decides to be final,that many call "accurate",and don't want to "pollute" by changing it to something closer to their taste.Here I don't mean to change it with cables,but with any means anyone can use,like a good equalizer etc...........
Those beans have been spilled so many times, the kitchen floor is covered with them. John is merely pretending that it's linoleum.
Hi,
I think the world is full of equipment that measures alike and still doesn't sound the same.
Isn't that wonderful? 🙁
Cheers, 😉
I think the world is full of equipment that measures alike and still doesn't sound the same.
Isn't that wonderful? 🙁
Cheers, 😉
Yes it is.It is a nice opportunity for many to buy a "perfect and accurate" piece of equipment for any budget,and everybody will be happy🙂
It's not that I don't trust my ears, I just don't explicitly trust my ears. In home trials is really the only good benchmark. You can't trust a speaker to sound the same in the showroom as it will in your room. As an example, I'm still trying random surround speakers to figure out which ones I plan to stick with. I've tried about 5 different pairs, I happen to stick with the ones that timbre match the fronts while sounding good. I'll keep trying ones out, I was considering some B&W's next. I did the same with my sub, only to a lesser degree. I didn't have to worry about timbre on the sub, lol.
Again, this doesn't prove anything. The manufactures specs don't represent how a pair of speakers will sound in a room, and a lot of cases they present the data in the best light possible. Proper measurements of a driver will give you a good idea how it sounds just as proper measurements of a system will give you a good idea as to how it'll sound. Fr is what most people rely on as a basis of comparison and it's one of the least useful tools.
Not understanding what measurements represent is not the same as measurements being incapable of accurately depicting the experience. I've yet to see anyone point out an quality of sound that can't be represented with data.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.