On average people tend to like the music they grew up with in their mid to late teens and maybe early 20's. My kids are grown up now, but like the distorted music they heard during the years their musical tastes were formed. My mom is in her 90's and thinks Chattanooga Choo Choo is the best thing ever.
Mark,
I was just coming back from running an errand and I was listening to some Jazz. As you say it was so compressed that I had a bit of a time identifying that the horn was a Sax, it was so compressed that the blat and other distinctive sounds of the sax were none existent.
I was just coming back from running an errand and I was listening to some Jazz. As you say it was so compressed that I had a bit of a time identifying that the horn was a Sax, it was so compressed that the blat and other distinctive sounds of the sax were none existent.
Sorry catching up. Can't use laptop during the day as experiment #5 has discovered the shiny off button and awful at multiposting! I think there are a number of issues rolled up together into the one paragraph here that its worth teasing out.
1. Why don't people on here have the latest and greatest DACs
There are a number of reasons, rolled up into the ragtag cross section that resides here and core to DIY. You've got the crowd who are happy that 10 years ago we were already below any known thresholds for audibility so why fret. You've got the DS is evil use old ladder DACs with the oversampling turned off and you've got the discrete DAC brigade. But there are also those producing things using recent ESS chips sets and getting close to SOTA performance (oh and there is still the ODAC if you don't need SPDIF inputs).
2. Would having a Benchmark DAC2 make things suddenly audible?
I personally think no, but that's an opinion and I have no proof to back that up. Mr. Marsh would say yes, as he has a DAC2
3. As has been mentioned there are a lot of people on here with unshakable beliefs in their ability. There are also some who are so hell-bent on cheating they post 9/9 scores on Foobar ABX for bit identical files. Worse there are some who are breaking all known laws of nature with their claims. Having great hearing is one thing. Violating the second law has to cause a pushback.
4. when tests are setup then few step to the plate. At least until after the cheat sheet is published.
5. some are very happy with their delusions and to a degree its a hobby, no one gets hurt fine. But they wont change their views.
6. Amongst the -140dB club most of them would admit they are doing their few ppm designs for the challenge rather than because it would sound better.
7. Some on here have known each other for more years than they care to remember. This can be perceived as ganging up when they are all posting together, but its just a group of people with the same view expressing freedom of speech.
All of which adds up to a number of camps on here. Actually tribes is probably better. The forum does not moderate unless a rule is broken, so you get what we have in all its horror and glory. I like it and there is gold amongst the dirt if you dig it out.
As for me. I know I have an old and obsolete DAC with a 4558 output stage. But I also know it is far from the weakest link in my system.
Okay, but more to Scott's point, can we reasonably listen on our own systems and compare notes, or is there just too much diversity in equipment performance?
Simply from room/speakers I'd say "yes", as that swamps (magnitude-wise) the response of the system vs. the electronics side. Barring, of course, misbehaving equipment.
Personally I don't see how it is possible to compare notes on some of these questions from the disparate equipment that everyone has. So many different speakers with unknown FR and that alone to me seems to make some of this comparison such as listening to cymbals, bells or triangles, take your pick due to the fact that one tweeter may have a hole in the FR where another has a peak at the same exact point. How can you possibly make a comparison that way, one person might hear something that on another system the same person wouldn't hear the same anomaly. I don't see any easy answer for that besides somehow coming up with an agreed upon reference speaker at a minimum and perhaps other parts of the electronics chain.
We could all get NS-10s!
Oh, wait. They don't make those anymore.
Okay then, if the sound being compared has narrow band dips and peaks, then FR could be an issue. Transient response as shown on waterfall plots may be more of an issue for some things.
Oh, wait. They don't make those anymore.
Okay then, if the sound being compared has narrow band dips and peaks, then FR could be an issue. Transient response as shown on waterfall plots may be more of an issue for some things.
Last edited:
All get JBL M2's. They still make them. Then we can compare notes with some small meaningfulness or reasonableness. [is there such a word?]
Just kidding.
JC --- HAPPY NEW YEAR !
-Richard
Just kidding.
JC --- HAPPY NEW YEAR !
-Richard
How many of us listen to the music as opposed to those who listen to the system. There is time for both, but which activity do you default to? There will be your main two groups I think.
A sound system is a total experience for many. You have to like the way it looks and operates, or you will make changes. Who is happy with the current state of their system and have been for a few years at least? Those will be our satisfied group who are getting everything out of the system that they should be.
There is time for walking around listening to the music in the background as much as enjoying a book with something to sip on in "the listening position". How many never get there? How many of us obsess when in the listening position? Again, many of us will spend some time doing all these things if the truth be told.
-Chris
A sound system is a total experience for many. You have to like the way it looks and operates, or you will make changes. Who is happy with the current state of their system and have been for a few years at least? Those will be our satisfied group who are getting everything out of the system that they should be.
There is time for walking around listening to the music in the background as much as enjoying a book with something to sip on in "the listening position". How many never get there? How many of us obsess when in the listening position? Again, many of us will spend some time doing all these things if the truth be told.
-Chris
Finally, I pushed the right buttons to find this circuit. It is about 40 years old, but I used it regularly until about 33 years ago. It made the Analog master recorders for Mobile Fidelity and Wilson, and the studio boards for Crystal Clear Records (direct disc) and others. It IS one step over the 5534, subjectively, and it would still be better than virtually all op amps today, subjectively. I have made better studio boards since then.
This was what Jan has asked for.
This was what Jan has asked for.
Attachments
Last edited:
Its a nice circuit. Similar to the LH0032 (long obsolete). I have used similar in the past. What aspect did you improve upon? What were the weaknesses?
I just did a bunch of research on hearing testing. The audiophile perception of hearing test is quite off the mark. They are measuring the minimum sensitivity of your hearing. It is a good indication of hearing damage and degradation over time. Its not measured in dB SPL but referenced to an averaged hearing sensitivity of a young person with undamaged hearing. I found a chart that you can use to translate the numbers to SPL, but this goes to another issue. Formal testing is done in a very quiet space, some times a special "soundproofed" chamber.
Different headphones and different artificial ears produce different SPL with the same drive so standardization is critical. The hearing test headphones are quite stable in output and have very similar actual response from unit to unit. Something that commercial headphones do not have. They are also checked daily. I was going to work out calibration so I could test my hearing, turns out to be pretty involved. Probably will take a day to do. Headphone output above 8 KHz varies a lot every time you put the headphone on and the resonances that are a function of the cavity really make HF measurements moot.
Testing hearing for distortion sensitivity kind of makes no sense today. Its impact on speech intelligibility is small (I believe the mil-spec is 3%, could be higher) and its also unclear how that would be different from sensitivity at higher frequencies. Given all the back and forth even in this thread on distortion I believe the best academic info on distortion audibility is in the .5% range and its unclear what a higher or lower sensitivity to distortion (on pure tones/or what?) would mean in practice. If someone has serious distortion in their hearing it would probably also show as other issues. And suggests medical attention is needed.
FWIW here is an old set of tests on audiophile headphones by the US Navy http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a163971.pdf and you can see the variations in response. Their interest (sonar) actually does have life or death consequences. They also list the distortion levels of the different headphones. Numbers similar to what I have seen.
Demian,
thanks for the post, you basically corroborated what i thought. My mother works in a clinic and they do do hearing testing, they have no booth which I think is rather common. The last time I had my hearing checked I was in a booth but could clearly hear a low frequency rumble from an outside source leaking into the chamber. It isn't much different than trying to isolate a recording room from a session room with a band or from outside noise sources from outside studio, not a simple thing to do.
The audiologist who did my testing told me not to tell my wife I had virtually perfect hearing in those tests, couldn't say I didn't hear something when my hearing was that good if she knew! Of course as we both understand that was only up to about 8khz so it wasn't comprehensive testing. I've tested my ears myself with my Clio system and a simple single tone sweep that I could hear clearly up to 16khz before I noticed a complete drop-off above that range.
Happy New Year to you Demian, I still need to return that package you sent to me.
thanks for the post, you basically corroborated what i thought. My mother works in a clinic and they do do hearing testing, they have no booth which I think is rather common. The last time I had my hearing checked I was in a booth but could clearly hear a low frequency rumble from an outside source leaking into the chamber. It isn't much different than trying to isolate a recording room from a session room with a band or from outside noise sources from outside studio, not a simple thing to do.
The audiologist who did my testing told me not to tell my wife I had virtually perfect hearing in those tests, couldn't say I didn't hear something when my hearing was that good if she knew! Of course as we both understand that was only up to about 8khz so it wasn't comprehensive testing. I've tested my ears myself with my Clio system and a simple single tone sweep that I could hear clearly up to 16khz before I noticed a complete drop-off above that range.
Happy New Year to you Demian, I still need to return that package you sent to me.
No it wasn't. I just asked what type opamp you used in that tape EQ, and my guess is it's a uA709.
Jan
Attachments
I think he meant he used the discrete op-amp he just posted. Or partially posted, as one end is cut off. Although, this latest one looks like something he posted before, so perhaps the wrong jpeg got attached?
Last edited:
Hi Chris, I have spent a life time 'listening to the system'.
Noways that I have systems that I am happy with the sound of, I generally listen to the 'programme'.
That said I do revert to close listening to the system, but this easily converts to just enjoying the music and the production values.
I am happily comfortable with the sound of my system, but as the system gets better more subtle 'errors' are revealed, and so the chase continues.
My system is 'there'...finally.
In the case of my system, anywhere inside or outside the house, the sound that propagates is clean, clear, effortless and 'real'.
Be it from the clothes line, the couch, the sun room or the kitchen, the sound I have is always detailed, musical and enjoyable.
Detailed AND enjoyable is the 'holy grail', the world is full of systems that do either, but seldom both.
There is simple method to convert detailed to detailed plus enjoyable at a stroke.
Dan.
Last edited:
Sure. You got 20 grand for which I can purchase a pair.
Remember if I spend it, it means certain death.
Or at least come to my funeral.
Hi Dan,
You`re at least getting your money`s worth from your system. I have several pieces of equipment that I swap out every now and again, and I enjoy them all. Even an old Philco 1937 radio (which I need to do some maintenance on). Everything needs maintenance now and again, so it`s a good thing I can change between systems when needed.
I`m about to put a Marantz system back into service that I enjoy the most.
-Chris
You`re at least getting your money`s worth from your system. I have several pieces of equipment that I swap out every now and again, and I enjoy them all. Even an old Philco 1937 radio (which I need to do some maintenance on). Everything needs maintenance now and again, so it`s a good thing I can change between systems when needed.
I`m about to put a Marantz system back into service that I enjoy the most.
-Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.