That has Not been found to be true. A few do but under careful tests conducted by F.Toole et al most prefer low distortion and flat frequency response.
-RNM
For classical sure, early jazz, yeah.
Modern jazz is often quite compressed, depends on the genre.
Rock and roll, and pop... when did Toole do whatever he did? Anything modern is full of effects, intentional use of vintage gear with it's distortion, etc., etc. Not low distortion exactly.
Flat frequency response? that varies. There is a natural FS slope with acoustic instruments that drops off as frequency rises, so the resulting FS is not flat. Some modern pop is truly flat and sounds very bright as a consequence.
I have only limited time to look it up. Nothing turned up yet to support your claim. It's up to you if would like to provide a pointer to it.
From what I did find, he seems to be interested in capturing live performances and trying to reproduce them accurately. Don't know if he has any interest in music for which the studio version is intended to sound best, and live performances are seen as necessarily compromised.
My understanding would be to the effect that for much, probably most recorded music in today's world there is ample evidence that it has been produced with some intentional distortion on individual vocals and instruments (but not necessarily on all of them), and to some extent on overall mixes, somewhere or other in stages of the production chain. In some cases it is gross distortion and in other cases fairly subtle (coloration), but it's there for the most popular genres. Not so much or at all for classical and some jazz and probably a few other genres. Country may tend to vary with sub-genre.
Perhaps Mr. Toole's findings will be updated to reflect the changes at some point in the future. I hope so.
As an aside, I have to fully agree with what you said upgrading my DAC-1 to a newer model. It was replaced with a DAC-3, which definitely sounds better, cleaner, and more detailed, although not hugely so. Still worth it to me though.
From what I did find, he seems to be interested in capturing live performances and trying to reproduce them accurately. Don't know if he has any interest in music for which the studio version is intended to sound best, and live performances are seen as necessarily compromised.
My understanding would be to the effect that for much, probably most recorded music in today's world there is ample evidence that it has been produced with some intentional distortion on individual vocals and instruments (but not necessarily on all of them), and to some extent on overall mixes, somewhere or other in stages of the production chain. In some cases it is gross distortion and in other cases fairly subtle (coloration), but it's there for the most popular genres. Not so much or at all for classical and some jazz and probably a few other genres. Country may tend to vary with sub-genre.
Perhaps Mr. Toole's findings will be updated to reflect the changes at some point in the future. I hope so.
As an aside, I have to fully agree with what you said upgrading my DAC-1 to a newer model. It was replaced with a DAC-3, which definitely sounds better, cleaner, and more detailed, although not hugely so. Still worth it to me though.
Last edited:
I have to say I have not seen anything from Toole reference the recording chain, just that on playback people seem to prefer lower distortion (something the Gedlee metric also shows). However you only have to dip your toe into the murky waters of gearslutz to realise that people recording popular music want a particular sound. For top 20 hits its worse as the spectre of Chris Lord Alge the destroyer of dynamic range comes up. In a few hours he can compress the best recordings pancake thin, but his services are in demand.
But interested in hearing more from JC about ribbon mic problems...
But interested in hearing more from JC about ribbon mic problems...
One of the worst was Metallica's Death Magnetic. Even most of their fans didn't like it.
On the low distortion end of the spectrum, the hi-res Steely Dan source PMA used for his listening test is distorted, just listen closely. Probably sounds better that way than without the distortion, would be my expectation.
For comparison, I posted a link to an mp3 (of all things) that was less distorted and more detailed than the hi-res steely Dan. The band on the mp3 is definitely worse though.
On the low distortion end of the spectrum, the hi-res Steely Dan source PMA used for his listening test is distorted, just listen closely. Probably sounds better that way than without the distortion, would be my expectation.
For comparison, I posted a link to an mp3 (of all things) that was less distorted and more detailed than the hi-res steely Dan. The band on the mp3 is definitely worse though.
JC, I've heard a good number of systems. While IC's usually are not preferred, there have been many that sounded fantastic and better than many discrete things.
You don't "hear" artifacts, you hear aberrations (at least as we discuss). An artifact would be a click or pop from a vinyl record or something that doesn't belong in music. But aberrations are the result of poor measurement qualities; and even digital artifacts you can see but never become an audible artifact. Aberrations sound like something wrong occurred in the music, or it just didn't sound good.
For awhile now I've been thinking about a good album to recommend as a sort of standard that's easy to acquire among people that read this thread. There are some I like so much I can't recommend them... and then again it's necessary that they be acquirable as well for a reasonable sum. I believe any 58, 60, or 62 LSO-6006 should sound pretty much amazing. If you are a digital guy... well, sorry, there isn't any digital equivalent that I'm aware of that has the same quality but it is good.
You don't "hear" artifacts, you hear aberrations (at least as we discuss). An artifact would be a click or pop from a vinyl record or something that doesn't belong in music. But aberrations are the result of poor measurement qualities; and even digital artifacts you can see but never become an audible artifact. Aberrations sound like something wrong occurred in the music, or it just didn't sound good.
For awhile now I've been thinking about a good album to recommend as a sort of standard that's easy to acquire among people that read this thread. There are some I like so much I can't recommend them... and then again it's necessary that they be acquirable as well for a reasonable sum. I believe any 58, 60, or 62 LSO-6006 should sound pretty much amazing. If you are a digital guy... well, sorry, there isn't any digital equivalent that I'm aware of that has the same quality but it is good.
Floyd Toole major point about the recording chain is that we need standards for the mastering room: loudspeakers with flat FR and controlled directivity.
When we talk about audio quality, what does that mean? Of course, a designer believes he makes the best quality (or at least the best quality he is capable of).
The next question is then: why doesn't everybody buy that specific product?? The answer is that people all have their own idea of what quality means, of what is high quality.
It is the hallmark of a fashion industry that many different products, in different price ranges, different performance, different parameters can exist side by side in the market. There is no 'quality' indicator as such.
If JC's audio products are so high quality (and I agree they are), why does 99% of the population buy someone else's product?? Because they all have a different idea of what 'quality' is.
Just as the experience and appreciation of sound quality is governed not just by what comes out of the speaker, purchase decisions are also not just governed by what comes out of the speaker. If, in this industry, you focus on a single parameter of appreciation (what comes out of the speaker) you are shortchanging yourself and will never capture a larger part of the market.
You may be content with that, nothing wrong with that. But please don't make the mistake blaming 'the market' and customers that do not understand what is best for them. They do very well, and vote with their wallets. The market is always right.
Jan
The next question is then: why doesn't everybody buy that specific product?? The answer is that people all have their own idea of what quality means, of what is high quality.
It is the hallmark of a fashion industry that many different products, in different price ranges, different performance, different parameters can exist side by side in the market. There is no 'quality' indicator as such.
If JC's audio products are so high quality (and I agree they are), why does 99% of the population buy someone else's product?? Because they all have a different idea of what 'quality' is.
Just as the experience and appreciation of sound quality is governed not just by what comes out of the speaker, purchase decisions are also not just governed by what comes out of the speaker. If, in this industry, you focus on a single parameter of appreciation (what comes out of the speaker) you are shortchanging yourself and will never capture a larger part of the market.
You may be content with that, nothing wrong with that. But please don't make the mistake blaming 'the market' and customers that do not understand what is best for them. They do very well, and vote with their wallets. The market is always right.
Jan
Jan: Can you make available any clips of your 'award winning' recording from the triode festival?
Not sure; if there are they will not be high quality 😉
I will check. Note that this was recorded and replayed with - gasp - equipment not connected to the I'net!
Yes, highest quality money can buy. Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 😎
I won't be at my HQ for another week, currently at my Belgian West Coast Divisional Office 🙂
I was just watching the arrival of the first wave Brexit refugees.
Jan
Attachments
Last edited:
But if You will evaluate only sound (blind test), in many cases you will not found diferrence from so called "model T", and in many cases quite opposite... So enhanced costs are mostly only for fashion..
Last edited:
Looks to me more like the Dutch Navy waiting in readiness to defend the coastline from marauders from across the channel 😛
- Status
- Not open for further replies.