Tests are saying humans do not hear H2 0.1 - 1% and H3 0.01 - 0.1% with any music samples, so why to bother.
Yes .
If the low distortion figure is achieved with high feedback ,
then ( by mysterious mechanisms only touched by knowledge )
there is a good chance of bad sound .
Unlike say , a wafer tester , where the results are defined by
rigid math .
If the low distortion figure is achieved with high feedback ,
then ( by mysterious mechanisms only touched by knowledge )
there is a good chance of bad sound .
Unlike say , a wafer tester , where the results are defined by
rigid math .
PMA, You know very well that isn't the whole truth. Existing data are for perhaps 95% of the population, and they are not hard limits.
In my view, most people simply ignore low level distortion without even knowing that is what their brains are doing. And, the way brains work it is not a simple matter of asking someone to try to change it suddenly for some test.
EDIT: Also, there are people who make errors of sighted listening. It is not an easy area to research properly due to the complexity of human brain functioning.
In my view, most people simply ignore low level distortion without even knowing that is what their brains are doing. And, the way brains work it is not a simple matter of asking someone to try to change it suddenly for some test.
EDIT: Also, there are people who make errors of sighted listening. It is not an easy area to research properly due to the complexity of human brain functioning.
Last edited:
Well thanks Scott... You nearly caused me to waste a glass of a veeery nice Malbec.... 😀
It's really interesting .
I wouldn't believe the efficacy of low
feedback had I not experienced it
myself .
( And not only class A )
The 95% / 5% - that's still a hypothesis, not proven. And "ignore" - well - perception is very complex. Both the ear and the eye add distortion, by objective standards, and the overall sensory process isn't at all understood. Perhaps those 5% have more, or less.. innate ear distortion, or have learned to hear stuff others ignore.
When I was working on video compression stuff, I learned to see artefacts that no one untrained would notice, and to see the flicker in frame rates that should be invisible. Took a while to "forget" that! So would it be better, teaching the "5%" to be like the "95%" rather than the other way around, if you see what I mean..?
Harmonics seem to make some sounds smoother if they aren't overpowering.
Solitude by Vince Kaichan | Free Listening on SoundCloud
Compared to that, sine waves are a bit grating. Perhaps the harmonics make the tone more audible so that it can be used at a lower level, and this quite simply means it sounds softer?
Or maybe it's just sound production tricks I'm not picking up on.
Solitude by Vince Kaichan | Free Listening on SoundCloud
Compared to that, sine waves are a bit grating. Perhaps the harmonics make the tone more audible so that it can be used at a lower level, and this quite simply means it sounds softer?
Or maybe it's just sound production tricks I'm not picking up on.
They were only trying to immitate the Sennheiser Orpheus HE 1 :
YouTube
World's Best Electrostatic Headphones - Sennheiser Orpheus HE 1, HIFIMAN Shangri-La, and Mr. Speakers Electrostatic - Audio Bacon
Patrick
In fact, less than 0.001% at 20Vp-p. I doubt the race for lowest distortion and would vote for "unconditional" stability with all possible kinds of speaker complex load.
This is but ONE single school of thoughts, with some publicity from Jean Hiraga in France. These guys think that since a musical instrument has a lot of harmonic content (monotonically decreasing or otherwise), an amplifier should do the same.
That reminds me of the Bose 901 joke of the 70's: the idea is in a concert hall, the audience hear about 10% direct sound and 90% reflection, so Dr. Bose went on building a box with 1 speaker facing forward and 8 speakers facing back.
Of course they're all dead wrong.
Perfect wording: for this group and this group only.
It was a statement from Earl Geddes who did a lot of research in that area. I will trust his expert opinion on that.
EDIT: Regarding whether it is better to ignore common deficiencies of reproduction systems, I think it is an interesting question. For the past few months I have been trying to work on it from the other end, that is, to reduce some deficiencies. Turns out to be a lot of work 🙂
Last edited:
John,
Erno Borbely and I believe Nelson Pass have both commented on cascoding being useful for jfet voltage and current gain stages, but cascoding FET current gain stages such as an output stage driver, while resulting in lower distortion, were also percieved as less dynamic sounding. Erno tired cascoding the output devices it in a couple of late 80’s preamps to lessen the difference in the 2SK216/2sj79 devices, but gave up on the idea after negative customer feedback on the dynamics issue.
Erno Borbely and I believe Nelson Pass have both commented on cascoding being useful for jfet voltage and current gain stages, but cascoding FET current gain stages such as an output stage driver, while resulting in lower distortion, were also percieved as less dynamic sounding. Erno tired cascoding the output devices it in a couple of late 80’s preamps to lessen the difference in the 2SK216/2sj79 devices, but gave up on the idea after negative customer feedback on the dynamics issue.
Last edited:
No science behind that 95/5. Another kind of business approach masked by science - like coat.
Not the one that landed a probe on Mars, that's the point. I'll also point out that Dr. Bose's original work had little to do (in the theoretical sense) with the eventual product.
Last edited:
That may be excusable if said musical instruments were also tuned to a harmonic scale
- Status
- Not open for further replies.