It is a phrase that is never used for encouragement, and was not taken as such (obviously)."Put up or shut up" is a well know phrase I thought you'd be familiar with, it was meant as encouragement 🙄
That said, if you really meant it as you suggest, then you have my sincerest apologies..
jn
Well it is now, anyway it worked, you described a bit more to Pavel about required measurement stimulus
I had debated using the word smearing, but have seen it used so much as a descriptor by types of people who adhere to quantum devices and pictures in fridges, that I shied away from using it.Re ITD discrepancy, it wouldn't so much shift the image as make it unstable since it's the time of arrival of the sound that is detected not once if is a steady state, so perceptually it would wobble about
jn
It is possible to design a well working high SR power amplifier, but it is useless for audio. Again, it is easy to calculate maximum possible SR of the audio signal and to build the amp with at least 10x higher slew rate limit.
It is easy to have sufficient SR that i have never paid attention to this parameter. But as far as i remember, I can improve an amplifier in a way that also improve the SR. So, may be it is this coincident?
Aren't words and phrases great? I have no idea what smearing is supposed to mean in this context. I know this is the BT thread but wouldn't it be nice if people were clear occasionally? 😉I had debated using the word smearing
Good quality hi-fi equipment is often accused of being boring.
If it is boring, who cares if it is good quality or not? Everyone may have different taste but if you feel an amp is boring, there is no reason to call it good quality hifi, or worse, to keep listening to it like someone with personality problem.
Aren't words and phrases great? I have no idea what smearing is supposed to mean in this context. I know this is the BT thread but wouldn't it be nice if people were clear occasionally? 😉
No. As you clearly stated, this is the BT thread.😉
My thinking is that smearing is exactly what you said, unstable image location.
jn
Does an exciting sounding amp improve boring music?
No. A good amp shouldn't do it. I want my amp and speaker to be able to show the quality of the singer and musician. And to find the music i like i will simply find the music from legendary singers and musicians. No good recording can substitute the quality of the musician, in my systems.
Surely all that is needed is that the two channels have sufficiently similar frequency responses?jneutron said:Stating that an amplifier is "fast enough" does indeed cover anything the ears can hear in a monophonic situation, but the stereo condition adds the ITD concern. The expectation that an amplifier has sufficient bandwidth to assure the two stereo signals acoustically maintain a rigid control of ITD may not be correct.
I do. I want my excitement from the music, not the amplifier.johnego said:If it is boring, who cares if it is good quality or not?
OK, that is a new one. We can now add "personality problem" to deaf, poor, stupid as descriptors of those who are interested in sound reproduction via good engineering.Everyone may have different taste but if you feel an amp is boring, there is no reason to call it good quality hifi, or worse, to keep listening to it like someone with personality problem.
Sorry... amps yes, speakers, unknown due to non linearities.Surely all that is needed is that the two channels have sufficiently similar frequency responses?
jn
Aren't words and phrases great? I have no idea what smearing is supposed to mean in this context. I know this is the BT thread but wouldn't it be nice if people were clear occasionally? 😉
Yeah, if there were some way to get an agreed set of words always used in the same context... Ah, we can dream 😀
Meanwhile, there's those raccoon tails... Well, it began with an "r" didn't it... ? 🙂
Non-linear modulation would be a better description than smearing for the effect that Jn is talking about
Last edited:
if you feel an amp is boring, there is no reason to call it good quality hifi
Nope, perhaps there is no reason to buy it. Big difference.
Well, Bruno Putzeys is back with a new company, new - potentionally boring - Class D amplifier (THD+N: -116dB@100W/4Ohm), and a new long-stroke 6.5" driver:
1ET400A - Purifi
1ET400A - Purifi
How did you discover the difference in sound? Was it an objective comparison?Accuracy is not about THD only. Even HD is a complex matter that cannot be represented by the standard measurement of THD. Accuracy of an amp is not a matter of how output should be 'similar' with input. A driving stage should have finite or zero output impedance and the preceding stage should have infinite input impedance. This is very underrated, worse if you look at power transfer between amps and speakers. Damping Factor and output impedance of an amplifier are among variables that you cannot compare between input and output. But this will change the sound, make the sound coming out of speakers to be different to what is represented by 1/0 in the recording (or the live sound).
Are you speculating?Many subjectivist efforts to 'alter' the sound is probably a form of frustration because of those responsible with knowledge development in this field are not able to present to public a methodology to design audio system that can closely represent the live sound as perceived by the subjectivist good ears.
I'll bet you can't quote any of those attacking posts.One of the contributor of this thread (Rn.M.) was regularly attacked by some "objectivists".
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Member Areas
- The Lounge
- John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III