I know this has been discussed numerous times. I know that tests have established that absolute phase is audible with certain signal types, such as (IIRC) triangle waves.
Have there been any good explanations offered for how this is possible with steady state AC signals of any form? It is intuitive that transients might have absolute phase audibility... but steady state signals? Even asymmetry in the driver's forward/rearward excursion behavior shouldn't create audible differences if the signals are symmetric (which all are, if decomposed).
Have there been any good explanations offered for how this is possible with steady state AC signals of any form? It is intuitive that transients might have absolute phase audibility... but steady state signals? Even asymmetry in the driver's forward/rearward excursion behavior shouldn't create audible differences if the signals are symmetric (which all are, if decomposed).
Polarity, not phase!
Any asymmetry between push and pull of a driver will manifest itself as a differing distortion spectrum and quantity with changes in absolute polarity, assuming an asymmetric signal. The data showing audibility on specially created test signals is solid; the data on audibility in real rooms with music and reasonably low distortion speakers is much more ambiguous.
Dick Greiner, who wrote one of the definitive papers on the subject, concluded that on real-world music reproduction, it's probably a minor issue, maybe even a non-issue, but so easy to get right that it's worth doing.
Any asymmetry between push and pull of a driver will manifest itself as a differing distortion spectrum and quantity with changes in absolute polarity, assuming an asymmetric signal. The data showing audibility on specially created test signals is solid; the data on audibility in real rooms with music and reasonably low distortion speakers is much more ambiguous.
Dick Greiner, who wrote one of the definitive papers on the subject, concluded that on real-world music reproduction, it's probably a minor issue, maybe even a non-issue, but so easy to get right that it's worth doing.
Polarity, not phase. Check.
How can you assure anything at all about the recording chain? I'm not just talking about making sure the polarity of all equipment is correct, but more fundamentally how do you know that the microphone is picking up the "correct polarity," whatever that is. I mean, with wavelengths being a few inches or so, on average, typical differences in mic placement could easily have the mic pick up a vocalist on a particular note "180 degrees out of phase." If she moves her head, does that not change the "polarity?"
But that really wasn't my question. Why is it audible? I assumed that the explanation involved asymmetric signals and non-linear driver (and room, obviously) response in the two directions... but how are the signals asymmetric? Decomposed any signal is just sine waves. Within the bandwidth of any speaker, any signal is just the sum of symmetric signals. Of course transients can be different, but I'm talking about steady state repeating signals. Hasn't audibility been established for those as well?
How can you assure anything at all about the recording chain? I'm not just talking about making sure the polarity of all equipment is correct, but more fundamentally how do you know that the microphone is picking up the "correct polarity," whatever that is. I mean, with wavelengths being a few inches or so, on average, typical differences in mic placement could easily have the mic pick up a vocalist on a particular note "180 degrees out of phase." If she moves her head, does that not change the "polarity?"
But that really wasn't my question. Why is it audible? I assumed that the explanation involved asymmetric signals and non-linear driver (and room, obviously) response in the two directions... but how are the signals asymmetric? Decomposed any signal is just sine waves. Within the bandwidth of any speaker, any signal is just the sum of symmetric signals. Of course transients can be different, but I'm talking about steady state repeating signals. Hasn't audibility been established for those as well?
No. A varying distance to the microphone will produce group delay ( delay of all frequecies by the same time). You could also have phase shift, often varying with frequency. But polarity refers to whether the microphone picked up a pressure or a vaccum. No matter what distance you are at, the pressure part of the sound wave will remain the pressure part, and the vaccum part will remain the vacuum part.
Some instruments, say, horns, seem to have severely asymmetric wave forms. For instance the wave could be quick on the up stroke and slow on the down stroke. If you change polarity, you exchange pressure with vacuum, and regardless of driver distortion you now have a completely reversed soundfield *if* your wave was asymmetrical to begin with. And recording studios, good ones, go to great lengths to preserve absolute polarity - if only to avoid cancellations due to time delay when mixing.
As to
... *in the long run*. You can decompose any signal into a combination of signals *steady state*. The Fourier analysis serves as a mathematical tool, not as a sensory explanation of what actually happens.
For instance you excluded transients, but for the duration of the "upstroke" of a hypothetical asymmetric triangular wave, even a steady state one, you do have a transient upstroke which has nothing to do with a sine wave, and which doesn't necessarily look like like the downstroke. A hypothetical square wave of 0.1 Hz fundamental, while "composed of nothing but sine waves", actually consists of 10 second alternations of DC. Not that I claim audibility of that. Just as a thought experiment.
Because the mammal ear seems to work as a highly nonlinear, actively amplified zero-crossing detector, see for instance
Hearing mechanisms
which explains in one stroke potential tolerance of fairly high THD with simultaneous low tolerance for crossover distortion, and the audibility of absolute polarity, and the subjective preference some people have for single ended amplifiers.
analog_sa said:
It is "officially" recognized to exist because it is detectable under controlled (i.e., blind) conditions, at least with certain signals and certain systems.
You can't. Otherwise I wouldn't have so many records and CDs that sounded so terrible.
Yes, and each of those sine waves has a coefficient! If you've got a mike, an oscilloscope, and a trombone, you can convince yourself that asymmetrical sounds exist.
I'd hate to correct Fourier (and even more so, a math whiz like you), but you can indeed`deconstruct the symphony into a Fourier series. You merely assume that the wave's period is the length of the symphony. That's how a single impulse standing all alone among 4096 points can have an FFT...
MBK said:
Again that is true only for transients. I thought audibility had been established for steady state signals as well? If so, then movements of the microphone are absolutely equivalent to swapping polarity, at least for the fundamental.
But even though real tones have harmonics, isn't the polarity for steady state signals rather arbitrary? Since movements of the microphone will invariably realign the phase of the harmonics present in real tones relative to one another, how could you possibly say that one polarity is more correct than another?
And what about ribbon microphones? Are they all marked "front" and "back?"
I excluded transients intentionally, because the mechanism of action is much less mysterious and readily explainable. I posed the question the way I did because I was under the impression audibility had been established for steady state signals as well, like triangular waves, and I was searching for a suitable explanation of why that is possible.
If polarity is audible for instruments like the trombone, then could a possible explanation be that certain components of the fourier decomposition are outside our audible range, therefore excluded and leaving asymmetric transients even when the source can be mathematically decomposed into steady state symmetric signals?
I wouldn't get hung up on the mathematical modelling of sound, e.g., Fourier transform. Sound "is" *not* a sum of sine waves. Sound "is" the perception of our ears and brains of an alternation of pressure and vacuum in a suitable medium within appropriate time scale and magnitude given by our biology. This alternation may very well be asymmetric at human time scales regardless of modelling method using infinite time scales etc. Any wave editor and a sound file will show you that! Say, in SY's example, you may *model* the symphony as the first cycle of a periodic and do an FFT. But the symphony, in *reality*, only played once.
Sound can be very usefully *modelled* as if it *was* a sum of sine waves.
Your ear doesn't care about the math.
Sound can be very usefully *modelled* as if it *was* a sum of sine waves.
Your ear doesn't care about the math.
In you ear!!
Hearing – sound wave transduction to nerve impulse patterns is nonlinear
we can perceive absolute polarity because the transduction of mechanical motion to nerve impulses is asymmetric, the ion pump/gate at the base of the "hairs" on the hair cells only act when bending one way and they are all lined up along the basilar membrane in the same orientation relative to pressure wave propagation in the cochlea
the polarization change when the “hair” bends the right direction causes the release of neurotransmitters at the other end of the sensitive cells where it diffuses across the gap to trigger an impulse in the nerve fiber transmitting/processing the signal
microelectrode probing in cats show the bunching of nerve impulses at the positive? peaks of the sound wave - this absolute polarity information is largely lost above ~ 4KHz due to saturating the max impulse/recharge rate of the nerve fibers
Hearing – sound wave transduction to nerve impulse patterns is nonlinear
we can perceive absolute polarity because the transduction of mechanical motion to nerve impulses is asymmetric, the ion pump/gate at the base of the "hairs" on the hair cells only act when bending one way and they are all lined up along the basilar membrane in the same orientation relative to pressure wave propagation in the cochlea
the polarization change when the “hair” bends the right direction causes the release of neurotransmitters at the other end of the sensitive cells where it diffuses across the gap to trigger an impulse in the nerve fiber transmitting/processing the signal
microelectrode probing in cats show the bunching of nerve impulses at the positive? peaks of the sound wave - this absolute polarity information is largely lost above ~ 4KHz due to saturating the max impulse/recharge rate of the nerve fibers
JCX,
in addition to that, in the paper quoted in my post #7 the authors show an active amplification process in gerbil cochleas.
I quote:
"Here we show that asymmetrical transducer currents and receptor potentials are significantly larger than previously thought, they possess a highly restricted dynamic range and strongly depend on cochlear location."
The authors show graphs of "steady-state transducer current plotted as a function of basilar membrane displacement" and fitted them with "second order Boltzmann functions".
The graphs clearly show transducer current only on positive basilinear membrane displacement (the membrane displacement itself looks symmetrical). Current starts at about 25% of maximum measured displacement (100 nm) after zero crossing and does saturate at a certain level.
Several nonlinearities stick out - apparent sensitivity difference between basal and apical cells (about 6 fold), saturation of course, and differences in amplification depending on cell location (estimated at 45 dB at low frequencies to approximately 60 dB at high frequencies)
Bottom line: the ear works on positive displacement only, and selectively amplifies the signal to a varying but very high degree. This amplification reaches saturation after a certain point. The transfer function as a whole fits a second order function (S-shaped).
in addition to that, in the paper quoted in my post #7 the authors show an active amplification process in gerbil cochleas.
I quote:
"Here we show that asymmetrical transducer currents and receptor potentials are significantly larger than previously thought, they possess a highly restricted dynamic range and strongly depend on cochlear location."
The authors show graphs of "steady-state transducer current plotted as a function of basilar membrane displacement" and fitted them with "second order Boltzmann functions".
The graphs clearly show transducer current only on positive basilinear membrane displacement (the membrane displacement itself looks symmetrical). Current starts at about 25% of maximum measured displacement (100 nm) after zero crossing and does saturate at a certain level.
Several nonlinearities stick out - apparent sensitivity difference between basal and apical cells (about 6 fold), saturation of course, and differences in amplification depending on cell location (estimated at 45 dB at low frequencies to approximately 60 dB at high frequencies)
Bottom line: the ear works on positive displacement only, and selectively amplifies the signal to a varying but very high degree. This amplification reaches saturation after a certain point. The transfer function as a whole fits a second order function (S-shaped).
Absolute Polarity
The Absolute Reality of Absolute Polarity
Here’s the first part of what I’ve been promising to reveal regarding the Absolute Reality of absolute polarity. Once you setup your system to play any track on any commercial stamped CD in absolute polarity your system will play all tracks on all commercial stamped CDs, DVDs, DVD audio discs, SACDs, and probably DSDs or any other laser read media in absolute polarity. I and my music loving audiophile friends have heard that to be the case on thousand of tracks that were mostly CD tracks as well as hundreds of tracks on every other type of disc we tried with the same conclusion. There a few exceptions such as the Stereophile Test CD STPH-002-2 that has all its tracks after track number 8, a musical polarity test track, in the wrong polarity. There are some other test discs that may also be recorded incorrectly. In addition there are some rock music CDs that also have certain polarity anomalies such as the lead vocalist(s) and/or instrumentalist(s) being recorded in a different relative polarity than the rest of the musicians in order that they might stand out against a wall of sound but even those recordings are consistent and we’ve always preferred them played in the same polarity as every other disc.
I believe that one reason that some music lovers prefer vinyl records to their digital versions is that most of the time when they hear CDs, they’re playing out of absolute polarity. Here’s a quote from my think piece A Speculation Regarding Perception of Detail, “How much tweaking and component swapping in our systems are only musically misinformed attempts to correct for music played out of absolute polarity that in Absolute Reality are bound to fail the test of high-fidelity? Does this suggest that the conclusions of some prior listening tests should be reevaluated and repeated with music that we know for sure is played in absolute polarity? I definitely think so, and that should include recordings as well, but each of you may answer that question for yourselves.”
So if you use a phase coherent minimum phase speaker system or single driver headphones and non-inverting playback electronics that you should be able to verify those results. If you believe you’ve found any discs that don’t conform to that standard please let me and the rest of the music loving world know so that we may test them for ourselves. These conclusion are completely contrary to what you’ve been led to believe by some in the audio industry who claim that absolute polarity is a random or that recorded media has no inherent polarity. It’s my opinion and that of many of my music loving audiophile friends that once you’ve become accustom to hearing music in absolute polarity it’s addicting and you’ll never want to hear music inverted except when testing for polarity.
The second part of the Absolute Reality of Absolute Polarity is the explanation of why at least 95% and probably closer to 99% of laser read media playback components such as CD players including those in cars invert music. Many manufacturers have different model CD players with different output polarities which is definitely a mistake and which incidentally isn’t correlated with their prices and with multiple outputs such as fixed, variable, and headphone may also have their outputs in different relative polarities which would also be a mistake. The reasons for that are more difficult to explain and will follow in due course. I will be describing the Electronic Industry Association (EIA) microphone standards RS-112-A that were promulgated in October 1979, the CD Red Book, the CBS CD-1 Test CD that’s the digital music industry’s standard since 1980, and the Audio Engineering Society (AES) standard AES26-2001: AES recommended practice for professional audio Conservation of the polarity of audio signals (Revision of AES26-1995), printing date October 11, 2004. Whether or not a CD player, any laser read media player, components, and speakers are inverting are objective facts that can be scientifically verified that don’t depend upon subjective opinions of a disc’s playback relative polarity to that impressed upon the disc.
When the lies and various intrigues of the 23 years since the inception of CDs are revealed for in all their ugly truths it won’t seem so surprising that the Absolute Reality of laser read media all being made in one polarity to be enjoyed by all those who will listen took that long to be revealed. There’s been a lot of great music hiding in plain hearing right under our collective ears if only we’d been hearing it in absolute polarity. Life is short and music is infinite so go listen and enjoy!
George S. Louis
Perfect Polarity Pundit™ Chief Polarity Buster of the Polarity Police™ who knows he right because his alter ego Father Audio Music Messiah™ is on his side who’s brought you the Second Coming of CDs.
The Absolute Reality of Absolute Polarity
Here’s the first part of what I’ve been promising to reveal regarding the Absolute Reality of absolute polarity. Once you setup your system to play any track on any commercial stamped CD in absolute polarity your system will play all tracks on all commercial stamped CDs, DVDs, DVD audio discs, SACDs, and probably DSDs or any other laser read media in absolute polarity. I and my music loving audiophile friends have heard that to be the case on thousand of tracks that were mostly CD tracks as well as hundreds of tracks on every other type of disc we tried with the same conclusion. There a few exceptions such as the Stereophile Test CD STPH-002-2 that has all its tracks after track number 8, a musical polarity test track, in the wrong polarity. There are some other test discs that may also be recorded incorrectly. In addition there are some rock music CDs that also have certain polarity anomalies such as the lead vocalist(s) and/or instrumentalist(s) being recorded in a different relative polarity than the rest of the musicians in order that they might stand out against a wall of sound but even those recordings are consistent and we’ve always preferred them played in the same polarity as every other disc.
I believe that one reason that some music lovers prefer vinyl records to their digital versions is that most of the time when they hear CDs, they’re playing out of absolute polarity. Here’s a quote from my think piece A Speculation Regarding Perception of Detail, “How much tweaking and component swapping in our systems are only musically misinformed attempts to correct for music played out of absolute polarity that in Absolute Reality are bound to fail the test of high-fidelity? Does this suggest that the conclusions of some prior listening tests should be reevaluated and repeated with music that we know for sure is played in absolute polarity? I definitely think so, and that should include recordings as well, but each of you may answer that question for yourselves.”
So if you use a phase coherent minimum phase speaker system or single driver headphones and non-inverting playback electronics that you should be able to verify those results. If you believe you’ve found any discs that don’t conform to that standard please let me and the rest of the music loving world know so that we may test them for ourselves. These conclusion are completely contrary to what you’ve been led to believe by some in the audio industry who claim that absolute polarity is a random or that recorded media has no inherent polarity. It’s my opinion and that of many of my music loving audiophile friends that once you’ve become accustom to hearing music in absolute polarity it’s addicting and you’ll never want to hear music inverted except when testing for polarity.
The second part of the Absolute Reality of Absolute Polarity is the explanation of why at least 95% and probably closer to 99% of laser read media playback components such as CD players including those in cars invert music. Many manufacturers have different model CD players with different output polarities which is definitely a mistake and which incidentally isn’t correlated with their prices and with multiple outputs such as fixed, variable, and headphone may also have their outputs in different relative polarities which would also be a mistake. The reasons for that are more difficult to explain and will follow in due course. I will be describing the Electronic Industry Association (EIA) microphone standards RS-112-A that were promulgated in October 1979, the CD Red Book, the CBS CD-1 Test CD that’s the digital music industry’s standard since 1980, and the Audio Engineering Society (AES) standard AES26-2001: AES recommended practice for professional audio Conservation of the polarity of audio signals (Revision of AES26-1995), printing date October 11, 2004. Whether or not a CD player, any laser read media player, components, and speakers are inverting are objective facts that can be scientifically verified that don’t depend upon subjective opinions of a disc’s playback relative polarity to that impressed upon the disc.
When the lies and various intrigues of the 23 years since the inception of CDs are revealed for in all their ugly truths it won’t seem so surprising that the Absolute Reality of laser read media all being made in one polarity to be enjoyed by all those who will listen took that long to be revealed. There’s been a lot of great music hiding in plain hearing right under our collective ears if only we’d been hearing it in absolute polarity. Life is short and music is infinite so go listen and enjoy!
George S. Louis
Perfect Polarity Pundit™ Chief Polarity Buster of the Polarity Police™ who knows he right because his alter ego Father Audio Music Messiah™ is on his side who’s brought you the Second Coming of CDs.
A Speculation Regarding Perception of Detail
I’ve observed that if an audio system sounds good, no single component of that system can be all that bad nor can the polarity of the recording be played inverted from the live performance.
I have come to this conclusion because I haven’t been able to compensate for a bad component without causing some egregious sonic and musical tradeoffs. On the other hand, if a system really sounds awful it may only be a single component or the inverted polarity of the recording that’s causing the problem. For example, simple as it may seem, a single component could degrade the sound if its power cord is plugged into the wall outlet in less than the best sounding orientation.
A great sounding system is the result of its creator’s choice of components and musical judgment. The only true basis for their judgment is an understanding of music and a memory of unamplified acoustic instruments and voices in a reasonable acoustic venue and heard from an aesthetically correct distance.
I believe that every choice one makes in the design of an audio system involves tradeoffs, and the only question is which tradeoffs each of us finds acceptable. Around fifteen years ago, when I first became interested in the audibility and importance of absolute polarity, the speaker system that I’d created some ten years earlier and used for all my serious testing and musical enjoyment had second-order 12 dB Linkwitz-Riley crossovers. Despite its many advantages it also had one major disadvantage; it wasn’t phase coherent. Without phase coherence it was impossible for me to discern polarity or to hear music purely in or out of absolute polarity because that crossover requires some of its drivers to always play in opposite relative polarities to each other. As a result that speaker system was inconsistent with the single absolute polarity of live music. I listened to each separate driver connected first in one polarity and then the other. It wasn’t all that easy in the beginning to hear the differences, especially with my sealed back electrostatic tweeters. But since they crossed over at a relatively low 1.6 kHz I eventually decided that they, as well as all the other drivers, sounded better connected in absolute polarity. And next, with all the drivers playing in absolute polarity, I determined that I greatly preferred hearing music in absolute polarity. And from that day to this, I only find music played in absolute polarity to be truly emotionally satisfying and believe that the single most important sonic and musical aspect of a properly connected audio system is its ability to reproduce the polarity of live music.
Audio systems must at the very least satisfy the following three requirements to be suitable for rendering polarity judgments. 1. The playback polarity of the source is heard in the same polarity as the original recorded source. 2. The system is phase coherent and preferably minimum phase. In the analog domain the only classic crossover networks that permit a speaker to preserve the phase-polarity of the input signal are 6 dB first-order Butterworth. If you’re not sure about your speaker system, you may use single driver headphones. 3. The system’s frequency response deviates no more than +/- 3 dB from flat between 50 and 8 kHz which is an example of an application of the rule of 400 as defined in the first edition of the Audio Cyclopedia. (continued in the following post)
I’ve observed that if an audio system sounds good, no single component of that system can be all that bad nor can the polarity of the recording be played inverted from the live performance.
I have come to this conclusion because I haven’t been able to compensate for a bad component without causing some egregious sonic and musical tradeoffs. On the other hand, if a system really sounds awful it may only be a single component or the inverted polarity of the recording that’s causing the problem. For example, simple as it may seem, a single component could degrade the sound if its power cord is plugged into the wall outlet in less than the best sounding orientation.
A great sounding system is the result of its creator’s choice of components and musical judgment. The only true basis for their judgment is an understanding of music and a memory of unamplified acoustic instruments and voices in a reasonable acoustic venue and heard from an aesthetically correct distance.
I believe that every choice one makes in the design of an audio system involves tradeoffs, and the only question is which tradeoffs each of us finds acceptable. Around fifteen years ago, when I first became interested in the audibility and importance of absolute polarity, the speaker system that I’d created some ten years earlier and used for all my serious testing and musical enjoyment had second-order 12 dB Linkwitz-Riley crossovers. Despite its many advantages it also had one major disadvantage; it wasn’t phase coherent. Without phase coherence it was impossible for me to discern polarity or to hear music purely in or out of absolute polarity because that crossover requires some of its drivers to always play in opposite relative polarities to each other. As a result that speaker system was inconsistent with the single absolute polarity of live music. I listened to each separate driver connected first in one polarity and then the other. It wasn’t all that easy in the beginning to hear the differences, especially with my sealed back electrostatic tweeters. But since they crossed over at a relatively low 1.6 kHz I eventually decided that they, as well as all the other drivers, sounded better connected in absolute polarity. And next, with all the drivers playing in absolute polarity, I determined that I greatly preferred hearing music in absolute polarity. And from that day to this, I only find music played in absolute polarity to be truly emotionally satisfying and believe that the single most important sonic and musical aspect of a properly connected audio system is its ability to reproduce the polarity of live music.
Audio systems must at the very least satisfy the following three requirements to be suitable for rendering polarity judgments. 1. The playback polarity of the source is heard in the same polarity as the original recorded source. 2. The system is phase coherent and preferably minimum phase. In the analog domain the only classic crossover networks that permit a speaker to preserve the phase-polarity of the input signal are 6 dB first-order Butterworth. If you’re not sure about your speaker system, you may use single driver headphones. 3. The system’s frequency response deviates no more than +/- 3 dB from flat between 50 and 8 kHz which is an example of an application of the rule of 400 as defined in the first edition of the Audio Cyclopedia. (continued in the following post)
Does all this take into account the bits I've read on the ear as a transient sensitive diode, for the most part? Meaning, we only hear the timing of the transients and relative levels of those peaks, and reconstruct within the brain? Thus, making the overall polarity of the electrical music signal important?
If true, this would then lead down the road of reduction to an understanding of the linearity with in a given system with regards to linear (correct) transient capacity (delivery/reproduction) in all stages/components of signal delivery as the primary factor in the human function's deciding what a good system of reproduction 'sounds' like, as the linear weighted measurements would be 'not the whole story'...
My experiences in design and execution, parts, mechanicals, vibration, etc..seem to indicate that there is much truth to this as hypothesis.
Working on this as a primary point, and the rest as being the support structure of the given system, part, whatever, have paid off in a huge way. It becomes obvious, with a bit of thought, that that sort of analysis tends to bring one to the doorstep of the most expensive parts anyway....but..that ain't nessessarily so. It's very much of a 'everything counts and is cummulative'...but we know that already.
If true, this would then lead down the road of reduction to an understanding of the linearity with in a given system with regards to linear (correct) transient capacity (delivery/reproduction) in all stages/components of signal delivery as the primary factor in the human function's deciding what a good system of reproduction 'sounds' like, as the linear weighted measurements would be 'not the whole story'...
My experiences in design and execution, parts, mechanicals, vibration, etc..seem to indicate that there is much truth to this as hypothesis.
Working on this as a primary point, and the rest as being the support structure of the given system, part, whatever, have paid off in a huge way. It becomes obvious, with a bit of thought, that that sort of analysis tends to bring one to the doorstep of the most expensive parts anyway....but..that ain't nessessarily so. It's very much of a 'everything counts and is cummulative'...but we know that already.
georgelouis said:
hello, georgelouis
... i will not ask you to prove your own thinking is correct
... by you doing Blind A/B listening testings
But we can discuss
I do not have same opinion as you on those 2 points.
1. I do not think the absolute polarity meaning same polarity for every sound
as was in the recording room or recording situation
will effect the final sound quality we hear.
In fact I am sure there are many records we listen too
where the original phase is not preserved, from instruments
and from microphones.
Not after all has been processed and mixed together in afterwork.
A process where different recorded channels of sound has to pass many many amplifiers and amp stages.
Still in my audio system, I like it to have a, in phase, non-inverted output
from my CD-player to my speakers
We should also know that both LSP crossover filters and woofers
change the phase and delay, the timing of signals.
In fact several capacitors in or round the signal path
may change the phase angle some degrees.
Different for different frequencies.
2. Polarity differences coming from from Main outlets,
if we put connector one way or another?
There has to be some exceptional case of power supply set up arrangement, if even possible at all,
to cause any final effect at sound output.
There is no logical explanation how this effect you mention
should possibly be created.
So until this is proven, I chose to tell my totally opposite opinion.
Regards
lineup
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.