It is not vs, it is the total amplifier + speaker distortion combined, the final acoustic wave that we hear. I do not find any distortion more important than that. No reason to accept more distortion when we can have less.
Last edited:
I hear that, or similar, stated a lot, I prefer a revealing system regardless of the quality of the recording, I find a poor system makes a poor recording sound worse.
To me it’s a fractured sound on a micro level.....as in the micro dynamics are not smooth, almost like a static. Mostly when turned up.
Pixelated would be what I’d compare it to optically, you can see the picture fine @ 1x but zoom to 10x not so focused.
Too low a bias current in power amp. ( usually because the heatsink and power supply are undersized.
Multiple aluminum or tantalum coupling caps. Polyester and Ceramic caps
Old op amps
Multiple aluminum or tantalum coupling caps. Polyester and Ceramic caps
Old op amps
I concurr with your view of grain. Some might use the term 'grain' to describe what others could term as more of a 'gritty' sort of sound. A more gritty type of sonic could be due to some overt distortion mechanism or another, perhaps IMD. However, subjectively, I sometimes notice a sort of dynamic sonic loudness kind of grain, just as you describe. Grain equating to sounding granular. This can be an especially noticeable effect with quiet, or distantly miked instruments, which can seem to abruptly rise and fall above and below the threshold of being plainly audible in the mix, rather than do so smoothly in a natural live sound sort of way. Or, conversely, seem to rise and fall too much or too abruptly in loudness, which can also be describes as sounding grainy.
Dynamic loudness grain, is an interesting subjective effect, because I very much doubt that it is the result of the signal amplitude being audibly inaccurate at any instant. At least, not enough to be audible has a subtlety non-smooth? transitioning of the loudness level. I susppect there may, instead, be some signal amplitude related correlation with some other non-obvious parameter which is responsible for the subjective impression of dynamic loudness grain. I don't know.
Last edited:
This collection of nasties can be responsible for any audio ill on earth 🙂
Yet, the OP started the thread with 3 particular amps, none of which suffers from low bias, cheap opamps, tantalum or ceramic caps and despite that two of the amps in his view present grain. Perhaps it would be more productive if the thread moves from generalisations towards the specific issues these two amps may have.
I have been trying to build the 'best amp in the world', starting with any published design on the internet and proceed to building my own (but I still build people designs for comparison). Class B. There is a few things that I couldn't get satisfactorily when compared to what easily be achieved with class A. I called it 'strain'. As with 'grain', I know a noble way to solve the problem. That and using the right small signal transistors. But this 'strain' is harder to solve without running the bias current to above 200mA. But I think I have achieved an acceptable level after carefully changing the resistors to my favorite ones. Solder also matters. Most expensive solder I own is a Cardas silver but I don't like it.
Few months ago I mentioned that I will try to use good sources to see if my best class B can achieve enjoyment level of class A amps. And I found that to my taste, better source didn't do nothing to my system. The last transparency bits that it added were not important. So my plan was to give up class B but at last I got something that prevented me to venture to class A amp design. For the first time I feel content with class B amp.
I have found the presence of ceramic capacitors anywhere in the amplifier circuit cause a rough hashy sound due to dielectric absorbtion. In small amounts this contributes to what reviewers call "detail". Replace them with some equivalent polystyrene or polypropylene firm caps for a smoother more natural sound.
Thanks, analog_sa, for pointing this out. Although... there are small ceramics on many of the transistors -- Miller caps, I presume. Values around 47pF. I presume those are to prevent RF oscillation and are invisible in the audio band.... Does anybody know if otherwise?
Last edited:
You do know that microphone can capture sounds (diffuse sound field) that ears can't. Linkwitz used notch filter around 3k in his active crossovers to remove the sound that he said is not supposed to be there. So, what is your definition of transparency or revealing system? Do you want the notch filter or not? 🙂
Attachments
The conditions are quite specific Electro-acoustic models How many recordings have not been mixed on a couple of studio monitors?
Hi ! i agree completely on this ...
🙂i had a cd i think from Oasis with a lot of distortion ... maybe it was wanted ?
anyway on my cheap system was just unbearable ... 🙁
a friend's better system sounded it in a very different way ... the distortion was "cleaner" in some way ... more acceptable 🙄
And this experience motivated me to improve my system 😱
Last edited:
IME those little caps are always audible and easily replaced with polystyrenes. But don't expect an earth-shattering improvement. Still, an interesting and worthwhile experiment.
Most amplifiers suffer from the screeching violin disease, a harsh, hard, cold and depleted sound. The reason for that is better explained in physics terms rather than by the shady philosophy of Objectivism.
skem,
skem,
That's exactly what it is.
That member is right. "Noise" refers to numerous different physical processes.
Last edited:
So let's say in a recording there is this "diffuse sound" content: how bad does it sound like? If in our system there is no notch filter, it means that with transparent/revealing system such recording will sound awful?
Okay, IME most amps are not sufficiently transparent to show that "diffuse sound". So if you use that notch filter and there is no such "diffuse sound" in the recording, what happen to the signal around 3kHz then?? You change the sound in the recording?
So my point is, very revealing amp is rare. I cannot make one without using very wide bandwidth output transistors. And when the bandwidth is so wide, we get exposed to many troubles. So, may be there is nothing wrong with revealing amps itself but when it must come with a price (due to the troubles) then we have to choose what matter more to us. Call it subjective taste or not hifi, but I prefer the one that I enjoy the most.
And the Pioneer M22 is a very old amp (70's I think) but surprisingly it uses 15MHz output transistors (I think), which is quite fast for that era. It doesn't use cap in feedback so there might be a drift with output DC offset, and must be checked. Nothing special with the topology. We can't expect it to sound as smooth as AX25 topology.
Hi ! this statement has made me think better ... because it is very true.
Does anyone know a CD title particularly helpful for this kind of listening test ? a CD that can expose very clearly this kind of harsh sound ?
moreover i think that also recordings of brass instruments can be a good tool for testing playback systems
Note SL says, "I have found through my own head-related recordings of symphonic music that the dip adds greater realism, especially to large chorus and to soprano voice and allows for higher playback levels." My assumption would be any such issue that might exist with a mixed recording is the engineer's job to rectify.
Yes, he said it should be switchable, this is OT anyway