John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
johnego said:
If you close your eyes, how will your brain interpret the sound of a plane or geese flying across the sky? May be it is not as obvious as one would have assumed?
I am going to guess that localising a moving object might work in a different way to a static object. Musicians tend not to fly, except perhaps in their own minds after taking recreational substances.
 
Can you just tell me in simple words how what you described works?

I know what you're thinking. What did i describe? The point where we differed was just the concept that once the reflections are recorded the direction is not crucial anymore. That's regarding single micing. With close micing technique, it is up to the engineers how they will mix the individual records including added effects for space/ambiences.
 
I am going to guess that localising a moving object might work in a different way to a static object. Musicians tend not to fly, except perhaps in their own minds after taking recreational substances.

Actually the backline business is flourishing as more and more musicians fly.

Backline is gear rental, as they fly to gigs they need to rent things like drums, keyboards etc.
 
I am going to guess that localising a moving object might work in a different way to a static object. Musicians tend not to fly, except perhaps in their own minds after taking recreational substances.

Please note also that the mic for single mic technique should be special and the amp/speaker/room/headphone should be special too.

I think subjectivists should learn how to design better solid state amps from the fact that many people prefer and think that the high THD tube amps sound more realistic than most ss amps. High order distortion can fake the room reflections such that it may sound more realistic. With many ss amps the details are just not there and you're just like listening to... amplifiers.
 
I know what you're thinking. What did i describe? The point where we differed was just the concept that once the reflections are recorded the direction is not crucial anymore. That's regarding single micing. With close micing technique, it is up to the engineers how they will mix the individual records including added effects for space/ambiences.
Ok, cymbals will probably sound higher than the drum for many people for psychoacoustic reasons (expectation, high frequencies perceived as placed higher, coupling with the room, speaker placement etc)
 
Ok, cymbals will probably sound higher than the drum for many people for psychoacoustic reasons (expectation, high frequencies perceived as placed higher, coupling with the room, speaker placement etc)

Yes. Not many DIYers have the luxury of transparent audio system. For those who have, experiencing the illusion of instrument placement is just ordinary thing.
 
Yes. Not many DIYers have the luxury of transparent audio system. For those who have, experiencing the illusion of instrument placement is just ordinary thing.

I’m guessing here but a higher mic (above) the drum set would give the illusion that the person listening to the final recording is looking down onto the cymbals effectively placing it lower in the soundstage?
 
Based on my more than 20 years of experience with audiophile community and presentations and visits in their homes, I would probably reverse your statement. Not many audiophiles have a transparent audio system.

I'm not sure if DIYers are mostly audiophiles tho but with expensive stuffs audiophiles have (speaker, amplification, room) i think it is silly if they don't eventually 'get' it.
 
Member
Joined 2016
Paid Member
I think subjectivists should learn how to design better solid state amps from the fact that many people prefer and think that the high THD tube amps sound more realistic than most ss amps. High order distortion can fake the room reflections such that it may sound more realistic. With many ss amps the details are just not there and you're just like listening to... amplifiers.

"Many people" .. .actually a teensy weensy proportion of the music listening population...
 
I'm not sure if DIYers are mostly audiophiles tho but with expensive stuffs audiophiles have (speaker, amplification, room) i think it is silly if they don't eventually 'get' it.

Having sold high-end equipment for a *ahem* while, I will tell you that most owners lack the one necessary piece of equipment that most DIYers do as well: trained hearing.
You can't sell either a room or a cochlea/brain transplant (yet), so manufacturers have to concentrate hard on the idea that the grail can be bought. It cannot.

Just my 2¢ worth,
Howie
 
The funny part about this is I’ll bet if you look behind all the objectivists system I’m gonna wager over 50% have high end cables......only difference is they will be there for some other reason than they sound better!

“Oh, they were a gift, it would be rude not to use them”

“Oh, the snakeskin looks so cool”

“Oh, they lay so nice”

Etc.........:D
 
The funny part about this is I’ll bet if you look behind all the objectivists system I’m gonna wager over 50% have high end cables......only difference is they will be there for some other reason than they sound better!

“Oh, they were a gift, it would be rude not to use them”

“Oh, the snakeskin looks so cool”

“Oh, they lay so nice”

Etc.........:D

I'll speak for myself on this one, although I do not consider myself a dyed-in-the-wool objectivist, I am more of a decide case-by-caseivist.

I purchased some Monster RCA interconnects because they were double-shielded and have a split tensioned center pin and really tight ground collets which has greatly reduced the number of intermittents I have had with some other cables. They were in the $15-$30 range for a 6' double RCA-RCA. Nicely made, durable cables with excellent shielding. These cables eliminated the Ethernet RFI pickup issue I had with the cheapos. They even have a handy directional arrow on them so you know how to hook them up! (sorry, couldn't resist smacking the hornet's nest)

Cheers,
Howie
 
The funny part about this is I’ll bet if you look behind all the objectivists system I’m gonna wager over 50% have high end cables......only difference is they will be there for some other reason than they sound better!

“Oh, they were a gift, it would be rude not to use them”

“Oh, the snakeskin looks so cool”

“Oh, they lay so nice”

Etc.........:D

I doubt it. I have tried / demoed / borrowed “high end” cables, but I’d rather light my money on fire than give a cent to con-men like Audioquest, for example.
 
I'll speak for myself on this one, although I do not consider myself a dyed-in-the-wool objectivist, I am more of a decide case-by-caseivist.

I purchased some Monster RCA interconnects because they were double-shielded and have a split tensioned center pin and really tight ground collets which has greatly reduced the number of intermittents I have had with some other cables. They were in the $15-$30 range for a 6' double RCA-RCA. Nicely made, durable cables with excellent shielding. These cables eliminated the Ethernet RFI pickup issue I had with the cheapos. They even have a handy directional arrow on them so you know how to hook them up! (sorry, couldn't resist smacking the hornet's nest)

Cheers,
Howie

Same here I bought all Pangea (their cheapest )interconnects mainly for the fact they are built better and grip tighter......if they happen to make a difference in SQ hopefully it’s not worse! I do seem to notice maybe a little overall better clarity but it’s certainly not in your face.

Case by caseivist, I like it......that would be a mashup of subjectivity and objectivity?
 
Last edited:
Perceived height information is mostly because of Y-axis speaker frequency dependent directivity and this again is grossly affected by crossover filter design and driver's placement and distance. Many side lobes are created and they contribute to perceived height "information".
I don't fully agree. Of course, with speakers arranged in an enclosure from bottom to top in the order: bass, medium, treble, we can expect this, but, as I said, not the case when we use headphones, full range speakers, coaxial or d'Apollito speaker sets.
As, depending from the quality of the source, some records present more (subjective) vertical informations than others, and because we still feel or imagine vertical informations in records where nothing were done in this purpose (close miking, artificial reverb), I believe there is both a way from our hearing system to discriminate some vertical directivity by various ways, and a part created by our brain itself, dependant of what I call "culture".
Some kind of visual memory of the form of the source. Hifi is just about (re)creating virtual images of the sound stage of recorded music.

Based on my more than 20 years of experience with audiophile community and presentations and visits in their homes, I would probably reverse your statement. Not many audiophiles have a transparent audio system.
Again, PMA, the purpose of an HIFI system is not to be "transparent", but realistic and agreeable with as much records as possible. A very different way to think about this ? It is not a scientific process, every one has his own order of preferences, tastes, images of the reality. "Transparency" do not exists with no speakers or microphones. And, because we can feel differences between DACs, preamps, amplifiers, not even electronic devices.
By the way, what is an "Audiophile" ? Someone that listen to his system, instead of listening to music that his system was designed for ? A strange deviation, don't you think ? This should be reserved to designers during the creative process and customers during listening sessions in showrooms to try to find their best gear.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.