Measuring audio qualities... - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 136Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 276 Old 12-29-2018, 02:18 PM - Thread Starter
 
bing!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 577
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 322 Post(s)
Liked: 238
Measuring audio qualities...

How is resolving measured?
-At the 30 second mark, if you can hear the floor creak on Dinah Washington's What a Difference a Day makes, and the timbre of the wood on the strings come alive after making a change, when you could barely hear one, how is that measured?

How is pop measured?
-In Carole King's So Far Away, when the guitar, the kick drum and the bass pop off the rest of the track, and floats over it, when before, it all was just part of the track, how is that measured?

How is sound stage measured?
-When I listen to the The Last Waltz Suite by The Band, on the left channel, there is that piano. After a change in my system, that piano goes from being a flat part of the background to deeply holographic and full bodied, with the whole song going from 3 feet wide to bigger than the room, how is that measured?

How do you measure excitement?
Two different speakers, same everything upstream, same song. If one makes you tap your feet more vs. the other, where do you start measuring that?

Would love to see data.

Last edited by bing!; 12-29-2018 at 02:53 PM.
bing! is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 276 Old 12-29-2018, 02:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
bdht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked: 107
I find its best not to focus on that at all. If measurements interest you then seek them out, if not don't waste your time on it. I find headphone measurements to be very helpful in making decisions, but they don't show the soundstage of a pair of hd800s or alpha primes. And dac/amp measurements usually only show a millisecond of information and I would be suprised to see an accurate measurement of the things your describing, real time analysis of harmonics, decay, and all the nuances recorded. Spectral graphs can show the decay of a particular frequency, but when rendering a 5.1 192khz mix? All you can do is listen at that point.
alan0354 likes this.
bdht is online now  
post #3 of 276 Old 12-29-2018, 02:35 PM - Thread Starter
 
bing!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 577
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 322 Post(s)
Liked: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdht View Post
I find its best not to focus on that at all. If measurements interest you then seek them out, if not don't waste your time on it. I find headphone measurements to be very helpful in making decisions, but they don't show the soundstage of a pair of hd800s or alpha primes. And dac/amp measurements usually only show a millisecond of information and I would be suprised to see an accurate measurement of the things your describing, real time analysis of harmonics, decay, and all the nuances recorded. Spectral graphs can show the decay of a particular frequency, but when rendering a 5.1 192khz mix? All you can do is listen at that point.
Exactly! I find that these things, which I find more interesting and quite pleasing, are to me, ultimately more important than a perfectly flat frequency response.
alan0354 and Scotth3886 like this.
bing! is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 276 Old 12-29-2018, 02:55 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: United States
Posts: 2,590
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1297 Post(s)
Liked: 2096
First you have to learn the "language" to ask the proper question

Here are the answers in the video, it discusses how sound is measured, how systems are tested and how it all comes together.

Enjoy the education--some things are simple, other things are more complicated so it all depends how deep you wish the rabbit hole to go.

If you want more information than the video provides, plenty of books on the subject or go visit the Audio Engineering Society, they have a ton of information if you want more information.

18Hurts is online now  
post #5 of 276 Old 12-29-2018, 04:44 PM - Thread Starter
 
bing!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 577
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 322 Post(s)
Liked: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Hurts View Post
First you have to learn the "language" to ask the proper question

Here are the answers in the video, it discusses how sound is measured, how systems are tested and how it all comes together.

Enjoy the education--some things are simple, other things are more complicated so it all depends how deep you wish the rabbit hole to go.

If you want more information than the video provides, plenty of books on the subject or go visit the Audio Engineering Society, they have a ton of information if you want more information.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrpUDuUtxPM&t=1038s
I watched it and found it interesting. But it does not address most of the points I mentioned above. The talk was focused almost entirely about equating flat frequency response with performance. Well, duh, thats been known for ages? I am less concerned about a relatively flat frequency response because in this day and age, it should be a given (at least to the discerning buyer). What I have been aiming for is the fun factor, defined by me, in the list above. All his tests were done in mono only.

I did find it interesting that Dr. Goodsound defended himself to his CEO for failing consumer reviews by stating "the consumers don't know how to review speakers". I wish I could get away with that on my annual review. "Mr. HR Guy, my boss doesnt know how to review my work".

Interesting note, he completely demolishes room equalization, pretty much calling it snake oil. I am intrigued.

Note2: in the last decade, Harman's bread and butter has been OEM car audio. it still had a stable of prestige brands, but most of the money came from Toyota, Lexus and the like. they finally sold themselves to Samsung in March of 2017 and there goes Dr. Goodsound. He had a good gig for a really long time.

Frequency amplitude over the hearing spectrum was an obsession in the 50's and 60's. Kinda old school thinking given what is available out there. Fun, excitement, very subjective factors, I find are more elusive today and is what has been achieved by a few systems I've heard. In the old days, you walk into a room, its the clarity that grabs you. Now, the stimulation of toe tapping is what grabs me. Alcohol helps

Last edited by bing!; 12-30-2018 at 04:57 AM.
bing! is offline  
post #6 of 276 Old 12-29-2018, 08:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
bdht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked: 107
I have a headphone system I use for loudspeaker virtualization with Out of Your Head, that I think is pretty unique and is capable of really a massive headphone virtual listening room for both 2 channel music and 7.1 movies. I'm postive alot of people would turn their nose up at alot of the equipment, but when using Out of Your Head, the differences are not small between some serious hifi equipment and what's built into the pc motherboard, sound cards, the headphone out on an AVR, desktop dacs in the $1-300 range, the ability to process and render all the information being added from the binaural rendering and room impulse response was night and day. Adding in the digital and power conditioning completely refined the sound and imparted incredible realism to the different presets in OOYH. Without the conditioning I found myself prefering to listen to music without the program, but with the conditioning, the sound became completely non fatiguing and ultra detailed. Believe me, I would love for inexpensive gear to work the same, I have lots of other gear to try this on and there's just no comparison.

System Specs:
Transport: Uptone ISO Regen, Amanero USB to i2s board with i2s isolator, Uptone LPS 1.2 powering both
DAC: Audio GD NFB 7, 2013
Amp: Audio GD NFB-1AMP
Power: Topaz 91092-31 Ultra Line Noise Isolator
Headphones: Audeze EL-8 with Dekoni LCD Velour pads, MrSpeakers Alpha Prime, Sennheiser HD650
bdht is online now  
post #7 of 276 Old 12-29-2018, 08:54 PM
Advanced Member
 
bdht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked: 107
Another example of something tough to measure. I'd seen recommendations to use quadrapole(star quad) power cables for digital devices, due to the large voltage swings of digital devices and the low inductance of that type of cable. The dac im using, however, has r core transformers with double stage power supplies designed to avoid pulses through the psus affecting the analog output stages. You wouldn't see this in a 12khz jitter test at the output of the dac because its going to manifest during playback, like accurately rendering and outputing complex passages, decay, harmonics etc. So when trying these cables on dacs with simpler psus, the effect of the cable was very noticeable, whereas on the dac with better psus, there was no dicernable difference.

Last edited by bdht; 12-29-2018 at 10:11 PM.
bdht is online now  
post #8 of 276 Old 12-29-2018, 09:22 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,840
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5327 Post(s)
Liked: 3840
Quote:
Originally Posted by bing! View Post
How is resolving measured?
-At the 30 second mark, if you can hear the floor creak on Dinah Washington's What a Difference a Day makes, and the timbre of the wood on the strings come alive after making a change, when you could barely hear one, how is that measured?
With a stopwatch: "27, 28, 29, 30 seconds!"

sorry, I couldn't resist.
m. zillch is offline  
post #9 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 12:41 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 255 Post(s)
Liked: 244
These are some pretty good questions! But I think that the biggest problem is separating "hardware" from "software". The best system in the world won't get your toe tapping if you don't like the music. Whereas it's easy to tap your toe to your favorite music on a low quality system. Soundstage is almost always a fantasy that depends on recording technique and mixing- but some systems can impose an artificial sense of soundstage that is pleasant. Resolving is also a matter of the hardware in your head- and it's known that loss of resolution can happen that's not as blatantly shown by the usual hearing tests.

There are nonetheless plenty of scholarly articles on all these subjects. Including ones that show that how music influences are emotions, and how our emotions influence what we hear. Another "circle of confusion"! Who's to say that you're feeling the right way, at the right time, to the right degree? The artist? The sound engineer? Your expectations? Should receivers have a "happy/sad" knob?


Quote:
Originally Posted by bing! View Post
I watched it and found it interesting. But it does not address most of the points above.
Toole's video that @18Hurts posted does explain the difference between art production, and *reproduction*. How music makes you *feel* is between you and the artist. The goal of an audio reproduction system is to get that message to you as accurately as possible. If you prefer the sound of inaccuracy, fine, but that's comparable to drawing a mustache on the Mona Lisa because you like her better that way.

Quote:
The talk was focused almost entirely about equating a flat frequency response with performance.
Toole didn't talk about just flat frequency response for 75 minutes. He talked about differentiating art from reproduction systems, the history of measurements in the speaker industry, room reflections, speaker directivity, the "circle of confusion" inherent in the industry, the importance of trained listeners, room modes at bass frequencies, the futility of simple EQ in practical listening environments, the correlation between the correct objective measurements and listener preferences. You might want to rewatch it a few times until you understand the significance of what you missed.
Or buy his book, lots of pictures and it's very readable, even for an idiot like me. Toole starts at first principles, and draws on an enormous body of research to progress towards many useful conclusions.

Quote:
Well, duh? Thats been known for ages. I am less concerned about a relatively flat frequency response because in this day and age, it should be a given (at least to the discerning buyer).
In the video, Toole pointed out quite the opposite. A single flat frequency response is almost a useless metric by itself, even if the measurement was done honestly and properly. At what power? What distance? What angle? What boundaries? What smoothing? Even if you're discerning enough to understand those criteria, can the manufacturer provide them?
As was pointed out in the video, you need several other multi-dimensional measurements to predict the quality of a speaker. But if you have those measurements, and they're all honest, then Toole explains that your prediction should be accurate.
This blog by Olive describes a committee of audio industry experts, moderated by Toole, and their frustration with the paucity of information available to consumers. Note how they agree that much more than a single flat response is necessary:

Sean Olive: What Loudspeaker Specifications Are Necessary?

Quote:
What I have been aiming for is the fun factor, defined by me in the list above.
Sure, why bother being discerning? Not only is it a lot of work, but most speaker manufacturers won't- or more likely *can't*- give you the necessary measurements anyhow. Toole explains this. He also explains why it's unlikely that you will be extremely unlikely to perform your own unbiased listening tests, and therefore your "fun" will probably be self-delusional.

Quote:
This patently obvious as all his tests were done in mono only.
Toole explained that mono testing is *always* consistent with stereo testing results. If you think they aren't, please share your research... The end results were that the scientific predictions correlated very closely with the listener preferences(fun?) in mono, which correlated *exactly* with the listener predictions(fun?) in stereo.

Quote:
I did find it interesting that Dr. Goodsound defended himself to his CEO for failing consumer reviews by stating "the consumers don't know how to review speakers". I wish I could get away with that on my annual review. "Mr. HR Guy, my boss doesnt know how to review my work".
I think you *really* missed the point there! Consumers *Union* which publishes Consumer *Reports* is a scientific testing organization. Toole's more thorough methods and more extensive testing cleary showed what listeners preferred. And I'm not sure where you've been, but as Toole pointed out in the video, CU's testing was already widely known in the audio industry as a joke. The fact that Toole educated CU and they changed their testing methods shows that even CU eventually realized that they had been doing things wrong. Toole's boss didn't disagree with him, he wanted a plan to fix a marketing problem. Pro tip: try revolutionizing an entire industry before your next annual review.

Quote:
Interesting note, he completely demolishes room equalization, pretty much calling it snake oil. I am intrigued.
I'm intrigued at how you managed to come to that conclusion? Toole points out the stupidity of *overly simple* correction. You do know he promotes and uses Harman's proprietary room correction software?:

Toole on Harman's Sound Field Management software

Quote:
Note2: in the last decade, Harman's bread and butter was OEM car audio. it still had a stable of prestige brands, but most of the money came from Toyota, Lexus and the like. they finally sold themselves to Samsung in March of 2017 and there goes Dr. Goodsound. He had a good gig for a really long time.
Your passive-aggressive ad hominem name calling is puerile and uncalled for, IMHO. But if I was Toole, I'd be proud of the moniker "Dr. Goodsound". Too bad that's not the name he used when he autographed my copy of his book.
Toole had been in audio research for 50+ years in 2017. Do you think he should've tried to hang in for another 50 with Harman? Give the guy a break!
Not sure what your point is about mobile audio. Considering my daily driver is a '75 Dodge truck with a factory AM radio (mono only), and a single small full-range speaker, I'm glad for all the advancements. Have you listened to a factory system lately? That incredible improvement of sound in such a difficult environment didn't happen by accident.

Quote:
Frequency amplitude over the hearing spectrum was an obsession in the 50's and 60's.
Just the 50's and 60's? And was it really the obsession? Seems like there were plenty of obsessions from that era, some of them wildly popular, where flat (on-axis response) took a back seat.

Quote:
Kinda old school thinking given what is available out there. Fun, excitement, more subjective factors are more elusive today and is what has been achieved by a few systems I've heard. In the old days, you walk into a room, its the clarity that grabs you. Now, the stimulation of toe tapping is what grabs me.
So you were one of those guys in the Edison test Toole displayed, believing a gramophone was the pinnacle of audio technology?

Quote:
Alcohol helps
In your case, *that* I can believe!
But that's an admission that your listening preference is for inaccuracy. Once you go down that road, there's no point in asking questions about audio *reproduction*.
CharlesJ and SmittyJS like this.

Sources/processing: stack of stuff that if it isn't vintage now, it will be soon!
Amps: stacks and stacks of old iron
Main speakers: big DIYSG
Surrounds: Bose graveyard
Subs: a bunch

Last edited by fill35U; 12-30-2018 at 01:08 AM.
fill35U is offline  
post #10 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 01:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1625 Post(s)
Liked: 420
All the test and measurement aside, just listen and find what you like. Instruments cannot tell you how the system sound. I did so much measurements on amplifiers, there is no telling from the THD spec at all how the amp will sound. It seems like if the amp is high distortion ( 0.05% or more), it's not as transparent, but even ultra low THD of 0.006% to 0.0025%, it's not supposed to have different sound, it cannot be further from the truth.



I found there are too many variables, the room, the speaker impedance variations, the amp and last but not the least......your ears. Who is going to tell you which system supposed to sound good and which is not..........By measuring? Hell!!!


I actually have instruments to measure, I spend years measuring. This is first hand experience, not quoting papers, articles.



You listen, if it makes your hair at the back stand up, that you resonate with the sound, it's a good system for you.( not necessary for others)

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #11 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 01:17 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1625 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Remember, ultimately, it's YOUR money, it's your ears. Buy whatever make you happy. Even is snake oil, it's YOUR magic oil.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #12 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 05:16 AM - Thread Starter
 
bing!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 577
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 322 Post(s)
Liked: 238
.....

Last edited by bing!; 12-30-2018 at 10:36 AM.
bing! is offline  
post #13 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 05:22 AM - Thread Starter
 
bing!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 577
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 322 Post(s)
Liked: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
Remember, ultimately, it's YOUR money, it's your ears. Buy whatever make you happy. Even is snake oil, it's YOUR magic oil.
Thank you.

bing! is offline  
post #14 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 10:49 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,840
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5327 Post(s)
Liked: 3840
This entire field used to be called "sound reproduction" or "high fidelity". This means the goal is to reproduce or replicate the original art, warts and all, as accurately and as faithfully as possible. Many confuse the job of their stereo system as being to please them much like the job of the salt and pepper shaker on our dinner table. Not for me! If Ringo has an annoying nasal voice in real life then that's exactly how I want to hear it! [No offense to Ringo and I actually like his music but it was the first voice that came to mind.]

We are not measuring the art we are measuring the faithfulness, truthfulness, or fidelity to the original signal. For me the goal is quite obvious: transparency. [See my signature for more.]
unretarded likes this.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there IS no concept of "accounting for personal taste/preference". As art consumers we don't "pick" the level of bass, nor the tint/brightness of a scene's sky, any more than we pick the ending of a novel or Mona Lisa's type of smile. "High fidelity" means "high truthfulness", faithful to the original artist's intent: an unmodified, neutral, accurate copy of the original master, ideally being exact and with no discernable alterations, aka "transparency".
m. zillch is offline  
post #15 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 11:04 AM - Thread Starter
 
bing!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 577
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 322 Post(s)
Liked: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
This entire field used to be called "sound reproduction" or "high fidelity". This means the goal is to reproduce or replicate the original art, warts and all, as accurately and as faithfully as possible. Many confuse the job of their stereo system as being to please them much like the job of the salt and pepper shaker on our dinner table. Not for me! If Ringo has an annoying nasal voice in real life then that's exactly how I want to hear it! [No offense to Ringo and I actually like his music but it was the first voice that came to mind.]

We are not measuring the art we are measuring the faithfulness, truthfulness, or fidelity to the original signal. For me the goal is quite obvious: transparency. [See my signature for more.]
If you havent enjoyed music played live in an intimate setting, like a soprano singing next to a piano in a living room, or a rock band in a small club, you won't know or understand the emotion I speak off. I was walking in a mall a couple of months ago, I heard the sound of a guitar in the air. It grabbed my attention, despite the all the other auditory inputs coming in. I felt like the sound was special. When I peered into a restaurant, I realized what it was. A guy was playing an accoustic guitar plugged into a small amp. He wasnt playing anything complex or extravagant. But he was putting into the air the emotion he was putting into the piece. I heard it, with my own ears. Didnt read it on the internet, or deduced it from research data. I felt it.

Clear, highly detailed sterile and flat (as in flat beer/no sizzle) playback, meh. What understand from you is, you hear the music, you don't feel it. That is unfortunate.

Last edited by bing!; 12-30-2018 at 11:55 AM.
bing! is offline  
post #16 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 11:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1625 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by bing! View Post
There is school of thought that believes that "excitement and toe tapping" are reduced when the time domain is messed up by multi-driver speakers not design to address the matter. This intrigues me, and I currently have a design that dabbles it in. I find some validity in it compared to a different design I have heard. The difference is what I would describe as the same when analytical vs musical performance of speakers are compared. If you were to consider the concept, imagine this, having listened to a lot of live and very personal (small room) music performed, where even pieces of music I normally would not interesting, I found myself tapping your toes to. This is because the musician has something there, that can be lost in playback. That said, a speaker design that does not mess up the time domain, will get your toes tapping on most recordings. Case in point, I never liked Gordon Lightfoot, but with my speakers, I played them from Spotify, and now I'm like, how did I miss that?
That is so true, I don't even analyze about time domain or whatever, to me, there is the vibration or connection when listening to the musician live, that make your hair stand up on the back of your neck, you feel the emotion if the performer is good and convey their feelings across.

I might not be as into hifi as some of you, I am not as in tune a lot of times. But I can share my experience as a guitarist. Like when I went out and bought my last Fender Stratocaster. There were two Fender American Standard Strat, same sunburst color, same hard tail I could choose from. I play them both, it only took me 30 seconds to pick out one I like more, the sound, the touch are different. One just fit me a lot better. They are the same brand, same color, same model. Any non guitarist would thing it makes no difference, WRONG. I can feel one, not the other. I bought the one I could feel it. There is no snake oil, both are identical.

When it is right, you feel it, it's very quick, you don't have to concentrate and close your eyes and like you are pushing on the toilet!!! When you have to be under the gun blind listening, you miss the moon. You feel it.

Anyone that actually pick a component in blind test, then regret after a few days, that when you actually live with it for a few days, you would pick the other one? When you get too clinical, you miss the moon. Let your feeling reach out and feel it.

I have my own believes, BUT when people claim they can hear the difference with even things I consider snake oil, I would not put them down. Maybe I am just not into it as much as they are. Maybe they just have better ears than me. This is listening, not science, that's where all the technical measurement ends.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.

Last edited by alan0354; 12-30-2018 at 11:20 AM.
alan0354 is offline  
post #17 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 11:21 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,840
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5327 Post(s)
Liked: 3840
Quote:
Originally Posted by bing! View Post
Clear and highly detailed flat playback, meh. You can keep it.
Murky, indistinct, roller coaster shaped frequency response playback, yuck. You can keep it.
rnsound likes this.
m. zillch is offline  
post #18 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 11:28 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,840
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5327 Post(s)
Liked: 3840
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
This is listening, not science, that's where all the technical measurement ends.
Yeah, those people interested in the science of audio ought to start their own forum if they want to talk about that silliness. [sarcasm]
Ratman, CharlesJ, rnsound and 2 others like this.
m. zillch is offline  
post #19 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 11:39 AM
Advanced Member
 
bdht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Murky, indistinct, roller coaster shaped frequency response playback, yuck. You can keep it.
Lol, read his first post and your first post, you're both quite literally inclined towards ultra revealing hifi systems, but for some reason one assumes a digital system that doesnt tweak harmonic distortion or a vinyl tube based system is worth argueing over.

When I was building my system and reading about all the options, for me the digital system seemed like the best approach, listening over headphones to fast complicated music with distorted guitars, or 7.1 action movie soundtracks being run through a loudspeaker virtualization program. That doesn't mean I find vinyl or tube systems unappealing or incorrect.

Y'all sound like elitists, really. And this infects every audio forum I've been to. Head fi, sbaf, asr, reddit, doesnt matter. Discussion is great and weighing the pros and cons of various systems can help new users make informed decisions, but how do you think they'll react when they see posts like this? Remember... public forum.
bdht is online now  
post #20 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 11:55 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 50
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 22
I’m of the opinion that all this is relative, and not just the consumer experience, but what is called transparent or faithful reproduction. Can we really tell how unfaithful was the equipment of the artist when they created their art, and adjust it to achieve that faithful reproduction? Is that faithful to what the artist was hearing, to their intent, do we even know their intent and how it differed from what they were hearing (or not hearing?) Did Beethoven experience his work in the same way as you or me? If not, how does one define sound reproduction?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
viorel is offline  
post #21 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 11:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1625 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Yeah, those people interested in the science of audio ought to start their own forum if they want to talk about that silliness. [sarcasm]

No, it's those that prefer measurement over how it sounds should start their own music sound analysis forum. This is hifi audio forum, that people listen with their ears, not with instruments. ( that's sincere, not sarcasm)

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.

Last edited by alan0354; 12-30-2018 at 12:12 PM.
alan0354 is offline  
post #22 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 12:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1625 Post(s)
Liked: 420
One more thing, people that think science is exact DON'T KNOW SCIENCE. When going to the highest form, the line of science and arts are blurred. There are so many things that have no explanation, how they discovered them has no scientific explanation. Like the Electromagnetic theory that is so important for EE and audio amplifiers, there is NO EXPLANATION, just 4 formula invented that you take it or leave it. People think they are multiple variable calculus, BUT actually people invented multiple variable calculus to try to explain Electromagnetics, not the other way around.


One of the most important discovery of organic compound, the Benzene Ring ( you see in in drugs starting with Phenyl.....) was not discovered in scientific means. One scientist was research into this, worked very hard but can never fully explain why some chemical compound behave a certain way. He was hitting the wall, then one night, he dreamed of a snake biting it's own tail and it goes round and round. Then when he woke up, a light up in his mind, it's CIRCULAR!!! Then he went on and proofed it is CIRCULAR. The basic form is the Benzene Ring, modify a little and stack them together becomes sugar!!!



I studied musical theory, you know you can write a song that conforms to all the musical theory and it sounds dreadful. Then one kid sing out something in his mind and can be beautiful!!!


Sound is feeling, it's an art, not science.
Scotth3886 likes this.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #23 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 12:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,234
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3589 Post(s)
Liked: 2023
just about everything sounds the same except for speakers so I can see getting rid of alot of forum categories. and outside of speakers, just read the manual and its done.
alan0354 likes this.

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is offline  
post #24 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 12:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1625 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by viorel View Post
I’m of the opinion that all this is relative, and not just the consumer experience, but what is called transparent or faithful reproduction. Can we really tell how unfaithful was the equipment of the artist when they created their art, and adjust it to achieve that faithful reproduction? Is that faithful to what the artist was hearing, to their intent, do we even know their intent and how it differed from what they were hearing (or not hearing?) Did Beethoven experience his work in the same way as you or me? If not, how does one define sound reproduction?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The recording sound so far off from the live sound we shouldn't even talk about faithful reproduction. I know, I was a musician for over 10 years. People say the record and reproduce the live music sound either DON'T know what they are talking about, OR they lie.


People might think the recording sounds like live performance.......through the PA system. That is true, BUT what you hear through the PA in the concert does not sound like the live performance without the PA. The PA and the mixing board creates the sound.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #25 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 12:36 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,840
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5327 Post(s)
Liked: 3840
Quote:
Originally Posted by torii View Post
just about everything sounds the same except for speakers so I can see getting rid of alot of forum categories
The electronics reviewers of the largest and oldest audio magazine in the US, Sound and Vision, think all modern, solid state amplifiers kept within their operational (non-clipping) range sound the same, yet they continue to publish articles about receivers, integrated amplifiers, and power amplifiers, so how do you explain that if there's "nothing to talk about"?

Last edited by m. zillch; 12-30-2018 at 12:43 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #26 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 12:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,234
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3589 Post(s)
Liked: 2023
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
The technical editors of the largest and oldest audio magazine in the US, Sound and Vision, think all modern, solid state amplifiers kept within their operational (non-clipping) range sound the same yet they continue to publish articles about receivers, integrated amplifiers, and power amplifiers, so how do you explain that if there's "nothing to talk about"?

I can believe both sides to argument which makes it hard. I really believe that some of the gear in our hobby sounds different. now is the difference better? not always. the fact that science cant really measure imaging or soundstage should tell us not all is same. why would one amp cause a sound out of a single speaker to appear on that speaker and another amp cause that same sound to appear 2 feet to the side of speaker?

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is offline  
post #27 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 12:57 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,840
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5327 Post(s)
Liked: 3840
Quote:
Originally Posted by torii View Post
the fact that science cant really measure imaging or soundstage should tell us not all is same.
Science can measure imaging and sound stage.
Here's one example:
http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=7671

P.S>. There are no controlled scientific studies showing one, modern day sold-state amplifier has different imaging or sound stage than another. [It's more of a source recording, source playback device, room, speaker placement/aiming, and speaker thing (dispersion and directivity being important aspects of it).]

Last edited by m. zillch; 12-30-2018 at 01:30 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #28 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 01:07 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,840
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5327 Post(s)
Liked: 3840
Quote:
Originally Posted by torii View Post
why would one amp cause a sound out of a single speaker to appear on that speaker and another amp cause that same sound to appear 2 feet to the side of speaker?
There is no example of this phenomenon under controlled conditions.

I've heard this however, so has Scott, however our heads were not fixed in a vise [figuratively] from exposure A to exposure B, and yes that matters, nor was the test blinded.
torii likes this.

Last edited by m. zillch; 12-30-2018 at 01:13 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #29 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 02:03 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,840
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5327 Post(s)
Liked: 3840
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
There is no example of this phenomenon under controlled conditions.

I've heard this however, so has Scott, however our heads were not fixed in a vise [figuratively] from exposure A to exposure B, and yes that matters, nor was the test blinded.
An example of this phenomenon occurs, for me, with the Chesky Imaging Test I made the short video of. There are instances where if my head is held in a very specific position the "off stage left" and "off stage right" positions snap into precise, locked position, focused exactly where they are supposed to be, but if I move or turn my head ever so slightly it completely vanishes and becomes imprecise and unfocused.

I'm confidant this is related to one's own personal HRTF curves, which vary from individual to individual mostly due to differences in the shape of the pinna (outer ear), one of the main ways we determine image localization, and how tiny changes in the room reflection arrival times and phase interact with our personal HRTF from one head position to the next, even when the change is just millimeters.
unretarded likes this.

Last edited by m. zillch; 12-30-2018 at 02:10 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #30 of 276 Old 12-30-2018, 02:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Alex F.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,333
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 899 Post(s)
Liked: 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
The electronics reviewers of the largest and oldest audio magazine in the US, Sound and Vision, think all modern, solid state amplifiers kept within their operational (non-clipping) range sound the same, yet they continue to publish articles about receivers, integrated amplifiers, and power amplifiers, so how do you explain that if there's "nothing to talk about"?
Please do not change facts. You are paraphrasing one person at Stereo Review, the predecessor of Sound &Vision. The statement you are referring to was from the late Julian Hirsch. He initially said it about 50 years ago. It was his personal opinion, not that of the magazine.

Sound & Vision itself does not agree with Hirsch's opinion. Many of their reviews discuss sound characteristics of components and note their sonic differences.


Music room: Cary SLI-80 tube integrated amplifier, McIntosh MA6500 integrated amplifier, Quad 99 preamp, Quad 909 power amp, Acoustic Research AR9 loudspeakers, Yamaha CD-N500 CD player, Teac UD-503 DSD DAC, Phase Linear 8000II linear-tracking turntable.
Theater room: Panasonic 65S60 plasma television; Yamaha RX-A2020 (preamp section); Adcom GFA-5503 and GFA-5400 amplifiers; Polk LSi25, LSiC, and LSiF/X loudspeaker system; Velodyne FSR-18 servo-subwoofer.
Alex F. is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 2-Channel Audio

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off