Vintage vs Modern 2 ch receivers question - Page 7 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 140Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 03:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Matt2026's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 7,227
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 938 Post(s)
Liked: 26817
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWarrior View Post
Since I helped to take it off-topic, I can help put it back on track, lol.

My dad's old Sansui 9090 is still kicking in my mom's basement. It could use some service, he performed some before he passed, but it could probably use a re-cap and maybe new volume pot. A few lights are burnt out, too, which sucks. I can remember being mesmerized by the bouncing power meters when I was young, and pushing and pushing until the meters pegged, lol. Of course, then I remember the day around Christmas when my mom came home to find her Precious Moments nativity set had fallen (read, been shaken) off the wall-mounted shelving...not a fun day for me, lol. Come to think of it, I still owe her a replacement.

I'm late to this party and maybe it's already been suggested but I don't know how long it will be before I can read much more. I had a pot problem on my Nakamichi RE1 circa 1994, sound would diminish in one of the channels. I ordered some DeoxIT from Amazon. I sprayed it into several openings in the pot, turned it fully CW-CCW several time and then repeated the process then left it fully CW to dry out just in case there was any residue I preferred it end up in the fully CW position as I'll never turn the volume up that far. Working fine since then.
DreamWarrior likes this.

Regards, Ken (Retired)
7.1.2) Denon 4520CI; Aircom T-8, Samsung 55H8000; OPPO 203; 6x SVS Ultra BS,
Ultra Center; FH 2xPolk; Rythmik F12; CyberPower CP1500PFCLCD (x2)
2.1 Ch.) Nak RE-1, CR7A, BD F7500, Denon 300F/Ortofon 2M Bronze;
ADS L1290(x2); PINNACLE BABYBOOMER SUB, PANAMAX MR4300
Matt2026 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 04:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Audiophile: "Hmm, which mode should I select on my new AVR, 'Pure' or 'Adulterated'? Let's read up on what they do. . .

'Pure Direct plays the music in the pristine, natural state and with the original and unprocessed realism of live music, without the nasty, stair step digitization of digital sound."

*Presses "Pure Direct" which, among other things, causes a 1 dB lower average output because intelligent room correction technologies focus on reducing the peaks as their top priority over the power-sapping boosting of lulls.*

"Hey, listen to that! In Pure mode it is punchier, more natural, all the stair steps go away, and it's more 3D now. Good thing I have a good ear for these things and I'm immune to expectation bias so there's no need for me to conduct such a test under double blind, level-matched conditions."


Last edited by m. zillch; 11-19-2019 at 05:01 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #183 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 04:25 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
(there is no other explanation for pure direct winning so much).
This is incorrect.
CruelInventions likes this.
m. zillch is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #184 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 04:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Red MC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 437
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 303 Post(s)
Liked: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db View Post
It depends on the placement flexability of the speakers in the room whether you want/need EQ . EQ is not a plague like you say. Its designed to provide flat in room response and good speakers in poor locations still sound bad. I agree with you that room EQ doesn't handle bass very well and the best way to treat a room for bass is with multiple identical subs and bass traps. Bass from your speaker placement can be bad as well depending on both where they are located within the room and relative to the listener position.
I'll explain my POV further.

If your speakers have relatively flat frequency response on the listening axis under anechoic conditions, then the direct sound will be relatively flat as well. Depending on your room and placement and the speaker's off-axis response, the early reflections and the reverberant field are not likely to follow a nice, gently sloping FR. But the precedence effect means that our auditory processing gives more weight to the direct sound than the reflected sound because the direct sound arrives first. An auto-EQ system does not, because it can't separate the direct sound from the reflected sound, it just measures the total sound power at one or more locations in the room. Then it equalizes the result to bring it close to a target curve. In doing so, it degrades the direct sound. The more EQ it applies, the more it can mess up the direct sound. This argument applies over the midrange and treble. In the bass, wavelengths are long enough that our hearing can't really separate the direct and reflected sound.

So in my opinion, full-range EQ should only be used for loudspeaker correction and never for room correction. But that assumes you have good speakers with good objective performance. If you have speakers that aren't very flat to begin with, auto-EQ may improve them. It also assumes you purchased the speakers because you preferred their frequency response. YMMV.

I think anybody who prefers the sound in Direct and/or Pure Direct modes should consider disabling the EQ and setting levels, distances, and crossovers manually the old fashioned way.

HT: Dynaudio C2, Contour S CX, 2x BM14S, Aperion surrounds, Simaudio Titan, Marantz AV8801, Oppo 103, Linn Majik DS, and a Pioneer Kuro
Stereo: Dynaudio Focus 160, Simaudio W-5 LE or Luxman M-600A, Linn Akurate DSM, 2x Rythmik F12G
Other interests: motorcycling, skiing, being active

Last edited by Red MC; 11-19-2019 at 04:35 PM.
Red MC is offline  
post #185 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 04:37 PM
pjp
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NJ/NY
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked: 456
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Audiophile: "Hmm, which mode should I select on my new AVR, 'Pure' or 'Adulterated'? Let's read up on what they do. . .

'Pure Direct plays the music in the pristine, natural state and with the original and unprocessed realism of live music, without the nasty, stair step digitization of digital sound."

*Presses "Pure Direct" which causes a 1 dB lower average output because intelligent room correction technologies focus on reducing the peaks as their top priority over the power-sapping boosting of lulls*

"Hey, listen to that! In Pure mode it is punchier, more natural, all the stair steps go away, and it's more 3D now. Good thing I have a good ear for these things and I'm immune to expectation bias so there's no need for me to conduct such a test under double blind, level-matched conditions."

Holy crap. How many times can you post the same irrelevant point over and over and over again?????? Look at 3db's case. That is how you use "pure direct" -- it is "pure direct" against the optimized digital setting -- that's how it is used. They sound nothing alike.

Your useless test, which I literally cannot believe you are posting again for the 1000th time, is totally irrelevant. Nobody uses pure direct with all the AVR DSP manually shut off. If you have an AVR, you optimize it for the room, then you choose whether or not you use pure direct or DSP for music by listening to both modes. Nobody can hear a difference when DSP isn't doing anything (your 0% of real world case) Everybody can hear a difference when it's DSP versus pure direct (the 100% real world case). Everyone can hear the difference, but you can't hear it because you don't hear anything that isn't printed on a graph.
pjp is online now  
post #186 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 04:44 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
Holy crap. How many times can you post the same irrelevant point over and over and over again?????? Look at 3db's case. That is how you use "pure direct" -- it is "pure direct" against the optimized digital setting -- that's how it is used. They sound nothing alike.
Yes, equalization and speaker delay changes make audible differences. Nobody disagrees on this point so I don't understand why you repeatedly bring it up.

Last edited by m. zillch; 11-19-2019 at 05:20 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #187 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 04:45 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
Everyone can hear the difference, but you can't hear it because you don't hear anything that isn't printed on a graph.
False.
m. zillch is offline  
post #188 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 04:50 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db View Post
Answer my question..what AVR do you own? Where are you getting this info?
Unless I missed it we still don't have an answer to this question, correct?

Last edited by m. zillch; 11-19-2019 at 05:09 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #189 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 06:07 PM
pjp
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NJ/NY
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked: 456
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Yes, equalization and speaker delay changes make audible differences. Nobody disagrees on this point so I don't understand why you repeatedly bring it up.
The reason I bring it up is because that is how 99.999% of people use "pure direct" in their AVRs. Whether they use the AVR for dual-use, or movie only, or music only, they still optimize the DSP settings using the built-in EQ software, or REW, or they tweak it by ear -- whatever they use, they optimize the sound the best they can. They will typically use non-direct for movies, there's nothing to debate there. For music, they will use either the optimized DSP (non-direct) or "pure direct". How do you think they make that decision?

To answer your question. I bring it up because that is the "100% use case" for AVR's. It's the only way to discuss the topic. The real question is, why do you keep bringing up "pure direct" versus all DSP settings manually turned off? It's useless. Nobody uses "pure direct" that way. Pure direct serves no purpose when used that way (analog to digital to analog with no digital manipulation is absolutely transparent to the human ear). Having all digital processing turned off (eq, time delays, etc.) doesn't tell you anything about what digital processing does (or does not) do to the fidelity of 2-channel music because no processing is happening. It's a fake case that means nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Unless I missed it we still don't have an answer to this question, correct?
What difference does it make? The concepts we are talking about are the same for all AVR's (there are some detail variations on how direct modes are implemented within individual brands and models of AVR's, but those individual differences doesn't mean anything to the overall discussion).
pjp is online now  
post #190 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 06:12 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
What difference does it make?
It would allow us to look up what your manuacturer says about Pure Direct on your particular AVR, among other things.
frank xbe likes this.
m. zillch is offline  
post #191 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 06:53 PM
pjp
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NJ/NY
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked: 456
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
It would allow us to look up what your manuacturer says about Pure Direct on your particular AVR, among other things.

Not sure what difference that will make, but I'll give you the full history when I have time to do so.
pjp is online now  
post #192 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 07:52 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Audiophile: "Hmm, which mode should I select on my new AVR, 'Pure' or 'Adulterated'? Let's read up on what they do. . .

'Pure Direct plays the music in the pristine, natural state and with the original and unprocessed realism of live music, without the nasty, stair step digitization of digital sound."

*Presses "Pure Direct" which, among other things, causes a 1 dB lower average output because intelligent room correction technologies focus on reducing the peaks as their top priority over the power-sapping boosting of lulls.*

"Hey, listen to that! In Pure mode it is punchier, more natural, all the stair steps go away, and it's more 3D now. Good thing I have a good ear for these things and I'm immune to expectation bias so there's no need for me to conduct such a test under double blind, level-matched conditions."

Think I was using a gross amount of hyperbole? Guess again. [Well, OK, a little hyperbole on my part]

Check out how Yamaha literally describes it. Here it is, verbatim, straight from the horse's mouth:

"Pure Direct mode is a feature offered by many Yamaha receivers. When engaged, it feeds sound directly to the amplifier and bypasses any DSP processing that might otherwise color the signal, ensuring the best possible high-fidelity sound from all audio sources – even USB and HDMI inputs. The end result is a more realistic sound and a deepening of the listening experience, making it more enjoyable than ever.

Does Pure Direct really matter all that much? If you love music and movies, absolutely!"

Sheesh. What percentage of customers would say they are looking for "colored sound"? Makes you wonder why they have any option other than Pure Direct, huh? I guess the other mode is for people who "hate music and movies".

Last edited by m. zillch; 11-19-2019 at 07:57 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #193 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 08:34 PM
pjp
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NJ/NY
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked: 456
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Think I was using a gross amount of hyperbole? Guess again. [Well, OK, a little hyperbole on my part]

Check out how Yamaha literally describes it. Here it is, verbatim, straight from the horse's mouth:

"Pure Direct mode is a feature offered by many Yamaha receivers. When engaged, it feeds sound directly to the amplifier and bypasses any DSP processing that might otherwise color the signal, ensuring the best possible high-fidelity sound from all audio sources – even USB and HDMI inputs. The end result is a more realistic sound and a deepening of the listening experience, making it more enjoyable than ever.

Does Pure Direct really matter all that much? If you love music and movies, absolutely!"

Sheesh. What percentage of customers would say they are looking for "colored sound"? Makes you wonder why they have any option other than Pure Direct, huh? I guess the other mode is for people who "hate music and movies".

Question: Since you've finally acknowledged that everyone can easily hear differences between "full EQ/DSP" (non-direct with DSP settings active) and "no EQ/DSP" (pure direct), have you ever actually listened to 2-channel music on your AVR, and flipped "pure direct" on and off to see how they compare? In other words, have you compared how your best, most painstakingly optimized DSP settings sound for 2-channel music in comparison to "pure direct" (with no optimizations)? If so, what did you hear? If not, why not?
pjp is online now  
post #194 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 10:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
Question: Since you've finally acknowledged that everyone can easily hear differences between "full EQ/DSP" (non-direct with DSP settings active) and "no EQ/DSP" (pure direct),\
"Finally"? Show me where my "original stance" said/implied EQ is inaudible.
m. zillch is offline  
post #195 of 430 Old 11-19-2019, 10:47 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
Not sure what difference that will make, but I'll give you the full history when I have time to do so.

Nobody asked for any history, just what model number receiver (or preamp? integrated amp?) you currently use:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db View Post
Do you own an AVR? If so what make and model?

Last edited by m. zillch; 11-19-2019 at 11:05 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #196 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 04:40 AM
pjp
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NJ/NY
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked: 456
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Nobody asked for any history, just what model number receiver (or preamp? integrated amp?) you currently use:
As I've said, the concepts being discussed apply to all AVRs that have a properly functioning "true direct". There is no benefit to looking at individual AVRs. There can, however, be value in looking at a cross-section of them, so I will do that when I have time.

It isn't really valid to complain about me providing more information than you requested (especially when the original request doesn't mean a lot in isolation). However it is valid for me to complain when the same question, that takes 30 seconds to test, that is relevant, has been asked over and over and is never answered.

Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
"Finally"? Show me where my "original stance" said/implied EQ is inaudible.
The entire thread I have made only 1 request, which is for you to simply compare how your system sounds using fully optimized DSP versus no optimization at all (i.e. pure direct turned on). That test requires no prep at all and takes 30 seconds to conduct by simply listening to 2-channel music while flipping the "pure direct" switch on and off. Instead of doing this simple 30-second "no prep" test, you have bounced between:

a) Misconstruing my request to be comparing "true direct" to having all DSP controls disabled (which I never asked for and which has no bearing on how any human actually uses pure direct in the real world)

and

b) Mocking the idea of using your ears to test. That objection, however, is now invalid, as of your post #186 , where you acknowledge that what I am asking you to compare can very easily be heard by anyone.

My question from post #193 (and a many prior posts throughout the thread) still stands, which I will repeat below:

Question -> Have you compared how 2-channel music sounds using your best, most painstakingly optimized DSP settings versus how that same music sounds with "pure direct" enabled (i.e. with no optimizations)? If so, what did you hear? If not, why not?
pjp is online now  
post #197 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 06:08 AM
3db
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3db's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,749
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Liked: 457
Thanks for your explanation. I have more questions as yo can see.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Red MC View Post
I'll explain my POV further.

If your speakers have relatively flat frequency response on the listening axis under anechoic conditions, then the direct sound will be relatively flat as well. Depending on your room and placement and the speaker's off-axis response, the early reflections and the reverberant field are not likely to follow a nice, gently sloping FR. But the precedence effect means that our auditory processing gives more weight to the direct sound than the reflected sound because the direct sound arrives first. An auto-EQ system does not, because it can't separate the direct sound from the reflected sound, it just measures the total sound power at one or more locations in the room. Then it equalizes the result to bring it close to a target curve. In doing so, it degrades the direct sound. The more EQ it applies, the more it can mess up the direct sound. This argument applies over the midrange and treble. In the bass, wavelengths are long enough that our hearing can't really separate the direct and reflected sound.

The receiver uses parametric eq to equalize the speakers which does alter the frequency response of the speaker. But does shaping the frequency response alter dispersion characteristics of the speaker? I ask this because your saying the AVR room correction alters the ratio of direct to reflective sound but in my eyes, that's a dispersion characteristic which I thought would be a physical character of the speaker including such things as baffle width, phase plugs on the midrange/woofer. driver etc,. I want to add that room eq is used to fix the sound at the listener position or listener area and not for the whole room..




Quote:
Originally Posted by Red MC View Post
So in my opinion, full-range EQ should only be used for loudspeaker correction and never for room correction. But that assumes you have good speakers with good objective performance. If you have speakers that aren't very flat to begin with, auto-EQ may improve them. It also assumes you purchased the speakers because you preferred their frequency response. YMMV.

I think anybody who prefers the sound in Direct and/or Pure Direct modes should consider disabling the EQ and setting levels, distances, and crossovers manually the old fashioned way.

I'm of the opinion that it does help as all 3 of my systems sound good with it engaged. But... (there's always a butt ... ) I'm an old fart and I like to hear my speakers as is when it comes to 2 channel listening. I bought them for that reason. However, when in HT mode, room eq comes in with in with bass management.

AVR Yamaha RX-V 1800/1900/1500
TT/Cassette ProJect Xpression III/Yamaha KX1200/KX800
BR Yam. BD-S681/Sony X800/Pan. BD30 DPL Sam. 65"/ 55"/50"
Speakers PSB T-45,8C,1B/ PSB 500,200C,RBH A600/Alphas
Subs Rythmic LV12-R/PSB Subsonic 6/5
3db is offline  
post #198 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 06:12 AM
3db
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3db's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,749
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Liked: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
A behavior must be extremely atypical in order to qualify as a USDA-certified, free range, non-GMO "quirk". If you look at AVS threads discussing "pure direct" preferences vs DSP for 2-channel music, you will see that your preference could not possibly be more typical.

I don't know how to break this to you -- I guess I just have to come right out and say it: "You're normal"

Please reread my last response. My choice is atypical as I said that the EQ sound makes the speakers sound less veiled and not as warm sounding. I have also setup the 1800/1900 to use DSP to provide me with bass management but not alter the room eq and I prefer that wgen listening to classical music involving the pipe organ. I prefer it that way for this genre as the rest remains unchanged. You are trying to lump all my answers into your DSP bad, Pure Direct good but I have provide you with info on my quirk and my preference which shoots holes in your data flow algorythm. You also made incorrect assertions in earlier posts in this thread that AVRs are not capable of not applying DSP. You seem to be spinning this in circles.

AVR Yamaha RX-V 1800/1900/1500
TT/Cassette ProJect Xpression III/Yamaha KX1200/KX800
BR Yam. BD-S681/Sony X800/Pan. BD30 DPL Sam. 65"/ 55"/50"
Speakers PSB T-45,8C,1B/ PSB 500,200C,RBH A600/Alphas
Subs Rythmic LV12-R/PSB Subsonic 6/5

Last edited by 3db; 11-20-2019 at 06:20 AM.
3db is offline  
post #199 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 08:03 AM
pjp
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NJ/NY
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked: 456
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db View Post
Please reread my last response. My choice is atypical as I said that the EQ sound makes the speakers sound less veiled and not as warm sounding. I have also setup the 1800/1900 to use DSP to provide me with bass management but not alter the room eq and I prefer that wgen listening to classical music involving the pipe organ. I prefer it that way for this genre as the rest remains unchanged. You are trying to lump all my answers into your DSP bad, Pure Direct good but I have provide you with info on my quirk and my preference which shoots holes in your data flow algorythm.
Thanks for the clarification. I never said, direct should always win. I said very clearly that, looking at posts on AVS, that it wins probably more than half the time (without counting them). My experience is that it has always won, but I would never suggest that is the universal case for everyone -- and, in a very acoustically difficult room, I might find that DSP is better also (I haven't encountered that yet).

What I did say is that, when you spend a huge amount of time tweaking DSP settings with REW and whatever else -- some people do that over a period of years that they own their AVR -- it would not be possible for "out of the box" Pure Direct default settings to beat that optimized DSP if there wasn't some negative fidelity impact to the DSP processing despite all the good it is doing with correction of room and speaker irregularities. Do you have an alternate explanation how pure direct "out of the box" defaults could beat highly optimized DSP so often for music?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db View Post
You also made incorrect assertions in earlier posts in this thread that AVRs are not capable of not applying DSP. You seem to be spinning this in circles.
I never said anything close to that. I simply said there are no defined industry standards defining how pure direct operates in AVR's. Direct implementation is up to every manufacturer/model/vintage -- nowhere did I say it didn't bypass DSP -- I believe it typically does. All I said was that, because there are no industry standards, you need to make sure your AVR is truly bypassing it.
pjp is online now  
post #200 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 08:28 AM
3db
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3db's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,749
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Liked: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
Thanks for the clarification. I never said, direct should always win. I said very clearly that, looking at posts on AVS, that it wins probably more than half the time (without counting them). My experience is that it has always won, but I would never suggest that is the universal case for everyone -- and, in a very acoustically difficult room, I might find that DSP is better also (I haven't encountered that yet).
What experience do you have? We keep asking you for make and model of your AVR or AVR-prepro..... Your experience and my experience are different and probablly half doesn't make it a clear cut win or loss.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
What I did say is that, when you spend a huge amount of time tweaking DSP settings with REW and whatever else -- some people do that over a period of years that they own their AVR -- it would not be possible for "out of the box" Pure Direct default settings to beat that optimized DSP if there wasn't some negative fidelity impact to the DSP processing despite all the good it is doing with correction of room and speaker irregularities. Do you have an alternate explanation how pure direct "out of the box" defaults could beat highly optimized DSP so often for music?

To clarify, you are asking me whether I can explain other peoples subjective preferences? I will answer your question with a question..why do I like PSB so much and believe Wilson Audio is overpriced sh?te for the money?




Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
I never said anything close to that. I simply said there are no defined industry standards defining how pure direct operates in AVR's. Direct implementation is up to every manufacturer/model/vintage -- nowhere did I say it didn't bypass DSP -- I believe it typically does. All I said was that, because there are no industry standards, you need to make sure your AVR is truly bypassing it.

I'll give you your last point as it is manufacturer dependent. I can vouch for Yamaha that it does bypass.

AVR Yamaha RX-V 1800/1900/1500
TT/Cassette ProJect Xpression III/Yamaha KX1200/KX800
BR Yam. BD-S681/Sony X800/Pan. BD30 DPL Sam. 65"/ 55"/50"
Speakers PSB T-45,8C,1B/ PSB 500,200C,RBH A600/Alphas
Subs Rythmic LV12-R/PSB Subsonic 6/5
3db is offline  
post #201 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 08:50 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
As I've said, the concepts being discussed apply to all AVRs that have a properly functioning "true direct". There is no benefit to looking at individual AVRs.
We disagree. The simple question posed to you was what particular receiver (or preamp? integrated amp?) you use:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db View Post
Do you own an AVR? If so what make and model?
m. zillch is offline  
post #202 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 09:53 AM
pjp
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NJ/NY
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked: 456
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db View Post
What experience do you have? We keep asking you for make and model of your AVR or AVR-prepro..... Your experience and my experience are different and probablly half doesn't make it a clear cut win or loss.
My experience is black and white. Looking at the sequence of changes in my system over a long period of time will make that clear. As soon as I have a chance to do it, I will, but I need to look up model numbers since they aren't fresh in my head.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db View Post
To clarify, you are asking me whether I can explain other peoples subjective preferences? I will answer your question with a question..why do I like PSB so much and believe Wilson Audio is overpriced sh?te for the money?
I'm not asking you to explain other people's subjective preferences. I agree that would be an insane request on my part. Let me see if I can clarify what I am asking, because I agree it's confusing. Let's say I asked you why 50% of people voted for something that, on an objective basis, did not make any sense. I would not be asking you about how each person came to their subjective decision, I'm simply asking why 50% of people voted for something that is not expected based upon objective logic.

Getting back to the topic: If DSP manipulation was truly transparent to the fidelity of 2-channel music, my argument is that objective logic would dictate that highly optimized DSP settings, that people have spent a long time refining, with computers and other sophisticated tools, sometimes over years -- should (virtually) always beat the living crap out of the 15-second process of pulling the AVR out of the box, hitting the "pure direct" button, and calling it the day.

If there is no fidelity downside to DSP processing for music, do you agree that highly optimized DSP settings should be expected, objectively, to beat totally unoptimized "out of the box" settings? <- I'm not saying you have to agree with this, I'm just interested in your rationale if you don't agree that this is the objective expectation of "highly optimized" versus "totally unoptimized".


.

Last edited by pjp; 11-20-2019 at 10:25 AM.
pjp is online now  
post #203 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 10:19 AM
_tk
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 751
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 611 Post(s)
Liked: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

Sheesh. What percentage of customers would say they are looking for "colored sound"? Makes you wonder why they have any option other than Pure Direct, huh? I guess the other mode is for people who "hate music and movies".

Are you being serious with this reply? Because there are a boatload of reasons why people want to "color" their sound.
_tk is offline  
post #204 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 10:33 AM
3db
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3db's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,749
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Liked: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
My experience is black and white. Looking at the sequence of changes in my system over a long period of time will make that clear. As soon as I have a chance to do it, I will, but I need to look up model numbers since they aren't fresh in my head. .
Please do. You have me curious


Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
I'm not asking you to explain other people's subjective preferences. I agree that would be an insane request on my part. Let me see if I can clarify what I am asking, because I agree it's confusing. Let's say I asked you why 50% of people voted for something that, on an objective basis, did not make any sense. I would not be asking you about how each person came to their subjective decision, I'm simply asking why 50% of people voted for something that is not expected based upon objective logic.


I like to see where you are getting this information...because my experience leads me a totally different conclusion



Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
Getting back to the topic: If DSP manipulation was truly transparent to the fidelity of 2-channel music, my argument is that objective logic would dictate that highly optimized DSP settings, that people have spent a long time refining, with computers and other sophisticated tools, sometimes over years -- should (virtually) always beat the living crap out of the 15-second process of pulling the AVR out of the box, hitting the "pure direct" button, and calling it the day.

If there is no fidelity downside to DSP processing for music, do you agree that highly optimized DSP settings should be expected, objectively, to beat totally unoptimized "out of the box" settings? <- I'm not saying you have to agree with this, I'm just interested in your rationale if you don't agree that this is the objective expectation of "highly optimized" versus "totally unoptimized".


.

You will be surprised how many people use and choose room corrected settings on their AVR over Pure Direct for both music and HT. I'm not the only guy on the block that uses it.
m. zillch and Out-Of-Phase like this.

AVR Yamaha RX-V 1800/1900/1500
TT/Cassette ProJect Xpression III/Yamaha KX1200/KX800
BR Yam. BD-S681/Sony X800/Pan. BD30 DPL Sam. 65"/ 55"/50"
Speakers PSB T-45,8C,1B/ PSB 500,200C,RBH A600/Alphas
Subs Rythmic LV12-R/PSB Subsonic 6/5
3db is offline  
post #205 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 10:35 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by _tk View Post
Are you being serious with this reply? Because there are a boatload of reasons why people want to "color" their sound.
I'm sure tons of people do but off the top of my head I can't recall anyone describing that they like colored sound, specifically using that word. Can you cite an example of any AVS forum poster saying they like "colored sound"?
m. zillch is offline  
post #206 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 10:45 AM
_tk
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 751
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 611 Post(s)
Liked: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
I'm sure tons of people do but off the top of my head I can't recall anyone describing that they like colored sound, specifically using that word. Can you cite an example of any AVS forum poster saying they like "colored sound"?

I'm not talking about the word itself but the meaning of it. But yeah, a quick search on this forum will bring it up. For instance:

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/89-sp...-speakers.html


Confused why you bring this up though.
_tk is offline  
post #207 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 10:52 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,193
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5546 Post(s)
Liked: 3986
Quote:
Originally Posted by _tk View Post
Confused why you bring this up though.
I didn't bring up the use of the word "color". Yamaha (quoted in my post) did:

"Pure Direct mode is a feature offered by many Yamaha receivers. When engaged, it feeds sound directly to the amplifier and bypasses any DSP processing that might otherwise color the signal, ensuring the best possible high-fidelity sound from all audio sources – even USB and HDMI inputs."

By my read they are using the word as a negative/put down.

Last edited by m. zillch; 11-20-2019 at 11:03 AM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #208 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 11:37 AM
3db
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3db's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,749
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Liked: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
I didn't bring up the use of the word "color". Yamaha (quoted in my post) did:

"Pure Direct mode is a feature offered by many Yamaha receivers. When engaged, it feeds sound directly to the amplifier and bypasses any DSP processing that might otherwise color the signal, ensuring the best possible high-fidelity sound from all audio sources – even USB and HDMI inputs."

By my read they are using the word as a negative/put down.

A Yamaha glossy marketing line ??



I guess this is what makes this hobby so fun trying to figure out sh?t from shineola
m. zillch likes this.

AVR Yamaha RX-V 1800/1900/1500
TT/Cassette ProJect Xpression III/Yamaha KX1200/KX800
BR Yam. BD-S681/Sony X800/Pan. BD30 DPL Sam. 65"/ 55"/50"
Speakers PSB T-45,8C,1B/ PSB 500,200C,RBH A600/Alphas
Subs Rythmic LV12-R/PSB Subsonic 6/5
3db is offline  
post #209 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 01:07 PM
_tk
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 751
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 611 Post(s)
Liked: 265
What Yamaha really means by "color" in their Amps/AVR's under $1000: Engage "Pure Direct" to get an even more sterile and flat sound vs. our normal house sound.
_tk is offline  
post #210 of 430 Old 11-20-2019, 01:17 PM
Senior Member
 
Red MC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 437
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 303 Post(s)
Liked: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db View Post
Thanks for your explanation. I have more questions as yo can see.

The receiver uses parametric eq to equalize the speakers which does alter the frequency response of the speaker. But does shaping the frequency response alter dispersion characteristics of the speaker? I ask this because your saying the AVR room correction alters the ratio of direct to reflective sound but in my eyes, that's a dispersion characteristic which I thought would be a physical character of the speaker including such things as baffle width, phase plugs on the midrange/woofer. driver etc,. I want to add that room eq is used to fix the sound at the listener position or listener area and not for the whole room..
The EQ doesn't change the loudspeaker radiation pattern. If it does change the ratio of direct to reflected sound, it's only an indirect effect of emphasizing or de-emphasizing different frequency ranges with different dispersion.

What I'm saying is that full range auto-EQ can take a loudspeaker with excellent on-axis frequency response and mess it up. While the steady-state in-room response at the listening position is becoming flatter, the direct sound may be getting worse, and the direct sound is more important. The better the loudspeaker, the more likely that auto-EQ is degrading its performance rather than improving it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
I'm not asking you to explain other people's subjective preferences. I agree that would be an insane request on my part. Let me see if I can clarify what I am asking, because I agree it's confusing. Let's say I asked you why 50% of people voted for something that, on an objective basis, did not make any sense. I would not be asking you about how each person came to their subjective decision, I'm simply asking why 50% of people voted for something that is not expected based upon objective logic.

Getting back to the topic: If DSP manipulation was truly transparent to the fidelity of 2-channel music, my argument is that objective logic would dictate that highly optimized DSP settings, that people have spent a long time refining, with computers and other sophisticated tools, sometimes over years -- should (virtually) always beat the living crap out of the 15-second process of pulling the AVR out of the box, hitting the "pure direct" button, and calling it the day.

If there is no fidelity downside to DSP processing for music, do you agree that highly optimized DSP settings should be expected, objectively, to beat totally unoptimized "out of the box" settings? <- I'm not saying you have to agree with this, I'm just interested in your rationale if you don't agree that this is the objective expectation of "highly optimized" versus "totally unoptimized".
Why do you assume that the results coming out of an automated calibration and equalization tool are optimized in any way? I don't see how they could possibly be optimum because none of the current systems are capable of measuring the room response independently from the speaker response. They take the combined steady-state response of the speaker + room and pull it towards an arbitrary target curve. These systems are just as likely to butcher the response of a well designed loudspeaker as they are to improve the response of a poorly designed loudspeaker.

As far as I can tell, everybody seems to agree that the audible differences between the standard path and the pure direct path are intentional and result from signal processing (level trims, delays, bass management, EQ). So that only leaves a few possible reasons why people would prefer pure direct for music:
a. Automated equalization is degrading the sound
b. Crossing over to the subwoofer(s) is degrading the sound
c. Non-technical reasons e.g. marketing, appeal of minimalism, just because

If necessary, you can distinguish between a. and b. by manually turning off the EQ. In my case, it's a mix of both, but a. is the main problem.

HT: Dynaudio C2, Contour S CX, 2x BM14S, Aperion surrounds, Simaudio Titan, Marantz AV8801, Oppo 103, Linn Majik DS, and a Pioneer Kuro
Stereo: Dynaudio Focus 160, Simaudio W-5 LE or Luxman M-600A, Linn Akurate DSM, 2x Rythmik F12G
Other interests: motorcycling, skiing, being active
Red MC 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