 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
86.152.193.110
In Reply to: RE: Don't you know posted by b.l.zeebub on March 28, 2014 at 02:14:05
N/T
Follow Ups:
*
What's with the nasty attitude?
You said: "You don't but the only people who can directly compare the original sound with the recorded version (ie those who are present during the recording) do so all the time.
One has to wonder who is wrong: you or the engineers, producers and artists. No... wait... one doesn't as the answer is obvious."
-------------------------
Anybody who has ever heard unamplified instruments at a live performance, such as a classical concert, knows how instruments truly sound. A good example is an intimate chamber music session, where you often can sit very close to the performers. One can take in the distinctive sound of each instrument: the fundamentals and overtones, the richness and beauty.
You do not need to visit a recording studio to learn what violins, cellos, or flutes sound like, do you?
If you then play multiple chamber music recordings from different labels and all of them sound hard, sterile, and cold through one amplifier and reminiscent of the real thing via a different amp, then it is obvious which unit does a better job of reproduction.
The Bryston amps I have auditioned--at length with my own reference recordings--were always sterile and cold, and stripped away the richness of the instruments.
Besides spending plenty time in recording studios I've also worked at the German Opera in Berlin on and off for ten years so the sound of unamplified instruments and voices is quite familiar to me.
It's one of the reasons I do not use tubes anywhere in my replay chain as they tend to be less than accurate. They are quite euphonic though but that is not what I am after.
As a little aside: Large, active PMC monitors are quite popular in classic recording circles and guess what?
They are all powered by Bryston amps.
I really hate this derogatory usage of the word Euphonic. What exactly do you mean?
Because I have found that really good tube gear is clearer, more transparent, more natural with tone color shading (less "gray" sounding), better with dynamics and better with imaging and soundstaging. Even the best SS i have heard has residual graininess in the highs, grayed out tonal color, squashed dynamics (irrespective of the power) and generally a less lifelike sound as compared to live, unamplified music and the best reference recordings.
See, I have found that what other are calling accurate I find to have unnatural graininess and edge that one never hears in a live setting. Even listening to my ex play a strad in my living room and I sitting 3 meters away didn't create the unnatural artifacts I hear in nearly all SS gear.
"See, I have found that what other are calling accurate I find to have unnatural graininess and edge that one never hears in a live setting. Even listening to my ex play a strad in my living room and I sitting 3 meters away didn't create the unnatural artifacts I hear in nearly all SS gear."
If it sounds wrong, how do you know that the problem is the amplifier rather than some other part of the record playback chain or some kind of adverse component interaction?
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
A valid point, Tony. Of course one cannot discount that possibility; however, I have found that if things were working well before and the change is only the amp then one can be at least pretty sure that the problem is either with the amp or the speaker/amp interaction.
If you choose an amp with a high output impedance and match it with a speaker that has a wild impedance curve then you may not really be sure what you will get.
However, the issues I am talking about don't relate to FR or other linear system killers. The distortions that ruin sound usually come through regardless and imprint a "character" on the sound that is unnatural once noted. This signature will be heard regardless of what else is in the chain.
Those load dependent effects can also interact with the non-linear properties of the amplifier by impacting feedback, affecting stability, etc... My belief is that amplifiers and speakers (and associated wiring) should be evaluated as pairs, not evaluated separately.
I don't know why, but that solid-state edge seems to be prevalent at power up, but with the solid state equipment that I happily use, it's gone after the equipment has been powered up for 24-48 hours. IMO, solid state equipment should be run 24-7 for best sound. This does not appear to shorten product lifetimes and may possibly extend the lifetime of components by reducing the number of thermal cycles and power transients. Electric cost can be a factor, however, particularly in the summertime.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
"Those load dependent effects can also interact with the non-linear properties of the amplifier by impacting feedback, affecting stability, etc"
If it uses a lot of negative feedback then you are correct. However, amps that don't will not suffer most of these ills just FR variation with the impedance load. Matti Otalla looked into the back EMF of speakers and the impact on amplifier distortion and stability. I have seen it firsthand as well with an OTL amp that was unstable on the Acoustats I used to have...it started oscillating at a couple of watts.
"My belief is that amplifiers and speakers (and associated wiring) should be evaluated as pairs, not evaluated separately.
"
AGain, it matters a lot if the amp has negative feedback or not. If not then one just needs to know if the speaker has severe impedance swings or not and if it has adequate sensitivity. Doen't mean it will sound good (either or both components can still be crap) but that paper exercise will eliminate a gross mismatch.
" don't know why, but that solid-state edge seems to be prevalent at power up, but with the solid state equipment that I happily use, it's gone after the equipment has been powered up for 24-48 hours. IMO, solid state equipment should be run 24-7 for best sound. This does not appear to shorten product lifetimes and may possibly extend the lifetime of components by reducing the number of thermal cycles and power transients. "
While it certainly smoothes out the sound I have found that it doesn't really go away...just reduces it a bit. If the amp is Class A then you can't really leave it on all the time so you are mainly talking about relatively low bias AB amps or D amps. Even AB tubes get too hot to leave on 24/7. My own amp has a Class A single ended transistor output stage that needs a good hour to sound its best and has reached thermal equilibrium (i.e. the heat sink stops getting hotter). Before that the soundstage is a bit constricted, the depth foreshortened a bit and dynamics a bit compressed...once it warms up though...whoo boy does it expand in all ways but images get even better defined and focused. Just wish it didn't take so darn long...
It could be that my amplifiers are good enough after an hour, but I don't have the patience. (They are class AB, and H, seven in all.) My DAC takes much longer to stabilize. All told, I am "wasting" about 120 watts of electricity, which I view as a good tradeoff.
I usually hear the sound of live instruments as warm and inviting. On those occasions where I do not, then I don't return to hear the same band/venue. I expect recorded music to have similar characteristics. That is the case with the majority of my record collection as played on my system. There are some exceptions and if they are repeated I tend to black flag the offending record labels. Of course there is the occasional bad recording made with grainy op-amps, etc... I listen at concert volumes and expect to listen at these levels for at least the length of a typical concert without any fatigue. Otherwise, there is something wrong. (This is for unamplified acoustic music.)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Sounds not too dissimilar to what I require.
Some should, other's not so much.
The only SS. audio thing I've ever had that really was significantly impacted by warm-up is my current power amp. It simply doesn't have enough feedback to fix the distortions present prior to achieving it's normal bias point. I've left it running for decades but have now stopped because I figure the electrolytics may be getting dry and I want to stretch their life. The heat generated isn't usually an issue since we heat with electricity anyway. True, it's less efficient than the heat-pump but it sounds a whole lot better...
It's rough the first 20 minutes and stops changing in an hour which, oddly enough, is when the heatsink temperature stabilizes.
As you well know all designs are a mass of trade-offs. I can live with this one although I consider it sub-optimal.
73, Rick
I just looked at your system for the first time! I had the Nak PA5 amp in the past...not bad...but I didn't keep it for long. I had it for a while driving the panels of my Infinity IRS Betas (I like those Renaissance speakers you have!)...then I went to tubes and hybrids and never looked back.
I would imagine that the stabilization of the operating points happens when the temperature stops changing. I experience the same thing with my Class A NAT. However, it takes a good hour or more. It is clear though when it gets there because it goes from good to OMG good! Waiting that long though listening to merely good is annoying I have to say and it runs far too hot to leave it on.
b.l.zeebub said: “Besides spending plenty time in recording studios I've also worked at the German Opera in Berlin on and off for ten years so the sound of unamplified instruments and voices is quite familiar to me.
It's one of the reasons I do not use tubes anywhere in my replay chain as they tend to be less than accurate. They are quite euphonic though but that is not what I am after.
As a little aside: Large, active PMC monitors are quite popular in classic recording circles and guess what?
They are all powered by Bryston amps.”
-------------
You have made it clear that your ears hear orchestral instruments and voices as cold and clinical, thus your preference for solid-state gear that reproduces them in that fashion. You call it accurate. I hear those same instruments quite differently.
I will not even bother to reply to your generalization that all tube components are less accurate than solid-state products.
Today I had conversations with two top employees at PMC’s U.S. office. They confirmed that their best active studio loudspeakers do utilize Bryston amplifiers--sort of. It was explained to me that the amps were chosen for their well-known reliability and build quality. But the circuitry undergoes a major revision to alter the overload characteristics and to change the sonics. PMC found the stock amps to be fatiguing, and cold, hard, and sterile, which is a sound they did not want in their speakers. So they change the voicing of the amplifiers, one said, to fix those problems.
the difference in perception lies with musical preferences. The Devil's profile says he favors:
"bit of everything from Latin to Black Sabbath but mostly Dub"
His profile also mentions chamber music and orchestra (see final part of System entry).
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
