 
|
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 |
75.100.188.177
In Reply to: RE: Well put: is it lack of "bad" distortion or the addition of "good" distortion posted by Feanor on September 19, 2015 at 06:12:26
when it is simply a matter of personal preference?We keep being told how studies have "proven" humans "prefer" certain distortion profiles as a rationale for declaring certain topologies or amp types are "best". Certainly the results of any such study weren't 100% thus there is always room for tastes to differ.
Regardless of what any study has shown, isn't the simple fact that there are so many amps of so many different types successful in the market place proof that the premise that there is a "best" fallacious?
try it! you know you want to!
Edits: 09/19/15Follow Ups:
"Regardless of what any study has shown, isn't the simple fact that there are so many amps of so many different types successful in the market place proof that the premise that there is a "best" fallacious?"
In a way, yes but only because of so many different goals.
If the goal is to have the sound coming from the speakers of a playback system sound the way the music sounded in the recording studio then a person first needs to know what real instruments actually sound like.
Not everyone does, not everyone cares. Most people just want a system that "sounds good to them", whatever that means.
So, in the end, the answer to your question is no.
Having "many different types successful in the market place" only proves how many different goals people have.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
nt
try it! you know you want to!
""goals", preferences, the same thing"No, they are not the same thing.
If the goal is for the playback to sound the way it really sounded....that is very different than simply "I want it to sound good to me".
Many times I have made actually improvements in my system only to have the initial reaction of "I don't like it".
I had become accustomed to the sound of my system even though it was wrong. That had become my "preference".
Listening again, with my objective goal in mind, I had to admit that the piano sounded more like a real piano and the acoustic guitar sounded more like a acoustic guitar, etc.
"..clearly not everyone agrees on what is best"Yes, but only because of their ignorance (lack of knowledge of what real instruments sound like and/or an abandonment of the real goal).
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 09/19/15
It is well known fact that our senses are often and easily fooled. Stereo is just one such tech that relies on that fact. Not everyone agrees on what sounds "real".
Those whose interpretations differ from your concept of what constitutes "real sound" are "ignorant"? WOW....no point discussing anything with you, God....
try it! you know you want to!
Edits: 09/19/15
"Not everyone agrees on what sounds "real"."
Some people don't like the sound of a real acoustic instrument even in the presents of. But that's not the same thing as disagreeing.
and therein lies the problem. The misunderstanding of the goal.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
listening to a recording and saying amp a is a more true to life sound versus amp b and saying your opinion is "more" correct than someone else's. And saying those that disagree with you are ignorant.
try it! you know you want to!
If I was the recording engineer and heard with my own ears both the live instruments and the live mic feed and I was the one who made the decisions as to how close to or how far away from the actual sound of the instruments the recording was going to be, don't you think I might be in a better position to judge?
All opinions are not equal.
Get over it!
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
nt
try it! you know you want to!
"Get over what?"
Get over the fact that all opinions are not equal.
"Have you been the re on every recording made?"
No but I have been on enough to have more than just an unsupported opinion.
How many have you been on?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
and I have heard enough live music to be comfortable with my ability to judge what does and doesn't sound like live music. I don't have to be a professional chef to know what I like to eat either...
try it! you know you want to!
"All opinions are not equal."
I agree with you. People who spend their entire life listening to recordings and not making any are, at best, second class audiophiles. When it comes to disagreement as to what sound's right and what doesn't, I take this experience into consideration whenever possible.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
nt
try it! you know you want to!
It's not listening to recordings that counts, it's listen to unamplified real instruments.
And yes, even those who have don't always agree but they each have a real point of reference so at least they're in a position to argue.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
nt
try it! you know you want to!
Yes and their arguments are worth listening to and trying to learn from.
From what I can tell, your argument is not.
You say that listing your system it not relevant to the discussion but it is.
It would give some insight into where you're coming from.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
You don't need to know my system to have this discussion any more than I need to know your system. We aren't talking system specific issues, we are talking about personal preferences. Yes, even your engineers who "spend their entire life listening to recordings" don't agree. That's my point. It's subjective and people don't all agree on matters of taste and interpretation.
try it! you know you want to!
"It's subjective and people don't all agree on matters of taste and interpretation."
Then why do you keep arguing for amplifiers with, in your words, inaudible distortion?
What does it matter if all that matters is each person's own opinion?
If that were the case then there is no reason for discussion at all.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
"People who spend their entire life listening to recordings and not making any are, at best, second class audiophiles."
I wouldn't call them that.
I would just say that they are ignorant.
Ignorant is not a pejorative term (at least I don't intend it to be), just descriptive.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Thats plain silly , philes dont have to make their own recordings , there's always live music and regardless , a hi fi system is for enjoyment not science research or to be used for telemetry , so they will always choose what pleases them , for some its the glow of toobs , others is amps small enuff to fitin your pocket ... :)
Recordings for sure, if designing and or reviewing ...
Edits: 09/19/15
I don't disagree with what you have said in the spirit in which you said it but......
An audiophile is a person enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction.
So audiophiles seek out excellent recordings and strive for a playback system that will have a high degree of fidelity to that recording.
In the audiophile's mind it's more important than "telemetry" and takes a lot of "science research".
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
nt
try it! you know you want to!
Well, on that count I disagree with Nelson.
For the casual listener it is just entertainment but for the serious audiophile it's a life long journey striving for unobtainable perfection.
I have to say there is a lot of entertainment along the way.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
"As I said at the beginning, this has been an interesting amplifier to develop,largely because it has contributed to my depth of knowledge as to what techniques make for a good sounding amplifier. Of course this is a subjective thing, and no amplifier is the best for all listeners and situations."
try it! you know you want to!
nt
try it! you know you want to!
.
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
I believe in freedom of choice without insult and innuendo. My issue is with claims that a certain amp or amp topology is "best" or "better" than mine, or yours, for that matter. Personally, I couldn't care less what others like, but I don't appreciate the arrogance shown in dictating matters of taste. Putting down what others find excellent because it doesn't fit a model, a flawed study, or using measurements when it is convenient to an argument, but claiming they are irrelevant when not, etc., is propaganda, plain and simple.
How can there possibly be a "best" amp, i.e., one that does everything "best" in all systems, in all rooms, to all listener's complete satisfaction. Nothing is perfect. Each topology has it's strengths and weaknesses. We each consider those and based on our own preferences and ranking by importance of features, make a choice. The only person whose opinion matters is the one buying the equipment. It is ludicrous to be told that there is something inferior with your choice if you don't agree with some claimed "best".
Additionally, I know of no study of human preferences that has had unanimous results, that is, an audio study in which a group of people were asked for their subjective preference and had 100% agreement. You can't use a study based on subjective selection criteria to then infer something objective about those preferences. In other words, let's say someone did a study to see if there were certain types or patterns of distortion that were objectionable, or less offensive, or whatever. And 90 out of 100 people tested choose even ordered, descending harmonic distortion as agreeable, or least offensive, or whatever. That still leaves 10% with a different take. Are they "wrong"? You then take these results and say any amp that doesn't have this distortion pattern is fundamentally "flawed" or not as "good" as one that has the preferred pattern. Since no amp is perfect, it can't be anything but different! How can any value judgment be valid?
But you can argue objective performance. So when an amp is said to be "best", the only way that can be argued is through objective parameters, i.e., specs. Thus, I have asked for a spec comparison. We then usually get the "measurements don't tell the story". Well, no, they don't tell the subjective story, but again, that isn't open to debate. If a pet amp topology is "best", it should surely also measure well. But measurements are too simple to be accurate. Well, if an amp can't preform with simple signals, how are we to believe it does better with complex ones?
When an amp is putting out distortion at 5% and has harmonics at -40db, it isn't simply reproducing "live instruments" alone any more....it's an effects box. To each his own, I have no problem with that, again, that's subjective taste. But don't tell me an amp with clearly audible distortion is "best" or "better" in some objective way when there are those at 0.005% and -110dB down across all harmonics.
try it! you know you want to!
> But you can argue objective performance. So when an amp is said to be "best", the only way that can be argued is through objective parameters, i.e., specs. Thus, I have asked for a spec comparison. We then usually get the "measurements don't tell the story".>So which particular amp is the best in terms of measurements - if you can't tell us a specific one and show us why compared to the second best then your whole argument is just made up and in audio terms is totally meaningless.
If not the two best amps, then just the two best you know of for comparison - by two different manufacturers.
Edits: 09/19/15 09/19/15 09/20/15
subjectively or objectively. I have said that objectively, its specs are hard to beat and better in general than those who claim their tube amp is objectively superior.I have also said that the claims some have made about their tube amp being more accurate and better at recreating the sound of "live music" is false objectively because their tube amp is producing audible distortion. It is commonly said and many studies have shown that 1% THD is audible and that on average human hearing is capable of hearing to -80dB. Most tube amps will produce thd at or above 1% and many will have harmonics at greater than -80dB. Additionally, SN ratio, output impedance, and frequency response versus load are often poor or cause issues.
I have posted a link to the specs of my amp several times. I have put up. Perhaps you should too if you want to argue objectively. Have you figured out the difference yet between subjective and objective?
try it! you know you want to!
Edits: 09/20/15 09/20/15
The study of psycho-acoustics is not a beauty contest (an A/B listening test).
It's a scientific study into the ear brain mechanism not accomplished by taking a poll.
It is that and physics that lead us away from non-linear devices, push pull and feedback.
Anyway, it's been fun. :-)
I would listen to your amp in my system anytime you want to bring it over.
With my speakers I only use a fraction of a watt and many SS designs have their highest harmonic distortion % output at those low output levels.
I have no idea if that's true for your amplifiers.
Take care,
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Which class -A SS amp has a lot of distortion at 1 watt ....
No, I think it's Class B or Class A/B SS amps that have that problem but I don't think the problem extends all the way to 1 watt.
Is the N-Core amp Class A?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
no, class d....
try it! you know you want to!
So, if you know, is there the equivalent of crossover distortion in a Class D amplifier?
I just read the IR pdf about Class D amplifiers and there seems to be, having to do with switching and dead time.
The chart I'm looking at shows that the HD starts higher and doesn't drop to minimum until 10 watts output.
After reading that pdf it seems that Class D amplifiers are held together with a wing and a prayer.
I would really like to hear one of these things.
Like CD, once you understand how PCM works it's amazing that they sound as good as they do.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
"Note: THD+N includes noise.
Noise (mainly thermal noise from resistors) dominates below 10W. Since the noise level is constant and absolute its amplitude relative to the test signal level, expressed in percents, is higher for lower signal levels. This in no way implies that distortion performance has an optimum at 10W but that at lower powers it is completely unmeasurable amongst the (very low) noise. This is why distortion spectra are only shown for high power levels where any distortion of note exists. "First Watt" performance is, in fact, first rate. "
try it! you know you want to!
I was reading the International Rectifier pdf.
The above is from the N-Core pdf that you linked and no, I don't see the note.
I searched the pdf for "Note: THD+N includes noise" and came up blank.
The above is not THD+N to start with.
BTW not that it matters but it looks like this one bottoms out at 6 watts vs. the 10 watts from the IR pdf.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
http://www.hypex.nl/docs/NC400_datasheet.pdf
try it! you know you want to!
I was looking at the nc1200 datasheet that you linked in this post,
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/amp/messages/20/208394.html
The only thing that matters is how it sounds. Bring of over and we'll listen to it!
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
...is how it sounds.
Yep.
I guess you have now backed down from your objective claims.
try it! you know you want to!
do you really think all opinions are equal?
would you use a surgeon with no experience?
interpretations based on what?
actually hearing and studying the sound of real instruments?
or just hearing different stereos?
I didn't say anyone was stupid, just ignorant.
there's a big difference between ignorant and stupid.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Ignorance is curable- stupid is forever
must be ignorant is indeed arrogant and simply wrong. Trained musicians don't always agree. How do you know someone else's level of training or experience? Who are you to dictate your interpretation?
try it! you know you want to!
When you walk from the studio to the control room, the mic feed either sounds like the instruments in the studio or it doesn't.
Educated people present and taking that walk do not disagree.
The mic feed either sounds like the instruments or it doesn't.
How many times have you been in a recording studio with real players playing real instruments while being the engineer who is setting the mics and making the decision whether or not the true sound of those instruments is being captured?
Never.
Yeah, I thought so.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
nt
try it! you know you want to!
No you don't but it's a matter of degrees.
Your opinion is not as reliable as the opinion of a person that has spent years professionally studying the sound of live instruments. Correct?
Again you wouldn't hire a surgeon with no experience to cut you open, would you?
All I trying to get across to you is that not all opinions are equal.
You do agree with that, don't you?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
I don't buy on reviews even though no doubt most professional reviewers have heard more gear than I have.
Again, audio isn't brain surgery. You are confusing the subjective with the objective. When it comes to matters of taste, no one knows what I like better than me....
try it! you know you want to!
...apparently you don't understand the scientific method.
Objective is observational - how does this sound differ from live, unamplified music?
Experts with well developed critical listening skills and knowledge of live music would agree.
Subjective is opinion - how do I like the way it sounds?
Everyone has different priorities in the way music is reproduced.
If measurements correlate to the objective observations, then they have relevance. If not, you continue to look for other measurements which do.
for anyone who actually believes there are amplifiers with "inaudible distortion". :)
Objective is metrics- how does something measure. How something sounds "different", objectively, requires a physical measurement, rather than someone's opinion, which is simply subjective, regardless of who makes the observation. Why? Because measurements are not subject to bias, tastes, or other foibles of human perception. You can't argue with an oscilloscope. A SN ratio is a defined quantity. Your claim of what constitutes a "better" amp, without any defined physical metrics, is simply your subjective opinion. And we all have those...
Experts don't agree. That's the whole point. Human perceptions differ, tastes differ.
Some people like distortion, some don't. Some prefer signal fidelity, some want what they perceive to be a "live sound", which is simply their conception of a live sound, as there is no one "live sound".
Still want to compare specs?
try it! you know you want to!
...here is the part you are missing - for a measurement to be RELEVANT it has to be correlated to the goal and purpose of the product.
If the goal of an audio amplifier were to produce the lowest THD+N, you would be correct.
But it isn't.
The goal here is to reproduce music as realistically as possible through loudspeakers.
You cannot determine that with measurements unless they correlate to the result - and you cannot judge that without objective, observational listening.
Which is what JA attempts to do in Stereophile with his suite of measurements.
Otherwise the objective measurement "watts per pound" would be just as important.
Better go back and take a basic science class.
I would have thought you understood that I am referring to measurements related to the goal of an amp, which for most designers, is a wire with gain.Your goal is some nebulous, undefined, subjective "as realistically as possible", which means different things to different people and is completely and unarguably, without any definable metric, SUBJECTIVE. If you can't comprehend that basic concept, you are the one lacking in basic understanding.
There is no such thing as "objective, observational listening". What exactly is "observational listening"? LOL...Listening, by definition, is a subjective act as you will always find people who will differ on what was "heard", never mind the established fact that human senses are prone to bias and other error.
You arguments are flawed, as is your understanding of the topic. Enough, I am tired of you and your demonstrated inability to comprehend the difference between subjective and objective and the implications of each with regards to claims about amp performance.
try it! you know you want to!
Edits: 09/20/15
...since there IS NO SUCH THING as a straight wire with gain, how do you know how one amplifier's deviations from that goal affect the music as opposed to another amp's deviations?
Which reproduces music more "accurately"? One of the two must.
It is NOT POSSIBLE to find out JUST with measurements.
Observations of trained critical listeners are not "subjective" any more than is your ability to identify your wife's voice on the telephone.
And of course you are tired of my comments because you KNOW my logic and reasoning are correct.
Which makes you WRONG.
Music reproduction is the ultimate goal, not trading off one bench measurement for another, and you cannot determine the success or failure of a design WITHOUT LISTENING to the result.
"You are confusing the subjective with the objective"
No, I think you are.
Do you have any understand of physics or electronics?
We have to use our subjective interpretation of our senses to try to determine if we are meeting our objective goals.
Whenever I make a change to my system, that physics (the type that morricab was talking about in his original post "I would say nearly all amplifier designs are conceptually WRONG!") tells me will be an objective improvement, it ends up being a subjective one as well.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
nt
try it! you know you want to!
Well once again, the goal of the hobby is expressed in it's name. Hi-Fi.
A high degree of truthfulness to the original.
I believe if we had a playback system (this would include the room and all aspects of the system) and a recording (both of which being deemed perfect in every way by the good Lord Himself) a lot of people wouldn't like it because that's not what their looking for.
I do not have a problem with that. People can listen to whatever they want to and enjoy whatever sound (no matter how far away from real it is) they want to....just don't call it Hi-Fi.
If it's Hi-Fi you're after then there are rules (as pointed out by morricab) prescribed by science and the study of psycho-acoustics that need to be followed.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
How do you determine how close you are to that goal of high fidelity, whatever it may be?There is only one way to reach that goal?
If your audio experts can't agree, then clearly there is no unique solution.
try it! you know you want to!
Edits: 09/19/15
"What is your definition of high fidelity?"
I just gave you THE definition of Hi-Fi. It's not exclusively mine.
" "Original" what?"
Sound of the instrument. In a recording that would be the sound of the instrument at the mic position.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
A high degree of "truthfulness" to the original? That is subjective goal unless you have a metric to define "truthfulness". Not everyone will agree on what is most "truthful" to the original.
The "sound" of the instrument? Another subjective goal. Unless you were there at the mike feed, it's impossible to know with certainty what the sound was exactly, and even two people who were there may not necessarily agree because not everyone interprets sensory input identically. And that isn't even touching on the fact that not all instruments of the same kind even sound the same!
That's the problem with subjective goals. There is no objective way to prove when you have reached them, or no absolute reference to judge exactly how close you are. All you can do is give your opinion, and as we know, even seasoned experts with all the experience in the world may and do disagree. There is no closed solution.
try it! you know you want to!
"Unless you were there at the mike feed"
It's "mic position" and I was, many times.
With the likes of Dennis Green (RIP), Roger Kellaway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Kellaway and John Ondrasik (Five For Fighting) playing our 9' Baldwin concert grand piano.
Jim Capaldi's (RIP) drum set and congas.
Johm McEuen's (Nitty Gritty Dirt Band) banjo and acoustic guitar.
Kenny Loggins' voice.
Dave Mason's voice and acoustic guitar.
Chris Hillman's (The Birds, The Flying Burrito Brothers, Mcguinn Clark and Hillman, The Desert Rose Band) guitar and voice.
Jonathan McEuen's voice and martin D-28 acoustic guitar.
Phil Salazar's fiddle.
Ann Kerry Ford's (wife of Robben Ford and Broadway singer) voice.
I can do this all night but it won't convince you of anything so what's the point?
I can see that this is going no where.
Why don't you just bring your amp over and we'll give it a listen?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
what I doubt is that everyone would share your interpretation of that experience.
And no, I won't be swayed that your experience and opinion of those experiences is universal truth.
Ever see the film Rashomon?
Anyway, I have a feeling you are no where close or I would be happy to give you a listen. I suggest trying to find someone local with an ncore based amp and have at it....In the meantime, check out the specs. I think you will find them interesting.
try it! you know you want to!
"Isn't "high fidelity SET" an oxymoron?"-No, but High Fidelity Class D is.
"How do you determine how close you are to that goal of high fidelity, whatever it may be?"
-See post #1.
Can you tick any of those boxes?
My Garg0yle 2A3 DC's hit 6 out of 7 with a quick glance, 7 out of 7 with a verifying measurement.
( 7) Flat distortion profile vs. frequency (most amps rise in the highs or bass or both). )
△ᴉʇɐuᴉɯnllI oᴉpn∀△
Edits: 09/19/15
http://www.hypex.nl/docs/NC1200_datasheet.pdfAs for the "check list", can you point me to some documentation or research that proves those factors positively correlate universally with subjective preferences? Or even objective measurements? Of course I am referring to normal human preferences, not those with infinite hearing sensitivity....
try it! you know you want to!
Edits: 09/19/15
"As for the "check list", can you point me to some documentation or research that proves those factors positively correlate universally with subjective preferences? "
-I could, but obviously you wouldn't read it anyways, so what's the point.
I recommend you re-read what has been posted so far before you try anything more advanced.
You know, I don't consider myself a smart man, however I was chosen as a global community teachers assistant for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's circuits and electronics course in 2013.
This was not based on my skill set per se, but on my ability to explain electronics in a different way so that people new to the field from across the world could understand.
That being said, I am qualified to say, that you are one of the most stubborn people in the world.
△ᴉʇɐuᴉɯnllI oᴉpn∀△
or leave me alone...
try it! you know you want to!
I understand, you probably feel silly now arguing with a guy that learned electronics from MIT.
Can't blame you there.
It is time that you start providing information that proves the superiority of your gear instead.
I don't have anything else to say on the matter at this point in time.
I really only stayed in this long to lend credence in regards to what Morricab was talking about.
Perhaps in the future there will be an interesting thread that explains as to why we as humans have evolved over thousands of years to find certain harmonics distressful.
I don't want to spoil it for you, but I'm sure some here can already guess which typologies sound distressful. ;)
For now, carry on as you were.
△ᴉʇɐuᴉɯnllI oᴉpn∀△
You're the one claiming the objective superiority of your SET and how it "checks all the boxes" and how class d is "low fi". I call your bluff and offer you the chance to make your case and you fold.
I'm guessing you had a look at the ncore specs and you are the one feeling a little silly now...
try it! you know you want to!
I had the opportunity to experience one of the Telarc recordings of the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra. After many takes, Shaw would review the results downstairs and critique the performance.
Jack Renner is a sharp guy.
I'm not saying I have the experience or the trained ears of a Robert Shaw or a Jack Renner but 15 years in the recording industry did teach me a thing or two.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
That is totally incorrect, everyone who is into "High Fidelity" has the same goals.
△ᴉʇɐuᴉɯnllI oᴉpn∀△
When I first became interested in "hi-fi" back in the early '70s, people were interested in just that: high fidelity.
Today the goal of many is the euphonic, not the high-fidelity.
I love the music of Dmitri Shostakovich
Euphonic:
adjective
denoting or relating to euphony; pleasing to the ear
God forbid - unless my music sounds UNPLEASING I'm not happy! Bleed eardrums, bleed!
----Feanor
why do audiophile are so depressing!
Why flog yourself? If it sounds good why does that mean "euphonic"? Do you want flat, grey and sterile to convince yourself it is "accurate"? Do you hear that when you go to a live unamplified concert (do you go?)
I went last Friday to hear Beethoven piano and organ concertos (number 1 and number 4) in a Church in Zurich. It was rich and full and dynamic sounding...you might say "Euphonic" (I know anyone with a Magico + Soulution system would think so if it was from a recording and not the real thing).
Do you really think all the recordings are so devoid of life?
... then that's the way it ought to be reproduced -- it's no the role of playback to "correct" the recording.
See my comments on "live sound" in my post below.
I love the music of Dmitri Shostakovich
And no one (at least I am not) proposing to "correct" for anything.
There are far fewer really poor recordings (outside of pop/rock that is) than people realize.
Even though I do not agree with all that Audio Note, UK, has to say, their discussion that a system should give you maximum contrast from recording to recording is pretty informative. Recordings have a HUGE variety of different sounds and if your system in any way homogenizes them then it is somehow wrong. So, if you are finding a lot of recordings sound flat, grey and boring way...beware that something is likely wrong.
I have made quite a number live recordings, have you? I know live sound intimately from years of exposure and recording. The sound I got is never grey or flat or sterile...even when using DAT tape. I still use some as reference material.
I disagree, that is just another one of those old statements SS fans say to disparage SET fans. Ad nauseam
If anybody out there reading this is chasing "euphonic" effects, stand now and be counted.
△ᴉʇɐuᴉɯnllI oᴉpn∀△
"If anybody out there reading this is chasing "euphonic" effects, stand now and be counted."That's the thing.
There are some who are chasing "euphonic" effects, know the difference and freely admit it.
I have no problem with that. Who the hell am I to dictate what someone else should want to listen to.
On the other hand there are those who think they are chasing the truth, but don't know what the truth is and in fact like "euphonic" effects (or the presents of high orders of HD causing what some think is "speed" etc..) but won't admit it (or I should say, can't admit it because they just don't know better).
This is why I have said that it is very important for everyone in this hobby to take the time to get intimately familiar with the sound of real acoustic instruments.
Otherwise we will never move the SOTA forward. We, instead, will just keep arguing about opinions.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 09/19/15
Heard some nice Beethoven piano and organ concerts last Friday in nice Church. I am sure many hear would call that sound "Euphonic" if they heard it coming out of their stereo systems :).
These guys must really think most recordings are crap to believe that the flat, grey and lifeless sound they hear is "accurate".
There are millions of live sounds; they depend on:
= The venue
= Your seat in the venue
= The musicians position in the venue
= The individual instruments used
= The playing style of the musicians
= The temperature and humidity
= ... a probably a few other factors.
Any "typical" live sound that an individual might imagine is highly subjective and affected by preference.
I love the music of Dmitri Shostakovich
Let's clarify a bit, shall we?
I am referring to A) Live UNamplified music
B) Clearly the position you sit will affect the final outcome...but you still are unlikely to confuse the live sound (wherever you sit) with recorded and played back sound...you agree?
C) Again, individual instruments will for sure affect the original sound but if a violinist uses a Strad and then switches to a cheap modern students violin you aren't going to say suddenly "Geez now he sounds just like a recording!!" are you? It still sounds LIVE, regardless of the drop or gain in quality
D) Whether the musicians are great or they blow won't impact whether you think the performance is LIVE or not. Whether you like their performance or not is also irrelevant to the issue of "liveness".
Seriously, I don't think you completely don't understand the difference between the real thing and a recorded and played back event.
All the live examples above are still not likely to be mistaken for a recorded and played back version of that event. This is the main point that you miss.
You keep talking about different kinds of live as if they could be mistaken for a recording and that just won't be the case in nearly all circumstances.
I hear people talk all the time that it is like wine tasting...except that they are simply wrong and it is not at all like wine tasting. Wine tasting is the direct "live" event, just like going to hear real musicians play. The character, flavor etc. is different from wine to wine just as from performance to performance. Recording and playback is now a step removed from the real thing and the goal is get as much of that real thing captured for all time. There is NO analog for wine tasting (you can't smell or taste a picture of a glass of wine, for example) or food tasting for that matter. There are visual analogs but no one is saying that a flat TV picture would fool someone into beliving its real. Maybe if they perfect hologram TV they can open this discussion...
No dispute.
I love the music of Dmitri Shostakovich
Literally speaking you are correct...however, that was not really the point...
Every recording should sound different , because they are , its the one thing really common with class-D amps , they do not deliver this varying contrast with recordings as well as Class A or AB amplifiers , Well , at least the ones i have heard so far .
They do capture live thou ....
Also, no amp is perfect, they all have strengths and weaknesses. That's a fact. Choosing an amp involves subjectively ranking which strengths are more important to you, which weaknesses least important. Add to this the fact that all amps are part of a system, and not all amps have the same strengths and weaknesses in all systems, and the whole hypothesis crumbles.
And we don't even need to address the faulty hypothesis that all live unamped music sounds the same to all people.
try it! you know you want to!
"They do capture live thou .... "
Live...but the same!! Things that make you go hmmm....
the make of the instruments used, and the season when the performance takes place...
Ever see the movie Rashomon? I think that explains the subjective nature of human perception quite elegantly.
try it! you know you want to!
nt
try it! you know you want to!
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 ]
