|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
50.82.37.198
I am a believer in perceived sonic impact of + vs. - polarity / phase of recordings. Over the years I have heard positive impact of changing polarity of my system to match the polarity of an LP. See Stan Rickers comments on this if you don't believe this occurs.
Anyways, I have also always found DGG LPs to be thin and light weight in the tonal spectrum. Yesterday I played Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra (Kubilek) and I switch the polarity. This was the first time that any DGG LP sounded correct. It was full, warm and natural in tone.
I recommend you experiment with polarity and see if you have similar success. Not all LPs are easy to identify, but many are.
Follow Ups:
Having a "polarity" switch could be a useful thing in that it might allow one to hear any recording in the polarity that sounds best to our ears. But I'm willing to be that, in many cases, "best" = "personal preference" rather than "polarity correct". Certain aspects of the recording will sound better to many of us with polarity inverted, while certain other aspects of the recording will sound better with non-inverted polarity. Recordings are such fake or inherently *incorrect* THINGS to begin with that, many times, correct polarity really doesn't matter all that much.The most sweeping and vital gestures contained within the recording are revealed when the soundscape before us seems to mimic that found in nature IN THE OVERALL SENSE. If polarity then becomes a relatively minor issue, it's not because it does not matter, it's because there are bigger fishes to fry. It'a a crazy mixed up world out there, and we are sometimes forced to focus on the bigness of the picture rather than on the tiny-ness of the details.
People will prefer *incorrect polarity* to *correct polarity* at least 50% of the time (that's my guess, at least) - not because correct polarity is not an aspect of the truth, but because NO system ever sounds exactly like real music does. We can fiddle with our polarity switches all day long without getting our systems to sound exactly like live music does, so our minds seeks solace in the powers of imagination. I will always be forced to rely upon my imagination to "fill in the dots", when all is said and done. And, the biggest dots are not the polarity dots. I'll be hurting myself if my mind is focused on that polarity switch, because what my mind really wants to do is to focus on the more sweeping and vital gestures contained within the music - gestures which hinge more upon dynamic response and lifelike spectral content than they do upon correctness of polarity.
What might be sad and disappointing is, sometimes, an unavoidable part of living in this world. So, the real secret to listening pleasure lies in our openness to suggestion. Things will never perfectly *right* or perfectly natural, no matter what we do with our polarity switches. There is a point at which trying to minimize the *wrongness* in our system becomes more of a distraction than it is worth if/when it gets in the way of our seeing what is *right*.
Remaining open to suggestion and seeing the big picture is the "correct polarity", as far as my mind is concerned. I've tried listening to speakers that are more "time/phase coherent" than most (Royal Device Laura w/ Miranda) in "absolute polarity correct mode" (in which the entire system has been tested for correct polarity from the AC outlet to the final connection at the loudspeakers), and even when I thought that I could tell the difference between "correct" and "incorrect" on a recording my thought was, "Gee, this recording might sound slightly more realistic this way, but I could easily fall in love with this music either way..." It's simply not that big of a deal, at least not to me.
Edits: 12/19/14 12/19/14 12/19/14
.
Once I got the polarity figured out, this quickly became my favorite rendition of the Concerto for Orchestra. It is better than the Reiner CSO in my opinion.
Later Gator,
Dave
I have never been able to hear a phase difference on my system. On one occasion, I sat my wife and teenaged son in front of my speakers and switched phase behind their backs. Neither of them even knew that I was doing anything. I have tentatively concluded that with dipolar speakers, like my ESLs, phase differences from one recording to another are irrelevant or at least much more difficult to detect. Does anyone else here run ESLs? If so, do you hear phase differences?
Lew,
I use Quad 63 ESL speakers and I can certainly hear the differences in polarity.
Pat
Fine speakers, but there is a complex electronic crossover and delay circuit in there which may impose phase changes that make phase reversal more evident, despite dipolar operation. (Or if the back wave of the ESL63 is attenuated, that could turn it more into a direct radiator type.) It's not a simple issue, I think.
I now have a pair of Beveridge speakers in a second system. These are basically front-firing ESLs. I have not yet experimented to find out whether I can hear phase differences on the Bevs.
I've yet to find more than a handful of DGs that don't exhibit inverted polarity. Curiously I've found that DG open reel tapes display polarity effects even more vividly than their LPs and CDs.
After wearing out pairs of banana plugs on speaker cables I went with a linestage (Aesthetix Calypso) that offers polarity switching via the remote control. Of course they call it "phase," but you can't have everything :-)
It is "phase" not polarity. An AC signal has no "polarity."
There is no real "polarity" to the signal, in the conventional sense of the word.
Now, how do you guys know that the phase of DGG recordings is "inverted"? Maybe it's phase correct on the LP (in this case), and you just find you prefer the phase when it's inverted with respect to whatever is on the LP.
It sounds "right" when you switch to inverted polarity :-)
If you haven't heard a DG disc or tape that sounds right, now you know what to do. Of course this only works if your speakers are polarity-coherent and have minimal (or no) crossovers to confuse matters.
Honestly, I could never hear polarity changes myself until going with Gallo speakers.
I don't have a polarity switch and don't wanna f around changing spkr. wires from record to record. I don't hear what you & Stu hear with DG.
I have quite a few DG LP's that do not sound wrong to me. Tympani, basses, piano, pizz. strings - nothing lacks wallop nor sounds terribly thin on records like HvK/Berlin Beeth. 7th, HvK/Berlin Shoenberg's Trans. Fig. Night/Variations For Orch., Carlos Kleiber's Beeth. 5th and a number of other DG LP's I have. Isn't a tell tale sign that percussive attacks sound sorta muffled? I don't hear that on most of the DG's I own.
Guess my spkrs. don't qualify (they do have cross-overs), nor do my ears.
That's what I usually tell folks who can't tell the difference. As I said, I couldn't either for the longest time. Then when the Gallos "allowed" me to hear the difference, it was kinda fun for a while to listen and try to hear which was which, bearing in mind that many (most?) disks and tapes are in mixed polarity where the recording engineer didn't bother keeping things straight. Or intentionally played games during or after the fact.
It's a learned thing, after you hear it the first times. You come to hear the difference between the way your tenor sax sounds when it blows. As opposed to when it sucks. No offense.
Now that I've reverted back to the oldest Gallos ("Ultimates," circa 1996) my own ability to discern polarity changes has diminished a lot. This is either old age or the way the 4-ball Ultimates are wired -- at one point going from positive to negative between balls 2 and 3. I still think I can tell the difference but maybe I'm fooling myself.
In any case, except for the extreme examples (e.g., certain DGs), it's a very minor thing and not worth worrying about.
Speakers can have crossovers and still be phase coherent. There are several speaker manufacturers that make phase coherent speakers with crossovers. My Thiel CS3.7 speakers are supposedly phase coherent to ±10° but I haven't tried to hear polarity differences. I don't have a polarity switch in my present system so I would have to reverse the speaker cables.
In a previous system, I had a DAC with a polarity switch and I could never detect an audible difference, but I didn't have phase coherent speaker at the time. I also own the original Grado HP-1 headphones with polarity switches on each ear speaker, but I was never able to hear absolute polarity differences with them, either. Perhaps some people are not sensitive to polarity while others are.
Best regards,
John Elison
take the room out of the equation. It would be interesting to know whether those who can hear phase differences with certain LPs on certain speakers can also hear the same differences via headphones. Room acoustics can and do also alter phase perception, I think.
There is a reason that "time coherent" loudspeakers like those made by Green Mountain Audio have relatively narrow, focused dispersion patterns. The old "head in a vice" routine...
Edits: 12/19/14
Well, I could never hear a difference, but Joseph Grado claimed he could easily hear the difference with a live microphone feed. He said he installed the switches because he used headphones for recording and he was sensitive to absolute polarity when making live recordings. None of the other Grado headphones have polarity switched, so I guess John Grado doesn't feel the are necessary.
Happy Holidays,
John Elison
The ability to "easily hear" differences in polarity does not seem to be a prevalent trait, but a small minority of the our population is unusually sensitive to polarity.I wouldn't say that polarity is inaudible because I think that I can hear changes in polarity in some instances, but at the same time, it might be possible for me to train myself to alert to things that might ordinarily pass by unnoticed. Engineers and other obsessive-compulsive types might train themselves to become unusually alert to such things in the same way that white supremacists might train themselves to become unusually alert to variations in skin and eye color within a large crowd of people. Eagle eyes and Beagle ears have something in common, but to the eyes and ears of more easy-going creatures certain types of details simply aren't worth fretting over.
Edits: 12/19/14 12/19/14
I don't have a dog in this fight. I always felt blessed that I was not cursed with the ability to hear differences in absolute phase, but I also have entertained the possibility that my "disability" is due to the fact that I am a devoted fan of dipole speakers, for life. I don't doubt for a minute that others hear what I cannot hear.
Correct.
I don't doubt that others might hear what I cannot always hear, especially when I CAN hear some of the very same things under certain circumstances.
At the same time, after hanging around the audio boards for a number of years, I don't doubt that some people might be deliberately straining to hear minute details that that they might have ignored if they weren't intent on proving how acute their hearing is ("golden ears").
In other words, I don't exclude any possibility...
My modified Sound Lab ESLs are full-range and have no cross-over. So, if phase makes a difference that you and others can hear, then my hypothesis would be that dipolar speakers "fail" to convey phase-specificity. You should come over to my place some time; it would be very interesting to me if you can hear phase differences on my system.
Does anyone know of a case where one guy prefers phase at 0 and another prefers phase at 180, with the exact same source material and system, or is the preference for one phase vs the other universally the same among listeners who can hear differences at all?
There would have to be a solo instrument on the record and once digitally recorded with a phase correct recording chain you could look at the wave form.The first half wave, of the first wave form after silence, would be a positive going wave form if the record is phase correct.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 12/18/14 12/18/14
nt
Yes, I made the change at the speaker end with my banana plugs. I hope to be installing a switch at some point.
nt
... because life is too short to move cables on a record per record basis.
JB
If you have been doing this for years!!!
Nonetheless, too many music listeners are denying themselves much pleasure for the cost of a switch.
The effect you describe happens over and over again.
I find the polarity of an LP easier/quicker to detect than with CDs. The added advantage is that the polarity stays the same for the whole record.
Once you hear the difference you cannot live without it. Many "sour" recordings are revelaed as not bad at all.
Most interesting polarity story - Clark Johnsen found that all of Pearson's recommended recordings were of the same polarity. Makes you wonder how that DID NOT affect reviews of equipment?
"The added advantage is that the polarity stays the same for the whole record."
Why would that necessarily be true?
With a pop record, each song can be recorded on a different day or even in a different recording studio with a different recording engineer.
"too many music listeners are denying themselves much pleasure for the cost of a switch."
Where in the chain would you place the switch?
Couldn't the switch cause more sonic harm than the reversed phase?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Not really. I have a Reiner Scheherazade where 1s side is inverted to 7s side. I have a late Buddy Holly where the orchestral background is inverted to simple backups.
Plus HP , I believe, couldn't hear absolute polarity. On his list, all the Decca recorded RCAs were inverted.
I remember a review many years ago in the magazine (when I was still a subscriber/reader) of a fellow who had made an easy to use, remote controlled polarity switch. Long time ago. CJ had just started telling his WOOD EFFECT story and a few folks had heard the good news.
My memory is that HP did not review it but one would have a hard time believing it was not passed around.
I doubted the efficacy of this thing with all of the added wire and connectors - I worried it could mask many of the cues. Could be he auditioned this thing and said, "what's the point?" I think the switch does need to be thoughtfully installed - minimal wire and soldered in.
The trick is WHERE was his playback system? Was it non-inverting start to finish? Only takes one inverting component to reverse the polarity. Of course, with a switch none of that makes a difference - you select the best position without regard to the set polarity of the recording or of your system. Could have been his system was inverting and the inverted records would sound the best!
I believe a good number of HP's favorites were classical large orchestra works ... one wonders how one could make a judgement of polarity when the possibility exists of different elements in the 'mix' have different polarities.
but I have found most GOOD orchestral records have a best setting.
HP recommended quite a few recordings. Considering that there's a 50/50 chance of any recording having a specific polarity (which I believe is what CJ said too) its pretty hard to believe that every single rec from HP has the same polarity.
. . . which is what HP called them.
Of course, from time to time he also lauded others that did not make the Super disk list.
These were his favorites - maybe he called them reference and not recommended - Clark, nor I, meant every recording he liked. That would have been rather incredible!
As others have stated, almost all of my DDG are inverted as is most of my Philips. Most of my Deccas are likewise inverted.
RCA's are generally correct if a 1s pressing, other pressings will vary considerably. Merc's are OK. Epic and most Columbia re also inverted, although not so with the Jazz and Pop stuff which can vary considerably.
Pop stuff will vary considerably and also because out of polarity stuff is deliberately mixed into the the final mix. Take Phil Spector's Wall of Sound: He keeps voices in correct polarity and inverts the background to give that big vague soundstage behind a focused voice.....
YMMV of course and the issue is compounded by so many speaker systems employing drivers in mixed polarities.
In a couple articles written by HP before his death, he refers to polarity issues on "treasured" recordings. Only trouble is that he did not elaborate any further....
I've seen a lot of lists of what's polarity-inverted and what's not, but this is the first one with which I agree almost 100%. My only slight quibble would be with classical RCAs recorded in Europe which are inverted IME.
I said to CJ that I suspect that oversized, over pampered ego could not admit someone had "discovered" something before him. Akin to the old General Motors "not invented here" syndrome. When GM "invented" it, it existed.
From the short article in POSITIVE FEEDBACK I surmise the warming CJ felt was a sign that the old bear did hear it and probably heard it a good long time ago.
I must agree with Rick W that 50/50 is close to my experience while saying your experience with certain labels correlates with mine, for the most part.
I, also, agree with RW that, as we all know, absolutes are rare in our hobby! It is the BEST setting. I guess with simple, minimal number of microphones recordings there would be an absolute but for others ...
nt
Though you probably were referring to HP's rec's on those labels you've named a tiny handful of record labels and claim the 50/50 view is bs. A list of record labels in existence since, say, the '40's would be a helluva long list - ditto for the # of labels in my collection.Please explain what the hell "absolute" polarity is. AFAIK - and also according to AA's former resident expert CJ - there's no such thing. It ain't like one polarity is "correct" and the other is "wrong" for a recording.
CJ also said its around 50/50 for recordings. Here's a quote from him:
"Major labels split pretty much 50/50, as the laws of statistics demand whenever no control is exerted over a binary event." My reply to banpuku has a link to the CJ article I got the quote from.
Since each of the labels you mentioned employed multiple studios, recorded in multiple non-studio venues, used multiple engineers, and of course countless mics/wires its hard to believe every recording on a given label (or some figure like 85%) ended up in the same polarity.
Beyond that, I own quite a few recordings on the labels you mentioned and don't hear what you hear.
Edits: 12/18/14
Rick,
What is absolute polarity? Good question: please read Stan Ricker's webpage on this regard. Stan and I spent some time on the phone discussing this. He educated me regarding polarity.
Here is the link, hope it helps.
http://www.rickermaster.com/polarity.htm
Thanks,
Pat
it seems to me what he's talking about is not "absolute" polarity. Here's a quote from Clark Johnsen: "The Absolute is achieved only case by case; it is not written into law regarding any groove or any gear." Below is a link to an article on the subject by Clark.
"The Absolute is achieved only case by case; it is not written into law regarding any groove or any gear."
That's exactly correct. It is true that there is an absolute phase. That is to say that the waveform emitted by a musical instrument has a phase and that it is best that the reproducing equipment adhere to that phase. In reality, the phase of a signal at the speakers is a random thing once it has been reproduced by the entire signal chain and there is a 50/50 chance the phase is correct at the speakers, probably having been inverted dozens of times between the original waveform and the sound emanating from the speakers. And again, if there are multiple instruments and multiple microphones, the chances are that some will be in phase with each other and some will be out of phase. In other words there is mixed phase among the instruments so there is NO actual absolute phase to the recording. This does not mean that reproduced music will not sound better in one phase or the other, but to assert that any one label consistently releases recordings in any particular phase reveals a lack of understanding of the recording process and the reproduction process.
Please understand that Stan Ricker is talking about a positive air wave is one that is coming at the listener, thus producing a "push" effect on the ear drum. This would be considered a (+) polarity.
Conversely, if the airwave is "pulling" away from the listener, then this is a (-) polarity.
Stan's position is based upon his oscilloscope readings, which I too have tried and agree with. The hard part about using an oscilloscope is that you have to isolate a single instrument that is centered in the image in order to easily discern a positive or negative polarity. This is easy to due with a trumpet, drum kick, trombone, etc. But less easy to do with a mass of strings. It takes time and effort to catalog this kind of stuff, but in many cases I find that it pays off with better perceived sound. Just my 2 cents.
in practical reality recordings are - to say the least - not all in the same polarity. Though I've reversed polarity at my spkrs. (my preamp inverts polarity) I don't think there's much point in doing so. For approx. 50% of recordings by doing what I did my system will not match the polarity of the recording. 'Course that'd be true if I hadn't reversed polarity at my spkrs.
I've certainly wished I had a polarity switch on occasion so I could check the difference on some recordings that I wonder about. But I guess its just not that important to me because having a polarity switch is far from top priority when I ponder upgrading my preamp, and I'm sure as hell not gonna switch around my spkr. wire from one recording to the next. I simply accept that some recordings sound better/worse than others via my playback system, and that I don't know how much of that is due to polarity.
We are all in agreement with the exception of that impossible quantity ABSOLUTE which Rick W is using in a scientific way. So, he is correct, not combative (though he does sound a little combative) but when you READ what he is saying you will see he is emphasizing an important point.
We are looking for "correct" which in our context is the best setting for a given recording which will likely contain both in-phase and out of phase information, which was placed there on purpose. If you correct the polarity of deliberately out of phase "stuff" that is not correct.
I already mentioned cases of deliberate inversion. Doesn't make it right. Its just dumbing down of performances for the general public
Excellent point regarding Peason. I wonder how many other reviews fall into this unrealized adverse impact.
Glad to learn that I am not the only other crazy one who cares about polarity of each recording.
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: