|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
50.82.37.198
In Reply to: RE: I read it, and.......... posted by Rick W on December 18, 2014 at 14:37:23
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.
Follow Ups:
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
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: