|
Amp/Preamp Asylum Looking for a new Amp or Preamp? If you're after tubes, post over here. |
|
|
|
Amp/Preamp Asylum Looking for a new Amp or Preamp? If you're after tubes, post over here. |
|
In Reply to: RE: At best Cheever defines the euphonic, not the accurate posted by rick_m on March 31, 2014 at 21:32:46:
"I think it should read "properly specified". Maybe that would be better. "
Maybe, what would you propose. I would propose that they impement a number like the Geddes or Cheever T.A.D (total aural dissonance). Of course no manufacturer will use that if it gives them a bad number.
"Nothing. It was the notion that it couldn't be reduced to inaudibility using feedback"
Hasn't been done yet after 60+ years of trying. I don't think it can be and you do but that doesn't mean my statement is false, just unproven as is your assertion. It is not just an issue of insufficient GBW.
"You of all people know that distortion is bad, although some forms are far worse to the ear than others. BUT, if all things are equal except for the quantity, less is more"
It is only bad if it is audible. The problem with what you are assuming is in the last part of your sentence. IF All things are equal but in the real world ALL THINGS are NOT equal. They can also be highly non-linear, which results in even less equality. This is the case with distortion and audibility. With negative feedback you trade some relatively inocuous 2nd and 3rd order harmonics to get a whole myriad of little high order harmonics that are anything but benign. Not equal! Crowhurst showed that by sending the signals back around in what is essentially an endless loop you end up with a signal modulated "noise" floor that obscures low level information and adds a "grit" to the overall sound. True noise is not correlated with the signal and it is often not masking low level information...even sounds below the true noise floor. Your brain CAN pick those up because your brain is a bit like a lock-in amplifer digging signal out of the noise. But it cannot if the "noise" is correlated with the signal.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: At best Cheever defines the euphonic, not the accurate - morricab 02:05:04 04/01/14 (3)
- RE: At best Cheever defines the euphonic, not the accurate - rick_m 07:16:33 04/01/14 (2)
- RE: At best Cheever defines the euphonic, not the accurate - morricab 10:33:04 04/01/14 (1)
- RE: At best Cheever defines the euphonic, not the accurate - rick_m 11:00:29 04/01/14 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
