Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

Re: Naw, SM, I didn't say what they were good for.

Soundmind you stated "Solid state audio components don't make any sound, neither do tube components." I would have to say that statement is 100% incorrect in a real-world enviroment.

As EVERY audio component is distorting in one way or another, they are adding something to the signal that wasn't there originally. I know you'd probably argue that it's inaudible, but I disagree! Thus to the extent that they add distortion, or if they are interacting with the other component's LCR parameters or for reasons I don't even know are happening, they are adding a characteristic sound that's uniquely their own. So I'd argue that ALL audio components do indeed have a unique "sound".

I believe you're just playing one of the many Objectivist games. In fact the "sound" game is the same one that Dan Banquer also likes to play when he states "One of these days the crackpots are going to realize that there is no real sound of wire..." (See link provided)

However this time you're wrong! EVERY audio component I've ever heard imparted a unique "sound" of it's own on the music. Whether this is due to their own unique way of distoring, or if they are interacting with the other component's LCR parameters or for reasons I don't even know are happening, it's an undeniable fact. While it's true that in a perfect world an amplifier would ONLY amplify the signal it's being feed, the ideal would be straight-wire with gain as they say. However, it's not a perfect world. NO audio component does ONLY what it was designed for. Unfortunately they all vary from perfection and they all do it uniquely, thus all have a unique sound characteristic.

Now as for your comment that you didn't attack John's designs. Again I'd disagree with you. Attack can mean: The word attack is often used to mean criticize or accuse (this usage may have started in newspaper headlines, where "attack" typesets into less text line length than "criticize") Now let's look at these comments of yours as addressed to John:

1) You do not have an objective working definition of what an amplifier is supposed to do ideally. You judge by sound alone. At what point do you say the amplifier is doing its job, any problem with the sound lies elsewhere? In your way of looking at the problem of sound reproduction, no such point exists. For you, every problem is a nail because what you do is to hammer at them. (Here you critic how he designs his components, i.e. "by sound alone" as if you're there and actually know, you also critic John problem solving abilities)

2)To this comment "Damn those JC-1s are gooood!" (YOU replied, You are easy to please.) Sounds like a critic of his product to me!

Finally I asked what you've audio components you've made that's as good or superior to John's designs. To that YOU responded "If you must know what I have designed that I have contributed publically so far, it's the concept and circuit which was incorporated (according to me), in the Yamaha DSP1. On the advice of legal counsel, I did not pursue them over it. At this point, it hardly matters anyway, the patent is expired and the idea was never favored much by audiophiles. I have other ideas which don't much interest anyone either."

I'd say the fact that audiophiles don't favor your ideas and you other ideas which don't much interest anyone either, speaks volumes about your abilities to design and build a marketable audio product to discerning audiophiles. That's something John has been doing since the JC-1 preamp he designed for Mark Levinson so many, many years ago.

PLEASE don't misunderstand me. I believe you're intelligent, but being intelligent or even gifted in one area doesn't mean your intelligent or even gifted in another different area. When you start designing, manufactuering and selling audio components that others start to prefer over John's designs perhaps then you can start attacking/criticing how John designs, solves problems and defines how and what the function ideally is and what criteria John uses to determine if he has met his design goals in fulfilling that function!

Tell then it's all just techno-babble speak on your part, that seems more due to the fact that you believe John is a Subjectivist than for any other real reason.

Thetubeguy1954




This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  VH Audio  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]