|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.50.30.128
In Reply to: RE: Sucker for SET: Sophia 91-01 posted by Brent Powers on November 13, 2015 at 14:13:49
Very basic good-audio procedure.
About ( rough estimate ) one out of four of your recordings, on LP, CD will be OUT of absolute phase in both channels. You have to teach yourself HOW this sounds, and MARK each source material as it being IN or OUT of absolute phase, and ONLY listen to the material with correct absolute phase, to get the MOST out of the recording.WHEN YOU LISTEN TO OUT OF ABSOLUTE RECORDINGS, ( WITHOUT CORRECTING BY SWAPPING both SPEAKER LEADS 180 DEGREES ), it is like looking at the negative of a great photo, rather than the actual photo itself !!
Now you know !! Have fun , enjoy yourself.
Jeff Medwin
Edits: 11/14/15Follow Ups:
That is, all drivers are wired the same way (+ to +, - to -) and have minimal or no crossovers. JA checks for this in Stereophile's speaker tests. I used speakers that were polarity-coherent (Gallo Reference 3) for quite a while, and a polarity (phase) switch was essential. That was a big reason why I got my Aesthetix Calypso linestage. Pretty much everyone could hear that a record/CD/tape was being played in the "wrong" polarity. Now (different speakers) I can't tell the difference. Trust me, it's a blessing.
maybe you like the phase backwards?
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
There's a sense of openness and clarity that tells you you're listening in the correct polarity (normal or inverted). And once you hear it, you look into the subject, read what others have said about it, and see if your experience regarding specific record labels matches what others have said and written. As in, for example, DG and Riverside are almost always in inverted polarity, Columbia and Prestige almost always in normal.
(I'm using "normal" here when you frequently see "non-inverted," which I always thought sounded dumb.)
No offense, but I gather you have never heard the difference.
And for the life of me I don't understand why this thread is here in the SET asylum. For what it's worth, the normal/inverted difference always sounded more pronounced to me when listening to reel to reel tape than with CDs and Vinyl. But SET???
"It's easy, IF your speakers meet certain requirements"
Well, logic would seem to suggest that, as I remarked in my probably overlong earlier response, the type of speakers that would seem likely to make the effect more pronounced would be speakers that themselves generate a lot of asymmetric (especially second-harmonic) distortion. (Most speakers, I understand, are likely to be among the biggest sources of distortion in any audio setup.)
For the same reason, logic would seem to suggest that the effect would be more pronounced when listening with an amplifier with substantial asymmetric (especially second-harmonic) distortion. Thus, SET amplifiers would seem to be prime candidates for that.
"And for the life of me I don't understand why this thread is here in the SET asylum."
Well, the thread started out as an SET discussion, and then, as threads often do, it morphed a bit...
Chris
I re-read the OP's post and your responses and do understand why the thread evolved as it did. I have to say I've never hear the dramatic changes the OP says he did and agree with your responses.
Polarity discussions do tend to bring out some pretty weird stuff :-)
Dave,
I spent a fair amount of time with my system and absolute polarity. I can hear differences (somtimes virtually non existent and sometime fairly noticable) depending on the material. I certainly hear differences when I switch speaker connections, I also hear differences (although I think smaller) when I switch polarity at my DAC (which I can do from my chair with a remote).
But although I hear differences, I just do not listen to music that way (listen and the switch and then relisten). So I simply decided to insure that my system was correct throught the chain and leave it at that. My phono stage inverts so I inverted polarity at the cartridge. So digital and phono are correct to my preamp. My single stage 1626 preamp inverts and my 2 stage monoblocks do not invert so I inverted speaker cables at the speaker. My 2 way horn speakers have both drivers in the same polarity and a positive DC signal on the + terminal moves the woofer cone outward.
So I beleive my audio chain preserves the polarity from source to speaker (ignoring phase shift from 2nd order woofer xover, horn driver uses 1st order). Recordings that are not in correct absolute phase or were phase is different for different instruments/performers will not sound as good as they could if the recording engineeres had been more careful but I don't generally have the time to worry about this. Some recordings are not that great for a lot of reasons including phase, but I still enjoy listening to them.
Pete, my current speakers are NOT polarity coherent, so I'm off the polarity treadmill, for which a fervent "Thank heaven" :-)
Now, whenever I switch the remote from "normal" to "inverted," neither I nor any friends (so far at least) can tell a speck of difference.
Which is not to say that you couldn't.
I can easily hear the difference resulting from speaker cable switch but not as clearly from the DAC switch. This is what I hear generally: in one orientation the sound stage is bigger, more open and the bass seems a bit "better", in the other orientation everything shrinks down very slightly, the mid range and bass become less full sounding (music is a bit washed out).
This is without a doubt the analysis/comparison that very quickly drives me nuts. Switching from the speakers is clearly audible but takes too much time to do regularly and the DAC phase switch is subtle so I usually don't bother because in general I like and enjoy the sound I hear in my system. One way sounds better on a one song and vice versa on another song, sometimes I hear a difference that seems worth it and sometimes not. I listen to probably around 5-25 hours of music a week in my system, comparing phase would probably reduce this to 1-5 hours a week!:)
My switch is on the line stage remote (Aesthetix Calypso). Polarity changes came in loud and clear using that remote and I confess I never compared the audibility of changes via speaker switching after getting the Calypso.
Your description of listening via the correct polarity matches my recollections. I'm not sorry I have lost the ability to discern it, though :-)
You probably can still hear it in the right setup? Perhaps your new speakers are not as phase coherent as the Gallos? What speakers did you switch too?
You may remember those old Gallo Ultimates -- the giant ones with four "bassballs" per side, sitting in open racks -- that were standing in the corners for 10 years while I played with the latest and greatest Gallos. Big mistake. The Ultimates, among Anthony Gallo's first series speakers back in 1996, just blew away the newer ones when I got around to comparing them.
But the wiring between the 12-inch bassballs goes from plus to minus at one point, effectively obliterating phase/polarity distinctions. At least for me.
I just wanted to say my monster fulton p12 speakers are very sensitive to absolute phase (we are talking about ac here) from the cartridge to the speaker connections
its like the music gets trapped in the speaker... with minimal lower frequency(bass) out of absolute phase
Lawrence
human perception is for me end all be all....look if we cannot hear the difference between a table top radio and our hifi..we/you should give it up ya?
when it sounds right to the human ear it is right!
"its like the music gets trapped in the speaker... with minimal lower frequency(bass) out of absolute phase"Just out of curiosity, how do you know which of the choices is "in absolute phase," and which is "out of absolute phase"? You are reporting that one choice sounds nicer than the other, but how do you know that it is the "in absolute phase" choice that sounds nicer?
Chris
Edits: 11/25/15
.
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Thanks, Tre, for posting; that's an interesting, and nicely written article you gave the link to. Of course the debate over whether absolute polarity is audible or not continues.It seems to me now that it is in principle plausible that absolute polarity could be audible, since musical instruments can have +/- asymmetric waveforms, and since the human ear presumably must have some degree of +/- asymmetry in its response to pressure peaks and troughs.
What is not clear to me, though, is whether the effects that people report hearing are actually due to the +/- asymmetry of the ear's response, or whether instead the reported effects are due to +/- asymmetries in other parts of the audio chain; the most likely other candidates being the loudspeakers and the amplifiers.
Any of the obvious experiments one could think of performing, such as switching the polarity of the speaker wires, or switching the polarity of the audio signal going into the amplifier, might in fact be doing nothing more than revealing that the loudspeakers distort asymmetrically, or that the amplifier distorts asymmetrically, or both. And even if the sound is nicer for one polarity choice than for the other, does this necessarily mean that that choice is the "correct" one that corresponds to preserving the absolute polarity of the original sound source? Or might it happen that the nice sound happens to coincide with a "wrong" absolute polarity?
If one wanted to establish that there was a genuinely audible effect due to the +/- asymmetry of the ear's response, one would have to find a way of eliminating all the other possible confounding factors associated the the asymmetries of the other components in the chain. I doubt that the typical reported listening tests have really nailed this question. Maybe people are just hearing the effects due loudspeaker or amplifier distortions. Or maybe they really are hearing genuine ear-dependent polarity effects. Who knows?
Chris
Edits: 11/25/15 11/25/15 11/25/15 11/25/15
I agree with your analysis.
The subject, as a whole, remains unresolved.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
I think your first sentence, and your understanding about polarity and about "polarity coherence" is incorrect, except, perhaps for ALL first-order crossovers.Others will chime in.
And we STILL have the problem of a certain percentage of the music SOURCEs we listen to being out of absolute. Its NO blessing if your speaker system can't differentiate this.
Jeff Medwin
Edits: 11/19/15 11/19/15
Let me say this. And hope that Clark Johnsen, author of "The Wood Effect," chimes in, since Clark wrote the book (literally) on the subject.For years and years I listened in vain to detect polarity changes. There are a number of tests on the "Chesky Jazz Sampler & Audiophile Test Compact Disc," including one where a piece of music is played and the polarity shifts midway. I could never hear the shift. Suddenly, listening to the test via my then-new Gallo Reference 3 speakers, the shift was clear as day. I wrote Gallo and a VP confirmed what I said here and that the Reference 3s were "especially sensitive to polarity." That's for sure. I came to know that while many discs/tapes were in mixed polarity (no consistency during the recording process) many others were easy to spot. Deutsche Grammophon products, for example were invariably recorded in inverted polarity.
I wore out a pair of speaker connectors making changes to hear the "right" way. Then, as noted, I got a linestage that allowed polarity changes via the remote.
Now I've lost it, and lost the polarity coherence that made it possible. I don't honestly miss it because it tended to interfere with my enjoyment of the music. One audiobuddy with a phenomenal music system who steadfastly refused to pay attention to polarity after hearing the shifts on my own system put it succinctly, "Who needs it?"
I gather that you do :-)
EDIT: IIRC, The Gallo Reference 3 had NO crossover between mids and highs and only a single capacitor between mids and woofer. And the wiring among all drivers assured that they were polarity-coherent.
Edits: 11/19/15
I could hear it easily, first with my Audiostatics and then later with my Acoustats. THen i heard it with my Reference 3as. Now, I hear it again with my Odeons. I have a thing for time coherent speakers it seems...
I appreciate your explanation.I had seven-way Fulton P-12 Premiere speakers for many years, and with that, and, almost any good speaker system, "I" am always wanting to hear it with the source played back correctly in absolute phase, when doing my serious listening.
Just (three weeks ago) I spent part of a night - and showed a Kansas City audiophile, ( with a full-blown ALTEC A-4 system set up in his huge listening space 45' by 25' by 14' ), the difference between in and out of absolute, and HE is now on the bandwagon to hear everything optimally.
One size does not fit all. Do as you WISH !! I am glad you are happy. I will do what makes me happy. Regards and my best wishes to you.
Jeff Medwin
Edits: 11/20/15
For SET amps, is it more ideal to have the positive signal (speaker diaphragm moving forward) electrically moving toward saturation or toward cutoff?
Saturation.
But if we limit the signal at the grid of the output tube so as to keep the tube operating only in the "most linear part of the operating curve" (the definition of Class A) then it won't matter.
If we drive the output tube outside of the "most linear part" then we would want the positive half wave to move the tube toward saturation but be sure the drive stage can handle the low input impedance of driving the tube into grid current.
A 3 stage amp with the speaker connection inverted or a 2 stage amp with both the source signal and the speaker connection inverted.
But again, operating the tube outside the "most linear part of the operating curve" is throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Well, I have probably dismissed certain recordings as being badly done when they might have been out of phase. Must experiment a bit. Thanks for the input.
nt
I think your gear is good enough to hear it on any reasonable recording.Maybe you need to simply WORK at it some, go back and forth 180 degrees on speaker leads !! Do a solo singer with instruments accompanying.
I've been keen to this for four decades now !!
Some of the responses to this KNOWN subject herein are ludicrous and hilarious !!
I am embarrassed and feel sorry for some of these posters. Really !!
Jeff Medwin
Edits: 11/16/15
I'm curious. Am I one of the ones that embarrass you about this?
No, I think we have to allow for a variety of people, with differing experiences, on a Public Forum.
I've been thrown a lot worse up here - over many a year. No embarrassment to me.
I deleted a couple words on the heading above ...sorta like it better.
Jeff Medwin
OK, it is true that there is an absolute polarity. That is to say that the waveform emitted by a musical instrument has a polarity and that it is best that the reproducing equipment adhere to that polarity.
The number of inversions of polarity in a CD player, preamp or amp makes absolutely NO difference to the outcome of absolute polarity at the listening position because there is no guarantee that the CD was even recorded in absolute polarity. There could be dozens of amplifiers in all the signal processing done in modern recordings from the microphone to the input to the ADC and even the speaker's crossover. For absolute polarity to be adhered to every one of these devices in the signal chain would have to be non inverting and that clearly does not exist in the real world. Further, if there are multiple instruments and voices, each of these tracks would have to have an identical signal chain and each would have to be non inverting. If this makes any sense to you, it should be clear that this is entirely fantasy.
In reality, polarity is a random thing and there is a 50/50 chance the polarity 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 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 polarity among the instruments so there is NO actual absolute polarity.
Many of the processes used along the way aren't 0° or 180°, they're somewhere in-between. In addition, it's almost certain that processing equipment will impart a phase shift across the audible spectrum. The latter renders absolute phase impossible, except over an ill-defined band of frequencies. Then there's the fact that various sources may not be miked in the same way or at the same distance. In the end, if you really feel the need for this, you'll have to play the instrument yourself. :)
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
"Many of the processes used along the way aren't 0° or 180°, they're somewhere in-between. In addition, it's almost certain that processing equipment will impart a phase shift across the audible spectrum. The latter renders absolute phase impossible, except over an ill-defined band of frequencies. Then there's the fact that various sources may not be miked in the same way or at the same distance. In the end, if you really feel the need for this, you'll have to play the instrument yourself. :)"
TK: I am sure you are right, and for these various reasons it is in practice unlikely that the effects of absolute polarity would be discernible, even if they might in principle be in "ideal" circumstances.
I have wondered, though, as to whether there might be a possible, related, effect that might be more relevant; an effect that is more or less specific to SET amplifiers: The distinguishing feature of an SET amplifier is that it can have a very large amount of second-harmonic distortion, and this means that it is an asymmetric distortion, which implies the positive-going part of the waveform is distorted differently from the negative-going part. For example, the positive half of the waveform may be "compressed" in comparison to the negative part.
The loudspeaker is also, typically, an item that introduces a large amount of distortion, and this also may well have a high proportion of second-harmonic distortion, meaning again an asymmetry between how it distorts the positive part of the waveform and the negative part. (For example, a different behaviour when the cone moves outwards from the magnet, as opposed to when it is drawn into the magnet.)
Now, is we put these two components (SET amplifier and loudspeaker) together, then depending on the polarity of the connection between them, the asymmetry of the distortion by the amplifier may either be reinforced by the asymmetry of the speaker distortion, or it may be partially compensated by it.
Thus, one could imagine that there might indeed be an audible difference between the two possible polarities of the connection of the speaker to the amplifier. Since the distortions of both speaker and SET amplifier are quite large, the effect might perhaps be quite noticeable.
This sensitivity to the absolute polarity would, of course, have nothing whatever to do with the absolute polarity of the source signal from the CD player. In practice, when people claim to hear the effects of absolute polarity, I presume they are doing the switching of polarity in the amplifier to speaker connections, since there would be no convenient way, typically, to switch the polarity of the signal at the input to the amplifier.
Also, the effect I am talking about would be one that is almost exclusively confined to the case of SET amplifiers, because they are almost unique in generating dominant second-harmonic, and large, asymmetric, distortion.
I wonder if anyone has checked for this rather distinctive phenomenon?
Chris
The idea of absolute phase is that ideally when sound pressure depresses the microphone diaphragm, we want the speaker to push the cone outwards. Right? It doesn't matter how many phase reversals occur during the mastering and distribution chain as long as the phase is ultimately correct at the speaker.Now consider that sound is mostly sine waves due to our atmospheric pressure, but square waves would behave the same. So if the audio signal is out of phase by 180 degrees, it will just be half time delayed by the frequency period at that moment. Note that the sound doesn't simply depress the microphone diaphram, it vibrates it. Same goes for the speaker cone.
And considering that everything else, i.e the whole orchestra/band will also be delayed by the same relative amount, how can this be audible? Consider this analogy, the recording was made lets say in 1965. How much time phase shift has occurred by 2015 when we play it. It's irrelevant!
Of course if different microphones are out of phase during the recording process, that cannot be corrected on the playback side - at least not with a simple DPDT switch.
Edits: 11/20/15
"And considering that everything else, i.e the whole orchestra/band will also be delayed by the same relative amount, how can this be audible?"
Well, I think a claim would be that the waveforms of certain musical instruments are actually quite asymmetrical as between the positive half of the wave and the negative half. This would mean that turning the waveform upside down and shifting by half a period would not give back the same thing. I found a couple of examples on the webpage below; for instance, the flute seemingly gives quite an asymmetry of this kind.
Now, imagine listening to such a recording on a loudspeaker that itself has an asymmetric response to positive vs. negative voice coil current. Perhaps, for example, the inward cone displacement for a given current might be larger in magnitude than the outward displacement for the same but sign-reversed current, because the coil is drawn into a stronger magnetic field when the cone moves inwards. Presumably in principle the sound of the flute that one then hears coming from the loudspeaker could be different depending on whether the upper half of waveform of the flute is pushing the cone outwards, or instead is pulling it inwards.
So I suppose whenever there are (at least) two elements along the chain of the sound reproduction process that each have an asymmetry between positive and negative, then one has the possibility that switching the polarity somewhere along the chain between those two elements will produce a different sound as perceived by the ultimate element in the chain (the listener in his living room).
Elements in the chain that might have a positive/negative asymmetry include the amplifier (especially if an SET, which has high second-harmonic (asymmetric) distortion), the loudspeaker, and, I suppose, the ears of the listener. And then another element in the chain that might have a positive/negative asymmetry is the musical instrument, or voice, of the performer in the recording studio. We would not call this asymmetry a distortion, but, rather, just a characterisation of what that particular instrument or voice "actually" sounds like.
Anyway, I suppose that whenever the recording involves instruments or voices with a positive/negative asymmetry, and if there is also another asymnmetrically-distorting link in the chain, then one can in principle end up with different perceived sounds in the living room, depending on whether or not one makes a polarity reversal of the signal (further back along the chain than the asymmetric distorter).
I would suppose that loudspeakers, and SET amplifiers, are the prime candidates for introducing such asymmetric distortions. And of course, if one has both an asymmetrically-distorting loudspeaker and an asymmetrically-distorting amplifier, then the polarity of the connection from the amplifier to the loudspeaker will also affect the sound, quite independently of any issues associated with the polarity of the signal from the CD player.
I'm not sure whether any of these considerations necessarily imply that it is better to keep the polarity between microphone and loudspeaker to be the "correct" one. If one polarity sounds different from the other, then human nature being what it is, one will almost certainly decide that one of the options sounds nicer than the other. But whether that necessarily has to be the one that has the "correct" polarity is perhaps not so obvious.
As to which, if any, of these effects can be expected to be sufficiently pronounced to be audible, I don't really know. My feeling is that a distorting loudspeaker coupled to a distorting SET would probably give quite a noticeable effect (independent of any polarity reversal in the signal from CD player).
I was a little surprised to see how much asymmetry there can apparently be in the waveform of a musical instrument like a flute, and so maybe I would have to revise my previous estimate that one would be very unlikely to be able to hear the effect of switching the polarity of the audio signal from the CD player. But on the other hand, if one were only able to hear the effect of the polarity reversal because one was listening through highly-distorting speakers, or through a highly-distorting amplifier, then would that really "count" as an honest example where the absolute signal polarity needs to be preserved? (Maybe the wrong-polarity version might actually sound nicer, after all!)
I wonder how much positive/negative asymmetry there is in the response of the human ears? One would not, I suppose, call that a distortion, but rather, just "the way we hear things." So if one directly listened to a flute, and one could hear the difference between that and an "anti-flute" whose waveform was upside down, then I suppose one could consider it important to arrange for the audio system to reproduce the flute as a flute and not an anti-flute.
All in all, I think it is an interesting topic.
Chris
If you are using field coil speakers .. try switching the polarity on the power supply side.. that way you don't flip the polarity on the spk binding post, you simply switch the polarity on the field coils.. so the SET connections remains the same all the time..
Gotta try this..... using 8" FC's presently !
Willie
Flipping the polarity of a field coil has the same effect as flipping the speaker wires so I don't see that as a viable option. The generation of the even harmonics is based on the direction of the cone movement and the relationship to the existing even order distortions within the driving system.
dave
I agree! switching speaker terminals with SE amps is not a valid way to invert polarity. When I do it, I often hear a difference but when I use a method that inverts in the digital domain I do not.
dave
"I agree! switching speaker terminals with SE amps is not a valid way to invert polarity. When I do it, I often hear a difference but when I use a method that inverts in the digital domain I do not."
That's very interesting, that you can confirm that! I did, in the meantime, try some googling on the topic, and I found some similar kinds of suggestions out there; that it could be something to do with the distortion profiles of the SE amplifier and the loudspeaker acting either "in parallel" or "in anti-parallel."
I wonder, then, what evidence there is for audible differences that are actually due to polarity reversal of the audio signal from the signal source? Have you yourself, I wonder, ever heard differences when inverting the signal, as opposed to the speaker leads? It seems to me it would have to be an incredibly subtle effect, and while I wouldn't go so far as to say that it must certainly be inaudible, I would be very surprised if it could be reliably detected with normal kinds of music and listening environments.
I can imagine that most people who try the absolute polarity reversal experiments do it by reversing the polarities at the speaker terminals, and for an SET amplifier I could easily believe that would have audible effects. And indeed, one might very well want to make the polarity choice that sounds better (whatever that means!). But that would be unrelated to any absolute polarity issues in the individual recordings. (Though it might be that for other reasons, the sonic signature with one choice of speaker polarities might sound more attractive with some recordings, and the other polarity choice might sound nicer for other recordings.)
Chris
I think when it comes down to it, (most) speakers generate even order distortion and all systems (from the source material to the speaker) also have some form of even order distortion. While you may have individual parts of a system that do not generate copious amounts of even (pp amps), that doesn't account for the stage to stage relationship of the existing even order. Even order summing in phase creates more even, even order summing out of phase creates higher order odd.
dave
Absolute phase isn't a new concept, and I remember that it was investigated by a few reputable groups in the mid-'80s. The double-blind results were indistinguishable to listeners who were generally regarded as being "audio-aware." :) That was with solid state gear however, not tubes, so I can't respond to potential results using an asymmetrical amplifier. On the other hand, distortion in the SETs I build is very low, so much so that I don't consider their even-order contribution to be sufficient to produce an audible sonic signature.Incidentally, even-order distortion is not confined to positive-negative asymmetry. A square wave can generate huge amounts of even-order energy and still be completely symmetrical in this way. It only need have a duty cycle other than 50%. I have personally witnessed this effect using lab-grade spectrum analyzers and variable duty cycles, and it can be simulated using the FFT function in SPICE programs. The point I'm making is that if absolute phase were audible (and I believe it's not), an asymmetrical amplifier probably isn't required in order to hear it.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
Edits: 11/15/15 11/15/15
"The point I'm making is that if absolute phase were audible (and I believe it's not), an asymmetrical amplifier probably isn't required in order to hear it."I agree with you; I doubt very much that absolute phase, in the sense normally understood, is audible. If it were audible, it would presumably only be in subtle effects at the start of percussive sounds, and suchlike, and it seems very hard to believe that one would ordinarily be able to notice these. And if a claimed audibility could not be confirmed in double-blind tests, it would indeed be reasonable to conclude that it was imagined rather than real.
It certainly would not seem to be at all consistent with the kind of "night and day" differences reported by the OP: "As for brightness, with the polarity switched the Sophias are in fact rather lush and dark."
I guess I was trying to be charitable, and wondering if there was any conceivable phenomenon that could account for what was reported. I still feel that if there were a couple of percent of asymmetric distortion in the amplifier, and another couple of percent of asymmetric distortion in the loudspeaker, then it is not implausible that the audible sound could be significantly different depending on whether the polarity of the loudspeaker's distortion was, so to speak, parallel or anti-parallel with that of the amplifier. The effect, if it were significant, could occur even with a pure sinewave as a signal source; it would not in any way depend on the ordinarily understood notion of the absolute phase of the audio signal in the CD recording, which I would consider to be essentially irrelevant in any case. And it would be a continuous (in time) effect, much more in line, perhaps, with what the OP reported.
I know nothing about the distortion levels in the OP's amplifiers and speakers, so I don't know whether such effects could be significant or not. But I would certainly be willing to bet that if instead the polarity of the audio signal going into the amplifier (both amplifiers, in the case of stereo) were reversed, there would be no audible difference. (At least, no difference that could be confirmed in double-blind tests.)
By the way, although it may not be pertinent to the present discussion, I would call a rectangular wave, with duty cycle not equal to 50%, asymmetric in the sense I meant. That is to say, the sign-inverted signal is not equal to a time-translated version of the original signal.
Chris
Edits: 11/15/15 11/15/15
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: