|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
208.148.210.197
chip amp chips can be voiced? Where in the design or implementation does a chips signature sound come from?Ie, someone may say I like the sound of LM3886's or hypex or Ice--is it a matter of the chips voicing more than implementation?
Follow Ups:
Ideally we would like a wire with gain, a perfect voltage or current amplifier if you will. There are tradeoffs evident when one actually tries to accomplish this goal. The physics of this imperfect universe ensure there will never be a perfectly functioning gain stage, so the designer is forced to choose between what he percieves as the leser of evils in order to create useable product. It is all a matter of the design tradeoffs made along with what modern technology can offer us with the goal of reducing the tradeoffs to less than audible levels. If one cannot approach this pure wire with gain in all areas of response that are audible then one is left with a difference between what goes into an amp and what comes out of an amp which is other than gain. These nonideal deviations are presumably what is responsible for the various voicings of the different implementations.
.
No but as few active stages as possible is usually a good idea. For example, my system with cd has a total of 4 active gain stages (one in the DAC and 3 in the integrated amp). No op amps only 2 tubes and 2 transistors and no negative feedback. For phono I have to add two more active stages to have sufficient gain.
Hi.I share the same 'less means more' idea with you.
Since I love LPs more than my DVD-audio & CD, a good phono premap is needed for me. I use both SS & tube.
My tube pre-amp is a basic two-stage phonostage plus a programme selector, followed by a non-reactive passive volume attenuator. I so designed-built this simple pre-amp to accept MM cartridge, DVD-audio & CD inputs WITHOUT any grounding loop isolation device, e.g. I/P transformer (very popularly used to kill ground loop hums due to multi inputs), & yet neglegible hum at phono I/P full volume.
My SS 'pre-amp' is only a two-stage phonostage employing two NPN bi-polars. Fully monoblock design with 17V battery power supply. I always try not to use any chips. The SS phonostage, being my second phono source, is hooked up to my tube phono-preamp occasionally. Frankly, I prefer my tube phonostage better.
I never got the problem of not enough gain even on playing LPs though many worry about not enough drive with passive linestages. More headroom makes music sound more engaging & more enjoyable.
If you want to cut down on opamps and such in your cd player/DAC then try the Monarchy Audio M24 DAC. I am using it and its fantastic. The analog output stage is a passive IV conversion followed by an SRPP tube output stage. It also has a full tube preamp that I don't use because I really don't need it and it adds an extra stage (it is also SRPP and very good sounding though with a normal power amp). This is how I get only 1 gain stage in the cd player. My amp (kr audio VA350i) uses 3 stages because the "preamp" is passive. So JFET input, MOSFET driver and KR audio T-100 output tubes (1 per channel good for 30 watts). Yep a MOSFET driving an output tube and it works better than any tube driver I have yet heard.I am using a Silvaweld SWH650 phonostage. Its tube rectified and tube regulated (the only transistor in the whole darn thing is the one for the MC input). Simple passive RIAA equalization means no negative feedback here either.
My TT rig is a Voyd "The Voyd" (3 motor concept with big ass power supply making pure sine waves) with Helius Cyalene arm and Benz Micro H2 cartridge (weakest link IMO).
Hi.Better than tubes-driving-tubes? That's news to me.
My experience was reversing yours. The very best power amp I ever heard so far, dollar for dollar, is the Belgian desinged but
Canadian built Tenor Audio 75WP 75W all-triode OTL-OCL power amp monoblock. It was famed a very fine sounding amp beating amps cost many times more, by critics worldwide.It uesd the cheapest tubes imagineable, with SS regulators throughout, yet its sound was good musical & yet so powerful I was very impressed.
Unfortunately, this affordable sonic jewel was discontinued & now replaced by a tubes-driving-MosFETs power monoblock, being more powerful & "less adjustment than the older all-tube model" per the amp distributor.
I was saddened as I missed bigtime the musically being-there from the new hybrid amp.
c-J
"Better than tubes-driving-tubes? That's news to me."Glad I could be the first to break it to you. It shocked me too, believe me. However, I started reading about how difficult it is to really get the driver of the output stage right and where a couple of guys claimed that this was the primary source of distortion in many tube amps. This high voltage MOSFET really controls the output tube such that there is NO sloppiness in the bass (also great output trannies) and yet the mids and highs sound like pure SET. The secret I think is that there is no feedback and the fets are running single ended class A with no feedback, which should produce mostly low order products like a good tube stage (actually according to Boyk and Sussman's model it should produce only 2nd and 4th harmonics due to the quadratic nature of the mosfet).
I know the Tenor OTLs. Fantastic sound and you can really hear how the regulation tightens up the sound compared to some other OTLs. I know this because I had a pair of Silvaweld OTL Tube Reference amps using a similar tube complement to the Tenors. The sound was crystal clear and extremely dynamic. Truly a beautiful sounding amp; however, they were not as well regulated and as a result the bass was somewhat sloppy. The mids and highs were nearly perfect (when biased correctly...too low bias and they began to sound a bit cold). I only sold them though due to the unbearable heat they generated (500 watts per monoblock all the time). The room went up at least 5 degrees C in a couple of hours!!
However, the KR hybrid is just as dynamic and clean sounding as the Tenors with even better bass. Hard to believe but at least to my ears true. Here is a link to the smaller brother of the amp I own. You will see that it has pretty nice measurements for a tube amp in general (let alone a SET).
http://www.vi-fi.nl/assets/s2dmain.html?http://www.vi-fi.nl/xtrartikelen/testen/100000982d090451e/index.html
The one I have gets about 10 more watts. Notice the linearity of the output vs. frequency (no sharp rise in the bass due to tranny saturation big key to good bass performance). Notice also the -3db point is 80Khz...without negative feedback! Distortion at 1 watt has only to the 5th harmonic at about -105db. At 10 watts some higher harmonics but all below -110 db. Even a decent damping factor (always above 5).
The Tenor at 10 watts looks like this:
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/tenoraudio_75wi/
Not too bad either but there are more higher order harmonics and there is more power supply noise in the distortion spectrum. Also, the progression is not as smooth probably for two reasons, 1) it is essentially a pushpull amp and 2) it uses negative feedback. Also running in Class AB it will perhaps have a bit more mismatch in the zero crossing (a SET has no discontinuity there). Finally, it has a more complicated circuit which means more active stages with each adding some distortion.
Honestly much of this is made up for by not having the output transformer. OTLs really do sound amazingly transparent and the KR is first tube (output) amp that I have heard that really measures up in this regard. I have found that the OTLs though that are using negative feedback (this means Graaf, Tenor, Silvaweld, and some Atmasphere) to lower the output impedance to a reasonable level do sound a bit less rich harmonically than the best zero feedback tube amps. Not so cold as most solid state and a bit different but not perfect either. Call OTLs my second favorite amps :), with "normal" hybrids my third favorite (I still love the tone of my Sphinx Project 14 hybrid...tubes in Mosfets out). I have heard one, from AcousticPlan, that is very close to sounding like a good OTL.
Right now electronic state of the art is these active devices which have these nonidealnesses built in, ie tubes/transistors. Unfortunately I don't believe there is a such thing as an passive electronic gain stage (don't know of any in any other physcs disciplines either). I have not researched the possibility of using some other class of gain stage and so can't say if the electrical approach is best but one might guess that for example a hydraulic gain stage would have tradeoffs of its own. It is an interesting line of questioning...Whether or not our audio system designers have indeed isoated and implemented the "best" approach that technology allows.My post was not intended to imply anything other than what I believe is the answer to the original posters question. Although you could say that in general I believe when active stages can be avoided in favor of passive stages often times this will yeild meaningful improvements in maintaining a lower distortion of the original signal.
Hi.No gain no 'pain' sonically.
Even the best amp design employing active devices like tubes, discrete bi-polars & chips, there is always distortion due to non-linear transfer of the signals.
Passive topolopy is the better evil than active provided there are enough gain & power to drive the loudspeakers properly.
So keep the active stages minimum to prevent too much gain to overload the headroom needed for the powerstage to swing.
As I posted here last week, even a 2051 chip can be built into a fine sound power amp winning the "Best of 2006" award. The designer
built the simple amp more simple by employing a simple non-inductive
stepped volume attenuator.Less can deliver more.
c-J
Good luck trying to drive any speakers that exist today with a phono cartridge output for example. Even if you can hear it through some ultra efficient mutations of speakers it likely wouldn't be very satisfying volume wise. You see in this day and age the state of the art IS these electronic gain stages that I have listed some of the downsides of.BTW
I don't understand why I am being lectured here. Did I not demonstrate a sufficient understanding of the downsides of the existing commonly used electronic gain stages? Is there something specific that I said which is incorrect?
Hi.I said passive linestage to drive power amps, both tube & SS, that in fact, I am doing since day one, driven by LP phonostage, & DVD-auido & CD player direct. I am still a very happy camper. No audiophile vistors who auditioned my set-up ever complained about not enough guts & juices.
I never hinted a phono cartridge or even via a phonostage with say 0.5V O/P could drive a loudspeaker direct. This is your incorrect impression.Let me tell you a real story in line of your thinking
Years back when I was en-route back home stopping over Vacouver, Canada, I popped in probably the largest hi-end audio boutique in town.
The store manager brought me into one of the audition rooms to listen to some of the very best stuffs. What caught my eyes was a full range of large & tall colourful pair of twisted horn speaker systems with subwoofers (out of my head I forget this pretty famous brandnme). He said if speakers one day could make so highly efficient, he would like to drive direct from a CD player without any amp in between. He said who needed any amps if the source can drive the speaker direct, ideally the best sound.
He did try to drive the horn speakers direct with a high-end CD player & we could hear thinny low low sound coming out from the horn speakers !!! Of course, this was only a trial to show this audio expert's die-hard philosophy of less-deliver-better music.
I don't see why you sound sorta upset?
Trial and error. Power supplies, chokes, caps, circuit layout, shielding, etc. ...The "expensive" Sonic Impact I think is the most tonally neutral of what I've tried. But still, there's something wrong with the HF.... Kind of "gritty" character that obscures nuances, inflections, and textures in the music.
Although with all the processing in music today, this flaw may not pose a problem for everyone.
I assume you are talking about switching amps. These have created a lot of discussion in the high-end, with the traditionalists condemning them categorically because they heard bad sound in a few setups, and others finding them the most natural-sounding amps ever made.The basic problem in the design of the chip set is the so-called "dark time," which is the time between one switch (say the one connecting the load to the positive rail) turning off and the complementary switch (the one connecting the load to the negative rail) turning on, and vice versa. If the dark time could be made zero, there would be no harsh distortion added to the signal. However, any overlap between the operation of the switches is a direct short between the positive and negative rails. This would create very high spikes of current from the power supply and other forms of distortion.
The different designs seek to manage the dark time to be as small as possible without creating shorts. These depend for success on the consistency of the integrated circuit manufacturing processes (transistor matching, reproducibility of parasitic capacitances, etc.): as the processes improve, it becomes possible to make the dark time smaller in practice. Thus, newer designs may indeed sound more life-like.
The elephant in the room is the low-pass filter these amps require, to keep the switching tone out of the speakers.
These are linear filters, so they affect all frequencies to some extent. Some GEAs claim the filter influence on the upper treble is audible. I don't accept this without further information, but I do know that anything added to the speaker connection has some audio-band character. The dielectrics in the capacitor and the insulation on the coil may both flavor the sound.
Further, all real capacitors and inductors have some parasitic inductance and capacitance, respectively. This means some of the higher harmonics of the switching tone will leak through the inductor in the filter and get on to the speaker cable. If the speaker cable has RF resonant properties that are excited by this leakage, then that setup may sound particularly bad. RF tones affect the audio signal through intermodulation, and can cause problems anywhere in the audio system.
Note that many switching amps also use switching power supplies, which create much more noise. Some designs have the supplies right next to the amps on the same circuit board! There are plenty of ways the amp designer can make the chip set sound good or bad, through success in managing the RF noise issues. The user can also help by addressing RF resonance problems in the audio system.
Finally, be aware that many switching amps have extremely low output impedance, and this is independent of frequency. Some speakers may sound different if they have more effective damping in the midrange and treble.
Excellent post Al. I hope you realize (unlike my good buddy TG54) that your last point about the low output impedance of some chip amps is what my tongue in cheek comment about the DEQ offering variable vs fixed eq was all about.
What are your suggestions for using a switching power supply?cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
I'm using the Gilmore Raptor amps, with big toroidal transformers and (I think) fast-recovery diodes in the bridges. These supplies are quiet except when my neighbor is using her hair dryer: the DC on the power line makes them buzz.The transformers also have a vertical vibration mode on the case bottom plate, that I've fixed by placing the amps directly on solid wood supports. The InnerSound amp I used to have had the same issue.
It should be possible to reduce the noise from switching supplies, to improve the performance of amps that use them. Extensive magnetic shielding and appropriate filters on all wires would be an improvement over placing the supplies on the same boards with the amps. I don't know if this would make the supplies as quiet as good linear supplies; we'll have to see if someone develops such an amp.
Sorry to hear about the neighbor :-). Sounds like you need some circuit isolation there.
I'm taking along hard look at the 41hz Tripath kits as well as the ICE class D's at DIYCable. Too bad Tripath bit the dust, although I would imagine there is decent inventory out there, although for how long...?
Also too bad...is that the Gilmore Amps don't come with that chick that poses with his Carver clone speakers. Ay-Caramba!cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
It is often related to the harmonic series displayed by single or multitone measurement.
.
"I'm going to go pack for France."
Your speakers, your room and the speaker/room interface.
A fantastic way to add voicing that is not fixed, but infinitely adjustable is to insert one of these (link) between your CD players digital output and your (pre)amplifier.
Good luck.cheers,
AJ
p.s., you could also try something like Curl's "sheer luck" magic caps, but of course YMMV.
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
Although POLLYinFLA would have you simply take his and Behringer's word that the ULTRACURVE PRO DEQ2496 is a component that offers "...extremely high audio performance (which) makes it ideal for audiophile mastering and PA purposes." Hey isn't that what the Objectivists here always accuse the Subjectivists of? Simply taking a manufactuer's word? Hmmmmmm....Although it's not the same model I've heard the ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024 used in any otherwise very nice system. Unfortunately it was immediately noticeable as being in the circuit between the amp & preamp, even when set to flat. It was detrimental to soundtaging and subjectively added a harshness that only removing it fully cured. It will definitely "voice" your system in a way that only the worst of solidstate components can.
I guess POLLYinFLA really has filled Unsoundmind's shoes. What POLLYinFLA does with digital EQ, Unsoundmind did with a BSR equalizer!
Thetubeguy1954
These operators didn't seem to have the troubles you did. What gives?
4 deaf guys maybe?http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0101/behringer8024.htm
http://www.audiophilia.com/hardware/hw1.htm
http://www.audioxpress.com/reviews/media/203hansen2196.pdf
Anyhow, you should give the newer DEQ2496 a try. Might do wonders for them uncorrected baffle loss, monopole mode exciters ya got there. Just put a Mastersound badge over the B word and it will sound like magic. Maybe even wire up a few glowing tubes and stick 'em on top of the enclosure to warm up the sound a bit. Who knows huh :-) ??
cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
POLLYinFLA,I'm honestly trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. So either you really need to increase your reading comprehension drastically or else it's you who are guilty of making stories to fit your POV, like you accuse me of doing!
What I fine extremely funny about this particular post is how you'll use the comments of professional reviewers, who are using components, speakers & tweaks you're always ridiculing here in PHP. But now you'll accept the words of these same people whose equipment you always ridicule as valid proof of your beliefs. Simply because they agree with your defense of your beloved pro-audio gear. POLLYinFLA you are a hypocrite!
Here's some info I could find about the equipment used by the reviewers whose reviews you used:
Charles Hansen & Bill Fitzmaurice didn't list any of their associated components! All they did was talk about the Behringer and it's measurements! Nowhere did they mention listening to it at all. So my question to you POLLYinFLA is how did you come to the mistaken impression that they didn't or wouldn't encounter the same problems my friend did when they actually stopped measuring and started listening to the Behringer? You sure are being quite deceptive POLLYinFLA. Is this a character trait of yours I've previously missed?
Next we have Henry Wilkenson. His associated equipment included highend wires like Audience Maestro Interconnects & Speaker Cable, Cardas loudspeaker cable, Acoustic Zen & Straightwire Interconnects (all of which you always ridicule here on PHP) Henry also used a tubed VAC Standard L.E. pre-amp (you always ridicule tubes here) The speakers Henry used were Thiel 1.0, Dynaudio 3.3 speakers (these are the types of designs you ridicule for being uncorrected baffle loss, monopole mode exciters ) and finally Henry used tweaks like P.S. Audio Power Plant P-300 DH Labs Isolation devices Rosinante isolation platform (which you also typically ridicule!) But I guess all that's OK when it supports your POV hypocrite.
As Thorsten Loesch is now designing equipment for AMR, he states that he's using all Abbingdon Music Research components including wires & power conditioning in inmates systems here. However at the time of the article he was using SET amps and singlefullrange speakers. (Both of which you ridicule Polly)
====================================================================
Now when you talk about why these operators didn't apparently seem to have the troubles you believe I did. It shows how little you understand what I'm saying when you read my posts. I, old bird brain, didn't have any "troubles" because I don't own or use any low-end Behringer or any other pro audio components. Had you actually understood what you were reading you would have realized the system in question was that of friend of mine who's a professional recording engineer. Furthermore he's good enough as a professional recording engineer to have actually taught at Rollins College in Winter Park, Fla., which FYI was founded in 1885, is Florida’s oldest recognized college, and is consistently ranked by U.S. News & World Report as one of “America’s best colleges. So I believe he knows a thing or two about how to use a digital equalizer.
====================================================================
As far as you question of What gives? How can I possibly know? I wasn't there when the reviews were doing their reviews was I? However the first article by Thorsten Loesch is something I'd take with a salt-shaker of salt. Thorsten joined my online audio group back around April 2004. Needless to say I proved over time that Thorsten talks negatively about the sonic traits of components he's never heard. That's something you and him have in common POLLYinFLA. When I wrote to Steven R. Rochlin of Enjoy the Music as to how he felt about his reviewers publically posting negative comments about audio components they've never heard. Steve responded very professionally by not talking about Thorsten except to say that he no longer writes for Enjoy the Music! Hmmmmm????In addition POLLYinFLA, personally I'd question the character of a man who in addition to commenting on the sonic qualities of components he hasn't actually heard, was constantly berating audio manufactuers for a myriad of reasons. Yet now according to Thorsten himself, he's now designing components for AMR audio (http://www.amr-audio.co.uk/) we see that these Thorsten designed components appear to be no different than what he berated other manufacturers for making. If you don't believe me contact SAS Audio and ask Steve Sammet about Thorsten. I'd say Thorsten's a shady character, at least IMHO. Funny thing is the last time I saw what Thorsten's system was composed of it didn't include a Behringer Ultracurve Pro Digital EQ! I find that strange in light of his comments of "I would rate the impact of the Ultracurve on my system in the same region as that of high quality full range drivers or single ended triodes. It brings me closer to the music and makes it easier to forget about the mechanics of reproduction." So it's as good as his beloved SET & Single Fullrange speakers, neither of which are cheap. Yet he doesn't actually use a cheap Behringer himself? Hmmmmm???? In addition we can look at Thorsten's system here in inmates systems and there's no Behringer in there either! Perhaps Thorsten smartened up?
Oh yeah POLLYinFLA since you use Behringers and Thorsten says it is "supposedly" as good as an SET, does that mean you secretly want an SET yourself? Hmmmmm???
=====================================================================
POLLYinFLA asks me are these 4 deaf guys maybe? They could be, they could have been paid to say that and it could be their honest assesment. I just know it's NOT for me.
=====================================================================
POLLYinFLA states I should give the newer DEQ2496 a try. Might do wonders for them uncorrected baffle loss, monopole mode exciters ya got there. No POLLYinFLA I'll do without the low-end pro crap for now. As for my Aliantes until you've heard them yoursel personally anything negative you say about them is simply more bird-brained banter that's without merit, much like the posts you write here on PHP all the time.
=====================================================================
Just put a Mastersound badge over the B word and it will sound like magic. Maybe even wire up a few glowing tubes and stick 'em on top of the enclosure to warm up the sound a bit. Who knows huh :-) ??Trust me I know. We could remove the Mastersound name and put Behringer on it and the Mastersound would still sound incredible. It's not the name on the outside bird-brain, it's the guts on the inside that makes it what it is. PLEASE just stay in Tampax, Fla with your hodge-podge of digital equalizers, multiple pro solidstate amps, bastardized pseudo-Orions & Rat Shack wires and keep telling yourself, This is what live unamplified music should sound like, this is what live unamplified music should sound like, This is what live unamplified music should sound like, this is what live unamplified music should sound like... Maybe if you repeat it often enough and believe with all your heart you'll believe that's true one day!
Tom you really need to condense your thoughts a bit to avoid these rambling diatribes that, while they do amuse me, make for a bit more arduous reading of your incoherence. I'll still get my laughs if you shorten thing up a bit, plus it would be easier on your keyboard.
That said, I would understand your dislike of Thorsten, since I'm sure he viewed your explosive tempered irrational illogical with amusement also. No need to explain that one to me. I knew that already.TG54 - POLLYinFLA asks me are these 4 deaf guys maybe? They could be, they could have been paid to say that and it could be their honest assesment. I just know it's NOT for me.
Could be. But I saw no mention of the collapsed soundstage story you made up or imagined hearing looking at the Behringer, so I thought I would point them out.
TG54 - POLLYinFLA states I should give the newer DEQ2496 a try. Might do wonders for them uncorrected baffle loss, monopole mode exciters ya got there. No POLLYinFLA I'll do without the low-end pro crap for now. As for my Aliantes until you've heard them yoursel(f) personally.
So you would rather do with the low-fi hi-end crap instead? I need to hear the anemic bass of the baffle step filter-less Aliante myself? I need to hear monopole bass in room myself to see what modes are being excited? Why? We both know that they sound nothing like live music, irregardless of what magic nutrasweetened amp you connect to it. Why would I want to hear that floppy little poly cone breakup and distorting lower end tweeter through the imagined 1st order network applied to 2nd order bandpass drivers? You don't think that your parroting statements about them sounding anything like live music are taken seriously by anyone with familiarity with live instruments do ya? Maybe someone who listens primarily to smooth jazz and Supertramp http://cgi.audioasylum.com/systems/5400.html then makes up stories about attending unamplified events. But not me :-).
I'm suggesting the DEQ for the anemic low end and a bit of smoothing. It can't fix the inherently flawed design itself, but it would help somewhat.TG54 - We could remove the Mastersound name and put Behringer on it and the Mastersound would still sound incredible.
No, if you could not see it and was told you were listening to a Behringer, you would say it sounded terrible. We both know that.
TG54 - It's not the name on the outside bird-brain, it's the guts on the inside that makes it what it is.
Again, we both know that by far the biggest impact on sound for someone like you is the outside. The visual doesn't change the sound waves before your ear, but has a huge impact between your ear and brain. The emphasis on your.
Ok now, remember, deep breaths :-).cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
POLLYinFLA,It's hard when talking to a bird brain like yourself to do so but I'll attempt to keep this brief.
POLLYinFLA said: Tom you really need to condense your thoughts a bit to avoid these rambling diatribes that, while they do amuse me, make for a bit more arduous reading of your incoherence.
The reasons my posts are so loooooonnnggg is I have to explain in great detail to a bird-brain like you, things others would automatically understand. As an excellent example of this I'll refer to the post where you said in reference to me talking about the Mastersound sounding more like live unamplified music than any other amp I've heard. "...He almost never states whether it has to be connected to speakers, as if that would have any relevance :-)."
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages/29556.htmlAs I explained to Tre' I apparently gave (YOU) old bird-brain credit for having too much intelligence. Sorry but I assumed the audiophiles/music lovers here at PHP would realize that I could not make the statement that an integrated amp like the Mastersound, produces the closest replication of live, unamplified music I've ever heard. Unless it was being used as intended. I almost never state it is connected to speakers, NOT because that doesn't have any relevance, but rather because I credited most readers with understanding it would have to be to make my statement :^)
So PLEASE POLLYinFLA don't blame for trying to make the things I say understandable to an idiot like yourself.
====================================================================
Instead of addressing your many attempts to provoke me. I'm simply going to make a few comments:1) Only an idiot like yourself would comment on the sound qualities of an audio system comprised of components he hasn't heard! If you'll notice I seldom if ever make comments about components I haven't heard and if I do I'll state that I've not heard that particular component, but if it's anything like this other component the manufacturer makes that I have heard, like I did when I talked about the Behringer crap. I ONLY commented on what I actually heard the DSP8024.
2) YES! I know anyone actually familiar with live unamplified music, like myself you plays acoustic guitar (what it's serial # so you can verify the validity of my statement?) would apon hearing my system say it does sound very much like live unamplified music. Not EXACTLY like live unamplified music because no system does, but it has many of the traits & characteristics of live unamplified music that are important to me. My friend the professional recording engineer believes it's a world-class system. That may be a bit to much praise, Perhaps when Tom Danley visits Orlando, he'll take me up on my offer to come and visit. Then he can tell you himself about how explosive, irrational, & illogical my temperment is. He could also then give you his honest opinion of my system (good or bad) as he sees it.
3) As far as those reviewers you keep mentioning I've already addressed the hypocrisy of a person like yourself who'll use reviews by reviewers using components you constantly ridicule as being flawed, because they don't mention hearing the collapsed soundstage I heard through the Behringer DSP8024. Speaking of being a hypocrite once again we find you're giving reasons why you don't need or want to hear my system, i.e.
a) I need to hear the anemic bass of the baffle step filter-less Aliante myself?
b)I need to hear monopole bass in room myself to see what modes are being excited? Why?
c) (You) know that they sound nothing like live music, irregardless of what magic nutrasweetened amp you connect to it.
d) Why would I want to hear that floppy little poly cone breakup and distorting lower end tweeter through the imagined 1st order network applied to 2nd order bandpass drivers?Yet strangely enough at Christmas time you asked if you could come and hear my system. I know you'll come up with some lame false excuse as to why you did that, but the truth is you asked me if you could come and hear my system. I suppose this is just the backlash of my rejection of your visit.
4) Finally I suggest you take a look at many of the inmates systems here. If your path to audio nirvana via copious amount of digital EQ, multi mis-matched pro-solidtstate amps and a bastardized version of Orion speakers was truely the path to audio nirvana and not audio hell as I suggest it is, why aren't many more of your objectivist buddies, or the subjectivists here following your lead? Or do you believe ONLY YOU know what live music really sounds like and all these others mistaken?
Ta ta... Thetubeguy1954
I really appreciate your doing that Clifffffff, thanks!
Nice to see you continuing your therapy here. I know you really look forward to my posts, so here we go :-).
BTW, I'm really glad that you enjoyed my parrot routine so much that you adopted it and have taken to parroting it yourself. See how much fun this can be when the pitbull is laughing instead of threatening bodily harm?TG54 - Although POLLYinFLA would have you simply take his and Behringer's word
My word and a manufacturers words are two different things. If I stated what the manufacturer did, then what you can do it take your mouse and left click/drag over my words, then right click, select paste and then quote me saying what it is I actually said, see, like I did with you just above. Works great for quoting instead of deluding oneself into thinking what another might have said. Remember now, this is all part of your treatment here at the asylum.
TG54 - Although it's *not the same model* I've heard the ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024
Exactly.
TG54 - It was detrimental to soundtaging and subjectively added a harshness that only removing it fully cured.
Well, there could be several reasons, including the most likely, operator error, but also poor synergy with the power cord used, poor synergy with the IC used, poor synergy with the other components (non-pro?) etc., etc., so there's really no way to pin point anything to the unit itself.
TG54 - It was detrimental to soundtaging and subjectively added a harshness that only removing it fully cured.
Again see above. Now, this all assumes that what you are saying is not completely fabricated for effect, like remember the story that you made up about once being a subjectivist, except no one believed you except you? Could this be similar? Take several deep breaths before you answer that one, remember, this is the new, calm, non ranting Tom that was promised oh so long ago.
TG54 - I'll readily admit I just assumed it was placed between the preamp & amplifier. It's quite possible I am mistaken and will need to ask the owner if that's how it was inserted or if it was done as Behringer suggested in their manuel.
Who is this Manuel you keep referring to? Is he the owner? I'm really confused here.
TG54 - As for POLLYinFLA I originally posted to him in a very civil manner, but his first few posts were filled with disparaging comments that refered to my amp as an euphonic noise generator, my speakers as floppy little cones and IIRC refering to me as Tubeboob. He constantly talks about my needing therapy etc.
Ok, first of all, I refer to the Mastersound as a Nutrasweetener, ie, an artificial flavoring, which I thought you would find as a compliment, seeing that is your sonic goal correct? Plus, why do you take my remarks about your amplifier so personally, as if you are filled with self doubt about its true performance? Why the utter lack of confidence and not just laughing it off like I do your comments about my equipment?
What exactly is wrong with my comments about your floppy little poly cones that sound like real, live music?
You only need use the search function to see that I have never called you anything like Tubeboob. C'mon now Tom, you're making that one up like the ol' you use to be a subjectivist thing and remember the you did the blind test thing and could easily tell differences tale? That was a great one! How about we just laugh together about stuff like that instead of all this raging pitbull being prodded business?
Ok, now mark your calendar. I know you were crushed missing out on heading up to Chicago to hear your first real set of speakers, but now the show is coming to you! NSCA Expo 2007 is around the corner!
It should serve as a nice alarm clock for you. There will be lots of folks there dying to hear your stories about 35 watt tube amps and 6" plastic cone computer speakers and god like wires, etc, etc.
How about we share all the laughs and attend the show together?
You'll get see and hear what real amps, speakers, etc. sound like and have lots o' fun. Hopefully hear some live music too, as a reality check for you of how little your stereo sounds like it.
Whaddaya say?cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
To my comment of: Although it's *not the same model* I've heard the ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024, POLLYinFLA responded: Exactly.I suppose POLLYinFLA's contention is that that because I haven't heard the precise model he's refering to, I have no idea about it's sound quality or lack of it. I readily admit there's a bit of truth to what POLLYinFLA suggests. However, I've noticed in that most manufactuers components tend to have a family sonic signature, thus my comments about ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024 which I admitted wasn't the same product.
====================================================================
Speaking about the ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024 I mentioned it was detrimental to soundtaging and subjectively added a harshness that only removing it fully cured. To this POLLYinFLA being the idiot that he is refrained from any intelligent or rational input and suggested about someone he doesn't know: Well, there could be several reasons, including the most likely, operator error! The man I am speaking of (Paul B.) is a professional recording engineer and one IIRC that Tom Danley holds in fairly high esteem. So I'm sure old bird-brain has it correct and the problems were "most likely" human error.Next POLLYinFLA continues in his usual condescending manner by talking about things he believes cannot effect the sound as if they're the actual problem, when he stated: but also poor synergy with the power cord used, poor synergy with the IC used, poor synergy with the other components (non-pro?) etc., etc., so there's really no way to pin point anything to the unit itself.
This is more typical POLLYinFLA bird-brained, banter. It's quite easy to pin-point the problem as being the ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024. All we had top do was listen to the system before inserting the ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024. When it's out of the circuit the music sounds more harmonically correct with nice soundstaging. Next we simply add this additional audio component and listen again. Unfortunately when the the ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024 is in the circuit the music sounds less harmonically correct with worse soundstaging capabilities. I guess this procedure is too complicated for a bird brain like POLLYinFLA.
=====================================================================
Now when I commented that the ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024 was detrimental to soundtaging and subjectively added a harshness that only removing it fully cured. POLLYinFLA needed to come up with a way to defend his beloeved pro-solidstate gear. So POLLYinFLA claims this all assumes that what you are saying is not completely fabricated for effect. I'd like to respond by saying no one has ever caught me in a lie here, because I haven't lied. Second Tom Danley knows the person I'm speaking about, so you can believe what you will POLLYin(Tampax)FLA. Now as far as the story that POLLYinFLA believes I made up about once being an Objectivist (not Subjectivist you bird brain) that doesn't surprise me that not one Objectivist believed me! After all you guys want so desperately to believe you correct and simply cannot bear the fact that some of us wise up, listen with ears and see the fallacy of the Objectivist way.
=====================================================================
POLLYinFLA asked Could this be similar? Well yes POLLYinFLA it is similar. It the exact same tactic objectivists always take, i.e deny the truth & misdirect. So in your attempt to misdirect POLLYinFLA now turns the topic to me by implying I'm upset with his comments of: Take several deep breaths before you answer that one, remember, this is the new, calm, non ranting Tom that was promised oh so long ago. Poor bird-brained POLLYinFLA. He cannot tell the difference from a long post and a rant. Just like he cannot tell the difference between a real audiophile's system and a system based on his bastardization of Dr Linkwitz's Orions, powered by multiples of pro-solidstate amps, using copious amounts of equalization (in an vain attempt to get some coherency)and all the extra wires these many amps and equalizers use. Instead of audio nirvana that sounds like the highway to audio hell.
=====================================================================
In an effort to remain honest I stated: I'll readily admit I just assumed it was placed between the preamp & amplifier. It's quite possible I am mistaken and will need to ask the owner if that's how it was inserted or if it was done as copious suggested in their manuel. POLLYinFLA in another vain attempt at humour stated: Who is this Manuel you keep referring to? Is he the owner? I'm really confused here. It doesn't surprise me that old bird-brained POLLYinFLA couldn't follow I was refering to Behringer's audio manuel that accompanies their ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024. What does surprise me is how POLLYinFLA readily admits something we've all been quite aware of here on PHP He's Confused!
=====================================================================
When I TG54 commented that I originally posted to POLLYinFLA in a very civil manner, but his first few posts were filled with disparaging comments that refered to my amp as an euphonic noise generator, my speakers as floppy little cones and IIRC refering to me as Tubeboob. He constantly talks about my needing therapy etc.POLLY the pompous ass said: Ok, first of all, I refer to the Mastersound as a Nutrasweetener, ie, an artificial flavoring, which I thought you would find as a compliment, seeing that is your sonic goal correct? NO! POLLYinFLA that isn't my goal. Unlike you and your highway to hell system, I'm attempting to get as close to the sound of live, unamplified music as I can get, period. Not some mis-conceived idea of what that should sound like!
Next in typical objectivist fashion he attempts to mis-direct by now turning the topic to be about me. For POLLYinFLA putrid, patronizing, pompous proclomation of: Plus, why do you take my remarks about your amplifier so personally, as if you are filled with self doubt about its true performance? Why the utter lack of confidence and not just laughing it off like I do your comments about my equipment?
This arrogant ass always assumes anything about another. POLLYinFLA what you really need to understand is I don't take your comments about my amp as being with any merit, let alone personally. If I was filled with this self doubt you want so desperately to believe I am, I would have sold the Mastersound by now. What you continually fail to understand is that I believe I hear amazing differences between how well the Mastersound Reference 845 replicates live unamplified music verses other amps I've heard and that's all that matters to me. I know without any question that my approach has resulted in a system which provides me with an emotional connection to music that I have seldom, if ever experienced with any other systems reproducing music. I have no need or desire to prove to you or anyone else how well my system replicates music. At one time you actually had the chance of hearing what your stereo (that is if replicating live unamplified music is your goal) should sound like. But your arrogance has forever ended that opportunity with me.
FYI I have owned some very nice and fairly expensive solidstate systems in the past. Unfortunately in the end I was never really happy with what I heard. Within 6 to 12 months of a new purchase I was always looking to upgrade the amp, preamp, CD player, interconnects and/or speakerwire. That all changed for me about 4.5 years back. One day I was bored and I started to read about SET amps on the internet. I couldn't believe ANYONE would want a 1 to 10w/ch amplifier! As if that wasn't crazy enough, these people were very restricted in their speaker choices as well. I just couldn't fathom why anyone would willingly make such as self-limiting choice. But a funny thing occured as I continued reading. I noticed one thing that really grabbed my attention. Almost all SET owners seemed to jump off the upgrade train after they purchased their SET amp. As I continued reading as much as I could find about SET's and their owners I noticed how happy they all seemed to be with their systems. That happiness with their systems is what caused me to decide to look into SETs for myself and that lead to my I buying the Mastersound. Then another funny thing happened, just like I read in the articles from SET owner's I too belived I never, ever heard a better amp (although I know there are better amps) Just like all the articles I read I was finally happy with my amp and my audio system. Just like the other SET owners I jumped off the "upgrade train." To this day completely happy with the sound of this amp. I'll own the Mastersound until one of us dies! I've owned the Mastersound for almost 5 years now and that's the longest I've ever owned ANY audio component without wanting to upgrade! I've never heard more realistic sound from any amp than I do using the Mastersound and I've never been happier with my audio system either.
====================================================================
POLLYinFLA asked me: What exactly is wrong with my comments about your floppy little poly cones that sound like real, live music? The "ONLY" problem is your constant disparaging of audio components you've never personally heard. The laughable part is these remarks are coming from a man whose personal audio system is composed of components that most audiophiles/music lovers here on PHP, even amongst the objectivists, would cringe at just the thought of hearing it!
=====================================================================
POLLYinFLA also states: You only need use the search function to see that I have never called you anything like Tubeboob. Truth be told POLLY I'm not about to look through 100's of your unintelligent, unrational posts that simple berate, disparage & ridicule everyone & any component that isn't either a solidstate pro unit or some form of a speaker based on Dr Linkwitz's beliefs. Sorry but I have so many better things to do with my time.
=====================================================================
C'mon now Tom, you're making that one up like the ol' you use to be a subjectivist thing and remember the you did the blind test thing and could easily tell differences tale? That was a great one! How about we just laugh together about stuff like that instead of all this raging pitbull being prodded business?POLLYinFLA just because you don't believe something doesn't mean I'm lying or making it up. I'd appreciate your at least waiting until you catch me in a lie (which you'll never do) BEFORE accusing me of lying by making up stories to support my POV. The truth is I started my audiophile life as an Objectivist. I was about 15 and didn't believe a) wires could possibly sound different b) tubes were a viable audio technology. What's so difficult to accept about that? Thats what you believe even to this day! As far as the raging pitbull crap is concerned I attempted via an analogy to show you how YOUR behviour was no different than that of a child prodding a chained dog because they felt safe. As you continue on in that assinine childish fashion I believe someday, somewhere you'll prod a "dog" via comments like you constantly make here and either you'll misjudge the chain's length or the chain will break and you'll get bit. How you've twisted that in that bird-brain of yours into meaning I want to physically hurt you is something only you can understand. I was trying to help you , not hurt you.
=====================================================================
Ok, now mark your calendar. I know you were crushed missing out on heading up to Chicago to hear your first real set of speakers, but now the show is coming to you! NSCA Expo 2007 is around the corner!
It should serve as a nice alarm clock for you.POLLYinFLA you're such a pompous ass you don't know that I've already been exposed to Tom Danley's original "Unity Horn" design when he licensed a friend of mine (Nick) here in Florida to make them. Ask Tom Danley bout my friend who owned Lambda Acoustics. POLLYinFLA I've been exposed to so much more than you can imagine o bird-brained one. Yet in your pompous I know everything attitude you simply assume once I hear something you like (which I've already heard) my eyes will open, I'll see the errors of my ways and I'll agree with your POV. Keep dreaming bird brain.
=====================================================================
POLLYinFLA asks: How about we share all the laughs and attend the show together? POLLYinFLA are you honestly so dense as to not understand that thought of meeting you disgusts me? I truely think you're mentally unstable. Anyone who gets his jollies out of trying to get a rise out of others by constantly ridiculing their audio choices & beliefs is NOT somone I'd want to meet, let alone hang out with! How many times do I have to tell you that I see your actions as an adult man who attempts to torment others with insults about their beliefs & choices in audio, because you feel safe hiding behind your moniker. Is exactly like a child tormenting a dog because he feels safe hiding behind the chain that holds the dog? Sorry POLLYinFLA I don't hang out with twisted, demented people who see it as fun & enjoyable to ridicule and torment others. But perhaps you can find another like yourself. You know birds of feather sort of thing!
====================================================================
Polly proclaims: You'll get see and hear what real amps, speakers, etc. sound like and have lots o' fun. POLLYinFLA I've seen and heard a lot of pro-solidstate gear Crown, Crest, QSC & BGW amps. Lots of pro speakers Westlake, JBL, Altec, Tannoy, Genelec, Mackie. KRK Systems, TAD & Tom Danley's Unity horns. I've also seen a good share of some of the best of home audio solidstate amps, Mark Levinson, Krell, Rowland, Edge, Ayre, OCM, Belles, Threshold, and while in England Musical Fidelity, Chord, Naim, Linn. As for tubed amps, Conrad-Johson, Acoustic Research, Lamm, Graaf, VAC, Berning, Sonic Frontiers, Wavac, BAT, Air Tight, Mastersound, Cary, KR Audio, McIntosh 275, Marantz 8B. For highend speakers I've heard the HQD (Hartley-Quad-Decca) Infinity IRS, Wilson Watt/Puppy & Alexandria, JM Labs Utopia, B&W 800D, Von Schweikert, Snell, Sonus Faber & Aliante and while in England Lumley, Quad, Spendor, Forsman (looked like a giant Karlson design to me. My point is I didn't by my present components without a lot of prior exposure to some really nice stuff, so I doubt you're going to be able to present me with any eye-opening news!
====================================================================
Finally old bid-brain. I play an Ovation guitar. I used to be in a band when I was much younger. I attend almost every concert WLOQ has in the summer 3/16/07 starts off a new season of live jazz concerts. Plus I go to the Bob Carr Performing Arts Center here in Orlando, Fla to hear symphonies, so I have plenty of exposure to live unamplified music. Thus I know how close my system comes to the real thing ---which is why you should have availed yourself of the opportunity to hear it BEFORE I knew what a pompous ass you are and rescinded my original invitation to visit my home. So whaddaya say?I say I'm glad we never met!
Thetubeguy1954
--
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
"Hopefully hear some live music too"Would that be live, unamplified music?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Tre - Would that be live, unamplified music?
For that, TG54 would have to bring his Mastersound. I can carry a decent amount of weight, so it's feasible. It would be a breath of fresh air at such an event, to have a real amp like the Nutrasweetner845A there, introducing folks to what live music really sounds like, instead of that harsh, grainy, skating rink stuff they're all use to.
Hopefully TG54 is ok with it.cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
> Nutrasweetner845A there, introducing folks to what live music really sounds like, instead of that harsh, grainy, skating rink stuff they're all use to. <If Tom's amp is a sweetener and yours is grainy, why not get together and make oatmeal? If you want, you can try to find an amp that sounds fruity and you'll have a nice healthy, heart-friendly breakfast!
If only my good buddy Tom could see the humor, we'd all be laughing. Unfortunately, I think he continues to take this all rather personally.cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
What's really funny is that I have uglier, more heinous arguments than these with close friends! Then we laugh about 'em over cigars and scotch.I see Joey Porter is now a Fin and that other Joey is a free agent. Pretty good swap....
Kerr - I see Joey Porter is now a FinJoey Porter, I hate that guy, what a jackass. Oh wait, he's a Fin now?
Man I love that dudes attitude, heck of a player....LOLcheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
hahahaha - and it goes both ways. As a lifelong Vikings fan (now nominally a Colts fan due to geography) I like Daunte Culpepper better now that he's a Fin! Plenty of boats down there in Miami - and willing women as well, I suspect!
rw
I ask if the live music would be unamplified, acoustic music.Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
He kinda references it here like he's done before in this thread above http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages/29549.htmlTG54 - amazing how the Mastersound Reference 845 sounds like live unamplified music
except he added some qualifiers this time. He almost never states whether it has to be connected to speakers, as if that would have any relevance :-).
Anyhow, doesn't look like it http://www.nsca.org/Expo/Attendees/EveningEvents/tabid/367/Default.aspx#2007ExpoJam
but maybe TomServo would be the better one to ask.cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
Tre' you'll have to forgive POLLYinFLA. He's such a bird-brain one needs to go into great detail when saying somthing as simple as: The Mastersound Reference 845 produces the closest replication of live, unamplified music I've ever heard!"First POLLYinFLA takes offense with this for some strange reason. I've never said the the Mastersound Reference 845 produces the closest replication of live, unamplified music of any amplifier made. What I've said is Mastersound Reference 845 produces the closest replication of live, unamplified music I've ever heard. POLLYinFLA doesn't seem capable of understanding the difference between those 2 statements.
Second I apparently gave old bird-brain credit for having too much intelligence. Sorry but I assumed the audiophiles/music lovers here at PHP would realize that I could not make the statement that an integrated amp like the Mastersound, produces the closest replication of live, unamplified music I've ever heard. Unless it was being used as intended. I almost never state it is connected to speakers, NOT because that doesn't have any relevance, but rather because I credited most readers with understanding it would have to be to make my statement :^)
But for idiots like POLLYinFLA I'll explain that in order to state that the Mastersound, produces the closest replication of live, unamplified music I've ever heard. That would presume a source, wires from the source to the Mastersound and then speaker wire to the speakers, as well as power cords to the source and integrated amp.
OK POLLYinFLA do you finally understand?
Thetubeguy1954
Why don't you explain to Tre how your Mastersound sounds just like live unamplified music when hooked to a pair of Bose or Radioshack speakers. After all, it is the amp that is responsible for this magnificent sound. Isn't it?cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
POLLYinFLA made another the idiotic post, as ONLY he could make. POLLYinFLA asked me: Why don't you explain to Tre how your Mastersound sounds just like live unamplified music when hooked to a pair of Bose or Radioshack speakers. After all, it is the amp that is responsible for this magnificent sound. Isn't it?I think Tre', unlike yourself understands in the end one hears a system as a whole. Obviously a system can only sound as good as it weakest link. The Mastersound Reference 845 integrated amp replicates the closest to live unamplified music that I've ever heard, period! Again, obviously the better the source (BlueNote Stibbert) the better the interconnects (Z-Squared Au/Au) the better the speaker wire (Nordost Blue Heaven) and the better the speakers (Aliante Pinafarina Ones) the better one will hear what the Mastersound is capable of.
Hooked up to Bose or Radioshack speakers as you propose will not make the Mastersound any less of an amp. What it will do is limit how much of the Mastersound's capabilities can be heard, due to the restrictions of the speakers you suggest using. This is why it took years (YES YEARS) of trying different interconnects, speakerwire, CD Players & speakers to get my system to where it is now. An analogy of what your proposing would be to take an exceptional dancer, (exceptional dancer = mastersound) restrict his capabilities by placing him in a closet, (restrict the mastersound's capabilities by connect Bose speakers) ridicule the person who declared he was the best dancer he'd ever seen, (person = me declaring the mastersound is the best I've heard) because in these circumstances he cannot dance exceptionaly (just like with Bose speakers attached the mastersound cannot sound the best I've ever heard)
What I cannot understand is how or why anyone could have a problem with my stating my opinion that he Mastersound Reference 845 integrated amp replicates the closest to live unamplified music that I've ever heard, period! Do you miss that I said that I'VE EVER HEARD? Never have I declared it's the best amp in the world, in fact I know you've read my inmates system because you've provided a link to it in your previous posts. Did you also miss where I said although I'm sure better exists, I haven't heard it as of yet.
Honestly POLLYinFLA only an idiot would try to make the arguement that because we hear a system as whole, we cannot know what the individual components "sound" like. Just like only an idiot would comment on the sonic traits of audio components they've never heard! Hey you do both of those things don't you?
OK, I understand. Inside joke.If the live music is amplified it has very little value as a reference.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
> If the live music is amplified it has very little value as a reference. <Except how would you then have any idea if your system was properly capturing Herb Ellis' plugged in Gibson ES-175 (or a host of other electric jazz guitarists) or Chick Corea's electric Fender Rhodes piano? Or Steve Swallow's electric bass? These guys are jazz performers. Sometimes you just gotta plug in!
Now if you're referring to heavy metal or rap or something, I would agree. But electricity alone does not mean the music cannot be used as a reference.
Hello Kerr,You addressed a good question when you responded to: If the live music is amplified it has very little value as a reference. With: Except how would you then have any idea if your system was properly capturing Herb Ellis' plugged in Gibson ES-175 (or a host of other electric jazz guitarists) or Chick Corea's electric Fender Rhodes piano? Or Steve Swallow's electric bass? These guys are jazz performers. Sometimes you just gotta plug in!
The reasoning behind this is actually quite simples. We use live unamplified music as our "Reference Standard" because it doesn't allow for additional components & wires to add their own distinct signature sound. So we use a variety of instruments & voices which have their own unique natural unamplified sonic characteristics. Typically I like to start with a piano, because it covers such a wide frequency range. Then I go for what I call "plucked" strings via listening to acoustic guitars, banjos, mandolins & stand up bass. This allows me to hear a fairly wide frequency range from the low bass to the high notes of a mandolin. Plus I get to hear the different harmonics of a guitar, mandolin & banjo. I also like to hear bowed strings via stand up bass, cello & violins as well. Next I go to brass with trumpets, saxes, trompones flutes. I don't know why but that's also when I listen to harmonicas. After that it's male & female voices from bass to sopranos. If we can get these to sound as close as we possibly can to what those instruments & vocals sound like, then we can rest assured that amplified music will be replicated as faithfully as possible!
So yes Kerr sometimes you just gotta plug in to hear Chick Corea's electric Fender Rhodes piano? Or Steve Swallow's electric bass? However to hear these outstanding jazz performers sound the best they can in our homes, you and I need to get the live unamplified sound correct first. Once you've/we've done that everything else just falls into place...
Thetubeguy1954
Now if you're referring to heavy metal or rap or something, I would agree. But electricity alone does not mean the music cannot be used as a reference.
> I don't know why but that's also when I listen to harmonicas. After that it's male & female voices from bass to sopranos <Interesting. A blues harmonica playing friend of mine likens his instrument to the human voice. However, any argument I might further make falls flat on its face because he blows into a microphone that is sealed against his lips, thereby creating the distortion that Chicago-style blues harpmeisters covet. Oh, well... it sounds good and it is after all the blues!
The reason I use the electric guitar is quite natural - I play it. Of course, I also play the acoustic but I'm primarily an electric player. It's the sound I'm used to and, of course, any electric guitarist can tell which Gibson, Fender or Gretsch someone is playing, along with its age - with a few years fudge factor one way or the other. Same goes with many amps. As with audio gear, I occasionally get fooled but not very often.
The flip side is that I agree with you and Tre that live unamplified music is the barometer. I go listen whenever I can and usually spend a few weeks a year in NYC jazz nightclubbing because I enjoy it and also to help re-calibrate the ol' ears. Stereo gear pales in comparison to live music... or even "dead" (recorded) music. Next time you and AJ trek up to Indiana, stop in and listen... OW! Tom! Stop hitting me! OUCH... I was KIDDING!!!! MOMMEEEEEE!!!! :)
Hi Kerr,That's interesting to know your harmonica playing friend equates his instrument to the human voice. I've found, and I'm curious if others here will agree with this statement, that the harmonica is a very difficult acoustic instrument to get to truly sound correct.
Kerr I don't know if you know who Howard Levy is but he's an incredible harmonica player. In Howard's hands the harmonica truly becomes an beautiful instrument. I'm having a brain fart right now because I cannot remember which song it is by him that I use to voice harmonicas. IIRC it's his version of Walking In Memphis on the CD Discovery by John Tesh that's incredible! Howard also plays a duet with Nelson Rangell on flute that I use to voice a system due to the complexity of the smooth, breathy sound of the flute accompanied by the raspy, woody yet also breathy sound of the harmonica. By breathy I mean the way you hear the wind blow through each instrument as they're being played.
As far as the next time I trek up to Indiana, I appreciate your invite to stop in and listen. I just cannot fathom the circumstances that would occur to possibly get me in a car with that pompous prick POLLYinFLA! Sorry Polly but this time you don't get a cracker. Seeing you for who you are i.e., a "man" who gets his enjoyment via ridiculing others and who'd rather provoke than intelligently discuss a topic, doesn't mean I'm angry when I call you what I know you are. At the same time it also means you're no one I'd care to ever know personally either.
Statute of Limitations has thankfully run its course! Ah, those were the days! No one cared if audio sounded like live music because we had no clue what live music sounded like - at least not what it sounded like without the blissful haze of dubage blasting through our noggins.Now it's scotch and an occasional Hennessey XO... and in MUCH smaller doses! :)
--
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
nt
I didn't say it can't be used as a reference. It can.But how do we know Herb Ellis had his tone controls set the exact same way on his Gibson ES-175 the night we saw him live as compared to when he was in the studio?
How do we know that Chick Corea is using the same electric Fender Rhodes piano not the one that had the speakers replaced?
A Baldwin piano is a Baldwin piano and a Martin D-28 is a Martin D-28...etc.
When acoustic music is used as a reference and the system passes the "test" I would think the electric stuff will come out right as well.
The system is either right or it's not. But using the electric stuff as a reference I don't know how one would ever be sure.
I think you can get my point.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
How do we know the mics on the Martin D-28 (and please stop using that as a point of reference - you're making my covet muscle re-develop!!!) or the Baldwin are the same?I get you point and I think you get mine. We have little basis for comparing live music, amplified or unamplified, with recorded - yet we continue. All we have is our hearing and our aural memory, bad as they may be. :)
> We have little basis for comparing live music, amplified or unamplified, with recorded - yet we continue. All we have is our hearing and our aural memory, bad as they may be. :)That why there are measurements, but those are useless to most audiophiles, right ;-)
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
"That why there are measurements, but those are useless to most audiophiles, right ;-)"Right!
You are joking, aren't you?
There are no measurements for the kind of things we are talking about. You can take two systems that measure the same but will sound (to the ear) very different.
Hell, a Yamaha receiver with Bose speakers measure OK. We are talking about the measurements one takes, with his ears, after all the bench measurements have been satisfied.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
> There are no measurements for the kind of things we are talking about. You can take two systems that measure the same but will sound (to the ear) very different.If they sound VERY different, some not all of the measurements will be VERY different.
> Hell, a Yamaha receiver with Bose speakers measure OK
They wouldn't measure OK not even in comparison to a Kef iQ5.
> We are talking about the measurements one takes, with his ears, after all the bench measurements have been satisfied.
As Peter Azcel would say, we listen with our ears but measure with instruments ;-).
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
"If they sound VERY different, some not all of the measurements will be VERY different."That is just not true.
Have a nice day.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Tre - If they sound VERY different, some not all of the measurements will be VERY different." That is just not true.Can you show me an example of this?
BTW, your site has no mention of the XO details for your JBL/Morel.
Can you shed some light on this? What XO frequency for the Tweeter/mid. I can't see the Morel going low enough to match the directivity of the mid unless output levels were severely restricted.
A 5" diameter cone should be getting directional about 900hz or so.
Any off axis measurements?Cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
Just ask Julian Hirsch. "They all sound the same. Oh, you mean small differences that only people who are paying attention can hear. I wasn't talking about those differences" From an interview with Peter Sutheim.Remember, small differences are big differences to audiophiles like me.
I don't believe you understand what I'm talking about. It's too subtle for you yet what we audiophools spend our time chasing.
List your system. I don't answer questions about my system for the likes of you. :-)
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Tre - Just ask Julian Hirsch.That may be difficult to do.
Tre - "They all sound the same. Oh, you mean small differences that only people who are paying attention can hear. I wasn't talking about those differences" From an interview with Peter Sutheim.
In other words, you have no example of 2 items measuring the same but sounding different. Ok, that's what I thought.
Tre - Remember, small differences are big differences to audiophiles like me.
Real or imagined?
Tre - I don't believe you understand what I'm talking about. It's too subtle for you yet what we audiophools spend our time chasing.
That is probably true.
Tre - List your system. I don't answer questions about my system for the likes of you. :-)
My system has an effect on *your* crossover and speaker design? Interesting.
cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
"In other words, you have no example of 2 items measuring the same but sounding different. Ok, that's what I thought."You missed it. JH is the God of you science types. He, dead now, for years claimed that amps that measures the same, sound the same. On Peter's show he admitted that the he did not pay attention to the "small differences" admitting they exist but beyond his scope.
So, think again.
"My system has an effect on *your* crossover and speaker design? Interesting."
And what does my system have to do with anything? We were not talking about my system, were we?What does my system have to do with systems that measure the same sounding the same?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Tre - You missed it.Missed what? I still see no example being offered, by you, of 2 components measuring the same but sounding different. Can you cite this real life example, or did you simply imagine it?
Tre - JH is the God of you science types.
He is? Wow, I wish I knew that, being agnostic and all. So if I'm a "science type", does that make you a "non-science" type? "anti-science" type? "Selective science type"? Do you drive a car? Fly in planes? Use a computer?
Hmmmm.
He, dead now, for years claimed that amps that measures the same, sound the same. On Peter's show he admitted that the he did not pay attention to the "small differences" admitting they exist but beyond his scope.I'm not quite sure what this has to do with you presenting 2 components that measure the same but sound different. Again, is this something you read, or do can you cite a real example for scrutiny?
Tre - And what does my system have to do with anything? We were not talking about my system, were we?
What does my system have to do with systems that measure the same sounding the same?Nothing. I saw your speakers on your website and asked the following:
AJ - BTW, your site has no mention of the XO details for your JBL/Morel. Can you shed some light on this? What XO frequency for the Tweeter/mid. I can't see the Morel going low enough to match the directivity of the mid unless output levels were severely restricted.
A 5" diameter cone should be getting directional about 900hz or so.
Any off axis measurements?I'm a speaker builder and was interested. Perhaps you found the questions offensive or they somehow made you uncomfortable? My apologies. No offense intended, just curiosity. Nice drivers overall IMHO, but XO is the glue that holds it all together.
cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
Can you show me two amplifiers that are different but measure the same (that is, no differences that would account for them sounding different) and sound the same?I'll make it easier. Can you show me two amplifiers that sound the same?
______________________________________________________________
I have heard differences between CD players that measure, for all intent and purposes, the same.
____________________________________________________________________
So tell me about the JBL 2118. I'm not a speaker guy but the JBL seems to act like a big tweeter. Can you elaborate? (I'm asking you to tell me what I'm saying) Thanks.
____________________________________________________________
Please show the math for speaker beaming. I understand that once the wave length is shorter than the diameter of the cone beaming will occur. I'm sure there is more to it than that. Thanks._________________________________________________________________
I'm an engineer who understands that, when it comes to audio, we still don't know what to measure.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
I'm an engineer who understands that, when it comes to audio, we still don't know what to measure.Many times a product measures well and is considered done. Trained listeners observe that it sounds like crap. Those guys go back to the drawing board and lo and behold, they "find" something they ignored before to explain the observations.
.
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
> But electricity alone does not mean the music cannot be used as a reference.
It can be used as a reference, but not as a reference of live UNAMPLIFIED music, because it is AMPLIFIED ;-).
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
> It can be used as a reference, but not as a reference of live UNAMPLIFIED music, because it is AMPLIFIED ;-). <Drat those subtleties! :)
And then there's the problem of listening to a guitarist using an amp on the recording that clashes with the amp you're listening through at home! :)
.
Hi TubeguyKeep in mind that the B-word is defiantly at the low end in Pro-sound.
A great buy for the money but…like a really cheap guitar, it may not be the best player.
At the other end, look at a Lake Contour, ouch.Also a less obvious problem with pro gear in the home is the difference in “standard” levels. It is easy to attenuate the output back to “hifi” but to retain the proper gain structure / headroom, should amplify the hifi input up to pro level. If I recall, the difference in level is 14 dB, with Pro gear full signal or 0 dB being +14 dB over hifi 0dB.
When your hifi thing reaches max signal, it is still at least –14 dB from full on the pro gear its driving.
An issue with multiple stages of gear is noise, ideally, as the level reaches amp clipping, that all the other stages are say –2 dB from clipping also.
This puts the noise floor of each section as far below 0dB as practical while maximizing the systems dynamic range.
Pro sound uses higher signal levels (and often balanced signal cables) to reduce noise pickup.
How are those speakers coming?
Hey, are you near Orlando?Best,
Hello Tom :^)I know the B-word is defiantly at the low end in Pro-sound. Our mutual friend Paul B. the recording engineer told me and allowed me to hear it. Hey speaking of friends, how close is your new speaker to the one Nick at Lamda Acoustics was making when you licensed him to do so?
The RCA LC9As are coming along nicely but slowly. I can only do so much and then the pain becomes unbearable. As of now one is completely stripped and the other is about 80% stripped. Then comes the filling and sanding... YUCK!
I live exactly 20 - 30 mins east of downtown Orlando, Fla. Why do you ask?
Thetubeguy1954
Hi TomI maybe painted B a little too darkly, the stuff they make is usually very good for the price. Well, Nick’s speaker was the first generation Unity Horn alignment, about 7 years ago now.
Back then, it was as good as I could get it.That was a 2way horn with a compression driver and 4 mids on one horn body so it was “one source” from about 300Hz up...
After 5 years of fooling around with them, I found enough “things” to warrant a second patent application and am calling the new version a Synergy horn.
The SH-50 I had at the AES thing a couple weeks ago and the SH-25 (which will be introduced at the NSCA show in Orlando of all places, the 14th thru the 17th) are 3 way horn systems, 3 (frequency range) sets of drivers on one horn..
With the SH-50, the time is preserved well enough to reproduce a square wave from about 220Hz to 2600Hz, a range which spans 3 sets of driver and there crossovers and its polar pattern is that of one CD source.
We were going to demo a big Tapped horn woofer we made too but someone at the trade show got scared a couple weeks ago and now it is just going to be parked, with a ladder so you can go inside.. We weren’t going to crank it up loud but I was going to play the fireworks recording.
http://riekersoundreinforcement.blogspot.com/
Anyway, if you guys wanted to stop by, I would happy to give you the nickel tour.Let me know if you need a hand with your crossovers etc when it’s time.
Best,
Hello Tom,I remember well hearing Nicks setup of Lambda Acoustics version of your Unity horns. It was back when CFAS had our meeting at the local public TV station. They used to allow us to setup in one of their huge rooms which was about the size of a high schools indoor basketball court. Nick setup a monster version of the speaker with two 15" woofers below the Unity Horn and two 15" woofers above the Unity horn too! It things like that that cause me to get such a kick out of that old bird brained POLLYinFLA, constantly disparaging my choices in audio components. He believe's if I'm just shown the "right" setup I'll change my ways! He doesn't seem to believe I've been exposed to things like your Unity Horn when licensed to Lambda or Nelson Pass's First Watt amp just as it was being shown to the general public etc. I guess it's easier for him to believe I make this all up, rather than accept the fact that someone could have listened to most of what's available and still prefer an SET amp.
Tomservo said: Anyway, if you guys wanted to stop by, I would happy to give you the nickel tour. Tom I'd love to hear your new Synergy horn. Where exactly is the NSCA show going to be held in Orlando? I'd really like to meet you. Afterwards you can confirm to the lunatic-fringe objectivists here what a rabid dog I really am! Unfortunately this is happening with WLOQs start of the summer series of outdoor jazz concerts and I seldom if ever miss an opportunity to hear live jazz. But if I can possibly attend I will do so. As I said bfore it would be nice to meet you in person.
Tomservo said: Let me know if you need a hand with your crossovers etc when it’s time. Tom if you have any free time that while you're in Orlando I'll extend to you an open invitation to come and visit my home. You can see the RCA LC9A's and if you wish hear the "Italian Connection" Mastersound/BlueNote/Aliante.
Hi TomSometimes I cringe at some of the things said here. Its funny too as at the root of everyone’s reason for being here is an interest in getting better sound.
If it were easier to walk over and hear each others systems, it would be so much easier, sometimes there would also occasionally be those “ahhh….I see what you mean” moments..
As it is though, it leads to some lively discussion at times and sometimes requires a thick skin.
The trade show is at the convention center, a link is below.
I don’t know about the free pass situation but you can call the shop and ask about it (tell them I suggested you call). Maybe Paul B. has access to some being a recording kinda guy.
http://www.nsca.org/Expo/Attendees/EXPOBUZZ/HandsOnDemonstrationRooms/tabid/426/Default.aspx
I might have a chance to get away one evening or another although trade shows are generally pretty wearing and include going out to dinner with people etc (in other words its like real work).
We will have a demo room, an exhibit on the trade show floor and in the food court, the Matterhorn subwoofer will be parked.
I do get down to the mouse house occasionally to however so at some point I’ll take you up on your offer.
I think your LC9A’s have a lot of promise.
A couple years ago I rebuilt an A-7 for a friend. It needed drivers and a new crossover and I found a few mechanical issues in the cabinet that needed to be fixed.
The end product was better than I could have hoped for, Flat about an octave further each way than before and the phase measured as good as our stuff.
I think the geometry on your boxes would also allow a “modernization” in the same way.
While some things haven’t changed, what the drivers can do and what can be done in the computer, were simply unavailable back then.
Best,
Hello Again Tom,Like you I too, I cringe at some of the things said here.... Oh well. The invitation to come and visit my home is an open one, unlike what POLLYinFLA attempts to get people to believe here, I'm able to take constructive criticisms about my system (I know it's not perfect) and considering what you do and your vast knowledge I'd really appreciate your input. Should you get away some night it would be about 15-20mins east on the 408.
Here's a little info on the LC9As. The story of the RCA LC-9A is an interesting one, at least to RCA buffs. This model was developed by Mr. A.J. May, who was in speaker engineering at RCA from 1943 until the early 1980s. It was RCA's attempt to compete head-to-head with Altec's A7, and to improve on what RCA felt were the A7's shortcomings, most notably the lack of directivity control through the crossover region.
The LC9A used 120 degree radial horn flares for both high and low frequency sections, and achieved a very uniform pattern over this angle. The speed bump in the bass horn is the result of following n exponential flare profile. When you squeeze the horn into a radial horizontal format, the mathematical function forces this bump in the geometry. Due to the high construction costs of the cabinet and cast horn flares it was not cost competitive with the A7 and sold in very small numbers. It's estimated that only 100 to 300 pairs were ever made. The LC9A sold for $2000pr back in the very early 60's! Unfortunately RCA's audio division was really beginning to unravel by the time the LC9A was introduced, and it is probably safe to say that it did not receive the marketing effort that the design deserved. I have heard from people who heard a pair of them with original drivers, and they say they really are marvelous speakers with a captivating sound.
The LC9A was a bass reflex design, with three large ports on the lower front faces of the cabinet. Mr. May had intended to fit passive radiators to these openings. As the story was told to me, his managers heard the design at an early stage, found the performance to be "good enough", proclaimed the design finished, and reassigned A.J. to other tasks. Ah, the tribulations of working for a large corporation! From what I hear the people who own them hold them in high esteem and wouldn't part with them for anything.
Compression Driver - These RCA MI 11419's are actually JBL LE 175's OEMed for RCA by JBL.
Woofers - Unfortunately I cannot find a lot of info on these at this time other than it was called the MI 11424 and was a specially designed RCA woofer made specifically for the LC9 enclosure, designed by AJ May. It was a flat non alnico magnet. I've been extremely lucky as I was recently contacted by a man in California who has a single cabinet with the original drivers still installed, that I should be getting "if" the deal goes through.
Hope to see you Tom! Bye for now from the irrational, mean-tempered rabid dog, who love euphonically colored amp and sloppy coned speakers that don't sound anything at all like anything any serious audiophile/music lover would want to own...
Thetubeguy1954
TG54 - unlike what POLLYinFLA attempts to get people to believe here
....the irrational, mean-tempered rabid dogTom, you're taking this all way too seriously. Me saying something doesn't make it so. Me "insulting" your s-t-e-r-e-o is just that. Laugh it off. Why bring up all that stuff I kid you about, like your amp and temper, if you don't believe it yourself.
I'm sure most people know when I'm joking, needling or being serious here...except you.
If you recall, your "invitation" for me to visit was to demonstrate you being able to "hear" the difference between wires that measured no different, or no different enough to be audible, in a carefully uncontrolled listening test in your living room, to avoid the spotlight of doing so in a public forum, where you knew you would fail as all other audiophiles before you have. You simply wanted to avoid any such guaranteed embarrassment. I declined to participate in such an offer. I have better things to do with my time, as noted previously. You then insisted that I should at least hear the wonders of your particular low power tube amp, as if I had never heard a tube amp (or dozens) before. Ditto for your 2 way plastic cone monitor. There was simply no way I was going to travel all that way to hear something like that, which I have heard umpteen times before. It might sound a slight shade different from another little low efficiency 2 way box, like a Sonus Faber, as you yourself admit, like I have heard in various forms on a great many occasions. Again, that is not something I would travel 2 miles for, much less 80. If you actually had the RCA's functional with the TAD and Lambda units, that IS something I would travel for, even if hooked to a low power amp like yours, due to the sensitivity being high enough as not to be a major stumbling block to fidelity.
I would simply have ignored your fantasies about wires and came and heard your system, no strings attached.TG54 - who love euphonically colored amp and sloppy coned speakers
I never once said sloppy cones, I said floppy, alluding to the cone flex and bending hysteresis common to soft cones like the SS. I offered to bring my measuring laptop over to show you this behavior...and you declined. Ditto for the so called 1st order XO without diffraction loss correction.
I never once had a problem, with *you* saying you enjoyed them. It was much more the quotes about those being the best many expert listeners had ever heard and me being invited to drive all the way over to hear that type of sound as if it is not something I could have experienced on many occasions. I won't even mention the box coloration and monopole radiation in an acoustically small room.
The RCA is not my cup of tea either, but used with the mentioned drive units, would have been at least interesting enough to warrant my attention. So lets get at least that straight.cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
POLLYinFLA,Now states Tom, you're taking this all way too seriously. Me saying something doesn't make it so.
I'm glad you finally realize that Polly.
===================================================================
Me "insulting" your s-t-e-r-e-o is just that. Laugh it off. Why bring up all that stuff I kid you about, like your amp and temper, if you don't believe it yourself. I'm sure most people know when I'm joking, needling or being serious here...except you.First I do laugh off anything you say about audio, because it comes from a "man" whose audio system consists of multiple mis-matched solidstate pro amps, copious amounts of equalization via low-end Behringer digital equalizers and your bastardization of Dr Linkwitz's Orion design. That knowledge alone would send shivers of dread up the spine of an serious audiophile or music lover, so trust me I'm laughing. As are probably 90% of all the people here who know you truly believe that "system" is capable of sounding like anything more than a giant boombox!
However what you call joking & needling when you talk about me personally is a different manner altogether. I've told you I don't consider your actions to be "joking & needling" but rather see it as what it truly is, your serious attempts to provoke an outburst from me, because you feel safe hiding behind the moniker of your PC. When someone tells you they find your behavior offensive and you continue said behavior it is no longer "joking & needling" but rather now it is seen as what it truly is, i.e. a deliberate attempt to provoke me. As I've said many times before you're behaving like a child who torments a dog by constantly prodding him with a stick, feeeling safe in what you do because you can hide behind the length of chain that restrains the dog. Then when you're caught poking the dog by it's owners you proclaim I was ONLY playing with him. Just like you want me to believe you're ONLY "joking & needling" me. I'd love to see you in the midst of a group of black people and shout out: You're all N#$$@*S and then tell them you were only "joking & needling" them. Sorry POLLYinFLA but I see such behavior for what it is, the actions of a sick mind.
=====================================================================
Now POLLYinFLA you really need to stop fibbing and telling half truths. Let's tell the truth as it actually happened shall we? It's true at one time I invited you over to my home. But that was before I knew you to be the pompous prick I now know you as. The "invitation" was for you to witness a demonstration of my being able to detect differences in wires when/if you changed them with me out of the room. It wasn't to avoid the spotlight of doing so in a public as you like to imply as I've offered this same challenge to RBG and Pat D-Cake. Hell all 3 of you could have come at one time. The problem with you objectivists is you all proclaim that subjectivists cannot hear differences in wires, yet when asked to come and see a subjectivist do so, you develop a myriad of excuses why you won't come or why the test isn't valid. I knew I wouldn't fail this test as I've passed it many times before! Just like I knew your objectivist would come out & decline to come witness the test. I believe your excuse was you had better things to do with your time. I don't blame you POLLYinFLA it's hard to see all your audio beliefs shot down in front of your eyes. However later much to my amazement you actually ASKED me if you could come and visit my home and hear my system. Or are you going to deny that? It was on 12/21/06 when you said: Tom, I'm giving you a chance to prove to me and educate me that your system is as good as you say and others have confirmed (as you said). Why no forgiveness for your fellow audiophile in the season of giving? Hopefully doubt has not began to creep in. If it is as good as you say, how could I not like it? Fortunately for me by that time I seen enough of your posts here on PHP to know you to be the pompous prick you are. So I rescinded my original invitation to you, permanently! To help refresh your memory as to what actually happened there's a link to your post below...Do you really want to still pretend that didn't happen when I can prove it did? I offered you a chance to hear a 40W/CH SET which is quite high powered for an SET. And now you lie and say: There was simply no way I was going to travel all that way to hear something like that, which I have heard umpteen times before. When the reality is you; a) Asked to come hear my system, b) haven't heard a 40W SET umpteen times or dozens of time before, nor c) have you heard Aliantes umpteen times or dozens of times before.
Now if you wish to proclaim here in front of everyone that all 2-way monitors and all tube amps, let alone SET amps sound basically the same, please do so. You'll only be proving to everyone what I've been saying about you since the beginning ---your listening acruity really is piss-poor. That, however, at the very least would explain how you can believe that hodge-podge of gear you call a stereo is tolerable to you!
Thetubeguy1954
oo
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
POLLYinFLA,You are a sick man. Besides being a liar by claiming I'm threating you, which I've never done although I have offered you many the times the opportunity to act like man, which you've repeatedly declined.
Did poor little POLLY get his feathers twisted? Have I finally struck a nerve? Perhaps now you'll see you "joking & needling" as the sick, demented acts of violence that they are! FYI I'm Sicilian. Sicilains are decendents of Italian, Greek & Black mixed together. That's why on the tv show Sopranos they refer to Italians that aren't Sicilian as "white bread." My wife is 100% Colombian, so you're sadly mistaken POLLYinFLA when you call me a racist.
I think the analogys I provided struck you where it hurts. Now faced with the grim reality of being the pompous ass you are, you want to turn that on me and pretend I threatened you and I'm a racist. If you honestly believe I've threatened you Polly PLEASE, I implore you to go to the police and show them these vicious threats I've made. But you know as well as I do that I didn't threaten you and you're just lying, like you did when you said “…you consider them (measurements) useless and meaningless, because we really can't measure everything, so we might as well measure nothing and just listen with the trusty ol' ghost hearing measurement devices only, the ears.” Lying comes very easy to you huh Polly?
As I've said many times if you wish to meet we can. You're not afraid of a 53 yo disabled man are you? Especially one who's told you he is NOT threating you, but rather is giving you the chance to act like a man and say to his face the same nasty stuff you vomit into your posts and than pass off as "joking & needling." I have no intentions of hurting you in anyway (unless facing the truth hurts) As I've stated numerous time I want to help you, not hurt you.
To have him take a listen to the SH-25. I'm really looking forward to it and I can tell you Mr. Scata is rearing to go like an unchained pitbull. Should be a real ear opening experience for him, having gotten so use to hearing that little plastic cone box of his.
Two questions for you:
1) Is the rear chamber on the SH25 sealed to lower GD?
2) Did you get a chance to do the square wave test on the SH100?
Thnx.
BTW, the Behringers are cheapo, but the DEQ2496 is pretty transparent when using the digital thruput. Its no Lake, but its not supposed to be at that price point.
See ya there.cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
Near Avalon Park.
Nice place.
To crowded.
"Although POLLYinFLA would have you simply take his and Behringer's word that the ULTRACURVE PRO DEQ2496 is a component that offers "...extremely high audio performance (which) makes it ideal for audiophile mastering and PA purposes." Hey isn't that what the Objectivists here always accuse the Subjectivists of? Simply taking a manufactuer's word? Hmmmmmm...."You missed a key point, the effects of an equalizer on any given system are independently MEASURABLE.
Secondly, you said
"Although it's not the same model I've heard the ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024 used in any otherwise very nice system. Unfortunately it was immediately noticeable as being in the circuit between the amp & preamp, even when set to flat"
Look at the instructions that accompany the Ultra-Curve Pro DSP8024, specifically look at pages 22 -24 under Section called application, the device is not supposed to be used between the preamplifier and the power amplifier, but BEFORE the preamplifier, i.e. the equalizer should always receive a full signal, another point, did you adjust the input sensitivity accordingly to obtain optimum results, this point pretty much makes placing the equalizer between between the amplifier and the preamplifier a no-no if optimal results are to be obtained, the same should also apply to the DEQ2496.
PS: I will answer the response on Peter Aczel in detail in the next few days, Secondly, I suggest you drop this name-calling business, it is not condusive for rational discussion.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
You missed a key point, the effects of an equalizer on any given system are independently MEASURABLE.the measurements which quantify the loss of resolution, imaging, and dynamics wrought with cheapo op amp based equalizers when used full range? I have a third octave Behringer unit myself that I used to use on the subs in my HT. Wanna buy it?
rw
why the loss of resolution, imaging and dynamics wrought by ANY device is not meaasureable?
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
conventional metrics the least bit useful. Why does the Crown IC-150 measure great and sound horrible? Same answer.
I am told that it is sometimes called the ICK 150. ;-)
the Crown amplifier story is getting old. Where did you find the measurements of the Crown IC-150 and which measurements were published? I take it that you are referring to an amplifier from the 70's, however judging from your comments you knew even less about measurements then that you do now.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
of the uselessness of THD and IM measurements. Surely you don't think otherwise. If so, perhaps you might ask Mr. Danley the same question.Where did you find the measurements of the Crown IC-150 and which measurements were published?
You can still find the ICK manual on the Crown website. Tests were published back in the 70s by all the audio rags of that day. Everyone applauded the unmeasurable distortion. Yeah, right. :)
rw
I asked why"loss of resolution, imaging and dynamics wrought by ANY device is not meaasureable" {CORR]
not why THD and/or IM measurments might be useful or useless, which is irrelevant to the issue at hand. My question was "why is loss of resolution, imaging and dynamics wrought by ANY device is not meaasureable? Why not answer that one rather than discussing an irrelevant issue.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
If they did, then the virtually universal practice of voicing components by ear would be rendered unnecessary. Why would any human intervention be necessary if the metrics were conclusive? You might try actually talking to a designer to understand the question. As I have done.Specs don't tell us the whole picture. Never have. Maybe some day in the future they will.
Your deleted message contains several of your latest and most humorous fixations.
Still dancing around the question, eh?> If they did, then the virtually universal practice of voicing components by ear would be rendered unnecessary.
There is still a small matter called preference and that varies from individual to individual, voicing by ear does not mean that the parameters are unmeasurable, in fact folks have been known to voice by ear, then measure the final prototypes, those measurements then form the basis of the actual product.
> Why would any human intervention be necessary if the metrics were conclusive?
As stated many times in the past, metrics measure performance, not user perception or preference.
> Specs don't tell us the whole picture
Specs were never intended to give the full picture, in this instance I asked for measurements not specifications, big difference.
I take it that you obliquely accept that those parameters are measurable, am I right?
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
"then measure the final prototypes, those measurements then form the basis of the actual product."Only in the end as some form of quality control. The final arbiter is the ear of the designer or at least those that care about sound quality. How good that designer is at actually listening is a whole other issue and part of why many designs are "voiced" so strangely.
"As stated many times in the past, metrics measure performance, not user perception or preference"
But the performance of a piece of audio gear is intimately tied to listener perception. The two cannot be separated as you would have us do. Therefore, the metrics must relate to the listener experience and not the listener must conform to the metrics. This give relevancy to the metrics otherwise they are nothing more than a form of mental masturbation.
I use metrics all the time in my work as a chemist. However, those squiggles in a mass spectrum are representative of a reality and give direct correlation to the molecules being measured. If they didn't then they would have no relvancey and therefore no value in my work. Audio metrics are the same, they need to be correlated with the real world end point, ie. user experience.
Again, show me a measurement that can demonstrate loss of resolution (whatever that vague term actually means). Dynamics are in some ways measureable (but perhaps not relevant because the real music conditions differ).
There is still a small matter called preference and that varies from individual to individual...Why any engineer would choose lower (perceived) resolution or less than neutral response?
"I take it that you obliquely accept that those parameters are measurable, am I right?" (damn HTML tags not working again)
I will restate my opinion. The numbers alone do not provide any useful information. We have yet to measure RFI noise rejection. That increases noise and thus reduces dynamic range. If you were to compare two amplifiers with necessarily different spectral harmonic distortion plots, which one would you choose simply by looking at the spikes? Such information is more of a curiosity rather than providing any conclusive evidence.
Don't you know that by now? I merely state the obvious.
"Why any engineer would choose lower (perceived) resolution or less than neutral response?"Because the engineer is looking at the whole package, not just a single variable.
"I will restate my opinion. The numbers alone do not provide any useful information. "
I do not recall anyone (of note) claiming so, or do you evidence to the contrary?
> We have yet to measure RFI noise rejection
For amplifiers maybe because it is not particularly relevant, but RFI noise rejection is measureable and quoted on some products where it is a relevant metric.
"That increases noise and thus reduces dynamic range"
????, how could know you possibly know that without measurements or controlled tests. Increased noise and reduced dynamic ranges can occur as a result many other factors, to establish that it is caused by increased RFI requires measurements and controlled tests.
" If you were to compare two amplifiers with necessarily different spectral harmonic distortion plots, which one would you choose simply by looking at the spikes? Such information is more of a curiosity rather than providing any conclusive evidence."
For those that lack knowledge of how to correlate measurements to listening impressions you will be correct. However this scenario is not unique to audio but applicable to every area where measurements are used, and in a lot of cases it is simply down to a lack of knowledge on the side of the observer.
There is no explaining to do, those variables are measureable, however correlating them to listening observations requires some requisite knowledge.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
By all means, choose your gear solely on numbers. Good luck!
"By all means, choose your gear solely on numbers. Good luck!"Where did I ever say that, for one the measurements are not always available nor comprehensive enough to be able to make that a viable option. At any rate, you never did answer the question, did you?
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
At any rate, you never did answer the question, did you?You first. That is what began this exchange.
An impasse....willing to wager that you have absolutely zilch to put on the table, if you said this five posts earlier we could have saved ourselves a lot of pointless posts.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
that's exactly what I was thinking about you. What a coincidence! I ask you a question and you have evaded answering it for the following seven posts.Your lack of an answer is an answer. Same one I arrived at as well. :)
I suppose you forget the point at which you joined the conversation, i.e. I said the variables adjustment by Behringer DSP8096 are independently measurable, how else could they write a suite of program to modify them if they were not?Don't bother answering..
I directly quoted the comment to which I responded. Let me help you out....the effects of an equalizer on any given system are independently MEASURABLE.
> I directly quoted the comment to which I responded. Let me help you out.
...the effects of an equalizer on any given system are independently MEASURABLE.I wonder how Behringer managed to write a suite of programs to modify dynamics, imaging and provide dynamic noise-gating if they are not measureable.
What is your next crock?
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
You're talking about post processing effects and I'm referring to original audio signal integrity. The imaging to which I refer relates to less compromised signal quality, not a "setting" with a slider.
Earlier you said this"> I directly quoted the comment to which I responded. Let me help you out.
...the effects of an equalizer on any given system are independently MEASURABLE."now you said
"You're talking about post processing effects and I'm referring to original audio signal integrity"
What is the else will the effects of an equalizer? and even your new revised statement is still wrong, since you still have to measure the original "uncompromised" signal before making any adjustments.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
that despite your assertion, the effects of which cannot be fully measured. Signing out. You get it or you don't.
Obviously you do not get it, because it was and still is about audio quality pre and post-processing. I love your phrase "the effects of which cannot be fully measured", yet another crock, I said measureable, let's just say "fully measured" is a waste time and money, "relevant and applicable" is where the action is. AJinFLA's post is more succinct. he said"...because we really can't measure everything, so we might as well measure nothing and just listen with the trusty ol' ghost hearing measurement devices only, the ears."
it sums up your most of your posts nicely. Signing off
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
HI....assuming these are all "measureable" as you claimed. Using state-of-the-art instrumentation regardless.
and loss of resolution and dynamics are directly measureable.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
.
Why not just read it up yourself, the last time I checked you were not interested in such measurements, so why bother asking?
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
Hobby,Forgive me for saying so but this is typical objectivist behavior. You stated that dynamics (which I believe is easily measured) and loss of resolution are able to be measured.
Please explain how one measures loss of resolution and if you would what measurements determine soundstage Height? Depth? Width? Or how is air around instruments measured? Those are all important traits to me yet I know of no measurements that correlate with them.
Hi.Want to tell me where to find them again in case I've missed them.
But at the moment they can only be determined as such subjectively.
"But at the moment they can only be determined as such subjectively. "No, their subjective evaluation is no different than for other parameters such frequency response or SPLs. At any rate that is besides the issue, the point is that those parameters are in fact measureable. And we are back again discussing listener perception and objective measured performance and all the associated baggage, related but certainly not identical.
"No, their subjective evaluation is no different than for other parameters such frequency response or SPLs"How can you measure a loss of resolution? Dynamics, maybe but only with tests that don't really exist at the moment (for example measuring dynamic or power compression with a sudden burst to simulate real music transients). I have seen a paper on thermal compression and they found that at normal levels the speakers had only small differences in compression. However, one or the other speaker will SOUND more compressed than the other, which suggests that something was being missed in the measurements that were being made. At high levels often the woofer begins to compress first (this was always a test in Audio way back when and invariably the woofer would poop out before the mid and tweeter...at around 120 db though). The instantaneous shifts are not indicated by such a test and the ear seems to be sensitive to the difference.
"At any rate that is besides the issue, the point is that those parameters are in fact measureable"
They may be measureable but are they relevant?
"And we are back again discussing listener perception and objective measured performance and all the associated baggage"
Naturally because until there is a solid correlation between the two it will be the core issue.
"How can you measure a loss of resolution? Dynamics, maybe but only with tests that don't really exist at the moment (for example measuring dynamic or power compression with a sudden burst to simulate real music transients). "Well, Behringer made a good stab at it, even managed to write a suite of programs to modify some of those variables, how did they manage that ;-).
" However, one or the other speaker will SOUND more compressed than the other, which suggests that something was being missed in the measurements that were being made."
I doubt it is being missed, just not provided to endusers as the information is only useful to those with the requisite specialist knowledge.
Your response should be most interesting, please try and keep it polite.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
"Well, Behringer made a good stab at it, even managed to write a suite of programs to modify some of those variables, how did they manage that ;-)."They did what? Made software to reduce resolution? I mean I guess if you inject distortion or noise into the signal you can accomplish this. Dynamics? Well of course they can be expanded or compressed electronically but if we are talking about the native dynamics of a speaker then maybe they can measure some aspects of it but not under real music conditions.
"I doubt it is being missed, just not provided to endusers as the information is only useful to those with the requisite specialist knowledge"
Your speculations are duly noted but realize that in the absence of such data my position that the information is not available holds more water than your speculation that information is being withheld. Prove to me they can make relevant measurements in this regard. Maybe they can but maybe not.
"They did what? Made software to reduce resolution?"I thought we were discussion measuring the loss of resolution, at any rate some other programs do that, but that is an aside here.
"Dynamics? Well of course they can be expanded or compressed electronically but if we are talking about the native dynamics of a speaker then maybe they can measure some aspects of it but not under real music conditions"
Engineered dynamic compression/expansion takes place under real music conditions.
"Your speculations are duly noted but realize that in the absence of such data my position that the information is not available holds more water than your speculation that information is being withheld"
Your position is no more valid than mine, not that it matters anyway.
"Prove to me they can make relevant measurements in this regard"
Too much trouble....
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
"I thought we were discussion measuring the loss of resolution,"WE ARE!! And I would posit that you have not mentioned yet how measuring let alone clearly defining what is meant by loss of resolution can be accomplished. Now you say that Behringer whipped up some software to do just that? Name of the device they sell, please that does this (if you point me to a distortion box I don't whether to laugh or cry).
"Engineered dynamic compression/expansion takes place under real music conditions."
We are not talking about electronic purposeful solutions for making compression or expansion. It is well known that these things have existed for a long time. We are talking about getting accurate measurements from the intrinsic behavior of a driver under real music conditions. These are two completely different things and I hope you can see this.
My position is more valid because you are the one claiming its measurable and I am claiming that the determination under real world and not static conditions is not available. Since you can't or won't provide an example of how this might be done then my position is clearly stronger.
Engineered dynamic compression/expansion takes place under real music conditions.Is that real ketchup, Eddie?
Bwahahahahahaha!
nt
Hobby,You stated that I missed the key point, the effects of an equalizer on any given system are independently MEASURABLE. While I'm quite sure that you're correct Hobby about the the effects of an equalizer on any given system being independently MEASURABLE. I see the point as being more one of just because it's measureable that doesn't mean it automatically a good thing. So the point I was attempting to make is should we just accept POLLYinFLA & Behringer's word that the ULTRACURVE PRO DEQ2496 is a component that offers ...extremely high audio performance (which) makes it ideal for audiophile mastering and PA purposes? As you stated it's measureable, but is it use detrimental or advantagous?
=====================================================================
Next Hobby you said: Look at the instructions that accompany the Ultra-Curve Pro DSP8024, specifically look at pages 22 -24 under Section called application, the device is not supposed to be used between the preamplifier and the power amplifier, but BEFORE the preamplifier, i.e. the equalizer should always receive a full signal, another point, did you adjust the input sensitivity accordingly to obtain optimum results, this point pretty much makes placing the equalizer between between the amplifier and the preamplifier a no-no if optimal results are to be obtained, the same should also apply to the DEQ2496.I'll readily admit I just assumed it was placed between the preamp & amplifier. It's quite possible I am mistaken and will need to ask the owner if that's how it was inserted or if it was done as Behringer suggested in their manuel. Truth be told I cannot answer your question of did the owner adjust the input sensitivity accordingly to obtain optimum results? I will say I believe he did as he's a professional recording engineer and gets pretty picky about those types of things. What I can state as fact is it was immediately noticable in the system even when set to flat and it wasn't an improvement but rather detrimental to the sound. Last thing I knew the owner had removed it completely & has kept it out since then to the best of my knowledge.
=====================================================================
Finally Hobby you ended your post with with to comments: 1) I will answer the response on Peter Aczel in detail in the next few days. Ok I'll look forward to your response.2) You also suggest that I drop this name-calling business as it is not condusive for rational discussion. I agree with you Hobby it's not condusive for rational discussion. However I hope you'll agree it's just as detrimental for rational discussion when you talk about my intelligence, question my character and suggesting I need physiatric help. As for POLLYinFLA I originally posted to him in a very civil manner, but his first few posts were filled with disparaging comments that refered to my amp as an euphonic noise generator, my speakers as floppy little cones and IIRC refering to me as Tubeboob. He constantly talks about my needing therapy etc. I cannot find one post POLLYinFLA has ever written me that was a rational conversation. Most of his posts are either pathetic attempts a humor with personal digs or just plain ridiculing the person he's posting to and their audio components. As you've now hopefully seen, I address people in the manner they address me.
In any event, I'll be looking forward to your comments on Aczel.
Thetubeguy1954
Actually tubeguy the DEQ 2496 works extremely well as long as you use it digital in/digital out only. I also recommend using it with a couple of jitte boxes on the input and output. That being said the built in DAC in stock condition is OK but easily bettered. However; bypassing all the opamps inside and transformer coupling it out apparently works very well. The ADC that is built in is also OK, not studio quality but not half bad either. I had the cheaper 8024 and it is really no comparison, the DEQ 2496 is vastly superior in terms of function and sound quality. The 8024 used with analog inputs is a disaster (if you get the optional digital in and out it is not too bad actually).
That the DEQ might actually improve the sound of TG54's system, including his Aliantes with no baffle step filter in his non-anechoic room? Surely you jest? What about the collapsed sound stage and grit, grain, etc?
IIRC, he has some sort of CD player that deliberately measures poorly in order to sound good, so I'm not sure if he even has a digital out to use. Perhaps my good pal Tom can answer that one.
Great little cheap toy for "voicing" IMHO.cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
POLLYinFLA,Ignorantly states in his typical fashion that I (TG1954) have some sort of CD player that deliberately measures poorly in order to sound good, so POLLY's not sure if I (TG1954) even has a digital out to use.
First POLLYinFLA yes the BlueNote Stibbert most definitely has a digital out! Second how you the pompous, parroting proclaimer of poorly perceived putrid proclamations perchance pretended that the Stibbert purposely performs poorly in order to sound good, is just another fine example of more bird-brained banter of King POLLYinFla! I guess the bird brain considers these to be the measurements of a CD player, that measures poorly in order to sound good...
SPECIFICATIONS: DIMENSIONS: 550mm L x 250mm H x 450mm D - WEIGHT: Kg. 12,00 - FREQUENCY RESPONSE: 4Hz - 44KHz @ +/- 1dB - THD (Total Harmonic Distortion): 0,0001% Max. - SIGNAL-NOISE RATIO: 118dB - DYNAMIC RESPONSE: 127dB - SPEED FLUCTUATION: 0,0001% Max. - CONTROL DIGITAL SYSTEM: Zero-Clock™ - DAC: PCM1704 - DIGITAL OUTPUT: 75 ohms RCA connector - ANALOG OUTPUT: STEREO RCA + XLR connectors - POWER SUPPLY: Electro-Power™ 100/260Volt 50/60Hz electronic.
Sorry Tom, I think I confused you talking about some wacky unfiltered Kobiashi (sp?) CD player that you said measured bad so must sound good as your actual CD player. My bad.
Now what the hell is all that crap?cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
Yes POLLYinFLA, you definitely confused a previous converstion with about a CDP that measures poorly yet is supposed to sound very good. In any event the photo is the highly regarded Blue Note Stibbert, which is what I use. All that crap were the measurements you so love to rely on.Pondering & perusing the Stibbert's performance prior to posting this page of paranoid parrot proclimations could have possibly prevented POLLYinFLA's pathetic position, permiting him perchance to parlay this portion of his putrid plan & possibly prepare a path out when mistaken as his is... Alas he's but a bumbling bird-brain beaten before beginning because as he says... He confused what I was talking about! Here's a tip, take time, think, then talk!
I like those, although you consider them useless and meaningless, because we really can't measure everything, so we might as well measure nothing and just listen with the trusty ol' ghost hearing measurement devices only, the ears.
No, I was talking about all that crap around the CD drawer. Is that cube like a Borg ship, where it's picked up all that other junk or is the entire thing the cd player? Is that some sort of clamp?
Now another question for you. How would that Dilbert thing have improved upon the sound of Dr Geddes RMAF demo if substituted for the $50 Costco Toshiba? http://gedlee.com/downloads/Observations and Thoughts.pdf
TG54's thoughts and observations?cheers,
AJ
The threshold for disproving something is higher than the threshold for saying it, which is a recipe for the accumulation of bullshit - Softky
POLLYinFLAConcerning the specs of the Stibbert you commented: I like those, although you consider them useless and meaningless, because we really can't measure everything, so we might as well measure nothing and just listen with the trusty ol' ghost hearing measurement devices only, the ears.
Once again POLLYinFLA you're succeeding only in showing your stupidity and arrogance. Not one subjectivist person I know believes ALL measurements are meaningless. This is unfortunately your poor mistaken impression of what subjectivists believe. Your mistaken postion is further clarified when to add your comment of: because we really can't measure everything, so we might as well measure nothing and just listen with the trusty ol' ghost hearing measurement devices only, the ears. But lo & behold even Dr. Linkwitz, the man whose speaker design you bastardized in an attempt to "improve" it uses his ears and trusted the ears of a friend OVER measurements to make final improvements when voicing his Orions. So why would you use this design or use some variation of it, "IF" using the ear as the final arbitrator is such a heinous thing as you appear to suggest? You're a real hypocrite POLLYinFLA, you use a variation of speakers that were finally voiced by trusting the ear and then you ridicule everyone else who does that exact same thing!
What subjectivists believe is there should be a measurement for EVERYTHING we hear. It's an unfortunate state of affairs that today's measurements as they're typically used in audio correlate very little with what we hear. Ask Tom Danley about that Polly! So POLLYinFLA as you're the one who bows at the altar of measurements, please tell me which measurement defines how high a soundstage will be? Which measurement defines how wide a soundstage will be? Which measurement defines how deep a soundstage will be? Which measurement defines how much "air" will be heard around the performers & instruments? Which measurement defines what a components resolution capabilities are? What measurement defines a components imaging capabilities? These are all important to me so please tell which measurements I need to read and how to interpret them. If you do that I'll use them, I promise! But until you do so I'll have to trust MY ears, not some ghost's ears.
===================================================================
POLLYinFLA continues with: No, I was talking about all that crap around the CD drawer. Is that cube like a Borg ship, where it's picked up all that other junk or is the entire thing the cd player? Is that some sort of clamp?I'm quite sure you don't really care about this CDP at all but instead are yet again attempting to ridicule or provoke me. However in case anyone does care. The BlueNote Stibbert's actual CDP itself is the gray box that hangs down from the black acrylic plinth. It is completely isolated via 4 conical springs. The main plinth of the CD player chassis, just as the Bluenote analog record players, is made of a 20mm thick black acrylic shaped like the Ferrari Formula 1 steering wheel. This special shape, was purposely designed to have totally non-parallel edges, which increases enormously the structural rigidity. The implementation of the design is to virtually eliminate any vibration feedback.
=====================================================================
Now POLLYinFLA I don't know why you insist on asking me questions like: How would that Stibbrt have improved upon the sound of Dr Geddes RMAF demo if substituted for the $50 Costco Toshiba?As I've told you numerous times in the past, unlike you I don't comment on audio components I haven't heard. I will admit that if there wasn't a marked improvement that was immediately noticeable when inserting the Stibbert in place of a $50 Toshiba CDP, I'd be shocked! I can tell you this much because I heard it for myself, the Stibbert made a marked improvement when it replaced the Audiomecca KEOPS CDP I was previously using. The Audiomecca KEOPS also made a marked improvement when it replaced the CAL DX2 I used before it. As for the difference between a $50 Toshiba and the $5000 Stibbert I BELIEVE it would be so dramatic that even you'd comment about the differences heard. However until I heard it for myself I cannot promise it would be so, but I believe it would be so with all my heart.
"I like those, although you consider them useless and meaningless, because we really can't measure everything, so we might as well measure nothing and just listen with the trusty ol' ghost hearing measurement devices only, the ears."Yep, you captured the foolishness that pervades thinking of many on this board.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
Who in the world... or just on this board ... thinks we should measure nothing at all in audio??? It's a statement that is so far beyond ridiculous that I find it hard to believe anyone feels that way.
"So the point I was attempting to make is should we just accept POLLYinFLA & Behringer's word that the ULTRACURVE PRO DEQ2496 is a component that offers ...extremely high audio performance (which) makes it ideal for audiophile mastering and PA purposes? "Are you suggesting that they cease to market their products with favourable language, they are not making any outlandish claims for their product nor do they judge their product to have a performance that is impossible to capture by measurment, if their liberal use of the word "high audio performance" does not meet your expectation then you move on, I do not see why there is a problem here.
"I'll readily admit I just assumed it was placed between the preamp & amplifier. It's quite possible I am mistaken and will need to ask the owner if that's how it was inserted or if it was done as Behringer suggested in their manuel. Truth be told I cannot answer your question of did the owner adjust the input sensitivity accordingly to obtain optimum results? I will say I believe he did as he's a professional recording engineer and gets pretty picky about those types of things. What I can state as fact is it was immediately noticable in the system even when set to flat and it wasn't an improvement but rather detrimental to the sound. ."
Well, the DSP8026 is a relatively complex beast, it certainly a'int plug n' play, learning how to use it pays dividends. And flat is about the worst setting you can use, the manual advices against using 'flat' response for many situations, so using the 'flat' setting as a benchmark for performance is misleading and not necessarily indicative of the performance of the unit.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
"Your speakers, your room and the speaker/room interface.
A fantastic way to add voicing that is not fixed, but infinitely adjustable is to insert one of these (link) between your CD players digital output and your (pre)amplifier.
Good luck."Aside from some Altecs played at low volume, the best sound I've heard from one of these amps was with Bose speakers.....
I initially thought the Bose speakers kind of knocked down what seemed to be HF nasties of the amp, but based on what you stated, maybe the Bose speakers are better than we've thought....
And gotten all sorts of different voicing from them. So, there's more to it than the infinite variables of book cases, curtains, and tone controls. I recently snagged a cheap LM3886 amp to hear what it was about and it was about being warm, fast, and detailed. My one tube amp is sizzling fast, detailed, light in bass, and cool sounding. And so it goes.......This brings about the my unanswered question of how does an audio designer know what his creation will sound like without building it and playing it hundreds of hours to know exactly how it will shake out? But, that's another post.............
Hi.Nobody knows the outcome without some trials & errors or researching.
One time a sensior design engineer of AudioQuest, the 26-year old cables/cords makers, told me its products all gone through intensive sighted (sorry!) audition sessions by a panel of third party personnels, including audio critics etc & their design/production to go along with the panel's joint subjective recommendations.
Chips, like anything else in audio, get their own so called sonic
signatures, due to their designs & interfacing conditions with mating parts. We are talking complex L, C, R networking, my friend.LM3886 is a high performance audio amp chip broadly used in digital surround audio amp/receiver application. It can deliver 68W/4R rms
with Vcc at lowly +/- 28V, with effective O/P protection.How chips sound like? Let me take a successful story of Red Wine Audio which design/builds linear chips audio amps only & earns rave apraisals from critics & end-users alike in recent years. Repeat award winners.
Its owner/designer took tons of patience & pain to tune up the 2051 chip WITH a non-inductive stepped volume attenuator to work out his repeatedly award winning amps which sonically beat many exotic amps, SS or SET alike.
Just like a slap on the face of many tube only lovers, here is an end-user's appraisal:
"Sitting in the dark in the evening with a glass of red wine, music emerges & floats & decays as naturally as if the musians were in the room..."
That said, I personally never auditioned Redwine Audio's latest "Best of 2006" award winning chip amp.
Until I had, I still stick to my belief discrete devices still sound more musical to my ears than any chip amps I've heard.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: