Is the appeal to euphonic distortion learned?

I don’t think its learned.

The presence of enough 2nd or 3rd (both are treated by the ear the same way) masks the presence of the higher ordered harmonics. This is common in tube equipment but not so much in solid state equipment, although Nelson Pass (as an example) is careful to see to it that his stuff expresses a bit more of the lower orders than many solid state products to create this masking.

I’m not saying that his stuff makes more distortion. I am saying that the **ratio** of lower orders to higher orders is enough that the lower orders are able to mask the higher orders to a certain extent. So you can still have lower distortion, say 0.05%THD and still get this masking to work.


Traditional solid state has typically been lower distortion but since the higher ordered harmonics aren’t masked solid state has gotten a reputation for being bright and harsh, since the ear is keenly sensitive to these harmonics and assigns a tonality to all forms of distortion. This is why tubes are still around.

Its arguable that the orders of the harmonics should have a weighting system applied, since the ear is insensitive to the lower orders and very sensitive to the higher orders.


When the music is correctly reproduced, the higher ordered harmonics won’t be audible. But when the 2nd in particular is too profound, the electronics are said to be ’euphonic’, which is to say that they are musical, just perhaps not all that neutral.


But this is certainly not learned! All humans respond to these harmonics in the same way; the higher orders are used by the ear to sense sound pressure. That is why the ear is so sensitive to them.
Report this

Very good posts right on the spot for me thanks...


I will only add that all discussion in audio about S.S and tubes are secondary to the main point : how to reach the highest S.Q. possible...

Why?

Because that means nothing at all comparing tubes/versus S.S. in general... There is too much difference in the different embeddings conditions where these comparisons took place sometimes and too much difference between bad and good S.S. and bad and good tubes and all levels between bad and good.... Then chosing one abslutely over the other possiblity make no sense....Anyway electronic design can create these 2, tubes and S.S., on par with each other... Sansui made it 45 years ago.... 


Acoustic control is one of the 3 keys to S.Q. and the main one key, choice of gear are only fouth,five,and six’th keys..... Second key is electrical noise floor control and third key mechanical vibrations and resonance control...

Why?

Because it is way more easy to buy a decent very good piece of gear than implementing the processus of controlling all the different parameters embeddings ,especially the acoustical one...

How do you think a tube amplifier or a S.S. amplifier sound in a bad room?

How much value can we give to a review in an bad or not optimally controlled room when the reviewers speak about "nuances" and subtle acoustic cues ?


Creating this thread is fun anyway and we must learn something with post like the one i just used ..... Thanks to the poster....Thanks to the OP.

Shamelessly stolen. Oh well at least you waited a decent amount of time.

And thank you for making my point.

I crave detail. If it’s all euphoric and warm

Ultimately it is not the gear that will give that, even well chosen, but acoustical embeddings controls ....

Why?

Because detailed and euphonic are a gross and not so subtle way to speak about acoustical qualities that are dependant for their manifestation way more from the embeddings controls than from the gear itself even the speakers for most of us with speakers under 5,000 dollars...

Myself i want way more than details and euphony, i want pin point imaging, natural tonal timbre, over the speakers soundstage, listener envelopment experience, and good source acoustical width experience... If i had that i will have details and euphony but because  of the rightfully controlled acoustical, electrical and mechanical  embeddings, not by the magical virtue of a brand name manufactured product, so well designed it is....

It is easy to buy something good nowadays, much more difficult to place the gear in an optimally set controlled environment....

There are real instruments 🎹. They can be heard at live concerts (currently excluded).  There are hi fi systems that can make you feel like you’re listening to such an event in your home.  A lot of high end approved gear sounds like your listening to the players in an anechoic chamber.    Use your ears 👂. Talk to someone who has experienced the high end journey from the 60’s till today.  Call Steve at Decware...you will learn much and be happier for it!

A lot of high end approved gear sounds like your listening to the players in an anechoic chamber.

Many people really think that the sound coming from a 100,000 speakers is ALWAYS better than a 1000 dollars one....They trust the price not the room and not their ears, and there is NO musicians in this group and thread....Musicians dont buy audio product because they are the more high cost....


Give any speakers to a skilled acoustician, it will make one sound bad the other heavenly, with no regard to their price.....

But understand me right, a 100,000 bucks pair of speakers is probably better designed than a 1000 bucks one.... But the key factor that will distinguish them could be and is often the room controls....

By the way the human hearing faculties are way less more deceptive that "skeptic sunday scientist" says they are... Reason is simple, evolution.... recognizing timbre voice speech and the source of sounds is vital tool for survival.... The first sense to be born is hearing, the baby listen his mother voice, and in coma and death you can speak with people, it is the last sense organ to go.... The ears and hearing faculty in men can learn a lot and increase in experience, in musicians for example, way more than the eyes could be trained themselves... The reason is that in sounds experience, content and meaning are very important factors which ask constant  translation and interpretation....

Then yes the ears can be deceived, but not so easily than said by the obsessive blind test group of skeptic scout pretending  it ....