The question I always had with measurements, are we even measuring the correct things for human hearing parameters?
Let me end the Premp/Amplifier sound debate ...
I'm old enough to remember Julian Hersch from Audio magazine and his very unscientific view that all amplifiers sounded the same once they met a certain threshold. Now the site Audio Science Review pushes the same.
I call these views unscientific as some one with a little bit of an engineering background as well as data science and epidemiology. I find both of these approaches limited, both in technology used and applied and by stretching the claims for measurements beyond their intention, design and proof of meaning.
Without getting too much into that, I have a very pragmatic point of view. Listen to the following three amplifier brands:
- Pass Labs
- Luxman
- Ayre
If you can't hear a difference, buy the cheapest amplifier you can. You'll be just as happy. However, if you can, you need to evaluate the value of the pleasure of the gear next to your pocket book and buy accordingly. I don't think the claim that some gear is pure audio jewelry, like a fancy watch which doesn't tell better time but looks pretty. I get that, and I've heard that. However, rather than try to use a method from Socrates to debate an issue to the exact wrong conclusion, listen for yourself.
If you wonder if capacitors sound different, build a two way and experiment for yourself. Doing this leaves you with a very very different perspective than those who haven't. You'll also, in both cases, learn about yourself. Are you someone who can't hear a difference? Are you some one who can? What if you are some one who can hear a difference and doesn't care? That's fine. Be true to yourself, but I find very little on earth less worthwhile than having arguments about measurements vs. sound quality and value.
To your own self and your own ears be true. And if that leads you to a crystal radio and piezo ear piece so be it. In my own system, and with my own speakers I've reached these conclusions for myself and I have very little concern for those who want to argue against my experiences and choices.
- ...
- 197 posts total
If all acoustic cues are there at the minimal volume, the lowest possible before being inaudible, whitout any loss between them, the audio system is well embedded and well chosen, and synergetically matched... Thanks to these 2 posters remarks for this important reminder....BUT For sure the "listener envelopment factor", which is rarely mentionned in audio threads but which is a very important one, will ask though, particularly in some room size and geometry, for an optimal sound level which will not be high but not too low if you wanted it optimal,unlike the other acoustic factors like timbre and dynamic or imaging for example which will not be changed by a substantial loudness lowering.... The listener envelopment though depends not on sound optimal level "per se" but "on having strong lateral reflections arriving at the listener 80 ms or more after the direct sound "....The sound level being optimal for the room which is my point... By the way a better ionization of the room will help for the listener envelopment factor if the audio system/room acoustic controls can give it to begin with because this factor is a bit more difficult to get it right than imaging and soundstage only, you cannot have it before having a great imaging and soundstage already, the listener envelopment will come after like an ultimate refinement of the room/listener position in using a better timing between direct and lateral reflections but also back/front reflections and in the right amount of reflections for sure...Balance between diffusion, reflection and absorption is an art of listening here.... Anyway people with the habit of listening at too high sound level have a problem (80 decibels is the LIMIT for any long listening ) , be it their ears or the system/room , or the music choices.... Sorry .... 😁😊
|
We are, if all the measurements are actually made and often they are not. I think I outlined what is needed to know the sound of any amplifier earlier in this thread. I find it interesting that those interested only in the specs discount the subjective aspect so vehemently. I think this arises out of not understanding that all forms of distortion are audible as tonality. That's a bit of connecting the dots. But once you understand that simple fact, the whole idea of things being 'audible and not measurable' goes away. But you have to also understand what the measurements are saying. |
Priceless remarks indeed like usual... I will only add to "tonality" what is called "timbre" .... The micro dynamic of the tonal playing instrument timbre reveal much about the system/room interaction... In acoustic CORRELATION between measures and subjective timbre perception is crux of the matter... Same in electronic engineering design like say atmasphere... Then dividing subjectivist amd objectivist camp is preposterous .... For sure it is always measurable but not always with a material external tool only like some claim but always measurable in the sense of correlating a tool measure with the subject hearing interpretation...It becomes after that a standard in acoustic and in engineering... |
Dear @erik_squires : I know I arived late to your thread, an interesting one.
" And if that leads you to a crystal radio and piezo ear piece so be it. " well that could be something " extreme ". In general audio improved through the years and today any one can listen " differences ", only a deaf can't hear.
" to remember Julian Hersch from Audio magazine and his very unscientific view that all amplifiers sounded the same once they met a certain threshold. Now the site Audio Science Review pushes the same. " In those vintage years electronics were designed and builded using the active and pasive devices that existed. Designers have not " hundred " of options about and along that the today high-end meaning was non-existent so de electronics designs were manufactured with way different targets than today units. In the other side the room treatment concepts was almost something new even for reviewers. Because of all those and several other reasons the systems were not high resolution ones and with this real limitation was not easy to find out quality differences.
I don't know today why ASR says " amps sounds the same " because I don't have the specific link where they attest about. But today it's almost imposible that 2 different manufacturer designs can sound the same. As I said audio improved through the years, today passive and active devices improved really over those vintage years and exist more options that in the past. In the other side normally each designer has his own whole targets on what he will design and build. The circuit layouts are not the same in those 2 different manufacturer electronics and not only that but not only that because a designer can choose smd passive devices instead true hole and the power supply design of those amps will be different too with different choosed parts even the input/output connectors and internal wiring came from different parts manufacturers.Heatsinks are different too and even the amp class operation or the global feedback levels. All those parameters/characteristics modulates each one amp quality performance and yes we can listen the differences no matters what because our system today has way higher resolution than in the past. Active/passive parts and design has its sound signature/coloration and this coloration is what we listen it. A few months ago I wanted to improve my external crossovers in the speakers and I posted a thread in Agon looking for help on capacitors: I was running V-caps and Soniccraft but already used Duelund/Mundorf/Jantzen/Audyn, Audicap, MIT/etc/etc suddenly I remembered that I have a lot of Wima caps that in the past I changed for " better " caps soI try the MKP10 and to my surprise it performed with higher quality levels, I finished using the FKP1 in combination with Kemet caps but I was using at the input of my monobloks ( cappacitor coupled. ) very expensive teflon cooper V-caps and I tested there the FKP1 and wonder what: outperforms the V-caps ! !Al these " unexpected ". Today if electronics are working inside its specs develops very low distortions and when today amps are developing high distortion levels that we can listen is because those amps are been overloaded are been out of its headroom. Today is extremely difficult that we can listen amp distortions because those amp designs are well designed and the designer know that his competition just does not do it, today manufacturers puts high care about. Again, if the amp/preamp is running inside its design specs we normally will not hear distortions or almost no distortions.
@glennewdick " are we even measuring the correct things for human hearing parameters? " Please re-read my last post because those kind of measurements you are asking for just does not exist and in my posts I try to explain about. Of course I can be wrong.
R.
|
- 197 posts total