2. analog
  3. 1197397501

An Audiophile Goal

An Audiophile Goal.

I have been grappling with the perceived problem of listening to LPs at the same volume setting, for every LP. The original post that I addressed this problem with is here http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1179765549&openmine&zzAcoustat6&4&5#Acoustat6. It was to discuss my idea of playing back all LPs at the same volume setting regardless of type of music or recording etc. To say it was a debacle would be an understatement to say the least. The discussion did not start the way I thought it would and went quickly downhill from there. I would like to put that behind me and realize why it was so controversial and failed as a discussion. As I originally said this idea was new to me and it took such a long time to coagulate my thoughts about this and the reasons why it works. The answer is obvious now. I didn't have an audiophile goal.

I got the answer from reading the recent post about J. Gordon Holts article in Stereophile which was discussed on Audiogon. .
The reference being about an audiophile goal in one of the posts. This was my thought, myself and audiophiles in general don't have an audiophile goal (actually, I do have several but I will stick to the topic). It seems that no one can agree on a goal, its all so subjective some say, I like it loud, I like it quiet, I like a lot of bass, I like imaging and on and on. This is fine, that is why we all buy different speakers and equipment. It comes down to you can't measure music. You have to hear it, does it make your toe tap? Can you listen at a low level? Is the tweeter too bright? Is the Bass too loud? Ad nauseum. And there we go again are my toes tapping enough? What is low level listening? Is the bass loud enough for hip hop but too loud for a violin concerto?

I found myself an audiophile goal and an easy one at that, its 20-20k hz. Yeah, you like it too. Right? You buy phono cartridges, pre-amps amps etc. that are flat 20-20k hz. So my audiophile goal is to get 20-20k hz flat (as possible). I said I needed a goal! I know there is more to it than that, but undeniably it is a goal. Now if I go with a test reference of 83db at 1000hz from my test LP this will be an excellent level for dynamics, noise levels and acuteness of hearing. All that is required is 1000hz at 83db from the test LP and all other freq matching this level, So 10,000hz and 5,000hz along with 500,100, 80, 50 and 30hz with all of the freq in between at the specified level of 83db will all be played back off of the test LP at the same level or as close as possible as can be obtained within a systems speakers and equipment and rooms limitations. Find this level and you leave your volume control set to this position for every LP you play. Pretty simple actually.

The original idea came to me slowly over the last three to four years, though I struggled with the quandary for as long as I can remember and I have yet to hear anyone say, sure you don't do that? I thought we all did. All because I didn't have an audiophile goal. Now I find out that perhaps even J. Gordon Holt may not have an audiophile goal, even one as simple as this. The best thing is now I get to listen to all of my LPs at the same gain setting with its attendant qualities of dynamics, constant noise levels, unchanging freq response and a host of other benefits which come along for the ride.

I knew it was wrong to be changing volume levels and bass levels for different LPs. Jumping up in the middle of a song to hear the bass drums or turning it down for a quiet violin solo and doing the same for complete albums. It was insane, I always felt like I was in junior high school cranking it up for the cool parts. But every one does it, so did I. I was missing that audiophile goal.

I enjoy listening to my Lps, many of which I still have from my early high school days and everything in between which amounts to about 2500 quality LPs. As a now confirmed audiophile, now that I have a realistic and perhaps more importantly a measurable goal, I could start figuring out which albums sound good and which do not. It was easy, every LP is played back at the same gain level (volume control setting if you will) and guess what you hear? Every Lp for what it actually sounds like.

Another benefit is that every system you hear is played back to the same standard from the same test LP, perhaps it could even be used at audio shows where every room is played back at this reference setting. If you choose not to listen at the standard then it is stated at the door that reference setting is either higher or lower than the reference. This way if you choose not to abuse your hearing in a room that is 6db above the reference standard you are warned before entering.

And all of this because J Gordon Holt didn't have an audiophile goal.

If you can listen to one Lp at a certain level whether it be a high or low level why can't you listen to any other record at that level?

Just a few thoughts.
Thanks,
Bob
acoustat6
johnnyb53
3,510 posts
 
Putting your efforts and money into 20-20KHz +/- 0dB is counterproductive for several reasons.

1. Flat frequency response is overrated in the sense that it is the distortion that we listen through the most easily. Think about a live concert. Between concert room interactions to the sound guy doing EQ boosts and dips, live music is never flat, yet it is the gold standard for fidelity because it is real. We are more used to listening past frequency nonlinearities than any other type of distortion.

2. Flat frequency response would be nice if it were achieved from one end of the signal chain to the very end, but it never is. So having a flat response for playback only preserves the last tweaks during mastering. Some recordings are mastered to sound good on an iPod or a car radio. Is this how you want to hear them through a 20-20KHz flat system? Personally, I can't BEAR to hear Motown CD reissues on a hi-rez system.

3. Some means of achieving flat frequency response wreck other sonic cues for which human hearing is more sensitive. For example, heavy-handed equalizing messes up phase relationships, which we use to identify timbre and location. That's one reason 1st generation CD players sounded so bad--they used a "brick wall" analog filter to shut down any frequencies above 20KHz, and wrecked the phase relationships of the audible overtones from 5-20Khz in the process.

4. 20KHz is nowhere near high enough to achieve realistic-sounding fidelity. It's not that we can easily identify test tones above 20KHz, but the upper frequency response also defines the rise time of every reproduced note. If my math is correct, a 20Khz top end limits rise time to 1/40,000 of a second. Listen to a system with electronics rated out to 150KHz and the music sounds more lively with faster and more dramatic transients. Good transparency requires speed. Look at how the Gram Slee Era Gold is such a highly regarded phono stage for the money. The designer is adamant that having a frequency response out into the MHz range is essential for preserving speed and upper octave overtones and therefore, timbre.
stubby
73 posts
 
This is why I listen to CDs. :)
mlsstl
1,438 posts
 
An LP has a dynamic range in the 60 to 70 dB range. There are physical constraints on the maximum groove excursions that can be stamped into a record.

The length of a record also affects the volume at which a record can be cut. If you want the max out of an LP, you can't put much more than 15 minutes a side on a record. If the recording doesn't have much bass, you can make this longer. If the engineer is willing to lower the record level, you can get still more time.

You also don't want to intentionally record at a lower volume than needed, as this will sacrifice the signal to noise ratio of the recording.

Examples: if I have a 30 minute harpsichord recording and make use of the headroom available on the LP, it will sound much louder than a 50 minute Led Zeppelin record with heavy bass. The recording level pressed into the Led Zep LP had to be significantly reduced to accommodate the extra bass modulation and time.

You have to use your volume control to play each of those records at a volume appropriate to the live version.

A LP record has a set of fixed constraints that an engineer must work within. How he juggles those to best match the demands of a particular recording will vary widely from LP to LP.
dan_ed
2,451 posts
 
Hell, if measurements told the whole story we'd all have excellent sounding rooms. ;-)
lewm
13,108 posts
 
Picking up on what others have said, and I hope adding to it, instead of driving yourself nuts trying to "equalize" your room, there is a fairly reasonable path to your goal, costwise, using digital equalizers. Several of these have been reviewed especially by Robert E Greene of TAS whose obsession with flat in-room response is similar to yours. You should be reading his articles, not Holt's. Equalizing in the digital domain ameliorates or avoids phase problems, too. You might be able to find one of the units that REG has reviewed in the Agon for sale listings, for a "reasonable" price.

Having said that, I can tell you that I listen to most all my records at one of two volume settings on my preamp, and they are only one click apart, i.e., about 9 o'clock and about 9:30 on the dial. (I have a very high gain LOMC-capable preamp.) But almost all LPs sound fine at 9 o'clock. So have I reached some sonic nirvana by doing that? I don't know, never thought about it in that vein, but I AM loving my phono playback system these days. My cdp is on the workbench for some upgrades, for the past 2 months, because I don't miss it.
More to discover