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
acoustat6 OP
357 posts
 
I believe what a number of you missed was not only the 20-20k response important but more importantly is the 83db 1000hz level. Really it is the place to start and I found it by accident just like Madame Curie and Galileo found... Oh nevermind.

Here are some of my thoughs recently and why I needed an audiophile goal. I believe that perhaps as you get closer to "a good freq response" all you need is 83db at 1000hz playedback from a test LP for an "easily" accomplished goal. This goal is a nice place to be, it is working for me. There are a number of reasons that 83db is used and I suggest you research "83db reference level". And if you all get lazy let me know and I will attach some links. My though would be most have heard of this allready.

For myself I am not expecting flat 20-20khz in my room and I do have a slight tilt up in the last octave which I like. I am still working on my room and system as I would like a better freq response. I know about the BBC curve also.

Now wouldn't it be nice to go to a show or a friends house and listen at the same levels? Of course being that the only freq you are expected to get correct is the 1000hz signal, all of the others freqs, being like mine and everyone elses systems, probably not nearly as flat as we would like. Would that not be what we are listening to?
How you get there and how well you you do is your thing and if you choose not to listen at that level it would just be duly noted that your system is playing at a louder or softer level than the reference.

Bob
opalchip
355 posts
 
Hi Bob,

What you're missing that people are trying to explain is that there is no correlation AT ALL between where your Volume knob is set and achieving 83db IN ROOM listening level on a particular record. And because human hearing itself responds differently at higher and lower listening levels, as does the relative response of room mode factors - You must have identical in room's to compare two lp's. The only way you could do that would be if every lp had a test tone track incorporated.

What you do by leaving your Volume knob at a spot where your system produces 83db from ONE randomly chosen test disc, is measure how much relative gain the Mastering engineer applied to the cutter head of each record - kind of. I say "kind of" because even this would only be true if all lp's were recorded at the same In Studio db level.

In cutting lp's, each performance has different requirements determined by how much the stylus travels during low frequence peaks and also by random decisions made about how many minutes and which tracks to put on each side of the lp. The more minutes, and the louder the bass content, the lower the gain you can apply to the cutter head - it's that simple.

Let's take for example, an lp that has nothing but a 1000hz tone that was actually recorded while the tone was being played at a measured in room 83db level in the recording studio. Covering all of side A is 17 minutes of this tone and covering all of Side B is 23 minutes of the exact same 1000hz tone played into the microphone at 83db.

Now - keep in mind that the disk mastering engineer has to reduce the excursion of the cutter head to fit the extra 6 minutes of grooves onto Side B. The tone was still recorded at 83db in the recording studio, however - Same tone, Same vinyl, same stamper number. But the grooves on the 23 min. side will have smaller squiggles and your cartridge will produce less db gain as the coils or magnets travel back and forth a correspondingly shorter distance in the same amount of time.

What happens now?

Not only does it tell you NOTHING about the recording itself to play back both sides with your Volume Knob at the same place - it is FLAT OUT misleading. If you set your Vol. Knob to measure in room 83db while playing the 17 minute side - producing the sound pressure level EXACTLY AS IT WAS RECORDED, and you leave your Vol. Knob where it is to play Side B - you would NOT produce in room 83db and therefore NOT be playing the tone EXACTLY AS IT WAS RECORDED. Case closed.

The 15 minute side will be louder. And it will sound slightly better to you because of that fact alone. (We don't need to prove that the same software, cut at a lower gain will produce more rumble and expose more noise in a system than one cut at a higher gain. We know that.)

Now it's obvious, but with 2 different lp's - before you can decide if one lp is of better quality, either as recorded OR as your system reproduces it - you have to turn your Vol. knob to the point where the the lp is measuring in your room at the level (or a fixed minus/plus db of the level) where EACH WAS RECORDED - which we don't know. The closest you can come is to guesstimate - based on the type of music and the circumstances - but it will virtually never be to leave the Volume output of the preamp at one fixed setting.
acoustat6 OP
357 posts
 
Hi opalchip, Thanks for an insightful reply. While I understand some of your arguments, I must repeat that what I explained works very well for me and I suspect it will for others also, except for those that use audio as a mood enhancer for mating.

Actually you dont need a test LP, my suggestion is to start at a "low" level and listen to your LPs at that level and continue to increase it as you tune your system to suite every LP. The key here is to listen to every LP without changing the level set. You may and should change speaker locations, tuning your cartridge and TT, sub/main speaker levels, seating location etc. Now if you need to increse or decrease volume setting do it and continue this untill yuo have reaced a point where the best LPs sound their best and lesser LPs are revealed for what they are. I believe that this will tune your system to its most natural and truthful ability. This will take some time, this is not accomplished in one listening session or overnight but is a long term goal. Except now that you know this is possible, perhaps the process can be accelerated.

The fact that every LP was recorded/pressed different is what I want to hear. Do we increase or decrease the volume on LPs that are dynamic? Do you turn up or down a LP that is noisy with limited gain on the LP? Do you turn up or down an LP with "big" bass or do you adjust the bass levels then turn it up? Does a rock LP that is "required" to be played loud get a special compensation now that the noise level of the LP is twice as loud as the "quiet" violin concerto played at half the volume level? Which LP is truly quiet? Which LP has great dynamics? How do you really know if the target is always moving?

Opalchip or others, please explain to me why you would change the volume level for different LPs, whether it be up or down, and what this can accomplish. Just how do you know where each was recorded? Or which LPs should be played back soft or loud.

We are supposed to be audiophiles for goodness sake and I find it just unbelivable that even something as simple as a good in room freq response at a certain level to be contemptuous is just amazing. Yes, I know it does not tell the whole story but it is a large part of it.

Opalchip, sorry to glean some of your quotes from your past postings, but feel that we are searching for some truth somewhere as you state.

"So I very much agree with the Hardesty camp that Flat, Time and Phase Correct HAS to be the holy grail, at least as a starting point, for serious listening."

"And that's OK - each to his own. Reproduction accuracy is not an ethical standard like "truth", it's a preference. And it's not a very popular one. Even "truth" itself isn't exactly a popular standard anymore. Not to get into politics, but look around! So why on earth would audio accuracy be important?"

"I prefer hearing what was actually recorded coming out of the front of my speakers..."
mlsstl
1,436 posts
 
Opalchip or others, please explain to me why you would change the volume level for different LPs, whether it be up or down, and what this can accomplish.

This has already been discussed several times but it is apparently not registering.

Look at the basic design of an LP. It is a piece of plastic with a modulated groove pressed into it. Due to various design parameters (which include characteristics of stylus size and shape on the playback cartridge) there is a maximum modulated level that can be pressed into a record.

If a musical piece has a lot of low bass present, this requires wider grooves than music that doesn't have as much bass. As a practical matter, if you want the full volume on music with a lot of bass content, you are limited to about 15 minutes on each side of the record.

Unfortunately, not all musical pieces are conveniently cut into 15 minute segments. If you have a symphonic piece that is 50 minutes long (25 minutes a side), but still has lots of kettle drum action, the record stamping plant must press the record with a lower modulation level in the grooves to get it all on the record. That is just a fact of life.

With your system of finding a single spot where you permanently park your volume knob setting, this means that some records are going to be played louder than they should and some records will be softer. That long symphony (or Led Zeppelin) record you have will be played at too low a volume. However, a short record (say our harpsichord) would end up being played too loudly under your system.

You might be better off buying yourself an inexpensive sound level meter. Take it to some live concerts and check the actual volume you are hearing where you sit. Then go home, and use the meter to set your stereo to that volume. You'll be far closer to getting an authentic experience with this method than the one you're trying to use.
acoustat6 OP
357 posts
 
Hello, Trust me it is registering what you are saying, and conversely you are not hearing what I am saying. LPs are limited to only so much energy available to them, as an example, and it is up to the engineer to get the most out of this. I can only provide the vehicle for the LP to reveal itself as either a "good" or "bad" recording of music or perhaps its sonics are somewhere inbetween. If it is not there, there is nothing you can do to fix this, and all other problems with LPs including, but not limited to, previous groove damage, lack of dynamics, rumble, pops/clicks, noisy vinyl, bad pressings, LPs that are recorded too loud or too low etc... you tell me what changing volume levels does to improve the record? Or what you can do to improve them in general that would not adversly affect the sonics of a well recorded LP? Perhaps even why you want to say a record with those problems, if they are serious enough, are worth listening to?

Thats just it, most LPs suck, many are OK, a number are good and few are great. Or are you tring to tell me that all LPs are great? If you manipulate them enough... Its not my job to correct what some lousy engineer, bad pressing or poor condition LP has to offer by manipulating my system so no LP sounds good. I do have an slp meter.

Now about the audiophile goal..
Bob
More to discover