Help with my University Research Project


If you are interested in helping to shape a formal research project (Miami University/Oxford) concerning the effects of wire and electronics on the reproduction of music, then please read further. If anything, you might find my research proposal interesting.

I was a Chemist for a major oil company for a few years and have since quit my job to return to school. I am an Audiophile/Jazz Guitarist and a scientist so much of the HiFi industry goes against my better judgment. However sometimes I cannot argue with my perceptions (they are all we have after all).

I have a friend who is a professor of Physics. His current area of research could be summed up with this statement:

"I am concerned with the mathematics describing the differences in human perception of sound"

While 99% of his work is done with paper and pencil, he does have some very excellent equipment. He is also a music lover (though not really into HiFi) so I have described the "state of the union" with respect to the HiFi industry (he was very intrigued). We have discussed conducting research into this topic:

1. If person (A) sings middle-C, and then person (B) sings the same exact note they will sound different. The pitch is correct but the "tone" distinguishes the two. The reason is that when someone sings middle-C for instant, they are not singing only at the middle-C frequency. Instead what we hear is a combination of many different waves. All of them partially cancelling, partially amplifying one another. In essence there is a distortion around the note. (1st,2nd,3rd harmonics blah blah, lots of math) When a machine records these voices it does not perfectly reproduce the original subtle combination of waves. This is the reason that recordings do not compete with live performances.

Some cables and electronics (tube amps in particular) are inserting a distortion (some more than others) that alters the signal (this is not debatable). Sometimes, as is the case with good tube amps/really goo SS amps, there seems to be a more "real" presence to the music. This could also explain the reasoning behind the theory of "system synergy". By that I mean the matching of components/cables so as to present a more balanced musical presentation. We are postulating that the distortion, with certain component/cable combinations, results in the,(excuse this word), recovery of lost waves. This does not mean that the resulting signal is exactly the same, or that there is not some unwanted stuff in there. We merely suggest that it is the missing waves(distortion) that give music its "real" quality.

Keep in mind that the first step into any research project is to determine what has already been done. So the next several weeks will be devoted toward the reading of countless science journals.

I would like to hear you thoughts about my project, but more specifically, I would like to get a consensus on the attributes of certain component/cable or component/component combinations. For instance, Krell model *?* and XLO model *?* cables produce a *?* sound. I hope to determine a few generally accepted extremes with which to base my experiments on.

Thanks
trthomp
I will be talking to local audio shops soon. What I was thinking was starting with is the middle of the MIT line and comparing it to the middle of the Kimber line. Also, I plan to start with ConradJohnson and Rotel. All of these companies are well represented at my local shops.

I do not plan to nail down the wave characteristics associated with "proper soundstage" or any of the more
popular terms. What I hope to do is to determine that there are changes each component/cable etc makes on a signal. I just wanted some suggestions so that I could possibly have easy measurements. Those measurements will be stored in the computer. For instance, there would be a file containing all the cable info. I would then run a test on a certain amp/pre-amp combo. Based on the deviations from that test, the computer would suggest a cable that might bring the signal closer to the reference.
What a refreshing idea. One that I am sure will bring a great deal of comments from both objectivists and subjectivists alike. Great food for debate. Keep us posted.
I wonder how you intend to deal with issues that very much seem to influence our subjective perceptions of cables and electronics, but which are not related to the areas which you intend to study objectively. Two which come to mind are reproduction of soundstage and reproduction of dynamics. There may be others, such as detail reproduction, but with that one it is not quite as clear that it has nothing to do with spectral balance. I think this brings out the issues related to "objective" testing vs. subjective analysis. Even the so-called "objective" testing is subjective because, even if we had perfect instruments for measuring things objectively, what we choose to measure (and not to measure) make the test subjective. Unfortunately, in subjective analysis, such as listener evaluation, these factors, both those which are understood and those which have yet to be, all contribute to our subjective perception.
It seems that your topic has to do with the harmonic effect of cables in high-end systems (you like to use the word "distortion" as an ordinary-language stand-in for the mathematical concept of harmonics, but I prefer harmonics, despite the math). My question to you is the following: why stop at cable-component interaction? Because the relative balance of a system's harmonics are important to its sound, the frequency response of cartridges, amplifiers, speakers and all other elements in the signal path (including wires, connectors, transistors, tubes, capacitors, resistors, chips, etc. even fuses) can have an effect on the timbre or harmonic balance of the sound. Of course cables too can be used to vary the timbre of a system, thus changing the subjective effect on the listener. The significance of cables to our perception of tone quality is one of the most hotly debated topics at audiogon with numerous threads worth searching through (some are maybe worth as much as those "science journals" you plan to read). For discovering the "generallly accepted extremes" of cable/component interaction, you might do a statistical analysis of the words found in individual posts to describe the sound of specific cables with specific components (i.e. how many times does the phrase "powerful, punchy bass" appear in descriptions of Krell model "?" with XLO model "?").
Your project sounds most interesting. I do hope you can carry it off with sound research methodology. I suspect that what you intend to do will be far more difficult than what you now think likely.

So many of the effects of component changes are subtle and most difficult to describe in any rational way: hence the strange pseudo poetic language which suffuses most reviews of equipment in the high end press.

I certainly do not believe that most audiophiles can be dismissed as deluded fools, the victims of self-fulfilling prophecies. I do believe that they are hearing genuine, real differences that are consistent and which do affect the pleasure derived from the reproduction of music. However, I'm not sure that these subtleties can easily be correlated with attributes measurable by test equipment. In fact, I’m sure that they cannot.

Therefore, it is likely that your survey will have to take for its raw material the sum total of subjective opinions offered by a group of listeners. How you will be able to tabulate such subjective responses according to an objective standard is beyond me. Frankly, I'm not sure it's even possible.

However, in this sense the appreciation of reproduced sound differs little from other types of connoisseurship such as those involved in the evaluation of fine art, wine, automobiles, sail boats, sports equipment, architecture, computer software or virtually any product, device, or system enjoyed by us human beings. How many of these may be adequately described by a small set of objective measurements? Actually, none of them can. The top speed attainable by a car certainly does not fully describe it’s success as a racing vehicle. Also, its ability to accelerate, its handling capabilities, its braking power, its road holding ability, and many other factors greatly influence how adequate it is to its purpose. Nor can most of those factors be easily quantified.

That is why people who review and write about such things as cars, sailboats, wines, etc. necessarily resort to metaphor, analogy, and other forms of “imprecise” poetic language. Interestingly reviewers of those things are not reviled for stating opinions which they cannot back up with tests or measurements. It seems that only in the world of high end audio is there the expectation that the complexities of evaluation ought to be reducable to a few measurements.

Also it is clear that the ability to evaluate and discern subtle differences in any human endeavor is learned and that it improves with practice and experience. The choices made by naïve observers about anything are always inferior to those made by knowledgeable consumers. Just think of how a six year old would decorate a house and how a grown up with taste would do the same. Or even in our own lives, we can easily look back at the many things that impressed us as adolescents and which now embarrass us to come to the conclusion that opinions based on experience and knowledge are far superior to naïve impulse.

So I advise you to be careful in your selection of participants and to attempt as best you can, to limit it to those who have revealed an adequate level of discernment.

I’m a graduate of Miami myself (class of ’69) and wish you well in your project.

Sincerely,
László Bencze