Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Skeptico Saloon: An Objectivist Joint
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Skeptico Saloon: An Objectivist Joint - Page 10

post #136 of 843
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

I haven't found artifacting to be "micro details". In general, artifacts are big ugly splats. It's just that in electronic music, a big ugly digital splat can get hidden behind a bit of guitar distortion or synthesizer bleat. If you are used to listening to acoustic music, you don't need a heck of a lot of training to hear digital artifacting. It sticks out like a sore thumb.

But the nice thing about artifacting is that it is all or nothing. Something artifacts or it renders properly. There's no shades of gray inbetween. Once you find the bitrate that can sucessfully encode music, anything beyond that line is fine.

When people refer to microdetails, I think they are usually referring to the effect of masking. As you balance your frequency response, details that were covered up before start to come forward. It hard to know exactly what people are referring to with vague audiophile terms like "micro details" but that seems like a more likely explanation than artifacting.

I've been wondering lately if there's any attribute of an amp that would make it more "resolving" than another amp. I've especially been looking at differences between op-amps. "More resolving" and "micro-details" are terms used often. Do these terms have any merit?
post #137 of 843

are there any of these comments left after filtering out "just listen" anecdotes, only crediting Level Matched, Double Blind listening tests?

 

 

perceived differences can come from lack of matching loudness when/if the comparisons are done closely enough in time to to involve more than the very few bits that make it into long term memory

 

below ~1 dB loudness difference becomes hard to recognize as actual loudness difference - yet does show clearly in DBT/ABX - down to 0.1-0.2 dB  (1-2% drive V difference - you really have to measure) - with many reporting subtle frequency response differences, often the louder instance is rated "sounds better"

 

without Blinding protocols conscious sense impressions can be unconsciously influenced by everything from equipment appearance, knob/switch/connector "feel", "knowing" tube vs SS sound expectation, basically anything the brain knows about the test, equipment, remembers from reviews, peer comments, facial expressions get rolled into the conscious perception


Edited by jcx - 7/28/13 at 9:49pm
post #138 of 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post

I've been wondering lately if there's any attribute of an amp that would make it more "resolving" than another amp. I've especially been looking at differences between op-amps. "More resolving" and "micro-details" are terms used often. Do these terms have any merit?

Obvious differences would be:

- op-amps without current limit: degrading performance with "current-limiting" resistors inside the feedback loop (see mini3)

- picky op-amps: adding resistors at the output (outside the loop, increasing output impedance) because proper compensation was too hard for the designer very_evil_smiley.gif

- swapping: some circuits are carefully designed for a certain op-amp, but that doesn't stop people from swapping them for more expensive "upgrades" - can lead to instability or degraded performance

- output current: using an op-amp with low output current capabilities to drive low impedance headphones

- generally bad implementation (doesn't depend on a certain op-amp but may lead some people to believe that it's a particular op-amp's fault, or even that all solid-state stuff is bad)

...


Edited by xnor - 7/28/13 at 6:38pm
post #139 of 843

Anyone interested in the Sleeper4Android project?

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=43809838#post43809838

 

It's a fun experiment playing the ultimate showdown in cheap-fi vs hi-fi biggrin.gif


Edited by Joe Bloggs - 7/28/13 at 11:37pm
post #140 of 843
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

Obvious differences would be:
- op-amps without current limit: degrading performance with "current-limiting" resistors inside the feedback loop (see mini3)
- picky op-amps: adding resistors at the output (outside the loop, increasing output impedance) because proper compensation was too hard for the designer very_evil_smiley.gif
- swapping: some circuits are carefully designed for a certain op-amp, but that doesn't stop people from swapping them for more expensive "upgrades" - can lead to instability or degraded performance
- output current: using an op-amp with low output current capabilities to drive low impedance headphones
- generally bad implementation (doesn't depend on a certain op-amp but may lead some people to believe that it's a particular op-amp's fault, or even that all solid-state stuff is bad)
...

Awesome thanks that's the info I was looking for. I'll probably be buying a couple different op-amps to try out and wanted to know if it'd be worth the money.
Edited by gnarlsagan - 7/29/13 at 1:53am
post #141 of 843
There is a thread in this forum about it. Scroll down to "Worlds quietest room".
post #142 of 843
There is a thread in this forum about it. Scroll down to "Worlds quietest room". It is not intended as a torture device. It's a research tool.
post #143 of 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by krismusic View Post

There is a thread in this forum about it. Scroll down to "Worlds quietest room". It is not intended as a torture device. It's a research tool.

Oh pshaw, I totally didn't even see that thread. XD

I know it's not a torture chamber, but as it was mentioned in the audio podcast, people often become quite disoriented upon entering the "torture" room and ask to leave.

 

Also from that thread:

 

Quote:
When your room is so quiet your heatbeat is the noisefloorthats when you've given it enough treatment.

 

That's pretty dang scary....I don't want to be in that room isolated from the rest of the world.

 

 

Quote:
Orfield Labs uses the room to test products, including switches that go on car dashboards and the sound an LED display makes on a cell phone to make sure they're not too loud.

I didn't even know that existed. :-0


Edited by miceblue - 7/29/13 at 2:42am
post #144 of 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post


Awesome thanks that's the info I was looking for. I'll probably be buying a couple different op-amps to try out and wanted to know if it'd be worth the money.

this really isn't the best forum for getting "validation" of your preconceived, set course - if you really read the replies

post #145 of 843
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post

this really isn't the best forum for getting "validation" of your preconceived, set course - if you really read the replies

I remain ever skeptical of differences. I just knew nothing about op-amps and wanted to know if there's even the possibility of sound differences between them. I'll be buying the 4267 for the uha-6s mkii. It's cheap so I don't mind if it turns out it sounds the same. I actually consider that to be the most likely scenario.
post #146 of 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post


I remain ever skeptical of differences. I just knew nothing about op-amps and wanted to know if there's even the possibility of sound differences between them. I'll be buying the 4267 for the uha-6s mkii. It's cheap so I don't mind if it turns out it sounds the same. I actually consider that to be the most likely scenario.

 

There is a big (300+ pages) pdf out there on "opamp distortion" http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/chip-amps/139025-op-amp-distortion-measurement.html

 

There is certainly the possibility of significant measured performance differences between opamps - to what extent these differences are humanly audible when properly implemented in a given context is a separate question requiring rigorous empirical testing 

post #147 of 843
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_charles View Post

 

There is a big (300+ pages) pdf out there on "opamp distortion" http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/chip-amps/139025-op-amp-distortion-measurement.html

 

There is certainly the possibility of significant measured performance differences between opamps - to what extent these differences are humanly audible when properly implemented in a given context is a separate question requiring rigorous empirical testing 

 

Wow that's a great resource thanks. Nice to see the famous OPA627 on there. Unfortunately the ADA4627 I just bought isn't listed. I need a second uha-6s to do some rigorous empirical testing! 

post #148 of 843

Just tangentially related, but some slides on op amps and other parts for high-end audio performance design (no implications regarding audibility, especially considering the context):

http://www.bonisaudio.com/thd/img47.html

 

from Bruce Hofer of Audio Precision.

post #149 of 843
For the life of me, I don't know why folks with no interest in science and a chip on their shoulder keep marching into this forum and insisting that we respect their ability to throw money at phantom sound quality. There must be some sort of desire for us to accept their points as valid, but they don't make any effort to make valid points. I don't get it. There's a million other forums on headfi that they can get all the validation they want. Why do they keep gravitating to this one?
post #150 of 843

I still don't understand power requirements for headphones. I was trying to see if an Objective 2 would be enough for the upcoming Alpha Dog and everyone is like "oooh you need lots of power for them since they're orthodynamic; you need at least 1 W for it to sound good; sure you might not use the whole 1 W, but I've found that more power makes it really sound better."

 

-.-


Edited by miceblue - 8/18/13 at 3:43pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Skeptico Saloon: An Objectivist Joint