[nick_charles]

Never mind !

 

[JadeEast]

Quote:

Most everyone in the room picked up the difference but I correctly picked up what in part was causing the difference by ear. Everyone thought that the difference was an improvement but not me, it sounded worse...

Doesn't this statement throw the value of subjectivity under the bus?

 

[bigshot]

I have heard differences & can explane why they exist after much experimentation.

Great. Tell us about YOUR testing procedures that lead you to believe that amps and cables have a sound.

 

[bigshot]

As a practical matter, most recordings are made understanding there is a plethora of playback systems to be used. The engineer employs some kind of understanding of the playback system he is targeting. In essence, a model in his head or on paper is substituting for the actual playback system. But we should understand that is a model.

That isn't true. Every professional recording studio I've worked in employs a house engineer whose job it is to keep the equipment in good repair and calibrated. They go to great effort to establish a standard, so if you start recording in Los Angeles, and continue in New York, it will sound the same.

Home recording setups don't take this kind of care, but pro studios do.

 

[nick_charles]

Quote:

Doesn't this statement throw the value of subjectivity under the bus?

The anecdote seems to illustrate a few things.
 
Firstly the demonstrator primed the audience to hear a difference and so of course they heard a difference whether it was there or not, secondly the difference appeared to be in output level i,e it got louder and this is almost always perceived  as better, thirdly the op deduced what the difference really was and therefore was able to hear the apparent distortion.
 
However beyond this we know not much more. How much distortion was there with the different output 0.1%, 1%, 10% ? - Was the difference heard by the op really there or just a product of expectation , what was the amp/speaker -what was the load, was it a tweako cultist design driven far beyond capability into unstable speakers - who know ?

 

[germanium]

Quote:

The anecdote seems to illustrate a few things.
 
Firstly the demonstrator primed the audience to hear a difference and so of course they heard a difference whether it was there or not, secondly the difference appeared to be in output level i,e it got louder and this is almost always perceived  as better, thirdly the op deduced what the difference really was and therefore was able to hear the apparent distortion.
 
However beyond this we know not much more. How much distortion was there with the different output 0.1%, 1%, 10% ? - Was the difference heard by the op really there or just a product of expectation , what was the amp/speaker -what was the load, was it a tweako cultist design driven far beyond capability into unstable speakers - who know ?

The distortion is what caused me to look for it's cause & when I seen the meter that showed the power supply energy drop ( It was a Carver Silver Seven vacumm tube amp which has a power supply energy meter on the front of the power supply chassis, Carver liked to do things different from everyone else) I knew why I heard the sound as being worse.

 

[germanium]

Quote:

Please don't take offense. I was unable to generalize the remark any further and still refer to something recognizable. It struck me as amusing that cable talk came up in a thread named as this one is.

Before one can answer whether the reviewers have any merit one has to decide whether they think that there would be any difference in cables. If not then the reviewers are blowing smoke but if so then they may have some points to consider, however even if there is a difference one still has to decide for themselves if it is a difference that works for them. Here the reviewr can help only marginally at best & not at all if ones view of how things should sound are significantly different from the reviewers.
 
For example I myself look for sound that is as close as possible to known live instruments in a known environment. If it does not come very very close then it is no cigar for me. Now if I do get that sound under the circumstances I just listed then I know that what ever I listen to will closely match what the engineer intended for me to hear. If it makes poor recordings sound bad then that is ok because unfortunately someone in the recording or production decided that is what it should sound like. It it has harsh syllabants then that is what they intended & I don't want to try to cover that up as to do so would ruin the sound of my better recordings that are full of life yet smooth & highly detailed.
 
Some people hear any harshness especially on syllabants & they get thier ire up as if there isn't these types of sound in live music which there is, especially in live amplified music. If harshness improves when you improve detail then the harshness was due to the loss of low level detail and body that supported the more spikey elements of instruments like cymbals. One of the very things that makes cymbals sound harsh also takes the life out of other instruments like piano & lead guitar, that is the low level detail that gets lost in low grade electrolytic coupling caps. Subtituting metalized film caps or direct coupling often mostly fixes these issues. Power supply mods seem to fix the rest of but will not help at all without the first mods listed.
 
Often times though live amplified recording qualty cannot be totally fixed with these mods as these distortions were caused by the PA amps & speakers & possible poor miking used in the live concert & were just faithfully picked up by the recording micrphones.

 

[BlindInOneEar]

You know, it finally occurred to me what's been bugging me about this thread.  It seems like half the posters here can't enjoy their rigs unless they're "perfect" or "accurate" or some such adjective. 
 
Boy, am I ever glad I'm an untutored troglodyte! 
 
I picked out my rig based on the specs looking good and the thing making me tap my toes when I listen to it.  Should I be ashamed that I have a ball each time I fire it up?  
 
Folks, take a step back from this discussion.  It's the weekend.  Whatever floats your boat, spend some time with it over the next few days and have some fun with this hobby of ours!  That's why we're here, right?
 
All the best!

 

[Clarkmc2]

I'm with you. My audio hobby, which I am passionate about, is listening to music. Not equipment.
 
I have already established that I am OK listening to a low rez lossy file if that is what is available. I think enjoyment is nearly 100% what music you listen to, a few percent how well it is recorded and a tiny bit left over for how well your rig plays it. That would leave no room for dubious tweaks like wire and boutique capacitors. I have amassed a fairly revealing rig which a Bose Wave owner would consider expensive, but my quest was to get the best out of whatever I ask it to play. Revealing but not at the expense of forgiving.
 
At work this week a guy came in who believes only direct to disk vinyl sound good. While it is easy to demonstrate that vinyl is far less resolving than digital, what took the cake for me was that he had locked himself into letting the availability of music for his very limited format dictate what he truly enjoyed listening to. Let me admit that he and I are 180 degrees apart on our music priorities.
 
The moral of my tale? If you want a richer listening experience, listen to better music. If you like what a musician is doing, rather than looking for better recordings played through more expensive rigs, seek musicians who do what he does even more to your liking.

 

[mike1127]

Blind in one ear -- You might be surprised to learn that when you compose or interpret music, make recordings, or design audio systems, you have to use your brain! I guess you can be thankful that the people who designed your equipment used theirs.

 

[mike1127]

Quote:

That isn't true. Every professional recording studio I've worked in employs a house engineer whose job it is to keep the equipment in good repair and calibrated. They go to great effort to establish a standard, so if you start recording in Los Angeles, and continue in New York, it will sound the same.
Home recording setups don't take this kind of care, but pro studios do.

You're taking much too narrow a view. The recording doesn't exist solely to be played back on the calibrated system; it exists to be widely sold and played, and in that sense the recording engineer is aiming at a hypothetical system.

 

[mike1127]

Quote:

I have already established that I am OK listening to a low rez lossy file if that is what is available. I think enjoyment is nearly 100% what music you listen to, a few percent how well it is recorded and a tiny bit left over for how well your rig plays it. That would leave no room for dubious tweaks like wire and boutique capacitors. I have amassed a fairly revealing rig which a Bose Wave owner would consider expensive, but my quest was to get the best out of whatever I ask it to play. Revealing but not at the expense of forgiving.
 

This could be an interesting poll question: how do we divide up the sources of enjoyment?
 
You assign nearly 100% to "what music you listen to." I would agree in the sense that I get no enjoyment out of music that doesn't interest me no matter how well recorded it is. But given that I'm only going to be listening to something I enjoy anyway, I must also say that I enjoy it many times more at a high quality level (and even more so, live) -- and at a poor level it becomes annoying and painful, so I would say I give 15% to "what music you listen to," 30% to recording quality and 55% to playback quality.
 
The 15% is a way of saying, if it's a piece I love but at poor quality, then I will enjoy it only 15% of what could be possible.
 
I give more weight to playback but that's also a reflection of the fact I have more control over playback, not necessarily a statement that playback matters more than recording (if one could have control over both).

 

[bigshot]

Some people hear any harshness especially on syllabants & they get thier ire up as if there isn't these types of sound in live music which there is, especially in live amplified music. If harshness improves when you improve detail then the harshness was due to the loss of low level detail and body that supported the more spikey elements of instruments like cymbals.

Harsh high frequencies are response imbalances and are easily corrected with an equalizer.

 

[bigshot]

I'm with you. My audio hobby, which I am passionate about, is listening to music. Not equipment..

Equipment can be fun too. I love my Victrola! I just got some great Caruso records and I'm having a great time cranking and listening.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlindInOneEar /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
I picked out my rig based on the specs looking good and the thing making me tap my toes when I listen to it. 

 

 
HEATHEN!
 
se