What and how do we know what IS ‘Better’?
or
It’s all in our heads, or is it?
Part 5 Listener Fatigue ugh…
Ok so this is a long one, so grab a favorite frosty refreshment, settle into a favorite chair and follow along,
Or not :atsmile:
tLFF - - the Listener Fatigue Factor
I stumbled over tLFF (the Listener Fatigue Factor) again as I was tracking changes, over time, of the SQ of my system as it ‘aged’, while performing ‘experiments’. I noticed that sometimes I could crank up the DRC way more than other times before a degree of listener discomfort kicked in. So I started to track this ‘variability’ in my daily log.
And what I started to notice were patterns that as tLFF was reduced, I could crank up the DRC more than when the tLFF was ‘high’.
IOW, right from the start as
tLFF got better the
DRC could be increased as well, and vice versa.
And it should be noted that Listener Fatigue is a common enough experience, but is not well understood nor defined, at least as far as I can find.
IOW we know it when we hear it but don’t have the ‘what it is’, well enough in hand.
But what I came to realize was the reason the
DRC could go up as the
tLFF was reduced was because the acoustic energy was more closely coupled/bound to it’s parent/‘source’ ‘voice’, which is what happened as tweaks and such were made.
These changes produced a closer coupling of all the acoustic energy that an instrument makes such that it was more precisely timed and presented to my ears.
I heard this as the actual acoustic musical signal being more faithful to the original.
Not in terms of the FR spectrum but rather in the dynamic energy of the ‘voices’ that are presented to me.
An example.
Stick your head near a piano or drum set or other percussive instrument while it is being ‘vigorously’ played. What you will experience is the ‘power’ of the impacts, the percussive effects, the energy that is being created and ‘imparted’ into the acoustic environment.
This creation and release of power, is based upon the excitation of ‘tuned’ resonant components that further create sub and supra harmonics which are all ‘created’ as a direct consequence of the initial energetic injection by the musician. Namely when the stick hits the cymbal or drum, the hammer hits the string, etc. This ‘starting point’ for that note and especially the subsequent harmonics that are created are what we use to identify not just what the instrument is but which note is being played, how ‘loud’ it is, what the acoustic environment is, how near or far away in 3d space, etc.
We can identify these things because we have previous experience, we ‘learned’, what the acoustic ‘signature’ for a particular instrument sounds like. And as this acoustic signature is changed, by whatever means, there is a deviation from original acoustic power signature.
IOW we can tell a tack piano from a grand, from a standup etc. and we can tell when it is close miked or from a greater distance away because the resultant sub and supra harmonics change accordingly.
All of these subsequent harmonics are created and released into the acoustic environment in their proper time, because they are a function of the creation by that initial energetic impulse and are ‘time aligned’ to that source.
IOW they are bound to it, because they are created by it.
When these subtle time alignments are skewed or delayed or stretched out thru time, the original acoustic energy is now ‘smeared’ and no longer properly adds it’s acoustic energy to that of it’s parent.
IOW the acoustic energy we hear being presented to our ears is out of synch from it’s original creation.
This ‘smearing’ or spreading out the acoustic energy tends to ‘fill in’ where there should be a lessor amount of energy or where that energy simply didn’t originally exist in the dynamic creation of the original signal.
This makes the original source sound out of focus, as in, the subtle cues and harmonics are ‘Fat’ or spread out.
THIS is my vote for Listener Fatigue
Where the acoustic energy is not presented ‘properly’, either by having signal ‘added’ or by the signal being ‘out of synch’, because either;
this energy is not presented with the full and precise original energetic acoustic signature,
and/or more acoustic ‘artifacts’ have been added due to other sources of distortion.
In either case these changes can create Listener Fatigue.
And these changes/additions can come from 2 basic ‘sources’.
The first being the playback equipment adding ‘distortion’ of some sort, of which many are well known (IM, THD, FR etc.).
The second being a specific subset of the first, that being, that the original acoustic energy is being presented (heard) out of synch from its original source.
All due to changes to the re-created signal that are noticed, one way or another.
Even if the original recorded signal is distorted to begin with.
IOW Listener Fatigue is due to ‘misplaced’ acoustic energy.
From what I've gleaned thus far, when the re-created source signal is 'properly' timed, and passed along to the HP's intact, the resulting acoustical presentation creates more 'powerful' sound pressure, in its proper time with respect to its actual acoustic source.
This added 'power' means that the impacts of percussion instruments, and the ability to hear sub-harmonics is enhanced.
It also has other really kewl beneficial results for most other 'voices', like an increase in the perceived instantaneous dynamic range of each 'voice'.
IOW the smack and punch and impact and leading edge all have greater power behind them, for all ‘voices’.
Oh yes and let me add, this isn’t just about digital music playback. If
tLFF truly is all about the music being out of synch with itself, think about what happens when the diamond tip ‘reading’ the groove walls isn’t aligned ‘properly’…
The 2 channels of information become ‘time smeared’ if the VTA and azimuth aren’t adjusted ‘properly’. The use of
tLFF as a tool also applies to analog signal sources, especially vinyl, when the diamond tip isn't precisely reading the groove.
Think screech and Listener Fatigue gone berserk, especially on poorly recorded vinyl, in fact this is where I first stumbled upon this rather helpful diagnostic 'tool' many years ago.
This also applies to digital which is why I think we are seeing all these femto second clocks, power supplies with umpteen sections of regulation etc., just to help get the timing and amplitude as accurate as possible during the analog signal re-creation.
And power amps (strictly an analog device) can seem to play a big role in contributing to tLFF as well.
And there appear to be 2 general sources of these contributions to
tLFF.
The first source is during the re-creation of the analog signal, and the second contribution is during the ‘delivery’ of this signal.
So, first off, all DAC’s use mathematics to re-create the original musical signal, likewise a diamond tip ‘reads’ the groove wall, or the tape head ‘reads’ the magnetic flux modulation, etc. These re-creation methods and related devices are all performing a change of state from one medium to another (usually into an analog electrical signal). And these energetic translations/changes of state from digital, or mechanical, or magnetic, to electrical along with their compliment, the electrical to acoustic energy translations, are always the most critical in terms of ‘getting it right’ (accuracy, precision, resolution, etc.).
And during playback this initial change of state is the very basis for the signal to start with, and if it isn’t ‘properly’ dealt with, no amount of corrective action will ever ‘fix’ the signal. Well, other than substituting with ‘better’ devices and/or processes.
Secondly, faithfully delivering that signal and then completing this energetic change of state into acoustic pressure contributes it’s own variety of LF issues. This secondary contributor to
tLFF is something we can actually deal with on a less than wholesale replacement of major components (amps, dacs, cartridge etc.) basis.
Indeed this is where most of my tweaking has yielded the most bang for the buck. And which also significantly affects new major components as we ‘upgrade’ our systems as well.
IOW as the entire system is improved, new gear will perform ‘Better’, or at least it is not being limited as much by previous ‘choke points’.
And a significant portion of these improvements are gained from the amp and its ability to ‘properly’ couple with the driver.
And what I have come to know is that as we lessen these ‘errors’ while generating acoustic pressure, and/or allow more of the original signal to come thru,
tLFF is reduced and the SQ takes a mother may I step up as more and more of the available acoustic energy is aligned and then ‘properly’ presented/heard during playback.
The list of influences or tweaks I’ve experimented with, that contribute to the improvement of tLFF are, for some, hard to believe, and/or for others seem to be outright dubious.
However they either proved to be ‘Better’ or not, based upon the criteria as set out in this series of posts.
And to make things even more ‘complicated’ there does seem to be a threshold that needs to be crossed before these changes become evident to the point of undenyability.
IOW if the system is ‘clogged’ with ‘choke points’, unless you ameliorate a major clog there is a good chance you may not hear any change, mostly due to masking/smearing of acoustical energy where it doesn’t belong. This is a common observation made by many who try only one ‘upgrade’ like a power cable or interconnect cable, and hear no differences. Of course there is the distinct possibility that the attempted ‘upgrade’ simply wasn’t up to the task. (it wasn’t a sufficiently better cable etc.)
But once one of these ‘choke points’ is found and improved it will be VERY obvious when this happens, and it will be very hard to deny that not only was there a change but it was ‘Better’.
Another Side Note on the Side…
‘Choke Points’,
CP's do you need one hand or two?
So what ARE ‘choke points’ you ask?
I’ve been using the term ‘choke points’ but haven’t explained what I mean, until now.
This term refers to any portion of a system that limits the conversion from electrical power, to signal, to acoustic power in an audible way. I have ‘discovered’ several of these limiting aspects in my system to date, but only by negation.
By that I mean as they were removed the overall SQ makes a sudden and obvious improvement. One that is undeniable (well over the ≈10% threshold) and is so gratifying that there is no doubt as to its being “
Better”.
Such things as fuses, lowering the resistance of cable connections, ie, when I soldered the romex hot, neutral, and ground junctions only 15’ upstream from where my system is plugged in. And when I added an early mod to my 800’s (anax mod), it was as if I was hearing my music anew, again.
But once this threshold is reached it can initiate a cascade effect where EVERYTHING can start to make a difference. However initially this can lead to further confusion and frustration once a change IS noticed, because now determining if it is really an improvement, or just a change, becomes the deciding factor instead of just IS there any change.
This is at least in part, why this series of articles is being presented. To help with knowing if a change truly is “
Better”.
And
tLFF has, at least for me, become a most useful tool in terms of determining if changes made are actually beneficial improvements or are just changes. There are of course other tools mentioned in this ‘Better’ series that also can help and the combination of these tools allows me to more quickly determine what is a desirable change, and if an actual removal of ‘choke points’
CP's occurred, which did lessen the
tLFF’s influence.
Or not.
This is a decided double edged sword in that as the choke points and other system deviations are removed, the more those that remain seem to loom large(r), which for some can be quite frustrating.
On the other hand once a degree of resolution is reached and the SQ is refined ‘enough’, the SQ has stepped up and away from what we have experienced in the past, so now we are experiencing previously unexplored edges of the acoustic envelope.
Which means we are now navigating in somewhat unfamiliar acoustic territory.
But it also means as fewer and fewer ‘choke points’ remain, the overall SQ continues improve.
As such, we are discovering new/additional nuances and subtle details of the presentation of the music, as we continue to hear it all anew, as the veils and unwanted ‘artifacts’ are removed.
This of course could be the DIY’rs curse — forever removing artifacts… think Sisyphus
Listener fatigue as a tool
Like tea, you will know it’s good if you automatically reach for more when offered.
So if the desire strikes you while listening, to just turn it off, or down, or go do something else, or you are easily distracted away from listening, then consider that the Listener Fatigue Factor, (tLFF) is ‘high’, at least high enough that it distracts you away from ‘getting into the music’.
A correlate to this is, as we are able to listen to increasing playback levels (as the
DRC goes up) before
tLFF ‘distracts’ us, this would be considered an improvement, a ‘keeper’.
This is yet another test we can use as a tool to help determine if the changes we make really are improvements, or just changes.
In fact a striking example of this was when I first modded my 800’s with an early anax mod…
Which translates into, IF we can crank up the
DRC and NOT hear any acoustical information that is strident or distracting at the same or higher playback level as in previous listening sessions, THEN we can use this to help determine if the latest modifications/experiments were able to increase the playback level, before onset of obvious tLFF.
Another way of perceiving this is to view it as an exploration into scaleability and how well the components scale upwards together. I have learned that, again,as the ‘choke points’ are ‘removed’ or diminished in severity, the task now becomes how to determine if the resultant changes really are ‘better’, or not. And when there is an obvious improvement, as in ‘OH MY DOG’, or ‘I’m hearing my music as if it were the first time’ etc. this provides solid evidence, at least to me, of a marked improvement in the overall resolution and that the system has ‘gotten out of its own way’ all the more.
IOW, scaleability just took a significant step up, and EVERYTHING sounds better.
And from the, is the glass half full/empty perspective…
If the music does not, or can not, engage you, as in pull you into itself and hold your attention, then
tLFF may be a causative or an additional factor, one that can be ‘tested’ for and certainly monitored as changes are made to figure if said changes truly are a keeper, or not.
This also relates to the idea of increases in the
DRC, where, as the volume goes up (assuming that the ‘sound doesn’t get loud’ factor is in place), does the sound become more involving, more compelling, with more toe tapping time?
All of these ‘measures’ of ‘musical satisfaction’ can be quite useful tools to help determine if recent changes truly are ‘keepers’.
And after getting just a taste of Jggy just recently, it just reaffirms my take on this.
The ability of the entire system, and for each ‘voice’, to present and delineate those ultra fine details and remain in focus to itself, is also related to the Listener Fatigue Factor.
JJ
End Part 5
Next up
Feel the POWER
