[71 dB]

What THD percentage do we consider to be audibly transparent here?

The perceivable level of harmonic distortion depends on frequency so the is no single value (e.g. 0.7 %). At low frequencies much more distortion is allowed than at higher frequencies (especially at sensitive 1-2 kHz). At the highest frequencies disortion is again not an issue. The thresholds for even and odd harmonics are along the lines:

100 Hz - 1.5 % 5 %
300 Hz - 0.8 % 3 %
1 kHz - 0.5 % 1 %
2 kHz - 0.2 % 0.5 % (hearing most sensitive here)

As long as the THD is below 0.2 % the sound can be considered transparent in regards of THD. This is very easy to achieve in digital audio. In theory properly dithered digital audio is totally free of THD so as long as the dither noise is below the threshold of hearing the sound is transparent. In practise digital audio isn't THD free, of course. No ADC or DAC is totally linear, but getting under 0.2 % is child's play in 21st century. Typical value for THD is 0.01 %, well under the threshold of transparency.

 

[71 dB]

Notice how this has absolutely nothing to do with you're enjoyment of the sound.

Windows can be theoretically transparent, but that doesn't guarantee you enjoy the view.

 

[bigshot]

Between 1 to .5% is my line for transparency. And that's with tones. With music, it's probably more like 2 or 3%. Just about every piece of home audio electronics is audibly transparent when it comes to distortion levels.

 

[Glmoneydawg]

Between 1 to .5% is my line for transparency. And that's with tones. With music, it's probably more like 2 or 3%. Just about every piece of home audio electronics is audibly transparent when it comes to distortion levels.

Thats where i was going with my question...we've come a long way...with all formats...tranducers too...but i think they (transducers) remain the final frontier

 

[bigshot]

There is such a thing as audible transparency. I worked for a time on a ProTools workstation. While I had access to it, I used it as a reference for my tests. I was expecting it to have a much improved sound quality than my consumer stuff, but it sounded no better than my iPods or CD players. They were all equally perfect.

Now it's natural to think that something that costs tens of thousands of dollars HAS to sound better than something that cost a little over $100. But the truth is that the CD standard was designed from the ground up to be better than human ears can hear. If a CD player is performing to spec, its playback sounds just as good as anything else... even pro equipment. There is no final frontier in the digital realm. We are already there.

You're absolutely right... Transducers are another story. There is always a range of performance with transducers because they are mechanical and physical, and you always have trade offs and compromises. That is the area to put your effort into. There's room to grow there.

 

[Glmoneydawg]

There is such a thing as audible transparency. I worked for a time on a ProTools workstation. While I had access to it, I used it as a reference for my tests. I was expecting it to have a much improved sound quality than my consumer stuff, but it sounded no better than my iPods or CD players. They were all equally perfect.

Now it's natural to think that something that costs tens of thousands of dollars HAS to sound better than something that cost a little over $100. But the truth is that the CD standard was designed from the ground up to be better than human ears can hear. If a CD player is performing to spec, its playback sounds just as good as anything else... even pro equipment. There is no final frontier in the digital realm. We are already there.

You're absolutely right... Transducers are another story. There is always a range of performance with transducers because they are mechanical and physical, and you always have trade offs and compromises. That is the area to put your effort into. There's room to grow there.

Glad to see we can agree then my friend. ....bits is bits.....but bring on that speaker tech

 

[bigshot]

Tweaking my listening room is my biggest job. Now I'm trying to figure out how to quickly make adjustments to level and EQ because I'm finding out of spec recordings occasionally. I wish my equalizer had a "nudge" adjustment from my iPhone. It's a pain to burrow through menus on the video screen to do it.

 

[Glmoneydawg]

Tweaking my listening room is my biggest job. Now I'm trying to figure out how to quickly make adjustments to level and EQ because I'm finding out of spec recordings occasionally. I wish my equalizer had a "nudge" adjustment from my iPhone. It's a pain to burrow through menus on the video screen to do it.

Out of spec recordings will find you making adjustments that don't correlate with the majority of your music...let it go bud...let it go

 

[bigshot]

It's a particular problem with multichannel stuff. I have several recordings with one or more channels attenuated by exactly -6dB. Playing them straight sounds lousy. But it takes about six clicks through menu screens to get to the adjustment. When I get a new AV amp, I'm going to see if there's one that comes with shortcut macros. I also find big discrepancies between how the LFE channel is handled. I had it set perfectly, then I got some modern movies with thundering bass and I'm left out of spec again.

 

[Glmoneydawg]

It's a particular problem with multichannel stuff. I have several recordings with one or more channels attenuated by exactly -6dB. Playing them straight sounds lousy. But it takes about six clicks through menu screens to get to the adjustment. When I get a new AV amp, I'm going to see if there's one that comes with shortcut macros. I also find big discrepancies between how the LFE channel is handled. I had it set perfectly, then I got some modern movies with thundering bass and I'm left out of spec again.

Yep...i have a set of vandersteen qautros...the bass setup disc is mp3....my expensive cd drive wouldn't play it....got a cambridge cxu...no problem....digital is the devil and angel thing ....that's the fun part though right?

 

[bigshot]

Standardization and consistency is important!

 

[Steve999]

Between 1 to .5% is my line for transparency. And that's with tones. With music, it's probably more like 2 or 3%. Just about every piece of home audio electronics is audibly transparent when it comes to distortion levels.

The rule of thumb when I was young enough to care was 3 % THD (total harmonic distorition) for music and IMD (Intermodulation distortion) was a big no-no. Little more do I know than this, other than I don't think any of my current equipment (outside of my old turntables) approach anything like that.

I'm sure there are ways to twist the metrics so that things look better on paper than they are. But today it's all about the transducers, IMHO. : )

 

[old tech]

You're absolutely right... Transducers are another story. There is always a range of performance with transducers because they are mechanical and physical, and you always have trade offs and compromises. That is the area to put your effort into. There's room to grow there.

Putting aside mechanical and physical compromises, more fundamental issue with any transducer is that its purpose is to change an energy state, eg from electrical or magnetic energy to mechanical energy (or vice versa).

Whenever there is a change in energy state there is always losses to other forms of energy. It is unavoidable.

In this regard, it is one of the signficant advantages of a digital chain, everything is kept in the electrical domain.

 

[stonesfan129]

I could see DSD sounding transparent. I read that lots of recording studios use that as an archival format. I don't know why a CD wouldn't sound transparent though unless mastered poorly. I have heard plenty of CDs that were supposedly flat-transfers of master tapes that sound absolutely phenomenal, far better than anything I've ever heard on vinyl of these albums.