Planar Speaker Asylum

Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.

Return to Planar Speaker Asylum

Planar Speaker Asylum

You have summed it up succinctly

174.243.212.61

13th Duke of Wymbourne

In Reply to: RE: Accurate to the signal using what metrics? posted by E-Stat on January 08, 2025 at 07:55:38

There is little correlation. But that does not mean the numbers are wrong. There are (*) possible reasons why more artifacts could sound better combined with how the measurements are interpretated. And I am all for people listening to what they prefer as long as they don't confuse their preference as being objectively better.

I've linked to a recent YT video from Goldensound in which he shows three examples of a piece of music processed in different ways but with the same SINAD.

* I don't think any of the reasons are well proven and it is not in anyone's financial interest to pursue.
https://youtu.be/w4-euCGbYNQ?si=PVv6xtJ7oP7cY9Dx (Open in New Window)

Follow Ups:

RE: You have summed it up succinctly - E-Stat 11:35:02 01/08/25 (7)
Thanks for the link!

But that does not mean the numbers are wrong.

Just most "numbers" lack relevancy to what we hear. Notable exceptions include frequency response and linearity which is clearly audible. Given the complexity of a dynamic musical waveform, accuracy to exactly what? There's a difference between information and knowledge .

Many years ago, there was a similarly surly wannabe speaker designer who liked to call what he didn't understand or perceive "voodoo". He threw down the gauntlet and challenged me to a duel using an online DBT. I recently recounted the experience here . Follow the supplied hyperlinks to the Klippel site and see what you think! I'm not a Tracy Chapman fan, but serves as a point of reference after some familiarity with the content.

Everyone is entitled to their perception. Those who claim *superiority*, however, are merely deluding themselves in a specious cloak of unvalidated controls. Mr. Gory has demonstrated that he no idea why he believes what he does. Merely regurgitates what he's read. And goes all over the place completely missing the core question.

I find your posts a delight to read. :)
- A disclaimer - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 13:36:33 01/10/25 (6)
  I didn't read the whole thread before I posted and I've just noticed that earlier you used the phrase 'beaten into submission with correction'. Now, I think we now each other well enough by now that I am duty bound to distance myself from any insinuation that negative feedback does anything bad. What is does is (or should be) well understood and reduces distortion/artifacts. But the listener at home might not like the results, which I see as their problem to deal with rather than negative feedback's problem. I like your use of the term relevancy, I just used the analogy on PFM that jet engine thrust will not tell how enjoyable your flight will be but it does tell a lot about how well the airplane works as an airplane (yes, you could argue that low thrust means a longer flight that might be less enjoyable, or more enjoyable if you have time for another gin & tonic).
  - RE: A disclaimer - E-Stat 13:41:24 01/10/25 (5)
    What is does is (or should be) well understood and reduces distortion/artifacts.
    
    Decreases some and increases others . It's a matter of degrees.
    
    jet engine thrust will not tell how enjoyable your flight will be...
    
    Thrust is merely a measure of power (like watts) and has no qualitative aspects to it. Very much unlike what 75 db(!) of correction does to an audio signal.
    
    I prefer using inherently more linear devices that don't require such a beating to be civil.
    - RE: A disclaimer - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 14:53:50 01/10/25 (4)
      Pass makes a good point relating to Fig10 in that article that you'd have to apply 40dB of feedback to get back to where you where at 0dB (with 1% second harmonic and 0.3% third harmonic). The irony is that with 75dB of feedback you'd be much, much better off than having none! If you can actually apply 75dB of feedback that is! I look at this in two ways: designing for lowest distortion without overall negative feedback is an interesting design challenge and a noble cause but easy, designing with really high loop gains is difficult and, IMHO, beyond the capabilities of many. But, perhaps, 1% 2HD & 0.3% 3HD is perfectly acceptable so it is moot. Except that audiophiles seem to be threatened by stuff that measures well because they chose something that measures less well, even though they like what they have. And audio designers seem threatened because they don't want the market to become commoditized, which can happen if someone takes the time to master feedback and uses it to produce lower priced amplifiers.
      - Choose as you will - E-Stat 15:14:15 01/10/25 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: A disclaimer posted by 13th Duke of Wymbourne on January 10, 2025 at 14:53:50
        
        I'm not a fan of multitudes of high order harmonics that accumulate at the top. :)
        
        Edits: 01/10/25
        
        You shall not Pass - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 16:19:14 01/10/25 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Choose as you will posted by E-Stat on January 10, 2025 at 15:14:15
        
        Looks like Nelson has transcended guru-ship and is going for Wizard status.
        
        Merely one of many - E-Stat 17:15:33 01/10/25 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You shall not Pass posted by 13th Duke of Wymbourne on January 10, 2025 at 16:19:14
        
        who find having to put a massive filter on the output of an amp to remove copious amounts of ultrasonic garbage is not the best way to go.
        Do those who listen to Hypex amps do the same as John Atkinson must in order for the noise not to overload his gear?
        Dan D'Agostino never liked the "fuzz" always seen on square waves.
        
        Edits: 01/11/25
        
        Just as you feel about correction, I feel we'be beaten this topic into submission (nt) - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 17:36:49 01/10/25 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Merely one of many posted by E-Stat on January 10, 2025 at 17:15:33
        
        Nt

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: