In Reply to: Re: Another Sample Of An Audio Component That Doesn't Measure Well, But Sounds Great. posted by tomservo on November 8, 2006 at 12:32:51:
Hi Tom,I fiqured we were in agreement on wanting the most faithful or realistic replication of live music that can be obtained from a given recorded medium via our audio components.
You said that an issue here is the connection to measuring poorly but sounding good. By that I'm refering mainly to SET's. I know they don't measure as well as most solidstate amps do. Yet in my opinion they usually present a more realistic replication of live music. Speaking of SETs I agree as far as SET amps are concerened I would bet they are not all the same so far as ability to sound good. You may be correct when you say you know some of the SET amps are also “tuned†for “sound†as opposed to a conservative linear design. But the same thing can be said for some solidstate amps! Bob Carver was know to "voice" his amps to what he believed sounded best and I'm sure others do the same thing as well!
Tom I know you are much better informed than I am about which specifications & measurements actually play a part in revealing how well an audio component replicates music. But even the consensus over which specifications & measurements are important changes over time with new knowledge gained doesn't it? I remember when the THD wars were waged. Magazines like Stereo Review & high Fidelity told people they could hear .0005% over .001% (like you said) and manufactuers started producing components with have extremely low THD specs, yet here you're now saying THD % has little or nothing to do with how something sounds. I also remember when the hot topic of amplifier design in the 1970s was "transient intermodulation distortion" (TIM/TID) aka "slewing induced distortion" (SID), 0r "dynamic intermodulation distortion" (DIM) as introduced by Otala. Some audio designers stated that it does not happen in any sensibly designed amplifier. The others in the industry seized upon TIM as their 'proof' that feedback was bad, and the debate has raged ever since. Yet today hardly anyone mentions TIM/TID in their specs. Todays it negative feedback vs non-negative feedback that's discussed. Yet whether or not any of these measurements actually corrolate with how well the amp replicates live music appears very debateable even amongst the audio designers.As I said before I know some specifications & measurements play a part in how well an audio component replicates music, that's given. I'm NOT anti-science. I believe there are other factors to be considered when the human ear/brain combo is used as the reference standard in determining what "sounds" like live music and what doesn't, as opposed to test machines. What it should come down to is a combination of those measurements taken via test equipment that we know directly correlate to how well a component replicates music and what we discover needs to be measured if/when anyone takes the time to learn how the ear/brain combo determines what does and doesn't "sound" like live music! Like most any other topic discussed in audio, the truth lies neither in the Obj or Subj POV, but rather somewhere close to the middle of those.
After reading your statement: "Part of I’m trying to say is that a measurement is not a pronouncement of Good / Bad, more like a photograph of a running engine with its covers removed. To see anything useful, you need many photographs taken at different speeds, from different angles. Then you need to sit down and stare at them all and figure out what do you see." I think we are closer in what we both believe than we are able to see when discussing via a forum on the interent. I just don't see many of the proponents of measurements, giving much credence or time when considering the human perceptions and the ear/brain combo as being one of the many different speeds or different angles that needs to be considered.
As I've stated a few times now no one I know has ever mistaken live music for recorded or visa versa. Although the ear can be fooled it appears to be very relaible when determining live vs recorded music. I cannot help wondering if I could find an open-minded sound engineer that would help me to setup the test equipment correctly, could we possibly get the test machine to determine there were no measurable differences between a live softly played guitar in a room and a recording of that guitar? What if we could fool a test machine into reporting a recording was indistinguishable from live music to it, yet at the very same time anyone listening could recognize the difference between the live music and the recording. Would designers then start to give more credence and delve deeper into how the ear/brain combo determines live vs recorded music? Personally that's a series of test I'd love to see done and even partcipate in!
I also agree with you Tom, that it is sad the audio community has split into two camps mostly. You know I have tried many times to bridge the fence. Unfortunately this is always met by a very vocal group of Objectivists who then ridicule anything & everything I say. Berate me personally, disparage my choices in components etc, instead of actually debating the issues. Much to my disgrace after feeling enough is enough I became equally as abusive to them in return. This hobby and our enjoyment of it will only improve when everyone on both sides of the Obj vs Subj can learn to tolerate those whose audio preferences are different than their own! There is no one true way that works for everyone. My postion on audio is best understood by saying I believe the ultimate "goal" is to find a system that has the best capababilty to replicate LIVE music as closely as possible. But that's done while knowing all audio components are flawed so we should all choose the audio components that possess the performance capabilities that are the most important & desireable to us and our individual listening preferences. Thus while not a perfect replication of live music, it's the closet we can get to replicating LIVE music, while using the less than perfect audio components produced today.
Keep enjoying the music -- Thetubeguy1954
It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows. - Epictetus
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Another Sample Of An Audio Component That Doesn't Measure Well, But Sounds Great. - thetubeguy1954 09:20:27 11/09/06 (2)
- Re: Another Sample Of An Audio Component That Doesn't Measure Well, But Sounds Great. - tomservo 19:36:55 11/09/06 (1)
- Re: Another Sample Of An Audio Component That Doesn't Measure Well, But Sounds Great. - thetubeguy1954 10:25:48 11/10/06 (0)