• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

A Visit to Mike Lavigne's Home and Sound Galleries Media Server

tomelex

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
990
Likes
573
Location
So called Midwest, USA
The thing about the gurus, is they MUST believe in themselves. Unlike me or others, who have enough scientific background and know ourselves well enough to understand that WE are the biggest variable.

Example, so there is this GURU listening to his system, he is deep into audio, he has read all the adds for cables and interconnects and cryogenic fuses and whatever all we have all been exposed to. He has read all the scientific explanations, even if the science applies to radio frequencies or frequencies well outside the audio hearing of any human or dog or bat, so he knows there is some "science" there. Then he also knows that he can hear a difference between components, sometimes right away (that would be a real hearing thing, that would be good IMO) and sometimes he must live with this change for a long time to "discover" what he really hears. He is fine with that second theory, its science to him, as he has experienced it in the past, he has decided he did not like something after listening for some period of time, so he knows it works.

The sad thing is, he does not acknowledge how variable and tricky his ear/brain and memory interface all are, way tricker than he is. See, he does not even know "who" he is. He is listening along and all of the sudden, he "knows, understands, and believes" that that sound is "wrong" or better or not as good or the image shrunk or whatever. How does he all of the sudden "know" this, where did that thought or insight come from.....well, duh, from somewhere he has no knowledge or control of, the brain can not "look" at itself operating. BUT, if one believes that whatever thought the conscious grasps onto that is thrown up by the sub-conscious then he is a believer in "himself the GURU", and thus can quite genuinely express that he did hear that fuse or wire or whatever, and how it impacted his preference for music. They believe their preferences as thrown up by their brain, the thing they can not look into from the outside.

They refuse blind testing because they are not open enough to the fallability of their brain/ear/human body system. AND, they choose the science that works for them, and toss out the rest that does not. It is a religion, a system of beliefs based on faith (that which can not be shown true but is accepted as true), faith in ones self. They are deeply religious in that way.
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
191
Location
Australia
So Tom, if you're listening to some system and it sounds "wrong", does it mean:

a) The system's wrong, or
b) Your brain's wrong?
 

tomelex

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
990
Likes
573
Location
So called Midwest, USA
All humans have preferences, just about every "system" interprets the original recording in a different way, the only system that interprets it the correct way is the one at the recording studio where it was mix or mastered at. And it only interprets it the correct way because it matches the mix or master engineers human preference at that point in time. The rest of us get what we get, then we can mix or master it how we want with our systems that we put together based on what our preferences are. After that, it allows for folks who do not know the science of audio to fill millions of posts about their hearing preferences and endless debates about preferences instead of science.
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
191
Location
Australia
Okay, the key word there was "interpret" - what exactly do you mean by that? For example, is it the mix of audible distortion that is added by each playback system?
 

tomelex

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
990
Likes
573
Location
So called Midwest, USA
The only way to "playback" the original recording accurately is to sit in the chair at the studio where the mix or master engineer sat and listen there.

Therefore, not one of our systems is capable of playing back the recording the way it was intended. Therefore our systems playback the recording the way they want and no matter what you do, you have two choices, measure your system playback in your room and make it as flat as possible or play with it any way you want so it colors everything that comes through it with the same brush of inaccuracy.

Any time you change the signal in any way, you can call it distortion, but its not all audible.

Let me make this clear and simple, in your entire system, from your storage device output signal to the spl level and accuracy of the wiggle of air at your listening position, the only thing that should happen is it gets bigger or smaller, no additional distortions in time, phase, amplitude, or frequency content. The closer your entire chain is to doing that, the more accurate it is as Hi-Fi, however, accurate being making the signal accurately move the air, not accurate to the original mix or master session, as to do that you would have to go down to the studio and sit in the seat the mix master engineer sat in. Soooo, measurements prove accuracy to the signal, anything else is preference and painting everything with the same brush so to speak. Soooo, we deal with science or we deal with preference, one is measurable, one is like people, all different.
 

Thomas savage

Grand Contributor
The Watchman
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
10,260
Likes
16,307
Location
uk, taunton
It's like early man , when there was a drought.. You would do a dance and lop off a few heads and then the rain comes.. Thereafter, every time Your desperate for rain your dancing about like lunatics and lopping off heads...

Now in audiophool land that dance and lopping off heads made it rain....but we know better.. Don't we ? :confused::D
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
191
Location
Australia
Let me make this clear and simple, in your entire system, from your storage device output signal to the spl level and accuracy of the wiggle of air at your listening position, the only thing that should happen is it gets bigger or smaller, no additional distortions in time, phase, amplitude, or frequency content. The closer your entire chain is to doing that, the more accurate it is as Hi-Fi, however, accurate being making the signal accurately move the air, not accurate to the original mix or master session, as to do that you would have to go down to the studio and sit in the seat the mix master engineer sat in. Soooo, measurements prove accuracy to the signal, anything else is preference and painting everything with the same brush so to speak. Soooo, we deal with science or we deal with preference, one is measurable, one is like people, all different.
So, are we able to measure everything, are we able to guarantee accuracy?
 

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,415
Location
Seattle Area, USA
This is a cost effective upgrade option, pair of high quality studio actives and simple digital front end.. 3 hits on the bong and you will never be questioning why things don't sound right..

You will be totally enveloped , at one in perpetual rhythm and soul connect with the music..

If your going to be dependant on a ' dealer' make it a drug dealer not a hifi dealer..

I want to paste this into the multi channel thread....

Bong hits vs rear speakers...
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
3,075
Likes
2,180
Location
UK
The only way to "playback" the original recording accurately is to sit in the chair at the studio where the mix or master engineer sat and listen there.

Therefore, not one of our systems is capable of playing back the recording the way it was intended.
I don't agree that the sound the engineer heard was the one that was intended. The engineer only has the materials he is given, played back on equipment that is just as flawed as everyone else's. He, too, has biases and preconceptions like audiophiles. He can tweak this or that within limits, but at the end of the day he is just committing the outputs of several microphones to 'tape' based on a few rules of thumb. Luckily, microphones are pretty neutral and humans are pretty good at accepting every mix as 'valid'. Even if he couldn't hear the mix but adjusted the levels by viewing the VU meters, it would probably sound like music.

The audiophile with a better system in a real room may well hear a better version than the engineer - perhaps even closer to the one the engineer had in his head. Simply put, if I record something with my phone, it will sound better when I play it back over a good audio system than when I 'engineered' the recording as I "intended" by listening to it played back over the phone speaker.
 
Last edited:

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,228
Likes
12,564
Location
London
What I don't understand, those guys have money so unless they all inherited ,they must have a modicum of common sense yet they are all so completely and absolutely gullible ?
It's a dichotomy non?
Keith
 

Thomas savage

Grand Contributor
The Watchman
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
10,260
Likes
16,307
Location
uk, taunton
What I don't understand, those guys have money so unless they all inherited ,they must have a modicum of common sense yet they are all so completely and absolutely gullible ?
It's a dichotomy non?
Keith
It's typical human contradiction. Iv never met a human who does not on some subject or area of personality exhibit a contradictory dynamic. Myself included ..
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,455
Likes
15,811
Location
Oxfordshire
Luckily, microphones are pretty neutral and humans are pretty good at accepting every mix as 'valid'.

I am only an amateur recordist, but I have been recording music for over 50 years now and I would take issue with you over this statement.
Microphones are transducers and are almost as variable as loudspeakers. Their signal to noise ratio, sensitivity, directionality and frequency responses vary lots more than any non-transducers.
Not only that the sound you get varies a lot depending on positioning of the microphone, far more than one would expect, presumably because one's brain corrects to an extent when one's ears move but the microphone does not. Microphone amps are relatively (to all hifi electronics except a MC cartridge stage) sensitive too.
 

DonH56

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
7,925
Likes
16,770
Location
Monument, CO
Don't forget that the artist and/or engineers typically choose the mic for the sound they want. Flatness is rarely a criteria. All we can do is try to get our systems are true as possible to the source; good luck with determining what the original sound was like, and even if your source (media) is what the artist really intended or not, even leaving off the engineer who mixed for an average system so it sounds different on a really good system.

I strive to get my system as flat as possible as a starting point, then tweak to taste. I do prefer to use EQ and such over magic speaker wires and little dots of various materials scattered around the components and room.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,455
Likes
15,811
Location
Oxfordshire
Don't forget that the artist and/or engineers typically choose the mic for the sound they want. Flatness is rarely a criteria. All we can do is try to get our systems are true as possible to the source; good luck with determining what the original sound was like, and even if your source (media) is what the artist really intended or not, even leaving off the engineer who mixed for an average system so it sounds different on a really good system.

I strive to get my system as flat as possible as a starting point, then tweak to taste. I do prefer to use EQ and such over magic speaker wires and little dots of various materials scattered around the components and room.

Absolutely!
I have done the same with my system.
I do use my own recordings to check things though, whilst they are not magnificent recordings I was there and chose the microphones, their positions and monitored the recording.
 

Jinjuku

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 28, 2016
Messages
1,279
Likes
1,180
I don't agree that the sound the engineer heard was the one that was intended. The engineer only has the materials he is given, played back on equipment that is just as flawed as everyone else's. He, too, has biases and preconceptions like audiophiles.

The good ones also have education, really great measurement gear, most likely play a few instruments themselves, and rooms built for acoustics.

I understand, to the best of my ability, my bias's and attempt to correct for them. It's why I have a measurement system and ways to digitally correct if needed.
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
3,075
Likes
2,180
Location
UK
The good ones also have education, really great measurement gear, most likely play a few instruments themselves, and rooms built for acoustics.
All true, but can we honestly doubt that playing master tapes made in 1965 over some modern DSP speakers will sound better than the engineer heard at the time?

You could say it's only different, and that the version the engineer heard was the true sound - what he "intended". I don't believe it: he heard a version of his efforts that was limited by his playback gear. When we play it with more modern gear we 're-master' it, usually for the better (but sometimes we reveal too much, maybe).
 
Top Bottom