Audio Note speakers

[Rõlnnbacke]

Does it make sense ?View attachment 368348

PQ isn’t an engineer he is a salesman, everything he says is complete tosh.
Keith

Yes, but this text could move a customer towards coaxials

 

[Richard Austen]

My, how thoughtless of you. You just stepped on a lot of people's toes without even thinking about it.

Mustangs sell because they are fast, sexy and the last remaining example of their genre. To get that package buyers are willing to accept more frequent repairs. Some US vehicles have unusual longevity like the Suburban, for example. Buicks have better than average reliability combined with low repair costs. For unreliable vehicles look at VW and Mercedes.

The Mustang is the only "car" that they still make and the Mustang is fairly reliable when you consider it is a sports car - most people are willing to put up with less than great reliability IF you get performance - that is why people are willing to buy German cars - I am NOT one of them. I don't believe you should TRADE reliability for performance - I feel like if you pay $35,000 for a Toyota Camry and it has outstanding reliability (which they do) then if you pay $70,000 (double the price) you should retain that reliability and then ADD performance on top of it. But I respect those who don't care because perhaps they have the money and patience to have their Mercedes in the shop paying $2,000 for brakes that last 1/4 as long as the $300 brake job on the Camry.

 

[Richard Austen]

So, I guess it is safe to assume that everyone who has commented that purchasing speakers should only be based on the “science” have ended up with the exact same speakers (at least by brand, if not model) since it would be wrong for any of them to have had a preference that differed from any of the others. Because preference is unscientific.

Actually, this also goes to the recordings.

Auto-Tune is an “after the fact” form of DSP (corrective error-correction type of system). Like all forms of DSP and error correction systems from oversampling and Negative Feedback in SS amplifier, they attempt to “correct” the original signal or a singer's voice to make the frequency response flat.

I thought about this while watching the YouTube channel called "Wings of Pegasus". The channel is run by a musician named Fil who compares many artist’s isolated vocals with Auto-Tune and without.

In every case, what caught my eye was that Auto-Tune, according to the measurements, is FAR superior.

With Auto-Tune you can clearly see that the singers are kept to the correct pitch. Without Auto-Tune, even singers who are said to have a perfect pitch like Eva Cassidy or Celine Dion always miss the mark. They all sing with various jagged frequency responses and they are almost always either sharp of the note or flat. Auto-tune keeps all these singers closer to ruler flat and on the correct note.

Since flat response is the primary goal for these recording engineers and some audiophiles, Auto-Tune is obviously their ideal sonic presentation. Why would anyone want to listen to a singer with a jagged frequency response when it is VERY obvious that a flat response is more accurate?

So when you listen to Fil - you must ignore his silly preferences for singers singing off-pitch with jagged frequency response or his and other's dubious claims that Auto-Tunbe sounds "Robotic" - LOL - This is the same claim that SET guys and NOS CD player fans make about SS and Negative feedback and oversampling that they sound "Robotic" or "Fake:

Fil is merely CHOOSING the less accurate live non-auto-tuned version because he "likes it better." He likes inaccurate singing better than flat response accurate Auto-Tuned singing. Since ALL THE RECORDING Engineers who buy Genelec and Neumann and ATC all want ruler flat response - it totally makes sense that the vast majority of all music is Auto-Tuned - because that DSP achieves the goal of flat response; therefore, we must concede that Auto-Tune is ideal!

These guys like Fil with their subjective preferences for non-pitch correcting, and non-autotuning are ruining music - new technology is always better and we are better for it. You can clearly see the measured performance is far better with the use of Auto-Tune. All the recording studios buy equipment that essentially does the same thing.

So the next time you are on forums and you see anyone complain about Auto-Tune – point out to them that according to the measured response – Auto-Tune is much more accurate and you have the graphs to prove it. Poor Fil - he is such a sucker for liking the non-auto-tuned version better - poor bastard.

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

I

Actually, this also goes to the recordings.

Auto-Tune is an “after the fact” form of DSP (corrective error-correction type of system). Like all forms of DSP and error correction systems from oversampling and Negative Feedback in SS amplifier, they attempt to “correct” the original signal or a singer's voice to make the frequency response flat.

I thought about this while watching the YouTube channel called "Wings of Pegasus". The channel is run by a musician named Fil who compares many artist’s isolated vocals with Auto-Tune and without.

In every case, what caught my eye was that Auto-Tune, according to the measurements, is FAR superior.

With Auto-Tune you can clearly see that the singers are kept to the correct pitch. Without Auto-Tune, even singers who are said to have a perfect pitch like Eva Cassidy or Celine Dion always miss the mark. They all sing with various jagged frequency responses and they are almost always either sharp of the note or flat. Auto-tune keeps all these singers closer to ruler flat and on the correct note.

Since flat response is the primary goal for these recording engineers and some audiophiles, Auto-Tune is obviously their ideal sonic presentation. Why would anyone want to listen to a singer with a jagged frequency response when it is VERY obvious that a flat response is more accurate?

So when you listen to Fil - you must ignore his silly preferences for singers singing off-pitch with jagged frequency response or his and other's dubious claims that Auto-Tunbe sounds "Robotic" - LOL - This is the same claim that SET guys and NOS CD player fans make about SS and Negative feedback and oversampling that they sound "Robotic" or "Fake:

Fil is merely CHOOSING the less accurate live non-auto-tuned version because he "likes it better." He likes inaccurate singing better than flat response accurate Auto-Tuned singing. Since ALL THE RECORDING Engineers who buy Genelec and Neumann and ATC all want ruler flat response - it totally makes sense that the vast majority of all music is Auto-Tuned - because that DSP achieves the goal of flat response; therefore, we must concede that Auto-Tune is ideal!

These guys like Fil with their subjective preferences for non-pitch correcting, and non-autotuning are ruining music - new technology is always better and we are better for it. You can clearly see the measured performance is far better with the use of Auto-Tune. All the recording studios buy equipment that essentially does the same thing.

So the next time you are on forums and you see anyone complain about Auto-Tune – point out to them that according to the measured response – Auto-Tune is much more ac.curate and you have the graphs to prove it. Poor Fil - he is such a sucker for liking the non-auto-tuned version better - poor bastard.

If I understand correctly, auto-tune changes the recorded performance, just like audio note. Flat response, in theory, does not (too much). Edit: Dsp, neg. feedback, etc., change the signal, to come closer to the performance.

 

[Richard Austen]

I

If I understand correctly, auto-tune changes the recorded performance, just like audio note. Flat response, in theory, does not (too much).

Recording Studios that use Genelec, Neumann, ATC, PMC are chosen with by the same mindset as the people who use Auto-Tune. Auto-Tune is DSP, Negative feedback in an amplifier is a form of DSP, Oversampling/upsampling is a form of DSP. Non Oversampling non error correction non jitter reduction Digital adds and no feedback amplifiers add nothing to the original signal. That's probably why to people who like SET amps and NOS CD players have the same reaction to SS amps and DSP systems that most people have to the use of DSP Aut0-tune - it sounds Robotic - to those people who are sensitive to hearing SS amps that all sound pretty "fake." Hence why people leave SS and high feedback amps for SET amps.

 

[JiiPee]

Recording Studios that use Genelec, Neumann, ATC, PMC are chosen with by the same mindset as the people who use Auto-Tune. Auto-Tune is DSP, Negative feedback in an amplifier is a form of DSP, Oversampling/upsampling is a form of DSP. Non Oversampling non error correction non jitter reduction Digital adds and no feedback amplifiers add nothing to the original signal. That's probably why to people who like SET amps and NOS CD players have the same reaction to SS amps and DSP systems that most people have to the use of DSP Aut0-tune - it sounds Robotic - to those people who are sensitive to hearing SS amps that all sound pretty "fake." Hence why people leave SS and high feedback amps for SET amps.

Your logic is severely twisted.
1. Just because Auto-Tune uses DSP does not mean that DSP is a form of Auto-Tune.
2. Negative feedback and DSP are two completely different concepts. Negative feedback is not a form of DSP.
3. Amplifiers with no negative feedback do add something to the original signal - distortion. And they do it much more than amplifiers with negative feedback.
4. Your beloved SET amplifiers usually have output impedance, that causes changes in frequency response with most speaker, so they change the original signal much more than typical SS amplifiers.

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

Like all forms of DSP and error correction systems from oversampling and Negative Feedback in SS amplifier, they attempt to “correct” the original signal or a singer's voice to make the frequency response flat.

With Auto-Tune you can clearly see that the singers are kept to the correct pitch. Without Auto-Tune, even singers who are said to have a perfect pitch like Eva Cassidy or Celine Dion always miss the mark. They all sing with various jagged frequency responses and they are almost always either sharp of the note or flat. Auto-tune keeps all these singers closer to ruler flat and on the correct note.

Since flat response is the primary goal for these recording engineers and some audiophiles, Auto-Tune is obviously their ideal sonic presentation. Why would anyone want to listen to a singer with a jagged frequency response when it is VERY obvious that a flat response is more accurate?

Obviously, you don't have a clue what (flat) frequency response is. Frequency response is graph of a function Amplitude vs Frequency. Perfect amplifier or loudspeaker has flat frequency response. Human vocal output does not have flat frequency response!
In the video we see (on the right side) graph of a function Frequency (vocal fundamental) vs Time. Singer with perfect vocal pitch will sing required notes all the time - his Frequency vs Time graph of function is flat. But he doesn't have flat frequency response - his frequency response always is "jugged"!

Negative feedback in an amplifier is a form of DSP

You don't have a clue what negative feedback in an amplifier is. Or what DSP is.
"D" in "DSP" comes from "Digital" - and that has nothing whatsoever with the negative feedback in analog amplifiers.

 

[MattHooper]

No it isn't, but buying an massively overpriced car based solely on a sales pitch that has no basis in the reality of the product could be viewed as a mistake.

Different analogy.

 

[MattHooper]

Does it make sense ?View attachment 368348

That sounds if anything like pair matching of drivers. Which is of course, trivially measurable. Otherwise it seems they’re talking of voodoo.

 

[Richard Austen]

Feedback is time distortion.

Negative Feedback (NFB) and specifically global (Global =from output of amp to input of amp vs. Local = from output of a stage to input of the same stage) induces distortion caused by propagation delay. IOW by the time the distortion on the input propagates through the amp and then the feedback propagates from the output of the amp back to the input it's late and therefore no longer an accurate representation of the distortion that it is trying to correct.

Thus Feedback is a form of "correction" to pretty up the graphs. Auto-Tune is an attempt to pretty up the singer. It's not exactly the same - but they both frak up the sound and make music sound like crap.

SET amplifiers are connected to speakers with HE and benign impedance so the argument that they have vast effects on frequency response is silly - Sure they will be horrendous on an Apogee Scintilla that dips to 1 ohm but then those are not the sorts of speakers that get connected to SET amps. SS amps will drive all speakers - so what? All the best speakers I have heard have all been able to be driven with an 8 watt SET - all the speakers that I have heard over the last 35 years that need 100 watts have largely sucked donkey balls.

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

That sounds if anything like pair matching of drivers. Which is of course, trivially measurable. Otherwise it seems they’re talking of voodoo.

I thought it was about cooperation of mid/woofer and tweeter, making it look more like advocating coaxial.

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

Feedback is time distortion.

Negative Feedback (NFB) and specifically global (Global =from output of amp to input of amp vs. Local = from output of a stage to input of the same stage) induces distortion caused by propagation delay. IOW by the time the distortion on the input propagates through the amp and then the feedback propagates from the output of the amp back to the input it's late and therefore no longer an accurate representation of the distortion that it is trying to correct.

Don't electrons move at almost the speed of light? Than also this logic looks wrong to me.

Thus Feedback is a form of "correction" to pretty up the graphs. Auto-Tune is an attempt to pretty up the singer. It's not exactly the same - but they both frak up the sound and make music sound like crap.

They are essentially different.

I feel tired.

 

[JiiPee]

Feedback is time distortion.

Negative Feedback (NFB) and specifically global (Global =from output of amp to input of amp vs. Local = from output of a stage to input of the same stage) induces distortion caused by propagation delay. IOW by the time the distortion on the input propagates through the amp and then the feedback propagates from the output of the amp back to the input it's late and therefore no longer an accurate representation of the distortion that it is trying to correct.

Thus Feedback is a form of "correction" to pretty up the graphs. Auto-Tune is an attempt to pretty up the singer. It's not exactly the same - but they both frak up the sound and make music sound like crap.

SET amplifiers are connected to speakers with HE and benign impedance so the argument that they have vast effects on frequency response is silly - Sure they will be horrendous on an Apogee Scintilla that dips to 1 ohm but then those are not the sorts of speakers that get connected to SET amps. SS amps will drive all speakers - so what? All the best speakers I have heard have all been able to be driven with an 8 watt SET - all the speakers that I have heard over the last 35 years that need 100 watts have largely sucked donkey balls.

Please, familiarize yourself with the basic concepts of audio technology and related physics. In order for the negative feedback to add time distortion that would be detectable in audio signal, the feedback loop would have to be thousands of times slower than it actually is. You are just propagating old misconceptions that have been proven wrong by science long time ago.

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

One argument for A N that made some sense to me is that you "more listen to the music instead of to the gear". But that possibly is because it's so colored that you forget about bothering. But then you also can buy a pair (or one) of those millions of chipboard 20 cm woofer + tweeter speakers of the seventies for very little money. Often plenty of mids, very warm and pleasing sound. Of course with a beautifull amplifier of the same era!

 

[JiiPee]

SET amplifiers are connected to speakers with HE and benign impedance so the argument that they have vast effects on frequency response is silly - Sure they will be horrendous on an Apogee Scintilla that dips to 1 ohm but then those are not the sorts of speakers that get connected to SET amps. SS amps will drive all speakers - so what? All the best speakers I have heard have all been able to be driven with an 8 watt SET - all the speakers that I have heard over the last 35 years that need 100 watts have largely sucked donkey balls.

The problem with too high output impedance is vastly more common than You claim. Let's have a look at measured performance of Audio Note Meishu - a super expensive SET amplifier and a wet dream of many SET afficionados.

Stereophile has measured the said amplifier. You can easily find the results from the 'net. The conclusion regarding the effect of Meishu's output impedance of over 3 ohms was: "with both output taps, there will be audible modifications of loudspeaker responses with almost all loudspeakers."

There are several net sites providing lists of "SET-friendly loudspeakers". Those lists tend to be rather short...

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

Or, they buy speakers which they then equalize away from flat in order to obey the Harman Curve because it is objectively more subjectively pleasant than flat.

I know it would end the forum to ask as a topic, but I'd love to know where people's OSC* is placed in all this.

* OCS: Objective/Subjective Converter. The point at which people switch from measuring to listening or enjoying. For me, it occurs at where the wires meet the speakers. Some analog sources excepted.

Do you mean the in-room-curve? Than they could actually equalize the speakers-if-were-in-anechoic-chamber towards flat, except when they were flat

-Or the forum would become hip, full of love and understanding. Where wise technicians teach newcomers about audio. And all the others would sometimes smile about where they were arguing about.

 

[Pearljam5000]

 

[MattHooper]

I thought it was about cooperation of mid/woofer and tweeter, making it look more like advocating coaxial.

Now that I look at it again, seems to be about tweeter/mid driver integration. But of course that too is eminently measurable. These manufacturers who appeal to The Unmeasurable are usually just implying a secret sauce they have, which conveniently "can't be measured.'

 

[Purité Audio]

Turning the loudspeaker into a musical instrument.
Keith

 

[MattHooper]

One argument for A N that made some sense to me is that you "more listen to the music instead of to the gear". But that possibly is because it's so colored that you forget about bothering. But then you also can buy a pair (or one) of those millions of chipboard 20 cm woofer + tweeter speakers of the seventies for very little money. Often plenty of mids, very warm and pleasing sound. Of course with a beautifull amplifier of the same era!

As I've mentioned, in a few of my encounters with AN speakers I've found them quite pleasant, sometimes even quite impressive with certain tracks. I don't think everyone who enjoys the AN presentation is a dupe. However I feel their speakers are grossly overpriced, not to mention the company seems to make various bogus claims.