GENERIC "I ASKED AI [SOMETHING ABOUT AUDIO]- WHAT DO YOU THINK?" THREAD

[Winemaker]

Wanting to make a comparison between class H and class D I asked ChatGPT what he thought and this is what he answered me, do you agree or do you think ChatGPT is talking nonsense?

Class H for HiFi/Hi-End​

Advantages:​

1. Superior Audio Quality:
   • Class H amplifiers maintain a linear approach similar to Class AB, offering more natural and detailed sound quality.
   • Ideal for critical listening, where fidelity and sound transparency are essential.
2. Improved Dynamics:
   • The ability to manage variable supply voltage reduces distortion during signal peaks, resulting in more dynamic playback.
3. Good Efficiency:
   • While not as efficient as Class D, the energy efficiency is sufficient to handle high-power systems without excessive heat dissipation.

Disadvantages:​

• Higher heat dissipation compared to Class D, which may require adequate cooling.
• More complex than traditional Class AB, potentially increasing costs.

Recommended for:​

• Home HiFi audio systems: where a balance between quality and power is desired.
• Fans of classical music, jazz, or genres that demand precision and detail.

---

Class D for HiFi/Hi-End​

Advantages:​

1. Very High Efficiency:
   • Class D consumes less energy and generates less heat, allowing for more compact and lightweight designs and greater energy sustainability.
2. Modern Advances in Audio Quality:
   • Thanks to advanced technologies and better filters, modern Class D amplifiers deliver audio quality very close to that of linear amplifiers.
   • Particularly suitable for subwoofers and multichannel systems that require high power.
3. Versatile Design:
   • Ideal for more compact setups, such as powered speakers or integrated devices.

Disadvantages:​

• Potentially lower audio quality than Class H or AB, especially in mid-to-high frequencies, due to PWM modulation and output filters.
• Some audio purists perceive a "coldness" or lack of warmth in the playback typical of Class D.

Recommended for:​

• Multichannel or Home Theater systems: where high efficiency and compactness are required.
• Modern audio systems: such as active speakers or audio setups in small spaces.

---

Conclusion​

For a HiFi/Hi-End system, I would generally recommend a Class H or Class AB amplifier, as these classes offer superior audio quality with more natural and detailed sound reproduction, which is often a priority for audiophiles.

However:

• If you need a compact, energy-efficient setup, or for modern applications (e.g., active speakers), Class D can be a viable choice, especially with today’s high-end technologies.
• For genres like electronic music or environments where power is more important than extreme fidelity, Class D excels.

If your goal is to maximize sound quality for critical listening, look for a high-end Class H or AB amplifier with top-quality components. On the other hand, if versatility and efficiency are crucial, a modern high-end Class D amplifier might surprise you.

 

[Jimbob54]

The answer of course is it depends on the consumer's requirements and the implementation in the particular device in question.

Let's not do the "is chatgpt right?" thing here please.

 

[Wendigo79]

Just for fun I asked Deepseek about modern speakers

"why are moder loudspeakers so bright in sound profile? is it because of Spotify, YouTube and other compressed audio formats?"

The answer was:

"The brightness in the sound profile of modern loudspeakers can be attributed to several factors, and while compressed audio formats like those used by Spotify and YouTube can play a role, they are not the sole reason. Here are some key factors:

1. **Listener Preference and Market Trends**: Many consumers prefer a brighter sound profile because it can make music seem more detailed and lively, especially at lower volumes or in noisy environments. Manufacturers often tune their speakers to meet these preferences.

2. **Compressed Audio Formats**: Services like Spotify and YouTube use lossy compression (e.g., MP3, AAC) to reduce file sizes, which can result in the loss of some audio details, particularly in the midrange and bass frequencies. To compensate, speakers might be tuned to emphasize higher frequencies, making the sound appear brighter.

3. **Room Acoustics**: In many home environments, high frequencies can be absorbed by soft furnishings, while lower frequencies might be exaggerated due to room modes. Bright speakers can help balance this out, making the sound clearer in typical living spaces.

4. **Speaker Design and Components**: Modern speakers often use materials and designs that naturally emphasize higher frequencies. For example, tweeters made from materials like titanium or aluminum can produce more pronounced high frequencies compared to softer materials like silk.

5. **Listening Fatigue and Perception**: Bright speakers can initially sound more impressive because they highlight details in the music. However, this can lead to listening fatigue over time, as the ear becomes sensitive to prolonged exposure to high frequencies.

6. **Mastering Trends**: Modern music production often involves heavy compression and equalization to make tracks sound louder and more impactful on a wide range of playback systems. This can result in a brighter overall sound, which speakers might be designed to complement.

In summary, while compressed audio formats can contribute to the perception of brightness, the sound profile of modern loudspeakers is influenced by a combination of consumer preferences, room acoustics, speaker design, and trends in music production."

What do you think? Does AI have a point on modern speakers?

I just recently put my Dali Opticon 2 MK2 speakers for sale. For an obvious reason of course

 

[Old_School_Brad]

Isn't that a leading question to begin with? I mean, are modern speakers actually brighter overall? And how do we even define a "modern" speaker? Are we talking about 5, 10, 15, 20, or 30 years?

I think the premise is flawed from the start. I disagree with the reasoning behind lossy formats, and I also don't agree with the idea of bright mastering. The logic that a bright speaker should further enhance an already bright master doesn’t make sense to me either.

It seems it's just giving the answer you want to hear because the question is leading.

 

[JSmith]

"why are moder loudspeakers so bright in sound profile? is it because of Spotify, YouTube and other compressed audio formats?"

I'd be interested in what the response is when you ask the opposite... as in;

"why are modern loudspeakers not bright in sound profile? Is it because of Spotify, YouTube and other compressed audio formats?"

These AI bots are very good at telling one what they want to hear... especially when posed a leading question, as the initial premise of "all modern loudspeakers sounding bright" is an incorrect generalisation to begin with.


JSmith

 

[Wendigo79]

Well this was the result of opposite query:

"why are modern loudspeakers not bright in sound profile? Is it because of Spotify, YouTube and other compressed audio formats?"

The answer:

"The perception that modern loudspeakers are not as "bright" in sound profile as older models can be attributed to several factors, including changes in design trends, listener preferences, and the influence of compressed audio formats like those used by Spotify and YouTube. Here's a breakdown of the key reasons:

### 1. **Design Trends and Listener Preferences**
- **Neutral Sound Signature**: Modern loudspeakers are often designed with a focus on achieving a more neutral or balanced sound profile. This means they aim to reproduce audio as accurately as possible without emphasizing specific frequency ranges, such as the high frequencies (treble) that contribute to a "bright" sound.
- **Consumer Preferences**: Over time, listener preferences have shifted toward a more natural and less fatiguing sound. Bright speakers, while initially impressive, can become tiring over long listening sessions. Modern designs prioritize a smoother, more detailed sound that is enjoyable for extended periods.

### 2. **Compressed Audio Formats**
- **Lossy Compression**: Platforms like Spotify and YouTube use lossy compression (e.g., MP3, AAC) to reduce file sizes, which can result in the loss of high-frequency details. This can make music sound less bright or detailed compared to uncompressed formats like WAV or FLAC.
- **Loudness Normalization**: Streaming services often apply loudness normalization to ensure consistent volume levels across tracks. This can reduce dynamic range and impact the perceived brightness of the audio.

### 3. **Room Acoustics and Listening Environments**
- **Modern Living Spaces**: Many modern homes have hard surfaces and open layouts that can exacerbate high-frequency reflections, making bright speakers sound harsh. To compensate, speaker designers may tune their products to be less bright to suit these environments.
- **Near-Field Listening**: With the rise of desktop and near-field listening setups, speakers are often designed to sound balanced at close range, which can mean reducing brightness to avoid listener fatigue.

### 4. **Advancements in Speaker Technology**
- **Improved Drivers and Materials**: Modern speaker drivers and materials are better at reproducing high frequencies accurately without harshness. This can result in a smoother, more refined treble response compared to older speakers, which might have had a more exaggerated brightness due to technological limitations.
- **DSP and Equalization**: Many modern speakers incorporate digital signal processing (DSP) to tailor the sound profile to specific listening conditions, often resulting in a less bright but more accurate sound.

### 5. **Cultural and Market Shifts**
- **Focus on Bass and Midrange**: Modern music production and consumer preferences often emphasize bass and midrange frequencies, which can lead speaker manufacturers to prioritize these areas over treble.
- **Global Markets**: As speaker manufacturers cater to global markets, they may aim for a sound profile that appeals to a wider audience, often favoring a balanced or warm sound over a bright one.

### Conclusion
The shift away from bright sound profiles in modern loudspeakers is not solely due to compressed audio formats like those used by Spotify and YouTube, though these formats do play a role. It is more a result of evolving design philosophies, advancements in technology, changes in listening environments, and shifting consumer preferences. Modern speakers are often designed to deliver a more accurate, balanced, and enjoyable listening experience across a wide range of content and environments."


I guess you get what you want from AI. It's still interesting, or entertaining to make these queries

 

[Wendigo79]

Isn't that a leading question to begin with? I mean, are modern speakers actually brighter overall? And how do we even define a "modern" speaker? Are we talking about 5, 10, 15, 20, or 30 years?

I think the premise is flawed from the start. I disagree with the reasoning behind lossy formats, and I also don't agree with the idea of bright mastering. The logic that a bright speaker should further enhance an already bright master doesn’t make sense to me either.

It seems it's just giving the answer you want to hear because the question is leading.

My experice is that is really difficult to find speakers that are not too bright. Wharfedales and Dynaudios are exections for that. Altough I have heard opposite also for Dynaudio. But Klipsch, Dali, Triangle and many others tend to be too bright. I have also Elac DBR62's and they are not. So my impression is that they make most of them really bright nowdays. I have noticed that when I use my Dalis with youtube they sound great. They improve the sound by being bright. But when I use Tidal with streamer, they sound way too bright. So that's my logic with that.

But yeah, AI is like politicians. They say what they expect you to want to hear

 

[RosalieTheDog]

With all due respect, but what is the point
a) of asking questions like this to the automatic bullshitgenerators;
b) publishing the logs of these interactions on a forum
?

 

[Wendigo79]

With all due respect, but what is the point
a) of asking questions like this to the automatic bullshitgenerators;
b) publishing the logs of these interactions on a forum
?

To start conversation of brightness of speakers in a funny way. But yeah, I guess it just feeds the bullshit loop. AI generates partially reasonable nonsense to the internet and then uses that nonsense later to generate more nonsense

 

[Cogito]

With all due respect, but what is the point
a) of asking questions like this to the automatic bullshitgenerators;
b) publishing the logs of these interactions on a forum
?

Personally, I found interesting and your response was hardly "respectful".

 

[RosalieTheDog]

Personally, I found interesting and your response was hardly "respectful".

Not respectful to the bullshitgenerators.

 

[Petrushka]

The point is what you get from AI may or may not be true. And it may be a biased answer depending on which service is used and how the question was asked.

Personally, I look for AI systems that challenge the user when the premise asked is incorrect or offers incorrect conclusions. When you are dealing with garbage in, garbage out AI answers they don't typically challenge the user.

AI chatbots do not reason. They regurgitate the “consensus” from the material used to train them. They are very good at this, at least they are very good at writing, in terms of style.

I have asked a number of questions about vintage audio products and found the responses and the links to be very helpful. Much better than google searches.

 

[whereisbrian]

A request to AI bots is a loss of electric energy and the result is purely vapor.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

A request to AI bots is a loss of electric energy and the result is purely vapor.

At least the type of AI us ordinary folks have access to.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

AI searches are easier than a Google search - no doubt. That's the draw for users. But, the information provided can easily be incorrect. If the AI offers sources for its response that can be helpful material. Maybe it's correct? Maybe not. If you are not intimately knowledgable about the material in the question, AI can easily lead the reader down a false or misleading path. The less understanding the reader has, the easier they are to fool. If readers accept AI responses without challenge it can lead to more false myths than the human condition has ever experienced.

If you want to get a fun response ask your favorite AI, "Why are AI responses incorrect at least 50% of the time?"

Ha! ChatGPT concluded its list of reasons, including that human-created content can contain bias and inaccuracies, with a passive-aggressive question asking if I had any examples of incorrect AI responses.

 

[Petrushka]

There are several kinds of incorrect answers, all of them equivalent to the kinds of errors humans make.

Any factual errors will be linked to training material or to deliberate instructions added on top of training.

There are reasoning errors, and I find these interesting.

There are gaps in the ability to reason. These are also interesting.

When I see examples, I think, I know people who reason like that. This does not surprise me, because LLMs are trained on the writings of humans.

 

[whereisbrian]

AI is also a kind of joke.
With DeepSeek arrival, some tech stock market values fall down..
Surprise!

 

[Petrushka]

AI is also a kind of joke.
With DeepSeek arrival, some tech stock market values fall down..
Surprise!

They are a joke if you think the Model T was a joke.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

They are a joke if you think the Model T was a joke.

It's the farthest thing from a joke -it's serious in every sense of the word.

 

[JSmith]

DeepSeek

It's a shame no one has gone with Deep Thought or 42 yet... from Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.


JSmith