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!
Trolls are malevolent, but are you suggesting that's also the motivation for subjectivists? That's a bit of a stretch.
I think that subjectivists are motivated by improving the audio state of the art just as much as objectivists.
I'll call them listeners and testers from now on.
Listeners are just as scornful of testers, as testers are of listeners.
It is a kind of trolling, perhaps trolling themselves. I'd say they are motivated by improving the imagined state of their of own perception. We all surely fall into that trap to some extent. I cannot hear absolute polarity it seems, but I can convince myself I can hear a difference "listening" to the samples. When I "test" I remind myself I cannot.
Listeners are often apparently hearing differences that must make music sound vastly different if they wear a hat or sunglasses. Listeners often hear things like better high frequencies at higher bit rates, or differences in soundstage between various DAPs with all very good DACs. Like perceiving improved speed from the car after getting new brake pads.
While the tester always listens, the listener rarely tests.
If you pick the right test tracks and the right speakers (seemingly paradoxically, speakers with high second harmonic distortion), you could likely hear it. Ordinarily, yeah, it's pretty subtle at best.
If you pick the right test tracks and the right speakers (seemingly paradoxically, speakers with high second harmonic distortion), you could likely hear it. Ordinarily, yeah, it's pretty subtle at best.
That's interesting, I may have them (yamaha HS5s), I was listening for it on my HE400SE because they are wired out of absolute phase. I have no idea what to listen for and couldn't change the sample, but I could convince myself of differences again after the failing the test. I suppose it'd be in the attack and decay of lower notes?
Why is it paradoxical to hear it easier with second harmonic distortion?
It's difficult to think about it for me in terms of complex waves. A lot (i have no stats mind you) of music would have polarity of elements flipped, i.e. to make the bass sit better with the kick drum. Loads of studio stuff has a polarity button for that purpose.
At least for me, it was counterintuitive that a higher distortion device would let me hear something I couldn't on a low distortion device. Took a bit of thinking and an "Aha!" moment.
At least for me, it was counterintuitive that a higher distortion device would let me hear something I couldn't on a low distortion device. Took a bit of thinking and an "Aha!" moment.
In studios, its usefulness is preventing phase cancellation with other mics.
I see based on other threads that you mean really quite bad speakers. I still don't know what it would sound like, but I suppose it's a bit like stochastic resonance where it makes sense once you think about it.
Yes traditionally, but you'd also play with phase to make synths and stuff sit better. In any case it would mean that the polarity of an element was flipped and should sound "wrong". Anytime someone used a polarity button, they'd be audibly better off delaying the signal 180 degrees. But I suppose you'd need to be listening on bad speakers so anyone using a pultec EQ probably wouldn't hear it.
It's even simpler: 2nd harmonic means the transfer function is asymmetric with respect to zero. So if you have an up pulse, the output amplitude will be different than for a down pulse.
I have a simple basic Ethernet cable Cat 8 , 49 ft length. Connected to a good streamer : Lumin U2. Is there any logic to replace the cable with another expensive one? Like AudioQuest or similar? Thanks.
If that's the case then why buy a $3000 amp when you can buy a $200 amp? They all present differently. I have had some that sounded to my ears muddy and less clear. But to your point...you and others like you are why I generally read post and don't comment. This shouldn't be my second post.
One of the most idiotic setups for a comparison I've ever seen, and there were many. Every minute you spend sitting in front of it is a waste.
I really wonder if it can be made worse at all...
If that's the case then why buy a $3000 amp when you can buy a $200 amp? They all present differently. I have had some that sounded to my ears muddy and less clear. But to your point...you and others like you are why I generally read post and don't comment. This shouldn't be my second post.
One of the most idiotic setups for a comparison I've ever seen, and there were many. Every minute you spend sitting in front of it is a waste.
I really wonder if it can be made worse at all...
Not really. Assuming load is not a factor (although it often is) they all sound the same when level matched and not clipping. For the few that don't there will be some mundane technical explanation (e,g high input impedance)
Amplifiers aren't musical instruments, they don't have their own unique tone.
Why pay more? Build quality, longevity, features, appearance, power output.
First and foremost i respect this site and what it provides. However most of this information from these readings are false or have no bearing on sound. Your ears are what matter, not what electrical current chart show. I own the Arcam avr390 and the Denon X4700h. I used both these devices using external amps. Arcam hands down is the winner here. Arcam has a beautiful separation in soundstage. It engulfs you in tight engaging warm sound. Its a musical with a flat response when it comes to stereo. In other words its not overly musical where you hear any sibilance. Then Denon on the other hand was dull and lifeless. I dont fell any presence in sound. For example...a doorbell going off in a movie sounds like it coming from the speaker. The same doorbell scene using the Aram sounds like there's someone at my front door. Denons boomy bass is an issue and they have an LFE volume control to turn down the LFE effects for this reason. I believe their preamp mode is a farce. The arcam doesn't have amp shut off yet it plays louder without turning up the volume near full. When you crank the Denon...it sounds worse. When you crank the Arcam...it sounds better. Thats a true test in greatness if you ask me. Both receivers have excellent Hdmi picture quality though their HDMI outs. Arcam is on another Level here.
First and foremost i respect this site and what it provides. However most of this information from these readings are false or have no bearing on sound. Your ears are what matter, not what electrical current chart show. I own the Arcam avr390 and the Denon X4700h. I used both these devices using external amps. Arcam hands down is the winner here. Arcam has a beautiful separation in soundstage. It engulfs you in tight engaging warm sound. Its a musical with a flat response when it comes to stereo. In other words its not overly musical where you hear any sibilance. Then Denon on the other hand was dull and lifeless. I dont fell any presence in sound. For example...a doorbell going off in a movie sounds like it coming from the speaker. The same doorbell scene using the Aram sounds like there's someone at my front door. Denons boomy bass is an issue and they have an LFE volume control to turn down the LFE effects for this reason. I believe their preamp mode is a farce. The arcam doesn't have amp shut off yet it plays louder without turning up the volume near full. When you crank the Denon...it sounds worse. When you crank the Arcam...it sounds better. Thats a true test in greatness if you ask me. Both receivers have excellent Hdmi picture quality though their HDMI outs. Arcam is on another Level here.
Hello good sir..I noticed your an owner of the X4700H. Its a safe and stable receiver. I forgot to mention the Dunkirk test in my review.
The opening scene in Dunkirk is a true test of any surround system. The sound design in this scene it masterful. If you have a proper sound setup, this scene should put you smack dab in the middle of it! Your room should sound like its in a live gun range. It should put you in WW2. The Denon desecrated this scene. It completely lacks in surround guts, Its the reason its being sent back. So far my old Integra 30.7, Marantz 8801, Anthem Mrx's(ive owned a few) and now the Arcam AVR390 does this scene justice. I think the Marantz 8801 did the best job of the bunch. I honestly couldn't believe how lack luster the Denon did in this particular scene. If your happy with the Denon, by all means keep it. Its your ears
I could be wrong, but I don't think it is about "understanding" the test results. It is more about believing there are things that affects the so called sound quality to the ears, that, or cannot even be measured. It is just another one of those posts/comments/opinions that are obviously subjective based, to the point there is no way minds can be changed regardless. He said the Marantz 8801 did the best...., yet after I got the Denon AVR-X4400H, I demoted my AV8801 to one of my 2 channel setup and eventually gave it away. Funny he also mentioned MRX, well, last year I replaced my Denon with the AVM70, and while I do prefer the AVM70 as it seems to sound different (better I guess) with movies, yet they both sound very good with music listening. If we sample 100 people, we can be sure opinions would be all over the map. Many people believe in trust the ears is the best policy, that pretty much close the door to any other suggestions, let alone counter points.
