Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[goat76]

They ‘believe’ and of course are told by manufacturers/retailers that the result will be more real and lifelike but it is just distortion if indeed the component adds anything audible.
Keith

I’m not talking about the people who are easily tricked by others into believing things, I’m talking about the people who listen for themselves and “dare” to choose the gear that makes their experience of audio reproduction more life-like and real, even if they fully well know that the gear they didn't select (by the same criteria) measures better.

 

[Doodski]

I’m not talking about the people who are easily tricked by others into believing things, I’m talking about the people who listen for themselves and “dare” to choose the gear that makes their experience of audio reproduction more life-like and real, even if they fully well know that the gear they didn't select (by the same criteria) measures better.

That is hardly daring or even unique. It is a foolish way to select stuff and ends up with colored sounding gear. Gear selection is not to be done by coloring the sound with each piece added to a system because that is what the PEQ is for.

 

[goat76]

That is hardly daring or even unique. It is a foolish way to select stuff and ends up with colored sounding gear. Gear selection is not to be done by coloring the sound with each piece added to a system because that is what the PEQ is for.

If a person had a close-to-perfectly-measuring digital amp and a tube amp, I would seriously be questioning his goals if he still chooses to go with the digital amp even though he clearly prefers the reproduction of all music using his tube amp.

It seems to be a lot more work trying to simulate his tube amp using PEQ instead of just using the tube amp.

 

[Purité Audio]

I’m not talking about the people who are easily tricked by others into believing things, I’m talking about the people who listen for themselves and “dare” to choose the gear that makes their experience of audio reproduction more life-like and real, even if they fully well know that the gear they didn't select (by the same criteria) measures better.

That isn’t my experience, listeners without technical knowledge are led to believe that a particular component will have ‘musicality’ or be more ‘real’ and they believe them often without a second thought.
If the manufacturer were to say instead of musicality our design has a high noise floor or audio power supply noise …
Keith

 

[Petrushka]

What's your point?

Jim

Commercial recordings are engineered to sound good in homes. I have old ears, but I can easily tell live from recorded.

But that distinction can be blurred when the live performance comes over speakers, or takes place in an acoustically bad venue.

In my experience, headphones and near field speakers can produce an astonishing effect, maybe even the illusion of reality, but that isn’t the way I normally listen. I do not sit in one place. I wander around the house, even room to room.

People have different tastes and different priorities.

 

[goat76]

I see what you mean.

I realize that there are no "1:1" replicas. I used the phrase "... the closest approach possible to what I heard when I was there" for a reason.

When @Petrushka said "I am not trying to be difficult, but I see no way to capture a performance involving amplified instruments or voices, and which includes room or auditorium effects." and talked about "...whatever comes out of the performance speakers, plus audience noises, plus reflections and such from the venue. ", I wondered exactly what point he was trying to make. I still do. Maybe he was trying to make the same point that you raised, and may be he was trying to make a different point.

The choices of videos I posted contained some that were not apt to my point. That particular Gov't Mule was a bad choice; I have the recording of them "Live ... With a Little Help From My Friends" at the Roxy Theater in Atlanta. I look upon it as one of the most unaffected live recordings I have. If you've ever heard the Roxy with a crowd, I think you'd say it sounded pretty "real". (I use "unaffected" to mean less of that "coloration" that you mentioned, rather than more.) But I was in a hurry, and I chose videos that were not good examples.

As for recordings being severely colored by all the steps taken in the audio production, I had already addressed that point when I said, "What you may not like, therefore, is the set of choices that the recording industry personnel made." (My original post addressed the issue raised by @Drunkinho about "good engineeering that doesn't sound good", and addressed equipment more than anything. That post includes my sentence, "Whether you like the end result or not is beside the point ... the equipment does what it is designed to do.")

In my view, the most obvious advantage to most on-location recordings is suppression of crowd noise. At large venues, it can be overwhelming. If that qualifies as "coloring", than I'm all for it. After all, the main reason I haven't gone to large-venue concerts in over 40 years is that I don't need the second-hand smoke, the screaming and the pressure. So in that sense, you are absolutely correct; large-venue live recordings are definitely not "1:1 replicas" .... and I thank my lucky stars for that. The places I have frequented in the last 40 (more like 30) years have been small-venue. Although there has been amplification involved, it's nothing like an arena concert. Whole 'nother world. From what comparisons I can make from memory, the recording equipment was not SEVERELY colored.

Are we roughly on the same page here?

Jim

Sorry, I came into all this "sideways" as I have not read your initial discussion, I was just talking about things in general as all recordings are severely colored by all choices made during the recording, mixing, and mastering, and way more so than what a little coloration will do by the reproduction gear of choice by the end users at home. So if a little bit more coloration makes things sound a little more life-like and a little closer to being real to an end user, it will still be a drop in the sea in comparison to how the music sounded in the real live venue as that was far from being captured “un-colored” in the first place.

So then we land in the question of how important it is for you and me if we hear it the same way as the production personnel heard it in the studio. Maybe they had neutral gear or they didn't, so maybe the real goal should be to make things sound as life-like and real to ourselves instead of chasing something we believe is neutral.

 

[goat76]

If the simulation of a tube amp can be achieved using PEQ, then the variation from the flat response represented by the digital amp is quite large. After all, it has to be, to be audible.
If that's the case, then the amp has two characteristics; 1) It changes the sound of the recording, and does so audibly, and 2) it will change the sound with all recordings. I have never met a person who prefers audible alteration of all of their recordings the same way. They might be out there, but I've never seen one.

We old farts understand tubes. Younger people may not have the experiences that we have had. For them, the choice of PEQ and distortion apps can give them an idea of whether they like the effects or not. If they don't like what they hear, that same PEQ and those same apps allow them to experiment with the sound, giving them a versatility that buying tube gear cannot match. After a few years, they may (or may not) decide to abandon the idea of "tube sound" altogether.

And the money involved is vastly different.

Jim

It doesn't have to be larger than just adding a little bit of "shimmer" to everything, and maybe a little bit of "body" and a small amount of added three-dimensionality that make things sound more life-like and real to some listeners. At least that is what I have experienced with my Fender guitar amp, and I think that may be one of the things that make some people prefer the sound of tube amps for music reproduction as well. I don't think it will be that easy to just "PEQ" such quality out of a solid-state amp as I believe it may be affected by how different load is handled. ...Maybe.

As there is no such thing as the perfect loudspeaker that will not color the sound at all, you could say that all of us prefer the specific audible alternation that our choice of loudspeakers does to the sound. At least when it comes to me, I don't use different speakers for different recordings as I find everything sounds the way I want and expect things to sound out of the loudspeakers I use. They are tuned tonality-wise the way I want them to sound, and even if there are large differences in how different music album sounds, I have never felt the need for a different set of speakers for any particular kind of recording.

 

[Petrushka]

There are people who have that viewpoint. I find that totally acceptable for a personal viewpoint. There is, after all, no gainsaying preference.

The problem arises if you advocate that viewpoint as public policy. After all, the only way that we can have some reasonable assurance that we hear "what the production personnel heard in the studio" is for both the equipment in the studio and the equipment in our homes to be as neutral as possible. If we have our goal as "making things sound as life-like and real to ourselves" as public policy, then consumers get lost in a morass of affected gear that they have to search through, buying many different components at high cost to each of them. The audio industry loves that, but I don't think much of it.

I think "chasing neutral" is vastly more achievable than chasing something ephemeral that is "life-like and real to ourselves". After all, what sounds "life-like and real to ourselves" can change from season to season, year to year and place to place, as in changing houses or apartments. Neutral is a quality that is confirmed for everyone by tests and measurements. It may not yet be perfect, but we get closer every year.

Jim

Neutral is a term that can only be applied to electronics.

No commercial recording company places microphones at audience positions, which would be necessary to reproduce what the audience hears.

Binaural recording has been done, and played back over headphones can be pretty convincing, but played back over speakers in a home, is less so.

Recording engineers place microphones in order to produce a commercially viable product, something that will be listenable over a wide variety of playback systems. Binaural recordings can be as neutral as possible, given the state of the art in transducers, but commercial recordings are sweetened. People will accept a casually made recording if the performance is exceptional, but that is the unusual case.

 

[goat76]

Send that sucker in to Amir and let's have it tested! I suspect that under load, it has enough frequency response deviation from neutral to qualify as a roller-coaster!

Jim

Take it for what it is, it is of course in comparison to solid-state guitar amplifiers if that wasn't apparent enough. I suspect the difference in sound is similar.

 

[Petrushka]

I disagree. If that were true, why would Genelec KEF, Revel and Neumann strive for notable neutrality. Why would some JBL speakers exhibit neutrality that is an increase over the former models? Is it an accident? I don't think so. I think it took a great deal of deliberate effort.

I am well aware that speakers are a much more complicated problem to solve than electronics. But the industry has been advancing, more and more each year, and many models have achieved results that were unthinkable 30 years ago. Do you believe that we have reached the absolute zenith in loudspeaker-cum-room technology?

I don't. I think the best is yet to come.

Jim

Speakers exist in rooms, and rooms are not even close to neutral.

 

[dfuller]

Send that sucker in to Amir and let's have it tested! I suspect that under load, it has enough frequency response deviation from neutral to qualify as a roller-coaster!

Well, the tonestack isn't exactly flat. It's got a big mid scoop with the controls set to midpoints, and this is by design. Guitar pickups are very midrangey, it's there to compensate for it.

I suggest you check out the Tone Stack Calculator software to get an idea of what it's doing.

WRT solid state vs tube guitar amps, there's a whole shitload of different things going on there.

Tubes run at high voltage and high impedance, and compared to transistors have very little voltage gain - a 12AX7 in circuit only has about 35dB of gain per section at best - so any local or global feedback is pretty limited, if it's present at all. On top of that, guitar output transformers are for the most part not what I'd call "high fidelity" (the Soldano SLO's OT being an exception, that is a phenomenal piece), so they have an effect too. The combination of limited gain and limited feedback means the onset of distortion is gradual rather than sudden.

Solid state guitar amps tend to be much cleaner with a lot of global feedback (by comparison) in the power amp. This makes them feel non-dynamic (in that they don't react to your playing much, they just sort of sound the same but at different levels). They kind of just go "clean, clean, clean, crackle" where a tube amp goes "clean, not so clean, gritty, distortion".

Any distortion is added via clipper circuits rather than (usually) just overdriving the gain stages because they don't clip the way tubes do - in that the mechanism is different - and diode clippers don't really respond quite the same way as driving a preamp tube into grid clipping.

 

[Purité Audio]

Speakers exist in rooms, and rooms are not even close to neutral.

Contemporary designs can ameliorate the effects of the room.
Keith

 

[goat76]

Do you mean the "shimmer" and the "body"? Do you think that the frequency response has nothing to do with those subjective qualities? Put another way, do you believe that noticeable variations is frequency response, which is supposedly the most noticeable of audio playback characteristics, CAN NOT cause the characteristics that you call "shimmer" and "body"?

I think there is some misattribution going on here. I suspect (that's all it is, just a suspicion) that the audible characteristics of the Fender amp - both its frequency response and distortion characteristics - are so outre that a double-blind test is out of the question.

Looks like you've got yourself a "get-out-of-jail-free" card.

Jim

I already said it is in the differences between tube and solid-state guitar amps, I tune them the same way tonality-wise but the tube amps have this "shimmer"/"glow"/"aura"/"name-it-what-you-like" type of sound that is missing in the solid-state amp.

I don't know if the above characteristics are similar to tube amps for ordinary music listening, I don't own one myself hence my speculation if that may be the thing people like about them. I hoped someone who uses a tube amp would shim in if they recognized a similar characteristic as the guitar tube amps have.

 

[Petrushka]

Contemporary designs can ameliorate the effects of the room.
Keith

Make less severe. Take your speakers outside. If they sound the same, then the room has no effect.

 

[Petrushka]

That's the reason I said ...



Jim

I believe rooms will never be eliminated as a source of distortion. No matter how neutral speakers get, they will sound different in different rooms.

 

[Newman]

Yeah, I was wondering the same. In defence, I think the point behind it is that if musicians are finding the sound of valve amps preferable to SS, then home audio people might do the same.

But they are overlooking the fact that for playback, this loses sight of the exact tone/shimmer/whatever that was being created by the musician. And applies it to every instrument, every vocal, and all forms of music.

 

[BDWoody]

I like when guitar players use Whammy bars.

Maybe I should put one in my playback chain.

 

[Petrushka]

You have the privilege of believing what you wish. I have the privilege of believing otherwise. The technologies associated with cardioid patterns and active signal cancellation in both the vertical and horizontal. plus rear-wall reflection cancellation, are all proceeding apace.

Science is all about advancement in understanding, and (of course) ability. I've seen too much advancement just in my lifetime to not anticipate a new world just over the horizon. After all, could our present technologies have been predicted 50 years ago?

Not by me, they couldn't. I'm fascinated by what we've achieved ... and I hope the train just keeps on a-rollin'.

Jim

Would you like the sound of neutral speakers outdoors?

 

[goat76]

Do you mean to say that all this time, you were talking about tubes for music PRODUCTION, and not tubes for REPRODUCTION?

Which forum did you think you were posting in?
Jim

So it was never obvious to you that I was talking about the general characteristics of tubes, and that I was wondering if the same characteristics I noticed with a tube guitar amp may be the case with tube amps for music reproduction.


Here you get another chance to read my initial post again if it really was that hard to understand from the start. (But I suspect you are trying your best to misinterpret things here. If so, I have very little time for you.)

It doesn't have to be larger than just adding a little bit of "shimmer" to everything, and maybe a little bit of "body" and a small amount of added three-dimensionality that make things sound more life-like and real to some listeners. At least that is what I have experienced with my Fender guitar amp, and I think that may be one of the things that make some people prefer the sound of tube amps for music reproduction as well. I don't think it will be that easy to just "PEQ" such quality out of a solid-state amp as I believe it may be affected by how different load is handled. ...Maybe.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I believe rooms will never be eliminated as a source of distortion. No matter how neutral speakers get, they will sound different in different rooms.

I don't know if it will or not. The Klippel already can eliminate the room for measurements. You get results like the finest anechoic chamber in a small garage. So in principle it has already been done. Can that one day be done real time to eliminate room effects while playing music? Seems to me in principle it could.