Your Guiding Audio Principles

[watchnerd]

Every couple of years I re-examine what I believe to be true in audio, and then use these thoughts as a set of guiding principles when it comes to total system design. To be reassessed as new evidence or technologies emerge.

Here are mine. I'm sure yours will be different, or even contradictory.

1. The recording matters the most.

2. The transducers, speakers, headphones, & cartridges, are next most important.

3. The room is third, but barely.

4. Analog electronics are mostly a solved problem; past a mid-tier price point, returns are seriously diminishing.

5. Digital is rapidly approaching 'solved problem' state. $3000 DACS from 5 years ago are bettered by $500 DACs today. Don't spend too much on a component category that changes this quickly.

6. I cannot pass DBT ABX test between any kind of lossless, whether standard definition or high resolution, for playback.

7. Balanced connections are better. Use them wherever possible.

8. There is no reason to invest in Class A power amplifiers any longer; the best Class D is now good enough, and without the inefficiencies.

9. Tubes can be fun in phono stages and preamps. Using them as power amps carries too many other sacrificies in terms of matching speakers. The price is too high for the benefit.

10. Power is now essentially limitless. It's okay to trade sensitivity for bass extension.

11. Active speakers with DSP crossovers are the future, regardless of driver type. There is no real reason to invest in anything else at the moment, even if it means waiting.

12. Networked lossless streaming trumps direct-attached computer systems, both for convenience and noise isolation.

13. Digital EQ is not as bad as audiophiles think it is.

14. You can't trust sighted listening tests, especially if self administered. Confirmation bias is unavoidable, even if conscious of it.

15. Multi-bit/R2R/Delta-Sigma, doesn't really matter -- all that matters is the implementation.

16. Vinyl is not superior to digital. But I like it.

17. There is no replacement for displacement.

Edit: added more, based on in-thread discussion

18. [Tentative] @Cosmik 's rule: Room correction is fundamentally not valid.

19. Cables: For analog cables or digital coax, anything more expensive than Canare or Belden is a waste of money. For digital data, generic ethernet and USB are fine. For Toslink, Mitsubishi Eska is fine.

20. If you use passive speakers, keep the speaker cables short and use balanced interconnects. This is one of many reasons why monoblocks are better.

21. Tube rolling will drive you nuts, aggravate symptoms of audiophilia nervosa, and costs money.

22. MQA is partially lossy compression in a fancy container, a technology in search of a use case, and can be ignored for now.

23. Active speakers with the playback software embedded in the speaker (e.g. KEF LS50) appear, as of this writing, to have no defined upgrade path to new formats or protocols. Proceed with caution or use an external streamer.



What are yours?

 

[fas42]

1. Active speakers with DSP crossovers are the future, regardless of driver type. There is no real reason to invest in anything else at the moment, even if it means waiting. (11)

2. Nothing wrong with Digital EQ, whatsoever. (13)

3. Multi-bit/R2R/Delta-Sigma, doesn't really matter -- all that matters is the implementation. (15)

4. Couldn't be bothered with vinyl (16)

 

[Cosmik]

Every couple of years I re-examine what I believe to be true in audio, and then use these thoughts as a set of guiding principles when it comes to total system design. To be reassessed as new evidence or technologies emerge.

Here are mine. I'm sure yours will be different, or even contradictory.

1. The recording matters the most.

2. The transducers, speakers, headphones, & cartridges, are next most important.

3. The room is third, but barely.

4. Analog electronics are mostly a solved problem; past a mid-tier price point, returns are seriously diminishing.

5. Digital is rapidly approaching 'solved problem' state. $3000 DACS from 5 years ago are bettered by $500 DACs today. Don't spend too much on a component category that changes this quickly.

6. I cannot pass DBT ABX test between any kind of lossless, whether standard definition or high resolution, for playback.

7. Balanced connections are better. Use them wherever possible.

8. There is no reason to invest in Class A power amplifiers any longer; the best Class D is now good enough, and without the inefficiencies.

9. Tubes can be fun in phono stages and preamps. Using them as power amps carries too many other sacrificies in terms of matching speakers. The price is too high for the benefit.

10. Power is now essentially limitless. It's okay to trade sensitivity for bass extension.

11. Active speakers with DSP crossovers are the future, regardless of driver type. There is no real reason to invest in anything else at the moment, even if it means waiting.

12. Networked lossless streaming trumps direct-attached computer systems, both for convenience and noise isolation.

13. Digital EQ is not as bad as audiophiles think it is.

14. You can't trust sighted listening tests, especially if self administered. Confirmation bias is unavoidable, even if conscious of it.

15. Multi-bit/R2R/Delta-Sigma, doesn't really matter -- all that matters is the implementation.

16. Vinyl is not superior to digital. But I like it.

17. There is no replacement for displacement.

What are yours?

I agree with pretty much all of it, except I have no time for vinyl.

18. Room correction is fundamentally not valid.

 

[Thomas savage]

I agree too, dsp is the future and the present I guess..

I'd like to see things staying digital as far as it's possible throughout the playback chain..

I want streamed audio, at the resolution/bit depth etc it was mastered in. until then I'm sticking to CD's.

I don't believe multichannel audio is the future.. No one wants all those speakers in their lounge. It will remain neich though.

I see no reason why dsp can't be used automatically in playback informed by set parameters that have been pre ordained by a personal setup/preference test in your home.

 

[RayDunzl]

That first list is pretty encompassing...

18. Room correction is fundamentally not valid

My limited single-point-measurement DRC experience says "Room Correction is just speaker correction as measured at the listening position" so it is valid to me in that context.

It beats a Smiley Face Curve on a 31-band EQ.

 

[fas42]

Some additions:

5. Digital is approaching 'solved problem' state. $3000 DACS from 5 years ago are bettered by $500 DACs today. Don't spend too much on this component category. (5)

Many of the rest I disagree with; some are neither here nor there.

 

[Sal1950]

12. Networked lossless streaming trumps direct-attached computer systems, both for convenience and noise isolation.

Only point I'd question. #12

For Convenience, how is this networked rig more convenient than a simple PC/Laptops digital out straight into a DAC? Looks like a bunch more complication to me.

Noise Isolation, the boogyman of believers, used to explain SQ improvements from magicdustware gear that can't be measured. What noise is missing from a network that's in a direct connection?

 

[fas42]

More additions:

6. The integrity of the overall system matters the most.

7. Digital handling of source was always a solved problem; the analogue side is slowly, slowly, slowly creeping forward - solutions to convincing sound are now available, off the shelf, but at very silly prices - it will take some time for these to filter down to normal gear.

 

[dallasjustice]

1. Speakers
2. Setup (always includes multiple subs)
3. DSP (target curve, modal control and digital crossovers where possible)
4. Room
5. Amp
6. DAC
7. Computer setup(only coveneince)
8. Recording
9. I like myself too much to spend anytime thinking about vinyl.

As to 8, the recording/production is part of the artistic process. The artist is always sovereign. It's our job to access his/her musical intention. Sometimes this means trying new setups for better playback. (E.g. Multiple subs are mandatory for modern music)

Asking for a "better" recording is like asking for a different work of art.

 

[Thomas savage]

Contemporary music definitely puts demands on setups that most audiophile speaker manufactures are yet to get their collective heads round..

In fact the whole chain needs looking at to accommodate this imo.. Bit like Michael has done but you should not need to be so involved on the technical side as a customer as Michael has been.

 

[dallasjustice]

I try not to think about manufacturers in the collective. I do think there are some speakers which handle modern music better than others. In general, you are correct. Most of the audiophile speakers can't get he job done. And the setups aren't capable without subs.

Contemporary music definitely puts demands on setups most audiophile speaker manufactures are yet to get their collective heads round..

 

[tomelex]

--the overall system must allow you to hear details and clarity deep into the recording
--the power amp and the speaker are a system
--the room and the speaker are a system
--you must have enough power to handle peaks although many peaks are so fast people get by
--if you can hear differences between different recordings and you can hear details in recordings your front end is fine
--If the music or song moves you, then despite what your source is or your source extraction method (cd player, digital, lp and cartridge, preamp if used, interconnects, blah blah) then everything before the power amp is good enough since you have no idea at your home how the recording "sounded" before it was put to storage media anyway (edit added, I am not saying there is no reason to improve your system though)

 

[watchnerd]

I want streamed audio, at the resolution/bit depth etc it was mastered in. until then I'm sticking to CD's.

Do you mean 24bits or higher at 48khz or higher sampling rates?

Because you can get that from streaming from home. And CD doesn't do that.

 

[watchnerd]

Only point I'd question. #12

For Convenience, how is this networked rig more convenient than a simple PC/Laptops digital out straight into a DAC? Looks like a bunch more complication to me.

Noise Isolation, the boogyman of believers, used to explain SQ improvements from magicdustware gear that can't be measured. What noise is missing from a network that's in a direct connection?

1. It's more convenient (at least for me) to have a tiny micro computer the size of a pack of cigarettes in my living room than a larger HTPC chassis

2. The noise that's missing isn't because of the network connection itself (although some claim Ethernet is inherently isolated), it's because the bigger, noisier, more powerful general purpose PC is elsewhere.

 

[watchnerd]

Contemporary music definitely puts demands on setups that most audiophile speaker manufactures are yet to get their collective heads round..

In fact the whole chain needs looking at to accommodate this imo.. Bit like Michael has done but you should not need to be so involved on the technical side as a customer as Michael has been.

Are you referring to dance-leaning music with big gobs of sampled bass?

If so, yes, I agree. That's why the JBL LSR310S subwoofer, that matches @RayDunzl 's LSR308 and LSR305, has a special 'electronic music' mode.

But I only listen to that kind of music at the gym over headphones and in my car with the sunroof open and the windows rolled down.

 

[watchnerd]

--If the music or song moves you

Christmas music moves me during the winter. Hate it the rest of the year. What does that mean for my system?

 

[watchnerd]

Oh, I forgot some:

18. Cables: For analog cables or digital coax, anything more expensive Canare or Belden is a waste of money. For digital data, generic ethernet and USB are fine.

19. Tube rolling will drive you nuts and aggravate symptoms of audiophilia nervosa

20. MQA is partially lossy compression in a fancy container, a technology in search of a use case, and can be ignored for now

 

[tomelex]

Christmas music moves me during the winter. Hate it the rest of the year. What does that mean for my system?

That's kind of what my point was, if you don't like the music, it will still sound "bad" on even the "best" system. That's the emotional part of the whole hearing process. Remember (maybe) when you heard a new song on the table top radio and liked it immediately, despite the tabletop radio lack of full range FR, if we don't like the music itself, we cant really enjoy our system. We are emotional beings, especially men, more than we like to say. Anyway, that's part of the psychoacoustics stuff, its really the beginning for me, like the song then pay attention to all the details, and that's where ability of the system to portray the details is one of the most important things to me. That said, when I want SET sing song accompaniment, I choose that....which leads back to wanting to hear the music in a satisfying way. GUIDING PRINCIPLE, you must satisfy your preference not some one elses.

 

[tomelex]

Oh, I forgot some:

18. Cables: For analog cables or digital coax, anything more expensive Canare or Belden is a waste of money. For digital data, generic ethernet and USB are fine.

19. Tube rolling will drive you nuts and aggravate symptoms of audiophilia nervosa

20. MQA is partially lossy compression in a fancy container, a technology in search of a use case, and can be ignored for now

Yes and no, I would tread lightly here, IC (interconnects can come in some pretty bizarre configurations these days or have poor shields or none at all, however competent engineering and proper drive power and loading do mean they should sound the same. Audiophiles seem to look toward these bizarre IC configurations to act as tone controls.

Cables, well, cables running from a power amp to a speaker do make differences, and the more bizarre the more audible. Also, if your amp has feedback in it from the output then cables will also affect sound differently.

Bottom line, IC and cables make an audible difference, WHEN they are designed to do so or depending on the output topography of a particular source component.....output impedance, load impedance, feedback connections, etc. The cable or IC becomes a player in the game, its the system thing, again.

yes, tube rolling is essentially just tone control tweaking for a different harmonic spray and yes you can hear different tubes sound as you acknowledge, and those buggers, (when they are power tubes) are always changing over time, first worst then better then worst.

 

[watchnerd]

Bottom line, IC and cables make an audible difference, WHEN they are designed to do so

From my POV, that is a poorly designed cable. Or a cable that is designed with criteria I don't agree with -- I have a philosophical problem with cables as tone controls.

I specifically mentioned Canare and Belden for a reason; they're neutral, proven reliable and durable in professional settings over long runs, and also widely used in pro settings.