![]() |
'running in' new h fi equipment
In article ,
JustMe wrote: If, however, that piano that you so like was recorded and replayed through a system which adds or subtracts, it will no longer produce the 'tone' you chose it for. True, and I might have spent a fortune ensuring that the recording accurately represented this tone. Not so. Satisfactory equipment for both recording and reproducing needn't cost a fortune. Indeed, going down the valve route for example is likely to cost a great deal more. Read again - I didn't say you *had* to spend a fortune, I said I *might* have. I was merely extending the point that I might be devastated to know that, having put a great deal of resource into a recording, it wasn't being appreciated as I had intended but that there would be nothing practical I could do ensure wide circulation whilst enforcing its appreciation on specific equipment. I'm not sure I understand this. If the record/replay chain is doing a decent job, then your much loved piano should sound as close as possible when reproduced. As soon as you decide none of this matters, any chance of this being the case goes out the window. So that much loved piano will sound different - either better or worse according to your preference. But if that piano had a 'perfect' tone, than it can only be worse. But I still cannot dictate how someone else should listen to that music - whether I recorded it or not. No one should be *dictated* to about anything like this. Then we agree! But that cuts both ways. ;-) Does it? Yes. You can state your preferences without challenge. You can say you prefer an acoustic horn gramophone and no one will worry. However, it never seems to stop there. You've given all sorts of reasons why you don't care how 'inaccurate' your system may be while still suiting you. So these things become open to discussion. -- *Give me ambiguity or give me something else. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
'running in' new h fi equipment
In article ,
JustMe wrote: I'm not technical enough to understand how this works. What he said sounded plausible, but I certainly agreed with him about perceptions of "musicality". This is the bit of adspeak that always confuses me. The 'musicality' comes from the instruments etc as recorded. If the equipment in use adds 'musicality' it's akin to someone playing a piano etc along with your system. Which might just be fine sometimes, but you'd soon get tired of it. -- *A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it uses up a thousand times more memory. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
'running in' new h fi equipment
In article , JustMe
wrote: Also 'wear' would not explain why a unit is alleged to require a fresh warm up for each new use after it has been left unused/unpowered for some time. Hence my understanding is that people are not describing 'wear', but a change that undoes itself with lack of use and has to be redone when use recommences. Such as when components selected in the design (for whatever reason) are such as to perform at their optimum when they increase in temperature? The difficulty with such an approach is that the designer has to make even more assumptions than usual about the user's conditions of use. Thus on a hot day, or in a cold house, the unit may simply never settle into the 'intended' operating conditions. This may mean more that a slight change in sound quality. FWIW when developing I often used to shove an amp into the fridge overnight. This gave a few mins in the morning to see what it did when cold. This swiftly showed me that quite a few designs did *not* like this, and proceeded to be more prone to things like bursts of spurious oscillation. Took time and effort to design out problems like this and get a unit that would work at almost any 'room temperature' any sane user could be expected to have! Hence my personal view is that the designer should be dealing with this. Not making assumptions about the user always being in a given room temperature, and air-flow around the unit. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
'running in' new h fi equipment
Also 'wear' would not explain why a unit is alleged to require a fresh
warm up for each new use after it has been left unused/unpowered for some time. Hence my understanding is that people are not describing 'wear', but a change that undoes itself with lack of use and has to be redone when use recommences. Such as when components selected in the design (for whatever reason) are such as to perform at their optimum when they increase in temperature? The difficulty with such an approach is that the designer has to make even more assumptions than usual about the user's conditions of use. Thus on a hot day, or in a cold house, the unit may simply never settle into the 'intended' operating conditions. This may mean more that a slight change in sound quality. FWIW when developing I often used to shove an amp into the fridge overnight. This gave a few mins in the morning to see what it did when cold. This swiftly showed me that quite a few designs did *not* like this, and proceeded to be more prone to things like bursts of spurious oscillation. Took time and effort to design out problems like this and get a unit that would work at almost any 'room temperature' any sane user could be expected to have! I'm curious: did you always achieve the exact performance you were after, or did designing out one problem lead to compromises in other areas? I would imagine that designing commercial product requires all sorts of compromises anyway, but were there times when the trade off would be too great? Hence my personal view is that the designer should be dealing with this. Not making assumptions about the user always being in a given room temperature, and air-flow around the unit. Even if the designer felt that the "typical" performance was superior (or simply more popular and therefore more profitable for his company)? Slainte, Jim |
'running in' new h fi equipment
In article , JustMe
wrote: FWIW when developing I often used to shove an amp into the fridge overnight. This gave a few mins in the morning to see what it did when cold. [snip] I'm curious: did you always achieve the exact performance you were after, Yes and no. :-) or did designing out one problem lead to compromises in other areas? Often. :-) I would imagine that designing commercial product requires all sorts of compromises anyway, but were there times when the trade off would be too great? Yes. I was fortunate in that those employing me at the time wanted what they could regard as the 'best possible' power amp. Hence they were happy for me to spend time testing in all sorts of ways. Of course, their 'best possible' made assumptions and they set some targets which then wanted it to meet, but omitted other areas where they/I felt things were less important (or which we failed to consider). There are, therefore, always compromises and design choices which someone where someone else might decide differently. However I'd hope that in most cases we can arrive at 'compromises' that do not significantly affect most users. The real problem in commercial design like this is that the users have all sorts of speakers, all sorts of tastes in music, and widely varing preferences for sound level! Hence we could make a 'better' design for some by making it less suitable for others. However you have to be wary of doing this in a commercial situation. One example. Although I was mostly allowed to decide for myself the amp specs and designs, the directors insisted we include a relay in the o/p to act as a block against any switch-on or switch-off 'thud'. Even quite a small disturbance as 200wpc amp goes on/off can be quite loud. I warned that relays tend to go wonky in due course. They insisted, so I fitted a relay with a huge overspec in terms of lifetime and current switching capability. Alas, in production they decided to replace this with a flimsier relay as my choice made a loud mechanical "bonggg" noise as the contacts switched. The relays fitted all go wonkey after a few years... :-) My view was that anyone buying a 200Wpc amp would be quite happy to hear a switch-on 'thud' as it reminds you that the amp is powerful. At least I tried this view on the company. No joy. The smaller relay was less fuss, and cheaper, and they wanted it. Hence my personal view is that the designer should be dealing with this. Not making assumptions about the user always being in a given room temperature, and air-flow around the unit. Even if the designer felt that the "typical" performance was superior (or simply more popular and therefore more profitable for his company)? The difficulty here is - who should the designer have in mind as their target user? The problem is that many people may not be 'typical'. Indeed, once people are seriously into audio equipment they almost tend by self-selection to be 'atypical' people who often have very different preferences to one another. (Withness the arguments that go on in this newsgroup! ;- ) Indeed, after a few years a given user may change to different speakers, or decide to hide their poweramp in a cramped cupboard, hence changing its conditions of use. I'm sure that different users / designers / makers have varying views of this, so I can really only give my own. After that, yer pays yer money and yer takes yer choice. :-) However my concern then is directed towards ensuring that people are well-informed so can make choices on the basis of knowledge of what may or may not suit them. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
'running in' new h fi equipment
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 09:08:53 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote: One example. Although I was mostly allowed to decide for myself the amp specs and designs, the directors insisted we include a relay in the o/p to act as a block against any switch-on or switch-off 'thud'. Even quite a small disturbance as 200wpc amp goes on/off can be quite loud. I warned that relays tend to go wonky in due course. They insisted, so I fitted a relay with a huge overspec in terms of lifetime and current switching capability. Alas, in production they decided to replace this with a flimsier relay as my choice made a loud mechanical "bonggg" noise as the contacts switched. The relays fitted all go wonkey after a few years... :-) My view was that anyone buying a 200Wpc amp would be quite happy to hear a switch-on 'thud' as it reminds you that the amp is powerful. At least I tried this view on the company. No joy. The smaller relay was less fuss, and cheaper, and they wanted it. The directors were right! Apart from hair shirt enthusiasts I think that most people expect an appearance of high quality in other aspects, As well as good finishes etc this implies no nasty noises when you switch on and off. My Quad 606s produce a loud bang on switch on which I find it really annoying. Bill |
'running in' new h fi equipment
In article ,
wrote: On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 09:08:53 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf wrote: One example. Although I was mostly allowed to decide for myself the amp specs and designs, the directors insisted we include a relay in the o/p to act as a block against any switch-on or switch-off 'thud'. Even quite a small disturbance as 200wpc amp goes on/off can be quite loud. I warned that relays tend to go wonky in due course. They insisted, so I fitted a relay with a huge overspec in terms of lifetime and current switching capability. Alas, in production they decided to replace this with a flimsier relay as my choice made a loud mechanical "bonggg" noise as the contacts switched. The relays fitted all go wonkey after a few years... :-) My view was that anyone buying a 200Wpc amp would be quite happy to hear a switch-on 'thud' as it reminds you that the amp is powerful. At least I tried this view on the company. No joy. The smaller relay was less fuss, and cheaper, and they wanted it. The directors were right! Apart from hair shirt enthusiasts I think that most people expect an appearance of high quality in other aspects, As well as good finishes etc this implies no nasty noises when you switch on and off. My Quad 606s produce a loud bang on switch on which I find it really annoying. Fair enough. :-) Although: 1) I'd make a distinction between a 'thud' and 'a loud bang'. My point was that the sound isn't actually particularly loud or intrusive. Indeed, if the system is set to a source like a tuner the sudden appearance of the music can easily be as loud or louder. 2) The relays duly fail, thus giving intermittent connections, variable levels of distortion, and necessitating eventual replacement. Their decision to fit a *smaller and cheaper* relay than my choice made this tend to occur earlier and more commonly in the lifetime of the product. Hence they made two decisions. One to fit a relay at all. The other to use one that was less durable than my choice. Both decisions affecting the perceived 'reliability' of the unit. That said, I mentioned this as an example of a 'trade off', so they were entitiled to take the view they did. Some customers would agree with them, I assume, but I also suspect that others would not. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk