Amp swap disappointment
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:48:46 -0000, "JustMe" wrote:

snip

But, as I have explained repeatedly, any discussion of a subjective issue
is, by its nature, merely opinion and not fact and, therefore, there is no
need to insert the qualifying "IMO".


Actually no, as level-matched DBTs are by their very nature
subjective, but do give us true information regarding what is *really*
audible.

And the DBTs, by nurture, do for some (you obviously) create an
objective realm. A couple of things:

Is what is audible all that counts? Not a troll (really!) but I'm afraid
I've been reading HFW. Without going in to the merits or otherwise of
that organ I'm loosely curious - not the extent of actually buying any
of the stuff they mention to bolster their argument - by the notion of
sound outside the audible range having an effect on 'the act of
listening' - vibrations especially, and a specific reference to
supertweeters and subwoofers. You can't 'hear a note' but 'sense a
presence'.

And I think, from distant memory, that 'Which?' use DBTs and they (their
panel) quite readily find differences between amplifiers, CDPs and DVDAs
- devices of (to all intents and purposes) identical measurement.

Rob

Amp swap disappointment
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , JustMe
wrote:

Agreed - however I find British commercial radio to be pap in so many
ways. However the Beeb could take a moral high ground in this regard.
After all, they're not commercial (as if!) and so don't need to compete.

Alas, they do often feel driven to behave as if they *do* have to compete.
This is the result of being made to feel defensive about th license fee by
politicians who demand that the BBC should show it is 'popular'.

You may find this interesting
http://www.masterdigital.com/24bit/images/rdioproc.pdf I'm at present
looking into output processors for a new FM radio station..and they
all claim to be the best but I wonder...... (-:

Yes, it makes it clear just what a juggling act commercial broadcasters
are involved in. However we've all heard music sound outstanding on the
radio, as well as pap. A lot of the papness is down to choice. The fact
that such influences are more defined in pop broadcasting irritates me
more, as this is the music that I mostly enjoy (although rarely on the
radio).

In general, I enjoy the output of BBCR3. But they do use compression, more
so during the day as they assume people may wish this. Not as bad as
Classic FM, though...

I have heard 'Bolero' on Classic FM on more than one occasion and it is a
remarkable experience. Although it starts off with solo instruments and
small groupings playing softly, and grows to the entire orchesta going
full
tilt, the sound level via Classic FM seems to remain pretty much the same
throughout. Thus rather defeating the effect the composer desired! Once
you
notice this, the effect is almost comical as the the attempts of the
orchestra to become louder are casually defeated by the automatic gain
adjustments.

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

Was that ALL of 'Bolero' on Classic FM? then you are indeed fortunate ;-)

Mike

Amp swap disappointment
 

In article , Rob
wrote:

Is what is audible all that counts?

No necessarily. For example, a friend has just reported that one of his
tweeters has failed, and his (valve) amp now also sounds bit strange. One
possibility (which he is now investigating) is that the amp may have
deteriorated and instability damaged the tweeter as the amp performance
deteriorated. Hence there are cases where effect which are in themselves
nominally inaudible may end up having significant consequences.

Not a troll (really!) but I'm afraid I've been reading HFW. Without
going in to the merits or otherwise of that organ I'm loosely curious -
not the extent of actually buying any of the stuff they mention to
bolster their argument - by the notion of sound outside the audible
range having an effect on 'the act of listening' - vibrations
especially, and a specific reference to supertweeters and subwoofers.
You can't 'hear a note' but 'sense a presence'.

ULF can affect loudspeakers and amplifiers. Possibly also hearing.

Ohashi and others have also reported in physiology journals experiments
that show effects upon hearing and brain activity of 'ultrasound'
accompanying music.

And I think, from distant memory, that 'Which?' use DBTs and they (their
panel) quite readily find differences between amplifiers, CDPs and
DVDAs - devices of (to all intents and purposes) identical measurement.

I am not sure the above is correct about DBTs. However I'd agree that it is
perfectly possible to hear differences between some amplifiers, etc, in
some circumstances. e.g. differences in frequency response, or when one amp
is clipping/limiting and another is 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

Amp swap disappointment
 

"Mike Gilmour" wrote in message
...

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , JustMe
wrote:
[Clip]

.. Not as bad as Classic FM, though...

I have heard 'Bolero' on Classic FM on more than one occasion and it is a
remarkable experience. Although it starts off with solo instruments and
small groupings playing softly, and grows to the entire orchesta going
full
tilt, the sound level via Classic FM seems to remain pretty much the same
throughout. Thus rather defeating the effect the composer desired! Once
you
notice this, the effect is almost comical as the the attempts of the
orchestra to become louder are casually defeated by the automatic gain
adjustments.

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

Was that ALL of 'Bolero' on Classic FM? then you are indeed fortunate ;-)

Mike


http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/pipexd...ceng.htmlEarly information, though content with openly gain riding eh??Mike

Amp swap disappointment
 

"Mike Gilmour" wrote in message
...

"Mike Gilmour" wrote in message
...

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article ,
JustMe
wrote:
[Clip]

. Not as bad as Classic FM, though...

I have heard 'Bolero' on Classic FM on more than one occasion and it is
a
remarkable experience. Although it starts off with solo instruments and
small groupings playing softly, and grows to the entire orchesta going
full
tilt, the sound level via Classic FM seems to remain pretty much the
same
throughout. Thus rather defeating the effect the composer desired! Once
you
notice this, the effect is almost comical as the the attempts of the
orchestra to become louder are casually defeated by the automatic gain
adjustments.

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

Was that ALL of 'Bolero' on Classic FM? then you are indeed fortunate ;-)

Mike


http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/pipexd...ceng.htmlEarly
information, though content with openly gain riding eh??Mike

Ooops
http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/pipexd...lassiceng.html

Amp swap disappointment
 

On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:07:21 +0000, Rob
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:48:46 -0000, "JustMe" wrote:

snip

But, as I have explained repeatedly, any discussion of a subjective issue
is, by its nature, merely opinion and not fact and, therefore, there is no
need to insert the qualifying "IMO".


Actually no, as level-matched DBTs are by their very nature
subjective, but do give us true information regarding what is *really*
audible.

And the DBTs, by nurture, do for some (you obviously) create an
objective realm. A couple of things:

Is what is audible all that counts? Not a troll (really!) but I'm afraid
I've been reading HFW. Without going in to the merits or otherwise of
that organ I'm loosely curious - not the extent of actually buying any
of the stuff they mention to bolster their argument - by the notion of
sound outside the audible range having an effect on 'the act of
listening' - vibrations especially, and a specific reference to
supertweeters and subwoofers. You can't 'hear a note' but 'sense a
presence'.

I see where you're going with this, and infrabass can certainly affect
your perception, even though your ears are not in the loop. Very deep
bass in the low 20s is often used by movie sound producers to generate
unease and even fear, while a good dose of genuine high-level 6-7 Hz
will have you throwing up - literally!

OTOH, there's no real evidence that any *musical* content above the
22kHz cutoff of CD can be perceived - even it the studio microphones
could pick it up, which most can't. The only known studies which show
humans perceiving above the audible range have used very high SPLs of
ultrasonic waves, which simply don't occur in musical instruments -
and would destroy most tweeters in seconds!

And I think, from distant memory, that 'Which?' use DBTs and they (their
panel) quite readily find differences between amplifiers, CDPs and DVDAs
- devices of (to all intents and purposes) identical measurement.

Nope, read it carefully. They use blind listening panels, so that's
just single blind, and they write up notes on each presentation
separately, so they never do repeated trials to check if they can
actually hear any differences. While it seems at first sight to be
somewhat scientific, it actually isn't at all - especially if the
listeners compare notes while they're listening!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Amp swap disappointment
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:07:21 +0000, Rob
wrote:


Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:48:46 -0000, "JustMe" wrote:


snip

But, as I have explained repeatedly, any discussion of a subjective issue
is, by its nature, merely opinion and not fact and, therefore, there is no
need to insert the qualifying "IMO".


Actually no, as level-matched DBTs are by their very nature
subjective, but do give us true information regarding what is *really*
audible.

And the DBTs, by nurture, do for some (you obviously) create an
objective realm. A couple of things:

Is what is audible all that counts? Not a troll (really!) but I'm afraid
I've been reading HFW. Without going in to the merits or otherwise of
that organ I'm loosely curious - not the extent of actually buying any
of the stuff they mention to bolster their argument - by the notion of
sound outside the audible range having an effect on 'the act of
listening' - vibrations especially, and a specific reference to
supertweeters and subwoofers. You can't 'hear a note' but 'sense a
presence'.


I see where you're going with this, and infrabass can certainly affect
your perception, even though your ears are not in the loop. Very deep
bass in the low 20s is often used by movie sound producers to generate
unease and even fear, while a good dose of genuine high-level 6-7 Hz
will have you throwing up - literally!

OTOH, there's no real evidence that any *musical* content above the
22kHz cutoff of CD can be perceived - even it the studio microphones
could pick it up, which most can't. The only known studies which show
humans perceiving above the audible range have used very high SPLs of
ultrasonic waves, which simply don't occur in musical instruments -
and would destroy most tweeters in seconds!

Shouldn't think it's too difficult to arrange - one of HFW's 'year
awards' is given to some supertweeters - you'd just need to switch out
the main speakers and er, listen, feel, smell, taste whatever. All seems
a bit daft to me and for £800 I'm not about to jump in.


And I think, from distant memory, that 'Which?' use DBTs and they (their
panel) quite readily find differences between amplifiers, CDPs and DVDAs
- devices of (to all intents and purposes) identical measurement.


Nope, read it carefully. They use blind listening panels, so that's
just single blind, and they write up notes on each presentation
separately, so they never do repeated trials to check if they can
actually hear any differences. While it seems at first sight to be
somewhat scientific, it actually isn't at all - especially if the
listeners compare notes while they're listening!

'Distant' in my case is 20 years ago, so happily stand corrected. I
still think they make far more effort in this regard than virtually any
hifi mag I can think of.

Rob

Amp swap disappointment
 

On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:45:23 +0000, Rob
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:07:21 +0000, Rob
wrote:

And I think, from distant memory, that 'Which?' use DBTs and they (their
panel) quite readily find differences between amplifiers, CDPs and DVDAs
- devices of (to all intents and purposes) identical measurement.

Nope, read it carefully. They use blind listening panels, so that's
just single blind, and they write up notes on each presentation
separately, so they never do repeated trials to check if they can
actually hear any differences. While it seems at first sight to be
somewhat scientific, it actually isn't at all - especially if the
listeners compare notes while they're listening!

'Distant' in my case is 20 years ago, so happily stand corrected. I
still think they make far more effort in this regard than virtually any
hifi mag I can think of.

Resetting to zero, I thought you were referring to 'Hi-Fi Choice', and
in that case I agree that they do make a more serious effort than
most.

The real 'Which?' however has other issues. I used to think that
Which? was fine for cookers, fridges, telephones etc, but I *knew*
that their hi-fi reviews were absolute crap. I happened to be working
on a consultancy job for Hotpoint, and I got talking to one of their
engineers over a beer or two in the local pub. Turned out that he also
read Which?, and he thought that they were OK for TVs and hi-fi, but
he *knew* that their washing machine and fridge reviews were crap.
Kinda makes you think...................................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Amp swap disappointment
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:


The real 'Which?' however has other issues. I used to think that
Which? was fine for cookers, fridges, telephones etc, but I *knew*
that their hi-fi reviews were absolute crap. I happened to be working
on a consultancy job for Hotpoint, and I got talking to one of their
engineers over a beer or two in the local pub. Turned out that he also
read Which?, and he thought that they were OK for TVs and hi-fi, but
he *knew* that their washing machine and fridge reviews were crap.
Kinda makes you think...................................


:)


but seriously, domestic appliances just work ... one buys them based on
cost, looks and features. It isn't like buying loudspeakers.

And you hear see comments like ...

"my toast tastes so much better ever since I swapped the stock standard
power cord. Crunchier texture with an even spread of brown crust without
those dreadful lower end burnt bits"

"I demagnetise my washing machine once a month, and the clothes come out
so much cleaner ... a real night and day difference"


;)

Amp swap disappointment
 

Tat Chan wrote:


but seriously, domestic appliances just work ... one buys them based on
cost, looks and features. It isn't like buying loudspeakers.

And you hear see comments like ...

whoops, I obviously meant "And you don't hear comments like" ...

snip