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

If I were a recording artist, first and foremost I'd want those
listening to
my music to be entertained, inspired & moved by it. The Audiolab
doesn't do
that for me, the Alchemist does. For all its supposed colour, for
all its
foibles, operational quirks - whatever you like - it is by any
sensible
measure of what a hifi should be and do, better.

Only to *your* ears..............

Indeed - this is, by any sensible measure, what a hifi should do: sound
better to *my* ears. Whether *you* like it or not has no bearing on *my*
choice.

Absolutely - never suggested otherwise. But once you start using terms
like 'by any sensible measure', you're getting into dangerous OSAF
territory.

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.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"JustMe" wrote


*ears* sound 'coloured' on the basis of the above since they would
presumably have the same effect when you listen to live music? :-)

Indeed. Then "straight-line" is irrelevant in this context, as attending a
live performance has less to do with sound-quality and more to do with the
experience and atmosphere of the occassion.


Correct. IME, listening to 'live music' is rarely the best way to hear it...

(Be different if you could book the whole band to yourself in a venue of
your own choosing... :-)



That being the case, home listening is not about straight-line at all, as
the only way one can enjoy a live event, is to attend it.


Agreed.


Home music
reproduction is something different and shouldn't try to be something that
it isn't.


Agreed again.

Only a complete saddo will play recorded music and try to convince himself
he's at the live event (even if it was only 50 years ago....) - when I go to
a live 'music' event, I go to *watch* (and see) as much as anything else....

It also goes without saying that all this 'live event' bull**** precludes
any real enjoyment (and therefore any point, presumably?) in playing any
recorded/transmitted music in the car, bathroom, garage, potting shed,
kitchen, workplace, on the move etc. etc., does it not...???

In article , Keith G
wrote:

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

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...

Only to *your* ears..............

Indeed - this is, by any sensible measure, what a hifi should do:
sound better to *my* ears. Whether *you* like it or not has no
bearing on *my* choice.

What about the view that some of us don't really want the *hi fi* to
'sound' of anything - just the music? :-)



Surprised to see you bother to pen this old chestnut, Jimbo - there is
*no-one* here who gets to hear 'just the music'......

1) You seem not to have noticed the word "want" in what I wrote. :-)

2) The impression I generally get with the audio system I use is that I am
listening to the music, not to the amplifiers. :-)

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

In article , JustMe
wrote:
Only to *your* ears..............

Indeed - this is, by any sensible measure, what a hifi should do:
sound better to *my* ears. Whether *you* like it or not has no
bearing on *my* choice.

What about the view that some of us don't really want the *hi fi* to
'sound' of anything - just the music? :-)

Well in your case I guess you'd build an amp to suit your own taste ;o)

Yes. :-)

[snip]

Indeed. Then "straight-line" is irrelevant in this context, as attending
a live performance has less to do with sound-quality and more to do with
the experience and atmosphere of the occassion.

That being the case, home listening is not about straight-line at all,
as the only way one can enjoy a live event, is to attend it. Home music
reproduction is something different and shouldn't try to be something
that it isn't.

Yet the curious thing is that when I do something like listen to recordings
or broadcasts on BBCR3 from halls or studios I've sat and listened in, the
results often sound to me to be pretty convincing replicas of what I recall
hearing in the hall. The main limit being that the soundfield is more
limited as I'm only using stereo. Can't say if this is "straight line" or
not, but it can sound fairly convincing to me.

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

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 14:25:23 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

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

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...

Only to *your* ears..............

Indeed - this is, by any sensible measure, what a hifi should do: sound
better to *my* ears. Whether *you* like it or not has no bearing on *my*
choice.

What about the view that some of us don't really want the *hi fi* to
'sound' of anything - just the music? :-)

Surprised to see you bother to pen this old chestnut, Jimbo - there is
*no-one* here who gets to hear 'just the music'......

Sure there are - those of us who do *not* use valves and vinyl! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 15:18:51 -0000, "JustMe" wrote:

Only to *your* ears..............

Indeed - this is, by any sensible measure, what a hifi should do: sound
better to *my* ears. Whether *you* like it or not has no bearing on *my*
choice.

What about the view that some of us don't really want the *hi fi* to
'sound' of anything - just the music? :-)

Well in your case I guess you'd build an amp to suit your own taste ;o)

In my case, I'll listen to a few and pick the one that I like the most -
much like everyone else.

Actually, just like hardly anyone else....................

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"JustMe" wrote in message
...
[clip]

OTOH, plenty of amps will *add* what sounds like extra 'depth' and
'punch', but is really just IMD and clipping. Bizarrely, a reduced
dynamic range often sounds more 'dynamic'. All radio station sound
engineers are well aware of this trick.

I have never found the dynamic range compression employed by many radio
stations to do anything more than suck the life, soul and energy out of
the music being transmitted - it sounds ****.

The compression applied by radio stations, etc, tends to be various forms
of 'gain riding' where the gain is altered as the music plays - sometimes
also altering the frequency response. However the compression applied by
an
amp going into clipping would not behave like this as it would distort
the
waveforms and introduce extra components, not just alter the gain. Hence
you can expect the two forms of 'compression' to not sound the same.

I appreciate that there are different types of compression. I was
referring
specifically to the dynamic range compression employed by broadcasters,
separate to other steps along the transmission line or in the reproduction
equipment of the listener. It is this to which I was specifically
objecting.



Unfortunately radio stations especially commercial ILR's are in strong
competition as to the way their station 'sounds'. In many ways this is not
dissimilar to the music industries drive for your output to be 'louder' than
your rivals. Its a vicious circle where values held by the serious listener
are at odds with commercial pressures and I fear common sense. (Its a mad
mad mad world)
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...... (-:

Mike

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 15:18:51 -0000, "JustMe" wrote:

Only to *your* ears..............

Indeed - this is, by any sensible measure, what a hifi should do:
sound
better to *my* ears. Whether *you* like it or not has no bearing on
*my*
choice.

What about the view that some of us don't really want the *hi fi* to
'sound' of anything - just the music? :-)

Well in your case I guess you'd build an amp to suit your own taste ;o)

In my case, I'll listen to a few and pick the one that I like the most -
much like everyone else.

Actually, just like hardly anyone else....................

Yup, fair point.

"Mike Gilmour" wrote in message
...

"JustMe" wrote in message
...
[clip]

OTOH, plenty of amps will *add* what sounds like extra 'depth' and
'punch', but is really just IMD and clipping. Bizarrely, a reduced
dynamic range often sounds more 'dynamic'. All radio station sound
engineers are well aware of this trick.

I have never found the dynamic range compression employed by many
radio
stations to do anything more than suck the life, soul and energy out
of
the music being transmitted - it sounds ****.

The compression applied by radio stations, etc, tends to be various
forms
of 'gain riding' where the gain is altered as the music plays -
sometimes
also altering the frequency response. However the compression applied
by
an
amp going into clipping would not behave like this as it would distort
the
waveforms and introduce extra components, not just alter the gain.
Hence
you can expect the two forms of 'compression' to not sound the same.

I appreciate that there are different types of compression. I was
referring
specifically to the dynamic range compression employed by broadcasters,
separate to other steps along the transmission line or in the
reproduction
equipment of the listener. It is this to which I was specifically
objecting.



Unfortunately radio stations especially commercial ILR's are in strong
competition as to the way their station 'sounds'. In many ways this is
not
dissimilar to the music industries drive for your output to be 'louder'
than
your rivals. Its a vicious circle where values held by the serious
listener
are at odds with commercial pressures and I fear common sense. (Its a mad
mad mad world)

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.

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).

Mike

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