Don Pearce schreef:
On Sun, 13 May 2007 19:37:01 +0200, jaap wrote:

It's a public secret there's only a small market for better sounding
equipment. Most people don't bother because they want to hear amplified
sound and do not enjoy the quality, especially when expensive. There
lays the problem manufacturers are facing.
I think that lost something in the translation from Dutch. Could you
elaborate?

d

Alright. Being a public secret is a saying (over here) and means as much
as being common knowledge to most people.
No, I got that bit - it was all the rest that had me puzzled.

d

Look around you, probably within your family or among your friends. Most
people won't be bothered by new disk standards, color of face plates,
brand names, fourfold wiring with precious metals, quantity of
loudspeakers etcetera. It's all about enjoying the music, not how it is
reproduced.
OK, there exist a group of people running to the shop every year for the
last model but I don't think this is because they enjoy the music so
much. See my point?


Yes, but what did you mean when you said that people want to hear
amplified sound and do not enjoy the quality?

I gave you two examples. It is about the music, not how many watts or
how large the stack.


Another example: TV sets. It's only for a couple of years manufacturers
are paying attention to better sound reproduction. Many of us are having
terrible reproduction quality and still enjoy the moving pictures.


I shouldn't think many of us on this group use the sound system
supplied with a TV.

In my circle there's no one who has the tellie linked to his or her
hifi. I did on some occasions watching war movies because of the
impressive explosion sounds. Only got the pets and the wife upset


Manufacturers can produce better sets but what happens if customers
don't want to spend more money on a TV or HiFi?

Jaap

Nobody has produced anything better for many years.

You're missing the point here. Manufacturers can upgrade -lets say- a
midprized set by putting in more expensive capacitors. That set would
sound better because there's less fuzz in the audio. On the other hand
the higher expense has to be payed by the consumer and they don't. One
explanation can be that consumers want better cyphers when they put down
more money. My explanation is massconsumers don't think a small gain in
quality is worth a large amount.

Quality plateaued once the initial reproduction problems with CD had
been understood and addressed.

Personally I never liked the 'digital' sound with its harsh highs and
unnatural dynamics. But OK, tastes differ (we say over here).


Hi Fi is now a lifestyle business, and quite unrelated to
sound reproduction.

But do remember the nature of the group you are addressing here. We
are mostly not Hi Fi fashion victims, and many of us are well able to
understand in great detail what the true situation is.

d


Hope not to be blunt, but do you mean this NG is more about lifestyle
than audio? In that case the name should be changed...

Jaap

On Sun, 13 May 2007 20:36:02 +0200, jaap wrote:

Don Pearce schreef:
On Sun, 13 May 2007 19:37:01 +0200, jaap wrote:

It's a public secret there's only a small market for better sounding
equipment. Most people don't bother because they want to hear amplified
sound and do not enjoy the quality, especially when expensive. There
lays the problem manufacturers are facing.
I think that lost something in the translation from Dutch. Could you
elaborate?

d

Alright. Being a public secret is a saying (over here) and means as much
as being common knowledge to most people.
No, I got that bit - it was all the rest that had me puzzled.

d

Look around you, probably within your family or among your friends. Most
people won't be bothered by new disk standards, color of face plates,
brand names, fourfold wiring with precious metals, quantity of
loudspeakers etcetera. It's all about enjoying the music, not how it is
reproduced.
OK, there exist a group of people running to the shop every year for the
last model but I don't think this is because they enjoy the music so
much. See my point?


Yes, but what did you mean when you said that people want to hear
amplified sound and do not enjoy the quality?

I gave you two examples. It is about the music, not how many watts or
how large the stack.


Well, watts do matter. If you want to hear a symphony orchestra at
realistic level, they really matter. Unless you enjoy the sound of
clipping, of course. That, I'm afraid is what the 5 watt valve amp
people have to put up with.


Another example: TV sets. It's only for a couple of years manufacturers
are paying attention to better sound reproduction. Many of us are having
terrible reproduction quality and still enjoy the moving pictures.


I shouldn't think many of us on this group use the sound system
supplied with a TV.

In my circle there's no one who has the tellie linked to his or her
hifi. I did on some occasions watching war movies because of the
impressive explosion sounds. Only got the pets and the wife upset


Manufacturers can produce better sets but what happens if customers
don't want to spend more money on a TV or HiFi?

Jaap

Nobody has produced anything better for many years.

You're missing the point here. Manufacturers can upgrade -lets say- a
midprized set by putting in more expensive capacitors. That set would
sound better because there's less fuzz in the audio. On the other hand
the higher expense has to be payed by the consumer and they don't. One
explanation can be that consumers want better cyphers when they put down
more money. My explanation is massconsumers don't think a small gain in
quality is worth a large amount.


No, you have fallen foul of the "capacitor sound" myth here. There is
no such thing. Mid-priced Hi Fi amplifiers right now are essentially
faultless in their reproduction. You can't reduce fuzz by changing
capacitors because there is no fuzz.

Quality plateaued once the initial reproduction problems with CD had
been understood and addressed.

Personally I never liked the 'digital' sound with its harsh highs and
unnatural dynamics. But OK, tastes differ (we say over here).


Digital doesn't have harsh highs - it has accurate highs. There are
plenty of people around who compared the accurate highs on CDs with
the muted highs from previous technologies and found the comparison
unfavourable, of course. As for unnatural dynamics - they are nothing
to do with CDs. You can't blame the medium for what producers do with
it. And of course the CD is fully capable of vastly better dynamics
than any previously available medium. Vinyl, of course, has always
suffered reduced dynamics because it is mechanically severely limited.


Hi Fi is now a lifestyle business, and quite unrelated to
sound reproduction.

But do remember the nature of the group you are addressing here. We
are mostly not Hi Fi fashion victims, and many of us are well able to
understand in great detail what the true situation is.

d


Hope not to be blunt, but do you mean this NG is more about lifestyle
than audio? In that case the name should be changed...


Why should I mean that? This newsgroup is uk.rec.audio. That means it
concerns itself with the techniques and methods of sound reproduction.
Whether that is high or low fidelity is up to the originator of each
thread. In general of course, it won't concern itself with what colour
the latest offering from Panasonic is.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce schreef:
On Sun, 13 May 2007 20:36:02 +0200, jaap wrote:

Don Pearce schreef:
On Sun, 13 May 2007 19:37:01 +0200, jaap wrote:

It's a public secret there's only a small market for better sounding
equipment. Most people don't bother because they want to hear amplified
sound and do not enjoy the quality, especially when expensive. There
lays the problem manufacturers are facing.
I think that lost something in the translation from Dutch. Could you
elaborate?

d

Alright. Being a public secret is a saying (over here) and means as much
as being common knowledge to most people.
No, I got that bit - it was all the rest that had me puzzled.

d

Look around you, probably within your family or among your friends. Most
people won't be bothered by new disk standards, color of face plates,
brand names, fourfold wiring with precious metals, quantity of
loudspeakers etcetera. It's all about enjoying the music, not how it is
reproduced.
OK, there exist a group of people running to the shop every year for the
last model but I don't think this is because they enjoy the music so
much. See my point?

Yes, but what did you mean when you said that people want to hear
amplified sound and do not enjoy the quality?
I gave you two examples. It is about the music, not how many watts or
how large the stack.


Well, watts do matter. If you want to hear a symphony orchestra at
realistic level, they really matter. Unless you enjoy the sound of
clipping, of course. That, I'm afraid is what the 5 watt valve amp
people have to put up with.

Another example: TV sets. It's only for a couple of years manufacturers
are paying attention to better sound reproduction. Many of us are having
terrible reproduction quality and still enjoy the moving pictures.

I shouldn't think many of us on this group use the sound system
supplied with a TV.
In my circle there's no one who has the tellie linked to his or her
hifi. I did on some occasions watching war movies because of the
impressive explosion sounds. Only got the pets and the wife upset

Manufacturers can produce better sets but what happens if customers
don't want to spend more money on a TV or HiFi?

Jaap
Nobody has produced anything better for many years.
You're missing the point here. Manufacturers can upgrade -lets say- a
midprized set by putting in more expensive capacitors. That set would
sound better because there's less fuzz in the audio. On the other hand
the higher expense has to be payed by the consumer and they don't. One
explanation can be that consumers want better cyphers when they put down
more money. My explanation is massconsumers don't think a small gain in
quality is worth a large amount.


No, you have fallen foul of the "capacitor sound" myth here. There is
no such thing. Mid-priced Hi Fi amplifiers right now are essentially
faultless in their reproduction. You can't reduce fuzz by changing
capacitors because there is no fuzz.

Quality plateaued once the initial reproduction problems with CD had
been understood and addressed.
Personally I never liked the 'digital' sound with its harsh highs and
unnatural dynamics. But OK, tastes differ (we say over here).


Digital doesn't have harsh highs - it has accurate highs. There are
plenty of people around who compared the accurate highs on CDs with
the muted highs from previous technologies and found the comparison
unfavourable, of course. As for unnatural dynamics - they are nothing
to do with CDs. You can't blame the medium for what producers do with
it. And of course the CD is fully capable of vastly better dynamics
than any previously available medium. Vinyl, of course, has always
suffered reduced dynamics because it is mechanically severely limited.

Hi Fi is now a lifestyle business, and quite unrelated to
sound reproduction.

But do remember the nature of the group you are addressing here. We
are mostly not Hi Fi fashion victims, and many of us are well able to
understand in great detail what the true situation is.

d

Hope not to be blunt, but do you mean this NG is more about lifestyle
than audio? In that case the name should be changed...


Why should I mean that? This newsgroup is uk.rec.audio. That means it
concerns itself with the techniques and methods of sound reproduction.
Whether that is high or low fidelity is up to the originator of each
thread. In general of course, it won't concern itself with what colour
the latest offering from Panasonic is.

d


Don, I agree on most points but one (besides from reproduction levels,
which are measured in Bells and not Watts): your inability to
distinguish audible capacitor coloration. You hide behind your test
equipment, not knowing exactly what to look for. Is it the ESR, the
inductance, dielectric absorption? Do the test with open mind, you may
find yourself puzzled.

On Sun, 13 May 2007 23:04:17 +0200, jaap wrote:

Don, I agree on most points but one (besides from reproduction levels,
which are measured in Bells and not Watts): your inability to
distinguish audible capacitor coloration. You hide behind your test
equipment, not knowing exactly what to look for. Is it the ESR, the
inductance, dielectric absorption? Do the test with open mind, you may
find yourself puzzled.

Who cares what you use to measure audio reproduction levels? You need
Watts to produce them.

As for capacitor colouration, *nobody* has to my knowledge ever
demonstrated an ability to hear it. Many have made the claim, and a
few of them have allowed themselves to be subject to a test - all have
failed. I suspect you could easily add yourself to this number.

I don't hide behind equipment. This is a claim you are making to Serge
too, and I have to say it is rather rude. I use equipment, I have
designed equipment and I have measured the characteristics of many,
many capacitors. I have also worked in recording studios (where I was
taught vinyl cutting by an expert). My mind is open - if I ever hear
what I consider to be an unexplained difference I will immediately
challenge myself to identify it beyond doubt. I have never done so
yet. It is your mind that appears to be the closed one in this debate
and this leads you make assertions that fly in the face of reason. So
you need to be self-critical. If you find yourself believing something
that doesn't follow logic, don't just assume that you are right and
logic is wrong. Assume that you have got it wrong until such a point
that you can demonstrate beyond doubt that you have it right.

One thing, of course. You must make the test blind. Your brain plays
the cruelest tricks on you when you are aware of what you are
listening to.

You do know that James Randi has a million dollars awaiting anybody
who can repeatably hear the difference between cables?

Go for it - you can buy us all a drink with your winnings.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce schreef:
On Sun, 13 May 2007 23:04:17 +0200, jaap wrote:

Don, I agree on most points but one (besides from reproduction levels,
which are measured in Bells and not Watts): your inability to
distinguish audible capacitor coloration. You hide behind your test
equipment, not knowing exactly what to look for. Is it the ESR, the
inductance, dielectric absorption? Do the test with open mind, you may
find yourself puzzled.

Who cares what you use to measure audio reproduction levels? You need
Watts to produce them.

As for capacitor colouration, *nobody* has to my knowledge ever
demonstrated an ability to hear it. Many have made the claim, and a
few of them have allowed themselves to be subject to a test - all have
failed. I suspect you could easily add yourself to this number.

I don't hide behind equipment. This is a claim you are making to Serge
too, and I have to say it is rather rude. I use equipment, I have
designed equipment and I have measured the characteristics of many,
many capacitors. I have also worked in recording studios (where I was
taught vinyl cutting by an expert). My mind is open - if I ever hear
what I consider to be an unexplained difference I will immediately
challenge myself to identify it beyond doubt. I have never done so
yet. It is your mind that appears to be the closed one in this debate
and this leads you make assertions that fly in the face of reason. So
you need to be self-critical. If you find yourself believing something
that doesn't follow logic, don't just assume that you are right and
logic is wrong. Assume that you have got it wrong until such a point
that you can demonstrate beyond doubt that you have it right.

One thing, of course. You must make the test blind. Your brain plays
the cruelest tricks on you when you are aware of what you are
listening to.

You do know that James Randi has a million dollars awaiting anybody
who can repeatably hear the difference between cables?

Go for it - you can buy us all a drink with your winnings.

d


Don don't be offended, I won't either. The logic behind colorations
associated with cables and capacitors are explicable by electrical
properties. I can hear the difference between five or six cables, even
more capacitors (I have hundreds to play with and I do!) and so can you
(I presume). Never heard from James Randi but when we meet I'll buy you
a drink, as many as you need to forget your equipment and hard obtained
knowledge. Then we have a (blind) test listening to beautiful music.

Best regards from the home of the worlds largest audio equipment
producing company ever.

In article l,
jaap wrote:
Don don't be offended, I won't either. The logic behind colorations
associated with cables and capacitors are explicable by electrical
properties. I can hear the difference between five or six cables, even
more capacitors (I have hundreds to play with and I do!) and so can you
(I presume). Never heard from James Randi but when we meet I'll buy you
a drink, as many as you need to forget your equipment and hard obtained
knowledge. Then we have a (blind) test listening to beautiful music.

Then if you can truly hear these differences a fortune - and the esteem of
millions - awaits you. Unfortunately, you have to *prove* you can here
that difference in an accepted scientific way. Snake oil salesmen
throughout the ages have made money by claiming such things without proof.

Best regards from the home of the worlds largest audio equipment
producing company ever.

Philips? Not exactly renown for top end audio equipment. Apart from the
co-development of the CD far more interested in the mass market than
quality.

--
*When you've seen one shopping centre you've seen a mall*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article l,
jaap wrote:
Don don't be offended, I won't either. The logic behind colorations
associated with cables and capacitors are explicable by electrical
properties. I can hear the difference between five or six cables, even
more capacitors (I have hundreds to play with and I do!) and so can you
(I presume). Never heard from James Randi but when we meet I'll buy you
a drink, as many as you need to forget your equipment and hard obtained
knowledge. Then we have a (blind) test listening to beautiful music.

Then if you can truly hear these differences a fortune - and the esteem of
millions - awaits you. Unfortunately, you have to *prove* you can here
that difference in an accepted scientific way. Snake oil salesmen
throughout the ages have made money by claiming such things without proof.

Best regards from the home of the worlds largest audio equipment
producing company ever.

Philips? Not exactly renown for top end audio equipment. Apart from the
co-development of the CD far more interested in the mass market than
quality.

Dave, have you already forgotten DCC?

S.

--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

In article l, jaap
wrote:


Don don't be offended, I won't either. The logic behind colorations
associated with cables and capacitors are explicable by electrical
properties.

Such 'explanations' have been given on many occasions. The snag is as Don
and other have pointed out. No-one we know of have ever shown they can
*hear* the claimed differences when they take part in a suitable
comparison. Lots of claims, though.

The 'differences' seem to evaporate once people have to decide based only
on the sound, and they have no other clues.

I can hear the difference between five or six cables, even
more capacitors (I have hundreds to play with and I do!) and so can you
(I presume). Never heard from James Randi but when we meet I'll buy you
a drink, as many as you need to forget your equipment and hard obtained
knowledge. Then we have a (blind) test listening to beautiful music.

I look forward to you subjecting your faith to the test. :-)

IIUC You can contact Randi via the web. Please let us know how you get on.
I for one will be interested since I've repeatedly in the past done
comparisons and found that none of those tested could hear what you claim.
(Given some fairly basic requiremnents like the components having similar
capacitances, etc.)

Come to think of it, since you claim that amps years ago were 'better' than
those nowdays, i guess my old tests should be more impressive to you as I
did them some years ago, and used 'analog' sources. ;-

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

jaap wrote:
Don Pearce schreef:
On Sun, 13 May 2007 19:37:01 +0200, jaap wrote:

It's a public secret there's only a small market for better
sounding equipment. Most people don't bother because they want to
hear amplified sound and do not enjoy the quality, especially
when expensive. There lays the problem manufacturers are facing.
I think that lost something in the translation from Dutch. Could you
elaborate?

d

Alright. Being a public secret is a saying (over here) and means as
much as being common knowledge to most people.
No, I got that bit - it was all the rest that had me puzzled.

d

Look around you, probably within your family or among your friends.
Most people won't be bothered by new disk standards, color of face
plates, brand names, fourfold wiring with precious metals, quantity
of loudspeakers etcetera. It's all about enjoying the music, not how
it is reproduced.
OK, there exist a group of people running to the shop every year for
the last model but I don't think this is because they enjoy the music
so much. See my point?


Yes, but what did you mean when you said that people want to hear
amplified sound and do not enjoy the quality?

I gave you two examples. It is about the music, not how many watts or
how large the stack.


Another example: TV sets. It's only for a couple of years
manufacturers are paying attention to better sound reproduction. Many
of us are having terrible reproduction quality and still enjoy the
moving pictures.


I shouldn't think many of us on this group use the sound system
supplied with a TV.

In my circle there's no one who has the tellie linked to his or her
hifi. I did on some occasions watching war movies because of the
impressive explosion sounds. Only got the pets and the wife upset


Manufacturers can produce better sets but what happens if customers
don't want to spend more money on a TV or HiFi?

Jaap

Nobody has produced anything better for many years.

You're missing the point here. Manufacturers can upgrade -lets say- a
midprized set by putting in more expensive capacitors. That set would
sound better because there's less fuzz in the audio. On the other hand
the higher expense has to be payed by the consumer and they don't. One
explanation can be that consumers want better cyphers when they put down
more money. My explanation is massconsumers don't think a small gain in
quality is worth a large amount.

Absolutely *NOT*. Changing capacitors won't make one jot of difference.
Just measure it and you'll see. IF you would rather believe your ears
than objective measurements, then I have a Bridge I can sell you.

Quality plateaued once the initial reproduction problems with CD had
been understood and addressed.

Personally I never liked the 'digital' sound with its harsh highs and
unnatural dynamics. But OK, tastes differ (we say over here).



Digital has no "sound". CD is a transparent carrier, in that whatever
goes in comes out, to the limits of the 16 bit 44.1 system, which
comfortably exceeds the human ability to hear. You may not like what is
being done with CDs (I also hate today's Mastering, it's all bout
loudness, not quality) but that's nothing to do with the carrier, which
is transparent to well past the limits of human hearing.

S.




--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

Serge Auckland schreef:
jaap wrote:
Don Pearce schreef:
On Sun, 13 May 2007 19:37:01 +0200, jaap wrote:

It's a public secret there's only a small market for better
sounding equipment. Most people don't bother because they want
to hear amplified sound and do not enjoy the quality, especially
when expensive. There lays the problem manufacturers are facing.
I think that lost something in the translation from Dutch. Could you
elaborate?

d

Alright. Being a public secret is a saying (over here) and means
as much as being common knowledge to most people.
No, I got that bit - it was all the rest that had me puzzled.

d

Look around you, probably within your family or among your friends.
Most people won't be bothered by new disk standards, color of face
plates, brand names, fourfold wiring with precious metals, quantity
of loudspeakers etcetera. It's all about enjoying the music, not how
it is reproduced.
OK, there exist a group of people running to the shop every year for
the last model but I don't think this is because they enjoy the
music so much. See my point?


Yes, but what did you mean when you said that people want to hear
amplified sound and do not enjoy the quality?

I gave you two examples. It is about the music, not how many watts or
how large the stack.


Another example: TV sets. It's only for a couple of years
manufacturers are paying attention to better sound reproduction.
Many of us are having terrible reproduction quality and still enjoy
the moving pictures.


I shouldn't think many of us on this group use the sound system
supplied with a TV.

In my circle there's no one who has the tellie linked to his or her
hifi. I did on some occasions watching war movies because of the
impressive explosion sounds. Only got the pets and the wife upset


Manufacturers can produce better sets but what happens if customers
don't want to spend more money on a TV or HiFi?

Jaap

Nobody has produced anything better for many years.

You're missing the point here. Manufacturers can upgrade -lets say- a
midprized set by putting in more expensive capacitors. That set would
sound better because there's less fuzz in the audio. On the other hand
the higher expense has to be payed by the consumer and they don't. One
explanation can be that consumers want better cyphers when they put
down more money. My explanation is massconsumers don't think a small
gain in quality is worth a large amount.

Absolutely *NOT*. Changing capacitors won't make one jot of difference.
Just measure it and you'll see. IF you would rather believe your ears
than objective measurements, then I have a Bridge I can sell you.

Quality plateaued once the initial reproduction problems with CD had
been understood and addressed.

Personally I never liked the 'digital' sound with its harsh highs and
unnatural dynamics. But OK, tastes differ (we say over here).



Digital has no "sound". CD is a transparent carrier, in that whatever
goes in comes out, to the limits of the 16 bit 44.1 system, which
comfortably exceeds the human ability to hear. You may not like what is
being done with CDs (I also hate today's Mastering, it's all bout
loudness, not quality) but that's nothing to do with the carrier, which
is transparent to well past the limits of human hearing.

S.





Sorry, I do not agree with you. Sound is affected by everything it comes
in contact with. The surrounding, electronic parts, the hairs in your
ears, noise, air temperature and more. Talk with a musician and stop
believing technicians have a complete picture of nature.

I agree measurements are necessary, but please come down from your high
horse telling science knows everything. Was it you who said all (good)
amplifiers and players sound the same? Not true.

Please do a simple test exchanging capacitors in the PS of your audio
equipment or in your speaker crossovers. It might or might not be
measurable but one can hear definitely the change of coloration. Unless
you don't listen to music of course

One of the problems with Digital audio is that only part of the actual
information is recorded. For most people this 'sound' is good enough (as
most consumers don't want to pay for higher quality). Have you ever
compared a recording on a Telefunken M10 to your favorite CD or DVD?

As for the orchestra which is in need of 10 or more watts to be
reproduced correctly, this is again a (1970) sales story. Right now I am
listening through a 1.5 watt amplifier giving me more than enough
decibells to feed the 4x6 meter room. Hardrock or orchestra, no problem.
The problem is with the loudspeakers, not having made serious progress
since 1960.

Jaap