Thread: The biggest secret has been revealed?!

Have there been any articles out there that point to any electronic devices such as found in audio being sensitive or changing their specs due to vibration, thus altering the audio signal? I have never found anything other than small signal tubes being microphonic. I have never seen any measures implemented other than mechanical failure due to vibration where appropriate except for audio. Any links would be appreciated. Inquiring minds want to know.

Originally Posted by Stehno

...Much the same with background silence. I never mentioned it, sorry. If I've performed due diligence, then there should never be 1ms of black background as hopefully the entire presentation is loaded with volumes of the recording hall's ambient info captured at the recording so there's always something audible going on.

You´re right. I think i didn´t express myself well.
What i mean is, once we remove the garbage induced in the áudio signal, we will be able to listen all the little things that are always happening as you said. The example of the open / close microphone of Diana Krall allow us to hear "two layers of silence”. That´s what i mean about black noise floor.

Originally Posted by Stehno

I don't know as I've not come across any writings either. Even so, I'm quite certain nobody employs the extreme version of a rare vibration methodology that I do and in my case it makes components multiple times more musical. For example. I employ 3 little Jena Labs The Two line conditioners for my source and my 2 monoblock amps. The Jena Labs units are fabulous performers right out of the box and after burn-in. However, when I apply my unique and extreme form of vibration mgmt to them, over time they seem to perform 3 or even 4 times their original out of the box performance levels. Though I've no clue how one might measure that.

As for measurements themselves, I put little stock in them. I'm sure they do wonders at the test bench for checking indiviual parts but from a holistic listening perspective, they've yet to design a measuring instrument for quality of sound.

Sure, I get it, it is all part of the hobby. Have fun with it

Originally Posted by W9TR

A conductor moving in a magnetic field will create a voltage proportional to the length of the conductor, the strength of the magnetic field, and the velocity the conductor is moving through the magnetic field.

emf=l*h*v

This is Faraday’s Law.
l=length of the conductor in meters
h=field strength in Tesla’s
v=velocity of the conductor in meters/sec.

The earth’s magnetic field is about 0.00005 Tesla.
A 1m cable vibrating with a velocity of 1 m/s would create. 50 uV signal which is actually well above the noise floor of a good system.

I need to do the calculus on just what kind of displacement that is at 1 kHz but it isn’t very much.

Sorry to geek out on you but I am a believer in the basic laws of physics.

At one meter per second Tom, that is not a speaker cable, that is the Anaconda the local zoo has been missing for a few weeks...

Octopus,
Do you know why UFOs don't exist? Because the laws of physics say it is impossible for them to do what they do. Therefore, they cannot exist.


Do you remember this game?
It only works with the wire well stretched, right?
Do the same with your speaker cables (well stretched) and then tell me about the differences.

Originally Posted by Spock

Octopus,
Do you know why UFOs don't exist? Because the laws of physics say it is impossible for them to do what they do. Therefore, they cannot exist.


Do you remember this game?
It only works with the wire well stretched, right?
Do the same with your speaker cables (well stretched) and then tell me about the differences.

Sorry but both of the examples are simply wrong. Aviation in general should have been against the laws of physics because “heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible”, said Lord Kelvin, a few years before the Wright Brothers took flight.

Just because UFO are exhibiting maneuvers that are beyond our own technology, they are not necessarily breaking any laws of physics.

You'd be surprised what the Navy holds patents on. It will blow your mind first time you look at them.. Navy "UFO Patent" Documents Talk Of "Spacetime Modification Weapon," Detail Experimental Testing

As to the two cups and a string, that is "mechanical" vibration that has nothing to do with electrical signal propagation in a speaker cable. It is similar to any stringed instrument making a sound when the strings are plucked, bowed, struck, etc... In the case of the two cups, your voice sets the cups and the string that has tension into voice modulated oscillations that can be heard on the other end.

Originally Posted by W9TR

A very good question! No bad questions really. The first thing you imagine is a wire moving back and forth a meter! I know I did.

But remember that this is a velocity, not an amplitude. The amplitude needed to achieve this velocity will depend on the frequency of the induced vibration. I’m thinking it is quite small at say, 1 kHz, but I need to work the math problem. I’ll do it later this week when I have some more time.

On a more anecdotal note, if you’ve ever done live recording you’ve experienced microphonics in Mic cables.

Tom, have fun with it but the cable microphonics are well documented and explained. Google triboelectric effect and condenser mic effect. Many guitar players are familiar with the concept of "handling" the guitar cables. Dealing with CABLE MICROPHONICS – PedalSnake Blog

In fact, some few decades back, we were in the habit of suspending speaker cables on fishing line from the ceiling so they never touched the floor, to prevent static induced signal degradation. There was nothing that could be done for speaker/room borne vibrations obviously and if that even has an effect. (very unlikely). Many careful listening sessions later, we abandoned the silly practice with my audiophile buddies as none of us could ever conclusively hear any difference, not even in the driest, most static inducing winter season when the humidity gets really low in the house...

Originally Posted by TheOctopus

Just because UFO are exhibiting maneuvers that are beyond our own technology, they are not necessarily breaking any laws of physics.

Well, you mix everything up.
So, for a theme, we should accept the phenomenon and go looking for the justification for it, reviewing and improving the laws of physics beyond what is conventionally known. But when we talk about audio, we only can apply the conventional rules, and the phenomena that so many testify to are completely emptied.

Originally Posted by TheOctopus

As to the two cups and a string, that is "mechanical" vibration that has nothing to do with electrical signal propagation in a speaker cable.

You like to have the last word and to win the conversation.
But why don't you just try it and then say something?
Then you can even tell me: I tried it and I didn't hear any differences. That would be enough for me.

Originally Posted by Spock

Well, you mix everything up.
So, for a theme, we should accept the phenomenon and go looking for the justification for it, reviewing and improving the laws of physics beyond what is conventionally known. But when we talk about audio, we only can apply the conventional rules, and the phenomena that so many testify to are completely emptied.



You like to have the last word and to win the conversation.
But why don't you just try it and then say something?
Then you can even tell me: I tried it and I didn't hear any differences. That would be enough for me.

What was it I am supposed to try? Stretch my speaker cables tight?

Yes.
Maybe a device like this can help

NCF Booster | FURUTECH

Originally Posted by Spock

Yes.
Maybe a device like this can help

NCF Booster | FURUTECH

I've played with all kinds of cable risers as well as suspending speaker cables from the ceiling. It is only when one understands the physiology part of the human brain, specifically that our "echoic or auditory memory" lasts only 4 seconds, then one understands that in this hobby, you will hear many different things with many different tweaks, be they real or imagined... Perhaps not even all that important. If you "think" you hear a difference, then enjoy the new level of performance.

Test the echoic memory concept for yourself. The fact that one has to even wonder or guess if there is a difference says it all. How Bad Is Your Auditory (Echoic) Memory? - AcousticsInsider.com - YouTube

Originally Posted by Stehno

Our audible memory is pretty bad and no doubt it gets in the way routinely. But if it's so bad, how is that the high-end audio industry even exists? If you truly belief our echoic memory is so bad, why are any of us high-end audio enthusiasts?

I didn't watch the youtube video yet, but I'm guessing they make no mention of some who are able to train or develop an ability to discern / interpret what we hear? I find it odd how audio enthusiasts can so easily accept that none of us are inheritly born with the developed skills to be a connoisseur of fine art but they must first be educated and/or trained. Yet, when it comes to our listening skils many think we were just born with such abilities to discern / interpret what we hear so long as we passed a hearing test two years ago.

Good questions. IÂ’ve been into high end audio since the late 80Â’s. Took me 25 years to address and understand the answers those same questions.

1. All our senses can be fooled. Our eyes can even make us hear things differently as strange as that is. Echoic memory is 2-4 seconds, Iconic or visual memory is half a second...

2. All experts are also fooled as documented by wine experts, professional violin players, recording engineers and many others when it comes to not being able to see or not having other information to rely on. Hence far from perfect.

3. Define high resolution... recording engineers, the guys that work with the music were 50/50% or random guess determining high resolution. Recording and careful mastering is much more important than resolution. High resolution, as a measure of quality of the build of the gear itself, as in preserving the fragile signal and remaining faithful to the groove, tape or ones and zeros is obviously important but it is also dependent on the source itself or recording quality or it is wasted or only serves to highlight the flaws of the recording itself.

4. 1 in 10,000 people has pitch perfect hearing. I do not so canÂ’t comment. Perhaps they can hear things differently. Judging by blindfolded violin test fail, maybe not so different than the rest of us...


5. LetÂ’s get philosophical... What are your goals in this hobby? I know my goals and they are to acquire gear to listen to my favorite music that beings me pleasure. Mission accomplished. Period. No new shiny boxes every month for me. What I have is completely satisfactory and I have had serious gear in the past.

If your interest lies in the gear itself, great, itÂ’s your hobby, passion and money. Does a new shiny box, new cables, new power conditioner bring you closer to music? If yes, there you go.


6. What absolutes are you trying to achieve? Our hearing declines with every year that ticks by, many suffer from at least mild tinnitus, hearing loss, 3% of the population suffers from a condition they are born with called phonagnosia, where they do not recognize voices of even loved ones.


So why does high end audio exist? Why does any hobby or passion exist? Cars, art, watches, fine wine or even gourmet food and fancy restaurants? I think the answer is obvious. Yet the wine experts still fail... confusing white for red blindfolded.


The moment Diana Krall’s piano and voice rang out “temptation” in that studio, on that day in space and time, just like we are no longer in the same place in the universe, so is that moment, forever gone and replaced by a less than perfect copy of the event. You weren’t there, I wasn’t there, what I hear at home is absolutely fine for my purposes of this hobby. Perhaps you need to get closer still.

Will a new cable get me closer to the less than perfect recording? Even if it did, I have been perfectly happy with my speaker cables for over a decade now, whatever they do or donÂ’t do. IÂ’m listening to much more music than ever yet interest in gear is just about nonexistent unless I decide to setup another system or need to change due to new technology pushing me there.

Perhaps others have other ideas and a different philosophy.

Originally Posted by TheOctopus

Perhaps others have other ideas and a different philosophy.

My guess is all the rest of us in this forum.
We are old audiofools trusting in our ears. Why? There are exceptions (*) but the music come to us from the ears, so...

(*) amazing video about listening, in a very special heartfelt way.

Thanks for the replies. It is a very broad hobby that encompasses many different aspects. From the love of music itself, as well as the pleasure of collecting and enjoying music, to the ever evolving and quite impressive gear from the masterminds behind it, the appreciation of the expression of such technological advancements as an art of creating absolute gems of musical pleasure. If one enjoys the hobby, does it really matter? Who cares what one can or cannot really hear and if some aspects are real or a figment of the imagination based on the limitations of being human..

The point being, you only live once, so enjoy to the fullest, whatever turns you on.

Originally Posted by Stehno

Some people are performance driven and I get the impression somebody like Spock is looking not at acquiring new equipment (though he may) but rather is looking under every corner of the carpet, experimenting and trying new things to extract the very most from what he has. It's probably his nature to extract the very best from whatever he has a passion for.

You are absolutely right and you nailed it.
Because I am the first critic of my system and its flaws, I always hear my audiophile friends saying to me: you need to buy this you need to buy that.
Sometimes I feel tempted, but then I do another experiment that reveals another layer and once again I feel that there is still a lot to explore in the active components that I have. As you say

Originally Posted by Stehno

An inferior foundation creates a universal performance-limiting governor that ensure our components can only operate at their base performance levels whereas a superior foundation allows our components to perform far closer to their optimal levels. Levels that even their designers could only dream of.

-------------------------------------------------------------xx--------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by Stehno

Those who do nothing to improve their playback system's presentation will tell us recordings for the most part are very poor facimilies. Those like Spock might say, it's absolutely incredibile how much of the live performance was captured in any given recording.

Once again you hit the nail on the head.
Many years ago, in a portuguese forum, a group of audiophiles complained about bad recordings (which they claimed to be the majority) and protested against the compression and loudness war, as if everything was compressed. As always, they write, write but do not give examples. After much insisting, there were some examples, including Michael Jackson's Thriller and Metallica's Black Album. After I made the defense of the recordings in question, one of them came to say that anyway, his system played a lot of jazz and that this was the style of music that he listened to the most.
And here begins the first big mistake of many audiophiles: a system does not have to play a musical genre well. It must play everything.

Originally Posted by Stehno

Spock, do you ever feel like you're being watched?

Ah!

To say our playback systems are limited to certain genre is essentially saying our playback systems possess the intelligence to discriminate between genre's

I would not say that some systems chooses a genre of music, but that they rejects other genres.
It is not by chance that the most mentioned genre is jazz. In jazz we find mainly small groups (trios, quartets), with musical compositions often based on a protagonist instrument, which allows the system to shine.
But when the music gets more complex and the system goes down, something is not right. I remember my Pioneer stereo from the 90s. It played everything! Then I went looking for that more refined sound, with another instrumental separation and I also found myself thinking (and excusing the system) that now I had a much more correct view of the quality of the recordings and if I didn't play well it was because it was poor recorded. As everything in life has a meaning, going through this phase allowed me to open my musical taste to jazz (which I didn't particularly like) and other more experimental sound proposals, but not very complex from the point of view of the number of instruments.

Recorded music has limitations... If one is to appreciate the lowest to loudest passages within a reasonable SPL, compression must be used.

Conclusion:
The dynamic range of recorded music across genres based on an audio corpus of 1,000 songs was found to be smaller than the dynamic range of monologue speech in quiet. Samples from modern genres such as pop, rap, rock, and schlager generally had the smallest dynamic range, followed by samples from jazz and classical genres such as chamber, choir, orchestra, piano, and opera. Only in the lower frequencies was the dynamic range of speech surpassed by the dynamic range of music, and then only in the case of chamber music, opera, and orchestra.

Originally Posted by mep

That's not possible unless they cherry picked 1,000 songs recorded during the loudness wars.

Current world record is 113dB singing and 121dB shouting/yelling. Both females. The human voice has a frequency range from 85Hz to nearly 5KHz. So from the softest whisper that can be heard just above the noise floor of the room to potential 121dB. Can your recordings and system match that?

Moreover, conversational speech is typically 35-52bB of dynamic range. Dynamic range of recordings can be compared in this database and can be sorted by maximum dynamic range. Album list - Dynamic Range Database

Dynamic Range Compression Pt 1 - What Is Dynamic Range?

Here is a piece of basswood (pronounced like the fish) under the edge of my preamp. It reduces the bass a bit and tightens it up. This is changing the vibration of the equipment similar to the way Shunyata dampens the panels of the Denali. The bass wood lessens the bass a bit and gives a bit more highs. Damping the panels increases the bass a bit and smooths the highs. There is not a right way or wrong way, it always depends on what the listener wants and/or needs.

Originally Posted by mep

Great deflection, but that’s not what we were talking about. You just switched gears from someone speaking in a monotone voice and claiming a monotone voice which by definition has zero DR has more DR than 1,000 songs. Now you are talking about how dynamic the human voice can be. Pick your argument and stick to it.

You lost me there. Monotone voice has zero dynamic range? I just pulled my iPhone out of my pocket and used an SPL app on my monotone voice. With 39dB of registered ambient noise floor of my room, I can easily go up to 102dB with my voice without straining my vocal cords. That’s over 60dB of dynamic range.

Our best recordings, which have little to do with theoretical and anecdotal max dynamic range of say 77dB for analog master tape are typically in the teens for dynamic range. Rarely are they over even 20dB.

Originally Posted by stereogeek

Here is a piece of basswood (pronounced like the fish) under the edge of my preamp. It reduces the bass a bit and tightens it up. This is changing the vibration of the equipment similar to the way Shunyata dampens the panels of the Denali. The bass wood lessens the bass a bit and gives a bit more highs. Damping the panels increases the bass a bit and smooths the highs. There is not a right way or wrong way, it always depends on what the listener wants and/or needs.

Nice preamp!

Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by mep

Serge- You are confusing loudness with DR. Of course you can speak at a whisper or you can scream. If you are speaking in a monotone voice, by definition you aren’t changing the DR of your voice.

In that sense yes. I understand what you meant by “monotone” now. A continuous sound without changing pitch. But neither the conversations, nor music are typically monotone.

A dynamic range comparison of all genres calculated as the difference between the 99th and 30th percentile. According to this analysis, speech is generally largest in dynamic range in all frequency bands followed by the classical genres, jazz, and the modern genres. Speech is only locally surpassed by chamber music in the lowest two frequency bands ([110 Hz to 140 Hz]; [140 Hz to 177 Hz]) and by orchestra and opera in the lowest band.

If you are interested in the article, that I referenced from above, here it is. SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

Originally Posted by TheGemState

Nice preamp!

And CD player!

Originally Posted by TheOctopus

…Samples from modern genres such as pop, rap, rock, and schlager generally had the smallest dynamic range, followed by samples from jazz and classical genres such as chamber, choir, orchestra, piano, and opera.

Undeniable that especially in rock and roll there is a lot of misery in the recordings.

Originally Posted by Stehno

Good point. But have you considered the possibility that the audible impact of unchanging distortions (think a playback system's much raised electronics-induced noise floor) become more easily apparent with greater dynamic / complex passages? The very same reason many cannot listen to their system near or at live performance volume levels?
BTW, I'd like to discuss what you've got going on with your cabling. Could you pm me or at least point me to your most detailed posts about the subject? Thanks,

Yes, I thought so. It is natural that a good system exposes the worst recordings and highlights the good ones. But, in my opinion (but there´s not a final opinion i must confess) there is a lot of this discrimination that is done for lack of some fine-tuning in the system.
I'll tell you another story. After the honeymoon ended with my Sonus Faber Grand Piano Home (3 to 4 months after purchase – year 2001), I started to realize that many (too many) records were spinning on the shelf because they are now impossible to hear. The sound became compressed, and when I tried to pull up the volume it got a little worse.
I then had a Copland csa28 amplifier, a hybrid with a wonderful sound, as long as i didn't pull too hard for it.
I went to the dealer and complained about the compression. Immediately he connected some speakers like mine, but with Krell amplification and Nordost cables (*). In fact, the lack of signs of compression led the seller to say, "this is what you need to get them to sing". Right, when it comes to dynamics and decompression, but I didn't want that aggressive and dry sound. But I realized that the problem was not with the speakers.
I quickly went looking for another amplification and exchanged the Copland for a Classé Cap Cap 150 that came to give me some of the dynamics and openness I was looking for. And so on and so on.
And from trial and error in fine-tuning, I was convinced that even a revealing system has to reveal the bad recording but it must play it, even at high volumes (**).

I leave an example of a bad recording. Sounds almost all at the same level, strange timbres (unrecognizable drums), blurry sound without texture. But still, play!



(*) cables can be responsible for compression. It is not by chance that there is a multitude of audiophiles that bet on low capacitive ones (thin diameter) and distance between the condutors as a way to escape this negative effect (Nordost; Tellurium, etc)
By the way, talking about cables, do you want me to reveal my biggest secret?
Okay. Just give me a time to do the description

(**) Yes, many use the volume too carefully

While on the topic. Can you handle the truth about dynamic range compression?

Can you handle the truth about dynamic range compression? - YouTube

Originally Posted by mep

Someone speaking in a normal volume in a conversation is never going to come close to the DR of well recorded music. It’s a loser argument for you. You need to try something else.

Not sure what you are trying to prove really but I take it you are the type that needs to feel like you have outwitted and outsmarted your opponent? Well, let's go then.

The dynamic range of music as normally perceived in a concert hall does not exceed 80 dB, and human speech is normally perceived over a range of about 40 dB. FACT. Dynamic range - Wikipedia.


Your turn. Now the burden of proof is on you. Let's see some actual examples of recordings of dynamic range greater than 40dB....

Originally Posted by mep

Really? We have no recordings that exceed 40 dB of dynamic range???? I need to prove that to you??

I'm waiting... I'll give you a hint. Here is a dynamic range database. Have fun. Album list - Dynamic Range Database

There is a new standard by the way for measuring loudness in audio. LUFS

LUFS are the new way to measure loudness in audio.

This new measurement scale is an important development for many issues in music production.



But understanding LUFS can be pretty difficult at first. They’re different from the ways you’re probably used to measuring your signals.

Even so, these new units are being used all over the audio world. It’s important to know how they work to understand the role of loudness in audio production.

In this article I’ll go over everything you need to know about LUFS. What are LUFS? Loudness Metering Explained | LANDR Blog

Great article explaining psychoacoustics. Psychoacoustics: How Your Brain Affects Your Mix | LANDR Blog

Originally Posted by TheGemState

Nice preamp!

Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk

Thanks. This preamp murdered my previous preamp so bad it was a tragedy. It was so bad there were large groups of people outside my house holding candles....lol.