George I answered that for you in post #57............
Is Class A still the king of tone?
- Thread starter radical-squared
- Start date
George I answered that for you in post #57............
gadawg
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2017
- Messages
- 230
Where? Again if measurements are 100% correct ... price by definition cannot come into play, else by definition something that wasn't measured is making the more expensive amps better which supports my argument which is simply measurement cannot 100% describe performance.
Do you think measurement 100% describe performance? If not then we agree ...
George
to the questions you asked in post #60 and my reply........... the word 'subjective', I suppose one could add the word perception as well
crwilli
Well-known member
Why does one perspective have to be “right” and the other “wrong”?
Engineers design and build to specifications, and measurements help determine whether a system is built as intended. Audio certainly benefits from that discipline and rigor.
At the same time, measurements alone do not guarantee great sound in a listening room.
Ultimately, our ears are the final measurement system. While our hearing is influenced by individual preferences and cognitive biases, listening remains the ultimate test of whether a system delivers a satisfying musical experience. The challenge, of course, is that not everyone’s ears—or preferences—will agree on what constitutes great sound.
Perhaps measurements and listening are not competing viewpoints, but complementary tools in our pursuit of better audio.
Engineers design and build to specifications, and measurements help determine whether a system is built as intended. Audio certainly benefits from that discipline and rigor.
At the same time, measurements alone do not guarantee great sound in a listening room.
Ultimately, our ears are the final measurement system. While our hearing is influenced by individual preferences and cognitive biases, listening remains the ultimate test of whether a system delivers a satisfying musical experience. The challenge, of course, is that not everyone’s ears—or preferences—will agree on what constitutes great sound.
Perhaps measurements and listening are not competing viewpoints, but complementary tools in our pursuit of better audio.
gadawg
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2017
- Messages
- 230
Neither of those would be an answer to my question ... Here is what I'm asking for ... Do you think measurement 100% describes complete and total performance of an component? Yes/Noto the questions you asked in post #60 and my reply........... the word 'subjective', I suppose one could add the word perception as well
Cheers!
George
gadawg
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2017
- Messages
- 230
I've been responding to the original notion many posts up by a manufacturer that all aspects of audio component performance can be measured now as the science of measurement has advanced greatly over years past. While I agree we can probably measure much more than we did decades ago .. I think it would be an exaggeration to state that all aspects of performance are capable of being measured. I agree with you that measurements are a valuable tool for engineers while developing products and can be relative within a very controlled environment. I however don't agree that measurements actually tell you very much at all as to how one component will perform compared to another product that is of a totally different design. Things like THD are all but useless today because everything(other than speakers) will have a THD of much less than .1% which is about the limit of human perception anyway...
I'm just curious if folks agree that measurements can tell you everything or most everything you need to know about a component. I certainly don't but that's just me.
Cheers
George
crwilli
Well-known member
I understand and agree with your position George. Very clearly to me, measurements do not tell the entire story.
Neither of those would be an answer to my question ... Here is what I'm asking for ... Do you think measurement 100% describes complete and total performance of an component? Yes/No
Cheers!
George
to the question above , no. With regard to the multiple questions you asked in your earlier post, it is subjective. No 'spec measurement' of a piece of equipment will answer that, the dependency lies with speaker selection and all the room dependencies that are associated with set up.
Craig's last sentence, post #64 sums it perfectly IMO
atmasphere
Active member
The problem is you've not seen all the measurements that can be made. You've only seen the ones that were published.
So you are drawing a conclusion based on a very limited sample size, not only with the equipment, but with the measurements too. I can see how you might have come to your conclusion, but if you look at the issues, you'll see its based on a logical fallacy, known unsurprisingly as that of a limited sample size.
Sound stage is low distortion, wide bandwidth and low phase shift in the highs. A prominent 2nd or 3rd harmonic, if in the correct phase, can reinforce the sense of the image. I recently heard an older solid state system that had real problems conveying sound stage. I think it was having bandwidth problems. It belongs to a friend of mine so I plan to research it more.
Width has to do with cross talk. The more you can minimize that, the wider the sound stage. The Bacch system allows you to really minimize cross talk and the additional spread you get is amazing. There's lots of information encoded in stereo recordings that is very difficult to experience otherwise. A good deal of the cross talk is between the speakers themselves.
Space and air are functions of the first three things above as is layering. Tonal density has a lot to do with the 2nd and 3rd harmonics- they add richness. Its worth noting on this account that the most accurate system is likely to not sound as lush, although there's no reason it has to be unpleasant. Both richness and harshness are colorations...
If the amp has a poor distortion profile, it might do all these things but still be unpleasant to listen to for long periods.
Yes, if you have all of them, which for the two amps in your example, you don't. So an incomplete set of measurements garners a 'no'.Neither of those would be an answer to my question ... Here is what I'm asking for ... Do you think measurement 100% describes complete and total performance of an component? Yes/No
Cheers!
George
Randy Myers
Well-known member
This is pretty much exactly correct in that everyone has different likes and dislikes, "perspectives", and to that point even enjoy different types of music. Much more relevant than measurements or pricing levels.
While I can appreciate and do own many types of music (except I just cannot wrap my head around Hip Hop), what I enjoy the most will differ from many other members. And there is nothing wrong with that. However, this factor will greatly influence my preferences in gear, speakers, etc.
Yes, people bring price levels into the equation, but to be really honest, it is not the most important factor. To emphasize my point, in all my years of listening, enjoying, selling, manufacturing, etc., I have never enjoyed horn speakers. I respect many manufactures such as Klipsch and JBL, for example. When selling them they never would come back with issues. If someone loved Klipsch they would always be satisfied. I would never own a pair of either. My point being I have heard very expensive horn speakers and never enjoyed them (much more so than Klipsch, they are only an example of a product that I sold huge amounts of back in the day).
My preferences have always leaned toward speakers who mostly are lower efficient and tend to excel in sound stage and imaging. What has been referred to as the British sound. I owned KEF for years but also enjoyed Magnaplane, and other planar speakers. I currently am verry happy with my Harbeth. I believe they are currently one of the companies carrying the torch for the "British speakers".
The funny thing is I have had conversations with Alan Shaw, owner and chief designer at Harbeth, and he very much falls on the measurement side of things
. But his speakers very much hold true to the British design and sound.I am 100% sure that my preferences impact the products I like and dislike, regardless of pricing. Sure, we all would like to be able to have rooms that accommodate and be able to afford higher levels of gear. I also know that these factors would not change my personal perspectives. I also believe that I am very comfortable in a smaller sized room and it can do what I enjoy the most in music listening.
Bingo. As Ralph pointed out with the Recklinghausen quote, “If it measures bad and sounds good, you’ve measured the wrong things.”
It seems to me that we can measure things down to a nicety in a lab environment, but if there’s a way to positively correlate those measurements with what I experience when listening I haven’t seen or heard of it. That’s probably why I perceive most measurements advocates as a bit arrogant - their position presumes that every factor that can possibly be relevant to human perception of sound is not only known and measurable, but is in fact used in the evaluation of components performed by these people. To say that seems dubious would be an understatement. It’s my view that human perception of sound is far too complex a process to be explained by such a simplistic perspective.
The irony is that somewhere along the line, somebody had to have heard something they were trying to explain. Why else would the measuring process have been developed in the first place?
atmasphere
Active member
Even with fairly simple measurement equipment (an oscilloscope, a dummy load, Voltmeter and signal generator) I've been able to make measurements and hear their implications in a very direct way.
However, if you've read thru this thread, I recently explained exactly what measurements are needed, so you have indeed seen it, even if you've not heard it. I imagine though it might be more educational for some if those measurements and the amps that have those distortion profiles were auditioned. Then it would be easier to understand that the correct measurements do indeed have a very strong correlation to what we hear. To put that in perspective, THD is not that important; the distortion profile is more important. Only if the latter is correct does the former take more importance. So if an ugly distortion profile is present, even if THD is low the amp is likely to be unpleasant.
The reason this is so has to do with the fact that the ear is keenly sensitive to higher ordered harmonics, since it uses them to sense how loud sounds are. That's a pretty important function of the ear! So if an amp has low THD, but the distortion it has tends to be higher ordered, those higher orders will stand out as the amp adding brightness and harshness to the sound. The fact this is so has been known for well over a century since there is a musical function involved that predates electronics. The Radiotron Designer's Handbook, 3rd edition, published in the 1930s has a chart showing acceptable distortion known at the time which still is true today, since ears have not changed since then. Not rocket science.
“Not rocket science.”
Perhaps not to someone with your background and experience. I can’t bring that to bear, I’m afraid.
Pardon my ignorance, but I’d like to have at least a fundamental understanding of this.
So when listening to a piece of music on my system, say for example that I perceive an oboe playing left of center, about halfway back in the orchestra. I’ve heard many systems on which I could not place that instrument in space with any degree of certainty. What measurement(s) would correlate to that ability to precisely locate such a sound in space?
Perhaps not to someone with your background and experience. I can’t bring that to bear, I’m afraid.
Pardon my ignorance, but I’d like to have at least a fundamental understanding of this.
So when listening to a piece of music on my system, say for example that I perceive an oboe playing left of center, about halfway back in the orchestra. I’ve heard many systems on which I could not place that instrument in space with any degree of certainty. What measurement(s) would correlate to that ability to precisely locate such a sound in space?
atmasphere
Active member
The first thing to understand is moving to a different system in a different room introduces a lot of variables. The playback apparatus can be different which is an enormous variable all by itself. I know exactly what you're talking about as I've heard the exact some thing.
Now if two amps are being compared then this is a lot easier. One thing that can really affect how we perceive the sound stage is the phase of the 2nd and 3rd harmonics, especially if the phase of the 3rd harmonic is positive. They can cause certain details to become more prominent. This is a major reason why tubes seem to be more spacious.
But other things are important too. If the amp lacks sufficient feedback, it won't be able to correct phase shift in the upper extremes. So it must have wide bandwidth in the highs to prevent phase shift instead. Our ears use phase to help with echo location. So the best tube amps (which usually lack the ability to add enough feedback and may not have any at all) will be the ones that have extended high frequency response.
Distortion can obscure detail. This is easy to hear so again if you want the best sound stage, the amp should be low distortion. Transistors can be quite good at this, but if they are not pleasant to listen to its moot. But if they get it right, which is possible, they can actually be more precise, more focused about where the particular image really sits in the sound stage, and do that while being easy to listen to at the same time.
crwilli
Well-known member
Atmasphere
I appreciate you sharing your knowledgeable insights. One thing these discussions have taught me is that amplifier designers rely on measurements that many of us rarely see or discuss, and those measurements can be highly predictive of sound quality and performance.
At the same time, I think there is room for two amplifiers to measure similarly across the metrics we commonly examine and yet sound different to listeners. The article I linked argues that our ears are extraordinarily sensitive to certain aspects of sound—perhaps more sensitive than many measurement systems currently used to evaluate audio equipment.
If that is true, then it may help explain why listeners sometimes report differences that are not readily apparent in the measurements being discussed.
Is that a fair summary
I appreciate you sharing your knowledgeable insights. One thing these discussions have taught me is that amplifier designers rely on measurements that many of us rarely see or discuss, and those measurements can be highly predictive of sound quality and performance.
At the same time, I think there is room for two amplifiers to measure similarly across the metrics we commonly examine and yet sound different to listeners. The article I linked argues that our ears are extraordinarily sensitive to certain aspects of sound—perhaps more sensitive than many measurement systems currently used to evaluate audio equipment.
If that is true, then it may help explain why listeners sometimes report differences that are not readily apparent in the measurements being discussed.
Is that a fair summary
atmasphere
Active member
I think its close. The thing that relates to distortion is that the ear uses harmonics to tell the difference between sounds. IOW all harmonics are assigned a tonality which is why we can tell the difference between a trumpet and a clarinet.
When you add harmonics you alter the tonality. That might not look like much on an oscilloscope but it can be really audible. You need a more precise instrument such as a distortion analyzer, and then the experience to know what its telling you since even on the analyzer, the differences in the distortion profile might not seem like much.
There are other things that can be an issue too. The ear is keenly sensitive to intermodulations. You can have trouble with intermodulations simply due to how the grounding is set up inside an amp or preamp due to internal ground loops which do not cause an outright buzz. All you need is a bit of a non-linearity involved with that and you have increased IMD.
IMO if you look at the things to which the ear is most sensitive, you find your answer. Higher ordered harmonics, if unmasked, contribute to brightness and harshness since the ear is so keenly attuned to them. Its worth noting that SETs have the greatest amount of higher ordered harmonics of any amplifier design, but because the 2nd and 3rd harmonics they make are so prodigious, those higher orders are masked (via the ear's masking principle) so the amp sounds nice and smooth. That distortion profile BTW is described mathematically as a 'quadratic non-linearity'.
If you look a distortion vs frequency, you can find a lot of correlation with what we hear. If the amp has feedback but lacks the gain bandwidth product to support that feedback value properly, the distortion will start to rise at a certain frequency along a 20dB/decade slope. This can cause higher ordered harmonics to be unmasked. This is a reason (not the only reason) that feedback has gotten an undeserved bad reputation. Most tube amps do not have the gain bandwidth product to support a lot of feedback although there are a few outliers. A lot of solid state amps don't either FWIW.