Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 18/01/2021 at 2:00 PM, Steam said:

You still seem to be missing the point.  Not everything is well recorded.  What do you do with the stuff you have that is not well recorded?  Surely you have something that is not good.  

 

Lenny Kravitz sounds like he recorded in a toilet cubicle with a Walkman.  Early Who recordings used ground up razor blades for the treble and forgot the bass.  Do you dismiss music that’s badly recorded?  Or do you grit your teeth and suffer for your pure signal path?  If YOU like this then great.  But please don’t tell me what I should like or that what I like is somehow wrong.   The Who, were an awesome band that unfortunantly didn’t have the kit at the time to capture well what they were doing.  If I can mess with it and make it the way I like it and enjoy it then great.
 

Do you tell the owners of flea watt tube amps and high efficiency speakers that their system is euphonic and they are doing it wrong - another group on the wrong path.

 

 

 


 

 

Hmmm, I have had earlier iterations of my system sound like this with Lenny Kravitz. My current system seems to let you see through the mud and sounds great, surprising though that might seem. The trick (for me anyway) was in getting the most real, natural sounding,  yet musical source components I could afford Abbas Esoteric Audio DAC + phono) and pairing it with a highly resolving and transparent amplification chain into high (99db) efficiency speakers utilizing a fullrange driver,  helper tweeters and big 15" woofers in an open baffle. I've never heard anything like it. 

 

Part of the secret was using Russian silver mica bypasses in the amp driving the fullrange and tweeters. These caps just let more of everything through.  The added fine, delicate detail just brings every recording to life. Yes, you hear all the flaws in every recording and it sounds glorious. The only recordings I've heard which sound abysmal is the occasional rap album from the 90's. Heck even Alice Cooper's Poison is enjoyable though it's clearly not a great recording.... Far from it,  rather one of the examples of a bad recording. Makes Lenny Kravitz sound well recorded in comparison.

 

If EQ and tone control does what you want then power to you. My experience though is that the elimination of as much distortion as possible and minimal colouration outside of the source makes everything much easier and more enjoyable to listen to, and allows you to hear things you never even knew existed in the recording. Enjoy it warts and all, and so long as the musical content is good it's a fantastic experience.

 

Problem is though,  this approach takes years and you really can't get the best from a system without use of a soldering iron. Likewise,  no system is ever totally uncoloured.  It can't be.  Just the interconnects and speaker cables make an enormous difference. Takes a revealing system for the differences to be obvious though  :)

Edited by MattyW
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Audio sonic purity...   Well I have been into this audio wankery now for over 30 years chasing perfection and you know - I'm over it! At times I have had lived with amps and other compo

You are not alone.   The purists make you feel bad about just wanting to hear the music at it's best in your particular situation.  If a tone control helps, then use it.  There is no single path that

Really not sure what your point is?    There is a guy on here asking for help to get the sound they want and you haven't provided any assistance at all. Just endless links and comments sayin

I love having tone controls on my system - even better, they're on the remote 👍

 

I muck with them all the time, especially if I'm jumping around between albums.

Treble too hot, dial it down a smidge.

Great bass line on a well recorded track, crank the bass to taste (eg Sara on multiple Fleetwood Mac recordings)

Some recordings have ample bass already (eg Angus and Julia Stone's Yellow Brick Road - I leave that flat).

 

Some poor recordings unfortunately just can't be listened to at high volume regardless of EQ settings - recordings by The Killers and The Strokes come to mind - I love their music, but some of their CD masters are horribly compressed...fine in the car up loud, but sound congested/strained on my main system up loud.

 

No way I could go back to not having tone controls - and having them on the remote is IMHO awesome....

...particularly the bass...which is quite different in my room between the listening couch and standing in front of the pre-amp...

 

On 17/01/2021 at 8:50 PM, stereo coffee said:

Tone controls are not needed in good audio systems as they add distortion and remove your ability to hear the music you enjoy as it was intended to be heard.

That would imply your listening room is an exact replica acoustically as where the music was mastered - which is never the case.

 

12 hours ago, virgil said:

I watched a Darko video on acoustics and the expert was saying your are listening to a larger percentage of the room rather than the speakers themselves.

^this - the room makes the biggest impact to what you hear "in room".

Going off topic a little from tone controls to EQ more generally, IMHO good integration of subs into a system requires EQ and delay capability.

 

EQ has a deservedly bad rap - poorly applied it can make a system sound terrible, and old school 31 band (or fewer) graphic equalisers are not a tool I would use.

EQ applied well IMHO is an essential tool in achieving the best "in room" sound, as is speaker/listening position placement and room treatment.

 

I use EQ and delay to integrate my sub to my mains, and in my crossovers (4 way active DEQX setup).

 

Tone controls on the remote are part of the DEQX setup - it's brilliant!

 

Tone controls rock - I love them - I wouldn't have a system that didn't have them...and preferably controlled via the remote whilst sitting back enjoying tunes :)

 

Mike

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The two Lenny Kravitz CD's I have sound OK on my system :D

 

Edit: I'm not against tone controls on other peoples systems, I just don't get a benefit in my system for my ears with what I listen to.

 

vive la difference!

Edited by muon*
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaker positioning is everything and overlooked a lot of the time. It’s also free. Does the listening position need to be higher? Lower? Further back or closer? Also free. Purchase the ‘Get Better Sound’ book and follow the speaker positioning chapter. You will be very happy at what you can achieve. Have a look at my system thread to see what I have done in the past.

Edited by Darren69
  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


Before I did anything drastic, I’d be getting a room response measured using REW so you know what you’re dealing with. https://www.roomeqwizard.com/help/help_en-GB/html/gettingstarted.html

 

This will help you understand if it is an excessive reverb in the room, a non linear frequency response etc.

 

work this out then see what your plan should be.
 

Acoustic treatment (diffusion, absorption) will make a massive difference if used judiciously and well executed (Pre and post measurement validation). 

 

there is much you can do from here in terms of dsp too: https://www.minidsp.com/applications/auto-eq-with-rew

 

but start with measuring the room and sharing some of the plots. The gang on here will have lots to share from that point onwards as to how you might tame some of that brightness.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, muon* said:

I'm not against tone controls on other peoples systems

 

That’s a very fitting turn of phrase, I’m going to reuse that :)

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't tone controls and any kind of EQ be better set to suit your room instead of adjusting for each album? So done when setting up your system.

 

Adjusting for each album sounds like it would be introducing more problems like the risk of over compensating treble/bass, therefor listening to music thats not close to what was released commercially. 

Im not ocd, but i think id go crazy if i was adjusting tone controls on every album.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Andrews_melb said:

m not ocd, but i think id go crazy if i was adjusting tone controls on every album.

 

But in the good old days,  (I think it was) World Record CLub used to have 2 dials on the back of the sleeve where you could write down the position of the controls that sounded best

 

2 hours ago, Andrews_melb said:

Wouldn't tone controls and any kind of EQ be better set to suit your room instead of adjusting for each album?

 

Why must it be one or the other?

2 hours ago, Andrews_melb said:

Adjusting for each album sounds like it would be introducing more problems like the risk of over compensating treble/bass, therefor listening to music thats not close to what was released commercially. 

 

and when you don't like it the way it was released,  you change it.  It isn't a matter of overcompensating,  as you simply put the control where you like the sound.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites


12 hours ago, Andrews_melb said:

Wouldn't tone controls and any kind of EQ be better set to suit your room instead of adjusting for each album? So done when setting up your system.

I've set global EQ based on the room, and a room curve - this is the baseline.

Tone controls are for taste - tweak as desired.

12 hours ago, Andrews_melb said:

Adjusting for each album sounds like it would be introducing more problems like the risk of over compensating treble/bass, therefor listening to music thats not close to what was released commercially.

No-one at the listening end has any clue what the listening environment was for the mastering engineer...and I don't think it matters anyway...I'm sure the artist won't care if the end listener prefers more/less bass/treble as long as they're enjoying the music.

 

13 hours ago, Andrews_melb said:

Im not ocd, but i think id go crazy if i was adjusting tone controls on every album.

I'm not OCD either - I just dial up/down the bass/treble on the remote as I want - usually setting everything back to flat on an album change, and dialing up/down from there to taste.

  • Mostly I'll leave treble flat or apply some cut to taste
  • Often I'll apply some bass boost if the recording is good and I'm in the mood for more bass slam - again to taste
  • when playing at elevated SPLs with tracks that have good/extended bass at lower listening levels I might tweak the bass down if it gets overwhelming and/or the room starts rattling and/or the amps get close to clipping and/or the neighbours start complaining (actually I'll just turn it down if neighbours complain)

Tone controls on the remote are a revelation - I couldn't go back.

 

Mike

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure there are ways of changing the tonality in (mostly) non-harmful ways.

 

I noticed on my David Hafler 101/200 that even just switching the tone controls into the signal path totally collapsed the 'image' and I ended up not using them. I never bought another amp that had them.

 

Although the multitude of 'tone controls' on the back of the SGR CX4F speakers are not set to flat.:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, GregWormald said:

I noticed on my David Hafler 101/200 that even just switching the tone controls into the signal path totally collapsed the 'image' and I ended up not using them. 

 

I noticed that when switching in DSP for room EQ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Toole says that good tone controls are blame-free and, as explained below, essential:

“For optimum stereo listening if your music tastes are as eclectic as mine, one really needs adjustable (room) acoustics and, possibly, variable-directivity loudspeakers, but we know that won’t happen. We also need old-fashioned bass and treble tone controls to compensate for the unfortunate spectral balances in some recordings created by poor judgment (perhaps) and poor monitor loudspeakers and/or “room EQ” (probably) in control rooms and home studios.  Figure 2.4 in my book shows the enormous variations in bass response in numerous recording control rooms employing essentially the same loudspeakers. Recordings coming from these facilities cannot have the same spectral balance. So, as much as we might like to think that getting the playback system optimized may guarantee satisfaction, it is simply not possible. .... Consequently, recordings are variable and it is left to the ingenuity of consumers to make adjustments, or to their tolerance to put up with the variations.”  Ref: What Do Listeners Prefer for Small Room Acoustics?, Dr F Toole, 2016

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Grant Slack said:

Toole says that good tone controls are blame-free and, as explained below, essential:

“For optimum stereo listening if your music tastes are as eclectic as mine, one really needs adjustable (room) acoustics and, possibly, variable-directivity loudspeakers, but we know that won’t happen. We also need old-fashioned bass and treble tone controls to compensate for the unfortunate spectral balances in some recordings created by poor judgment (perhaps) and poor monitor loudspeakers and/or “room EQ” (probably) in control rooms and home studios.  Figure 2.4 in my book shows the enormous variations in bass response in numerous recording control rooms employing essentially the same loudspeakers. Recordings coming from these facilities cannot have the same spectral balance. So, as much as we might like to think that getting the playback system optimized may guarantee satisfaction, it is simply not possible. .... Consequently, recordings are variable and it is left to the ingenuity of consumers to make adjustments, or to their tolerance to put up with the variations.”  Ref: What Do Listeners Prefer for Small Room Acoustics?, Dr F Toole, 2016

 

 

Eventually the tonecontrolophobia stricken brethren will be dragged (kicking and screaming perhaps)  back into the fold.   😝

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, aussievintage said:

Tone control pics... good idea


note accuphase doesn’t just have tone controls.  It also has the ultimate evil that we have not discussed yet.  The dreaded “loudness” option - or compensation in Accuphase speak.  I have engaged both the tone and comp here for the photo to enrage the the audio puritans.

 

527CF124-4573-41B4-B993-D28A8C43E033.thumb.jpeg.1ea0813179ce148510402419b7767285.jpeg
 

D7A34BA6-767B-45F7-9B51-AA30A941845C.thumb.jpeg.fadd84a9f24fc69d8f7f490f7f34b1ec.jpeg

 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


18 minutes ago, metal beat said:

nothing wrong with tone controls  - either use them when you want to or have them out of the circuit.

 

vJyf7SS.jpg

 

 

That’s interesting:  normally you turn clockwise to increase and anti-clockwise to reduce.  First time I have seen it reversed.  Are you allowed to do this?  Surly this is wrong and should be stamped out 🤣

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Steam said:

t also has the ultimate evil that we have not discussed yet.  The dreaded “loudness” option - or compensation in Accuphase speak.

 

Well let's mention it then.  The basic circuit was just the same as a tone control - but working from a tap on the volume control so that the level of boost changes with volume.      Far from an ultimate evil, it is a very good idea.  The purist amplifiers do nothing to compensate for this very real "feature" of the human listening system.   

 

I suspect they just turn it up louder instead.  However, there is real pleasure to be had on a quiet morning or evening, listening to some quiet music that is balanced to sound correctly.

5 minutes ago, Steam said:

That’s interesting:  normally you turn clockwise to increase and anti-clockwise to reduce.  First time I have seen it reversed.  Are you allowed to do this?  Surly this is wrong and should be stamped out 🤣

 

But they appear to work just they way you want them too.  I presume the knob is linked to the internal dial and they turn together.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Steam said:

That’s interesting:  normally you turn clockwise to increase and anti-clockwise to reduce.  First time I have seen it reversed.  Are you allowed to do this?  Surly this is wrong and should be stamped out 🤣

 

that is correct - nothing different here :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you have heard, and have a system with audio purity,  you tend to do everything possible not to add distortion via tone controls to it.

 

I think what we are seeing in this thread, are many who are yet to reach that point, and not knowing enough about how to get there.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stereo coffee said:

When you have heard, and have a system with audio purity,  you tend to do everything possible not to add distortion via tone controls to it.

 

I think what we are seeing in this thread, are many who are yet to reach that point, and not knowing enough about how to get there.

 

Audio sonic purity...

 

Well I have been into this audio wankery now for over 30 years chasing perfection and you know - I'm over it!

At times I have had lived with amps and other components in my music room that retail for over $100K each.  Audiophile recordings sounded pretty spectacular.   Yeah - so what....

 

More important is playing the music that I love, with the tonal qualities that I love, with gusto or be it a pensive air, at the volumes I feel like at the time, either rocking the neighbours or just way way down low.

 

Just like the OP in this thread, the SQ of a lot of the recordings of my favourite music is s***, absolute rubbish.

But I loved the music in my car and on my boom box when I was growing up - and they all cost peanuts.  I've spent way more $$$$ than I care to admit over the years and have finally realised that I have been going backwards with my musical enjoyment.

 

Another option for tone controls, is a "tone shift/tilt".  I think it was Luxman that did it many years back and from memory our very own Earle Weston had it on his earlier preamps.  That might be a better compromise and a great option to build into a new pre.

 

For me now - the music is far more important that the gear.  I might be developing into an old fart!

Edited by Red MacKay
spelling
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Red MacKay said:

I might be developing into an old fart!

New member!

 

Fresh meat!

 

Welcome to The Old Farts Club :D  ;)

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Red MacKay said:

 

Audio sonic purity...

 

Well I have been into this audio wankery now for over 30 years chasing perfection and you know - I'm over it!

At times I have had lived with amps and other components in my music room that retail for over $100K each.  Audiophile recordings sounded pretty spectacular.   Yeah - so what....

 

More important is playing the music that I love, with the tonal qualities that I love, with gusto or be it a pensive air, at the volumes I feel like at the time, either rocking the neighbours or just way way down low.

 

Just like the OP in this thread, the SQ of a lot of the recordings of my favourite music is s***, absolute rubbish.

But I loved the music in my car and on my boom box when I was growing up - and they all cost peanuts.  I've spent way more $$$$ than I care to admit over the years and have finally realised that I have been going backwards with my musical enjoyment.

 

Another option for tone controls, is a "tone shift/tilt".  I think it was Luxman that did it many years back and from memory our very own Earle Weston had it on his earlier preamps.  That might be a better compromise and a great compromise to be able to build into a new pre.

 

For me now - the music is far more important that the gear.  I might be developing into an old fart!

Glad you are enjoying , what you have found to be best for you. Perfection though is not too hard to achieve,  and requires much less expenditure. with the result of SQ in most recordings being the opposite also strangely beginning with s  , not needing asterisk at all - in this case spectacular

 

It begins with

1. Coming to terms with your source component,  having the best possible audio and not adding or subtracting from that toward the power amp, (  the one exception being where companding is used  )  By all means find what is the best source component.  A deeper knowledge will be of great help  and your discoveries can be much shorter locating the better components where certain better circuit types are used.  a study of cables should find the properties of coax being both low in cost and beneficial vs other cables.  

 

2. Secondly you need to match the source RMS output level of the source component,  to be similar to the RMS sensitivity of your power amp as many $$$ can be wasted    where needless mismatches occur. A good figure to head to is power amps having 500mv RMS sensitivity  for full output.  As example the famous manufacturer Quad, getting this right for now 54 years

 

3. Always use a passive attenuator  as a study of electronics finds only resistance has properties of best maintaining audio signal purity ,

    using where possible contact-less attenuation.    https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/359931-100-wrong-purpose.html

   Contact less methods presently include magnetic, light dependent resistors and field effect transistors  

 

4. Learn some DIY skills and ask questions about every aspect of audio reproduction. Find a friendly forum like this one,  and share some of the skills you acquire along the way.

 

5 Listen to as many loudspeaker types you can , as you may find certain dispersion characteristics better than others.

 

6. Use a power amp with minimal or very low harmonic distortion having correct sensitivity and power output sufficient for your needs.

 

You may note I have not advocated integrated amps , which is not to say they cannot improve, presently they harbor too many compromises mainly between the input sockets and power amp input,  some containing this thread's devices.  You can see all the unnecessary circuitry by viewing schematic diagrams at  Hifi engine  https://www.hifiengine.com/

 

Following that,  and this is the fun part , explore as much music as you can. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with the Judicious use of tone controls.....even with the most acclaimed front end and/or speakers...

I like it so much  I run 2 integrates as my phono pre's power supply has 3 outputs so i make use of them...

 

IMG_2751.thumb.jpg.2b38ccb70fcf4b61def1d193ddc7292b.jpg  

 

All good fun...as it should be..

 

Tase

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tasebass said:

Nothing wrong with the Judicious use of tone controls.....even with the most acclaimed front end and/or speakers...

 

 

Gosh, just look at all the knobs and buttons on those vintage Rotels! 👍x

 

After foolishly sticking with Musical Fidelity class-A for decades I made a huge upgrade to a semi-vintage Rotel amp last year.

 

It is rather barren in the knob department, though, and that’s just the way I like it :D

 

 

 

IMG_0489.thumb.jpeg.ab56c6e63405e401f21c2d5a93e6d903.jpeg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Steffen said:

 

Gosh, just look at all the knobs and buttons on those vintage Rotels! 👍x

 

 

Rotel RC-5000 Stereo Control Amplifier Manual | HiFi Engine

The Daddy of the Range from back then....Knob's Button's Sliders...a fiddlers delight.......love to lay my hands on one....

 

( Did someone say graphic equalizer?   :tongue: )

 

Tase

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and the grand daddy of them all Cello Palette.   as a pre amp or an equaliser.

 

2020-03-0515.41_1799x1349_84543491-20f8-4057-b2d5-46bf73b5fb33_1771x717.jpg?v=1584136849

 

1.-Cello-Audio-Palette-EQ-Front.jpg?v=1597947453

Edited by metal beat
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Classic rock recordings (Stones, Velvet, Stooges, Hendrix, etc.) or "modern" alternative rock recordings (R.E.M., Replacements, Husker Du, Jesus and Mary Chain, etc.) was very poor and anti hi-fi/hi-end. If you want listen to it and enjoy it, you need an integrated amp or a preamp with tone control! When you listen that kind of music with clear and ultra-detailed units, without tone control, is impossible to turn up the volume! Your ears and your brain hurt😂. I listen the same album matching my Luxman L550 with the Krell Kav 300i of a friend of mine. The Krell (no tone control integrated amp) get an endless power, as a pro amp, but without warm/musical sound, so i listen always at low volume. With the Luxman the power is less, however enough to bring down the house, but the sound is musical, warm, magic...... heavenly! Tone control forever (imho).

Best

Pietro from Italy

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pietro73 said:

Classic rock recordings (Stones, Velvet, Stooges, Hendrix, etc.) or "modern" alternative rock recordings (R.E.M., Replacements, Husker Du, Jesus and Mary Chain, etc.) was very poor and anti hi-fi/hi-end. If you want listen to it and enjoy it, you need an integrated amp or a preamp with tone control! When you listen that kind of music with clear and ultra-detailed units, without tone control, is impossible to turn up the volume! Your ears and your brain hurt😂. I listen the same album matching my Luxman L550 with the Krell Kav 300i of a friend of mine. The Krell (no tone control integrated amp) get an endless power, as a pro amp, but without warm/musical sound, so i listen always at low volume. With the Luxman the power is less, however enough to bring down the house, but the sound is musical, warm, magic...... heavenly! Tone control forever (imho).

Best

Pietro from Italy

 

Hi Pietro

Some of us find the exact opposite, that such recordings reproduce so well, it is a total pleasure to listen to how they were actually recorded,  without adding distortion to the sound with tone controls.   But glad you are enjoying your music,  as you wish to.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, stereo coffee said:

But glad you are enjoying your music,  as you wish to.

I'm glad you are enjoing your listening way to. However, tone control, when done fine as on the top electronics by Luxman, Macintosh, Accuphase, not adds distortion but only color (more/less bass, more/less treble, etc.), just like cables or acoustic treatment do. Anyway the real pure sound is a "chimera", an impossible dream. A different position of the listener, furnitures, more or less carpets, and, mostly, our convinctions and "cognitive distortion" (for example, a lot of money we have spent for our "sonic toys"), create what for us is a perfect sound and for other a wrong sound. Important thing is: enjoying the music we love!🎸

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pietro73 said:

I'm glad you are enjoing your listening way to. However, tone control, when done fine as on the top electronics by Luxman, Macintosh, Accuphase, not adds distortion but only color (more/less bass, more/less treble, etc.), just like cables or acoustic treatment do. Anyway the real pure sound is a "chimera", an impossible dream. A different position of the listener, furnitures, more or less carpets, and, mostly, our convinctions and "cognitive distortion" (for example, a lot of money we have spent for our "sonic toys"), create what for us is a perfect sound and for other a wrong sound. Important thing is: enjoying the music we love!🎸

 

Hi Pietro

We have quite different viewpoints about how to get there , but at the same time share a common goal which is music.

 

Your comments invite reply, as they are invitational to a further heightening of position where mediocrity is accepted, and compromise is commonplace.  Each position is very appealing to large scale manufacturers as they can seemingly do less, and in the process distance themselves progressively further and further from actual human perception of hearing. 

 

We, representing broadly who are audiophiles, those interested in audio reproduction and equipment pertaining,  should be doing everything so compromise & mediocity is never entertained, when we choose one product vs another. 

 

Of those manufactucturers you mention,  Accuphase appear to have made some design effort with early designs, seen in the extended bandwidth some of their products offer to 400khz. If we pause for a moment, why do not all of their products offer extended bandwidth,  and why only build one or two products with this feature?  

 

We can find,  if we look,  that extended bandwidth is necessary in equipment as researched here by James Boyk  http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm

 

and commented separately by David Blackmer   http://enjoythemusic.com/magazine/manufacture/0114/the_world_beyond_20khz.htm

 

What you will likely find if it is of interest rather  is the introduction of digital in 1983, suggested to some,  thinking not what was truly possible, but more so,  financial return,   that the restriction of the Nyquist sampling theorem and mandate by Sony and Philips to have the CD format the size it ended up being, was enough to arrange the format to be restricted in bandwidth.    We can see Accuphase wrongly following this same thinking, by having subsequent products with 20-20khz bandwidth.

 

 

 

What is possible, when we begin designing without compromise is truly incredible. 

 

As I have previously commented applies

On 23/01/2021 at 4:40 PM, stereo coffee said:

When you have heard, and have a system with audio purity,  you tend to do everything possible not to add distortion via tone controls to it.

 

I think what we are seeing in this thread, are many who are yet to reach that point, and not knowing enough about how to get there.

 

Screenshot from 2021-01-28 11-55-48.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stereo coffee said:

We can find,  if we look,  that extended bandwidth is necessary in equipment as researched here by James Boyk  http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm

Author's Notes, May 4, 2000 
At the request of people involved in standards-setting for audio, who wanted this information made available as soon as possible, I published this original paper here, rather than in a professional journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stereo coffee said:

We can see Accuphase wrongly following this same thinking, by having subsequent products with 20-20khz bandwidth.

 

 

Instead, they should have followed up with a 51-band EQ, going from 2Hz to 200kHz.

:D

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was struggling to remember the term, but now I have it.  In Sci-Fi, they call this an alternate reality,  when someone clearly is experiencing a different world and history to that with which we are familiar.  :)  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys,

 

I am not sure how we got from tone controls to ultrasonic hearing, but IMHO it is a bit of a leap from “many musical instruments have sonic output beyond 20 kHz” (which hardly needed to be said: almost everyone would agree), to “we need it in our Hifi’ s because we can hear it”. Poor misunderstood Oohashi himself said that he is quite certain that we cannot hear above 20 kHz, even though he conducted experiments that led him to hypothesise a psycho-physiological effect, which, by the way, was never meant to be interpreted as musical appreciation or music sounding better or more realistic. Which also, by the way, has proven elusive to replicate at all, or demonstrated with anything other than gamelan music.

 

A simple test for anyone who has concluded that recording and playback above 20 kHz is beneficial: connect a super tweeter to an amp that you know extends above 25 kHz and play a 25 kHz sine wave through it. Unless something in your room or headphones or signal generator resonates sub-harmonically, you will not hear a thing. Turn it up. Satisfy yourself. (In fact, as a pre-test, do the above with ordinary audio at 20 kHz. If you are having massive trouble there, you can forget the rest.) P.S. you need a friend to ‘blindly’ adjust the loudness for you, or you very likely will think you are hearing it.

 

cheers

Grant

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sir sanders zingmore said:

Author's Notes, May 4, 2000 
At the request of people involved in standards-setting for audio, who wanted this information made available as soon as possible, I published this original paper here, rather than in a professional journal.

Likely he was busy, but at least his paper, is available.  Why not try instead to appreciate James contribution to the audio industry, for instance here:    http://www.its.caltech.edu/~musiclab/feedback-paper-acrobat.pdf

 

Here is quote from Designing with field Effect Transistors Siliconix Inc, it carries good reason why narrow band amplifiers should be rejected.

 

" The bandwidth of an amplifier contributes to its faithfulness in reproduction as well as to its dynamic range. The bandwidth must be sufficiently broad to accept the total signal, yet not so wide that spurious and johnson noise mask the weaker signals.

 

A narrowband amplifier will amplify only a narrow spectrum of signals. If the passband is less than the signal spectrum, the fidelity will be impaired because the output signal will reach only a fraction of its peak value. As the passband is widened, the signals are reproduced more faithfully until the output reaches its peak value.

 

A good yardstick is to look at other sources beyond CD players. a denon 103 cartridge carries frequency to 40khz , a Studer A807 is ruler flat to 23khz. , no wonder these source and recording devices are so admired.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, stereo coffee said:

Likely he was busy

🤣🤣

He had 11 years for crying out loud!

 

Can you post the link to where he's published it in a professional journal?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Marc locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...