This is a great discussion about the factors that go into good sound from a technical perspective.
Speaker/amp matching is perhaps the most important fundamental to get right first to achieve best results IMHO. Every system must have an amp and speakers and other things might help compensate but cannot replace a good amp/speaker match.
I am in the camp that says the happy path is to get the fundamentals right from a technical perspective first and tweak from there. Nothing is more fundamental than making sure the amp is up to the task of GETTING THE MOST out of the speakers. |
ALso, shame on the high end audio industry for not making it easier for buyers to get the most out of these products. It would not be hard to come up with a quantitative system for the benefit of buyers to identify quality of amp/speaker matches. But the reality is its up to the buyer to be educated enough to make these decisions. Good luck! I suppose such a system would take a lot of the mystique out of high end audio, for better or for worse. I guess if it were beneficial to the vendors to do something like that, they would. |
One of the most interesting recent developments in audio to me is that newer high efficiency amplifiers at affordable price points now offer an alternative to easier to drive higher efficiency speakers, which is a popular current high end paradigm for optimizing performance.
Full range, quality high efficiency speakers tend to be big and expensive.
NEwer high efficiency amplifier technology is capable of taking a lot of the technical guesswork out of the equation and driving most ANY speaker well. PLus they are small and affordable!
Watch out! There's a new and very talented kid on the block!
Of course, a good technical match alone does not assure that a listener will like what they hear, but it does provide a solid foundation to work with from there. |
" Full range, quality high efficiency speakers tend to be big and expensive.
I think you have blame the laws of physics for that!!! "
WHo better to blame without a dispute? :^)
Of course, Atmasphere's claim that negative feedback always makes an amp not sound like music as always is highly debatable, though he certainly backs up what he says with his products by not using NF.
The consensus answer to the NF issue seems to be that the results are a function of how it is done, with global feedback being more problematic than local.
My observation from listening and reading on teh topic is that good Class D switching amps seem to have a good NF implementation that makes it a non issue in terms of sounding "like music" or more like a good tube amp. Of course, what music really "sounds like" is highly subjective anyhow, so arguing about it is probably a moot point. Each experienced audiophile knows what does or does not sound like music or not to them.
I think Atmasphere and I do agree though from past discussions that one of the best indicators that things are working well is when turning the volume up sounds good and the high volume does not call attention to itself and is best indicated mainly by its volume relative to other sounds, like people talking, etc., and a bad NF implementation would seem to work against that goal. |
HEy, look, if it weren't for fretting over how well every technical detail of one's system is working in theory compared to others, what else would one do? Listen to music and find out, maybe? |
"I've picked some LP dogs that are so bad, the neighborhood dogs howl. And I don't think that's because of NF or impedance peaks or negative phase angles. Some recorded music just stinks."
No doubt.
Personally in my audio "journey" I have been in places in the past on occasion where few recordings seemed worth listening to. Nowadays, no two sound the same, and some are still barely listenable but the vast majority sound good enough for me to enjoy, especially if one takes pleasure in the variety of sounds a recording might deliver rather than futilely attempting to make them all sound similarly good.
FWIW, I use an ARC tube pre-amp and a Bel Canto Class D amp. There is a lot to be sid about pairing a tube pre-amp with a good Class D amp, if a tube amp is not what the speakers ordered.
So my conclusion is that the devil is in the details and the details are what will swing you one way or the other, for better or for worse.
As the great scholar and musician Frank Zappa once said, "you are what you is". Very true when it comes to recordings. |
"If that happens with less than 105 db, then its an indication that the system has some sort of odd ordered harmonic generation associated with its operation. A sound pressure level meter might be handy to sort out the actual volume level."
Maybe, but levels louder than 80-85 db (much lower) are often cited as the limits of safe listening without causing damage to ones hearing.
Even if you can go 105db, it may not be such a great idea to do so.
Maybe our hearing works a certain way with certain sensitivities for a reason?
I wonder what happens if one listens to nicely produced music, say a big band with lots of brass and high frequency energy live at 105DB? Is it as comfortable as listening to the no NF tube amp at the same level? Its a fair question, I think.
ANyway, its nice to know if one can go to 105db cleanly in any case. That's a pretty good indicator that you have the headroom needed for good results at more moderate volumes, where excessive loudness should not be an issue. |
I suppose everybody thinks their way is best, when in fact there always turns out to be many ways to skin the cat, including the means to superior sound quality, though personal preferences always determines what happens in the end.
Economics, convenience and ease of use are real factors for most along with superior sound. So that largely determines what is best.
Each paradigm has advantages and drawbacks. Which matters most will determine the winners.
Regarding sound quality alone, I would guess power paradigm has advantage of lower risk of bad sound up front for many, while results with voltage will be more variable case by case. However voltage scales to larger applications more cost effectively these days I would think.
Again, the game changer on the scene of late are high performance, high efficiency switching amps, that take a lot of cost and risk out of the equation for voltage amp applications. In lieu of these, I personally would be more inclined to go the current/tube amp path I think. I had strongly considered it during last major upgrade phase but decided to give Class D amps a try first, and am glad I did. |
More challenging impedance loads would seem to go hand in hand with getting a more full range sound out of a smaller speaker design that will fit in well to most user's living/listening space.
For less full range applications especially in smaller rooms, there would appear to be more viable/affordable options in well designed higher impedance speakers.
However, the trend over time for most things is to become smaller and more efficient and also usually more cost effective and usable accordingly. The old paradigms have their strengths, but do not hold up well from an overall end user perspective these days. Too big, too expensive, and more maintenance required to keep things running well over time. But they can and often do sound really good. As do a lot of voltage based systems that leverage modern technology.
Its not valid to base decisions today on technology from 40 years ago. It is a different story now. THough I do love nostalgia including tubes and even Victrolas and have the Victorian styled home to potentially put these things in to prove it, the game continues to change, so one has to keep an eye on the ball! |
Bifwynne,
What you relate sounds fine and does not surprise me. Whatever the details, paying attention to impedance matching between components pays off. Its a fundamental thing to get right, sometimes harder than others.
I just do not buy into the assertion that power paradigm and no negative feedback is the only way to make music sound real. It is based on sound theory perhaps, but in practice is not consistent with what I have heard in both cases over the years.
Cheers! |
Ralph,
Yes I know and you are very consistent in communicating the principles you design from and execute accordingly with your products, which I have heard sound pretty darn good.
But as I said its not the theory I have problem with, but the fact is that what I hear otherwise does not support it, and I do not think I am alone.
Its not that your way is a not a good way, I accept that it is, but the proposition that it is the only way or even the best way these days in all cases is debated. |
"I would have loved to see some valid discussion from the other side."
I think there has been some of that. ANy specific questions or subtopics of interest?
"I agree and wish other builders/designers would express their beliefs and ideas."
There is a lot of such discussion on the various A'gon threads, but Ralph is perhaps one of the more persistent contributors.
Plus Ralph's paradigm (based around avoidance of use of NF as the best means to avoid those nasty odd order harmonics + the rest seems to stem from that), FBOFW, is more unique and "radical" and a huge minority relative to the norm these days, so I think he has more work to do to gain mind share overall accordingly. He does a fine job though and I admire his tenacity in delivering on his vision!
|
...plus I must add that I share the feeling expressed by many others that I do learn things of value from Ralph's posts and I thank him for that as well. |
Atmasphere,
For the record, I never said you made this stuff up.
I would say you are its most vocal champion these days, at least in these parts.
Just making an observation. You offer a way that works and these days at least is different than most. Plus you are willing to spend time talking about it and educating others in the process. Kudos to you for all that!
On of the pivot points of the argument would seem to revolve around how how well a good local NF implementation implementation in a SS amp these days can work in comparison. That is something I have seen discussed here as well by some who are quite knowledgeable about NF and SS amp design, but I would like to learn more.
Meanwhile, I have to trust my ears, which largely thanks to you are tuning in more and more these days for those nasty odd harmonic side effects of NF. My ears tell me that use of NF these days does not necessarily have to be the road to audiophile hell, as perhaps it can be and has been perhaps in the past.
ISn't there a threshold below which all kinds of distortions become insignificant? Pick your distortion, all amps have them. The goal is to make them as unoffensive as possible.
Odd order harmonics from NF might be quite nasty relative to others as suggested, but that does not mean there is no way to get the negative effects into a range that is not significant, at least for most. No amp is perfect, I think we would agree on that?
But I am not convinced distortions from NF is such a pox on good sound necessarily these days as perhaps it was in the past. Seems like a curable disease to me, but I have no data to support that, only a gut feel from what I read and hear, only what my ears are telling tell me after years of listening.
Time will tell. WHat technologies will dominate 20 years from now I wonder? How will they sound compared to today?
|
