Let me end the Premp/Amplifier sound debate ...

Thanks for book recommendation and your interesting post...

The fundamental error of Julian Hirsch, and most 'Alikists' is believing there is a correlation between a static measurement and a complex dynamic process. At best there is a Venn diagram-like overlap. Another poster mentioned that no component can be evaluated 'in exclusis'. With which I agree completely. Also, I encourage people to read the book 'Cork Dork' by Bianca Bosker. Besides a fun read, there is an excellent chapter on the science behind how palates are trained to pick up subtle differences simply lost on others. The parallels to audio are striking and I think valid. No one would state that two wines of equal alcohol content taste the same. 

Priceless remarks indeed like usual...

I will only add to "tonality" what is called "timbre" ....

The micro dynamic of the tonal playing instrument timbre reveal much about the system/room interaction...

In acoustic CORRELATION between measures and subjective timbre perception is crux of the matter...

Same in electronic engineering design like say atmasphere...

Then dividing subjectivist amd objectivist camp is preposterous ....

For sure it is always measurable but not always with a material external tool only like some claim but always measurable in the sense of correlating a tool measure with the subject hearing interpretation...It becomes after that a standard in acoustic and in engineering...

If all acoustic cues are there at the minimal volume, the lowest possible before being inaudible, whitout any loss between them, the audio system is well embedded and well chosen, and synergetically matched...

Thanks to these 2 posters remarks for this important reminder....BUT

For sure the "listener envelopment factor", which is rarely mentionned in audio threads but which is a very important one, will ask though, particularly in some room size and geometry, for an optimal sound level which will not be high but not too low if you wanted it optimal,unlike the other acoustic factors like timbre and dynamic or imaging for example which will not be changed by a substantial loudness lowering....

The listener envelopment though depends not on sound optimal level "per se" but "on having strong lateral reflections arriving at the listener 80 ms or more after the direct sound "....The sound level being optimal for the room which is my point...

By the way a better ionization of the room will help for the listener envelopment factor if the audio system/room acoustic controls can give it to begin with because this factor is a bit more difficult to get it right than imaging and soundstage only, you cannot have it before having a great imaging and soundstage already, the listener envelopment will come after like an ultimate refinement of the room/listener position in using a better timing between direct and lateral reflections but also back/front reflections and in the right amount of reflections for sure...Balance between diffusion, reflection and absorption is an art of listening here....

Anyway people with the habit of listening at too high sound level have a problem (80 decibels is the LIMIT for any long listening ) , be it their ears or the system/room , or the music choices.... Sorry .... 😁😊

atmasphere

10,198 posts

03-14-2022 at 01:01pm

But I think it is about distortion and and higher order harmonics.
@atmasphere mentioned it in the thread about his new class-D amp… maybe on another forum though?

The “quiet loudness” is something I do not hear often. Mostly because I do not hear nice systems too often.
But I like it when they are that way. Seems that “quiet loudness” is correlated with it being nice sounding generally.

That is my experience as well. I’ve said this many times: the mark of a good system is it does not sound loud.

The reason a system sounds ’loud’ is distortion; from poor higher ordered harmonics from the amp, poor anti vibration control in the turntable (also poor cartridge condition or setup) or CD transport, early reflections and/or slap echoes in the room and breakups in the loudspeakers.

 

Thanks very much atmasphere for your knowledge...

I was hoping your explanation to confirm my point...

I could not explain all the details like you did...

In a word there is tube amplifiers and some S.S. which were never bright or harsh, like my Sansui AU7700 and some new technology now for the last decade...

My point is that there is now available many good different types of amplifiers... Yours for sure and some others...

It is more easy to look for one and buy it now than to solve all acoustic problems for us...

My point is acoustic is the key to optimize and put at their   peak level ANY amplifiers working PERCEIVED EXPERIENCE in a room  in a way that is astounding, not a minute upgrade...

Thanks to you for your useful post...

This has been what has kept tube amplifiers in business the last 70 years since they do offer a way around this issue (they make enough lower ordered harmonics to mask the harshness of the higher orders they also make).

But in more recent times semiconductors have advanced to the point where you can get rid of that pesky brightness/harshness for which solid state is known. IMO we’ve only just arrived near the top of the R&D sigmoid curve in audio in the last ten years or so.

Try to understand my point without repeating a common place evidence...

A bad electronic design or a corrupted source CANNOT be compensated or repaired by a room acoustic...

Who does not know that? Who? 😁😊😎

 

My point is that acoustic control method are more powerful than most upgrade

Of gear....

My second point is acoustic is the way, in most case, to transform your system and put it on another level : his true peak working optimal potential.... High quality sound experience is not the AUTOMATIC result after buying a 100,000 bucks piece of gear to replace a 50,000 one... Sorry if you dont know that... 😁😊

 

It is very easy to buy a good amplifier to begin with...Because electronical audio design is mature industry with good products available...

My point is when you have basic good gear the REAL WORK begin, and it is not upgrading to improve MORE because of your " taste" ... Sorry! If acoustic cannot improve a bad quality design, buying and plugging will not replace acoustic... 😁

It is studying acoustic et experimenting with it which is the way and the only way...And especially understanding psycho-acoustic also a bit....

Who dare to say that in audio forum? Me and very few others...

Almost all sell their "taste" in gear all over the place ignoring acoustic....

What i claim is not a common place fact like what you just say... It is a scientific fact: it is acoustic and psycho-acoustic which can explain almost all of  our audio experience...

This does not means that all amplifiers sound the same or speakers...Not at all for sure...

This means the main method to listen to the gear you already own it is putting it in an acoustically controlled room... If not, you will never know how your system can sound in optimal conditions and the difference is HUGE.. It is not an opinion here on my part, it is my experience... Not a common place fact at all because most people have no experience with acoustic anyway...Or very little because in small room passive  treatment is not always  enough to create immersive filling the room sound experience...It takes active mechanical control with Helmholtz resonators AND DIFFUSERS...

it is the reason why i insist about that...

And anyway acoustic in a dedicated room can cost peanuts , i proved it to myself...

I say all that to alert newcomers and advise them to think before throwing money...

Most people here are not bankers or billionaires able to buy and plug without even thinking... All people are not able to afford a pro acoustical dedicated room either...

It is possible to create one at very low cost...

Then i sell hope and creativity and acoustic science...

Who say better?

 

@mahgister it does not matter how well one treats a room in terms of the direct path sound.
If that sound is filled with distortions, then no amount of room treatments can work by going backwards in time to remove the distortions.

One would hear the direct path sound before any reflections arrive. Whether or not those reflections are high level or super reduced.

While the room may be important, it is not going to fix the amplifier.

 

 

There is difference between any piece of gear and any other one generally and in most cases for many reasons...It is common place experience...

Dont ask for a blind test please... 😁😊

There is also acoustic conditions which OFTEN make difference in gear minute one compared to room control...

And if you want good S.Q. buy first and to begin with some good gear....It is not so difficult because electronic audio engineering is mature technology for many DECADES... 70 years ? or 60 ? or 50 ? We must ask atmasphere for that, he knows....

But nothing will rival acoustic control and treatment to optimize and put your well chosen gear ON HIS PEAK WORKING POTENTIAL... NOTHING....

Certainly not upgrading a good piece of gear already for an alleged "better" one because of publicity by reviewers...

What we hear at the end is acoustically determined anyway ...A bad amplifier compared to a good one will not be changed by the room control in a good one for sure...but any good one will be TRANSFORMED in a miraculously good one...

All basic good design of amplifier and speakers are the starting point not the destination... Acoustic is the key....Nothing else...

i sell acoustic creativity not gear....

 

 

i concur with this post:

"If it measures good and sounds bad, –– it is bad. If it sounds good and measures bad, –– you’ve measured the wrong thing." –– Daniel R. von Recklinghausen, HHScott

The only measurement that matters is how it sounds in your system in your room with your program. Evaluation by any other method is foolish unless you are buying HiFi Jewelry or Furniture.