If neutral = accurate then sign me up.
Showing 36 responses by mapman
Geoff how about worrying about everything you have no control over. Like the Sun for example. It keeps us warm but is going to explode and kill us all some day. Or maybe apply your genius and offer up some solutions to the problem. That should be really entertaining! Are you trying to make us all neurotic? It may be working. I already have to resist the urge to buy useless crap from time to time. If I get the urge to buy Machina Dynamica, well then good job, mission accomplished! Mopman out. |
Cool Geoff. Glad to hear all is not lost. Do you think the engineers actually designing and building this stuff might be able to do it as well? Some, like the really good ones maybe even better? How about the successful end users setting this stuff up? Are they imagining that things are actually going quite well? If not maybe you can lend yourself out for hire. |
Back to the topic of neutrality, I agree shooting for neutrality is a good thing. Lab measurements are a useful tool. Lower noise and distortion is always better. How one connects to the music emotionally and why is a very subjective thing. Neutrality may or may not be part of that. Regarding my own voyage along these lines, I feel I have achieved a good place in regards to neutrality and low noise and distortion with greatly diminishing returns for pushing any more forward there. I am interested in other approaches now and comparing. Ones that are more purely "subjective" in terms of being able to connect to the music. I have a pair of decent efficiency speakers (Triangle Titus) that I would love to try of a low power and not necessarily expensive tube integrated amp. Something along the lines of GLOW Amp 1, Jolida FX10, or maybe Decware. I’ll be replacing rotted surrounds on an old pair of Boston A40 speakers soon. I may try these as a stand in for the Triangles in order to free the Triangles up for a new system to experiment with. I have a large nicely finished but acoustically lively living room dining room area with no sound in it currently, and I’m thinking a small setup like this for more casual listening would work well. |
Geoff I think you are a control freak and exhibit symptoms of narcissism. Some megalomania perhaps to. It seems to affect your reading comprehension and ability to comprehend or accept anything anyone else says. Its all about you it seems. It might still be treatable. Try some humility or at least maybe thanking people when they correct you or try to help. Does not have to be me. And don't give up on the thought of maybe developing a conscience. Yes you might find it interesting. Just my constructive feedback based on observation. Not a personal attack. |
Al, my understanding is that perceived brightness has to do with the fact that our ears do not have flat frequency response and are more sensitive to some frequencies than others, and that some forms of harmonic distortion tend to attenuate those frequencies that we hear best and are more sensitive to. So the lack of "neutrality" of our ears are as much a factor as that which comes out of the transducer. Here is a link to the chart I’ve referenced many times (and I have framed and hanging in my listening room, a nice audiophile work of art and science) that shows at what frequency music things occur and the corresponding sensitivity of the human ear: http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm So for example if the system is perfectly flat or "neutral" what we hear is not. We will hear more of the frequencies that our ears are more sensitive to than the others which might be considered a natural colorization that we all share to some extent. How each individual reacts to that in terms of musical enjoyment, fatigue, etc. may in fact vary widely, which would account for why there is little agreement on what sounds "best". The studies Ralph cites on how humans hear may be consistent with the idea that the frequencies that our ears are most sensitive to are the most important ones in regards to listening pleasure and minimizing "fatigue" in general. But it does not mean that what is most "neutral" or flat" coming out the speaker will necessarily sound the best to many. |
Al I agree with all your points. I want my recorded music to convince me it's live, warts and all. So I want it to be neutral and accurate. If it sounds any way all the time, even smooth and relaxing, that is not a good thing to me. Its not good either if the sound is continuously irritating and chases me out of the room. Its OK if some recordings are and come out that way. I know all is well when I hear a lot of variety and want to just keep on listening rather than wanting to turn it off. Only in recent years have I achieved that. |
Geof by your logic then photons are how a NEwton's Cradle works too. They never taught us that in physics class! You should write a book! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_cradle Electrons and teh signal in the wires do seem to work just like a Newton's Cradle. Geoff your logic is fine. Problem is it is based on missing facts. Logic is pretty useless based on missing or incorrect facts. Write your book and fill us all in. Or save time and just publish a link to the proper reference. Or if you really don't know don't act like you do. |
" I doubt anyone can claim their stuff is neutral." I can claim anything I want. Doesn't make it true. How about we meet in the middle and just say some things are more neutral than others? Then we can all move on. i will go back to plowing my fields with the mules and working on that Nobel prize someday though I fear time is running out for me :^) |
Roger that all sounds fine and good. You nicely summarized the differences between live sound waves and the waves that result in devices that conduct electricity used to reproduce live events. So all designers tackle the same problem in different ways. Are you doing something different or unique? Would love to know. Is the result more "neutral" than the others? |
Sheesh are things really so dire? My stuff sounds great. Maybe on the bleeding edge..... One thing never changes....worry about the things that matter that you can control, not those that do not as much and you can’t. Obsessive compulsive audiophiles are fine. Someone has to worry about the outstanding details in a lab environment before something is ready for mass consumption. Its just not me though. I spend my time listening and enjoying the music whenever I can. I’m an east coaster and usually try to get to Capital Audiofest each summer. Always some nice finds there. |
No doubt you can only reproduce what’s in the recording most all of which are flawed in some way, even the good live recordings which are the only ones relevant for comparing a live event to what you hear off a recording. I find once your system is performing well, the recording is essentially always the biggest bottleneck by far in regards to sound quality or "like live". You can’t reproduce what’s not there to start with. In a lab experiment like Atmasphere’s with ultimate care in recording and playback, only then is one in a position to be talking about anything approaching zero distortion or perfection. With the best live recordings I know of like teh best from Mercury Living Presence, Dorian or Mapleshade most good systems should sound like being there. Even my somewhat modest rigs do. I’m sure if I was at teh live performance recorded, with same perspective as the mikes, which alone is not likely, I might notice some differences. But why should that matter? They are ALL recordings. Flawed and/or limited representations of real life. Some might be like a high res photo and some like abstract Picassos, some even just a total disaster like DT might say. What matters is the illusion of a live recording. That happens with most any decent recording in a good setup, even if produced in a studio. |
One can assume a very generic definition of neutral in regards to sound and say that if it generally sounds like the real thing its neutral whereas if not it has some unique aspect to the sound, FBOFW. Vanilla ice cream versus other flavors essentially. More people like vanilla but some like other flavors. Most people recognize vanilla. Not much more to it practically than this I think. Neutral is generally the norm. Still some variation possible and still be judged "neutral". Anything else is more an acquired taste. Different strokes.... So its a very generic term that is useful but not sufficient alone for people like audiophiles that must obsess on details of everything. |
Its interesting that phase inversion tricks often result in most "holographic" recordings. There have been various gadgets over the years that add this in some form. I had a Omnisonic Imaging device many years ago, also a pre-amp with Carver sonic holography, and a yamaha dsp with various effects. Al these gadgets worked to various extents when used properly and things set up right. But when the basics are working and set up right, no such trickery is needed, unless one seeks something more extreme than natural. Some people want that. Some don’t. I want natural not unnatural. The recordings are what they are (we have no control over how made) so ignorance can be bliss there. |
Atmasphere do you know if the MLP label recordings were "inverted"? I've never heard anything about that. My understanding is they have the "holographic imaging" the best ones do because they were miked very simply for that (2 or 3 mikes for natural stereo live recordings). Did they know of and play phasing tricks in the production? How about more modern champs like Mapleshade or Dorian? |