Are there real audio differences and, if so, how do I find them?

[esldude]

I suppose I will be echoing Mayhem's ideas. I came to them somewhat differently. Don't know speaker design like he does though I have built a few for or with friends. One of the designs a company wanted to buy from us.

 

Once I had many years experience as a regular audiophile and a being a fellow who wants to know how and why things work I started to use room correction. That pretty much drove home to me what I think mayhem is getting on about. Speakers and the room they are in make so much difference, and other gear if you choose sensibly has gotten so good, the front end differences even when they exist are overwhelmed by the backend. Or to look at it another way, differences in front end components would be overwhelmed by taking the speakers you have in your room and moving them 1 foot. How can you hope to reach any valid conclusions about the front end in strange rooms with strange speakers you have not lived with awhile?

 

It is also my experience that one of the primary factors determining what you hear is the old boring frequency response if you can ascertain it. Small differences here or there can sound like something much more and much different. In stereo, interactions between that and speaker directivity can make dramatic imaging differences. Yet they mostly are wrinkles in FR. With some experience of this, you can read reviews by some, look at the equipments overall response and get a fair handle on why it had a recessed midrange, or painted an airy 3D picture though lacking solidity, or etc. etc. in the flowery language of reviewing. Often they are doing no more than describing the effects of frequency response and directivity of the speaker/room combo. But frequency response is boring, not mystical, not thought to lift veils, move one closer to the music and other wonderful sounding stuff.

 

There was one exception. The old Cello pre-amp equalizers. A high quality high end analog equalizer. It got rave reviews and even got reviewers to say often much of what they discussed was down to tonal balance. Yet each review had to apologize or explain how normally EQ was heretical to high end thinking. This in the years before digital EQ was available.

[PeterSt]

Although I would completely agree that choice of speakers is the most important determinant of overall system sound, I find it really interesting that on a "Computer Audiophile" site, virtually no one has commented on how they go about choosing the digital and digital to analog equipment they have decided to own.

 

All right, true life story :

 

Let me first discard my audio life before things really started to happen. Still it could be important to see that when I was at the age of 25 (really over 15 years into it by then) I bought myself a pair of Infinity Renaissance 90's just because I heard them in a shop and had good confidence in the sales man, who later became a friend.

What a mistake that was ! Not the friend, but the fact that I started out with the speaker. It took me a full year to find amplifiers for it which were neutral enough in order to not emphasize what we over here would call "American sound" (think the more bombastic sound). Btw, back then.

Take notice that audio shops crowd the streets over here, so to speak. So that wasn't the reason it took so long.

 

Fine.

Say that 10 years ago I really got the hang of it, and by nature this was the sequence of happening. Now mind that sequence :

 

Starting with the idea that CD Players (I had a transport plus D/A converter) could be improved upon, I started to write playback software. The story of why not use Foobar etc. is longer, but it is about the sequence of matters.

That the software ended up in a commercial product is unrelated.

 

Next up was creating my own D/A converter; Logically this followed from the software and its purpose : improve SQ in a very indirect fashion (though bit perfect). A D/A converter would apply more directly what I did in software.

That the D/A converter ended up in a commercial product is unrelated (and I am not kidding).

 

*Because* I was working on the accuracy of everything as an explicit target (but think speed as the representative of that), I decided to replace the still present Infinity's with Horn Speakers.

Not long thereafter I decided to replace the amps as well but to be honest this was about the heat and consumption (700W and always on). That traject again took me a year, because of now wanting cold amps; not so easy when all what smells like Class D (which includes T) doesn't cut it.

Later I would learn that this was a temporary solution (of 5-6 years) because it could be outbettered;

 

Later : With the over and over improvement of not only software but also the D/A converter, the speaker became the weak link in my view, and now a speaker was designed. This time the commercial aim of that was explicit because too expensive otherwise. Fully active and such, DSP where allowed, passive filtering where not.

 

 

What you see in this is that starting with the speaker turned out not to be the best choice, while starting with digital in the end was - while I ended up with the speaker as the last in the chain now.

Can be coincidence and be about my personal situation only, but since in the end this was without exception all in-house development with the notice that DIY is a 1000 times more easy (while it actually started out as DIY), to myself this must make some sense, looking back at it all. You can well say that this thread made me think of it for the first time. And, writing this last sentence, I now see I forgot something :

 

All of my audio life I have been telling myself that cabling would be the very last thing to focus on. "First have all other right". And that too really happened so, because if we look at me being really ready with all only since ~ May 2014, finally in September 2014 I started to think about interlinks. True, because someone in the Phasure forum came up with some idea. And what came from that ? an interlink we sell. And sure not to earn the few $$ over it. The enthusiasm of customers is still at 100% (no rejection so far) and that justifies the selling.

What I am saying : again there is nature in the sequence.

 

Next step (don't laugh) : my own USB cable. Yes, the last resort of misery. After quite some research tomorrow the parts for it will arrive. Can I do it ? chance seems like Russian Roulette. Whether this will succeed is not important for the story; that I only attempt it now and after the interlinks, is.

 

All 'n all a personal story, in the end not related to anything "commercial" which latter just happened after the fact in all cases, apart from the speaker.

Peter

[Jabs1542]

I also like that you are suggesting that there may be different choices depending on whether you are trying to optimize, redbook, hi-res PCM or DSD inputs and that they may not be a single solution that does all three "best." On the surround vs 2-channel, I would, for purposes of this thread limit it to really good 2-channel. Thanks

 

While we are at it you might want to consider the music you listen to. Example, I have a friend with a pair of Klipsch La Scalas. These speakers are known for being extremely efficient at the sake of low frequency (they are thin in the bass department). However his main choice of music is female vocal (i.e Norah Jones) so the speakers work out great for him and his tube amp. Personally I like a wide range of music including a full orchestra, so his speakers would be a non-starter for me. I have another friend that likes grunge (square wave electrical guitar), he clearly doesn't need to spend insane amounts of money for pristine resolution.

 

Most of us probably like a wide range of music, but if preferences happen to be narrowed down you can save a lot of money.

[sdolezalek]

All right, true life story :

 

1. I bought myself a pair of Infinity Renaissance 90's ...What a mistake that was... the fact that I started out with the speaker.

2. It took me a full year[/b] to find amplifiers for it which were neutral enough

3. Starting with the idea that CD Players (I had a transport plus D/A converter) could be improved upon, I started to write playback software.

4. Next up was creating my own D/A converter;

5. I decided to replace the still present Infinity's with Horn Speakers.

6. I decided to replace the amps as well but to be honest this was about the heat and consumption

7. With the over and over improvement of not only software but also the D/A converter, the speaker became the weak link

8. now a speaker was designed...fully active and such, DSP where allowed, passive filtering where not.

9. All of my audio life I have been telling myself that cabling would be the very last thing to focus on.

10. Finally in September 2014 I started to think about interlinks.

11. Next step (don't laugh) : my own USB cable. Yes, the last resort of misery.

Peter

 

Peter: First, thank you, this is exactly the kind of post I was hoping for because it tells a huge amount about where you are coming from when you post elsewhere (it puts it all in context). Second, it reinforces the notion that being an audiophile is a lifetime journey of pain and pleasure... :-)

 

Please excuse my attempt to summarize your post, but I think the sequence is really interesting and for those who might not take the time to read your full post I thought a summary would get much of the story across.

[Rexp]

Hi, my 2cents:

1. No, go to live acoustic concerts, establish a reference, then recreate the experience at home.

2. No as per the above.

3. No, specs are not the be all and end all.

4. Yes don't.

5. Absolutely! system synergy is paramount.

6. You can only determine if a particular upgrade is worth it, there is no linear correlation between SQ and the cost of a piece of HiFi.

 

I would recommend you visit a high end dealer (I used to be one) that has both digital and vinyl systems of same value as yours. Ask them to play a piece of music you know well. Compare the vinyl with the digital version. Go home and play the same piece. If the dealers system sounds better use that as basis to rebuild your system.

 

 

 

QUOTE=sdolezalek;395426]If I can't reliably perform my own DBT, and I can't rely on my own listening tests or long term memory for telling differences, and I can't rely on audio reviewers, and I can't just rely on specifications, THEN HOW IN THE WORLD AM I SUPPOSED TO CHOOSE WHAT TO BUY?

 

Please no, arguments about what works or doesn't. I'm just really curious what the most avid posters here actually use to make your own purchase decisions. AND PLEASE DON'T COMMENT ON ANYONE ELSE'S ADVICE, JUST POST YOUR OWN.

 

I'll start:

 

First, I do read audio reviews to assemble my list of possible equipment choices;

Second, I do listen to what the most experienced people here (and elsewhere) say they like;

Third, I do try to find something in the specifications that support the differences others claim to be hearing;

Fourth, I don't buy anything that I cannot convince myself I'm hearing a difference in;

Fifth, I pay attention to good and bad synergies between equipment choices, as no piece of equipment stands by itself; and

Sixth, I try to associate the percentage of improvement to the percentage of price increase; to justify some sense of value