Ever wondered why music sounds so different on headphones compared to loudspeakers?

[VenturaRV]

Fallacious argument, equating a $200k physical device with an electronic device which, if it actually costs $200k, has technology beyond NSA and CIA.

I'm affraid you misunderstand the term "physical". An electronic device is a "physical" device, too. When you say "physical" you must say "electromechanic" (in the way you use the term, it sounds like "metaphisical", sorry).

A top end digital system (that is "electromechanic" too) consist in an universal lecture unit, an universal (up to DXD and 6*DSD) converter, a top streamer and a separate ultraprecission master clock unit, all of them engineered and constructed with the highest exigence. This is real costly stuff.

 

Enviado desde mi LG-E430 mediante Tapatalk

[Ralph Glasgal]

A detailed article about the subject has just been published here:

How to make headphones stereo compatible

Basically, earphones of any type, interfere with the direction finding abilities of the pinna and the brain detects this deviation from normal hearing by sensing internalization and unrealism in general. If you hiss or hum and bring one finger or both fingers up into your ear you can hear this effect. The Dirac product can be better than nothing but is not a real solution. The stereo loudspeaker triangle also has pinna localization cue distortion problems. The Greek researcher Christos Tsakostas has made available his neat demonstration of these effects for both earphones and loudspeakers. Go to http://www.cloud.aria3d.com and hear Pink Floyd, Mozart, Gravity, etc. in a new way. All you need is a working browser and PC speakers and or earphones. The speaker effect is better of course. Also some good technical articles here.

 

With a Smyth Realizer, and 4 speakers using crosstalk cancellation processing, you can have full surround, externalization, and good response with any type of earphones, but this is not supported by Smyth and so you would have to be get extra hardware and be an expert to manage the process. As far as I know nobody has tried this. Ralph Glasgal, Home Page

[Priaptor]

Although I can happily listen to music on headphones, I have never enjoyed the experience much and for me it is no substitute for listening with speakers. With speakers I feel like I am listening to music, a performance or whatever. With headphones, with any recording, it feels artificial, I simply have this sensation that the music is in my head, this limits my enjoyment, I just don't like it much!

 

 

Is it just me?

 

To make that kind of blanket statement it is obvious that you never listened to a a really good headphone system. I too believed in the mantra you are preaching but it is flat out wrong.

[jabbr]

I can understand the kinetic energy from a needle running in a groove, but the mag tape has no such thing. It's easy to see what Dudley is getting at, but the hair-splitting here is beyond absurd.

 

No hair splitting. All the devices -- vinyl , tape, digital at some point produce current -- current is current -- only the magnitudes that form the waveform are different -- are you suggesting otherwise?

 

Of course the stylus creates current from kinetic force, and of course the tape head creates current from moving magnetic flux and of course the DAC creates current from digital voltages -- they all convert *something else* to current

[mansr]

No hair splitting. All the devices -- vinyl , tape, digital at some point produce current -- current is current -- only the magnitudes that form the waveform are different -- are you suggesting otherwise?

 

Of course the stylus creates current from kinetic force, and of course the tape head creates current from moving magnetic flux and of course the DAC creates current from digital voltages -- they all convert *something else* to current

 

The DAC is different from tape and vinyl in that it doesn't involve magnets.

[jabbr]

The DAC is different from tape and vinyl in that it doesn't involve magnets.

 

They are all different in some way -- my point is that they all produce current. The sound is a function of the produced current NOT the source.

[VenturaRV]

A detailed article about the subject has just been published here:

How to make headphones stereo compatible

Basically, earphones of any type, interfere with the direction finding abilities of the pinna and the brain detects this deviation from normal hearing by sensing internalization and unrealism in general. If you hiss or hum and bring one finger or both fingers up into your ear you can hear this effect. The Dirac product can be better than nothing but is not a real solution. The stereo loudspeaker triangle also has pinna localization cue distortion problems. The Greek researcher Christos Tsakostas has made available his neat demonstration of these effects for both earphones and loudspeakers. Go to http://www.cloud.aria3d.com and hear Pink Floyd, Mozart, Gravity, etc. in a new way. All you need is a working browser and PC speakers and or earphones. The speaker effect is better of course. Also some good technical articles here.

 

With a Smyth Realizer, and 4 speakers using crosstalk cancellation processing, you can have full surround, externalization, and good response with any type of earphones, but this is not supported by Smyth and so you would have to be get extra hardware and be an expert to manage the process. As far as I know nobody has tried this. Ralph Glasgal, Home Page

 

What I've seen in the graphics published in Dirac's page is extremely similar to what I have always known as a Bauer cross-feed equalization. I don't think there are something new under the Sun in this.

Anyway, I'm intrigued with the URL you mention. So, I'll start to investigate.

Thanks.

 

Sent from my LG-E430 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[mansr]

They are all different in some way -- my point is that they all produce current. The sound is a function of the produced current NOT the source.

 

The point I've been trying to make is that tape and vinyl are not nearly as different as suggested. Both use magnetic induction to convert motion of the medium to electrical signals.

[flak]

 

What I've seen in the graphics published in Dirac's page is extremely similar to what I have always known as a Bauer cross-feed equalization. I don't think there are something new under the Sun in this.

Anyway, I'm intrigued with the URL you mention. So, I'll start to investigate.

Thanks.

 

Sent from my LG-E430 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

 

Yes, nothing new on the facts underlying the use of cross-feed... what's new, but not available in the market yet, is Dirac’s version of cross-feed that implements a patent pending method which includes the time-difference cues without giving comb filtering.

 

Flavio

[dalethorn]

I'm affraid you misunderstand the term "physical". An electronic device is a "physical" device, too. When you say "physical" you must say "electromechanic" (in the way you use the term, it sounds like "metaphisical", sorry).

A top end digital system (that is "electromechanic" too) consist in an universal lecture unit, an universal (up to DXD and 6*DSD) converter, a top streamer and a separate ultraprecission master clock unit, all of them engineered and constructed with the highest exigence. This is real costly stuff. Enviado desde mi LG-E430 mediante Tapatalk

 

No, you misunderstood. The actual claim wasn't mine, it was Dudley's.

[dalethorn]

The point I've been trying to make is that tape and vinyl are not nearly as different as suggested. Both use magnetic induction to convert motion of the medium to electrical signals.

 

The tape process requires that the tape head gets charged from the player, then it reads the tape and sends the signal back into the player.

 

In the phonograph, the stylus generates the signal and sends to to the "player", i.e. to the preamp. This is a one-way process from the stylus to the amp, whereas tape is a 2-way where first the head has to be charged to read the tape. The stylus does not need to be charged to read the grooves.

 

That's what Dudley said, and he's exactly right.

[dalethorn]

No hair splitting. All the devices -- vinyl , tape, digital at some point produce current -- current is current -- only the magnitudes that form the waveform are different -- are you suggesting otherwise? Of course the stylus creates current from kinetic force, and of course the tape head creates current from moving magnetic flux and of course the DAC creates current from digital voltages -- they all convert *something else* to current

 

As I already said, the tape player requires the head to be electrically charged to read the tape. The stylus doesn't need to be charged. It reads the grooves kinetically, physically, not magnetically. It generates its own current.

[dalethorn]

I'm affraid you misunderstand the term "physical". An electronic device is a "physical" device, too. When you say "physical" you must say "electromechanic" (in the way you use the term, it sounds like "metaphisical", sorry).

A top end digital system (that is "electromechanic" too) consist in an universal lecture unit, an universal (up to DXD and 6*DSD) converter, a top streamer and a separate ultraprecission master clock unit, all of them engineered and constructed with the highest exigence. This is real costly stuff. Enviado desde mi LG-E430 mediante Tapatalk

 

So what you're claiming is that the electromechanical turntable that costs $200k needs another $200k of electronics 'stuff' to sound as good as your hypothetical digital server.

[semente]

So what you're claiming is that the electromechanical turntable that costs $200k needs another $200k of electronics 'stuff' to sound as good as your hypothetical digital server.

"Sound as good" is subjective, I think we should use "perform as well" instead.

[mansr]

As I already said, the tape player requires the head to be electrically charged to read the tape. The stylus doesn't need to be charged. It reads the grooves kinetically, physically, not magnetically. It generates its own current.

 

Can you point to a description of this "charging" you suppose exists? A schematic of an actual tape player with the "charging" circuit indicated will suffice.

[dalethorn]

"Sound as good" is subjective, I think we should use "perform as well" instead.

 

$200k turntables are created to perform physical real-world things like perfect balance, rotation speed, isolation, etc. Your discussion of $200k electronics is some kind of troll post that has nothing to do with why $200k turntables are built in the first place. The turntable tracks the record, and the electronics (preamp, amp etc.) take over from there.

[dalethorn]

Can you point to a description of this "charging" you suppose exists? A schematic of an actual tape player with the "charging" circuit indicated will suffice.

 

Let's try again, since I think you've been trying to steer this off topic. Here's Dudley's statement: "Considered against literally every music-playback medium ever conceived and created, the analog disc is the only one that generates its own electrical signal. Every other medium in existence—even analog tape—depends on an external power supply to create a source signal."

 

OK - the tape player requires an external power supply to create a source signal. The analog disc does not. Dudley said it, and I'm absolutely sure it's true. Go back and read all the nonsense posted here, and make your final argument. Don't leave anything out. I will take your answer to Atkinson and/or Dudley and have them comment on it.

[VenturaRV]

So what you're claiming is that the electromechanical turntable that costs $200k needs another $200k of electronics 'stuff' to sound as good as your hypothetical digital server.

Of course I'm not saying such thing.

I've said EXACTLY what you must have read. Any other words come from your own mind.

 

Enviado desde mi LG-E430 mediante Tapatalk

[VenturaRV]

No, you misunderstood. The actual claim wasn't mine, it was Dudley's.

Worse for him.

 

Enviado desde mi LG-E430 mediante Tapatalk

[mansr]

Let's try again, since I think you've been trying to steer this off topic. Here's Dudley's statement: "Considered against literally every music-playback medium ever conceived and created, the analog disc is the only one that generates its own electrical signal. Every other medium in existence—even analog tape—depends on an external power supply to create a source signal."

 

OK - the tape player requires an external power supply to create a source signal. The analog disc does not. Dudley said it, and I'm absolutely sure it's true. Go back and read all the nonsense posted here, and make your final argument. Don't leave anything out. I will take your answer to Atkinson and/or Dudley and have them comment on it.

 

Are you seriously saying a turntable doesn't require power to operate?

[dalethorn]

Of course I'm not saying such thing.

I've said EXACTLY what you must have read. Any other words come from your own mind.

Enviado desde mi LG-E430 mediante Tapatalk

 

Your post:

"A top end digital system (that is "electromechanic" too) consist in an universal lecture unit, an universal (up to DXD and 6*DSD) converter, a top streamer and a separate ultraprecission master clock unit, all of them engineered and constructed with the highest exigence. This is real costly stuff."

 

A "top end" digital system has nothing to do with why a turntable costs $200k. To "perform as well" as a $200k turntable, a digital system need cost no more than $5k.

[VenturaRV]

Your post:

"A top end digital system (that is "electromechanic" too) consist in an universal lecture unit, an universal (up to DXD and 6*DSD) converter, a top streamer and a separate ultraprecission master clock unit, all of them engineered and constructed with the highest exigence. This is real costly stuff."

 

A "top end" digital system has nothing to do with why a turntable costs $200k. To "perform as well" as a $200k turntable, a digital system need cost no more than $5k.

OK. If you're happy thinking that way, I don't want to be the one to come for spoiling your fun.

 

Enviado desde mi LG-E430 mediante Tapatalk

[dalethorn]

Are you seriously saying a turntable doesn't require power to operate?

 

It could be operated by hand. Whether that's relevant or not, Dudley knows. Apparently you do not, and you keep asking the wrong person. I tell you what Dudley (a real expert) says, and you say it's not true. But you apparently don't even understand what Dudley said, 2-1/2 years ago. Your level of concern over these many posts, hammering on the same thing and getting nowhere, doesn't look very smart. Maybe instead of arguing ad nauseam, you could send Dudley an email. I will do that myself, when I have a specific challenge from you that I can forward to him.

[dalethorn]

OK. If you're happy thinking that way, I don't want to be the one to come for spoiling your fun. Enviado desde mi LG-E430 mediante Tapatalk

 

Are you trolling, or is your response intended to convey useful information here? Take your time, no hurry.

[4est]

The tape need only be recorded once, and then it plays back like phono. The tape head itself does not require electricity- magnetized particles create current or current creates magnetism.

The tape process requires that the tape head gets charged from the player, then it reads the tape and sends the signal back into the player.

 

In the phonograph, the stylus generates the signal and sends to to the "player", i.e. to the preamp. This is a one-way process from the stylus to the amp, whereas tape is a 2-way where first the head has to be charged to read the tape. The stylus does not need to be charged to read the grooves.

 

That's what Dudley said, and he's exactly right.