Lies about vinyl vs digital

[fas42]

12 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Then stop posting about your "not the best" which is nothing to begin with because you talk theory only.

 

 

Anyone ever tell you that you are a rather explosive person to deal with, Peter ... ?

 

My "not the best" has certain, key attributes - "invisible" speakers no matter where you listen from is one of them. If people think that achieving this over decades, on quite an array of cheap audio stuff, is "nothing" then they're welcome to go back to playing with their expensive 'toys'.

 

The theory is immensely important, because unless you understand what's going on you're just emptying rounds and rounds of gun ammunition into deep darkness, in the vain hope that you might hit something worth talking about ...

[fas42]

BTW, I hadn't chased this down before - but it is the paper that everyone refers to, "the bible" ... http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=4865.

 

To cut to the chase, they tested 12 commercial subwoofers - and not a single one was 'capable'.

[STC]

5 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Hi STC - I hope this is something for an answer: because this is how crossover design is doing a job. Hard to explain other than matching two slopes nicely folding into each other.

 

I work with no overlap whatsoever, except for the roll off of both xovers which next add up to a flat line of -0dB (if all has been done right). Mind you, this one was a very steep roll off of -48dB.

I understand what you mean and I even understand the motivation, but my idea is just the "not blending" and therefore also the steeper roll of. Now I must say that the 48dB is a bit too much of it (unnecessary ringing) but this was a special situation.

 

What I see happening with horns is that it is difficult as it is to have the "one horn" right, with in addition the virtual impossibility of measuring both horns (say bass and mid) for the xover area. This is because they are too directional to measure them close by (and measuring at a distance is a no-go anyway). So basically you measure and tune (slope) (e.g.) the bass, measure the mid, and check that for consistency (matching). Never touch anything when the both are shown (do output) at the same time - only check.

 

This is of the commercial speaker (both slopes roll off at 24dB):

 

 

It's a bit difficult to pick a measurement with sense for this post (I have hundreds of them), but this one at least was about "XOver checking" (see texts below). So the red line is the net output. Blue is bass, green is mid. Looking at the red line you can hardly imagine that this is the net result of both, but there's also cancellation in order of the part to the right of the XOver point. So even the remaining output (of the blue line) does its job, which is similar to your "1 octave" but with a completely different way of working (the woofer used here is 6000Hz capable).

 

This is 1/12th smoothing, so not tooo much faking.

 

 

     

 

 

 

Thank you for a very detailed explanation. Our approach is similar except your's is more accurate and I set them based on preference by deliberately cut-off the low frequency about one octave with a 24dB slope.   Mine is not ruler flat response anyway (it used to be but I opted to set based on listening preference). I have a good 10dB or so bump below 80 or 90Hz. The level continuously adjusted to taste. during playback if necessary.

 

As you mentioned, it is hard to know what you are supposed to measure? Try measuring your left speaker at you your listening position (centre of head) and measure again  with the microphone at your left ear and another one measurement at your right ear. Try again by moving your head 3,5,10 cm forward and backward......Btw, this point you would give up. Too many variables.

 

 

We have so much in common and yet sometimes don't see eye to eye.  

 

 

[STC]

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

To cut to the chase, they tested 12 commercial subwoofers - and not a single one was 'capable'.

 

You have always avoided answering the question raised about your setup. Why would even want bring in about this paper since your objective is not to have the best? Ok, have you read this paper? If so please list the 12 subwoofers' make.

[fas42]

ST, you have a bizarre way of arguing your 'case' ... the latest kerfuffle arose because I said in a post that

 

Quote

False levels of frequencies that were never in the recording space, Bob. The lower the bass note, the greater the harmonic distortion, is the rule - so it may often happen that the 2nd or 3rd harmonics of some subterranean note in the recording is what you really hear - it's audible bass that has been invented by the distortion factory of the bass driver.

 

That paper has a lot to say about this behaviour - and I "avoid the issue" by not worrying about subwoofers ... simples.

 

The sense of powerful, driving bass is easily achieved by a decent midrange/bass unit - I find, for example, most rigs do an awful job with solid, pipe organ recordings; they're not in the race ...

 

The paper is behind a paywall - if someone wants to dump $33 for a 3 or 4 page report, go for it. People who have read the report confirm, in various posts, that all 12, unidentified in the report, units didn't meet the necessary standard.

[STC]

28 minutes ago, fas42 said:

The paper is behind a paywall - if someone wants to dump $33 for a 3 or 4 page report, go for it. People who have read the report confirm, in various posts, that all 12, unidentified in the report, units didn't meet the necessary standard.

 

Ok. At least show me the reference to those who have read the papers. You are misquoting the purpose and conclusion drawn in the paper. BTW, what speakers and subwoofers you are using? 

[fas42]

As a starting point, this is a pretty good breakdown - https://www.stereophile.com/features/189subs/index.html.

 

Current speakers are as you said recently, Sharp units from a boombox. The drivers are good quality; the cabinet is quite flimsy, and needs to be beefed up at some point to get the best from the drivers. They would go down to about 60 Hz, in the way most of such boxes go; no subwoofer.

 

Examples of the sound they produce are on my YouTube channel; not peak quality, because the rig has never hit the mark, so far.

[STC]

17 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Current speakers are as you said recently, Sharp units from a boombox. The drivers are good quality; the cabinet is quite flimsy, and needs to be beefed up at some point to get the best from the drivers. They would go down to about 60 Hz, in the way most of such boxes go; no subwoofer.

 

Like these? These are mine. 

 

 

 

It can go to 60Hz?  

 

Just for fun, I have used these against Harbeth S5HL, NCA Labs, ProAc, Dynaudio, Mission, Kingsound ( just for the HF comparison), my current SoundLabs,  Adam, JBL, ProSonus,  Genelec and Cliff design, MBQuart and many more consumer audio speakers. 

 

I know their limits. 

[fas42]

Nowhere near as sexy - from this, https://www.ecoustics.com/products/sharp-cd-dh790nh-mini-stereo-system/.

 

 

The front covers have been peeled off - zero visual class, I'm afraid.

[STC]

4 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Nowhere near as sexy - from this, https://www.ecoustics.com/products/sharp-cd-dh790nh-mini-stereo-system/.

 

 

The front covers have been peeled off - zero visual class, I'm afraid.

 

Even for this you have to get a picture from the internet instead of your own.  I wonder why? 

[fas42]

Two reasons: how the rig is set up is a complete mess, I have zero interest in aesthetics - I would have to spend ages making it look presentable, which I'm not interested in doing; and secondly, I have a strong aversion to taking photos, of anything. I would be lucky to take more than a couple of photos of anything that I'm involved in over a full year - activities like capturing visual memories just does not compute for me.

[fas42]

Of interest, a particular Nascar ...

 

What gets the job done,

 

http://www.gunnarracing.com/Misc/hudson build/hud18.jpg

 

 

What turns on the racing spectators,

 

http://www.gunnarracing.com/Misc/hudson build/hud70.jpg

 

 

So, what impresses the audio crowd more?

 

 

[Rexp]

I was thinking boxing rather than racing, no one can lay a glove on you, keep up the good work! 

[fas42]

Yes ... and, note from this, https://www.ecoustics.com/products/sharp-cd-dh790nh-mini-stereo-system/, that the speakers have to handle 100W RMS. Considering the sort of abuse that typical purchasers will attermpt to inflict on it, it appears that the manufacturer has made sure that the drivers can take this sort of power with ease - a couple of early listening exercises have given signs that levels of over 110dB SPL peak in a normal room should be quite easy.

[STC]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

Of interest, a particular Nascar ...

 

What gets the job done,

 

http://www.gunnarracing.com/Misc/hudson build/hud18.jpg

 

 

What turns on the racing spectators,

 

http://www.gunnarracing.com/Misc/hudson build/hud70.jpg

 

 

So, what impresses the audio crowd more?

 

 

 

 I can imagine what you could have done to those speakers. 

 

30 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Yes ... and, note from this, https://www.ecoustics.com/products/sharp-cd-dh790nh-mini-stereo-system/, that the speakers have to handle 100W RMS. Considering the sort of abuse that typical purchasers will attermpt to inflict on it, it appears that the manufacturer has made sure that the drivers can take this sort of power with ease - a couple of early listening exercises have given signs that levels of over 110dB SPL peak in a normal room should be quite easy.

 

Don’t believe everything you read. It will never reach 110dB and even at 100W the distortion is at 10%. Let me guess, you do not have the manual. 

 

Frank, you are not frank about your intention with your posts. Most of the stuff that you write are often taken out from other reviews. Your often quoted sound listening from a window was taken out from Linkwitz site. 

 

One thing you are really good at is to keep attracting reponses and not losing your composure no matter how abusive others were towards you. I respect you for that. 

 

And finally, if you are using this as some form of anger management experiment than you have to do better. 

[PeterSt]

1 hour ago, STC said:

if you are using this as some form of anger management experiment than you have to do better. 

 

I have been thinking along those lines.

[fas42]

1 hour ago, STC said:

Don’t believe everything you read. It will never reach 110dB and even at 100W the distortion is at 10%. Let me guess, you do not have the manual. 

 

Yes, I'm sure if I fed a 60Hz sine wave at 100W into the unit the distortion would probably be of that order. But that would occur extremely rarely, so I'm not too fussed about it. At the frequencies that really matter, subjective performance is good. I did some experiments at one stage, on some computer monitor speakers, using frequencies slightly displaced from the harmonics of the fundamental of interest, and listened for the intensity of the beating effect, from the acoustic mixing - a way of getting a handle on the actual distortion level. Apart from that, feeding in bass frequencies with a ramping of amplitude, up and down on repeat, is very informative ...

 

Bought from new, so I do have the manual - for what little it tells me about speaker performance.

 

Quote

 

Frank, you are not frank about your intention with your posts. Most of the stuff that you write are often taken out from other reviews. Your often quoted sound listening from a window was taken out from Linkwitz site. 

 

One thing you are really good at is to keep attracting reponses and not losing your composure no matter how abusive others were towards you. I respect you for that. 

 

And finally, if you are using this as some form of anger management experiment than you have to do better. 

 

Strange, I pick up ideas from other people, and see whether they're worthwhile in the context of what I do - guess I will have to totally invent, from scatch, my methods from now on ...

 

Ahh, I've learned not to provoke Peter the Terrible - my life is not worth the hideous onslaught, .

[STC]

56 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

I have been thinking along those lines.

 

He just confirmed it. 

[Axial]

 

[The_K-Man]

6 hours ago, Axial said:

 

 

Recording to tape the tape has a natural compression the hotter levels you press to it.  This lends some of the warmth some describe when recoring to analog tape.

[theophile]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xr9Oubxw1gA

[John Dyson]

On 2/17/2019 at 11:08 PM, The_K-Man said:

 

Recording to tape the tape has a natural compression the hotter levels you press to it.  This lends some of the warmth some describe when recoring to analog tape.

A significant component of that warmth is IMD (intermodulation distortion.)  IMD can either sound 'harsh' or 'mellow' depending on certain mathematical attributes.  Tape compression tends to have the 'mellow' attribute.    The tape compression tends not to be too awful until the IMD starts becoming more apparent as a kind of distortion (e.g. birdies are an extreme case.)

Analog tape requires some expertise to use to its maximum quality -- recording at a moderately high level to end  up well above the noise, but not so hot as to cause significant distortion that sounds like distortion :-).  It isn't a really difficult problem unless using tape professionally and trying to get the absolute maximum quality when dealing with multiple generations. 

 

Using tape at speeds of 15ips and 30ips help to allow using hotter signal levels, get above the hiss, and if possible -- try to avoid noise reduction systems.  30ips has other troubles, but if you really, really want to avoid NR -- then 30ips will be your best bet.   Every NR that I know something about (I'll be learning a LOT more about C4 soon -- so I don't know much about that) produces significant distortion or has problems with transients.

 

[The_K-Man]

14 hours ago, John Dyson said:

A significant component of that warmth is IMD (intermodulation distortion.)  IMD can either sound 'harsh' or 'mellow' depending on certain mathematical attributes.  Tape compression tends to have the 'mellow' attribute.    The tape compression tends not to be too awful until the IMD starts becoming more apparent as a kind of distortion (e.g. birdies are an extreme case.)

Analog tape requires some expertise to use to its maximum quality -- recording at a moderately high level to end  up well above the noise, but not so hot as to cause significant distortion that sounds like distortion :-).  It isn't a really difficult problem unless using tape professionally and trying to get the absolute maximum quality when dealing with multiple generations. 

 

Using tape at speeds of 15ips and 30ips help to allow using hotter signal levels, get above the hiss, and if possible -- try to avoid noise reduction systems.  30ips has other troubles, but if you really, really want to avoid NR -- then 30ips will be your best bet.   Every NR that I know something about (I'll be learning a LOT more about C4 soon -- so I don't know much about that) produces significant distortion or has problems with transients.

 

 

As opposed to digital, which is linear at recording levels right up to full scale.  At full scale digital doesn't 'bend', as you described so well above - rather, it snaps - with rather nasty results.

 

That linearity of performance of digital is why compression is often applied in mastering, also tape emulator plug-ins that recreate the effect of tape being pushed to its max during recording.

[Axial]

I like warm smoothness in my after hours music listening sessions. It soothes me. 

[Ralf11]

me too - that's why I carefully inject IM distortion