Jump to content
IGNORED

Fas42’s Stereo ‘Magic’


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, One and a half said:

I see what you describe as equipotential bonding. There are bonding straps that cater for higher frequencies and normal wires for LF that create a neutral voltage between the chassis of components. This can be measured with a decent DMM to confirm. 

The chassis frequency needs to be known to select the correct braid and then wire. 

 

The aim is to create a lower impedance path for unwanted currents to flow across the bonds, rather than the signal leads, I understand this very well, see the practice nearly everyday on industrial equipment. The difficulty is that consumer audio has hardly any bonding points (Lumin comes to mind that does) and adding them later is a challenge to keep the original finish intact for possible resale.

 

No current goes to ground, a small correction there, since the impedance of the ground is high to small but annoying noise, the noise travels back to the source; that’s how currents work regardless of frequency.

Thanks for the excellent explanation. In my system I use 5 separate chassis amplifiers,preamp, electronic crossover,cd transport,tube DAC. The star ground scheme is about 30 pounds of 00 stranded copper cable. I needed that kind of parallel circuit to achieve a interference or noise free system.

Link to comment
12 hours ago, MrD said:

or noise free system.

 

Hi MrD,

 

What does it mean "a noise free system" ?

 

Regards,

Peter

 

 

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
37 minutes ago, MrD said:

The audio signal is near 100 pct free of corruption.

 

Bbbbut ... that does not make sense ?

So I am sorry - but what is "100 pct free of corruption" now means ?

I am not playing word games, but merely try to point out that by such qualifications we again go nowhere. The "Frank" thing. And you were trying to support Frank, right ? yes.gif.34db0a80c2feb08e3f8f51784feddb6a.gif

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
12 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Bbbbut ... that does not make sense ?

So I am sorry - but what is "100 pct free of corruption" now means ?

I am not playing word games, but merely try to point out that by such qualifications we again go nowhere. The "Frank" thing. And you were trying to support Frank, right ? yes.gif.34db0a80c2feb08e3f8f51784feddb6a.gif

I don't feed trolls. If you don't understand....you need to study the subject.

 

Frank, I always look at the signal path and how that can be improved upon.  For deades studio engineers always rack mounted their equipment and bonded the equipment together and tied the rack to mains ground. Now the IC that carried audio signal is tied to the chassis ground along with the internals. So in this configuration all current interference is removed to chassis ground.

in a non commercial setting the rack mounting and bonding and tying into mains ground is not generally done. Relying on the internal ground scheme and the audio signal interconnects to remove all the current leakage and interference. This method is wholly lacking because it cannot remove what is necessary. Even if one spends a fortune on cables that separate interference from signal that will never address the the leakage created that the IC cannot remove. You need to create a parallel circuit tied to chassis ground and to mains ground. Only then can the audio signal be interference free.

 

I see what you describe as equipotential bonding. There are bonding straps that cater for higher frequencies and normal wires for LF that create a neutral voltage between the chassis of components. This can be measured with a decent DMM to confirm. 

The chassis frequency needs to be known to select the correct braid and then wire. 

 

The aim is to create a lower impedance path for unwanted currents to flow across the bonds, rather than the signal leads, I understand this very well, see the practice nearly everyday on industrial equipment. The difficulty is that consumer audio has hardly any bonding points (Lumin comes to mind that does) and adding them later is a challenge to keep the original finish intact for possible resale.

 

No current goes to ground, a small correction there, since the impedance of the ground is high to small but annoying noise, the noise travels back to the source; that’s how currents work regardless of frequency.

Link to comment

Roger, PeterSt is on our side! B| ... He understands what the goal is, extremely well - but we all have taken our separate paths, and the language used by one may not resonate with the other - however, we will all agree on the perceived qualities and attributes of an audio rig that's in the "zone". Peter puts great effort into ensuring that other parts of the chain are working to a very high order, and has achieved excellent subjective results.

 

You've focused very strongly on eliminating stray, non-signal voltage potentials between cabinets of the chain, by going OTT, by some people's standards, on adding very low impedance bonds between them. The fact that the sound improved as you kept adding showed how critical getting this right was, for your particular rig. But doing such is meaningless, if, for example, the audio system is a fully integrated unit - the simpler the audio chain, the less opportunities for this type of inteference to manifest. Which is one reason I've had success with the low cost gear I play with - everything is in one box, or close to it.

 

Unfortunately, a lot of audio gear is designed with the bling factor high on the agenda - getting the technical aspects as good as they should be is well down on the agenda, and the listener 'suffers'. Only people like the Swiss seem to understand how to combine the two; and of course you pay a high price for this!

Link to comment

Which is how most people do it! :)

 

It just happened for me that cheap as chips speakers gave me the first breakthrough in SQ - so from then on I questioned how important the transducers really were. Listening to ultra ambitious speakers which weren't 'fixing' the sound sent a message loud and clear, to me; hence my perspective.

 

The dealer where I got my original CDP had the Duntech Sovereign units running in the demo room, and they didn't sway me one iota ...

 

post-106822-0-31965000-1469413933_thumb.

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Roger, PeterSt is on our side! B| ... He understands what the goal is, extremely well - but we all have taken our separate paths, and the language used by one may not resonate with the other - however, we will all agree on the perceived qualities and attributes of an audio rig that's in the "zone". Peter puts great effort into ensuring that other parts of the chain are working to a very high order, and has achieved excellent subjective results.

 

You've focused very strongly on eliminating stray, non-signal voltage potentials between cabinets of the chain, by going OTT, by some people's standards, on adding very low impedance bonds between them. The fact that the sound improved as you kept adding showed how critical getting this right was, for your particular rig. But doing such is meaningless, if, for example, the audio system is a fully integrated unit - the simpler the audio chain, the less opportunities for this type of inteference to manifest. Which is one reason I've had success with the low cost gear I play with - everything is in one box, or close to it.

 

Unfortunately, a lot of audio gear is designed with the bling factor high on the agenda - getting the technical aspects as good as they should be is well down on the agenda, and the listener 'suffers'. Only people like the Swiss seem to understand how to combine the two; and of course you pay a high price for this!

Frank bling is immaterial all electronics used in the signal path degrade the audio signal. It’s just part of passing current.

Link to comment

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, MrD said:

Frank bling is immaterial all electronics used in the signal path degrade the audio signal. It’s just part of passing current.

 

Yes, degradation is inevitable. But one can reduce the impact, subjectively, to the point that where all the good stuff that I talk about, and you and others experience, is possible. It's when the 'noise' is still audible, of less than the right level of optimising; that's when the SQ is still unsatisfying, to some degree on some recordings.

 

I've gone a particular route. Others, like yourself, have chosen to focus very strongly in certain other areas - Peter has put a huge amount of effort into media replay software. What's clear is that there is no one "right" method - there are numerous avenues which may turn out to be "good enough" ... what has to be understood is that if the SQ one's getting doesn't tick all the boxes, then that person has to consider using at least part of another approach.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, fas42 said:

But doing such is meaningless, if, for example, the audio system is a fully integrated unit - the simpler the audio chain, the less opportunities for this type of inteference to manifest.

 

So Yes MrD, in similar fashion I wanted to respond to your :

 

On 10/28/2018 at 6:50 PM, MrD said:

In my system I use 5 separate chassis amplifiers,preamp, electronic crossover,cd transport,tube DAC. The star ground scheme is about 30 pounds of 00 stranded copper cable. I needed that kind of parallel circuit to achieve a interference or noise free system.

 

but since you are so keen on the "no distortion" thing, I thought to better ask you first what this means in your book so I could check the merits of what you are saying, knowing how difficult it is with such a "complicated" setup.

 

But instead I am pictured as a troll and must study a few things. Oh well.

 

Do you, btw, already have an answer ? ;)

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment

Quite amusing seeing the proponents of "room behaviour being everything!" thrashing around, in vigorous disagreement about just about everything ... ^_^.

 

Meanwhile, back in the world where the goal is enjoyable sound, I would again emphasise that if your aim is to make sure that you have a very small pile of Good recordings, and a big pile of Everything Else - then you're lost :P. It's mighty easy to assemble a rig which will deliver that objective - but then you're stuck with that other pile of, ummm, somewhat on the the noise stuff - I don't see the point of painting oneself in a very tiny coner ...

Link to comment

I was just made aware of a very recent paper, exploring the far more complex mental behaviour involved when listening, and attempting to "decipher" what one is hearing: "Adaptive and Selective Time Averaging of Auditory
Scenes", http://mcdermottlab.mit.edu/papers/McWalter_McDermott_2018_texture_time_averaging.pdf

 

This is far more useful to fathoming how human hearing can make sense of what it's hearing, when the only clues are what's emerging from a pair of speakers - and why it's so important to get the "small stuff" right.

Link to comment

Since I'm now "tuning into" academic research, I'll also point to this, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2671031/

 

Quote

The mismatch negativity (MMN) is a brain response to violations of a rule, established by a sequence of sensory stimuli (typically in the auditory domain)

 

Quote

It is generally believed that the MMN is evoked by any violation of an acoustic regularity or pattern. Indeed, the MMN is elicited by violations of abstract rules established in a structured auditory sequence (Näätänen et al., 2001).

 

This seems to be a core mechanism stopping "stereo magic" from happening, for an individual - and hence means one needs to eliminate any anomalies in the sound that "alert" the listener.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

Just came across another "method" -

 

Never heard of the Grandinote brand before - it's using the McIntosh output transformer idea, in a, Gasp!!, 60W amplifier ... yep, that's all you need, if the watts are done right ...

 

A review of another of their products, which ticks plenty of boxes, http://highfidelity.pl/@main-770&lang=en.

 

In particular, this paragraph caught my eye: this is what is achievable - and the methods used by this manufacturer are another pathway to getting closer to the optimum presentation,

 

Quote

 

With no album I reached a moment when something sounded too hard, harsh or even slightly unpleasant. Shinai has the rare ability to present the better side of recording without warming it up and without reducing the differentiation. This is a high-end device that, thanks to several "tricks", bypasses the weaker sides of many recordings, without emphasizing the good sides. Unlike - let's go back to it for a moment - most tube amplifiers, it does not hide the “dirt”, it does not swipe them under the rug. And yet, I felt as though there were fewer of them. Perhaps, while not focusing on them, it finally discovers the real face of the recordings, not their artifacts.

 

 

Link to comment

Since this was lost to the 'Graveyard', I'll reinstate it here,

 

10 hours ago, christopher3393 said:

"If I had to do it all over again, I wouldn’t have been as excited about DSD and MQA as I was when they first appeared. The thing is, in hifi, we are always looking out for the Next Big Thing because the idea of something new that makes music sound better is exciting! The reality being rarely, if ever, is the Next Big Thing big…

 

 

BTW, the Next Big Thing should be the realisation that recording replay can take a quantum leap in subjective quality, if the various weaknesses and flaws in the setup are resolved. But judging by the reactions of nearly all in the audiophile community, to such ideas being expressed, the chances of this happening soon are close to zero ...

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Since this was lost to the 'Graveyard', I'll reinstate it here,

 

 

BTW, the Next Big Thing should be the realisation that recording replay can take a quantum leap in subjective quality, if the various weaknesses and flaws in the setup are resolved. But judging by the reactions of nearly all in the audiophile community, to such ideas being expressed, the chances of this happening soon are close to zero ...

 

The graveyard is ALIVE... with the sound of music... or hopefully will be soon!

 

Frank, a prophet is never accepted on his home turf. I can't go your way. I have to rely on my primitive brain and figure out how to make the best of it without constantly fiddling. Music is more important to me. 

 

best wishes with your Quixotic Quest. In the meantime, may you drink from the cup!

 

 

Link to comment

And something else found, "3-D Audio Using Loudspeakers", a thesis from 1997: https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/29134/38271570-MIT.pdf?sequence=2

 

A quick glance through, this is full of "old school" thinking, on what is required ... but, at the end, in the discussion section, this caught my eye:


 

Quote

 

In natural listening, the auditory system makes use of various precedence mechanisms to
suppress the distorting effects of reverberation (Rakerd and Hartmann, 1983; Hartmann,
1983, 1997; Zurek, 1987). Hartmann (1997) describes three different precedence effects,
each operating over a different time span. The "law of the first wavefront" describes the
auditory system's ability to determine the location of a sound from the initial onset; local-ization information in subsequent echoes is largely suppressed, even when the echoes are
up to 10 dB more intense than the initial sound. This precedence mechanism is principally
responsible for our ability to localize sounds in reverberant environments.


In the context of loudspeaker binaural audio, the precedence effect should in theory allow
us to localize synthetic sounds in the presence of competing listening space reverberation.
Provided the first wavefront is correctly rendered at the listener, the precedence mecha-nism should capture the proper localization information in the onset and suppress the sub-sequent reverberation, just as would happen with a real source.

 

 

My emphasis added ... and in fact the "should" turns into a "does" - when a playback system is sufficiently competent. This is when the "magic" switches on - as far as the brain is concerned, it's now, "natural listening".

Link to comment
1 hour ago, fas42 said:

My emphasis added ... and in fact the "should" turns into a "does" - when a playback system is sufficiently competent. This is when the "magic" switches on - as far as the brain is concerned, it's now, "natural listening".

 

Does or should only applicable to binaural loudspeakers audio and stereo is NOT a binaural sound reproduction. Maybe, you should read the para 2 first before reading the conclusion. 

 

The obvious and unavoidable flaw is, and I quote “It is clear that the auditory system is unable to separately identify the two sources, and assigns a best guess location to the auditory event in the presence of conflict- ing cues.”  The shortfall of stereo was discussed there. This simply falls under how the sound physically reaches our ears. The best stereo system cannot change the law of physics. The flaws mentioned there cannot be rectified by a competent system.

 

The thesis doesn't support your magic. 

 

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...