Jump to content
IGNORED

Fas42’s Stereo ‘Magic’


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Yes, but the wheels are not always put on the axles ... 😁.

 

Ummm, 30years ago there wasn't Internet, cordless phones, smart phones, etc - things have changed. With later setups, once all these goodies had invaded our space, I had to take measures - like our friend @dmance says, assume everything is an antenna, until proven otherwise.

 

The reinvention of the wheel symbolizes a figurative, non-literal meaning, a so-called Idiom 😉.

 

30 years ago we certainly had less noise pollution from SMPS, PCs, mobiles, LED lights, Wi-Fi gear etc.

 

To assume that everything can act like an antenna is a good starting point – let me know what you have done to minimize the antenna effect in your current stereo?

Link to comment
On 7/28/2020 at 7:35 PM, opus101 said:

 

You were talking about using a 'scope, now you've shifted to using ears. Could we please return to using instrumentation and may I have an answer on the 'scope question? Pretty please.

Well, Mr Pedantic, that type of interference usually shows itself (depending upon the amplitude, of course) as a thickened baseline trace when connected to the component’s output under the “no signal” condition. Disconnect the scope and the line goes back to the normal no signal thin trace. If your scope is a good one, you can increase the gain when connected to the component’s output ‘till you can actually see the hash as a discernible signal. Increase the time base and you can sometimes see the modulation in the RFI. Most of the time, you’ll see essentially nothing except for perhaps the component’s noise floor. 
Does that answer your question, or are you still confused?

George

Link to comment
1 minute ago, gmgraves said:

Well, Mr Pedantic, that type of interference usually shows itself (depending upon the amplitude, of course) as a thickened baseline trace when connected to the component’s output under the “no signal” condition. Disconnect the scope and the line goes back to the normal no signal thin trace.

 

Did you try not connecting the scope probe at all and only connect the grounds between the 'scope and DUT? When you connect/disconnect the grounds notice any thickening of the trace?

Link to comment
19 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Funny, I have never mentioned anything about either of those brands. I did own a bryston amplifier a long time ago. Do you own either of these "ambitious " products Frank? 

 

I know it's difficult to follow logic, David, so I'll spell it out:

 

You,

 

Quote

Of course, the better the "rig", the less it will sound like Frank's favorite ghetto blaster

 

Me: I have posted often that I came across a prime example of how rigs in raw form can deliver exceptional sound, if all the circumstances are right; a Bryston and Dynaudio combo at the last hifi show, which also delivered PA levels of SPL - it sounded exactly like my "favorite ghetto blaster", 😉.

 

As an exercise, I'll leave it to a bright boy like yourself to add the next line ...

 

As an addendum, I have been making a list of @Audiophile Neuroscience certified junk brands, because they fit the metric that they deliver SQ just like the "favorite ghetto blaster" - as a service, I can post the list, so people know whose products they can ignore, 🙂

Link to comment
19 hours ago, opus101 said:

 

Errr - Wikipedia not to be trusted on cordless phones then?

 

Inter alia, in their subsection on Frequencies :

 

43–50 MHz (Base: 43.72–46.97 MHz, Handset: 48.76–49.99 MHz, FM) Allocated in December 1983, and approved for use in mid-1984 for 10 channels. 15 additional channels allocated April 5, 1995.[6]

 

Gosh, and the next year, every household had one - except ours, unfortunately 😜 ... ahhh, those massive bricks that the trendies were flaunting; luckily, most people waited until the prices, and sizing, made more sense 🙂.

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

I know it's difficult to follow logic,

 

I hear ya Frank !

 

16 minutes ago, fas42 said:

David, so I'll spell it out:

Me: I have posted often that I came across a prime example of how rigs in raw form can deliver exceptional sound, if all the circumstances are right; a Bryston and Dynaudio combo at the last hifi show, which also delivered PA levels of SPL - it sounded exactly like my "favorite ghetto blaster", 😉.

As an exercise, I'll leave it to a bright boy like yourself to add the next line ...

 

 

I dunno how "bright" one has to be but I'm guessing Bryston and Dynaudio would not consider it a glowing endorsement that...., " it sounded exactly like my "favorite ghetto blaster", 😉."

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
15 hours ago, Summit said:

 

 

To assume that everything can act like an antenna is a good starting point – let me know what you have done to minimize the antenna effect in your current stereo?

 

The current active speakers are so far pretty impressive, in raw form - have done a couple of tests, and they seem relatively impervious to what I used to worry about. This may change as I improve the resolution of the playback quality; I'll do something about it if that time arrives.

 

The earlier stuff? Too busy sorting other areas, so I used the simple workaround of switching everything off, when I wanted to hear the setup's full potential - one could drive oneself batty trying to sort internal engineering, and the exercise of constructing a full Faraday cage for everything, I didn't want to contemplate.

 

The rules of thumb I use are: no sharp corners to anything I do, in the electrical sense; all conductors follow shallow curves going from one place to another; zero bits of leads or other metal going nowhere left attached to anything, IOW, if anything is changed, don't leave bits of wire dangling. And, anywhere cables can be twisted, or twisted together I do so, as tightly as possible - with the current speakers, the cable connecting right to left is twisted to the point where I can't twist it tighter. How important is this? I don't know ... when the system is working as well as I can reasonably get it, I might try unloosening the twist, and seeing what that tells me, 🙂.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, fas42 said:

As an addendum, I have been making a list of @Audiophile Neuroscience certified junk brands, because they fit the metric that they deliver SQ just like the "favorite ghetto blaster" - as a service, I can post the list, so people know whose products they can ignore, 🙂

 

Interesting Frank. You already started the list with two brands I have never mentioned but I guess, like the 'magic method', facts and fantasy don't always align 🙄🤷‍♂️

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Confused said:

That is a little vague.  Clearly the speakers and electronics are of a standard that most people would consider competent, at the very least.

 

So for clarity, what are the top two or three issues you have identified, and how could they be “sorted”?

 

Okay, for me the "hifi" quality of the sound just screams at me, so I feel it should be obvious to others, 😝.

 

The vocals? Terrible; extremely "boxy" sound; just one weird sort of echo chamber she's in - a caricature of a woman's singing voice. That alone kills any chance of finding pleasure in listening.

 

The treble? A disaster, no sparkle to any sound element that should project the natural bite of what the high frequencies add to the sound; there is a deadness, a flatness to the overall; individual instruments are almost unidentifiable at times, because their tonality is so 'squashed'.

 

The 'smallness'? Everything's cramped into a tiny sound space; it's as if all the musicians are squashed together in a small box; miniatures performing.

 

How to sort? Hmmm, to me it's such a mess, because cables and other bits have been added and added, one thing on top of the other, to try and fix individual aspects to the sound, that someone found issue with. So, I would start by removing everything but the bare minimum of components to get sound, unplug everything else; use the simplest, most straightforward cables to hook things together; stabilise the speakers; take great care that every cable in the area of the system was well spaced from every other - and then listen. And keep listening. I would want the simplest, and most 'hygienic' 😁 starting point I could get, and then react to what I heard then.

Link to comment
37 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Interesting Frank. You already started the list with two brands I have never mentioned but I guess, like the 'magic method', facts and fantasy don't always align 🙄🤷‍♂️

 

Still don't get it? If I liked a system which happened to use expensive gear, then following your assertion that "the better the "rig", the less it will sound like Frank's favorite ghetto blaster", that then implies that the components used in the one that sounded good to me are therefore severely substandard.

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

If I liked a system which happened to use expensive gear,

 

We hear a lot about "ambitious" rigs you don't like, perhaps you should tell us how many you have heard that you do like....

 

26 minutes ago, fas42 said:

then following your assertion that "the better the "rig", the less it will sound like Frank's favorite ghetto blaster", that then implies that the components used in the one that sounded good to me are therefore severely substandard.

 

So, let's hear all about the high-end systems you do like and prefer over your modified ghetto blaster

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
54 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

We hear a lot about "ambitious" rigs you don't like, perhaps you should tell us how many you have heard that you do like....

 

 

So, let's hear all about the high-end systems you do like and prefer over your modified ghetto blaster

 

Okay, I'll give you a little exercise ... use the Search capability of this forum, type "Bryston" into the term to look for, and "fas42" as Author - and read the posts where I describe what I heard at the time ...

Link to comment

Yes ... two of the systems at that ultra high end show a decade and a half ago, the one that you may, or may not, have gone to ... a little clue - the Len Wallis effort didn't get it right ...

 

But that misses the point. Which is, that expensive gear is not the problem - rather, it's the lack of sufficient, or knowledgeable sorting having been applied.

 

 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Yes ... two of the systems at that ultra high end show a decade and a half ago, the one that you may, or may not, have gone to ... a little clue - the Len Wallis effort didn't get it right ...

 

But that misses the point. Which is, that expensive gear is not the problem - rather, it's the lack of sufficient, or knowledgeable sorting having been applied.

 

 

So, you have liked only two high end systems and that was15 years ago, presumably Bryston based.

 

Of those two, was "sorting" needed? Were they as good or better than your modified ghetto blaster ?

 

Have you heard any high end systems since this time ?

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

BTW, the earlier clip should sound like this,

 

 

So, you have liked only two high end systems and that was15 years ago, presumably Bryston based.

 

Of those two, was "sorting" needed? Were they as good or better than your modified ghetto blaster ?

 

Have you heard any high end systems since this time ?

 

Is the Carly Simon " All the things you are" clip "sorted" and if so on whose gear are you referencing "the clip should sound like this" ?

 

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
37 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

So, you have liked only two high end systems and that was15 years ago, presumably Bryston based.

 

Of those two, was "sorting" needed? Were they as good or better than your modified ghetto blaster ?

 

Have you heard any high end systems since this time ?

 

No, there's been a good handful, and only one was Bryston based.

 

What I went on was whether the sound "fell into place" - if the only thing I was aware of was the music being played; any deficiencies or idiosyncrasies of the playback chain were not obviously audible, they didn't draw attention to themselves. If they had been deliberately "sorted" or not wasn't relevant to this. The aim is to hear the recording, not the playback chain - vastly different setups will sound identical in essential areas, whether a competent in its own right high end rig, or something I've tweaked

 

I bump into systems that do a lot better than most quite often, courtesy of the friend up the road, 😉.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

No, there's been a good handful, and only one was Bryston based.

 

What I went on was whether the sound "fell into place" - if the only thing I was aware of was the music being played; any deficiencies or idiosyncrasies of the playback chain were not obviously audible, they didn't draw attention to themselves. If they had been deliberately "sorted" or not wasn't relevant to this. The aim is to hear the recording, not the playback chain - vastly different setups will sound identical in essential areas, whether a competent in its own right high end rig, or something I've tweaked

 

I bump into systems that do a lot better than most quite often, courtesy of the friend up the road, 😉.

 

So in 15 years you have only heard a handful of competent high end systems, with or without "sorting", but all the others (elsewhere stated as 'hundreds" of ambitious rigs) did not do as good as your modified ghetto blaster or the one you "bumped into" "up the road" ?

 

...and the Carly Simon " All the things you are" clip is "sorted" but we don't know whose gear you are you referencing "the clip should sound like this" ?

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, fas42 said:

BTW, the earlier clip should sound like this,

 

 

No Frank, it should have sounded more like this, https://www.dropbox.com/s/hz0cvazsaysppdy/10. All The Things You Are.wav?dl=0

but I would be willing to bet that it sounded WAY better in the studio, and that J.D. could markedly improve it. 

 

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
1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Is the Carly Simon " All the things you are" clip "sorted" and if so on whose gear are you referencing "the clip should sound like this" ?

 

 

Clips, when source tracks, are not sorted. Unless you're John 😁. The video of a system's playback of a track can be compared to that source file, to see how far away one's strayed - listen to both on the same playback chain; if a good match in tonality, and overall sense of the event, then something is workin' right, 😉.

 

 

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



×
×
  • Create New...