Power conditioning: how did you choose the best approach for your system?

[semente]

.

[semente]

On 6/27/2019 at 4:41 AM, PeterSt said:

It appears that mere electronic music is the most demanding. This is because it contains more "difficulty".

 

In what way?

 

Classical music recordings have both direct and venue sound. They also have a huge variety of instruments which can be playing simultaneously both solo or in a group of identical instruments. Or choirs. And you can listen to it live, so you are comparing reproduced with what you've listened to in loco. Can't make it any more difficult than that.

 

Violin Viola Cello Double-Bass Harp Bass-Drum Castanets Chimes Conga-Drum Cowbell Cymbals Glockenspiel Gong Guiro Snare-Drum Tambourine Tenor-Drum Timpani Triangle Wood-Block Xylophone Flute Piccolo Oboe English-Horn Clarinet Bass-Clarinet Saxophone Bassoon Contrabassoon French-Horn TrumpetT rombone Tuba Harpsichord Piano Organ ... What else?

[semente]

1 minute ago, PeterSt said:

 

Hey Ricardo - Did you just respond to a. your dislike of electronic music and b. your own idea of classical music's complexity, or did you include my explanation in the post you quoted from? 

I mean, strange question "in what way". 

 

Peter

 

🙃 I admit to disliking electronic music and electronic instruments.

 

And I also admit that I wasn't clear.

 

In what way audibly? These sounds don't exist without electricity or speakers, how do you evaluate accuracy in the reproduction without measuring equipment, as you do with square-waves?

A different speaker/amplifier is like using a different electric-guitar speaker/amplifier, a different presentation... Isn't there a big chance that one will create a system that will make these artificial sounds sound the way you think they should sound instead of one that accurately reproduces the recorded signal? In other words, one is creating an instrument, not reproduction equipment.

[semente]

57 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

Add to it that neutral really exists. But this also takes a mile more. 

 

Short answer here: try find someone describing the sound of our products (DAC would be easiest). You won't find them. So I focus on neutrality and use the "sophisticated" electronic music to get there. And indeed, it would be the only music of which we can't determine the original sound. A complex matter of its own. 

 

I wasn't commenting on the performance/sound of your equipment, which I've unfortunately never had a chance to listen to, but on how certain types of music may or may not be more or less effective when used to evaluate "neutrality".

 

In fact I am quite sure, from what you say/write here, that they would suit me like a glove.

[semente]

2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

In part that's why it works so well for evaluating - there is no 'natural' counterpoint to these created sounds, so they live or die, as a satisfying musical experience, on how well the ear/brain can pick up all the structure that occurs within the manufactured sound - we have no long term memory of how it's "supposed to sound," to help adjust what we hear.

 

IME these totally artificial sound elements become ever more satisfying the better the rig has evolved - they truly become 'magical'. Just today we heard Shania Twain's "Man! I Feel Like a Women" on the car radio - the synthesizer riff in that is superbly enjoyable, and is so much richer and fuller with greater competence of the playback.

 

In electronically created sounds the sky's the limit in terms of how sophisticated the structures of these sounds can be, and that's what emerges to delight the ear/brain when replay is good enough.

 

 

 

I disagree. A non-neutral system may produce "satisfying musical experience" with say Jarre as much as a neutral one, but will sound like rubbish when playing acoustic instruments or vocals. I've experienced this several times at shows.

 

It's like evaluating the fidelity of a video reproduction system using Finding Nemo or some other computer-animated film...