Jump to content
Ralf11

Removing Veils in the Audiophile Sound Chain

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

or just Lifting Veils...

 

feel free to discuss causes of veiling, and how to remove it, and - of course - whether this commonly used term is just a Red Herring


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes removing speakers grills helps.


The man that hath no music in himself, nor is not moved with concord of sweet sounds, is fit for treasons, stratagems, and spoils. The motions of his spirit are dull as night, and his affections dark as Erebus. Let no such man be trusted. Mark the music.

                                                                          ―  William Shakespeare.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

Sometimes removing speakers grills helps.

 

Yep, it does ^_^ ...

 

What people call veils, is actually distortion - it creates a stew of sound at the level where a lot of the important acoustic clues 'hide' - do your bit to fix that, and the recording suddenly starts making sense; your mind can sort everything out, with ease ... this is what produces the "effortless sound", "it was just magic, just music" experiences.

 

How to get there is another story, unfortunately ...

 


Frank

 

http://artofaudioconjuring.blogspot.com/

 

 

Ahhh, Mankind ... Porsche intellect, Trabant emotions ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree (and had mine shop-vac'd), but caught a comment in another thread on jitter & veils (Sandy?) and thought it deserved its own topic...


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/57012-dolbya-decoding-feedback-feral-examples-yesno/page/3/#comments #72

 

 Veils/Fog can be caused by different mechanisms , both at the Recording and Playback ends.

 Have a listen to John's examples in the link above.

 


"If you can't hear the difference between an original CD and a copy of your CD,

you might as well give up your career as a tester. The difference between a reconstituted FLAC and full size WAV is much less than that, but it does exist. - Cookie Marenco"

 

PROFILE UPDATED 18-06-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a hackneyed phrase but not a red herring.  Most likely refers to the effect of first listening to equipment that exhibits lower background noise.

 

I listen to oratorios quite often, and, with mass choral crescendos often from 50s to 70s analogue transfers, a key test is simply whether you can clearly make out the words.  Using the EC designs UPL/MOS combo for example, I was able to distinguish words that I hadn’t been able to make out on previous listenings.

 

So yes it’s a bit  of  a joke phrase, but lowering noise is real and probably the most  important single factor in improving SQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noise that you can hear (as noise), or noise that is "sub-liminal" and interferes with music perception, or alters something in the equipment?


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

Noise that you can hear (as noise), or noise that is "sub-liminal" and interferes with music perception, or alters something in the equipment?

 

I’m not necessarily talking about noise that you actively perceive as being present (such as surface noise on a LP) , but rather that you notice  in its relative absence, what reviewers might refer to as a “blacker background” when listening to a better system - I.e. the absence of unwanted noise from interference, ground loops, poor isolation, dirty mains power, sub optimal power supplies etc that accumulates in the playback chain to the detriment of perception of the analogue signal.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I plied the audio trade during the Seventies, fellow audio phreaks and I conducted numerous A-B comparisons, often accidentally, involving added [or substituted] equipment in the sound chain.  It was always obvious that equalizers, dynamic range expanders, and various sound effects performed their intended functions; however, when settings on this equipment was "nulled" (i.e., at neutral sound-effect adjustment), all present reliably noticed that something was amiss by having merely passed the signal through additional circuitry or buffers.  With revealing systems, this was found true of interconnects, too.  Speaker wire was a bit tougher ;), but changes can be observed.  I have assumed this audio impact has been long taken for granted, but I may be wrong.  I have always kept my chain as short as possible for this reason.  I have also avoided citing any snake oil, some of which has certainly demonstrated positive effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, SixChannel said:

When I plied the audio trade during the Seventies, fellow audio phreaks and I conducted numerous A-B comparisons, often accidentally, involving added [or substituted] equipment in the sound chain.  It was always obvious that equalizers, dynamic range expanders, and various sound effects performed their intended functions; however, when settings on this equipment was "nulled" (i.e., at neutral sound-effect adjustment), all present reliably noticed that something was amiss by having merely passed the signal through additional circuitry or buffers.  With revealing systems, this was found true of interconnects, too.  Speaker wire was a bit tougher ;), but changes can be observed.  I have assumed this audio impact has been long taken for granted, but I may be wrong.  I have always kept my chain as short as possible for this reason.  I have also avoided citing any snake oil, some of which has certainly demonstrated positive effect.

Back in the 1970s, the skills of circuit designers and the quality of op-amps was generally much lower than today.  Even DolbySR units used op-amps that we'd consider laughably bad nowadays (AFAIR LF411 or was it 413? or similar) -- and DolbySR came in at the middle/late 1980s'.

 

Point being -- I agree that your general rule of 'less is better' is DEFINITELY true.   That includes less capacitance in oversized cables that supposedly 'improve' quality (giving the snake-oil issue its due.)

 

However, the risk of actual lowered quality is a bit less than it was in the 1970s.  People are now using op-amps that have distortion of 0.01% in the real-world case, let alone something like a 709/301/307/741 that might be lucky to give 0.1%+ (estimated) at 0dB gain (also real world.)  *   Nowdays semiconductors often give nearly theoretical noise performance (e.g. 1/f & popcorn noise are almost gone), stuff from the past wasn't so lucky.

 

* I do have to admit that there WERE super competent circuit designers back in the day -- probably do a better job than most analog developers could do today -- given the same components...   The 'common knowledge' audio design often seen in power amps/preamps/etc of the day were really frighteningly bad.   Again, on the other hand -- I saw some 'frighteningly scary' stuff in the DolbyA design, and actually emulated it -- R Dolby got amazing performance out of apparently primitive designs.  That kind of expertise doesn't; come along very often.

 

John

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both Norton and SixChannel are on the mark ... "veil removing" is all about determining where in the playback chain significant, subjective, losses are occurring - and then doing something about it. Whether you want to call the latter tweaking, simplifying, noise removal, etc, etc - or veil lifting :D - is up to the individual ... but is crucial, I find, if you want the presentation of recordings to be "magic", ^_^.


Frank

 

http://artofaudioconjuring.blogspot.com/

 

 

Ahhh, Mankind ... Porsche intellect, Trabant emotions ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why I have upgraded speaker, room treatments, then upstream components. Trying to improve the quality of sound, to me.


Current:  JRiver 24 on Win 10 PC (AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with 32 GB RAM) or Daphile on an I5-2500K with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Audio Research SP-16

Amplification - Kenwood L-07M Monoblocks

Speakers: Wharfedale Linton Heritage

Cables: MIT speaker cables and DiMarzio Interconnects

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Both Norton and SixChannel are on the mark ... "veil removing" is all about determining where in the playback chain significant, subjective, losses are occurring - and then doing something about it. Whether you want to call the latter tweaking, simplifying, noise removal, etc, etc - or veil lifting :D - is up to the individual ... but is crucial, I find, if you want the presentation of recordings to be "magic", ^_^.

Like you implied elsewhere, and the best of the listening/audiophile hobby is enjoying the experience, not tweaking.  Avoid the 'rabbit hole', right?

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's good that you are learning from the liberal arts faculty


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Oh, I understand what's going on - it's a bit like some people having expensive cars, but they never clean them or maintain them - getting into one of such is an unpleasant experience; it smells, has smudges all over the upholstery, covered with road grime on the outside. and has a huge range of rattles and eccentricities in the driving behaviour ... but the driver doesn't care; he's bought the Right Sort Of Car, and it can't get better than that what's he experiencing .,.. he smirks at someone who is driving a very ordinary car in the next lane, which is beautifully clean everywhere, and has been tuned to an inch of its life  - "Hoo, that fool doesn't what he's missing - get yourself a Real Car, why don't you !!" ... :P

 

Frank

Angry replies like this aren't helping . ¬¬ You don't seem to realise that John is in contact with several Recording Engineers from that time period, and they are giving him a great deal of first hand information.


"If you can't hear the difference between an original CD and a copy of your CD,

you might as well give up your career as a tester. The difference between a reconstituted FLAC and full size WAV is much less than that, but it does exist. - Cookie Marenco"

 

PROFILE UPDATED 18-06-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small contribution:

 

I never recognize veils. So they don't need to be lifted either. This could be because I already got rid of them - not sure.

Still the sound can improve on an almost daily basis (make that weekly or even monthly to be on a safe side).

 

Easy to call it all distortion. Too easy actually. Or maybe better: there is so much distortion all over from any angle imaginable, that we should praise something to still receive music.

It can be infinitely improved upon.


Lush^2      Blaxius^2      Ethernet^2     HDMI^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)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

Small contribution:

 

I never recognize veils. So they don't need to be lifted either. This could be because I already got rid of them - not sure.

Still the sound can improve on an almost daily basis (make that weekly or even monthly to be on a safe side).

 

Easy to call it all distortion. Too easy actually. Or maybe better: there is so much distortion all over from any angle imaginable, that we should praise something to still receive music.

It can be infinitely improved upon.

I pretty much agree - as a listener, please enjoy the music.   As someone who doesn't listen except to work on the technology behind it -- then I must be much more critical and precise.

After a certain point, when tweaking for listening purposes, it can be a habit, and waste a lot of enjoyment.  That is, unless someone enjoys the tweaking (which is yet another hobby.)

 

John

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...