The myth of "The Absolute Sound"

[gmgraves]

25 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

It's obviously hard to "pass on" what a person is experiencing, in the listening. But I'll try again, 😉. People who have heard the MBL "watermelon" speakers working to a high standard know what the effect is - the sound picture completely floats in space, and allows listeners to move around without losing any of the sense of the musical presentation ... after a long absence from doing the audio thing, properly, myself, I came across an example of that very rig 😉 - and said, Yesss!! Other people can get it happening, so some understand - provided the motivation to get back into the game ... 🙂.

 

 

What happens is that lifting the standard of the signal being fed to the speaker driver overcomes, unless there is an obvious problem with the unit, most of the normal shortcomings of the driver. As an example, at one stage I was playing with two sets of those typical, small pairs of speaker monitors that came with desktop packages - one was bigger, had an impressive brand name, more controls, specs that said it "was better" ... guess which was the dud? 😉 ... Yep, far too many issues; wasn't worth putting the time into it.

 

So, that poor quality monitor would always betray its limitations, no matter what one tried. But, a decent $20 driver can easily reveal where a $100,000 chain driving it is getting things wrong - because the type of distortion anomalies that matter are very clearly reproduced on such a speaker.

 

Nonsense! And Frank, you must know it is.

[gmgraves]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

Many recent listening tests for John Dyson suggest that we may very well in many cases be able to notice such small measurable differences.

I never have. Yet my audiophile hearing acumen is very good. 

[sandyk]

6 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

I never have. Yet my audiophile hearing acumen is very good. 

Hi George

 If you are using gear with only 10% tolerance resistors, then it may not be your hearing that is letting you down!

 Yes, I already know that your hearing is better than average . sometimes, experience trumps age ?

 

Regards

Alex

[fas42]

17 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Yeah, Frank is full of it. Always has been for as long as he’s been here. Boom-box speakers and cheap, mid-fi gear soldered together giving better results than real high-end equipment? Proper “playback” systems capable of making even the lousiest recordings* sound good? Gimme a break.

* The reality is that the better the playback system, the LESS tolerant it is of inadequate program material, not the more tolerant!

 

Which means, George, that you are still a long way from appreciating what's required for optimum playback - the true "nonsense", spouted by the audiophile cognoscenti, is that only exceedingly expensive, impressive looking 'rigs' are capable of getting audio reproduction right - and that only "special" recordings are fit to be played on such ... in the words of the wise, Bah Humbug!! 😜

 

Remember, I mentioned the bell curve of listening displeasure - a lot of systems wind up sitting at the very top of that hump - and can't be cajoled into moving down into the peaceful valley on the right, where good grazing is to be had, 😊.

[kumakuma]

9 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Which means, George, that you are still a long way from appreciating what's required for optimum playback - the true "nonsense", spouted by the audiophile cognoscenti, is that only exceedingly expensive, impressive looking 'rigs' are capable of getting audio reproduction right - and that only "special" recordings are fit to be played on such ... in the words of the wise, Bah Humbug!! 😜

 

Remember, I mentioned the bell curve of listening displeasure - a lot of systems wind up sitting at the very top of that hump - and can't be cajoled into moving down into the peaceful valley on the right, where good grazing is to be had, 😊.

 

[fas42]

Huhh, what? ... can't quite hear you, sorry ... 🙂

[kumakuma]

18 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Huhh, what? ... can't quite hear you, sorry ... 🙂

 

You need to take your head out of your...

[STC]

23 minutes ago, fas42 said:

can't quite hear..

These three words stringed together now make sense. 

[fas42]

People ask, where are other people's experiences that match what I worry about ... there is a series of posts, this one and others following, that describe precisely what it's about; that I chanced upon, just now - guess which would be the DAC I would take, if I was "forced to choose one"? 😉

 

 

[fas42]

And also this one,

 

 

This is just an example of the type of Step By Step Surgery that I do, and try - with the benefits as reported here. At the end of the line of doing this sort of thing ... TAS manifests in the room ...

[gmgraves]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

 

Which means, George, that you are still a long way from appreciating what's required for optimum playback - the true "nonsense", spouted by the audiophile cognoscenti, is that only exceedingly expensive, impressive looking 'rigs' are capable of getting audio reproduction right - and that only "special" recordings are fit to be played on such ... in the words of the wise, Bah Humbug!! 😜

 

Remember, I mentioned the bell curve of listening displeasure - a lot of systems wind up sitting at the very top of that hump - and can't be cajoled into moving down into the peaceful valley on the right, where good grazing is to be had, 😊.

Nobody said anything about equipment needing to be “exceedingly expensive” but, by the same token it cannot be junk either. 

[fas42]

4 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Nobody said anything about equipment needing to be “exceedingly expensive” but, by the same token it cannot be junk either. 

 

Of course. I just mentioned above about playing with 'junk' computer monitors - there's always going to be a point when the effort needed to get decent sound is not going to be worth it - so biff the stuff! These days, remarkably good value is available cheap; plenty of opportunity to hack things a bit, see what gains can be made - and learn stuff, 😄.

[STC]

4 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

It's obviously hard to "pass on" what a person is experiencing, in the listening. But I'll try again, 😉. People who have heard the MBL "watermelon" speakers working to a high standard know what the effect is - the sound picture completely floats in space,

 

I am also familiar with MBL watermelon and know of people who worked extensively with those to create "sound picture completely floats" whatever that means.  You are giving the impression that the rest of us in possession of sound stuck to the speakers. Maybe, we are not an expert to turn a Sharp "boom box" into a SOTA system but at least give us little credit that we too may know a thing or two about audio production. And at least, give me some credit that I actually posted a video of Sound Lab and those Sharp speakers which you are using asking the listeners to guess.

 

So tell me, what's so special about the watermelon?

 

Quote

 

 

 What happens is that lifting the standard of the signal being fed to the speaker driver overcomes, unless there is an obvious problem with the unit, most of the normal shortcomings of the driver. As an example, at one stage I was playing with two sets of those typical, small pairs of speaker monitors that came with desktop packages - one was bigger, had an impressive brand name, more controls, specs that said it "was better" ... guess which was the dud? 😉 ... Yep, far too many issues; wasn't worth putting the time into it.

 

As usual, no names and no specific details where one excelled over the other.

 

Quote

 

So, that poor quality monitor would always betray its limitations, no matter what one tried. But, a decent $20 driver can easily reveal where a $100,000 chain driving it is getting things wrong - because the type of distortion anomalies that matter are very clearly reproduced on such a speaker.

 

 

Have you seen the research and measurement of drivers, cone materials and etc etc. There is nothing you could do that could change the physical properties of the cones and the colouration will exist whether you are feeding an accurate signal or a compromised speakers like from your thousand screws laptop.

 

Speaking of the 1000 screws laptop, mind identifying what laptop is that because I am familiar with dismantling a few and hardly recall seeing more than 50 screws. I am very curious to know why you laptop got so any screws.

[gmgraves]

3 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Of course. I just mentioned above about playing with 'junk' computer monitors - there's always going to be a point when the effort needed to get decent sound is not going to be worth it - so biff the stuff! These days, remarkably good value is available cheap; plenty of opportunity to hack things a bit, see what gains can be made - and learn stuff, 😄.

I don’t think anyone would have a problem with that. It’s fun to dink with stuff to see if one can get more performance out of it, be it with cars or audio equipment*. 
Where your credibility falls short is in the level of playback quality you brag that you get with equipment, that frankly, couldn’t achieve that level of performance if one completely redesigned it. Then there are the contradictions against yourself that you keep making as well as your insistence that the better the playback quality, the better mediocre to lousy recordings sounds. This last assertion is absolutely 180. degrees from reality. A bad recording absolutely sounds better on a cheap table radio than it does on a good stereo system, and the better the system, the worse that recording will sound.

 

*On the DIY question, I once bought four Quad ESL 57 electrostatic speakers and mounted them two by two; bottom to bottom and hung them like a movable blackboard between two aluminum posts. The posts were bolted to either side of a plywood box containing two Altec Lansing 15 inch woofers (that’s four in all). I bi-amped the speakers, using a Marantz Solid State power amp for the woofers and a pair of VTL tube monoblocs for the ESLs. Eventually I mounted a pair of silk soft dome tweeters between each pair of Quads (as good as the Quad’s midrange was, they had little bass or high treble). After months of dinking empirically with the home-made electronic crossover, I got the ensemble to sound killer. I used it for several years until one of the Quads arced-over, thus killing it. The Quad’s were all bought used, and the cost of getting one fixed was more than I wanted to spend so I sold them “as is”. They were among the best speaker set that I ever owned, and I designed and built it! So I certainly understand the joys of DIY audio.

[gmgraves]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

I am also familiar with MBL watermelon and know of people who worked extensively with those to create "sound picture completely floats" whatever that means.  You are giving the impression that the rest of us in possession of sound stuck to the speakers. Maybe, we are not an expert to turn a Sharp "boom box" into a SOTA system but at least give us little credit that we too may know a thing or two about audio production. And at least, give me some credit that I actually posted a video of Sound Lab and those Sharp speakers which you are using asking the listeners to guess.

 

So tell me, what's so special about the watermelon?

 

 

As usual, no names and no specific details where one excelled over the other.

 

 

Have you seen the research and measurement of drivers, cone materials and etc etc. There is nothing you could do that could change the physical properties of the cones and the colouration will exist whether you are feeding an accurate signal or a compromised speakers like from your thousand screws laptop.

 

Speaking of the 1000 screws laptop, mind identifying what laptop is that because I am familiar with dismantling a few and hardly recall seeing more than 50 screws. I am very curious to know why you laptop got so any screws.

He’s likely exaggerating for effect. I understand that. I have a 2011 Mac 17inch laptop that I use to run Tidal and ripped music from my NAS. I bought a 1TB SS drive for it, and while taking it apart, at one point I too would have sworn that the damned thing had a thousand screws holding the case together!

[STC]

39 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

He’s likely exaggerating for effect. I understand that. I have a 2011 Mac 17inch laptop that I use to run Tidal and ripped music from my NAS. I bought a 1TB SS drive for it, and while taking it apart, at one point I too would have sworn that the damned thing had a thousand screws holding the case together!

Probably he did. Maybe, I am giving to much importance to everything he says. 

[fas42]

2 hours ago, STC said:

 

I am also familiar with MBL watermelon and know of people who worked extensively with those to create "sound picture completely floats" whatever that means.  You are giving the impression that the rest of us in possession of sound stuck to the speakers. Maybe, we are not an expert to turn a Sharp "boom box" into a SOTA system but at least give us little credit that we too may know a thing or two about audio production. And at least, give me some credit that I actually posted a video of Sound Lab and those Sharp speakers which you are using asking the listeners to guess.

 

Where am I not giving you credit? There are plenty of ways to enhance the experience when listening to musical playback, and your methods are fine, as a means of achieving that - I'm just coming from the angle that optimum electrical integrity of the playback chain can bring 'magic' to the listening; because it just happened to work out that way for me, historically.

 

Quote

 

So tell me, what's so special about the watermelon?

 

The omni-directional nature helps, but the key aspect is that an all MBL chain, of the best of their components, carefully set up by someone from the factory - can push it over the line 🙂. Have heard setups of lower rung items from their catalogue, but the end result was nothing special.

 

Quote

 

As usual, no names and no specific details where one excelled over the other.

 

Always, this obsession with knowing precise details!! 😄 This is just cheap kit, the good one was a Harmon Kardon; the poorer was branded Altec Lansing - a Chinese purchase of the brand name, which meant nothing.

 

I run sine wave frequency sweeps over the full range, at varying volumes - the good one maintained clean sound until the highest SPLs; the other was a mess, all sorts of gurgles and buzzes and resonances at even mild levels - a loser, I'm afraid.

 

Quote

Speaking of the 1000 screws laptop, mind identifying what laptop is that because I am familiar with dismantling a few and hardly recall seeing more than 50 screws. I am very curious to know why you laptop got so any screws.

 

Yes, exaggeration - it was the annoyance of having to completely dismantle, to access the key area - of the HP. An older Dell was trivial, in comparison, to reach the same spot. Note, I think I pointed to an actual video of the dismantling of that model type, in the particular thread.

[STC]

15 minutes ago, fas42 said:

The omni-directional nature helps, but the key aspect is that an all MBL chain, of the best of their components, carefully set up by someone from the factory - can push it over the line 🙂. Have heard setups of lower rung items from their catalogue, but the end result was nothing special.

 

 

Really?  Have you seen inside a MBL? What makes them superior?

 

What is the difference between the large and the smallest? 

[semente]

8 hours ago, fas42 said:

People who have heard the MBL "watermelon" speakers working to a high standard know what the effect is - the sound picture completely floats in space, and allows listeners to move around without losing any of the sense of the musical presentation ...

 

Why do you think that the "watermelon" speakers produce a sound picture completely floats in space, and allows listeners to move around without losing any of the sense of the musical presentation?

 

Hint -> https://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/497MBLFIG4.jpg

 

By the way, I don't agree with the any...

[fas42]

3 hours ago, gmgraves said:

Where your credibility falls short is in the level of playback quality you brag that you get with equipment, that frankly, couldn’t achieve that level of performance if one completely redesigned it. Then there are the contradictions against yourself that you keep making as well as your insistence that the better the playback quality, the better mediocre to lousy recordings sounds. This last assertion is absolutely 180. degrees from reality. A bad recording absolutely sounds better on a cheap table radio than it does on a good stereo system, and the better the system, the worse that recording will sound.

 

You are missing a key point: what I'm saying is that very "ordinary" gear can produce highly impressive sound, but normally always fails to do such because the weaknesses - poor links in the chain - always cripple that capability. The obvious answer is to address the flaws until the inherent potential is realised - doing this, currently, requires some effort, and knowledge - just because something is "hard", doesn't make it impossible ...

 

Regarding "lousy" recordings, the "good stereo system" you're thinking of is usually right on the top of the bell curve of delivering unpleasantness ... good enough to make you aware of nearly everything that's going on, but not good enough to allow the mind to separate what it wants to hear, from that which it knows it can discard. Until you experience a system that demonstrates this happening, and can hear the subjective transformation occurring as one goes from one performance level to the other, you will find it hard to appreciate that this can occur - so be it ... another life, perhaps ... 😉.

 

3 hours ago, gmgraves said:

*On the DIY question, I once bought four Quad ESL 57 electrostatic speakers and mounted them two by two; bottom to bottom and hung them like a movable blackboard between two aluminum posts. The posts were bolted to either side of a plywood box containing two Altec Lansing 15 inch woofers (that’s four in all). I bi-amped the speakers, using a Marantz Solid State power amp for the woofers and a pair of VTL tube monoblocs for the ESLs. Eventually I mounted a pair of silk soft dome tweeters between each pair of Quads (as good as the Quad’s midrange was, they had little bass or high treble). After months of dinking empirically with the home-made electronic crossover, I got the ensemble to sound killer. I used it for several years until one of the Quads arced-over, thus killing it. The Quad’s were all bought used, and the cost of getting one fixed was more than I wanted to spend so I sold them “as is”. They were among the best speaker set that I ever owned, and I designed and built it! So I certainly understand the joys of DIY audio.

 

Good effort! Killer sound, why? Did the ensemble distort the recordings to make them sound good, or was it allowing you to get closer to the true nature of the recording? ... 🧐

[fas42]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

Really?  Have you seen inside a MBL? What makes them superior?

 

What is the difference between the large and the smallest? 

 

"Superior", because the people behind that company understand the goal - there are some pieces out there of the designer(s) talking - they know it's hard; but they aim high.

 

The small will lose the edge, because compromises are made to get product out there - a lot of audio companies do this; create a "killer" product which makes an impact, but which is hideously expensive - and sell the lower cost items off the back of that.

[STC]

3 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Superior", because the people behind that company understand the goal - there are some pieces out there of the designer(s) talking - they know it's hard; but they aim high.

Like how? Just because they built a Omni directional speakers?

[fas42]

1 hour ago, semente said:

 

Why do you think that the "watermelon" speakers produce a sound picture completely floats in space, and allows listeners to move around without losing any of the sense of the musical presentation?

 

Hint -> https://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/497MBLFIG4.jpg

 

By the way, I don't agree with the any...

 

Such a design just makes it easier to deliver the information that the brain needs to decode what the recording means - a uniform presentation in "all directions" means that an illusion that forms is not disturbed so much when you change the listening position.

 

Turns out that the conventional, highly variable as function of angle, output of drivers also works - if the level of SQ is good enough. Listening to the MBLs in the zone of sufficient performance was like coming across an old friend, that you thought you would never see again ... 😊.

 

The MBLs, like all audio systems, will have variable levels of competence, for multiple reasons - no guarantees, ever, that such and such a combo will always get everything right.

[fas42]

37 minutes ago, STC said:

Like how? Just because they built a Omni directional speakers?

 

Just found these... it gives a good sense of the type of thinking,

 

 

 

[STC]

9 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Just found these... it gives a good sense of the type of thinking,

 

 

 

OIC, there are videos about them!  They must be good then.