Truth and Tonality: can they co-exist?

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
37
0
Seattle, WA
I do have a point of reference Amir. Remember, I can play any digital format up to 24bit/192kHz. For me, crosstalk is a non-issue. I have never played a record and thought "gee, I wish the crosstalk measurements were better." I have been around this hobby for a long time and I just don't remember any heated discussions or teeth nashing over the crosstalk issue. I would like for other LP owners to chime in here and tell us if crosstalk is something that enters your mind when you are listening to music.
You have the same LP and Digital so that you can directly compare channel separation? Having digital is not the same as doing proper A/B to know the precise difference. And oh, I do remember heated discussions :).

Let me ask you this. If I had a new cartridge that had 60db better channel separation but was identical to your current cartridge otherwise, would you pass on it? I guarantee that you would not! The difference would be audible, tangible and measurable.

Out of all the measurements that people who love measurements use to discredit analog over their precious digital, there is only one that I will concede that makes a real meaningful difference and that is noise. Digital is dead quiet and I do like that and I wish LPs and tape were stone-cold quiet, but their not. For all the talk about the vaunted dynamic range on CDs vs. LPs, where is it? I find the dynamic range on well recorded LPs to be stunning. A cruel twist of fate has many modern recordings made so the vu meter is pegged at 0VU so there is no dynamic range to be heard. My table turns at the correct speed so I don't have pitch/speed issues that Ron Party was worried about in his post to Gary. Do I wish my noise floor was lower? Sure I do. Do I fret over some crosstalk measurement and believe I have a problem where there is none? Nope.
The biggest difference is not fidelity in my book is the level of enjoyment I get browsing my library literally with my fingertips and selecting what I want to hear instantly. I appreciate the extra subjective fidelity that LP brings but to me, if it is "all about the music", then convenience better have value.

No matter how much you fiddle with analog, it simply cannot match digital in this respect.
 

garylkoh

WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Sep 6, 2010
5,599
225
1,190
Seattle, WA
www.genesisloudspeakers.com
This is what someone measured under the same conditions: http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/t.mpl?f=vinyl&m=749693

So seems like Denon's graph is not quite replicated. Still not bad on the response front. On crosstalk though, as expected it doesn't hold a candle to digital.

There could be various factors - the first of which is cartridge loading. Here are a couple of clips from my FM122 phono stage owner's manual of the effects of resistive and capacitative loading on a MC cartridge. By the way I also own the Denon 103/R.

Res load..jpg

Cap load..jpg

combined load..jpg

As far as I know, many phono stages offer resistive loading for MC cartridges, but very few offer capacitative loading. Proper loading can ensure a ruler-flat frequency response.

Crosstalk is affected mostly by azimuth. Of course, there is no way that crosstalk from analog can be as good as digital because of the single physical structure (the cantilever) carrying both channels, but IMHO it can be further reduced from that in the audioasylum graph. Stylus rake angle and too much/too little VTF can also result in crosstalk - through distortion.

I think that optimizing analog playback might be one area in which the digital crowd has an obvious advantage - they don't have to do it.
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
Amir-we have had the "convenience" discussion before and analog is not for the digital couch potatoes. I agree 1000x over that digital is much more convenient than analog. Digital has now approached the stage that it takes very little user involvement in order to access and play your music library. And for some if not many, that puts them in the land of milk and honey. I can't believe there are now services for the digital couch potatoes who can't be bothered to rip their own music collections and the service does it for them. The next step on the digital horizon will be an intuitive interaction between you and your digital file server. You will just have to think of a song and it will start to play. Or it will read your mind when you enter the room and figure out what you’re in the mood for and start its own song list for you. Man, wouldn't that be something?

And yes Amir, I do have copies of the same music on LPs and CDs. My biggest sample would be the Beatles as I have every original CD, the re-mastered CD collection, the re-mastered mono collection, and the limited edition USB apple version. I also have two copies of the EMI Parlaphone BC-13 collection as well as single EMI LPs. All of the digital versions are resident on my music server.

And sure, I will take your new cartridge that has 60dB better channel separation. But since it doesn't exist, I'm quite happy with what I have.
 
Last edited:

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
37
0
Seattle, WA
Gary, he tested at two resistive loads:

47K



100 ohm



So at least with his testing and the Denon cartridge, the variations don't seem to be there.
 

Ethan Winer

Banned
Jul 8, 2010
1,231
3
0
75
New Milford, CT
At the end of the day, the two identically measuring preamps or power amps will not sound identical.

This is simply not correct. But I will be glad to change my opinion in the face of hard proof. Or at least a reasonable explanation. So watcha got? Please be very specific. And - with all respect - if you can't back up this belief, is there any chance you'd change your opinion?

--Ethan
 

Ethan Winer

Banned
Jul 8, 2010
1,231
3
0
75
New Milford, CT
Please, tell us what components measure neutral.

That's not a good question because nothing in the real world is 100 percent neutral. What actually matters is if the deviations from neutral are large enough to be audible. But there are plenty of components that are neutral enough to not audibly affect the sound. Any competent wire of sufficient gauge (for speakers) or low enough capacitance for a given output impedance (line level signals) will be audibly neutral. Same for any resistor or capacitor of the appropriate type. In this case "appropriate" means using metal film resistors in low-level circuits, or Mylar or styrene capacitors in the audio path. Rather than a disk ceramic cap, which is better suited for power supply bypass. In that use a disk ceramic is actually better than styrene which is rolled up and has more inductance. This is basic EE 101.

--Ethan
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
Very simple. You measure frequency response, distortion, and noise. Done. Though you probably should measure distortion at a few different frequencies and at several voltages.

--Ethan

Really? Simple as that eh Ethan? I've said it before and I will say it again-some measurements can be used as a predictor of how something will sound. As long as the measurements show no apparent flaws, they leave you clueless as to how something will sound in your house. Even Tim who has never seen a measurement that he didn't like has had to return products that he bought based on their measurements/specifications because they didn't sound good in his home. If we could deduce exactly how something was going to sound in our house by simply looking at measurements, we would have never had the need for dealers to demo equipment. The bottom line is that you don't know how something will sound until you hear it. Saying you can doesn't make it so. Anyone want to shell out big money for a pair of speakers without hearing them first? You know, just look at their measurements and dive right in with your cash head first? Didn't think so.
 

Ethan Winer

Banned
Jul 8, 2010
1,231
3
0
75
New Milford, CT
Yes, it's that simple. Can you refute it? If you can't, will you change your opinion? To paraphrase your own post, just because you say it's wrong doesn't make it so. I can explain this stuff clearly and completely, and I have done so repeatedly throughout this forum. So far I haven't seen anyone explain why that's wrong, or why measuring the usual stuff is inadequate.

--Ethan
 

Old Listener

New Member
Jul 18, 2010
371
0
0
SF Bay area
naturelover.smugmug.com
speed problems on LPs

Out of all the measurements that people who love measurements use to discredit analog over their precious digital, there is only one that I will concede that makes a real meaningful difference and that is noise....

I see a lot more posts on this forum by people who feel they have to discredit digital playback and measurements to bolster their preference for their precious LP playback.

My table turns at the correct speed so I don't have pitch/speed issues that Ron Party was worried about in his post to Gary.

Do you have any information about the level of wow and flutter your turntable produces?

LPs themselves often have wow and flutter levels that are audible. I can certainly remember LPs that were unlistenable because of high levels of wow and flutter.

Bill
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
So Ethan, you buy all of your audio gear based on measurements and without listening to it/them before you plunk down your cash? Measurements can be predictors of sound quality but that's it. The Japanese fooled many people years ago when the measurement wars started in audio. The Japanese predicted that American audiophiles would make a purchasing decision based on how many zeros came after the decimal point in their distortion measurements and they were right. Why settle for .0001% THD when someone else is offering .00000001% distortion? If measurements were all we needed to make informed purchasing decisions that didn't involve listening as part of the process, the Japanese won that war years ago and we were all too stupid to realize how well we had it then.

Sometimes I forget that you are listening through a $150 Pioneer receiver and I need to keep that in mind in order to put your comments in perspective.
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
I see a lot more posts on this forum by people who feel they have to discredit digital playback and measurements to bolster their preference for their precious LP playback.



Do you have any information about the level of wow and flutter your turntable produces?

LPs themselves often have wow and flutter levels that are audible. I can certainly remember LPs that were unlistenable because of high levels of wow and flutter.

Bill

No Bill I don't have any information about the wow and flutter that my turntable produces. Furthermore, I don't care because I don't hear it. I have a 30 lb platter that has had the run-out measured and the run-out adjusted (which the VPI TNT platter has adjustements for). My bearing has had new much tighter tolerance bushings machined and pressed in by a master machinist and my spindle has been micro-polished by said machinist. My TNT table sits on the TNT stand which has lead shot in the four legs. The motor is controlled by the SDS and the speed is set and checked with a strobe disc and light. I just don't hear any problems with wow and flutter. If I did, I'd buy a better turntable.

For those of you who hate all things analog-I get it and I for one am not trying to make converts out of any of you. Digital measures much better and it's a snap to use. You can buy a $20 DVD/CD player that will have better measurements than the most expensive analog rig could ever hope for. I'm sure some of you would even argue that a $20 CD player will sound better than a $100K turntable setup because it measures better. There is plenty of room in this hobby for all types of belief systems. As long as you are happy with the sound you are hearing, that's all that matters.
 
Last edited:

fas42

Addicted To Best
Jan 8, 2011
3,973
3
0
NSW Australia
So far I haven't seen anyone explain why that's wrong, or why measuring the usual stuff is inadequate.
This seems to be a key issue. I personally believe the "usual stuff" is inadequate, in the same way as saying a car has a certain acceleration, top speed or braking rate tells me nothing about how the car really "feels" to drive. These parameters are obviously part of the "truth" but how do we determine and then measure the parameters that really matter in day to day use -- in audio, whether there is sufficient truth and/or tonality for us to appreciate and enjoy the reproduction of a musical event ...

Frank
 

garylkoh

WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Sep 6, 2010
5,599
225
1,190
Seattle, WA
www.genesisloudspeakers.com
Thank you Frank. You are policing the dialectic better than I am!

I think that we can all agree that good measurements are a good predictor of good sound. Even the analog crowd wants a well designed turntable with low wow and flutter, etc. Ethan is correct in that if you measure the distortion in a capacitor at different frequencies, you can easily predict if a capacitor will sound good as a bypass capacitor. He believes that it is sufficient, I (and some others) don't believe that it is sufficient in itself and I will want to listen to the said bypass capacitor.

As some have also pointed out, even buying something with all the right measurements does not guarantee that he will *like* how it sounds, and he will return it. I think that this boils down to sufficiency of proof for each individual.

What we might all probably learn might be what is sufficiency of proof for all of us, and how can we measure it? Does anybody have any ideas besides FR, THD and IMD? Ethan might be on to something when he mentioned measuring distortion of a capacitor at different frequencies.
 

fas42

Addicted To Best
Jan 8, 2011
3,973
3
0
NSW Australia
Does anybody have any ideas besides FR, THD and IMD?
I will immediately throw in the aspect of susceptibility to interference. This is essentially accepted by everyone in the game as being relevant, by virtue of the trade in power line filters, installation of separate spurs, specialist power cords. Yet I have not seen a single test, resulting in a parameter value, of this apparently key element in getting good sound!

Take an extreme example. A chap in the next room has just plugged in, and is using an arc welder (but is acoustically inaudible): from The Art of Electronics, this is about the worst polluter of the electronic environment that you can get. Where is the information that tells me that a component I might want to buy is not affected audibly by this situation?

Frank
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
Gary-Thanks for reinforcing what I said, and that is measurements are nothing more than a predictor. I have stated that several times in several threads. We would all love to have the Sound Quality 2000 MKII meter I mentioned before. You just plug a component into it and tells you instantly on a scale that ranges from "sounds like crap" to "couldn't be any better" how something sounds and you can take it to the bank. The bottom line is that no one has been able to devise a measurement or measurements that you can read and know with any degree of confidence how the damn thing will actually sound. At some point you have to break out the old ears and listen.

I am just personally tired of someone always saying that everything we needed to know about measuring audio has been known for 50 years and if we don't understand that we are thick.
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
Thank you Frank. You are policing the dialectic better than I am!

I think that we can all agree that good measurements are a good predictor of good sound.

Sorry Gary, I do not agree with such a broad statement. I do not know precisely what you mean by "good measurements" and "good predictor", but , among other significations, your sentence can suggest that something that measures better sounds better. Your sentence can support your candidature to the Nobel prize of peace, but will not add value to this dialectic.
 
Last edited:

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
Sorry Gary, I do not agree with such a broad statement. I do not know precisely what you mean by "good measurements" and "good predictor", but , among other significations, your sentence can suggest that something that measures better sounds better. Your sentence can support your candidature to the Nobel prize of peace, but will not add to this dialectic.

??
 

Robert

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2010
163
3
405
Currently, I am evaluating two outstanding interconnects. They are both multi-strand, the strands have varying diameters, and the wire is made with a combination of different metals. From their construction, I will clearly state that they each have their own sound, by design. Otherwise, we would hook-up our components with single, large-gauge wire, featuring the material that has the best measured conductivity.

These two ICs are similar and different in sound. The first is made of gold and silver wire. The presentation is detailed with sparkle and a striking holographic presentation. It allows the delicate nuances of the technique to emerge. I can see the pianist’s fingers on the keys, and can hear the hammer hit the strings. The decay is breathtaking, and so is the sense of acoustic space. Strings have a shimmer and luster. On the down side, it can occasionally get a little shouty, particularly during congested climaxes. There is a little bit of grain, and the middle midrange has a very slight haze.

The second IC is made of gold and platinum, and while similar, again different in a very subtle and important manner. The midrange has more depth and clarity. It is smoother and has less grain. I can hear the wood and the brass more, but a touch less of the technique. The note transitions and evolution are wonderful, and the beauty and colors of the tones are highlighted.

Which one is more accurate? In my view, they are both accurate to the performance. They each bring me closer to the performance, from a different but valid perspective. These are the 2 best ICs I’ve heard, and yet, it is hard to be sure at this point which will satisfy across a variety of music. They are equally valid. Two sides of a coin.

I’m listening to Dvorak 8 by Harnoncourt and the Concertgebouw right now, a great modern recording. I can hear everything quite clearly, including the hall. To me, Harnoncourt sounds best when the music is slow. His attention to detail, phrasing, and delicacy are wonderful interpretations to the score. But when the music speeds up and calls for excitement, his technique sounds fussy and mannered. Now, Raphael Kubelik is able to provide that special sense of excitement to the faster parts, in his famous recording on DG. When I listen to Kubelik, it sounds ‘right’, and I don’t listen for the pizzicatos. With Harnoncourt, he relishes in the pizzicatos. Two equally valid interpretations, and so it goes.

So how about a DAC that measures a flat frequency response. Well, that might be a good thing. I am a strong proponent of extracting all the data from the source. If you modulate the beginning of the chain, you will be chasing your tail with the other components. While that DAC can be said to not exaggerate the frequencies, I cannot speak to whether it portrays the notes and the silence, as Jack says. I do not know if there is grain, distortion, or detail. I believe you can take 2 DACs with a flat response, and they will each have their own sound. The measurement may be a beginning, but it is not necessarily the entire truth. A flat frequency response may be a desirable measure, and so is 34C. Neither provides a guarantee.

We clearly have different goals. I want to be transported to a performance, suspend belief, and feel the emotional exhilaration of music. Others want a stereo that measures great and portrays what happened at the recording session. For me, the stereo is a means to an end, not an end unto itself. I think Frank said that my stereo is like an instrument in its own right. I would agree with that. But I am also getting closer and closer to accuracy and tonality, which is the real truth. Again, it takes two approaches.

This afternoon, I went to the orchestra and heard Schubert, Shostakovich, and Beethoven with my son. It is interesting to hear live music, and make comparisons. This is my benchmark.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing