http://www.computeraudiophile.com/blogs/mitchco/what-tone-quality-your-audiophile-system-126/
I recently came across this post on another forum, by a contributor named "Mitchco" who I thought did a wonderful job trying to bridge the gap that often exists between the subjective and objective (i.e. art and science) aspects of our hobby. The inclusion of Bob Katz's subjective chart that he uses to assess the sound quality of various systems is a gem and far more informative than J Gordon Holt's attempt at this over 30 years ago. The article is a very thoughtful read. Even if you eschew tone correction, I think there is a lot to be learned here. To see the Katz chart and fabled B&K microphone chart in the same article was, for me, a revelation. And if you are a "DSP-kind-of-guy", I'm sure you know there are newer and better tools that will perform some of the tasks mentioned, than those that were available even 3 short years ago.
There are some interesting issues to explore here. First, who among us would use the Katz chart to evaluate our system, and emerge with no significant deviations or descriptors that deviate from "ideal". Then, once identified, what is the best way we might try to rectify the residual concerns we have as a result of such a rigorous evaluation? We all know that "everything" matters. The choice of gear (even those that portend to be "straight wire with gain"), speakers, cables, speaker placement, room treatment, racks, suspension, footers of various sorts, grounding, and perhaps even the lunar phase (OK, I exaggerate but you get my point), ALL effect the sound that we hear in our system. In a very real sense, they are all "tone controls" to some degree. The question is, after you have done everything in your power to optimize your system, is it indeed possible that what you are left with are deviations or deficiencies that might be improved by the judicious use of "real" tone controls (including DSP)? There is no right answer here, especially since many might argue that DSP comes at a price. (I would argue there is good modern DSP and bad DSP of yesteryear and in fact it is now an essential tool in virtually every recording studio and mastering lab). You may certainly draw your own conclusions. But I thought the article was a great read to provoke asking the relevant questions.
I recently came across this post on another forum, by a contributor named "Mitchco" who I thought did a wonderful job trying to bridge the gap that often exists between the subjective and objective (i.e. art and science) aspects of our hobby. The inclusion of Bob Katz's subjective chart that he uses to assess the sound quality of various systems is a gem and far more informative than J Gordon Holt's attempt at this over 30 years ago. The article is a very thoughtful read. Even if you eschew tone correction, I think there is a lot to be learned here. To see the Katz chart and fabled B&K microphone chart in the same article was, for me, a revelation. And if you are a "DSP-kind-of-guy", I'm sure you know there are newer and better tools that will perform some of the tasks mentioned, than those that were available even 3 short years ago.
There are some interesting issues to explore here. First, who among us would use the Katz chart to evaluate our system, and emerge with no significant deviations or descriptors that deviate from "ideal". Then, once identified, what is the best way we might try to rectify the residual concerns we have as a result of such a rigorous evaluation? We all know that "everything" matters. The choice of gear (even those that portend to be "straight wire with gain"), speakers, cables, speaker placement, room treatment, racks, suspension, footers of various sorts, grounding, and perhaps even the lunar phase (OK, I exaggerate but you get my point), ALL effect the sound that we hear in our system. In a very real sense, they are all "tone controls" to some degree. The question is, after you have done everything in your power to optimize your system, is it indeed possible that what you are left with are deviations or deficiencies that might be improved by the judicious use of "real" tone controls (including DSP)? There is no right answer here, especially since many might argue that DSP comes at a price. (I would argue there is good modern DSP and bad DSP of yesteryear and in fact it is now an essential tool in virtually every recording studio and mastering lab). You may certainly draw your own conclusions. But I thought the article was a great read to provoke asking the relevant questions.
Last edited:
. Thanks for posting it Marty.
