Ethan Winer's definition of Audio transparency

[amirm]

LOL, no, you should not go by one rule. I used 100 dB to be perfectly safe, to make a point I could be certain cannot be refuted. In practice, 80 dB is probably enough. Surely 90 dB is enough. Again, I've never heard the noise floor of 16-bit audio on normal music playing at normal levels. So I'm absolutely certain that -96 is a safe number too. Let's go with that one, okay?

I hope this satisfies you!

The obsession expressed over this audio gnat is staggering. It's as if you guys are trying with all your might to find a chink in my armor, to find some infinitesimal thing you can find fault with. As if that would somehow discredit my efforts to define fidelity in practical terms. It's not working. Maybe you need to start yet another thread with my name in the title.

--Ethan

I don't know what you are asking us to do Ethan. You say in front of professional audio engineers that transparency is achieved when minimum of 100 db is achieved in our signal/distortion to noise ratio. In front of the rest of us in these forums, you use much lower numbers by as much as 20 db.

The title of this thread and the topic at hand is at what level we can assure transparency. Not what is good enough. Not what is fine most of the time. But what is transparent all of the time. Seems to me the statement you presented to the professional industry is a better criteria because it better matches research by top people in the industry. None will come out and accept 80 or even 90 dB as a safe substitute.

So can we agree that to assure transparency the bar is your 100 dB criteria?

 

[NorthStar]

It seems to me that sometimes we are turning in circles around the already mentioned obvious. :b

* I don't post here, but I read everything. And I can see very clearly. :b

 

[Robh3606]

But music can sound excellent, and highly satisfying, with only 80 dB separation between the signal and any noises.

Anyone know what the level is for grove noise in on an average LP?? I used to have a Phase Linear 4000 that had adjustable noise gates to help silence noise in quite passages and between tracks. As I remember it was always quite audible until the music started and masked it. Curious how it compares with the 80db figure. I would think that from just a subjective point of view it would be good bit higher than 80db.

Rob

 

[Ethan Winer]

I don't know what you are asking us to do Ethan.

LOL! I'm not asking you to do anything Amir!

So can we agree that to assure transparency the bar is your 100 dB criteria?

Did you not read my post above?

--Ethan

 

[mep]

LOL! I'm not asking you to do anything Amir!



Did you not read my post above?


--Ethan

Still no real answer to Amir's question. I guess the answer depends on the audience and therefore it's a moving target.

 

[Ethan Winer]

Still no real answer to Amir's question. I guess the answer depends on the audience and therefore it's a moving target.

Another person who can't read.

So I'm absolutely certain that -96 is a safe number too. Let's go with that one, okay?

 

[Ron Party]

He's answered the questions posed of him over and over and over. That he does not give you the answers you want or understand does not mean he's not answered the questions. This is not a cross-examination. If you don't like the answers, move on.

 

[mep]

Another person who can't read.

I doubt anyone else will see it that way, but that's fine. As has been pointed out, you are all over the place with your definition of transparency. It's at least 100dB or it's 80dB. What's 20 dB of noise/distortion among friends anyway?

 

[mep]

He's answered the questions posed of him over and over and over. That he does not give you the answers you want or understand does not mean he's not answered the questions. This is not a cross-examination. If you don't like the answers, move on.

Are you talking to me or Amir?? Ask Amir if he has answered his question. I don't think so.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I doubt anyone else will see it that way, but that's fine. As has been pointed out, you are all over the place with your definition of transparency. It's at least 100dB or it's 80dB. What's 20 dB of noise/distortion among friends anyway?

Nothing if they can't hear it. Fuel for endless controversy and equipment upgrades if they're Audiophiles and can't hear it.

I got Ethan's answer a couple of pages ago. Here's what I got (correct me if I'm wrong, Ethan):

"It depends."

It depends on what is masking the noise, it depends on the listening levels you're willing to tolerate (very deliberately chosen words, given the discussion), it depends on the ambient noise in your room, it depends on your hearing.... But, while he's comfortable that 80 dB is plenty under all but extreme circumstances (and you boys can go to extremes) he stated pretty clearly that he's comfortable with 100 dB as an absolute. Have I got it about right so far, Ethan? Does that mean he needs 17 bits, not 16? Yes, evidently that's what the math says. He overstated by a bit. Literally. Why doesn't that make him fall down in shame and beg for forgiveness? Because he thinks 80 is a more practical figure. 100 was a cross all your fingers and cover your *&$ number.

Are we done yet?

Personally, as I've previously stated, the whole thing seems pretty academic to me, as I've never heard the noise floor of a good digital recording, and I do a lot of listening on a dead-quiet headphone rig. Am I sonically challenged? Probably, but I've also never cranked it up to a 100 dB average, waited for the music to die down and listened for the noise floor. Why would I? Here's a solution: I think the recording industry should use absolutely as many bits as it needs for recording and processing. Then I think they should turn it into two formats: One that delivers a background silence that makes the best vinyl sould like a window air conditioner (16/44.1 will do) and another that is the absolute, cover your a$$ Audiophile hi-res. So Audiophiles can seal themselves in an anechoic vault, crank Wagner up to 120 dB peaks and wait for a silent passage, at which point they'll realize the noisefloor they're hearing is the ringing in their ears.

Tim

 

[jkeny]

Ok, Ethan seems to state that -100dB is a failsafe level, -80dB is PROBABLY Ok, & -96dB is finger in the air, feel which way the wind blows, - "let's go with this". value.
So can Ethan give some evidence that this figure is audibly transparent? Has he done some tests & experiments which now define -96dB SNR as suitable for audio transparency? Or is this the needed figure because he also claims that 16/44Khz is audibly transparent & this 96dB is necessary to reconcile both of these positions?

Can we take this -96dB as his final position or would there be some other provisos? He seems to state that looking for a single figure in audio is not really appropriate so I hope something has been achieved with this thread so far.

I hope there is no provisos about "when listening to pop music" as has been his want to state in the past. Can this aspect be clarified? Does this -96dB apply to all music, all frequencies? If not can this be elucidated some more?

Can I also ask Ethan, what is the definition for audible transparency with relation to frequency response - is it 0.1dB or +/-0.1dB & are there other qualifications to this figure as there are to SNR?

 

[Ethan Winer]

This is not a cross-examination. If you don't like the answers, move on.

So Audiophiles can seal themselves in an anechoic vault, crank Wagner up to 120 dB peaks and wait for a silent passage, at which point they'll realize the noisefloor they're hearing is the ringing in their ears.

LOL, indeed.

 

[Ron Party]

And with that being the final answer, this thread is closed.