It is an issue, but a pretty minor one. I've rarely experienced a noise floor high enough to be heard without turning off all music and cranking the volume up, even in headphone systems. Audible noise floor is something I get from plugging phones directly into a PC, or on that rare occasion when I have power issues getting into the system. The overwhelming majority of the time, normal room ambience is noisier than the noise floor. My system's inability to faithfully reproduce the accurate tonality and full impact of real voices and instruments, even just in the midrange where my monitors operate (they're down 6Db @ 60hz), is a much bigger issue, though it's one, unfortunately, that no amount of money or effort can adequately address.
I may not have understood your question and your position vis-a-vis noise. Noise is a very broad term and under its definition, which is: "any unwanted signal" in that case sound. If we abide to that definition of "noise" then any and all distortions are "noise".
I would also add that in term of noise, SS and Digital are king. Yet you seem to favor a noisier medium, namely Tapes with Tube electronics both by their very nature "noisier" (produce far more unwanted signals) than SS and digital, Care to explain?
Frantz I do like tape very much,but digital has it's own superalitives. I think low level noise and distortion are to different things. If a shielded cable like a RG58 can act like a antenna is the hash incorporated distortion or noise? Or is RFI/EMI intereference present in electronics distortion or noise?
All I'm saying is this type of noise or distortion if you want is much overlooked and does effect the quality of sound reproduction. That's just a subject that I never see talked about but there have been some that have mentioned it in passing.
There is a easy and low cost experiment to try if interested. If you take the necessary length of a good grade microphone low impedance cable and terminate it properly and then purchase a general type ferrite and put one on each end of the cable in a loop and one in the middle of the cable. replace your existing preamp IC with this cable and see if you gain additional clarity and dynamics. The ferrites can be purchased from Mouser at about 4 dollars each.
Anyway I have found that I have gained much more targeting this type of noise than trying to lower distortion in high quality audio gear.
It is an issue, but a pretty minor one. I've rarely experienced a noise floor high enough to be heard without turning off all music and cranking the volume up, even in headphone systems. Audible noise floor is something I get from plugging phones directly into a PC, or on that rare occasion when I have power issues getting into the system. The overwhelming majority of the time, normal room ambience is noisier than the noise floor. My system's inability to faithfully reproduce the accurate tonality and full impact of real voices and instruments, even just in the midrange where my monitors operate (they're down 6Db @ 60hz), is a much bigger issue, though it's one, unfortunately, that no amount of money or effort can adequately address.
If a shielded cable like a RG58 can act like a antenna is the hash incorporated distortion or noise? Or is RFI/EMI intereference present in electronics distortion or noise?
That's noise, though a shielded cable shouldn't act like an antenna, that's why it's shielded, if it is still picking up noise you need a new cable.
All I'm saying is this type of noise or distortion if you want is much overlooked and does effect the quality of sound reproduction. That's just a subject that I never see talked about but there have been some that have mentioned it in passing.
Frank talks about it all the time. I think it gets passed over in most discussions because, unless you have faulty cables or systemic power supply problems, it's usually not much of an issue. I hate to keep coming back to the same old example, but the Benchmark DAC1/Pre, love it or hate it, is a dac, preamp and headphone amplifier all in one unit for <$2k, that has independently been measured, more than a couple of times, with a S/N ratio of greater than 100 dB. Just under 100 dB is its average. If your high-end gear can't match that, it's either not living up to the title of "high-end" or you're listening to tubes and analog sources, in which case you have embraced the noise, not reduced it.
That's noise, though a shielded cable shouldn't act like an antenna, that's why it's shielded, if it is still picking up noise you need a new cable.
Frank talks about it all the time. I think it gets passed over in most discussions because, unless you have faulty cables or systemic power supply problems, it's usually not much of an issue. I hate to keep coming back to the same old example, but the Benchmark DAC1/Pre, love it or hate it, is a dac, preamp and headphone amplifier all in one unit for <$2k, that has independently been measured, more than a couple of times, with a S/N ratio of greater than 100 dB. Just under 100 dB is its average. If your high-end gear can't match that, it's either not living up to the title of "high-end" or you're listening to tubes and analog sources, in which case you have embraced the noise, not reduced it.
Yes Frank talks about similar issues, I don't think he has experimented exactly as I have.
btw Tim spend less than 15 dollars and put small cable snaps on either end of you head phone cable and see if your clarity and tonal signature does improve.
Yes Frank talks about similar issues, I don't think he has experimented exactly as I have.
btw Tim spend less than 15 dollars and put small cable snaps on either end of you head phone cable and see if your clarity and tonal signature does improve.
P.S. Mouser has Wurth,their smaller ones(.400 id work good) and comment them to ship 1st class mail,you will get them in 3 days and the shipping will be reasonable.
There is a easy and low cost experiment to try if interested. If you take the necessary length of a good grade microphone low impedance cable and terminate it properly and then purchase a general type ferrite and put one on each end of the cable in a loop and one in the middle of the cable. replace your existing preamp IC with this cable and see if you gain additional clarity and dynamics. The ferrites can be purchased from Mouser at about 4 dollars each.
Putting toroidal (or other types ) ferrites in a system in the way you describe can either decrease or increase the RF noise of the system. When you put the ferrite you are increasing the inductance of the cables and changing the RF impedance and resonances in the system. The result is unpredictable, as it depends on system susceptibility to RF, grounding practice and RF pollution conditions.
Putting toroidal (or other types ) ferrites in a system in the way you describe can either decrease or increase the RF noise of the system. When you put the ferrite you are increasing the inductance of the cables and changing the RF impedance and resonances in the system. The result is unpredictable, as it depends on system susceptibility to RF, grounding practice and RF pollution conditions.
WOudl you suggest a more reliable method of testing your hypothesis? I am not sure I will reliably be able to observe if "clarity and tonal signature does improve". I am one of those who do not believe in those tweaks ...
WOudl you suggest a more reliable method of testing your hypothesis? I am not sure I will reliably be able to observe if "clarity and tonal signature does improve". I am one of those who do not believe in those tweaks ...
Frantz I understand. In my system the difference has been quite dramatic,but then I have about 300 dollars total worth of ferrites on every one of my cables. Whether it is a NBS Statement IC,PC or a Nirvana audio digital SPDIF cable or a simple microhone cable. It has changed my opinion about cables in general. If somebody has a more scientific test or methodology I'm all ears.
Okay, let's nail the the "correct" meaning of noise, from Wikipedia:
In audio, recording, and broadcast systems audio noise refers to the residual low level sound (usually hiss and hum) that is heard in quiet periods of programme
In other words, it is any sound you hear if you play a silent track on any medium, that's been recorded with the mic input effectively short circuited. So in the sense that Roger is referring to it, here it is distortion, because you only hear the lack of clarity, etc, when the music is playing. Why it is frequently called noise is because it's hard to pinpoint: a transistor radio with its volume wound up screams with distortion, no problems identifying that, but once it's at a relatively low level it's hard to grab on to. As some people have stated here, sometimes the only way you know it was there is by getting the system to work better; you realise that it was there, by noting the difference with its absence.
Personally, that's why I use "bad" recordings; they sound bad because they are beautifully highlighting this low level distortion, making it dead obvious; just like the transistor radio having its volume wound up too much ...
Okay, let's nail the the "correct" meaning of noise, from Wikipedia:
In other words, it is any sound you hear if you play a silent track on any medium, that's been recorded with the mic input effectively short circuited. So in the sense that Roger is referring to it, here it is distortion, because you only hear the lack of clarity, etc, when the music is playing. Why it is frequently called noise is because it's hard to pinpoint: a transistor radio with its volume wound up screams with distortion, no problems identifying that, but once it's at a relatively low level it's hard to grab on to. As some people have stated here, sometimes the only way you know it was there is by getting the system to work better; you realise that it was there, by noting the difference with its absence.
Personally, that's why I use "bad" recordings; they sound bad because they are beautifully highlighting this low level distortion, making it dead obvious; just like the transistor radio having its volume wound up too much ...
That sounds like a perfect description of the noise floor, in a recording or a system -- that thing measured as signal to noise ratio. It is background. It is constant. It is linear. It is not "distortion." And in "bad" recordings like you've been talking about lately -- Springsteen, Adele -- in "loud" recordings, this noise will be the least obvious, because there will be no quiet passages to reveal it.
But then again, most audiophiles would call a real trumpet (especially with a Harmon mute) "ear bleeding bright" and prefer the dulled, high-end-approved version. That's just my own personal experience and opinion, and has no basis in measurement or fact.
Well, I disagree. I can do the "ear bleeding bright" trumpet sound if the system is sufficiently warmed up and all is where it should be. Of course, all systems can get to the right volume level, but they typically mess up the harmonics, the bits that create the "My head is exploding!!" sensation, it often just sounds like someone is stabbing you in the eardrums with a knife. This "exploding head" sensation is one form of that pressurising talked about in another thread.
The fact that most systems dull it down is part of what I referred to elsewhere: they have tuned their systems to give them the preferred sound on material from the "golden age", and that doesn't work with frequency correct source.
Okay, let's nail the the "correct" meaning of noise, from Wikipedia:
In other words, it is any sound you hear if you play a silent track on any medium, that's been recorded with the mic input effectively short circuited. So in the sense that Roger is referring to it, here it is distortion, because you only hear the lack of clarity, etc, when the music is playing. Why it is frequently called noise is because it's hard to pinpoint: a transistor radio with its volume wound up screams with distortion, no problems identifying that, but once it's at a relatively low level it's hard to grab on to. As some people have stated here, sometimes the only way you know it was there is by getting the system to work better; you realise that it was there, by noting the difference with its absence.
Personally, that's why I use "bad" recordings; they sound bad because they are beautifully highlighting this low level distortion, making it dead obvious; just like the transistor radio having its volume wound up too much ...
I'll post this off the NBS cable site. I agree totally with their description of the noise and it's effect on sound. Funny thing I no longer need to upgrade my cables to anything now. The cable snaps have upped the clarity so much I have blown by NBS's best cable at this point. Their point about EMI in current I agree with also,but that fix is not the same process.
Does it effect the noise floor? Maybe but the noise floor on my SS amplifiers hasn't changed,in fact my VAC's are quieter,but no matter they both have similar qualities.
Noise, in a cable, can and will affect the audio frequency range and interfere with an audio signal. The most common noise, Radio Frequency Interference (RFI), affects a cable directly in the audio range. RFI presents itself as hiss, commercial radio broadcasts, intercom broadcasts, or any other radio signal broadcast in the audible range.
Another source of noise is Electromagnetic Interference (EMI). Whenever electricity, i.e., an audio signal, passes through a wire, it produces inductance that creates an electromagnetic field. Because EMI manifests itself at a high frequency, it is commonly believed not to interfere with the audible range of frequencies. However, all frequencies demonstrate harmonic structures. Even if the cause of EMI is outside the audible range, the upper and lower harmonics of a given frequency often present themselves within the audible range. At the very least, EMI causes degradation of audio frequencies.
