why lower noise? how low noise and lower distortion relate.

[DonH50]

Would going to a non-ferrous chassis help? I know some components have been built with copper or Al (adding other problems, natch...)

 

[garylkoh]

Would going to a non-ferrous chassis help? I know some components have been built with copper or Al (adding other problems, natch...)

Yes - I think so. I've got a prototype preamp that has almost no metal in the chassis. But then RFI and EMI will cause problems.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Yes - I think so. I've got a prototype preamp that has almost no metal in the chassis. But then RFI and EMI will cause problems.

Yeah try selling that preamplifier in NYC. I remember walking into Stereo Exchange in NYC some 20 years ago (?) and listening to a customer complain that their "high bandwidth, reviewer approved" Ps Audio IV preamplifier was picking up channel 2. And it was

I also remember a good friend having a problem with an upstairs neighbor that must have been running an illegal power HAM set and every Sunday, would come blasting thru his stereo system. He tried all types of Ferrite beads, etc. to no avail. He finally solved it with a baseball bat He smashed the guys antenna

 

[cjfrbw]

I don't really understand the point of the thread or the commentary. Tape, vinyl etc. ALWAYS has noise and distortion, far in excess of what an objectivist digi-phile would ever accept as base line.

There are also a lot of antiquarians who would regard "noise reduction" as being tantamount to "music reduction" in an analog system.

 

[cjfrbw]

It's an absolute honest comment, and I see no reason to delete it, unless it is somehow in defiance of some kind of agenda. If there is an agenda, then please state it clearly so that I don't confuse the agenda with audio commentary or opinion.

 

[MylesBAstor]

I don't really understand the point of the thread or the commentary. Tape, vinyl etc. ALWAYS has noise and distortion, far in excess of what an objectivist digi-phile would ever accept as base line.

There are also a lot of antiquarians who would regard "noise reduction" as being tantamount to "music reduction" in an analog system.

Problem with this argument Carl is that digital has its own set of distortions, just different than analog. Just as transistors had a different set of distortions than tubes. Remember the first couple gens of digital. Totally the opposite of transparent

I think one problem in ID'ing these distortions/noise is that what might be perceived as say a frequency response anamoly is really distortion. See the work of Jung and Marsh and Curl

Or everytime eliminate one type of noise and distortion, another one rears its ugly head. Audio engineering is full of these examples

 

[cjfrbw]

My basic point is that analog i.e. vinyl and tape ALWAYS have noise, and noise reduction, per se, do not always come along with improvements in sound quality. When I used tapes with DBX noise reduction in the ancient past, I thought it sounded worse than the tapes without noise reduction.

The mighty struggles of vinyl lovers with plinths surrounds the fine art of finding the best point at which vibration control does not actually strip away the elements of the vinyl signal that are also music related. The construction of plinths and vibration control inevitably becomes as much art as science.

An inherently noisy medium does not always benefit from noise reduction or even distortion reduction if you toss out the baby with the bathwater, thus the comment, and the point at which the baby is tossed is subject to varying opinions.

Directly Heated Triode fans believe that AC heaters with their inherent noise sound better than noiseless DC heaters. When you talk about tubes, vinyl, tape in particular, noise and distortion reduction are subject to many IFs.

I can much more easily understand noise and distortion reduction in solid state and digital as being more universally beneficial.

 

[cjfrbw]

Mike,

I am glad that you and your listeners have found joy in your system. I think there is a leap between that and making claims that your system defines what all opinion ought to be.

However, when I wrote the comment, I wasn't really thinking about you at all. I read through the thread and really wondered what exactly the point was, since it seems to be trending in directions that don't necessarily agree with a lot of valid and varying opinions concerning the relationships of noise, distortion and analog and vinyl. The "consensus" is narrow, and subject to a sample of one system, however marvelous, but nontheless opaque to those who haven't heard it. That is fiat by testimonial, which is interesting, but still subject to valid contrarian speculation.

So pardon me if I don't delete, it is not as personal as you may think, I am in fact a bit confused by the whole thing.

 

[fas42]

I think one problem in ID'ing these distortions/noise is that what might be perceived as say a frequency response anamoly is really distortion. See the work of Jung and Marsh and Curl

Or everytime eliminate one type of noise and distortion, another one rears its ugly head. Audio engineering is full of these examples

Now the conversation over the last couple of pages has been fascinating to see -- demonstrating that a lot of audio people realise that at a certain point of upgrading their systems that the key to greater success is being fussier about the subtle aspects of the setup, rather than worrying about macro changes. Which is where it can also become a nightmare!

Now, I know I upset quite a few people on the forum some months ago talking about low level distortion, but that's exactly what's being addressed in this conversation here right now, only with some quibbling about whether you call it noise or distortion. I believe it should be called exactly what it really is: again, low level, relatively "inaudible", distortion.

I also agree that cjfrbw should not derail the intent of the discourse by bringing in the objection that the media have their own set of issues. Yes, they do, but over and over again I have demonstrated to myself, and others, that if you reduce that component of "incorrectness" contributed by the system that the "problems" of the recording fall away into effective inaudibility. Hence, problem of enjoying music playback solved!

Frank

 

[jazdoc]

I think of noise as unrelated to signal. Noise can have a number of sources.

Distortion is related to signal. Indeed distortion is variance from the original signal.

To our technical brethren, is this a reasonable layman's defintion?

 

[RogerD]

I am in fact a bit confused by the whole thing.

IMHO I think most are. I have posted about my own path to mitigate noise and distortion without much feedback. In fact I'm surprised that we have 8 pages on the subject. FWIW

 

[naturephoto1]

IMHO I think most are. I have posted about my own path to mitigate noise and distortion without much feedback. In fact I'm surprised that we have 8 pages on the subject. FWIW

Roger,

As you and I have pointed out and mentioned in your thread and elsewhere the affects of part replacement for upgrades, the usage of ferrite filters, certain other physical tweaks, etc. can reduce noise, interference etc. and allow more information to come through.

Rich

 

[RogerD]

Roger,

As you and I have pointed out and mentioned in your thread and elsewhere the affects of part replacement for upgrades, the usage of ferrite filters, certain other physical tweaks, etc. can reduce noise, interference etc. and allow more information to come through.

Rich

+1

 

[c1ferrari]

Hahaha

Interesting aside: Once upon a time in a galaxy far, far -*- oops, sorry it was this galaxy! Anyway, while checking out a customer's system I noticed a lot of rumble from the TT and suggested he use the rumble filter. That particular filter was down 3 dB at about 15 Hz, falling rapidly after that. After switching it on, I immediately felt like the system sounded much better without all that LF "hash" and the measured THD/IMD decreased significantly as the amp and speakers were no longer trying to amplify the noise. It felt and sounded like a low-grade headache that had just gone away. As I was basking in the change and preparing to accept the accolades from the customer over the much cleaner sound, he said "what happened to all my bass?"

Live and Learn

 

[RogerD]

And Rich I'll just add that until the "noise is lowered to minor amount (talking in real terms) you cannot appreciate how much information is available on most sources we listen to,vinyl,CD,and tape.

Cables are a good point but even the very equipment from after the microphone is prone to low level noise. That is why many studios have gone to battery power. The reduction of noise is the necessary gateway to unlock the benefits of ultra low distortion construction in audio equipment.

 

[c1ferrari]

i have experimented with moving the A10 U8's around under both the dart pre and dart amp, both of which are quite heavy.

Do you folks worry that placement of a footer, tweak, etc., under a piece of gear will leave an impression, i.e., dimple or worse, in the chassis?

 

[garylkoh]

Do you folks worry that placement of a footer, tweak, etc., under a piece of gear will leave an impression, i.e., dimple or worse, in the chassis?

I don't. With some pieces of equipment, a spike sounds better pointing UP (can make quite a hole in the chassis). So, if you buy anything second-hand from me, be prepared to find lots of holes on the bottom

 

[DonH50]

Yes - I think so. I've got a prototype preamp that has almost no metal in the chassis. But then RFI and EMI will cause problems.

You could use copper, or copper screen, as a shield.

 

[garylkoh]

You could use copper, or copper screen, as a shield.

Yes - silver is better, and this is what I've used.
http://www.mgchemicals.com/downloads/pdf/specsheets/8420.pdf

Unfortunately, it costs an arm and a leg and a hip, and there's no way I'm going to be able to sell the preamp at the price...... that's why it's still a prototype. My sister hit the roof when I told her how much it would cost.

 

[fas42]

The point of all this is that one should be able to get the result of good sound without spending silly money for materials or components: part of the answer for achieving this is to truly understand what's going on in terms of the physical phenomena that pull the SQ down. This is an arduous journey, which I have only partially completed, but at least I feel I've made major progress forward ...

Frank