Have you ever set up high resolution digital file playback in your system?
Your comment about tube output stages and digital is rather quaint.
Harshness – What causes it? What relieves it?
- Thread starter caesar
- Start date
Your comment about tube output stages and digital is rather quaint.
Yes, I can play 24/192 or DSD. My point...if the source master is analog then playing a digital a/d conversion is a complete waste of my time unless I wanted to hear a hobbled version so to speak. Maybe I am alone. To each their own.
You are neither wrong nor right..you like what you like.
But you say you "can" play 192 and DSD...have you? If not, I am not sure how you can make such a grand statement.
I have made it a point to hear music I cherish in every format...LP, tape, digital etc..and have made my decisions based on exposure.
Yes, I have a variety of HD Tracks hi Rez pcm downloads. They sound pretty good but still fall short of their originally mastered in analog counterparts.
And how about the the last 25 years of digital recordings?
Have you heard the Dead's 192 catalog done with the Plangent Process? Or the Blue Note 192 remasters...
The new Springsteen 96 khz masters also done with Plangent are re lavatory beyond anything I have experienced with this music. And I have heard Springsteen masters Ina studio before.
I don't' think you can pass judgment on digital unless you have heard the best DACs with the highest quality material. No different than Evaluating the quality of the vinyl format.
Looks like a naughty elf is messing with your keyboard Andre LOL!
Merry Christmas guys!
Sometimes I would like to find Apple's engineers and ask them if they ever use an iPad. Every sentence I type has to be proof read twice, and corrected. Spell check is one thing, but auto correct is out of control. Sorry for the off topic comment. Merry Xmas.
I agree!!! On top of that I am not a fan, and have never been a fan of touch keyboards.
But an iPad makes a helluva of an elegant control point for my 6Tb music collection.
I use my iPhone for controlling my file server. What I like about the iPad is it makes the Internet like a magazine. I pick it up from the table next to my chair, see if anything interesting has been posted, or whatever, and put it down for later.
I never thought of that! Sorry, but that is a LOL concept.
Since you like measurements so much, you should hear something that's able to unite proper measuring digital with a sound you can actually play music on, like the MSB Diamond DAC:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/...p-diamond-dac-iv-amp-da-converter-measurement
Quote:
"In most ways, MSB Technology's Diamond DAC IV offers the best measured performance in the digital domain that I have encountered.—John Atkinson"
I just thought you should know that, even with 2 very similar measuring DACs, the perceived result, when playing music (not test tones), is worlds apart.
alexandre
Interesting article regarding NOS DACs, measurements, etc...written by the guys at Metrum (DACs)...very interesting to read, not only outlining where some measurements dont always link back to the way humans hear, or how the electronics are producing sound...but then also readjusting those ways of measuring to more closely link to human hearing...interesting read.
http://www.metrum-acoustics.com/Design Philosophy Metrum Acoustics.pdf
interesting quotes about measurements:
"Truthfully, the filtering used by the microphone is not quite sharp
enough to simulate our ears. This deserves some explanation...
...Pictured above is a part of our ears. It concerns the cochlea with is located in the inner ear. Every spot in the
cochlea is sensitive to a certain specific frequency. The highest frequencies are registered at the front whil
the lowest are registered at the end of the cochlea. The basilar membrame, which is part of the cochlea,
functions as a base for 15 to 20 thousand hair cells. Each of these hair cells are connected to a nerve which
is connected to the brain. This is only a (very) short summary of the working of the ear because in truth, the
ear is infinitely more complex. We however will limit ourself to the sensory cells (hair cells) that each have
describe a limited range of frequencies in such a way that they all overlap.
The sum of all of these determines the range of our hearing, which on average is between 20 Hz and 20.000 Hz. With 20.000 hair cells their bandwith is very small and thus very selective. This means that for one specific hair cell, excepticing the
specific frequency that it is tuned to, a signal gets filtered out at 40 dB per octave. This means that our
hearing on this level behaves much like a band-pass filter, comparable to the filters found in CD-players.
Implementing filters of this level in a CD-player can thus be described as overkill..."
"...Because the basilair membrane [of the human ear] behaves as a sharp filter for our hearing, it has become, in a certain way, part of the DAC. The measurements on a NOS DAC are therefore not measured at its logical end-point, but
before the filter (our hearing). Herein lies the problem, which exists when comparing the actual time domain
results and the way in which the Jtest interprets and shows results..."
http://www.metrum-acoustics.com/Design Philosophy Metrum Acoustics.pdf
interesting quotes about measurements:
"Truthfully, the filtering used by the microphone is not quite sharp
enough to simulate our ears. This deserves some explanation...
...Pictured above is a part of our ears. It concerns the cochlea with is located in the inner ear. Every spot in the
cochlea is sensitive to a certain specific frequency. The highest frequencies are registered at the front whil
the lowest are registered at the end of the cochlea. The basilar membrame, which is part of the cochlea,
functions as a base for 15 to 20 thousand hair cells. Each of these hair cells are connected to a nerve which
is connected to the brain. This is only a (very) short summary of the working of the ear because in truth, the
ear is infinitely more complex. We however will limit ourself to the sensory cells (hair cells) that each have
describe a limited range of frequencies in such a way that they all overlap.
The sum of all of these determines the range of our hearing, which on average is between 20 Hz and 20.000 Hz. With 20.000 hair cells their bandwith is very small and thus very selective. This means that for one specific hair cell, excepticing the
specific frequency that it is tuned to, a signal gets filtered out at 40 dB per octave. This means that our
hearing on this level behaves much like a band-pass filter, comparable to the filters found in CD-players.
Implementing filters of this level in a CD-player can thus be described as overkill..."
"...Because the basilair membrane [of the human ear] behaves as a sharp filter for our hearing, it has become, in a certain way, part of the DAC. The measurements on a NOS DAC are therefore not measured at its logical end-point, but
before the filter (our hearing). Herein lies the problem, which exists when comparing the actual time domain
results and the way in which the Jtest interprets and shows results..."
Last edited:
Very frequently I hear "harshness" when listening to recordings of massed voices - and it's NOT in the equipment.
Because I also hear it at concerts, I've come to realize that it is some kind of mix between harmonic and intermodulation "distortion" within and between individual and mixed voices.
Charles
Because I also hear it at concerts, I've come to realize that it is some kind of mix between harmonic and intermodulation "distortion" within and between individual and mixed voices.
Charles
I don't know how many people you consider to be "massed voices" but there are little if any concerts anywhere, classical included, that don't use microphones and amplification.
Practically every "live" concert is played through a PA system. That goes for everything from the Madison Square Garden to the Metropolitan Opera.
Singers don't belt it out anymore. They want to save their voices. It is sad but true that voices have a lifespan. Microphones can make it last longer, but they are lasting longer giving poorer performances.
I shared the same idea for a long time, until I was able to listen to the same massed voices recordings I had found guilty of harshness sounding pristine. Surely some auditoriums and life venues have very poor acoustics and can also sound harsh in real performances. IMHO it is a different type of harsh.
BTW, my disagreement would be completely solved if your post referred to a few times, not very frequently, that suggests an usual practice.
I shared the same idea for a long time, until I was able to listen to the same massed voices recordings I had found guilty of harshness sounding pristine. Surely some auditoriums and life venues have very poor acoustics and can also sound harsh in real performances. IMHO it is a different type of harsh.
BTW, my disagreement would be completely solved if your post referred to a few times, not very frequently, that suggests an usual practice.
Masquerade from the Original Cast Recording of Phantom of the Opera is one of those torture tracks. For a long time I thought it was the recording. Well sorted out systems sail through it.
Agreed.
I am somewhat surprised that no one picked-up on Gary's post about PA in many concert venues. Yes, the MET uses these sometimes (they don't always mention it) and it is hard to know when they (and other venues) do. it is however an annoying concept for the audiophiles .. I must say that I have enjoyed more than a few Classical Music concerts not knowing there were PA involved. upon knowing i started to construct "things" in my mind. Which deterred to the enjoyment of the music. The lesson? We audiophiles have to learn not to fret so much . Just enjoy the damn Music!!!
A great thread question. The reasons are multifactorial. Speakers are an easy target these days, but the primary culprit is recording quality. That is part of what makes this hobby such a challenge. I am not an audio engineer, but one thing that bubbles up in my mind is timing. It is not simply jitter, but time and phase alignment issues at the speaker, amp (which Goldmund claims to fix with higher bandwidth) and potential EMI/RFI junk altering timing as shown by Nordost/Vertex.
Similar threads
Members online
- MarkusBarkus
- Kingrex
- Salectric
- wbfhet
- andromedaaudio
- Hessec
- joaovieira
- SlapEcho
- VinylSavor
- Blake
- Ferris010
- vermaxis
- Rdk777
- puroagave
- tsaett
- Argonaut
- five
- Dvuc
- bonzo75
- Nuforce
- rrohland
- LampiNA
- davetheoilguy
- adamaley
- asindc
- cuntigh
- sandervdp
- admin1959
- ton77
- Johan K
- exupgh12
- Mike Lavigne
- audiobomber
- louiej
- gfroman
- DetroitVinylRob
- Miramunt
- MOTU
- AudioHR
- itay123
- Pacha
- takacs75
- ptman
- Maxb
- Hobblecreek
- brianehrlich
- dminches
- Bruno Rivademar
- svirid petrovich
- Gregm
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |