 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
166.137.138.189
In Reply to: RE: Weiss Saracon is fantastic! posted by Jim F. on December 21, 2009 at 09:44:35
Jesus effin Christ. Your post there is why folks in other forums are not in a hurry to get anywhere near a computer for audio.
You did all that, did you actually listen to any music?
You know what I do, I grab beer, lately a New Belgium 1554, select the proper inputon the pre-amp, sit down on the couch and press play.
You have seriously made this about 15 billion times more complicated than it needs to be. My god.
Happiness is a clean record, and warm tubes!
Follow Ups:
> You did all that, did you actually listen to any music?
Actually, I'm listening to music all the time I'm doing
that.
;->
Some audiophiles like to attempt to improve sound by spending a ton of money on hardware. That's what appeals to them the most. Others appreciate the potential of DSP and like playing around with software. Isn't it more sensible for Jim F. to try to get a better sound by investing in an $850 professional program than by spending $10,000 on an EL34 tube amp? To me getting the sound you want purely by changing hardware is like changing light bulbs every time you want to change the brightness in the room. Why not just get a dimmer switch?
It is more sensible to expend ones effort on room acoustics and treatment than anything else audio playback related. And most audiophiles don't do it. They spend more money on gear, and these days lots of effort on computer software settings. That's crazy.
With Jim's DSP chain he could probably simulate the distortion profile of any tube amp you want quite nicely! he he he
And this from a guy who loves 6L6 and 300B tubes...
Cheers,
Presto
> With Jim's DSP chain he could probably simulate the
> distortion profile of any tube amp you want quite nicely!
Well, no, it's not quite that -- parametric. ;->
I was kind of amused to discover, however, in conjunction with
my research into an LP digitizing project that I may not now
get to in this lifetime (I've had a Versa Dynamics turntable
staring at me accusingly for the past 4 years now :-/ )
that Diamond Cut Productions' DC7 "virtual preamp" software
(for doing RIAA correction on vinyl digitized through a
"flat" preamp -- like the Instruments input on the Prism Orpheus)
will color the sound for you according to the distortion
characteristics of a whole list of tubes. They have a setting
called "high-end tube preamp" or something like that. ;->
"Why not just get a dimmer switch?"
Or some tone controls. I agree that the process describe here is prohibitively complex. And I seriously doubt it yields better results than a bit of eq. There is no doubt that audio tweaking, whether hardware or software-based, is a hobby in and of itself, apart from enjoying music well-reproduced.
P
> I seriously doubt it yields better results than a bit of eq.
Ah yes, the days of the ubiquitous parametric equalizer.
I remember them. Solve all your audio problems with this
cheap little Metrotec box!
;->
Nah. Much too complicated. A well-calibrated tone knob should do the trick.
p
> Nah. Much too complicated. A well-calibrated tone knob
> should do the trick.
Can't you just imagine J. Gordon Holt (of blessed memory), in a
mischievous mood, advising his readers "Don't waste your money
on those hifalutin' Koetsu and Kiseki and such-like exotic
cartridges whose coils are wound from mithril spun by the Elves
of Lothlorien to a thinness finer than Elf-hair. Just buy a
Shure and use your equalizer." ;->
Later on, of course, there were "equalizers" like the
Cello Audio Palette, and in the computer world of nowadays
there's Burwen Audio Splendor. Could it be done --
making a Shure sound like a Koetsu Rosewood Platinum Signature?
Maybe. Who knows?
Remember the Bob Carver Amplifier Challenge? He swore
that he could "voice" one of his solid-state t-amps
(t for "tube", get it?) to sound exactly like any
exotic tube amplifier the Stereophile
reviewers cared to name. That didn't turn out too well,
as I recall. But Carver did up making an exotic tube amp
of his own -- the Silver Seven. How big is **your**
circuit breaker?
http://community.klipsch.com/forums/storage/4/768823/Carver%20Silver%20Seven_Spain1.jpg
Audio tweaking begins from the enjoyment of music seeking to have it better reproduced and to give the tweaker an active role in it. It can however take on a life of its own to the point of putting the music itself and even fidelity second (but not "aside"). When this happens, tweaks take on an idiosyncratic and inordinate value in relation to simply reproducing the music well.
> Audio tweaking begins from the enjoyment of music seeking
> to have it better reproduced and to give the tweaker an
> active role in it. It can however take on a life of its own
> to the point of putting the music itself and even fidelity
> second (but not "aside"). When this happens, tweaks take
> on an idiosyncratic and inordinate value in relation to
> simply reproducing the music well.
Perhaps. And it's true of system "upgrading" too (i.e.,
buying new equipment), not just "tweaking" (pounding furniture
glides into the floor and propping your speakers and amplifiers
on them, putting Webster's Unabridged -- poor man's Shun Mook --
on top of your CD player to "damp" it, etc.)
What happens though, is what B. F. Skinner called a "variable-ratio
schedule of reinforcement". Sometimes, you get a real jolt
of the sweet (dopaminergic neurons squirting out neurotransmitter ;-> )
as a result of something you've done. I can still remember
the first time I heard Audio Research tube gear back in 1976
(particularly the SP-1-a preamp) -- what a rush! Other things,
fairly few and far between, have given me a similar thrill
over the years. Yes, putting my Quads on furniture glides
tightened up the bass very satisfyingly (no, I don't have
spikes on the bottom and sand inside the Arcici stands these
days -- I use a separate powered woofer instead. ;-> ).
A big project I did back in -- '94? '95 -- involving a
Radio Shack Optimus CD-4300 battery-powered CD transport
feeding a pair of battery-powered DTIs feeding a Theta
DS Pro Prime with its DAC chip also battery powered gave
me quite a thrill. And hearing Eximius DVD2One software CD
upsampling was another unexpected thrill (By contrast,
cheap ASRC-based upsampling did not give me the sensations
Jonathan Scull experienced reviewing the dCS 972, though
my first such device -- a Bel Canto DAC-2 -- was very nice
indeed, though probably, I now realize, for other reasons
than simply the upsampling. Later instances of the same
thing -- "I've got 24/96, now give me 24/192!" -- were not as
edifying.)
And so it goes. Other things, while eagerly anticipated to
the point of frenzy, like the Compact Disc itself, turned into an
almost heart-breaking disappointment when they finally materialized
(and thereby hangs a 25-year-long tale).
And that brings us to the second source of the problem.
Consumer audio reproduction has always been poised right
at the threshold of the "barely acceptable". It could almost
have been designed to lure susceptible people into a
kind of gambling behavior by providing just the occasional
tantalizing glimpse of paradise[*]. (It could almost have been
done deliberately, but I don't believe in conspiracy
theories -- it's just the way things work, what with the cost
and technical difficulty of superior audio reproduction,
the cost-constrained nature of consumer manufacturing, and
the need for economies of scale to keep costs down --
manufacturers need to target the mass market, and the
mass market **just doesn't care**.) That's part of the
heartbreak of digital audio -- it was supposed to be **better**
than adequate by a substantial margin (compared to
mechanical tonearms and cartridges and analog grooves
pressed in vinyl) -- it certainly looked like it was going
to be, on prima facie evidence (whooped up by both
marketers and "true believing" engineers). And then it
turned out to be **worse**!! And nobody in the "responsible"
press -- only the "crazies" at The Absolute Sound --
would even admit it! Talk about Charlie Brown and the football.
So, digital has turned out to be every bit as difficult to
get right as analog ever was.
And the beat goes on.
[*] Talk about "glimpses of paradise". Long before there was a buzz
about RFI and power-line interference, back in the mid-70's,
I was continually frustrated by the fact that, when I listened
to my (LP) system before going to work, it sounded **great**.
I'd anticipate returning to it all day, and then when I got
home at 5:30 and turned it on again, it would sound like **crap**.
I always thought this was a psychological phenomenon (and maybe
it was, but I don't think so -- in a similar way, I independently
discovered 1) inner-groove distortion and 2) listener fatigue,
before I ever heard the terms). I now realize that this was
probably because power is dirtiest in the late afternoon, when
all the household appliances are on. I now have all my systems
on power conditioning (PS Audio Power Plants) and, sure enough,
I get consistent sound.
> . . .(particularly the SP-1-a preamp). . .
I meant SP-3a (or SP-3a-1), for those of you with
long memories. ;->
I bought the Audio Research SP 2c back in the day. Nothing will ever seem to live up to the retrospective perfection. I had a system with that and its mate the Dual 50 F-1a 50w/ch tube amp feeding Magnaplanar Tympani 1-U three panel per channel electromagnetic screen speakers. In fact I have these still stored in my basement though probably unusable now. I just could not part with them.
I like your account of how things go. I was in particular trying to correct a bit what PP said. I don't think it is always the case that tweaking and upgrading take precedence over appreciating the music as well reproduced as one can. I sure try to keep it in its place, but like everyone I get seduced now and then.
> I had a system with that and its mate the Dual 50
> F-1a 50w/ch tube amp feeding Magnaplanar Tympani 1-U
I had, along with the SP-3a-1 (bought new for, what was it,
$795 ? -- anyway, a staggering sum of money for a preamp in
those days) a Dual 75 (bought used). And a pair of
Magnepan MG-IIs.
Years later, I sold the MG-IIs to a friend, and bought
a pair of Tympani IVs. With the ribbon tweeters. Total
overkill! (Buying them was a nostalgia trip. Magneplanar
Tympani (presumably the 1U, like you had) were
my **very first** introduction to "high-end audio" back
in 1973.) I **never** had the space to set those up
properly. They **literally** divided the rooms I had them
in, and overdrove the acoustic space pretty badly.
Had fights with the upstairs neighbor over them, more
than once (not that I ever played them that loudly; they
were just overpowering the small room **and** the neighbors).
So I finally traded them in and bought the Quad ESL-63s
(used). I still have and use the Quads, but they threatened
to be the death of me, twice. Another trip down memory
lane: I knew about the Quads' reputation for finickiness,
going back to the original "ELS-57" firescreens, but
some reviews in Stereophile indicated that the ESL-63s
were perfectly happy with high-quality solid state
amplification. So I bought a Krell KSA-80. Can't get
any higher solid state than that, right? Of course,
I was fronting all this with early-90s digital, through
a modest solid-state line stage (an Adcom GFP-565, which
I also still have and have uses for). Well, after
the initial love affair with the Quads wore off, I started
being plagued by some kind of high-frequency irritation.
Not just the typical digital upper-midrange glare,
but something on the threshold of hearing, like what
Todd Krieger says he hears with upsampling. Like very
high-pitched noise. I thought I was getting tinnitus!
I started going nuts swapping equipment, playing with
cables, etc. I finally had to ditch the (expensive,
even though used) Krells and go to tube amplification
(a pair of VTL Tiny Triodes at first, then a Counterpoint
SA-4 OTL tube amp purchased used -- a major reliability
headache, but that's another story). Before things
settled down with the Quads (and they never **really**
settled down) I was actually in tears over the sound
of that system (**the** system, my only system, at the
time). So that was my first pound of flesh extracted by
the Quads.
The second pound of flesh had to do with the bass.
Quad ESL-63s (unless they're rebuilt by Crosby Audio Works,
or some such third-party outfit) have a structural resonance
around 50-60 Hz that can be excited by just the right
program material. It's the famous Quad rattle. It
doesn't have to be playing loud, and it isn't always
the kind of program you'd expect to hear it on (like
an Enya CD), it can happen, unpredictably, with
almost anything. Very disconcerting, and more and more
irritating, like rubbing the same sore spot,
the longer you have the speakers. I was finally
ready to ditch them 10 or 12 years ago, but at the
same time I **hated** the idea of parting with them, so I decided
(riskily) to throw more money at the problem by getting
a Velodyne HGS-12 woofer to get the bass out of
the Quads. Well, the crossover in the Velodyne wasn't
nearly steep enough, so I had to supplement it with
a Bryston 10B SUB, crossed over at 100 Hz and 18 db/octave.
That took care of about 80% of the problem. But later
I replaced the Bryston with a Marchand XM126-2AA
two-way tube crossover, 24 db/octave and fixed 100 Hz
crossover frequency. **That** finally took care of
the problem, 100%.
My latest discovery about the Quads is that they **love**
digital amps. Who'd have believed it! So now I'm
very green -- I drive the Quads with a modest Little Dot T-150
Tripath amp, and I've retired the Jadis JA-80s and the
AtmaSphere M60 MkII OTLs, and the speakers seem just
as happy as they can be. With a conrad-johnson PV12-L
line stage (ca. 1994) before the Marchand crossover,
and currently sourced by the Cary 306 SACD used as
a D/A converter. It's a good thing the Quads so graciously
allowed me to go green. The previous AtmaSphere amps
(8 triode output tubes and 4 driver tubes per side),
each on its own PS Audio P-1000 power conditioner,
would blow the room's circuit breaker after about
an hour or so of listening, even with all the lights
off.
"I don't think it is always the case that tweaking and upgrading take precedence over appreciating the music "
-- I don't think it is always the case either.
p
In fact, I have learned from hard earned experience to stop tweaking once something good is obtained. Further tweaking can make things worse.
I therefore have two systems; one for experimentation and one for listening. The experimental system helps to upgrade my main system if something works.
avid audiophiles are not passionate music lovers. I bought my amp used from an audiophile with a $50K system who barely had 30 CD's. In this forum you probably find the least reference to music. One man's hobby is another man's quirky obsession. If your hobbyist goal is to manipulate electrons until they yield the sound you want, DSP is as sensible as endless equipment swapping. A focus on software is just as valid, and more economical, as focusing on hardware.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
