advertisement


Cyclic debates and moderation Part II

hammeredklavier said:
Simply that if amplifiers were all transparent, like they ought to be, then obviously one will sound much like another. Now, deviations from transparency will clearly lead to audible differences - but this is readily explicable, and not really what high fidelity sound reproduction is all about.
Click to expand...

I think it's a bit rich being told what or what isn't transparent when the loudspeaker systems they've used to make this generalisation are pretty compromised, be it rule of thumb active bodges or your piddly little bandwidth/output limited stand mounts.
 
Steven Toy said:
Why do the objectivists look at their script sheets and refer to those who trust their ears more than the measurements rather disparagingly as audiophiles?

We are all audiophiles!

Anyone who isn't is a troll.
Click to expand...
I am not an audiophile. When the "subjectivist" thing started in the 70s people that believed in it started calling themselves audiophiles and the word became associated with them. People that held onto a traditional view of sound quality based on evidence tended to want to disassociate themselves from the word.
 
hammeredklavier said:
That's an interesting point. I don't think the underlying science is quite as arcane and inscrutable as some audiophiles like to think.

I mean, take amplifiers as an example. If they have a flat frequency response, and do not produce audible distortion, why on earth would one sound different from another? Let's be very clear about this: for something to affect the sound of a hi-fi, relative to an alternative component, then it must have an audible difference in frequency response or distortion. There's no deep mystery - it must be making some part of the signal louder than other parts (which it shouldn't) or must be colouring the sound by distorting it. If the frequency response is fairly linear between 20-20,000 Hz, distortion is <0.1 %, and the noise floor is at -70 dB or (hopefully!) better, then one amplifier will sound the same as another.
Click to expand...

Measured into a pure resistive load at 1w output maybe, attach a pair of higly reactive 'speakers that dip to 2ohms in the bass and lets see if they sound the same.
 
For the record, I charver palone, not omi. I'm not even bibi. I just used to aunt nell polari while me mam was at handbag.

Varda?
 
nealg said:
Measured into a pure resistive load at 1w output maybe, attach a pair of higly reactive 'speakers that dip to 2ohms in the bass and lets see if they sound the same.
Click to expand...

Spot on. I personally blame speakers for everything!
 
Bob and Tony have hit the nail on the head. Now if all measurement talk and such like can be contained within this thread then it will make for a better forum all round. Keep this thread going, people have to vent their opinions, sorry facts somewhere.
 
Paul R said:
This is where the null test strikes.

It's worth reading a 35 year old article by Peter Baxandall that Robert is hosting at http://www.audiosmile.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=28381

Paul
Click to expand...

Nice to know someone is watching :)


cooky1257 said:
I think it's a bit rich being told what or what isn't transparent when the loudspeaker systems they've used to make this generalisation are pretty compromised, be it rule of thumb active bodges or your piddly little bandwidth/output limited stand mounts.
Click to expand...


Cooky, I think Rob has skipped out on this thread but your comment about judging amps from piddly bandwidth and output limited speakers is clearly aimed at him. Just for the record, he has about 13 different pairs of speakers at home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top