Audiophile?

[Vladimir]

Amplifiers are not a naturally occurring phenomena that we may or may not learn everything about by doing measurements. They are 100% man made electrical appliances. Nothing about them is unknown to electronic engineering and physics, including how changing electronic design affects audible performance. But they continue to be mystery boxes to audiophiles for some reason.

The problem with manufacturer declared specification is:

1) incomplete / irrelevant

2) lies

Guess why?

 

[fr0g]

Which are? (at 1 micro-watt to 1 milliwatt)

If you're going to be scientific in your hi-fi selection, you might as well base your decisions on proper science.

And what are the distortion figures of your speakers? And what's the size and nature (IE oscilloscope plot) of the distortion when you feed your speakers with a single cycle 60 hz test tone?

Valve amplifiers are generally inferior to SS ones. It's like insisting a Morris Minor is as good as a Ford Focus to suggest otherwise.

Fr0g and TrevC, please please please back up your stance on SET amplifiers by providing the answer to my question highlighted in bold.

If you can't do that then your stance on valves vs solid state is totally unproven. Your stance is based on commonly available measurements above 0.1 watts, which equate to volumes at which I almost never listen at.

Fr0g, likewise for speakers, but this time for all volumes between 30 dbs and 110 dbs and all frequencies between 20 hz and 20 khz. Let's compare, for example, your small low efficiency coned and domed speakers vs my large corner horns. Let's also measure thermal compression in your speakers and mine. Let's also look at single cycle tone bursts at various frequencies to see how our speakers cope with transients.

My point being, that Fr0g and TrevC seem to style themselves as selecting hi-fi on the basis of objective measurements, when the reality is that they haven't, simply because no comprehensive enough set of measurements have ever been done for amplifiers nor speakers.

I am a different type of audiophile to Fr0g and TrevC. When it comes to technical measurements in hi-fi, the more I've found out about them, the more I realise that I don't know what I'd like to know from them.

I am 100% certain I would enjoy the sound of your system LindsayT. That is not in question.

And maybe given the room, I'd go for some big speakers too.

Maybe I wasn't specific enough, but for normal folk, in normal houses, the kind of speakers I have are about as Hi-fi as is available. Crystal clear mids and highs and with the sub, plenty of real, deep, fast bass. All in a system that a normal wife can accept. Arguing about extremes such as yours is not really relevant outside niche forums. This one is far from niche.

As mentioned by Matt, mine could be improved by making them "not boxes". Or by excluding a crossover altogether, although with current single-driver tech I think that creates more problems than it fixes.

Yours could probably be improved by getting rid of passive crossovers. Who knows?

 

[fr0g]

If you want to achieve maximum fidelity then you need to address everything in your power to address.

Of course, speakers are the weakest link. I don't think anyone would dispute that.

So if you address every distortion and do what you can possibly do, at whatever budget, you end up with speakers with active crossovers powered by solid state amps. You certainly do not end up with valves and horns.

If measurable distortion is the enemy, you also avoid speakers in boxes and speakers with electrodynamic drivers. Also best to avoid any crossover in the presence zone, active or passive. ESLs with a single driver from 20kHz+ down to mid-bass, perhaps with an integrated sub if space is limited, will distort less than any other speakers.

Love to try some, as would I planars. I was close to trying some Magnepans but a certain ex-forumite's attitude put me off somewhat. But I would love to hear them at some point. Not sure I'd have the room though.

Long term I think the ones I have have reduced my "audiophile anxiety" somewhat. In fact I am tempted with something like Audiopro Living LV33 next. Something that simply disperses the sound, so I can get maximum satisfaction and do other stuff at the same time, and something with built in wireless features. My days of simply sitting and listening are long behind me. 99% of the time I listen while on the PC (like now, to a pair of ADM9Ts/ BK XXLS400 sub) or cooking (cheap Jamo in ceiling speakers).

Music is king. Not decreasingly infinitesimal increases in sound quality for increasingly painful leaps in expenditure, most of which are pure snake-oil anyway.

My headphones are probably better than my speakers. They cost under 200 quid.

 

[steve_1979]

...Your stance is based on commonly available measurements above 0.1 watts, which equate to volumes at which I almost never listen at...

You never use more than 0.1 watts?

Really? *nea*

 

[davedotco]

...Your stance is based on commonly available measurements above 0.1 watts, which equate to volumes at which I almost never listen at...

You never use more than 0.1 watts?

Really? *nea*

LindsayT's favoured speaker, the Electrovoice Patrician, has a sensitivity in excess of 100db/watt at one metre.

So an average power of 0.1 watts will give an average output in excess of 90db, bl**dy loud.

 

[matt49]

Long term I think the ones I have have reduced my "audiophile anxiety" somewhat. In fact I am tempted with something like Audiopro Living LV33 next. Something that simply disperses the sound, so I can get maximum satisfaction and do other stuff at the same time, and something with built in wireless features. My days of simply sitting and listening are long behind me. 99% of the time I listen while on the PC (like now, to a pair of ADM9Ts/ BK XXLS400 sub) or cooking (cheap Jamo in ceiling speakers).

Music is king. Not decreasingly infinitesimal increases in sound quality for increasingly painful leaps in expenditure, most of which are pure snake-oil anyway.

My headphones are probably better than my speakers. They cost under 200 quid.

There you go. We're very different. Three or four evenings a week I sit down in the living room and listen to (classical) music for an hour or two. The rest of the time when I'm at home (I work from home on average 3 days a week) I listen to background music in the conservatory or the kitchen or my study.

I've never understood the "audiophile anxiety" thing. I enjoy the whole process from beginning to end. If I didn't enjoy it, I wouldn't post on this forum.

The biggest mistake I made was buying expensive headphones (Hifiman HE-500s). They're great headphones, but they fall so far short of my Martin Logans that I very rarely use them.

 

[Native_bon]

Here is my explanation. An audiophhile is someone who judges performance of a music system on expectations, & not what the system is actually doing.

 

[SteveR750]

Shirley, it's a simple choice

This, or That ?

 

[lindsayt]

...Your stance is based on commonly available measurements above 0.1 watts, which equate to volumes at which I almost never listen at...

You never use more than 0.1 watts?

Really? *nea*

Almost never.

Based on a series of measurements I've done with a calibrated sound meter.

 

[TrevC]

...Your stance is based on commonly available measurements above 0.1 watts, which equate to volumes at which I almost never listen at...

You never use more than 0.1 watts?

Really? *nea*

Almost never.

Based on a series of measurements I've done with a calibrated sound meter.

Eh? Not based on an AC voltmeter connected to the speakers?

 

[drummerman]

Here is my explanation. An audiophhile is someone who judges performance of a music system on expectations, & not what the system is actually doing.

Nop. I pretty much enjoy what my stuff is doing ...

 

[Vladimir]

Shirley, it's a simple choice

This, or That ?

That.

 

[Infiniteloop]

Which are? (at 1 micro-watt to 1 milliwatt)

If you're going to be scientific in your hi-fi selection, you might as well base your decisions on proper science.

And what are the distortion figures of your speakers? And what's the size and nature (IE oscilloscope plot) of the distortion when you feed your speakers with a single cycle 60 hz test tone?

Valve amplifiers are generally inferior to SS ones. It's like insisting a Morris Minor is as good as a Ford Focus to suggest otherwise.

Absolute Rubbish.

 

[drummerman]

Which are? (at 1 micro-watt to 1 milliwatt)

If you're going to be scientific in your hi-fi selection, you might as well base your decisions on proper science.

And what are the distortion figures of your speakers? And what's the size and nature (IE oscilloscope plot) of the distortion when you feed your speakers with a single cycle 60 hz test tone?

Valve amplifiers are generally inferior to SS ones. It's like insisting a Morris Minor is as good as a Ford Focus to suggest otherwise.

Absolute Rubbish.

Well, he did say 'generally'

But 'inferior' in what respect? Technically? Valves have unique attributes and there are manufacturers that can engineer valve amplifiers with very low distortion.

Inferior in sound? - Subjective

What I would agree with is that it costs money to engineer a tube amplifier with a lot of power, much more so than for an equivelant SS product.

I did own an Audio Innovations Valve amplifier, I think it was rated at 20 or so watts/channel but it sounded much, much fuller, faster and subjectively powerful than an 8000S (Audiolab) it replaced.

I can only imagine how a top Audio Research or McIntosh set-up would sound!

 

[Infiniteloop]

Which are? (at 1 micro-watt to 1 milliwatt)

If you're going to be scientific in your hi-fi selection, you might as well base your decisions on proper science.

And what are the distortion figures of your speakers? And what's the size and nature (IE oscilloscope plot) of the distortion when you feed your speakers with a single cycle 60 hz test tone?

Valve amplifiers are generally inferior to SS ones. It's like insisting a Morris Minor is as good as a Ford Focus to suggest otherwise.

Absolute Rubbish.

Well, he did say 'generally'

But 'inferior' in what respect? Technically? Valves have unique attributes and there are manufacturers that can engineer valve amplifiers with very low distortion.

Inferior in sound? - Subjective

What I would agree with is that it costs money to engineer a tube amplifier with a lot of power, much more so than for an equivelant SS product.

I did own an Audio Innovations Valve amplifier, I think it was rated at 20 or so watts/channel but it sounded much, much fuller, faster and subjectively powerful than an 8000S (Audiolab) it replaced.

I can only imagine how a top Audio Research or McIntosh set-up would sound!

Quite.

It's the reason I couldn't bear to part with my Unison Research S8 when I bought a Devialet 200.

Would that have happened if the S8 sounded so inferior?

 

[lindsayt]

...Your stance is based on commonly available measurements above 0.1 watts, which equate to volumes at which I almost never listen at...

You never use more than 0.1 watts?

Really? *nea*

Almost never.

Based on a series of measurements I've done with a calibrated sound meter.

Eh? Not based on an AC voltmeter connected to the speakers?

I'm not convinced my AC voltmeter would respond fast enough to capture the transient peaks that I get on well recorded music.

 

[Jota180]

Well the bible for the English language, the Oxford English dictionary, give the meaning of 'audiophile' as "a Hi-Fi enthusiast".

If we look at that closer, Hi-Fi is short for high fidelity and diving back into the Oxford English, our language bible, 'fidelity' means - "The degree of exactness with which something is copied or reproduced".

So, certain areas of Hi-Fi are not as 'Fi' as others. Added distortion is not fidelity, it's is moving away from fidelity. Some people may prefer how it sounds but they cannot say it's as high fidelity as something that does not, all other things being equal, add as much distortion.

 

[drummerman]

So, according to all your kind selfs, an Audiophile could be a misguided fool, a snob, an enthusiast, a pervert, golden eared, cloth eared and more.

Love it

Happy Easter all my little audiophiles or otherwise x

 

[Electro]

So, according to all your kind selfs, an Audiophile could be a misguided fool, a snob, an enthusiast, a pervert, golden eared, cloth eared and more.

Love it

Happy Easter all my little audiophiles or otherwise x

I think I would prefer to be (and have been) described as a " Beardyweirdo" than an Audiophile *smile*

 

[TrevC]

...Your stance is based on commonly available measurements above 0.1 watts, which equate to volumes at which I almost never listen at...

You never use more than 0.1 watts?

Really? *nea*

Almost never.

Based on a series of measurements I've done with a calibrated sound meter.

Eh? Not based on an AC voltmeter connected to the speakers?

I'm not convinced my AC voltmeter would respond fast enough to capture the transient peaks that I get on well recorded music.

But that's the only way to measure the input wattage to a speaker. Your sound meter reading is (obviously) meaningless in this context.

 

[Vladimir]

...Your stance is based on commonly available measurements above 0.1 watts, which equate to volumes at which I almost never listen at...

You never use more than 0.1 watts?

Really? *nea*

Almost never.

Based on a series of measurements I've done with a calibrated sound meter.

Eh? Not based on an AC voltmeter connected to the speakers?

I'm not convinced my AC voltmeter would respond fast enough to capture the transient peaks that I get on well recorded music.

But that's the only way to measure the input wattage to a speaker. Your sound meter reading is (obviously) meaningless in this context.

DMM has typically 2-4 updates per second. Is that fast enough to capture all transient peaks using the min-max function?

 

[TrevC]

...Your stance is based on commonly available measurements above 0.1 watts, which equate to volumes at which I almost never listen at...

You never use more than 0.1 watts?

Really? *nea*

Almost never.

Based on a series of measurements I've done with a calibrated sound meter.

Eh? Not based on an AC voltmeter connected to the speakers?

I'm not convinced my AC voltmeter would respond fast enough to capture the transient peaks that I get on well recorded music.

But that's the only way to measure the input wattage to a speaker. Your sound meter reading is (obviously) meaningless in this context.

DMM has typically 2-4 updates per second. Is that fast enough to capture all transient peaks using the min-max function?

An average reading will do for this, or a DMM with a peak reading facility for the obsessive.

http://www.fluke.com/fluke/uses/comunidad/Fluke-News-Plus/ArticleCategories/DMMs/Under-Used_Functions.htm

 

[Vladimir]

 

[Infiniteloop]

Well the bible for the English language, the Oxford English dictionary, give the meaning of 'audiophile' as "a Hi-Fi enthusiast".

If we look at that closer, Hi-Fi is short for high fidelity and diving back into the Oxford English, our language bible, 'fidelity' means - "The degree of exactness with which something is copied or reproduced".

So, certain areas of Hi-Fi are not as 'Fi' as others. Added distortion is not fidelity, it's is moving away from fidelity. Some people may prefer how it sounds but they cannot say it's as high fidelity as something that does not, all other things being equal, add as much distortion.

That's great.

Except that the recording, mixing and reproduction of music, either live or from a studio, is very far from being a science.

 

[lindsayt]

...Your stance is based on commonly available measurements above 0.1 watts, which equate to volumes at which I almost never listen at...

You never use more than 0.1 watts?

Really? *nea*

Almost never.

Based on a series of measurements I've done with a calibrated sound meter.

Eh? Not based on an AC voltmeter connected to the speakers?

I'm not convinced my AC voltmeter would respond fast enough to capture the transient peaks that I get on well recorded music.

But that's the only way to measure the input wattage to a speaker. Your sound meter reading is (obviously) meaningless in this context.

No it's not meaningless. I know the efficiency of my speakers. I know how many dbs drop-off on average I get between 1 metre from my speakers and my listening position. I know how many dbs I'm getting at my listening position and therefore how many watts are being fed to my speakers, within a reasonable tolerance.

My multi-meter on the other hand is fine for measuring steady state AC voltages. It's hopeless at measuring non-steady state AC voltages.

Therefore my sound meter gives me a more accurate indication than my AC voltmeter of how many watts are being fed to my speakers when I listen to music.

Have you ever tried using an inexpensive digital multimeter to measure the voltages across your speaker terminals when you've got music playing through them?