Evaluating a System

Subjects that don't have their own home
Post Reply
Cressy Snr
Amstrad Tower of Power
Posts: 10552
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:25 am
Location: South Yorks.

#1 Evaluating a System

Post by Cressy Snr »

Looks like I for one have been doing it all wrong since I started this DIY audio lark.
Been reading some Arthur Salvatore http://www.high-endaudio.com/ and he seems to talk a lot of sense.

"Half-Empty"-The Forgotten Approach”

Now, a thoughtful reader may ask; "Even if I agree with the above argument, what does any of this have to do with the 'real-life' components that are available to us at this moment, with each and every one of them having at least one or more noticeable flaws?" Well, this is where I'm going to make, what I feel, are some practical and important points. The first is...

I want to discuss the (now rare) "half-empty" approach of evaluating components.

By this I mean that only the component's flaws are emphasized, and described in full and in detail. I think, ultimately, that's really all that matters to serious audiophiles. In fact, to me, a "serious audiophile", by definition, is one who wants the least amount of audible flaws. This is in stark contrast to those listeners who mainly want something which is "pleasant", "beautiful", "musical", "sweet", "powerful", "awesome", "great" or whatever other simplistic and fashionable words I've overlooked. The primary usage of such subjective and nebulous words is much too personal and inherently limiting for effective communication, let alone the creating of rational performance goals.

The ubiquitous use of superlatives, the rule today in audio "reviews", is not accurate, useful or honest enough for the serious audiophile. In the end, as the performance of a growing number of outstanding components approaches practical perfection, their remaining flaws become increasingly critical when distinguishing these components from each other. Superlatives, on their own, are useless, unless the writer's real goal is to make even more "friends", instead of elucidating important differences, let alone taking an actual public position between them.


The bit in bold unfortunately represents me down to a tee. So how does one move on from that, to actually being able to properly evaluate one’s progress towards getting maximum bang for buck.
Sgt. Baker started talkin’ with a Bullhorn in his hand.
Cressy Snr
Amstrad Tower of Power
Posts: 10552
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:25 am
Location: South Yorks.

#2 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by Cressy Snr »

Or rather than engage with all the above, simply admit I’m not a ‘serious’ audiophile and leave it at that. Difficult to face up to, but ultimately less stress

I do like his approach however.
Last edited by Cressy Snr on Sun Jan 31, 2021 4:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sgt. Baker started talkin’ with a Bullhorn in his hand.
User avatar
rowuk
Old Hand
Posts: 453
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 2:50 pm
Location: Germany

#3 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by rowuk »

When we talk about audible flaws, are we not talking about stereo in general? Regardless of the technology, the stereo source is very much corrupted. We can display that corruption (replication), or we can massage the data to get a plausible image for the type of music being played - that does not necessarily represent the original space where the recording took place (recreation).
My son studied and got his degree as an audio engineer. We have experimented with "reproduction" - recording so that important facets of a given space are in the stereo signal and recognizable during playback. Things like stage size, reflection patterns, decay can be captured, but do not necessarily sound like the original space. As we discovered, there are many reasons for this. The results of our research was that it is possible to record for a specific playback geometry if all of the room reflections can be controlled. Speakers with wide dispersion were not suitable for instance. What was far easier and generally successful, was providing "enough" cues and leaving the plausibility to the playback system. The "audiophile" can select his stage width/depth and degree of imaging. The passionate audiophile can create a large space when the music calls for it, or an intimate one. We can't "hear" if the space is Westminster Abbey or Notre Dame, Royal Albert Hall or Frankfurts Alte Oper, Abby Road Studio or one from L.A.But the space is believable.
My question is: if we want the truth, what does that mean? Are all devices sonically "flawed" or is the definition of truth flawed? I guess it depends on where we draw the line.

From what I gleaned, this guy is fanatical about low level detail - although many things in his list of things that comprise it are not all low level at all. I would also question how he discerns between natural detail and etched (exaggerated) detail.

Looking at this guys system, I would question many of the things that he claims. That starts with the positioning of his ion tweeter and the subwoofers/LF boxes seriously out of alignment with the rest. The record list is very interesting. The "supreme recordings" may be technologically "audiophile", but a bunch of the symphonic performances certainly are musically questionable. Who needs mediocre playing in living colour? Still there are many gems in the list and I will need time to study it and locate some of the suggestions.

I will read through rest of the the site. Mr. Salvatore at least took the time to define what he believes and how that road to his system is paved!

Thank you for the link!
Last edited by rowuk on Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
Cressy Snr
Amstrad Tower of Power
Posts: 10552
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:25 am
Location: South Yorks.

#4 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by Cressy Snr »

I would say that all analogue devices are sonically flawed. The bits is bits brigade might have a far easier time claiming that digital is perfect and is the truth, than would someone trying to claim that an amp, speaker, turntable or cartridge was perfect.
Sgt. Baker started talkin’ with a Bullhorn in his hand.
User avatar
rowuk
Old Hand
Posts: 453
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 2:50 pm
Location: Germany

#5 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by rowuk »

Cressy Snr wrote: Sun Jan 31, 2021 4:34 pm Or rather than engage with all the above, simply admit I’m not a ‘serious’ audiophile and leave it at that. Difficult to face up to, but ultimately less stress

I do like his approach however.
Like with religion,our flavor of audiophileness is very much influenced by those around us sharing similar goals. I believe that there are many options. None of these are mutually exclusive
1) technological nerd (can quote all of the architectures and rant at length why any of them are wrong)
2) Noise allergy syndrome audiophile (any click/pop/aliasing noise destroys their listening pleasure)
3) Blast me out of the room audiophile
4) watchmaker audiophile (only interested in the smallest details)
5) the philosophical audiophile (spends more time thinking than shopping or building)
6) the pragmatic audiophile - is just interested in great sound and appreciation of the whole media collection.
7) ...

I believe that you are very much an audiophile, just not by Arthurs measure (which is certainly only a particular flavour of the habit)
Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
User avatar
Nick
Site Admin
Posts: 15707
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 10:20 am
Location: West Yorkshire

#6 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by Nick »

The bits is bits brigade might have a far easier time claiming that digital is perfect and is the truth, than would someone trying to claim that an amp, speaker, turntable or cartridge was perfect.
Well, no, sampling theory gives a clear definition as to what level of "perfect" is available for any given bit depth and sample rate. This can be compared to the performance of any other part of the reproduction or recording chain. And of course the particular problems with bits can also be measured and compared (non linearity and phase errors for example). "They" may claim perfect (though unless "they" actually do make such a claim, its a bit of a strawman), but its clearly a flawed version of perfect just like any other.
Whenever an honest man discovers that he's mistaken, he will either cease to be mistaken or he will cease to be honest.
Cressy Snr
Amstrad Tower of Power
Posts: 10552
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:25 am
Location: South Yorks.

#7 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by Cressy Snr »

rowuk wrote: Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:15 pm ....6) the pragmatic audiophile - is just interested in great sound and appreciation of the whole media collection.
Thank you sir. :)
I’ve been struggling to categorise myself and your No6 definition above fits me perfectly. It’s the quest to be able to appreciate of the whole media collection bit that is so fiendishly difficult to get right and is something I’ve stubbornly refused to back down on, causing a lot of self-inflicted grief, if I say so myself. Definitely need to be a bit more pragmatic.
Last edited by Cressy Snr on Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sgt. Baker started talkin’ with a Bullhorn in his hand.
Cressy Snr
Amstrad Tower of Power
Posts: 10552
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:25 am
Location: South Yorks.

#8 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by Cressy Snr »

Nick wrote: Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:36 pm
Well, no, sampling theory gives a clear definition as to what level of "perfect" is available for any given bit depth and sample rate. This can be compared to the performance of any other part of the reproduction or recording chain. And of course the particular problems with bits can also be measured and compared (non linearity and phase errors for example). "They" may claim perfect (though unless "they" actually do make such a claim, its a bit of a strawman), but its clearly a flawed version of perfect just like any other.
My bad. I think Salvatores argument that music is an art, whilst audio is a science, is obviously correct. A practical person like me can only get so far. Practical without much theory people probably, in fact do, frustrate the scientist and the engineer, by making silly statements about stuff they don’t know enough about.
Sgt. Baker started talkin’ with a Bullhorn in his hand.
User avatar
Nick
Site Admin
Posts: 15707
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 10:20 am
Location: West Yorkshire

#9 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by Nick »

My point was that IF folk suggest there is anything perfect about digital reproduction of a analogue signal the maths shows they are wrong.
Whenever an honest man discovers that he's mistaken, he will either cease to be mistaken or he will cease to be honest.
User avatar
rowuk
Old Hand
Posts: 453
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 2:50 pm
Location: Germany

#10 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by rowuk »

Nick wrote: Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:56 pm My point was that IF folk suggest there is anything perfect about digital reproduction of a analogue signal the maths shows they are wrong.
Don't we have a similar situation with Reel to Reel tape where the head gap is a brick wall low pass filter and tape saturation a natural compressor?
Even if the recording process could solve all geometrical problems (length/width/height, location, space between instruments, size of instruments) could we move that to any media and the reproduce that somewhere else?
Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
JohnG
Old Hand
Posts: 418
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:59 am

#11 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by JohnG »

Steve
I think it is fair to say if a person has a Enthusiasm for Sound they are a Audiophile in the rawest interpretation.
The longer they are involved with nurturing and creating experiences to encourage and maintain such enthusiasm the more committed a Audiophile they are IMV.

I've met you, spoke to you, seen your creativity and enthusiasm, it is a behaviour I comprehend and fully relate to.

You're an Audiophile.
User avatar
Nick
Site Admin
Posts: 15707
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 10:20 am
Location: West Yorkshire

#12 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by Nick »

Don't we have a similar situation with Reel to Reel tape where the head gap is a brick wall low pass filter and tape saturation a natural compressor
Yes, yes we do. I think you may be reading more in what I wrote than what I wrote.
Whenever an honest man discovers that he's mistaken, he will either cease to be mistaken or he will cease to be honest.
Cressy Snr
Amstrad Tower of Power
Posts: 10552
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:25 am
Location: South Yorks.

#13 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by Cressy Snr »

JohnG wrote: Sun Jan 31, 2021 6:16 pm Steve
I think it is fair to say if a person has a Enthusiasm for Sound they are a Audiophile in the rawest interpretation.
The longer they are involved with nurturing and creating experiences to encourage and maintain such enthusiasm the more committed a Audiophile they are IMV.

I've met you, spoke to you, seen your creativity and enthusiasm, it is a behaviour I comprehend and fully relate to.

You're an Audiophile.
Well I reckon that although the DIY aspect complicates the issue of audiophile credentials in today’s consumer led scene, the DIYers were the original audiophiles and we are carrying on in that tradition, much as steam engine enthusiasts do with their own scene.
My own doubts set in at an Owston, a few years ago when Nick and David brought a full system of commercial gear and promptly blew away 90% of the rest of the gear in the room. It was certainly an ear opener and personally, I had to make the choice of either carrying on with DIY or just buying some amplification from a shop to run the big Mets with. It was a close thing, I can tell you. Things in fact went rapidly downhill from there, with the semi-omni debacle and three years down the line, with the Fanes and the 807 SEUL I’ve recovered the lost ground. I’ve had to up my game considerably after that bloody omni farce coupled with that damned set of expensive push-pull monoblocks that wouldn’t drive loudspeakers. A serious lesson learned about how not to do things.
But I’ve gone off topic and made this about me, which is unfortunate. :oops:
Sgt. Baker started talkin’ with a Bullhorn in his hand.
chris661
Shed dweller
Posts: 2556
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 7:29 am
Location: Sheffield

#14 Re: Evaluating a System

Post by chris661 »

Well, Steve, I found the appeal of commercial gear to be too strong, so I've had a couple of store (well, eBay) bought amps in the past couple of years.

The first was a Cambridge CXA80, which is a middle-of-the-road class AB job. Nothing special, but had a USB DAC built-in, which meant I could connect a laptop permanently running Spotify, and control the music from another device (tablet, phone, laptop - anything that'll run the app). The laptop also had some EQ built-in, which made me happy - I could flatten out the room's 40Hz peak, and do a couple of other tweaks.

SWMBO was happy, too - it was easy to control the system. With that setup, we had music playing for 6-10 hours per day.

Over time, the input situation changed: we wanted a couple of games consoles, Amazon TV Stick, and a few other bits, to all have good sound. We also wanted them to be able to feed to the TV or projector easily. Any input to either output.

So, something with HDMI switching was required, in addition to around 100w/ch and some built-in EQ. Eventually, I realised that an AV receiver was the way to do it. I picked a Denon model, which comes with its own dedicated measurement mic, has a turntable input, and generally ticked all the boxes.

To solve the "which video output device?" issue, I simply put a HDMI splitter on the output of the receiver, so both the projector and TV get the same signal. To choose where the video is displayed, just switch one of them on.

I tend to find that any reasonably-well-done class AB amp will sound very similar to the next, and didn't notice any particular change in the sound from switching from the Cambridge to the Denon. Now, though, I have a system which is easy to use, handles all of my I/O seemlessly, and sounds good enough for me.


I did think about trying to DIY it, with a store-bought HDMI switcher, digital audio extractor, DAC, remote-controlled volume control, and power-amp-du-jour, but that's a lot of boxes and cables, and there's still the turntable and a Wii (which puts video out on RGB) to try to integrate.

For my situation, commercial gear has been the only way forward.

Cheers,
Chris
Post Reply