Tarsando said, "Playing them back at the same "volume control level" tells you nothing."
How can playing all LPs back at the same playback level tell you nothing?
Would it not tell you which LP is recorded louder or quiter? Would it not reveal which LPs are more dynamic than the others? Would you not hear which has quiet vinyl, more or louder pops and clicks, which has distorted grooves? Which Lps have rumble and to what levels? Could you not hear which LP has more or less bass or has an overly aggressive top end? It would tell you which LPs you system has problems dealing with. It would tell you that if you system developed noise at this level something changed. Wouldn't it tell you your system needs to be only so quiet? It needs to be quiet at this level though, who cares if it gets noisy when the volume is turned up to 10.
Would it tell me that if you listen to your LPs not at the 1000hz 83db reference playback level and say that you are listening at 73db 1000hz level that LPs that sound quiet to you could sound noisy to me?
Bob |
I believe what a number of you missed was not only the 20-20k response important but more importantly is the 83db 1000hz level. Really it is the place to start and I found it by accident just like Madame Curie and Galileo found... Oh nevermind.
Here are some of my thoughs recently and why I needed an audiophile goal. I believe that perhaps as you get closer to "a good freq response" all you need is 83db at 1000hz playedback from a test LP for an "easily" accomplished goal. This goal is a nice place to be, it is working for me. There are a number of reasons that 83db is used and I suggest you research "83db reference level". And if you all get lazy let me know and I will attach some links. My though would be most have heard of this allready.
For myself I am not expecting flat 20-20khz in my room and I do have a slight tilt up in the last octave which I like. I am still working on my room and system as I would like a better freq response. I know about the BBC curve also.
Now wouldn't it be nice to go to a show or a friends house and listen at the same levels? Of course being that the only freq you are expected to get correct is the 1000hz signal, all of the others freqs, being like mine and everyone elses systems, probably not nearly as flat as we would like. Would that not be what we are listening to?
How you get there and how well you you do is your thing and if you choose not to listen at that level it would just be duly noted that your system is playing at a louder or softer level than the reference.
Bob |
Hi opalchip, Thanks for an insightful reply. While I understand some of your arguments, I must repeat that what I explained works very well for me and I suspect it will for others also, except for those that use audio as a mood enhancer for mating.
Actually you dont need a test LP, my suggestion is to start at a "low" level and listen to your LPs at that level and continue to increase it as you tune your system to suite every LP. The key here is to listen to every LP without changing the level set. You may and should change speaker locations, tuning your cartridge and TT, sub/main speaker levels, seating location etc. Now if you need to increse or decrease volume setting do it and continue this untill yuo have reaced a point where the best LPs sound their best and lesser LPs are revealed for what they are. I believe that this will tune your system to its most natural and truthful ability. This will take some time, this is not accomplished in one listening session or overnight but is a long term goal. Except now that you know this is possible, perhaps the process can be accelerated.
The fact that every LP was recorded/pressed different is what I want to hear. Do we increase or decrease the volume on LPs that are dynamic? Do you turn up or down a LP that is noisy with limited gain on the LP? Do you turn up or down an LP with "big" bass or do you adjust the bass levels then turn it up? Does a rock LP that is "required" to be played loud get a special compensation now that the noise level of the LP is twice as loud as the "quiet" violin concerto played at half the volume level? Which LP is truly quiet? Which LP has great dynamics? How do you really know if the target is always moving?
Opalchip or others, please explain to me why you would change the volume level for different LPs, whether it be up or down, and what this can accomplish. Just how do you know where each was recorded? Or which LPs should be played back soft or loud.
We are supposed to be audiophiles for goodness sake and I find it just unbelivable that even something as simple as a good in room freq response at a certain level to be contemptuous is just amazing. Yes, I know it does not tell the whole story but it is a large part of it.
Opalchip, sorry to glean some of your quotes from your past postings, but feel that we are searching for some truth somewhere as you state.
"So I very much agree with the Hardesty camp that Flat, Time and Phase Correct HAS to be the holy grail, at least as a starting point, for serious listening."
"And that's OK - each to his own. Reproduction accuracy is not an ethical standard like "truth", it's a preference. And it's not a very popular one. Even "truth" itself isn't exactly a popular standard anymore. Not to get into politics, but look around! So why on earth would audio accuracy be important?"
"I prefer hearing what was actually recorded coming out of the front of my speakers..." |
Hello, Trust me it is registering what you are saying, and conversely you are not hearing what I am saying. LPs are limited to only so much energy available to them, as an example, and it is up to the engineer to get the most out of this. I can only provide the vehicle for the LP to reveal itself as either a "good" or "bad" recording of music or perhaps its sonics are somewhere inbetween. If it is not there, there is nothing you can do to fix this, and all other problems with LPs including, but not limited to, previous groove damage, lack of dynamics, rumble, pops/clicks, noisy vinyl, bad pressings, LPs that are recorded too loud or too low etc... you tell me what changing volume levels does to improve the record? Or what you can do to improve them in general that would not adversly affect the sonics of a well recorded LP? Perhaps even why you want to say a record with those problems, if they are serious enough, are worth listening to?
Thats just it, most LPs suck, many are OK, a number are good and few are great. Or are you tring to tell me that all LPs are great? If you manipulate them enough... Its not my job to correct what some lousy engineer, bad pressing or poor condition LP has to offer by manipulating my system so no LP sounds good. I do have an slp meter.
Now about the audiophile goal..
Bob |
HI Dcstep, Thanks for discussing this important subject and enjoying the thread. It is an important subject and I do believe there are some important answers also. If I can at least get people to think about it, it is a step in the right direction.
I believe that just being happy does not make an audiophile. We really do need some goals even personal goals for our systems and as I said I do have several, this being one of them which goes hand in hand with the others. Give me an other "goal" and maybe I can forget this one!
The last thing I am is a "numbers guy", really, I consider myself much more as "an artist". Not in a literal sense but more in my life pursuits. Aesthetics and philosophy are some of my life goals. Dont forget that I had realised this idea from just listening to my LPs, it was not a "numbers thing" to begin with. This is a way to tune your system and no you dont need a test LP to do this, as you are ultimatly tuning your system to its own maximum capabilites.
You said that if one listens to acoustic jazz then you may not need 20hz. I suggest that even if that is the case where have we gone wrong as an audiophile? Who makes the determination that its OK to miss a lower octave or two? I say find the lower octave at a correct level and you will have a goal and your system playback will be better for it.
Again one of my other "goals" is evaluating LPs, how does one do this when they are missing the last one, or I am sure, two octaves as many systems do. Can you actually say to me that a LP is quiet, when infact a LP has a high level rumble say and your system is not reproducing it. Or it is 20db down due to not being "flat" and now that you are listening at another reduced level because it is "acoustic jazz" this noise is now 40 db down, sure would be a quiet LP then, but is it?
Is a scratched LP quieter if it is a jazz LP played at a low level or if the same scratched LP is a rock LP and played at a higher level is it now a badly scratched LP. Can you grade a LP at different playback levels?
Changing playback levels does signifcantly change the sound of the room and you equipment out of its optimal range. Including I believe the Fletcher-Munson curve which does not change with the recording, but stays constant with the playback level, this I believe is very important idea/thought/possibility, which I believe to be true but am not positive of.
I always find it amusing when someone states how loud they listen to a certain recording, they dont take into account that if their system is bass shy from 40hz down for an example. that they are now indeed listening much louder to reach that level and it is all with "high freq". Someone listening like this may now be listening to their system at a 1000hz reference tone at 89db for example. Now thats loud. Rather than someone with a full range system which is capable of the same overall volume level but is listening to the standard 1000hz at a "reasonable/appropriate" level. While all the time missing those important low freq at a correct level, as an audiophile goal.
Also I believe that we are not reproducing a live event but in fact we are reproducing a recording of the live event, a large distinction.
Bob |
Hi Opalchip, how about LOUD mood music for arguing and then mood music in a nice and soft level for the make up sex.
I think you are focusing, perhaps, too much on the "flat" part of it, yes it is a "goal", not withstanding the F-M curve and the BBC dip etc.. And the volume level DOES affect playback in the freq domain. So dont forget the "reference level", its is most important, if it is achievable with your system and to play it within its limitations and conversly to not be bamboozled by an overly loud system in the name of dynamics (turning it up does not increase dynamics) or a "live sound". What you can achieve, is a natural sounding recording showing off its limitations and it strong suits and most importantly to reveal the LPs for what they are.
Bob
|
Hi dcstep, thanks for your thoughtful response even if it veered off topic to "what is an audiophile"?
You said
"Acoustat6, 20Hz frequency response is a great goal, my point is that you won't use (hear) it with acoustic jazz recorded in a studio. OTOH, live music in a cathedral will surely lose some impact if that bottom octave isn't there. Even with just a soprano singing a capella, the building itself will produce low frequency information that helps you to identify how big the room is and add to the recorded ambience."
I say it is not OK to be missing valuable information ie: one octave, or to have a ragged freq response and to not be concerned about this, regardless of the music genre. It is still missing whether you think the LP has it or not. If you dont have the last octave, just how do you know what is or is not there? If your system has a 12db peak at 80 hz it is there for every LP. This is the "sound of your system" in conjunction with your speakers voicing.
"Still, MUST I have that last 10Hz to be an "audiophile", I think not."
I say no, you can do as you please. It was, as all know, used to be a free country and I for one would like to keep it that way. All that I am saying is that this is a good goal, if you can get to 20 hz at the reference level.
"I think an "audiophile" is someone that enjoys reproduced music beyond the level of just considering playback devices utilitities or commodities. They can be trying to achieve the best possible sound in their iPod,"
Oh good, we just officially made all BOSE Wave Radio listeners certified audiophiles!
"BTW buddy, no disrespect was meant in suggesting that you might be a "numbers guy." I exercise both sides of my brain."
No offense taken, I do wish I was "better" at numbers, but math has never been my strong point. Maybe its time for me to put to memory once and for all the 12x12 multiplication table:). 7x7 is, 9x9 is.....
"Back to your "goal". With all due respect, I think that you need to rethink it. A goal without an objective is nothing. (Making a goal and objective, in and of itself, is dangerous). You need an objective related to why you're an audiophile. It couldn't possibly be to hear all your music at 88dB, me thinks. Some people are only into audio for music, while some love the glow of tubes (it IS really seductive, I KNOW) or some want to have a system entirely from Stereophiles A-list or some want the biggest, baddest looking system possible. ALL of those are legit reasons."
I have allready stated my goals, as an audiophile. One is to enjoy music, which I do. Two is to be able to evaluate LPs for their sonic qualities, which I can. There are others but they do not relate to this discussion at the moment.
Setting up a system as stated, you do not wind up with all music being played back at the same SPL level. This is absolutly what we are trying to avoid! All LPs have different dynamics from LP to LP and within the LP itself, and yes totally different "overall gain" if you will, this is what you want to hear. This is what makes LPs so exciting. You are searching for ways to enhance your systems ability to play the lowest recorded level LPs and the loudest recorded LPs at the same volume setting. This is my audiophile goal. This ensures that your system is operating within its limits for ever LPs potential for upward as well as downward dynamics and to play at a natural volume for LPs that are recorded well.
Here are some interesting reading for those interested.
http://www.regonaudio.com/Records%20and%20Reality.html
http://replaygain.hydrogenaudio.org/calibration.html
What did Peter Walker mean when he said?
"There is only one correct volume level for any particular piece of music" Peter Walker, Quad Electronics.
Bob |
Hi Dave, sorry to confuse the issue but I was going through some literature and saw that. I always want to be open minded believe it or not. I am not sure if that is Walkers exact quote, I believe I have seen it quoted in slightly different wording.
Speak the word friend and ye shall enter.
I have to go to work now and will answer your question later.
Bob |
Hi Dave, I think you see what I am saying. If your system was unable to handle the dynamic peaks of that LP either one or two things are potenially wrong. Either the LP is not recorded correctly or your system is unable to handle the dynamics of LPs!
If it is the first one, well then who cares about the LP, it is crap. Definatly not a reference LP and then therefore you may listen to it at a reduced level, discard it or listen to it for what it is.
If it is your system, and it is unable to handle the dynamic peaks, turn it down, or tune your system to handle the freq extremes and dynamic peaks. And therefore play all LPs at this level, till you tune your system to be able to handle the upward and downward dynamics of this and all LPs. And then, yes, some LPs will play quieter and others louder, but is this not what we want?
We all complain that LPs are not dynamic enough, so how could one now say it is too dynamic?
Bob |
Hello, Cdwallace is onto it, as I see it. True fidelty of the recording, but dont forget that more importantly is that this is a great way to tune your system.
Think of it this way, you select a volume setting and it would be low initially and listen to the entire listening session like this. Then the idea is to tweak every piece of equipment )one piece at a time!)to get the "best" out of it that you can. Set volume level LISTEN, adjust bass, move speakers LISTEN, move chair, adjust bass, adjust VTA, adj VTF, tweak the volume again LISTEN adjust VTF, fine tune crossover, ETC ETC... you may change anything you want but each time continue to listen to every LP at the same settings. This cannot be achieved overnight. You might find that you like the listening level but changing the crossover point makes the bass better and louder or lower then change volume level again if necessary, or moving your speakers improves the imaging or tweaking the VTF....etc.
Unfortunatly this does not work for those interested in "mood music for mating". You may have a default (lower or higher) level in the beginning (or any time but realise that this is not the optimum level), and never make any changes in your system at these different levels. Only make changes when you are doing some serious lisetening.
Dcstep, yeah, I'm out there and I'm loveing it!:)
I am sorry to have confused you with the quote from Peter Walker of Quad fame, and HE said "There is only one correct volume level for any particular piece of music". I did not say this and sorry to throw this into the mix and confuse things. I like to keep things rational you know!
Though I have seen the quote as "there is only one volume level for every recording" NOW that reads completely different and that can be read two ways.
Bob |
Hello, Cdwallace is onto it, as I see it. True fidelity of the recording, but don't forget that more importantly is that this is a great way to tune your system.
Think of it this way, you select a volume setting and it would be low initially and listen to the entire listening session like this. Then the idea is to tweak every piece of equipment )one piece at a time!)to get the "best" out of it that you can. Set volume level LISTEN, adjust bass, move speakers LISTEN, move chair, adjust bass, adjust VTA, adjust VTF, tweak the volume again LISTEN adjust VTF, fine tune crossover, ETC ETC... you may change anything you want but each time continue to listen to every LP at the same settings. This cannot be achieved overnight. You might find that you like the listening level but changing the crossover point makes the bass better and louder or quieter, then change volume level again if necessary, or moving your speakers improves the imaging and bass or tweaking the VTF....etc. keep working these refinements to improve your systems playback at that level.
Unfortunately this does not work for those interested in "mood music for mating". You may have a default (lower or higher) level in the beginning (or any time but realize that this is not the optimum level), and never make any changes in your system at these different levels. Only make changes when you are doing some serious listening.
Dcstep, yeah, I'm out there and I'm loving it!:)
I am sorry to have confused you with the quote from Peter Walker of Quad fame, and HE said "There is only one correct volume level for any particular piece of music". I did not say this and sorry to throw this into the mix and confuse things. I like to keep things rational you know!
Though I have seen the quote as "there is only one volume level for every recording" NOW that reads completely different, and that can be read two ways.
Dave, said that "we all know of the LPs different recording levels and dynamic levels."
That is what I am trying to celebrate and encourage, these differences that make LPs so different (from each other) and exciting. I do believe that all LPs can/should be played back at the same level, if you like the sound of the LP is another question entirely or if your system is capable of the dynamics.
Bob |
Hi Dave, The quotes were from "Emalists" posts, with my responses after. All words that are in quotes are from "Emailist" except for the "Dear doctor I think its you instead" Sorry it is not easier to read, Try reading it again and then tell me who has the problem, me or "Emailist" who is trying to give me some advice.
Bob |
Hi Stringreen, Hey, Listen, I can hear you, no shouting!
Are you saying every LP is recorded and sounds exactly the same?
Bob |
Hi Dave, Thanks for having continued interest in this discussion. Actually there are many reasons for this and not limited to the few listed now.
A set level where all LPs have the ability to reveal their sonic character.
A set level for system noise.
A set level for LP/TT noise.
A set level that is consistent with human hearing at a "reasonable" level. This is NOT an arbitrary number/level.
To obtain a consistent and natural frequency level.
To set your system up within it limitations of system performance.
To obtain synergy between components.
To know what is needed to improve your system so all LPs can sound as good as they can sound, while poorly recorded LPs are revealed for what they are.
To be able to have some set goals that are obtainable and realistic.
There are other reasons that go along for the ride.
You only need so much amplification and you will know how much you need.
We don't look like a fools jumping up and down to impress our friends with our intimate knowledge of the volume control. Saying things like, this drum solo sound great LOUD, and now this part sounds great like this...
Do you wonder, if you have to do this, that your system is compressing dynamics?
It will force some people to actually listen to the music, recordings and their system. This statement is sure to get a few peoples undies in a bunch, I am ready.
Perhaps its a bit of a Zen thing at first. Just sitting there and listening to music. Maybe for the first time you will listen to the music, recording, pressing and condition of your LP playback.
Perhaps it will draw you in, to listen to downward dynamics and then shock you with your systems upward dynamics. Setting up your sytem this way encourages this. And unfortunatly show you that most LPs are compressed, noisy and have bad sonics. Fortunatly many LPs are quite listenable, even revealing the shortcomings, and great LPs are revealed.
So we all know, when stating things like I listen loud/soft, the dealer, audio show, friend etc.. cranked it up, we know what is meant by that.
Bob |
Emailists said, "I realize this issue of playing back all LP's at a common level is important to you, but please realize that you are perhaps the only one in the world who this is important to."
Actually, it is important to everyone, its just that you don't realize it. I think, that perhaps, it is you who doesn' get it, the reasons why poorly recorded/mastered/pressed LPs sound bad. It is because they do! We all know that poorly recorded/pressed LPs can never sound good, so why keep denying it? And why keep altering you system to accomomdate them? Isn't this why we search for good/great sounding LPs? Can I/you put on an poorly recorded/pressed/mastered LP and and manipulate it enough to sound "good"? Including by manipulating the sound through the "biggest" equalizer we have, the volume control. You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear.
Do you think, that a crappy recording, if played on a less resolving system improves the recording or that perhaps we can manipulate it enough that it "becomes musical".
You, yourself, answered these questions here in one of your own posts.
In your recent post "Listening to low quality" you said;
"On my main system....The recording totally falls apart. Hard to listen to. Not overly bright- but just thin, echo'ey, distorted, and not too enjoyable.
Back in my computer system all is well and I can really enjoy the music again.
I'm Just trying to think through what if any implications this has for my main system. It may make me think about those less than stellar real recordings in a new way.
After all ,it is musical enjoyment and fidelity to the original recording we're after, but can too much fidelity subtract from the musical enjoyment?
Just thinking out loud. Could something like a very tubey, bloomey, bufferstage that actually lowers resolution by a large amount and blurs musical details be a potential bandaid?"
Emailists
10-20-07
"Our hobby is an obssesive one for sure, but when other people who share your zeal for the best reproduction possible are telling you that your focus is misguided, you may have to examen in your life what is going on, perhaps under the guidance of a professional...."
Apparently everyone here on the Gon needs profesional help, from the single driver speaker aficionodos to the electrosattic speaker admirer to the SS amp lover and their tube lover counterparts and dont forget CD vs LPs, are we are all misguided if we think differently from each other?
How about Acoustic Resonators surely I didn't recommend "professional help" when you said,
"I put the Resonator on its stand (which was still stuck to the wall) behind me, and imediatley it sounded more dimensional, so I am once again a believer."
"Dear doctor I think its you instead"
"You might even find you're enjoying listening to music more without worrying about the levels each LP/recording was cut at."
I am enjoying it perfectly well, and do not have to worry about the different playback levels, that is the wonder of the way my system is set up.
Bob |
Hi Emailists, I have not come here to bicker with you, but since you have not discussed anything with me, prior to your previous post, which was your first post to me. Where I correctly quote you..
"Our hobby is an obssesive one for sure, but when other people who share your zeal for the best reproduction possible are telling you that your focus is misguided, you may have to examen in your life what is going on, perhaps under the guidance of a professional."
And in your second post to me you say, and I quote,
"it's obvious the help you need is not to be found on any audio forum."
I had no idea who were or your thoughs on anything audio (except that you are a professional!) so I did read some of your posts.
If you would like to tell me why you think I am wrong, we can discuss it. Don't go right off the bat telling me I am wrong, and no reason why, except for your "professional opinion" (tin eared gardener?), AND that you think I need "professional help" or "advice not available in this forum."
If anyone is interested in discussing my thoughts on a particular subject, thoughtfully and with interest, it is not you job to discredit me and and say that I am wrong with nothing to back it up except your "professional opinion" (what was that again?) and your (which, by the way you did not give in your origional post) or prior posters "anecdotes".
Is this the way we are discussing things?
Bob
|
Hi Craig, I am with ya brother, Amen.
Goodbye,
Bob |
Hi Raul, you said "Dear friends: One parrameter that is very important for we can set-up the SPL in our systems ( with out ears fatigue )is how much distortion produce the system, higher distortions means lower SPL so less distortions higher SPL.
Obviously that there is a limit where our " ears " are comfortable and this is singular for each one of us, but that 83db is a good point to start."
I say absolutly! But say your system is only capable of low distortion up to a certain volume level, why exceed that? And if it is capable of playing up to 125db do we want to listen there anyway?
Raul, You said you have a 1000hz reference signal at a specified level, when you do your in room freq response graph are all other freq at this same level?
Bob |
Hi Dave, Does it look like I fool around? No, I don't have time for that or the desire to mess with people. I am dead serious.
Bob |
Hi Dave, why would you say something nasty to me? Have I offended you?
Bob |
Hi JPV, Thanks for your post, you are close to what I describe. Don't forget that the 83db is the volume that my system is set at, is a reference tone of 83db at 1000hz from a test LP. This is an important distinction. You would use your test LP (NOT playing back an unknown quantity such as a favorite LP) with a reference tone of 1000hz and find that 83db to be the goal, of course then all other freq should be close. This way LPs cut low will play low and LPs cut high will play loudly, In the mean time the system noise levels and also the LPs noise levels never change, except that a noisy LP will be noisy and a quiet LP will sound quiet.
A dynamic Lp will sound dynamic when directly compared to a LP lacking dynamics. A LP that is cut incorrectly, say a solo violin recorded/pressed too high, will not sound right and that turning it down will not help this LP to sound good. Think about that for a moment, you decrease your volume level and that will reduce your systems ability to give good dynamic swings and a good in room frequency response.
You will find that LPs cut and recorded correctly will sound best with minimal noise. LPs that are not recorded/cut correctly do not sound good no matter if the volume is manipulated up or down, as they don't sound "good" no matter what you do with the volume control. Just face it, it is not a good sounding LP, and therefore why adjust your system to it?
I dont believe many systems are capable of playing 83db all frequencies (or if you dont want to listen that loud) in that case go to a lower set level, say 80db or 77db and set your system to this level. Whatever you do, do not make changes to your system when playing back at different volume control setttings. And definitely don't adjust bass levels to make up for volume control changes or lack of bass in LPs.
Bob |
Hi Dave, sorry, my mistake assuming they didn't like something you were saying to me.
Bob |
Hi Raul, Thanks for your reply. I never said mine was perfect, and don't dis' (disrespect) the Hagerman! :) You are correct though, we always/should be looking for something better, but I am a very content audiophile now. With a statement like that, they could take away my official Audiophile membership card!
You said,"Of course that your goal is a desired one but alone could means nothing, that goal have to come along with very low distortions ( any kind ), noise, colorations, right tonal/natural balance, high resolution, etc, etc."
You could have it just the other way around and have low distortion and no volume or have good mid range tone but no bass etc. etc..
You are correct, that it is all important, low distortion, noise and with good tone and resolution etc.. No matter where you loose contact with the info it is gone forever till you fix that problem, and not with a bandaid down the line. I never said that was the only goal, but I believe it is the place to start. But how do we get there? By determining a correct volume setting for LP playback that allows a well recorded LP to shine and let the others fail.
Again, just so we dont have a missunderstanding here, I never change the volume control setting for any LP! It is set at position 18 on my stepped attenuators and that is where it stays except when I am changing LPs IE: lifting and lowering the tonearm, the volume needs to be turned down to prevent any potentially nasty sounds. This means that my system is able to play back the "quietest" LPs and the "loudest" ones without changing volume levels for any LP or any cut on an LP.
This as you can well understand, allows every LP to sound as it is recorded, mastered and pressed. If an LP is loud it plays "loudly" if it is recorded/mastered low it plays "quietly". Do you agree?
If it has noisy vinyl it sounds noisy but if the next LP has quiet vinyl it is quiet. If the album has pops and clicks they are reproduced at the same level for every LP. Do you agree?
Now, I just don't agree with the idea that every LP has a sweet spot volume level that you need to find with your volume control. IE; turn it up for one LP and turn the volume control down for the next one down. I find this is wrong for many reasons. I also find that this is the biggest detriment/problem for setting up a system. And that you will have great difficulty setting up a system if you continue to do this.
Raul, how do you determine the correct volume level for each LP?
Bob
|
Hello Raul, you said "Unfortunatelly the whole audio recording/reproduction is not perfect so we can't have a precise number ( like the 83db ) for all, we can/could be around that number that seems to me has sense or at least more that your flat frequency ( alone ) goal.'
I never said that flat response was my only goal. I have said it is a goal and that yes it is difficult and perhaps not even desired (100%). My reason to say this is that it is more important to achiev a desired freq response rather than sheer volume! And that at a reference playback level the ability to achieve this is the goal, without blowing up your system or your ears. All the while getting a better freq response and dynamics within a certain volume level that is pleasing to your ears and realistic for LP playback.
Raul said,
"Btw and looking more in deep to your phono stage I can say that the manufacturer specification for the inverse RIAA eq deviation: +.- 1db from 25 to 25khz is really on a not desired side because that +,- 1db frequency deviation ( every time that ocur through the RIAA wide frequency response ) makes a degradation/coloration to the recording/cartridge signal because does not affect a single frequency but almost three octaves due that the RIAA is a curve not linear, the other subject here is the fact that the manufacturer specs start at 25hz not 20hz that is the RIAA standard and this means that below 25hz the deviation is bigger than 1db and this fact means that what you are hearing from 60hz an down is really worst.
I know that you like what you have but what really are you hearing?, certainly not what is on the recording.
Facts like this one goes against your goal, the good news is that you always can/could improve about."
I say, there you go, dissing my Hagerman Trumpet again. :)This discussion is not about my equipment. or my system at all. It is about an idea. Perhaps dare I say a new way to hear things just like Galileo or Darwin..., OH CRAP did I say that again!
Yes, I realise my system sucks compared to most here, but it does not matter what my system consists of, some of us are here to get the most out of their system and this is the way I see to achieve that goal.
Bob |
Hi Onhwy61, first off, nice Ducati and Revox equipment. I have always liked Revox, I had a 790/795? turntable years ago when they first came out. Ducatis, I still have a few.
Thanks for your input, Just think about it on occasion, that's all I ask.
Bob |
Hi Raul, You say that you agree with the two statements that if you do not change the volume control level that 1) the noise level never changes and 2) that the LPs overall volume level does not change, both of these are very obvious. Therefore we would then have an unchanging "potential" noise level (some LPs are noiser than others, but your systems noise level would stay constant) and also we could immediatly tell which LP is "louder". Now all we would have to do is find a reasonable volume level.
No offence take on the Hagerman comments, my intention not to bring equipment into the mix was to keep the discussion on topic and not to bring other variables into it.
Raul said, "for example: two similar room-audio systems with the same model speakers but with a " little " different speaker specification: sensitivity, one 86 db at one meter and the other 90 db on that same efficiency factor.
Do you think that you can/could be satisfied obtaining ( the same for both ) that 83 db at your seat position?, well maybe yes and maybe not depending on your amplifier ( between other things ) and if that amplifier mantain his distortions level at any measure current demanding. In our example we are " asking " more than double watts at the amplifier with the 86 db efficiency speaker and I'm almost sure that the distortion of that amplifier will be higher in this case and over the time from listening to this speaker ( against the other ) the ear/brain fatigue will be higher and maybe you have to lower that SPL."
I say EXACTLY! If your system is incapable of producing this level, why would you turn your system up above that point for any LP! You need to approach the reference level not attack it.
This is how one would set up their system. Play back every LP at the same gain setting. Are there LPs that are too loud at that level? Back it off or figure out why this is so. Are some LPs too low at that Level? How can that be? Is you system unable to handle the dynamics of various LPs? Do you have to turn your system up and down in an attempt to get dynamics or a "correct" level for a type of music? Is your system compressing even simple things like the various recording levels of different LPs?
And let's not forget that alot of LPs are not recorded/mastered/pressed correctly, these are the LPs we are trying to ferret out. LPs that are not "correct" are not made any better by changing volume levels. Especially overly compressed LPs such as B. Springsteen etc.. turning up a vintage rock LP, only serves to bring up its noise level.
Raul said, "imagine hundred of factors that influence what we are hearing in our audio system and you can see that that subject is complex!!!! for say the least."
I say you are correct and that those are the factors that we need to address in our system/room interaction to obtain fine playback. Not changing gain/bass levels to mask the problems.
Again, don't get too hung up on "the number" it is just one part of the equation. There is much more to it than that.
Bob |
Hi Stringreen, Yes, you are correct that rock sounds better loud than string quartets. But that still does not mean that if the recording is poorly done that turning up or down the volume control will assure proper playback.
I am definatly saying I never touch the volume control, except when raising/lowering the tonearm, for obvious reasons.
I am not sure if where you sit in a concert hall has anything to do with a LP recording. Really, you cannot change your seating position in your listening room to simulate a concert hall seating change. It does not work like that. You hear what is on the recording good or bad and changing seating position or volume level never changes that.
Now the hard part. You said "When I play my stereo, I modulate the sound as to its meaning. Pink Floyd works best pumping hard... Heifitz does his thing with counter clockwise rotation of the volume control. I don't know any other way to enjoy the music."
So, when Pink Floyd is playing the loud parts, should they not be turned up even further? When Heifitz goes for a crescendo, do you turn it up? Then turn it back down? Does one turn up or down Meddle?
I didn't know any other way to enjoy music either, before this. But then I realised I was unable to tune my system, turn the volume up and now the bass is too much, turn it down and now you have to turn up the bass. Toe in changes at different volume levels. Noise levels change with different volume levels. You cannot tell which LP is the most dynamic changing volume levels. and on and on.
Perhaps it is also a bit of a Zen thing. Presenting the LP for what its is and not something you wished it was. To listen to well recorded high volume LPs and to find LPs that were properly recorded for the music it represents at lower levels.
A Zen thing to listen to dynamic music and to be able to have your system play the soft as well as the loud parts within the capability of your system. But the best part is that this is most definatly a tuning tool for your system. This is how one achieves the best their system can be. Make it dynamic and go for freq extension and playback at a volume level that is suited to your system and room with 83db @1000hz -20db as your goal.
http://replaygain.hydrogenaudio.org/calibration.html
That is what this encourages and you will find this will get you there.
This is another way to listen to music. Take it for what it is. Hope this helps, any other questions let me know.
Bob |
Hi Mlsstl, you said, "That said, I appreciate that Bob's method is meaningful to him and seems to provide him with increased listening pleasure. However, there are some very good reasons that it is unlikely to gain popularity with most people."
I'll drink to that.
And just try to remember some of my points when you are listening/tweeking your system and see if any of them, perhaps, relates to you and your system.
Bob |
