2. analog
  3. 1197397501

An Audiophile Goal

An Audiophile Goal.

I have been grappling with the perceived problem of listening to LPs at the same volume setting, for every LP. The original post that I addressed this problem with is here http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1179765549&openmine&zzAcoustat6&4&5#Acoustat6. It was to discuss my idea of playing back all LPs at the same volume setting regardless of type of music or recording etc. To say it was a debacle would be an understatement to say the least. The discussion did not start the way I thought it would and went quickly downhill from there. I would like to put that behind me and realize why it was so controversial and failed as a discussion. As I originally said this idea was new to me and it took such a long time to coagulate my thoughts about this and the reasons why it works. The answer is obvious now. I didn't have an audiophile goal.

I got the answer from reading the recent post about J. Gordon Holts article in Stereophile which was discussed on Audiogon. .
The reference being about an audiophile goal in one of the posts. This was my thought, myself and audiophiles in general don't have an audiophile goal (actually, I do have several but I will stick to the topic). It seems that no one can agree on a goal, its all so subjective some say, I like it loud, I like it quiet, I like a lot of bass, I like imaging and on and on. This is fine, that is why we all buy different speakers and equipment. It comes down to you can't measure music. You have to hear it, does it make your toe tap? Can you listen at a low level? Is the tweeter too bright? Is the Bass too loud? Ad nauseum. And there we go again are my toes tapping enough? What is low level listening? Is the bass loud enough for hip hop but too loud for a violin concerto?

I found myself an audiophile goal and an easy one at that, its 20-20k hz. Yeah, you like it too. Right? You buy phono cartridges, pre-amps amps etc. that are flat 20-20k hz. So my audiophile goal is to get 20-20k hz flat (as possible). I said I needed a goal! I know there is more to it than that, but undeniably it is a goal. Now if I go with a test reference of 83db at 1000hz from my test LP this will be an excellent level for dynamics, noise levels and acuteness of hearing. All that is required is 1000hz at 83db from the test LP and all other freq matching this level, So 10,000hz and 5,000hz along with 500,100, 80, 50 and 30hz with all of the freq in between at the specified level of 83db will all be played back off of the test LP at the same level or as close as possible as can be obtained within a systems speakers and equipment and rooms limitations. Find this level and you leave your volume control set to this position for every LP you play. Pretty simple actually.

The original idea came to me slowly over the last three to four years, though I struggled with the quandary for as long as I can remember and I have yet to hear anyone say, sure you don't do that? I thought we all did. All because I didn't have an audiophile goal. Now I find out that perhaps even J. Gordon Holt may not have an audiophile goal, even one as simple as this. The best thing is now I get to listen to all of my LPs at the same gain setting with its attendant qualities of dynamics, constant noise levels, unchanging freq response and a host of other benefits which come along for the ride.

I knew it was wrong to be changing volume levels and bass levels for different LPs. Jumping up in the middle of a song to hear the bass drums or turning it down for a quiet violin solo and doing the same for complete albums. It was insane, I always felt like I was in junior high school cranking it up for the cool parts. But every one does it, so did I. I was missing that audiophile goal.

I enjoy listening to my Lps, many of which I still have from my early high school days and everything in between which amounts to about 2500 quality LPs. As a now confirmed audiophile, now that I have a realistic and perhaps more importantly a measurable goal, I could start figuring out which albums sound good and which do not. It was easy, every LP is played back at the same gain level (volume control setting if you will) and guess what you hear? Every Lp for what it actually sounds like.

Another benefit is that every system you hear is played back to the same standard from the same test LP, perhaps it could even be used at audio shows where every room is played back at this reference setting. If you choose not to listen at the standard then it is stated at the door that reference setting is either higher or lower than the reference. This way if you choose not to abuse your hearing in a room that is 6db above the reference standard you are warned before entering.

And all of this because J Gordon Holt didn't have an audiophile goal.

If you can listen to one Lp at a certain level whether it be a high or low level why can't you listen to any other record at that level?

Just a few thoughts.
Thanks,
Bob
acoustat6

Showing 6 responses by mlsstl

mlsstl
694 posts
 
An LP has a dynamic range in the 60 to 70 dB range. There are physical constraints on the maximum groove excursions that can be stamped into a record.

The length of a record also affects the volume at which a record can be cut. If you want the max out of an LP, you can't put much more than 15 minutes a side on a record. If the recording doesn't have much bass, you can make this longer. If the engineer is willing to lower the record level, you can get still more time.

You also don't want to intentionally record at a lower volume than needed, as this will sacrifice the signal to noise ratio of the recording.

Examples: if I have a 30 minute harpsichord recording and make use of the headroom available on the LP, it will sound much louder than a 50 minute Led Zeppelin record with heavy bass. The recording level pressed into the Led Zep LP had to be significantly reduced to accommodate the extra bass modulation and time.

You have to use your volume control to play each of those records at a volume appropriate to the live version.

A LP record has a set of fixed constraints that an engineer must work within. How he juggles those to best match the demands of a particular recording will vary widely from LP to LP.
mlsstl
694 posts
 
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.

This has already been discussed several times but it is apparently not registering.

Look at the basic design of an LP. It is a piece of plastic with a modulated groove pressed into it. Due to various design parameters (which include characteristics of stylus size and shape on the playback cartridge) there is a maximum modulated level that can be pressed into a record.

If a musical piece has a lot of low bass present, this requires wider grooves than music that doesn't have as much bass. As a practical matter, if you want the full volume on music with a lot of bass content, you are limited to about 15 minutes on each side of the record.

Unfortunately, not all musical pieces are conveniently cut into 15 minute segments. If you have a symphonic piece that is 50 minutes long (25 minutes a side), but still has lots of kettle drum action, the record stamping plant must press the record with a lower modulation level in the grooves to get it all on the record. That is just a fact of life.

With your system of finding a single spot where you permanently park your volume knob setting, this means that some records are going to be played louder than they should and some records will be softer. That long symphony (or Led Zeppelin) record you have will be played at too low a volume. However, a short record (say our harpsichord) would end up being played too loudly under your system.

You might be better off buying yourself an inexpensive sound level meter. Take it to some live concerts and check the actual volume you are hearing where you sit. Then go home, and use the meter to set your stereo to that volume. You'll be far closer to getting an authentic experience with this method than the one you're trying to use.
mlsstl
694 posts
 
...you tell me what changing volume levels does to improve the record?

Changing your volume knob's setting is a way to bring that recording closer to the actual experience of the live event.

Example 1: Our 15 minute per side harpsichord recording. It is recorded at full available groove modulation due to the short length of the musical composition and the lack of bass inherent in the instrument. At a live performance, let's say the average perceived volume at my seat is 72 dB.

I play the record with a preset volume control. Due to the LP I am presented with, I have a harpsichord blasting away at 90 dB. That hardly strikes me as desirable if one is trying to closely recreate the live experience.

Example 2: We have a LP of a 50 minute Mahler symphony. At the concert, the average SPL at my seat is 90 dB. Due to the inherent limitations of the LP format, the LP was pressed with lower groove modulations. (This is NOT because the engineer did a "lousy" job. The physics of LP production required that lower level.) When I play back this record on my fixed-volume level stereo, I get a 75 dB playback level. That is substantially softer than what I heard live.

The solution for the vast majority of music listeners is to turn down the volume somewhat when listening to the harpsichord recording and to turn it up when listening to the full symphony.

The quality of the record is just what it is. There is nothing we can do to "improve" that recording once it has left the pressing plant. However, one variable we do have control over is adjusting the playback volume to match that of a realistic concert. If you choose to listen to loud music at a low volume and soft music at a loud volume, that is certainly your prerogative. Of course, there are certainly times where the volume setting will be a good match for your LP. However, to not play a particular record at all, or to listen to it at an inappropriate volume simply because of a volume mismatch strikes me as unnecessarily robbing yourself of otherwise enjoyable experience.

In my opinion there is nothing magic about a particular volume setting on a preamp since the output volume of source material varies so widely. (This is also true of CD, open reel, FM broadcast and other music sources as well as LPs.) Having music play at an appropriate volume for the piece in question is important to me (and many others I suspect) and it is something over which I have control. It seems you choose otherwise, but that is certainly your option. Just remember to enjoy your music.
mlsstl
694 posts
 
Emailists, I'd have to comment that it is pretty common for people to use quotes out of context. The likelihood of this happening increases when you have someone like Bob who fervently believes he has stumbled onto an insight that few others, if any, have been lucky enough to see.

However, I'm glad you had a chance to correct the record (pun intended) regarding his misapplication of your words.

Bob's view that the volume control on a stereo system has one setting that is sacred above all others is rather unique. I have to say it certainly seems to offer him some type of satisfaction that increases his appreciation of his audiophile hobby.

That said, I still prefer adjusting the volume control so the level in my room is appropriate for the music I'm playing. That adds to my enjoyment and appreciation of the music.

I cannot fault the recording engineer and record producer for not wasting signal-to-noise ratio when they are making a recording of short duration, softly played music. Nor can I fault the engineer who reduces those levels to capture the sound of kettle drums in a long symphony. In both cases my opinion (which seems to be the more widely accepted one) is that the engineer is doing a fine job of making the most within the limitations of the media. The fact that I need to twiddle with my volume control a bit to take advantage of his efforts doesn't bother me.
mlsstl
694 posts
 
Bob, I'd remind you that it is easy to correctly quote a single sentence someone wrote but still have it be out of the original context in an effort to have it support an unrelated premise.

That appears to be what happened in this case. I'd further comment that it is also not uncommon for the person quoted out of context to be somewhat sensitive when they feel their words have been used to support a position with which they do not agree.

You've got a very unusual take on the subject of volume controls. That's fine but no need to be surprised that the world isn't following your lead. The only important thing is that it makes sense to you.
mlsstl
694 posts
 
Raul wrote:
Maybe what you have to do is to convince to the RIAA about your subject because with out standards is very difficult to follow a " rule " like you want.
Bob is certainly entranced with his way of looking at this issue but as with most things in life, simple theories are typically complicated by reality.

First, we have a massive inventory of already recorded material that doesn't follow his rules. The bulk of this can't be re-recorded, what with dead artists and a lot of the still-living ones likely not interested in the issue from his viewpoint.

But even if all new recordings from this point forward followed his rules, this would mean compromises that would adversely affect sound quality in other ways.

Some time ago I pointed out that the live sound level of a harpsichord is much lower than that of a full symphony orchestra. The book "The Physics of Musical Instruments" by Fletcher & Rossing indicates the harpsichord's volume level is about 68 DB +/- 5 dB. A symphony orchestra can easily exceed 100 dB.

If I set the recording medium to allow for 110 dB peaks from the symphony without distortion, that means my harpsichord should be recorded 37 dB under (110 db orchestra - 68 dB + 5 harpsichord = 37) under that level. Only then will my relative playback levels be correct for each recording without adjusting the amplifier volume knob.

The reality is that I've just intentionally thrown away 37 dB of signal to noise ratio for my harpsichord recording. S/N ratio is precious in recording, particularly for vinyl records where you're doing pretty good if you have much over 60 dB to start with. I find nothing "audiophile" by intentionally reducing my S/N ratio in the recorded medium to 23 dB (60 - 37) just to satisfy an urge to avoid touching the amp volume.

The reality is that the playback electronics have a lot more S/N bandwidth to spare than a LP. It makes no sense to me to give up something in short supply in order to conserve something I have lots of.

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.
More to discover