Hi rhg88 "Sometimes the "listenign comparison" mantra is pushed a bit too far. I was flabbergasted to see a 250+ thread in audiogon on whether or not someone can hear the difference in sound quality when interchanging two cat6-certified internet cables." I’m paid to hear the differences, and they do exist, but I think folks need to relax sometimes and study sound from a more settled approach. Audio settling doesn’t happen in a few minutes, it can take weeks or even more to hear changes in a system take on their full meaning. It’s like these blind fold tests and ABing. Those are all cool and fine to do but their not really more than a possible snap shot, just like any test. I’ll also comment on the Dynamic Range Database thing. I started to explore these (again) after it was brought up on the Stereophile forum and found this to be very if-y at best. I even went as far as to contact some of the testers and it’s extremely unprofessional and there is no standard testing protocol at all. The results are all over the map on the same recordings and it’s simply amateurish. Plus not one of these tests, that I witnessed, were done where someone physically changed the conditions of the testing. It goes back to our findings in 2004 where we found the physical conditions of the testing changes the results more than the testing itself. So for myself, after testing (doing) this 3 different times (late 90’s, 2004, last year) I feel pretty confident putting this one to bed. Then again if it’s helpful for others, it’s all good. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Hi uberwaltz "I totally understand it is likely my listening space that needs work rather than bad recordings per se.
However to some their listening space is not an area that can be subjected to various treatments, ynow wife dictates etc, so some of the changes required are just not practical for any number of reasons." Do you know how many listeners out there would love to get to that 1% place? There is absolutely nothing like listening contentment. There must be a bell that goes off somewhere in heaven every time there is a happy listener. Being able to spend time on the music collection is very cool indeed. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Hi Falconquest When I first started my relationship with HEA (late 70’s early 80’s) I was hit with my first blast of "highendism". It’s a language and personality that is a mixer of Electrical Engineering, science, Webster, compulsive RTA & blind fold testing, Male ego, empirical testing, physics, neuroticism, myth making and marketing. I think I said earlier, my friends in the entertainment biz warned me to stay as far away from HEA as I could. It reminded me of the different types of studio engineers, techs, producers and artist. When you take something as cool, and young, as stereo and begin to "tech-no-fy" it I have found that the best way to approach it is, be careful to what you lay claim to (credit for), and be humorist in your private world, while trying not to engage with those who have learned enough to be dangerous but not necessarily accurate. And (and this is an important one) always keep in mind of the folks who aren’t speaking up. For every one person that is speaking an opinion out in the open there are a 100 not saying anything. In todays info world that may even be more like 1 to 1000, who knows. HEA has created it’s own paradigm that exist with it’s own unique set of words and rules, that outside of HEA, makes little sense to onlookers. I always say "guys it’s not that hard" but HEA hates that type of simplicity. For example, HEA has sold the myth that these over built, beautiful looking, heavy, expensive, complicated, discrete audio components & speakers are better at reproducing sound. Yet the reality is, they actually play less of the recorded signal than does something with lower mass and simpler build. The writing is now on the wall that HEA’s over built and over priced products are on their way to the dinosaur archives, but the transition is hard to go through for those of us who have bought into our big system comfort zone. Along with the products themselves going through the transition, the HEA marketing starts to look suspicious. The sales tool of trying to make audio more difficult than it really is, is all part of the paradigm of trying to sell HEA as a more advanced hobby than it really is. The more the listener is mystified the longer he or she hangs on to the hope that one fixed sound is going to be the answer to playback, even though everything about music playing, recording and playback is a variable science. As I and others point out the transition should have taken place back in the 90’s when the reviewers were actually on this path to tuning, but the HEA revenue world didn’t want to let go of it’s new found wealth. It was a paradigm of guilt marketing, greed, incomplete science and eye candy. Quantum, discrete, isolation, dampening, compression, NASA, EE, inert, first reflection point, transparency, revealing and many more that are a part of the selling of HEA aren’t necessarily being used in the truest sense but have been turned into tools of convincing a certain part of the public of HEA to defend the market. You take a forum like this and throw in a little internet trolling and limited experience and you can see why the transition is taking so long. But the more you have folks like Tjbhuler speaking out, the easier the pill is to swallow. also I want to throw this in from Geoff "There is much confusion over what quantum physics is, what audio devices employ quantum physics or operate via quantum mechanics or quantum physics. However, it might be a little bit of an overreaction to condemn all audiophile devices marketed as quantum devices as hoaxes or suggest deception or lack or integrity. For example, the CD laser itself operates quantum mechanically, or any laser; they are “two dimensional quantum wells.” And one more thing that you guys should think about studying are the "fundamental forces". A lot of audio is easy to figure out if you have taken a course in, or even study on the internet, the interaction of the Earth's forces. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Thank You- MGthat is quite a bit of gear! I can remember you talking/writing about the 6 rooms full of gear prior to landing closer to the Strip. I look forward in reading more about the Music that you are digging here or over on Tuneland.
Happy Listening!
|
Hi Guys & Gals (got an email from one of the gals who asked to be included). So just wanted to say "hello ladies". I’ll be using "Guys" or "folks" or whatever as general terms for saying "hey gang". Thanks for the emails too. I’ll do my best to be here, facebook, TuneLand and by email, but if I fall behind please be patient with me, as soon as I’m caught up with clients and my own listening I’ll be back at it. You guys have been very kind with your private emails, thank you! It’s a lot of fun for me. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Thanks, geoffkait
The only release that would correlate with my LP would be 2009 so it may be that "unknown" source is vinyl. I am aware of compression/dynamic range arguments which indicate that anything with less dynamic range is much worse-sounding than uncompressed. Please correct me if I am wrong on that.
Having said that, my friend's comment when I played him that 2008/2009 LP and then 1980s CD was "This is worth a criminal charge". CD is so much more unpleasant to listen to that it hurts. According to that chart, 1980s CD has significantly better dynamic range than 2009 release. I am no big analog vs. digital fan and I have CDs that sound great and records that are not that great so I do not think it is that kind of bias.
Of course, there may be a few variables. My CD was Made in Germany and it was in those early years of CDs. I do not know if there could be any difference between that one and the one used to measure dynamic range for this chart. Something like German vs. US release, or wherever that evaluated CD was made. "Unknown" source from 2009 does not necessarily have to be my LP although I bought it around that time and it is the only option in the chart. Who knows, maybe I just prefer very compressed recordings.
|
Yup. Some Girls just confirms my experience with HD tracks is they are more money for POS recordings. Really annoying to pay more for less quality. I will never buy from them again as there is no quality control - just high prices. |
|
By the way, I would like to remind everybody that all of us here, me included, have way too much free time. I have not fully read the last few posts, but once the thread arguing about existentially-unimportant minutia of poor recordings vs. room pressure, etc. has Kim Jong Un, Planck, Einstein, and what not, in it, it is time to get up and do some actual work. |
Ok, I get some of the thinking behind these pressures, rooms, etc. I am not sure I am fully sold on it, but have never tried anything but a plain system made up of a few not-too-fancy components. I did notice that room made a major difference. I will leave it at that, being a bit suspicious and, at the same time, leaving door open that room pressure 360 and the rest is all really true.
However, I am wondering how, for the purpose of this thread, we define poor recordings. Not "poor", but "recordings". Maybe the word "recordings" is used incorrectly.
I will have to assume, and correct me if I am wrong, that Rolling Stones recorded one Some Girls album as the music seems to be exactly the same on whatever sound carrier I listen to. I mean, it is the same music, not the different version maybe recorded minutes earlier or later. However, CD from some early days, let's say end of 1980s or maybe 1990, is clearly much different-sounding than an LP from about 2008. On the same system in the same room. So I would guess it is not only in the room and crappy source material must exist, too. Should we clarify what we consider "recordings" in this thread?
|
|
Sometimes the "listenign comparison" mantra is pushed a bit too far. I was flabbergasted to see a 250+ thread in audiogon on whether or not someone can hear the difference in sound quality when interchanging two cat6-certified internet cables.
|
Oh well I guess our meeting is off and now back to making things great again. Easy come, easy go. Cheers!
|
At least you seem to acknowledge you’re a lot like Kim Jong Un. Acknowledging you have a problem is the first step to a full recovery. Remember, baby steps, Moops.
|
Hey if a US President can meet with Kim Jong Un anything might be possible.
As long as we don’t have to talk about fuse directions or other useless topics. Time there is valuable! Plus I've already heard all about that 15 gzillion times already here and it always has the same ending.
|
@mapman "It was very touching how gk pined for me when I was not posting for awhile. He can't be all bad."
Well then, why not still meet him at CAF, and break bread?
|
falconquest wrote,
“Since this discussion is about the integrity of information, we have to recognize that there are many aspects to this hobby that are sorely lacking in integrity. Further, since we are discussing scientific concepts, I will point out what I perceive to be the use of a scientific concept that has become a buzzword which is the use of the term "quantum". I would certainly like to know how any company that uses the term quantum in the description of their product actually applies the science. Perhaps it just sounds cool. Here is an explanation as to the root of the term.
Quantum is the Latin word for amount and, in modern understanding, means the smallest possible discrete unit of any physical property, such as energy or matter. Quantum came into the latter usage in 1900, when the physicist Max Planck used it in a presentation to the German Physical Society. Planck had sought to discover the reason that radiation from a glowing body changes in color from red, to orange, and, finally, to blue as its temperature rises. He found that by making the assumption that radiation existed in discrete units in the same way that matter does, rather than just as a constant electromagnetic wave, as had been formerly assumed, and was therefore quantifiable, he could find the answer to his question.
Planck wrote a mathematical equation involving a figure to represent individual units of energy. He called the units quanta . Planck assumed there was a theory yet to emerge from the discovery of quanta, but in fact, their very existence defined a completely new and fundamental law of nature. Einstein’s theory of relativity and quantum theory together explain the nature and behavior of all matter and energy on earth and form the basis for modern physics. However, conflicts remain between the two. For much of his life, Einstein sought what he called a unified field theory -- one would reconcile the theories’ incompatibilities. Subsequently, Superstring Theory and M-theory have been proposed as candidates to fill that role.
A more succinct definition is here...
A discrete quantity of energy proportional in magnitude to the frequency of the radiation it represents.”
————————————
>>>>There is much confusion over what quantum physics is, what audio devices employ quantum physics or operate via quantum mechanics or quantum physics. However, it might be a little bit of an overreaction to condemn all audiophile devices marketed as quantum devices as hoaxes or suggest deception or lack or integrity. For example, the CD laser itself operates quantum mechanically, or any laser; they are “two dimensional quantum wells.”
More specifically, for audiophile devices, I design and market at least four products that operate quantum mechanically. Most of these quantum type products are explained in detail on my web site. The Intelligent Chip, for example, is a quantum device. It employs quantum dots as the active ingredient as it were. The Definitive Explanation of How the Intelligent Chip Works. And How the Teleportation Tweak Works. I do not necessarily vouch for other audiophile devices that employ the word quantum in their explanations. Having said that, I feel confident that there are other audiophile devices that probably do operate quantum mechanically, e.g., WA Quantum Chips.
Cheers,
geoff kait
machina dynamica
advanced audio concepts
|
I totally understand it is likely my listening space that needs work rather than bad recordings per se.
However to some their listening space is not an area that can be subjected to various treatments, ynow wife dictates etc, so some of the changes required are just not practical for any number of reasons.
I accept they are working for those who step into that area.There may be some areas I can work on that would not violate her who must be obeyed rules of the house and will gladly investigate further.
But as I have said for that 0.1% of recordings in my collection that I find to give poor reproduction on my system I will just have to live with it. |
Since this discussion is about the integrity of information, we have to recognize that there are many aspects to this hobby that are sorely lacking in integrity. Further, since we are discussing scientific concepts, I will point out what I perceive to be the use of a scientific concept that has become a buzzword which is the use of the term "quantum". I would certainly like to know how any company that uses the term quantum in the description of their product actually applies the science. Perhaps it just sounds cool. Here is an explanation as to the root of the term.
Quantum is the Latin word for amount and, in modern understanding, means the smallest possible discrete unit of any physical property, such as energy or matter.
Quantum came into the latter usage in 1900, when the physicist Max
Planck used it in a presentation to the German Physical Society. Planck
had sought to discover the reason that radiation from a glowing body
changes in color from red, to orange, and, finally, to blue as its
temperature rises. He found that by making the assumption that radiation
existed in discrete units in the same way that matter does, rather than
just as a constant electromagnetic wave, as had been formerly assumed,
and was therefore quantifiable, he could find the answer to his
question.
Planck wrote a mathematical equation involving a figure to represent individual units of energy. He called the units quanta
. Planck assumed there was a theory yet to emerge from the discovery of
quanta, but in fact, their very existence defined a completely new and
fundamental law of nature. Einstein's theory of relativity and quantum theory
together explain the nature and behavior of all matter and energy on
earth and form the basis for modern physics. However, conflicts remain
between the two. For much of his life, Einstein sought what he called a unified field theory -- one would reconcile the theories' incompatibilities. Subsequently, Superstring Theory and M-theory have been proposed as candidates to fill that role.
A more succinct definition is here... A discrete quantity of energy proportional in magnitude to the frequency of the radiation it represents.
I have written to at least one company asking how they employ "quantum theory" in their product with no response. We must be vigilant when accepting these terms and their possible implications.
|
Now I can only talk base on my expereince on what I have gathered by Michael's tuning ways and what he has thought me and guided me through out this journey for many years. Many people seems to blame recordings as the culprit when it comes to a good musical reproduction in thier systems. This is because some recordings in thier system sounds just sublime so those that sounds bad must be due to a bad pressing or recordings that was not done right. This was also the same for me when I started dwelling into home audio. Prior to this I did follow the usual acoustic treatment at first reflection point, applying diffusers etc etc but nothing was giving me what was missing. I was quite disappointed with what I heard coming from my car audio setup.
There were some notes that ceased to exist in my home audio setup and certain details that was lost. Using the same cd in my car I could hear those notes with better perception of that particular recorded cd. This got me thinking what is happening and why is my expensive home setup not able to produce these notes. As I started doing more searches and trying to play that same recording in my friends setup I started realizing that there's more than just a bad cd recording/pressing or possibly not enough high end in my system lol!.
This was when I stumbled upon MG's old website which was giving me loads of information and real time tuning by other members on thier systems guided by Michael and few other members. This website (now tuneland) to me was a place where I was able to get answers on why this is happening. So much so Michael was guiding me every step telling me to voice out around my listening space. Placing cardboards around and listening to the changes. During this process I was shocked to hear the transformation by applying these cardboards around my listening space. Now every step i took was not about making improvments but it was more about realising significant changes happening to my soundstage, tonality, imaging, presence and high/low notes. To me this is enough to say that those musical notes are all there but its not coming out and reaching to my ears.
So now the question, is that particular cd a bad recording well the answer is nope. It's all there but they were just not reaching to my ears due to blockage in many ways. This was the biggest lesson I learned from Michael. Slowly practicing and understanding what he meant by pressure zone, laminar flow and mechanical vibrations only then was I able to dig in deeper, unblock those blockages and bring out all those notes back in my home system. Untill today I'm still learning but as of now being used in tune ways im able to hear and shape up a sound stage that brings utter joy and tears to me.
|
Hi glupson and Guys Thanks for the post. Btw the folks that are wanting to argue on this thread or any other have a different agenda than the OP. With that, we can skip over those posts and move on, try to come to an understanding, jump in and ask them to stop or wait till they give us space to discuss the OP. Anyone’s guess is as good as anyone else’s to know how to deal with trolling. Every time I get trolled on here, I thank my lucky stars I have TuneLand. There’s a huge importance to exploring and not just taking guesses about music, audio, recording and playback. I can bring up literally tons of topics to use as a discussion tool, and with those based on the answers or comments made you can tell whether a person has done something or not. Keep in mind that everyone on the planet has their own taste, so there is no right or wrong way to listen, but that doesn’t mean that there isn’t more to be heard. It only means we have chosen to go to a certain level of listening. How do you know? Recordings have a real space and real size to them. For example, lets say we setup a microphone in the isle of the concert hall while recording so we can add the hall sound to the close up and direct mics. In my case I usually did the direct miking, an over head miking, a mid hall miking and a couple of mics way in the back. Sometimes I would do 3 halos and other times 4, very common no brains miking. During the mix I can then choose how much depth and girth I wanted to give to the piece. If you’ve "done" this a few hundred times you instinctively learn how the halos were shaped by other engineers. Now the recording console, pre effect, doesn’t know anything but a 360 view of what is going on. That’s why when you are listening to headphones the sound is all around you when wearing non-directional cans. Now your going to notice something with these cans (unless they’ve been tweaked a certain way). There are no blacks holes in the soundstage. The sound covers the entire stage 360, that’s what a recording is. When we start using stereo in a room with the speakers in front of us instead of directly at the ear on either side we create that frontal image. It is the recording, but it is the recording reacting to the room and speakers. In other words, you are actually hearing the pressure in the room being stimulated by the speakers and not the speakers themselves (their just the origin). When you hear folks say "there is a black space between the instruments" that’s not what the recording is doing, that’s what the system is doing to the recording. The system is not connecting the dots, it’s not giving you the whole recording, it’s giving you parts and pieces. If the speakers and system is working with the room there is an easy way to tell. Any recording you put on will do this if you are hearing the recording itself. Put on a recording, hit play, and you will instantly hear and feel pressure behind you as if you were outside walking into a room and feeling the rooms pressure all around you. If you only see the stage in front of you and don’t sense the recording pressure around you (it has a sound too), your not playing the whole recording, or even close. Any of you guys, put on a recording you like where you can feel the sound all around you as if the speakers weren’t even there. Now play what you think is a sub par recording. First thing you will notice is the "so so" recording is not giving you that presence. It’s not the recording. All recordings have that 360 element to them. There’s no way to remove it. Even a very compressed recording will still give you that 360 effect. As has been mentioned earlier some folks can play that music in the car and it sounds acceptable, and put it on their home system and not as good. Folks, it’s not the recording. Recordings don’t dumb themselves down to play in a car or headphones and not in your home. It’s also not that your system is more "revealing". The fact is if your car can play it and your headphones can play it, your home stereo should be able to play it. If your in room system is more revealing than your car and your headphones you will hear more not less. That’s going to make some of you mad and for some even go into denial, but that’s reality. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net PS: don’t shoot me I’m only telling you guys the reality, ok |
|
folks are talking theory and there is absolutely no doubt to any of us who have actually done the testing needed, that the guy talking has never done the actual empirical testing themselves. Michael Green I just read this whole thread, but have failed to figure out what it was all about, except for moderately angry arguments at times aimed at another person coming from a few sides. Michael Green, could you give a few examples what those guys talking are talking without doing actual empirical testing themselves? There may be one mention of such a situation in the beginning of the thread, but even there I could not find out how you ("any of us") can have absolutely no doubt about what someone, who you only know through few words on the Internet, has or has not done without a person explicitly saying it. Could you describe what they talk and how you figure them out? As far as crappy recordings go, they do exist. Some may be more bearable on some equipment and some may not, but crappiness exists in this world. I know that many people who prefer to consider themselves "audiophiles" enjoy endless tweaks to get the right sound from each and every recording with whatever scientific or empirical excuse/explanation there is. It may be great for them, giving them more enjoyment. However, if most of the things sound decent on some equipment, and a few sound crappy, I would be suspicious. If the recording cannot be played reasonably well on a decent equipment, I would consider recording at least imperfect. grannyring and tjbhuler, I thought the same for the longest time and then I was subjected to "premium" Fender sound system in 2016 Volkswagen. Now I know that it is possible to have a system in the car that can make any recording sound not good. As I like to describe it, it makes your favorite orchestra sound like a garage band. I tried what I could with tone and fader controls, but even the Michael Green's magic adjustments would not help. I am not making fun of them, that is simply how they seem to me and I am in awe. Regarding that awe, I am just talking and not walking. I have never heard Michael Green's stuff. |
Trelja,
It was very touching how gk pined for me when I was not posting for awhile. He can't be all bad. |
"No, the fact is there is a sameness that a stock car audio system impacts on all recordings so they all sound decent. "
Hmm, could it be because when listening to music in our automobiles, we are "near field" listening. Sound is being directed directly at the left and right sides of our heads, not so much reflected. In your car, you're physically sitting between the speakers, which is gonna make up for poor acoustics. At home in our listening rooms, we don't sit between the speakers the same way we sit between our car's speaker but between and in front of the speakers within the room
and the sound is being reflected. |
@mapman "Take it from one with much experience. Don’t bother responding to Geoffkait if you want to actually get anywhere. Everything is a joke to him. He is like the pied piper of Audiogon. You will get nowhere with him. He might humor you from time to time if he feels cornered but that’s about it. He is clever like a fox though. He will gladly take your money should you decide to try one of his comical useless products. The ultimate troll! He should write a book. All talk, no walk."
This guy has punked you for years now. You’re both pretty local to each other...any reason you don’t show up at CAF, stick your finger in his face, and reset the relationship?
|
Hi Jafant, thanks!! Good to see you as well. My Vegas Strip location (where I’ve set up my writing room) has two suites. One upstairs apartment and one down stairs. There’s a system in the writing room and than the main listening area. The downstairs apartment has my wood curing area and a listening room. There’s also a gaming room in yet another space. Last year I had everything in one space with 6 listening rooms, but I felt too far away from the strip and airport. You can see everything on TuneLand but to give a breakdown of this space. The main listening area has a SAM wall behind the chair. On the back side of the wall is where I keep a big part of my equipment stored. That area has several tuning platform/shelves. On those shelves is Audio Note, Audolici, Music Hall, Creek, Magnavox, Pioneer, Sherwood, Kenwood, Superphon, Marantz, Jolida, Luxman, Rotel and more. I tune lots of equipment during the year so it comes and goes. Last year for example I had in Bricasti, Accuphase, Audio Research, Krell and again a few other brands to work on. Speakers, of course I have the Rev6, Rev60, Rev SW-15. And than my other speakers (less talked about) Viola, LOW, the 8" full range and others of mine. I also have the Reference Tonian, JBL and 4 or so other brands. I have a few other DACs, decks and tuners. I have my cables Picasso and Bare Essence. I also have Transparent Audio, Esoteric and a couple others floating around somewhere. Oh and can’t forget the Bare Essence "White". I have all of my other goodies as well. The main listening system has the Rev6 Combo setup with Picasso Type2 ICs and Type4 Bare Essence "White". I have a full display of my hand voiced Platforms & Rails using Brazilian Pine and Low Tone Redwood, LTR Tuning Blocks, MGA Sub amp & SW-15 sub, BP Cable Grounds. SAM and PZC acoustics, and a couple of RoomTune Squares. I’m also using my Mini Wall Tuning Blocks (Pretty cool little guys), Space Cones, MTD’s. So as you can tell my system is mainly a variable musical instrument. what about the equipment? Well because my system is a tuning tool I can put in an amplifier, my trusty Magnavox players and I’m off to the races. For the sake of the other thread I’m doing here, I’ve bought several amps so I can do the tune from scratch using basic electronics. 3 days ago I got in another Pioneer sx-3400 and popped it into the system. BTW for my reference tube gear I use Audolici from Portugal. The A25M is the MG Version. I also have the AVP-01 and AP-01 preamps. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Also car speakers are typically surface mounted which limits ability to do imaging the way home setups can. Not to mention the tweeters mounted far away from the woofs which totally eliminates any chance of decent imaging. Then the panels and such they are mounted in often tend to vibrate and muck up the sound to some extent. Then there is the background noise thing. Ability to pressurize a smaller space is the one thing car audio has going for it over home.
I recently leased an Acura TLX with their ELS sound system. Best sounding I’ve heard in a car in a while. Seems to have a handle on the issues including using active noise cancellation. Apple play with a high res source sets a pretty decent bar. Last car was a Toyota Avalon with JBL sound system. That was way more prone to the usual car audio acoustic vices.
|
Note to self: if cars were mounted on rubber tires only it would be one helluva bumpy ride. 🚗
|
Good to see you here -MG.
As always, very insightful and interesting thread. Can be speak about your different tuning rooms and the gear contained within each space?
I want to learn more about the electronics and cabling that you musical ears enjoy.
Happy Listening!
|
Now on the car topic. The reason they sound the way they do is because of the pressure they are able to create because of the small space. Simple Q & A that can be tackled by any auto audio guy. If folks want to put their spin on it, that's up to them but it will end back at the same place. Your listening to materials, vibration and pressure. So lets get to the Talk & Walk on this topic briefly. When talking about car stereos and the way they work, how many of you have stripped the car down to the frame and then built it back up again for sound reasons? Some of you probably have, but if not you'd be surprised about what you can learn about car sound from taking it all the way down to the frame and building it back up. To answer the suspension question, we tested our cars by listening and testing them while sitting on their wheels and also jacking them up off the wheels. Having them resting on their wheels sounds mushy (rubbery) as compared to coupling them to the floor and lifts. Raising them also made them far more tunable. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
I want to touch on the car, but first let me give you guys a little insight into my job of "doing" (the walk). About every day I get a call or email asking me to do some testing. This morning for example I was asked to test the sound of different materials used by the state of Illinois in building residential properties. In particular the 3M product called "fire-block" vs the other brands. What I will be doing is making a testing jig so I can hear the results when using 12-2 and 14-2 Romex. I will be testing literally dozens of different competitors and then make my recommendations. You might say "so what". And that would be cool, unless your one of the hundreds of thousands of listeners who want to go further. For every guy out there saying their system is just fine there are 40 saying "I wish I could....". They come up on this and other audio forums every day reading to see if they can find an answer to their questions. Why don’t they post? One of the major reasons is they know that many folks posting probably are offering their opinions on topics they have never, or with limited experience, researched more than reading what someone else thinks. How do I know this first hand? I have a list of emails from this very forum to get to almost every day since I have started visiting. Am I the answer? Nope, I’m the messenger. You’re the answer and I’m here to give the encouragement to try. If your not interested, then my question is, why did you post? And what are you going to say to those folks who do start to walk, or have been walking? The starting points I have been talking about cost you the listener zero dollars, or very little. The most interesting part to this is, this is the future of the hobby for the music adventurist, and it has been happening for a very very long time. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
|
I doubt even properly oriented, bees wax-stuffed, graphene-lined fuses with TC shmeared all over it can help that dude. But its worth a try! |
Would that be new fuses in my system or in GK?
Inquiring minds need to know!
|
But out of the many thousands of recording I have on vinyl. tape, cd etc there is likely only a double handfull that I consider to be truly terrible. Lets say 0.1% total?
Now maybe I am missing something here but WHY should I try to "fix" my system to get this 0.1% to sound acceptable? I am more than likely going to end up just making it worse for a whole bunch more recordings before I MIGHT get it right and at what cost in time, effort and $? Same here. Just a very few out of thousands. Some almost a century old (remastered of course). No reason to worry about the 0.1%. Even new fuses oriented in the right direction probably won’t help.
You’d have a better chance of making GK acceptable.
Toot toot! :-) |
Mapman, trust me. I know. I let him get under my skin once but never again. He reminds me of an alien creature discovered by Mulder and Scully. If captured, restrained, and secreted off to a special laboratory, the scientists would be befuddled and give up. They would conclude the creature is of no use to humankind and not worthy of further analysis. |
Very interesting thread.
I can concur that some recordings definitely sound better inside a car, recent example.
I was discussing the new Shinedown album with a fellow member who could not even listen to all off it, our agreed assessment was very bright and brittle. However I had also played it in my car where it became bearable and suggested he try it that way too. So something is happening for sure.
But out of the many thousands of recording I have on vinyl. tape, cd etc there is likely only a double handfull that I consider to be truly terrible. Lets say 0.1% total?
Now maybe I am missing something here but WHY should I try to "fix" my system to get this 0.1% to sound acceptable? I am more than likely going to end up just making it worse for a whole bunch more recordings before I MIGHT get it right and at what cost in time, effort and $? |
|
What’s this, The Revenge of the Nerds Pt. 2? What’s eating Moops, anyone know? Is he still steaming because I called him a pretend engineer? 🚂Toot, toot!
|
fsonicsmith,
Take it from one with much experience. Don’t bother responding to Geoffkait if you want to actually get anywhere. Everything is a joke to him. He is like the pied piper of Audiogon. You will get nowhere with him. He might humor you from time to time if he feels cornered but that’s about it. He is clever like a fox though. He will gladly take your money should you decide to try one of his comical useless products. The ultimate troll! He should write a book. All talk, no walk.
|
Why wouldn’t car stereos sound very good? They are battery powered, the speakers have no complex crossovers, there are no real “room acoustics issues,” the car is isolated from seismic vibrations by a pneumatic isolation system (shock absorbers) and the CD player buffers the data.
Ha! For once I can comprehend your post without resort to a secret decoder ring. Too bad it is so utterly false. Cars present horrible acoustic environments due to engine, wind, and road noise. They overcome this huge obstacle primarily with two "weapons"; compressed recordings (compressed by studios and radio stations with cars in mind) and the ability of car speakers to load the cabin of the car such that for all intents and purposes, the speakers are facing into the cabinet rather than outwards and the listener is sitting inside the loudspeaker cabinet. |
Hi Tj Great to see you here!! I know your experiences are going to help folks understand the Tuning process. It's going to be interesting to watch the change happen in our hobby. I'm also getting ready to do more posting on the Method of Tuning thread. Hope you have time to help out. I think it's one thing for me to post (as kind of the father of tuning, if that's fair to say), but when the actual listeners post about tuning the topic becomes real to many folks. Again it's the Talk & Walk issue. With you and others being real time examples, it adds that element of believability, that this hobby so desperately needs, and so many are searching for after a long time of audio spinning and it's spin doctors. thank you for being here! Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
|
Hi Jdane Yep, when the audio shops across the US went under it changed the landscape of HEA and the hobby in general. And it happened so fast. Folks on this thread have mentioned the need to experience tuning first hand, and in the mid 1990's we (MGD/RoomTune) were building tunable rooms inside of stores. It looked like things were on track for the industry to have a "method of listening", but then the mom & pops just couldn't hang on to their stores and compete against the internet. Tuning isn't new to HEA, it just came along when the market place was beginning their transition from live spaces to on-line sells. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
I'm sorry I came late to the party a lot has already been said and discussed but I wanted to say one thing. If one has not listened to a product regardless of what it is perhaps they should not state their opinion regarding it. Lots of debates going on due to the opposite happening here on Audiogon. Ya, I know its America and we have the freedom of free speech... ;-)
|
"We can read about audio and tuning as much as we want and it will not tell us if we will enjoy music on whatever system is being written about. The only way to know is to listen. Why not get a room at one of the audio shows and set up a $1,000 system that blows away all the high-end systems and makes every recording sound good, no, not just good, awe inspiring, to everyone who hears them. That would be doing us all a great service. Writing threads about how the high-end is dead and tunable systems are what we really need, not so much." Hi Tom I do a tunable setup every year (since 2005) here in Vegas during the CES. This last CES I had a full Tunable Room and system showing off strip. We were at AXPONA 2017 too, but because the setup time was so short the guys didn’t have a chance to setup the whole package. Some folks might recall "TuneVilla" which was covered by several magazines. Well the "place" (TuneVilla & TuneLand) has been around since 1989 in different locations in the US. This year I’ve rented space just off the strip that we’re thinking about converting, after I’m done using it for the wood curing, to have a tunable setup on the strip for folks to stop by and have fun. It’s close to Sahara and LVBD, so it’s very close to the convention center. The shows are cool, but the time period really isn’t enough so folks can come in and relax while they explore tuning with me, or on their own. Another cool thing about this location is, is right on the edge of the Vegas Arts District. So yes, as the OP states it can’t just be Talk, it’s also has to be Walk in order for folks to understand. thanks for you post Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net
|
I'm lucky to be on a budget--after a few thousand dollars, my hands begin to shake, I feel very unhappy, and all music sounds crappy to me. Therefore, I cannot test whether a $10,000 amp sounds 'better' than my $500 ones. But (at least back when stereo stores existed), I could compare various components in admittedly flawed tests (as close to 'single-blind' as I could get), either in the store or at home. Thus I was able to reject things where I could hear no difference (cables, etc.). Of course psychology plays a large part (as does, alas, progressive hearing loss)--but since I'm doing the listening, it doesn't matter what is objectively better. If the tube-glow makes the sound 'more warm' to me, fine. Also, the room environment (high wooden ceilings vs. 8' apartment stucco, speaker placement) makes far more difference than any equipment I can afford.
That said, I am a firm believer in single/ or double blind studies, which should be used for audio whenever possible. I don't think you can really test 'good sound' vs. 'bad sound' that way, but you can certainly test (1) whether there are objective sonic differences, and (2) whether those sonic differences are detectable by human ears. |
Why wouldn’t car stereos sound very good? They are battery powered, the speakers have no complex crossovers, there are no real “room acoustics issues,” the car is isolated from seismic vibrations by a pneumatic isolation system (shock absorbers) and the CD player buffers the data. |
"My car, really most any stock car audio system, helps make all kinds of poor recordings sound decent. My car is not tuned to these poor classic rock recordings etc... No, the fact is there is a sameness that a stock car audio system impacts on all recordings so they all sound decent. "
In all honesty this is what i expereinced too.
Over the years I have been pondering why is it that some of my recordings sounds just plain and un-ivolving but when I play it in my car it sounds simply amazing or decent. I started off this hobby from car audio and slowly went into home audio. Now I would not place my self as a car audio freak but I did get an amp and changed the head unit. The amount of money I have invested in my home audio is way more than what I spent in my car. Unfortunately playing the same recording just does not justify that amount of money I spent.
Thats what got me all sparked up on searching for an answer which lead me to Michael Greens website. Going through his website made me think differently and made me realize that its not all about your equipments, speakers and cables. To get a good sounding system is not about how expensive or best sounding equipments that have won major awards. Nor how famous a particular brand is that some may swear upon it. But its about tuning and getting whatever system you have to fit in better with your surroundings.
As I started my journey taking Michaels advise I began to see and hear more into those recordings. More information was I able to gather, more involvement and finally more passion towards this hobby. Which ultimately got me thinking seriously into building my own dedicated room. Before this my system was placed in my living room. What never changed was my equipments that I have invested previously but what has tottaly changed was my mind set in this hobby.
Now if i had know this earlier would i have still bought my expensive setup well no. I would have got something more functional and enough to power my speakers and load my room up with music and tune the hell out of it lol!
|
My car, really most any stock car audio system, helps make all kinds of poor recordings sound decent. My car is not tuned to these poor classic rock recordings etc... No, the fact is there is a sameness that a stock car audio system impacts on all recordings so they all sound decent. Is this fidelity to the actual recording? No. Far from it.
What are we after with our home audio systems? Homogenized sound that allows us to play objectively poor recordings well? Perhaps or perhaps not?
|
Michael,
We can read about audio and tuning as much as we want and it will not tell us if we will enjoy music on whatever system is being written about. The only way to know is to listen. Why not get a room at one of the audio shows and set up a $1,000 system that blows away all the high-end systems and makes every recording sound good, no, not just good, awe inspiring, to everyone who hears them. That would be doing us all a great service. Writing threads about how the high-end is dead and tunable systems are what we really need, not so much.
|
I can't even explain why some people respond with anger or animosity or disinformation to everything these days. If they get something out of that I can't fathom it.
@vinylfan62 It's called trolling -- and I agree, doesn't make sense except they get their rocks off by doing it and everyone else has to endure their deliberate deception and rudeness. |
This discussion has been enlightening. One particular idea that hit home with me is tuning a system to negate what is at first thought of as a bad recording. I've done this. But I won't anymore. I just want to listen and enjoy music most of the time. Let me point out that I tweek everything. None of my stereo equipment has avoided modifications. But when it's time to listen I want to enjoy the music and not have to adjust to maximize every recording I choose. I recently returned a MOFI LP to music direct. It sounded off. The replacement was excellent. Should I have kept the first one and changed my system to suit the recording each time I played it? I used to do that. Maybe grab a different cartridge and get it setup. That's about 10 minutes between recordings, right? I guess I lost the patience for that.
I realize I didn't comment on your main question. That's because I don't have an answer (or a theory or a hypothesis). I can't even explain why some people respond with anger or animosity or disinformation to everything these days. If they get something out of that I can't fathom it.
Good luck in your quest to understand others in this hobby...or anywhere. |
