Principles

Thank you, at least you understand what I'm moaning on about

 

You are a strangly blocked young man aren't you. Do you ever listen to anyone else but yourself! No one (including me), who has posted here, has ever put musicality (horrible word) or the ability for a system to reproduce music (as opposed to *sound*) as an absolute. The only people who talk in absolutes are the entrenched objectivist. Every subjectivist I know has an objective nature behind it. It is just a question of balance.

Richard

 

Ricardo,

This quote refers to 'musical performance' as if it is something completely different to the actual performance specifications! That just is not the case. Given the right specifications and measurements one can get a good idea of how something will musically perform.

 

Hi Tenson,

That is an interesting idea. It would certainly make choosing equipment far easier (not to mention designing it) What specifications or measurements would tell you that a loudspeaker will perform well musically?

What about an amplifier? Which measurements or specifications would you look for there when choosing a musically good performer?

 

Simon (Tenson), over the last 3 months I've read a lot of your posts on this forum. While some contain some interesting points, its been an amusing ride.
May I make a polite suggestion sir. Collage would go a long way to help you understanding some of the principles & idea's you have been commenting on.
It won't be any means give 'expriance in the real world' however it will help you grasp the fundementals and thus giving you a further understanding of the subjects you have been commenting on.
Just an merely an observation.
I would also say my English needs to go back to school as well its grim I know

 

I can only speak for myself.

In a speaker I like to look for a very fast decay rate for transparency and dynamics (cumulative spectral decay or step response show this well), phase coherence for imaging and soundstage, a smooth frequency response that extends well into the bass, wide and smooth off-axis response in the upper midrange and treble and ideally, a concentric wavefront propagation pattern. I could list more but that starts to rule out nearly every speaker if I want it that exacting to my tastes, hence I am building my own.

As for amps I am not so fussy. My experience has told me that most solid state and digital amps these days sound good to me. Low IMD is good (I seem to be sensitive to this, gives harsh highs) as is generous current ability and low odd-order harmonic distortion. I really don't mind even order harmonic distortion too much.

 

I have been to college. Which subjects do you feel I need to brush-up on? I am learning all the time

 

Simon,
Understanding Basic First principles, electronics AS+ level, material sciences & applications,acoustical implimentation & construction techniques. Plus a placement with a recognised body of accrediation (AES/BADA etc) where you will learn and grasp how audio works in the real world from a first hand presepctive by a 'man that knows what he's doing' and reaping his accquired expriance and thoughts.
In short a proper apprenticeship. This will enable you to speak with some aurthority on the subjects from genuine 'hands on experiance'
I found it helped me personally with my chosen career at the time, collage/university for myself was a total 7 years, not a 28 week coarse over one year.

 

Your doing well Simon, ignore the rest and go for what pleases YOU. The fact you build your own stuff lifts you a notch or two up above the rest IMO, I respect that because I know how hard it is. Doesn't make our opinions any more valid but we have practical experience in both designing and listening which overall better equips our understanding rather than just comming from a single direction.

 

Hi Tenson,

Why can you only speak for yourself? Aren't these musical attributes absolute?

"Given the right specifications and measurements one can get a good idea of how something will musically perform."

Are you saying that what you perceive as being 'musical' might be different to what someone else finds important?

 

As I said in previous posts, what people find musical will be different for everybody. So when you find something you consider musical ask the question 'why?' and you will have better luck finding other equipment you find musical. The only thing I am arguing against is the idea that specifications tell you nothing about how musical you will find a piece of Hi-Fi

 

I would like to understand more about electronics but it simply is not a strong subject for me. I also feel that with most things I learn just as much from playing around and doing it as I do from sitting at college.

There are always things to learn and one could spend their whole life trying to learn all that they might need, but at some point you need to get out and do things. For me, for several reasons, that point is now. I'm sure if I went to uni I would learn lots, but I can also learn lots by going this route that I wouldn't if I was at uni.

Also, I have done more than a 28 week course over one year.

BTW, I'm glad it was amusing, that’s the main reason for coming to these places

Oh also quite interesting, my brother who did 4-5 years (not sure lol!) at uni and got a first in computer science is now doing nothing at all to do with it and is teaching English in Japan... he learnt Japanese in his spare time as a hobby!

 

I'm not advocating that people absolutely disregard specifications or measurements either. I just feel that what makes loudspeakers or electronics sound 'musical' or otherwise is far more complex than that which can readily be quantified. I've listened to many loudspeakers with apparently excellent technical specification which render music (for me) into a relentless dirge. Ditto amplifiers. The only area where I've experienced some correlation is in the field of digital electronics and particularly cd players which can sound 'noisy' and uninvolving as a result. The artefacts in their measured performance can sometimes account for this perceived untidiness. I don't believe the measurement techniques required to analyse analogue electronics or loudspeakers satisfactorily actually exist yet.

 

Simon,

You mis-interperted my post.
I've had experiance of the 28 week coarse lol, a few years back when I decided to start in this game I enrolled on a basic electronics AS coarse, for what I thought solid grounding.
The Coarse Tutor was a top guy, helpful and understanding of those who wern't as sharpe as some in the class (I wasn't the oldest there one chap 62 )
Moral, I saw 22 Y.O's struggling with basic arithmetic trying work out dividing networks and V=I*R these were already A grade students.
All the notes were printed and layed out, and the only writing they were expected to do was fill in the blanks on the experiment sheets .
A light year away from my last year in Uni (some 17 years before).
My pint being hands on experinace is possobly the best way to accquire knowledge for sure, however holding a basic grounding in the revelent subjects helps understand and absorb the experiance to a greater degree.
If your going to design and develop loudspeaker technology or digital signal processing or even mechanical isolation devices, it really does help having the relevent knowledege.
By no means does any one indivdual know it all, I'm still a novice is many areas and ayways learning.
However my training in earlier years has been invaluable.

 

Sounds good, I would certianly like to do something like that when I have the time.

 

I agree, but I don't think the gap is anywhere near as big as some like to think.

Then what is considered 'excellent' measured performance is not what sounds musical to you. Fair enough. That does not mean that the measurements won't tell you what is likely to sound good though. You just need to look for something other than 'excellent'.

 

Hi Tenson,

Are you saying that we should pick whichever measurements suit our particular sensibilities or tastes? In other words the (perhaps relevant, perhaps not) measurements of the items we like the sound of, those are the ones we should use.
We might as well just listen to the stuff!
Of course the measurements you consider important are likely to be different to the ones I or anyone else does. Using measurements as any sort of yardstick is only helpful if everyone agrees on what they should be. We all have an idea what a centimeter or a Kg is so they are useful units of measurement. I'd disagree that such useful measurements of 'quality' exist in electronics or loudspeakers yet. Certainly we can measure impedance or sensitivity but they aren't really useful quality marks. I'd agree with some of your requirements re speakers but I imagine several other speaker designers might disagree with them or have other priorities. If it was as straightforward as using the criteria you mention the world would be flooded with marvellous loudspeakers by now but it isn't and we aren't.

 

for the record

i have to say tenson you have misquoted me above.

are you seriously saying if you could see say 1o different specs on 2 different amps you could tell whilst they are sitting in a box what one could be the best performer if you are you are deluded.

are you saying a speaker that is 0.5 db flatter across the 'vital mid-band' would sound better than another, because if you are you are again in correct.

show me some evidence of the fact that specifications enable one to make a choice over the replay of music if everything is of a similar standard.

 

I don't care about a yardstick for quality. I care about being able to pick a system that suits me. Knowing what specifications produce a sound I like helps because I don't need to listen to everything out there to have an idea of weather or not I will like it. In the same way, it also helps me to find equipment I may well like, but would not have considered otherwise.

 

I did not mean to misquote you.

And no, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is that by looking at the right specs, I could tell you which amp or speaker I am most likely to find musical.