• Hello and Welcome to HiFiVision.com - an online community for the home entertainment and tech enthusiasts!

    If you would like to ask a question, participate in a discussion and view attachments please Register yourself.

Wonder how many forum members are keeping up with this little war brewing in the Audiophile world?

Wharfedale Diamond 11.1 & 11.2 Speakers

raghupb

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Messages
2,746
Points
113
Location
Bengaluru
No idea of the debate between these two gentlemen.
Measured, non-measured, quasi-measured does not indicate how it will sound to each set of human ears.

The same equipment sounds differently to two people.
It is out of the scope of the video discussion above, but so very true.

Cheers,
Raghu
 

Robert Bose

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
62
Points
18
Location
Bangalore India
Whatever these guys argue, my years tell me there is a significant difference amp to amp
and cable to cable, under careful listening in your home environment not in a showroom
 

square_wave

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
3,259
Points
113
Location
Bangalore
It is actually about 2 gentlemen arguing whether all parameters that contributes to audio quality can be measured or not. Not about all amps sounding the same.

This argument has been raging for a long time. Nothing new about it.
 

keith_correa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
3,090
Points
113
Location
Mumbai
Bob Carver claimed in the mid 80's to duplicate the sound of ANY amplifier with a much low cost design of his. I think it was a Stereophile challenge. And he did it with the help of null tests. Actually duplicated it.
IMO Ethan Winer is absolutely right. He takes 2 electrical signals and compares them. There's nothing beyond that to be compared.

It is actually about 2 gentlemen arguing whether all parameters that contributes to audio quality can be measured or not.
Not quite. Paul claims this, but Ethan does not look at individual parameters at all. He takes the whole damn signal - which includes ALL parameters.

This argument has been raging for a long time. Nothing new about it.
The argument posed by "believers" was that we yet do not know everything that constitutes a signal. We do not know every parameter in a signal that affects sound. Ergo, we are not measuring everything that needed to be measured. Ethan doesn't go down to parameter level at all. He takes the lumped signal. :cool:
 

tuff

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
2,019
Points
113
Location
Thane
Let me see, If two amplifiers manufactured by the same company that uses measurements to test before selling, as a quality control and if a second manufacturers output parameters are the same, they should sound identical right? Else one could say two identical amplifiers manufactured would sound different. Am i making any sense?
 

captrajesh

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
5,383
Points
113
Location
Hyderabad
To me, it looks like Ethan Winer is irked about Paul McGowan raining on his party. (Of commenting on the limitation of his "Null Device" thereby affecting it's sales)

Having experienced what cables can do quite vividly I'll back Paul to the hilt.
 

liverpool_for_life

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2015
Messages
704
Points
93
Location
Chennai
(Of commenting on the limitation of his "Null Device" thereby affecting it's sales)

Please see the video to understand why Ethan built the 'Null Tester' device. It was to demonstrate, not to sell to the general public. He sells stuff, but those are all things related to room treatments.
 

smedhavi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
768
Points
63
Location
Bangalore
Amp measurements/specs killed audio quality. Seriously. Along with the quest of small sized LOUD speakers.

A traditional amp (look at any standard 11th or 12th Physics text book), produces about 1 Watt to 3 Watt power, and a lot of measured distortion. They sound wonderful when created using discrete components (mostly tubes those days, and big transformers). You needed those big single driver speakers to make a reasonable amount of sound with the small watt amps. Anyway those speakers were mainstream,, and had close to 100dB/W efficiency.

Then came less efficient but small speakers which split sound between different drivers using networks, and hoped that your brain would cobble it back; despite the phase shifts.

Next step was the need for more powerful amplifiers, so the input signal (wave) was split into the lower and upper halves, and then amplified using separate amps (push-pull). Once again we just hoped that it would be all fine once your mind stitched it back.

From there it just went down hill. You could sell anything as long as it had a huge wattage and low measured distortion. Who cares about the subjective opinion about how it sounds. You could always argue the way you wanted, or whatever suited your balance-sheet. Someone figured out that the measured distortion (THD) would be close to 0.0x%, instead of x%, if you just took some of the output signal and put it back into the input (negative feedback). Guess what, everyone did it! And it can also improve performance (gain stability, linearity, frequency response, step response) and reduces sensitivity to parameter variations due to manufacturing or environment (great!). Does anyone who is still reading still remember that we started the discussion on producing music?

Sorry to deliver the red pill:)

regards,
Sharad Medhavi
 

captrajesh

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
5,383
Points
113
Location
Hyderabad
Please see the video to understand why Ethan built the 'Null Tester' device. It was to demonstrate, not to sell to the general public. He sells stuff, but those are all things related to room treatments.
What made you think that I didn't. Listen to what Paul had said about the null box. That's what I think what it is.
What are you backing Paul on?
My personal experience.
Sorry to deliver the red pill.
What people are looking fpr is the Blue pill (the diamond shaped one) ;)
 

keith_correa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
3,090
Points
113
Location
Mumbai
My personal experience
I asked "what you are backing Paul on" and not "based on what are you backing Paul on". I think you misunderstood the Q.
-----------
Edit: I'm going to get some popcorn in anticipation of this thread missing the whole point and deviate into a traditional "cables matter" or measurements don't matter hellhole! :D
 
Last edited:

raghupb

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Messages
2,746
Points
113
Location
Bengaluru
If I understand the video,
One gentleman says "You don't need to measure parts, just measure the sum of all parts and be happy"
The other says "You have to measure parts, and some parts are ... well fuzzy" (ala Heisenberg)

This reminds me of Occam's Razor.
Standard Definition:
"All things being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one"
As applied to Audiophilia:
"All things being equal, I hear differently than you do"
As applied to Extreme-Audiophilia (reading too many articles, watching too many videos):
"All things being equal, I sometimes hear stuff in my head"

PS: Popcorn sounds like a good idea :p

Cheers,
Raghu
 

square_wave

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
3,259
Points
113
Location
Bangalore
From my experience / conversations with some high end diy as well as established makers of gear, I have seen the amount of grunt work that is needed AFTER the measurements are over and done with. The choice of components, point to point wiring vs pcb, wisdom gained from experience, knowledge that inspite of tomato being a fruit it cannot be added to a fruit salad, design approach, chassis design .. I can go on.

The point being, measurements are the bedrock upon which you make design improvements. When you make some of those decisions based off listening, it is tough to know ( measurement wise) why it sounds better. In many cases, almost 80 percent ( time and effort for r&d ) of the actual work happens after the "measurements bedrock" is in place. Measurements is not the end game.

Arguments flare up when subjectivists claim that everything important is outside measurement boundaries and objectivisits claim measurements is the end game. Also, an important thing to keep in mind is the weightage given to different parameters when you measure. This also can differ among designers depending upon their focus and goals.
 
Last edited:

keith_correa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
3,090
Points
113
Location
Mumbai
"One final myth I’ll address is the notion that there are aspects of audio that “science” doesn’t know about, or might miss when measuring. This too is easy to disprove using the null test. A null test compares any two audio sources, and combines them at equal volume with the polarity of one source reversed. So as one wave goes positive the other is negative, thus canceling completely. After nulling the two sources, any residual signal that remains reveals their difference, and that includes artifacts you might not even think to look for. Nulling has been used to measure audio devices since the 1940s. If there really was some aspect of audio that was unknown, it would have shown up long ago in a null residual."

By Ethan Winer in a section named "Audio Myths" in an online newsletter - "Copper" by PS Audio which is owned by Paul McGowan :)

Edit: Here's the link: https://www.psaudio.com/article/audio-myths/

Please do read all the comments after the article. The comments are more "illuminating" than the article. Enjoy!
 
Last edited:
Top