As things get QUIETER --things get LOUDER!
Posted by: Geoff P on 18 April 2004
Well I need to qualify that slightly.
By "quieter" I mean increases in clarity and reduction in noise floor together witha cleaner more separated delivery of the music.
By "louder" I mean the temptation to increase the volume because it all sounds so good and in fact the way this happens on an involuntary basis as an end result of things getting "quieter"
Do you get what I'm driving at here.
Let me link it to my own system over time.
1- In came a CDX2, the signal got much more detailed with a darker background -Result: My 112/HC/150 started being played a little louder
2- Out went the 112 in came a 282 on the HC -Result: Ah now I can hear what is "really" coming from the CDX2. Deeper detail and more "quietness". Involuntary raising of the volume again. Now the 150 is "cooking"
3)- I need more "omph" out with the 150, in with the 250mkii- Result: Wow, where did all this controlled bass come from, must be more in the CDX2 w a 282 than I thought, reach for the volume control again
4)- Bye,bye HiCap in with the supercap and put it all on Fraim- Result: Everything tightened up, no flabbiness, it's all got, deeper more detailed and at the same time there is a sense of relaxed power delivering whatever is thrown at it. Definitely this can be listenned to louder.
5)- The final addition (maybe I should say "addiction"), had to be done, just arrived an XPS2- Result: Even after just 2 day, separation of all the threads in the music, little musical details coming out of the shadows, much greater clarity in the bass so you can hear the individual notes you did'nt know you were missing before. Velvet black background, more air and dynamics, gimmee the remote this needs more volume.
So this source first stuff has it merits BUT make sure you add some oomph in the power amp department and make friends with the neighbours because the volume just has to rise as the dynamics and cleaness of delivery improves.
regards
GEOFF
By "quieter" I mean increases in clarity and reduction in noise floor together witha cleaner more separated delivery of the music.
By "louder" I mean the temptation to increase the volume because it all sounds so good and in fact the way this happens on an involuntary basis as an end result of things getting "quieter"
Do you get what I'm driving at here.
Let me link it to my own system over time.
1- In came a CDX2, the signal got much more detailed with a darker background -Result: My 112/HC/150 started being played a little louder
2- Out went the 112 in came a 282 on the HC -Result: Ah now I can hear what is "really" coming from the CDX2. Deeper detail and more "quietness". Involuntary raising of the volume again. Now the 150 is "cooking"
3)- I need more "omph" out with the 150, in with the 250mkii- Result: Wow, where did all this controlled bass come from, must be more in the CDX2 w a 282 than I thought, reach for the volume control again
4)- Bye,bye HiCap in with the supercap and put it all on Fraim- Result: Everything tightened up, no flabbiness, it's all got, deeper more detailed and at the same time there is a sense of relaxed power delivering whatever is thrown at it. Definitely this can be listenned to louder.
5)- The final addition (maybe I should say "addiction"), had to be done, just arrived an XPS2- Result: Even after just 2 day, separation of all the threads in the music, little musical details coming out of the shadows, much greater clarity in the bass so you can hear the individual notes you did'nt know you were missing before. Velvet black background, more air and dynamics, gimmee the remote this needs more volume.
So this source first stuff has it merits BUT make sure you add some oomph in the power amp department and make friends with the neighbours because the volume just has to rise as the dynamics and cleaness of delivery improves.
regards
GEOFF
I second that!If a system sounds ok you can go
louder and because of there is nothing wrong
ther will be no faults magnified by the level.
Only the poweramp can come to its limit.(and neither krell nor levison does
)
Vice versa:A sytem that sounds unbearable
played loud is not O.K.
this is (or should be) one of the most important benchmarks for
music reproduction. (and the reason why artificial round earth
sound is definitly wrong,and not a matter of taste.)What people mean often while saying:it cant rock.
O.J.
louder and because of there is nothing wrong
ther will be no faults magnified by the level.
Only the poweramp can come to its limit.(and neither krell nor levison does
)Vice versa:A sytem that sounds unbearable
played loud is not O.K.
this is (or should be) one of the most important benchmarks for
music reproduction. (and the reason why artificial round earth
sound is definitly wrong,and not a matter of taste.)What people mean often while saying:it cant rock.
O.J.
This is typical. I think it's because we're used to pushing our systems to the limit, so our ears expect a certain level of distortion to indicate that it's "loud, therefore fun". When the system is cleaner, we have to push it that much harder to get that subliminal "fun edginess".
Perhaps we even need it to seem almost out of control, for it to be most enjoyable. It's like driving a car for excitement: if the car always seems completely in control and within safety limits, it's not very thrilling. However, if you get achieve that perception of "TOO FAST! TOO FAST!" then the fun becomes palpable. Of course, this is just a little theory I have.
There's a related aspect for me, and that's the sense of "scale". Some might interpret this as "how big does it sound". Some speakers are not designed to sound big until they hit higher volumes. You need an amp that can push them to this level, and until you get it, you'll always be driving your system on the edge.
However, if you have a speaker that does scale at a lower volume, then I find that you're not as compelled to turn up the wick. My recent speaker change is a good example of this. My former Royd Albions sounded great, but like most speakers, they needed to be turned up to create that desirable sensation of "scale". However, the new Royd RR3s create that effect at a much lower volume, so I'm not forced to drive them as hard to get the same sense of palpable excitement.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
Perhaps we even need it to seem almost out of control, for it to be most enjoyable. It's like driving a car for excitement: if the car always seems completely in control and within safety limits, it's not very thrilling. However, if you get achieve that perception of "TOO FAST! TOO FAST!" then the fun becomes palpable. Of course, this is just a little theory I have.
There's a related aspect for me, and that's the sense of "scale". Some might interpret this as "how big does it sound". Some speakers are not designed to sound big until they hit higher volumes. You need an amp that can push them to this level, and until you get it, you'll always be driving your system on the edge.
However, if you have a speaker that does scale at a lower volume, then I find that you're not as compelled to turn up the wick. My recent speaker change is a good example of this. My former Royd Albions sounded great, but like most speakers, they needed to be turned up to create that desirable sensation of "scale". However, the new Royd RR3s create that effect at a much lower volume, so I'm not forced to drive them as hard to get the same sense of palpable excitement.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
A few quick thoughts...
Relating it to music, as in the Hifi playing music, and not the sound of the HiFi as an end in itself....
Natural acoustic intstruments, aka non electronically reproduced/enhanced ones, such as string, wood, brass etc, all have a complex mix of harmonics that blend together to form the timbre of the instrument. Usually, it sounds rather nice, unless of course you don't like the instrument in question. Or the player/performance, but that's another issue.
All electronic recording/reproducing equipment will add distortion of some kind. With valves, it's supposedly even ordered harmonic distortion that gives valves their supposed smoothness, warmth, and liquidity of sound, as against the odd ordered distortion of transistor designs that gives a harder, faster, tauter and 'edgy' sound.
Upgrade the equipment, thus hopefully increasing the resolution and lowering the noise and distortion, will make it at first seem quieter, as well as more detailed, full, natural etc. Distortion is annoying to the ear, makes things seem louder than they are, and is fatiguing to say the least.
In a concert hall, a symphony orchestra in full FFF, i.e. flat chat in large tuttis etc, comfortably hits around 110db of smooth, effortless, majestic sound. And does it from a whisper to a roar in the blink of an eye. Yet it is smooth, rich, beguiling and entrancing.
At home, one can both underplay, and overplay a recording with reference to the reproduced volume. Underplaying it re relative volumes that relate to musical levels/expression results in generally subtle masking of background/pianissimo parts by louder/fortissimo ones.
Overplaying it brings up the pianissimo parts to an unaturally excessive level, thus compressing the apparent dynamic range, reducing the contrast between soft/pianoissimo and loud/forte, including all the elements between pianissimo and fortissimo such as mezoforte etc.
To be sure, pushing the amp beyond it's comfortable working range into the area where it's distortion increases will add an edge to the sound, that may sound more 'exciting' but it's not about music at all.
It begs the question; is the quest for quality HiFi about listening to the music, or is the music only an end to the HiFi which becomes the end in itself. A great pity if it does, as music is far more rewarding to listen to than any HiFi I have ever heard.
Incidentally, on CD, in my 5x4mtr listening room, made of permanent materials (double brick) the acoustics are on the bright side - usual replay levels are around 8.30 to 9.00 o'clock - mostly I adjust the volume level on individual recordings to suit the pianissimo levels, and let the rest just fall into place, which they do if it's a well engineered and balanced recording. Sometimes a slight adjustment is needed to gain correct musical perspective, but that is all.
Hope this helps, speaking as a music lover who happens to be a HiFi nut....oh the shame of it...
Best Regards
John....
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
Relating it to music, as in the Hifi playing music, and not the sound of the HiFi as an end in itself....
Natural acoustic intstruments, aka non electronically reproduced/enhanced ones, such as string, wood, brass etc, all have a complex mix of harmonics that blend together to form the timbre of the instrument. Usually, it sounds rather nice, unless of course you don't like the instrument in question. Or the player/performance, but that's another issue.
All electronic recording/reproducing equipment will add distortion of some kind. With valves, it's supposedly even ordered harmonic distortion that gives valves their supposed smoothness, warmth, and liquidity of sound, as against the odd ordered distortion of transistor designs that gives a harder, faster, tauter and 'edgy' sound.
Upgrade the equipment, thus hopefully increasing the resolution and lowering the noise and distortion, will make it at first seem quieter, as well as more detailed, full, natural etc. Distortion is annoying to the ear, makes things seem louder than they are, and is fatiguing to say the least.
In a concert hall, a symphony orchestra in full FFF, i.e. flat chat in large tuttis etc, comfortably hits around 110db of smooth, effortless, majestic sound. And does it from a whisper to a roar in the blink of an eye. Yet it is smooth, rich, beguiling and entrancing.
At home, one can both underplay, and overplay a recording with reference to the reproduced volume. Underplaying it re relative volumes that relate to musical levels/expression results in generally subtle masking of background/pianissimo parts by louder/fortissimo ones.
Overplaying it brings up the pianissimo parts to an unaturally excessive level, thus compressing the apparent dynamic range, reducing the contrast between soft/pianoissimo and loud/forte, including all the elements between pianissimo and fortissimo such as mezoforte etc.
To be sure, pushing the amp beyond it's comfortable working range into the area where it's distortion increases will add an edge to the sound, that may sound more 'exciting' but it's not about music at all.
It begs the question; is the quest for quality HiFi about listening to the music, or is the music only an end to the HiFi which becomes the end in itself. A great pity if it does, as music is far more rewarding to listen to than any HiFi I have ever heard.
Incidentally, on CD, in my 5x4mtr listening room, made of permanent materials (double brick) the acoustics are on the bright side - usual replay levels are around 8.30 to 9.00 o'clock - mostly I adjust the volume level on individual recordings to suit the pianissimo levels, and let the rest just fall into place, which they do if it's a well engineered and balanced recording. Sometimes a slight adjustment is needed to gain correct musical perspective, but that is all.
Hope this helps, speaking as a music lover who happens to be a HiFi nut....oh the shame of it...
Best Regards
John....
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
Aha!we should not have anymore level problems
at home.Kef Q3 can do 112 db and most
other dynamic speakers i know do beyond 100 db.
(in tech specification papers)
An level meter is nothing than a reversed loudspeaker=microphone and a correct measurement of such an instrument means only
db at 1000 hertz (international technical agreement of measurement.)
And in the end you must admit we are dependant
of the amp linearity and power.(resuming that we all have perfect sourcesand there is nothing than perfect software on the market 
.....and there are no lying politicians 
....than i awake.
My personal formula for music reproduction is
Music+ Hifi system = music
Hifi=0
always trying to bring hifi to zero.
an other formula:music+ hifi > music is definitly wrong.
Music+ hifi< music is also wrong but a good starting point (remember tivoli)for the next
upgrade
........only problem i have : what means > or<
in a formula without numbers?
Me(and others) have spent a lot of time and money and are still on the way to find out.....
O.J.
at home.Kef Q3 can do 112 db and most
other dynamic speakers i know do beyond 100 db.
(in tech specification papers)An level meter is nothing than a reversed loudspeaker=microphone and a correct measurement of such an instrument means only
db at 1000 hertz (international technical agreement of measurement.)
And in the end you must admit we are dependant
of the amp linearity and power.(resuming that we all have perfect sources
and there is nothing than perfect software on the market .....and there are no lying politicians
....than i awake.
My personal formula for music reproduction is
Music+ Hifi system = music
Hifi=0
always trying to bring hifi to zero.
an other formula:music+ hifi > music is definitly wrong.
Music+ hifi< music is also wrong but a good starting point (remember tivoli)for the next
upgrade
........only problem i have : what means > or<
in a formula without numbers?
Me(and others) have spent a lot of time and money and are still on the way to find out.....
O.J.
Hy geoff and frederik!From the beginning of this thread
i had the feeling that the "headroom"will become an important(maybe the most important )Question.Because the room reflections of a n y
room are different.All other factors are tested
by manufactureres of Hifi components to the
limit of technical possibilities (speaking about analog reproduction and n o t about the situation that digital processors get better and faster and are nowadays as good as analog
sound production (theoretical)ever has been.
So here the headroom:
1,there is n o amp on the market that k n o w s the room where reproduction of production will be .
2,there are no speakes onthe market that k n ow
where reproduction of production will be.
3,The headroom of production is given byroduction room (studio,concert hall,club)
and the placement and quality of recording microphones.(not talking about mixers and equipment which changes sound electronical)
4,for reproduction this point 3 is given.
Only variable of point3 concerning reproduction is the level.(as geoff,frederik and me have the same opinion!)
So let us look at 1 and 2.
It is possible to adapt an amp with room corrector system individual to an room.this can be made by equalizing and can be measured
with given speakers, on listener place.
correcting amp(or better preamp) means nothing other than changing amplitude
of signal.theoretical it must be done very often and fast at any level and frequencie and
imo it is only possible with fast processors and a lot o f programming and it will only work
on o n e point of listener room.(not correcting
time(phase) ,because this will destroy productiongiven headroom.So you see our naim preamps and even the best conventional preamps available c a n n o t dothis.(no processors).
The speakers:Speakers reproduce music by recorded amplitude and time(phase)on only o n e
listener place.(there was also only o n e microphonplace in production(theoretically and ideal).And here comes the goal:speakers should havelimited off axis response because of listenerroomresonances.( Vertical and horizontal.)all headroom information is in the
electrical signal timewise and frequenciewise
coded.(recorded with the microphones)
Naims idea of wallplaced speakers is nothing
other than to limit the factors (position of speaker to frontwall is given and so frontwallresonances are better preknown than in (how far??)off wall cocepts
Room absorbers do nothing other than to adsorb
added resonances of listener room(also away to keep information of original headroom)
knowing this all should help on the way to a good sound......or to the next pub for a beer
O.J.
i had the feeling that the "headroom"will become an important(maybe the most important )Question.Because the room reflections of a n y
room are different.All other factors are tested
by manufactureres of Hifi components to the
limit of technical possibilities (speaking about analog reproduction and n o t about the situation that digital processors get better and faster and are nowadays as good as analog
sound production (theoretical)ever has been.
So here the headroom:
1,there is n o amp on the market that k n o w s the room where reproduction of production will be .
2,there are no speakes onthe market that k n ow
where reproduction of production will be.
3,The headroom of production is given by
roduction room (studio,concert hall,club)and the placement and quality of recording microphones.(not talking about mixers and equipment which changes sound electronical)
4,for reproduction this point 3 is given.
Only variable of point3 concerning reproduction is the level.(as geoff,frederik and me have the same opinion!)
So let us look at 1 and 2.
It is possible to adapt an amp with room corrector system individual to an room.this can be made by equalizing and can be measured
with given speakers, on listener place.
correcting amp(or better preamp) means nothing other than changing amplitude
of signal.theoretical it must be done very often and fast at any level and frequencie and
imo it is only possible with fast processors and a lot o f programming and it will only work
on o n e point of listener room.(not correcting
time(phase) ,because this will destroy productiongiven headroom.So you see our naim preamps and even the best conventional preamps available c a n n o t dothis.(no processors).
The speakers:Speakers reproduce music by recorded amplitude and time(phase)on only o n e
listener place.(there was also only o n e microphonplace in production(theoretically and ideal).And here comes the goal:speakers should havelimited off axis response because of listenerroomresonances.( Vertical and horizontal.)all headroom information is in the
electrical signal timewise and frequenciewise
coded.(recorded with the microphones)
Naims idea of wallplaced speakers is nothing
other than to limit the factors (position of speaker to frontwall is given and so frontwallresonances are better preknown than in (how far??)off wall cocepts
Room absorbers do nothing other than to adsorb
added resonances of listener room(also away to keep information of original headroom)
knowing this all should help on the way to a good sound
......or to the next pub for a beerO.J.
HI Geoff !1.Point is the rigth way.
Something i did not say in my post:serious built speakers have a nearby linear frequency
range from bottom to top.(speaker constructors try to build housings (passive) crossovers and
chassis placement near to the optimum of no phase shiftings.Only a simple equalizers that changes amplitudes of frequencies (not length of amplitude)can destroy the mechanical phase balance between chassis.(do not forget the whole speaker will give now quite another non linear frequencie spectrum than it had before
and therefore its mechanical thiele and small parameters will be(artificial) wrong. Speakers balance of its own is a factor that is same or better more important than the
room reflections.(bring your speakers in your garden or a free field and do the test with an equalizer,and you will notice that you can make them sound crap also without room reflections.
so the truth is:linear(naim amps and linear speakers
( logical only possible without processors,out
of the reasons i named before ).
and perfect positioning of speakers and listener in an (theoretical )non reflecting room.
acoustic is physics of moved air and amps are needed to magnify this,therefore loudspeakers are amps tools. being in a linear logaritm with physics (nothing other is our try of (analog)recording and reproduction of music,transforming acoustics to voltage by induction ).
but amps c a n n o t change the physics with an artifical system built on a basement that is far away of beeing congruent to physics and not even in a related alogarythm to physics.
And Geoff this (your thread)is really intresting.
....and all who read this excuse my bad english.
O.J.
Something i did not say in my post:serious built speakers have a nearby linear frequency
range from bottom to top.(speaker constructors try to build housings (passive) crossovers and
chassis placement near to the optimum of no phase shiftings.Only a simple equalizers that changes amplitudes of frequencies (not length of amplitude)can destroy the mechanical phase balance between chassis.(do not forget the whole speaker will give now quite another non linear frequencie spectrum than it had before
and therefore its mechanical thiele and small parameters will be(artificial) wrong. Speakers balance of its own is a factor that is same or better more important than the
room reflections.(bring your speakers in your garden or a free field and do the test with an equalizer,and you will notice that you can make them sound crap also without room reflections.
so the truth is:linear(naim
amps and linear speakers( logical only possible without processors,out
of the reasons i named before ).
and perfect positioning of speakers and listener in an (theoretical )non reflecting room.
acoustic is physics of moved air and amps are needed to magnify this,therefore loudspeakers are amps tools. being in a linear logaritm with physics (nothing other is our try of (analog)recording and reproduction of music,transforming acoustics to voltage by induction ).
but amps c a n n o t change the physics with an artifical system built on a basement that is far away of beeing congruent to physics and not even in a related alogarythm to physics.
And Geoff this (your thread)is really intresting.
....and all who read this excuse my bad english.
O.J.
Hy Geoff!Brodband speakers are ideal out of their homogenity.But there are problems of acceleration,and gravitation concerning high
frequencies.a tweeter can out of his low mass
more exact follow an electric high frequencie
signal.(there are also tries with extrem low mass chassis (like podszus görlich chassis)to
make bigger chassis faster)
the second thing is that tweeters are small and
therefore less phase problem out of its own(smaller) surface(tweeters are often controlled by an mechanical (phase plug or lense infront of them to hinder them swing uncontrolled)
an effect similar to oil damping in car shock absorbers.( in the tweeter example the air between lens and tweeter will damp working as an air pillow.if a tweeter starts to swing
in another way than a piston(front/back)you will recognize this as an distortion.
Inlinearity of our hearing:
no problem:it is there in real life and it will
be there in a non corrected reproduction.If theoretical)our equipment is linear.
so y o u r hearing(ears,Brain) adds non linearity to a l l acoustic events(or reproductions)
Off axis:normally you listen relatively on axis
to music performances or if one or more people are speaking infront of you (off axis listenin will diminuish horizontal direction feeling of
a tone. also if you hold a hand surfacing one ear you will loose Your" anatomic "time difference processor to localise direction of sound.(T w o ears :difference of time and frequencies decoded in your brain).....and basement for stereo reproduction.
what is done in life of axis, is hearing n o t
listening as we do to music or hifi.(want to say listening is concentrated,concious willingly hearing)
ideal room:free field or acoustic death room.
in death rooms are speakers standing on a gitter to put away also floor reflections(that you have on the free field.
ideal speaker:the one that would have as less as possible synergy with the walls an ceiling
of rooms and has also not the tonal coulured and extrem on axis sound of a horn.this becomes more nessecary the higher
the frequencies are.(does of course not work on the wall behind listener that is logical on axis ,but nature helps us here by the form of ourouter ear).
Compare it to an headphone:wherever you listen
to it sound is always the same.
you are used to do this and you know there you can hear also a lot of different "rooms" given py production and without listener room
reflection.(of course headphone is an unnatural
hearing,but i think its good for the example
that there are d i f f e re n t headrooms w i t h o u t listener room reflection
by production.
Last thing: on free air you need a lot more
amp power to bring the same "sound energy" to
listeners ear than in aroom.
I am far from a religous flatearther(think only there is tonality sometimes too less important) but i know that round earth hifi ideas are definitly physical wrong because often negating the factors t i m e and therefore P h a s e. and music is nothing
other than right tones in right t i m e.(and right level.)
So tell me :w h i c h
other goal could have reproduction?
frequencies.a tweeter can out of his low mass
more exact follow an electric high frequencie
signal.(there are also tries with extrem low mass chassis (like podszus görlich chassis)to
make bigger chassis faster)
the second thing is that tweeters are small and
therefore less phase problem out of its own(smaller) surface(tweeters are often controlled by an mechanical (phase plug or lense infront of them to hinder them swing uncontrolled)
an effect similar to oil damping in car shock absorbers.( in the tweeter example the air between lens and tweeter will damp working as an air pillow.if a tweeter starts to swing
in another way than a piston(front/back)you will recognize this as an distortion.
Inlinearity of our hearing:
no problem:it is there in real life and it will
be there in a non corrected reproduction.If theoretical)our equipment is linear.
so y o u r hearing(ears,Brain) adds non linearity to a l l acoustic events(or reproductions)
Off axis:normally you listen relatively on axis
to music performances or if one or more people are speaking infront of you (off axis listenin will diminuish horizontal direction feeling of
a tone. also if you hold a hand surfacing one ear you will loose Your" anatomic "time difference processor to localise direction of sound.(T w o ears :difference of time and frequencies decoded in your brain).....and basement for stereo reproduction.
what is done in life of axis, is hearing n o t
listening as we do to music or hifi.(want to say listening is concentrated,concious willingly hearing)
ideal room:free field or acoustic death room.
in death rooms are speakers standing on a gitter to put away also floor reflections(that you have on the free field.
ideal speaker:the one that would have as less as possible synergy with the walls an ceiling
of rooms and has also not the tonal coulured and extrem on axis sound of a horn.this becomes more nessecary the higher
the frequencies are.(does of course not work on the wall behind listener that is logical on axis ,but nature helps us here by the form of ourouter ear).
Compare it to an headphone:wherever you listen
to it sound is always the same.
you are used to do this and you know there you can hear also a lot of different "rooms" given py production and without listener room
reflection.(of course headphone is an unnatural
hearing,but i think its good for the example
that there are d i f f e re n t headrooms w i t h o u t listener room reflection
by production.
Last thing: on free air you need a lot more
amp power to bring the same "sound energy" to
listeners ear than in aroom.
I am far from a religous flatearther(think only there is tonality sometimes too less important) but i know that round earth hifi ideas are definitly physical wrong because often negating the factors t i m e and therefore P h a s e. and music is nothing
other than right tones in right t i m e.(and right level.)
So tell me :w h i c h
other goal could have reproduction?