|
|
Post by jackpine on Aug 15, 2014 14:08:19 GMT -5
Sometimes you just have to trust your ears, the most sensitive sound measurement tool at most peoples disposal. Any one of us could hear the difference between $200 student violin a $2,000 pro musicians violin and a $25,000,000 Stradivarius playing the same note at a normalized level. Could we learn to pick out the differences with a oscilloscope or spectrum analyzer I imagine so. There is no instrument I know of that will I split good, better, best spec though, ears are best for that. Trust your ears? Watch this video - and listen closely as you do. Now how much do you trust your ears? Hmm? I still trust my ears. It's your eyes that are fooling you. In your surround system sometimes you will be fooled into thinking your center speaker is playing having to bring your head within a foot or two of it to comfirm it's not. If there's no center speaker there you won't  . I had a friend accuse me of having my surround speakers on once. He was embarassed when I showed him there was no speaker wire attatched. |
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Aug 15, 2014 15:14:49 GMT -5
That video is meant to illustrate how we view the world around us - sight and sound and environment all play a role in how we perceive things. You can't easily disengage your ears from the other senses. All perception is via vibrations - no exceptions!
|
|
|
|
Post by solarrdadd on Aug 15, 2014 16:26:45 GMT -5
I recently picked up Portraits of Cuba (in HD FLAC rather than CD): www.amazon.com/Portraits-Cuba-Paquito-DRivera/dp/B000003GGWFantastic dynamics! Its "reference volume" is approximately the same as a theatrical mix according to Bob Katz who mastered it. On my receiver, that reads "0". The scary thing is that there isn't a whole lot of bass taking up that dynamic range. Those horns will give your tweeters a work out indeed! Why didn't you link the site you purchased the Hi-Rez FLAC from in case people want to buy it? To that end, if anyone is interested, I found it here at HDTracks. Some of the tracks sound pretty nice; I might have to pick it up in 96/24. Thanks OP. |
|
|
|
Post by sme on Aug 16, 2014 1:38:45 GMT -5
Why didn't you link the site you purchased the Hi-Rez FLAC from in case people want to buy it? To that end, if anyone is interested, I found it here at HDTracks. Some of the tracks sound pretty nice; I might have to pick it up in 96/24. Thanks OP. Thanks for getting others that link. My copy did in fact come from HDTracks, but I'm sure the CD sounds great too! |
|
|
|
Post by frenchyfranky on Aug 16, 2014 12:09:10 GMT -5
Sometimes you just have to trust your ears, the most sensitive sound measurement tool at most peoples disposal. Any one of us could hear the difference between $200 student violin a $2,000 pro musicians violin and a $25,000,000 Stradivarius playing the same note at a normalized level. Could we learn to pick out the differences with a oscilloscope or spectrum analyzer I imagine so. There is no instrument I know of that will I split good, better, best spec though, ears are best for that. Trust your ears? Watch this video - and listen closely as you do. Now how much do you trust your ears? Hmm? Very interesting, I will continue to trust my ears but close my eyes during critical listening, on the other side I'll not trust my eyes anymore for what I heard... |
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Aug 16, 2014 13:19:30 GMT -5
It isn't too much of a stretch to imagine someone buying those big mono-block amps to replace that wimpy UPA-200 and thinking WOW during the install - how could these NOT make a difference? This HAS to sound better. Guess what they hear? Better dynamics - more 'slam' - more of everything! Trouble is that any musical or movie passage that requires 100w to play well will be played well by both the new mono's and that clunky old UPA-2 amp. Both have more than 30w - with watts to spare. And the headroom difference between the UPA-2 and the XPR-2? A few db's worth the difference. Thats all you 'get'.
But go ahead and buy those hulking mono's guys - Emotiva will love you forever for it!
|
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,223 
|
Post by novisnick on Aug 16, 2014 14:29:37 GMT -5
It isn't too much of a stretch to imagine someone buying those big mono-block amps to replace that wimpy UPA-200 and thinking WOW during the install - how could these NOT make a difference? This HAS to sound better. Guess what they hear? Better dynamics - more 'slam' - more of everything! Trouble is that any musical or movie passage that requires 100w to play well will be played well by both the new mono's and that clunky old UPA-2 amp. Both have more than 30w - with watts to spare. And the headroom difference between the UPA-2 and the XPR-2? A few db's worth the difference. Thats all you 'get'. But go ahead and buy those hulking mono's guys - Emotiva will love you forever for it! You sir are mistaken! More need not be said. |
|
|
|
Post by sahmen on Aug 16, 2014 15:40:43 GMT -5
The demonstration in the video is interesting, as it shows one possibility of human error that is indeed real. However, we need to remember that it is not attempting to establish a scientifically generalizable or absolute fact. I mean that it is not attempting to prove that we are *always* deceived by what we see or hear, what it is saying is that we are liable to be deceived in some circumstances, or that *sometimes,* what we think we are hearing might be something entirely different. Just listen to the commentary and note the number of times it includes qualified expressions, such as "not always," and "might not", and you would see what I mean. Those qualifications are indeed prudent and cautiously chosen to maintain the credibility and integrity of the demonstration, so their presence is very auspicious, in my view. Now to claim that we "might" be deceived or deluded in some circumstances, or given certain conditions, does not mean or imply that we are *always* so deceived... Actually, using expressions such as "not always" or "might (not) etc. etc," automatically concedes the reverse argument, namely that, sometimes, what we see is, indeed, what we actually get. In the context of the present topic, it means that not all differences in sq we perceive can be dismissed as illusory, and, as I have said, I do not think this Mcgurk effect demo cancels out its own counterargument. To use a known Freudian analogy, we could conclude from it that, " sometimes a cigar is just a cigar," i.e. even if the cigar might also act in certain situations as a figure of psychological compensation for certain males or females (or, if you like, as a symbol of "phallic power," whether that power is "real" or imagined by human vanity)    So while I do not deny that our ears might sometimes deceive us in evaluating the audio components we have invested our hard-earned dollars in, I am also not ready to dismiss--as "unreal", "illusory," or "placebo effects," the palpable sq difference I can hear between any of my emo amp/preamp combos, on the one hand, and the Denon or Onkyo receivers they have replaced,on the other, especially since the difference is so substantial that I could tell the two sets apart even in my sleep. That is just one example; I could also point at others, but this one must suffice for now. |
|
|
|
Post by frenchyfranky on Aug 16, 2014 15:52:42 GMT -5
It isn't too much of a stretch to imagine someone buying those big mono-block amps to replace that wimpy UPA-200 and thinking WOW during the install - how could these NOT make a difference? This HAS to sound better. Guess what they hear? Better dynamics - more 'slam' - more of everything! Trouble is that any musical or movie passage that requires 100w to play well will be played well by both the new mono's and that clunky old UPA-2 amp. Both have more than 30w - with watts to spare. And the headroom difference between the UPA-2 and the XPR-2? A few db's worth the difference. Thats all you 'get'. But go ahead and buy those hulking mono's guys - Emotiva will love you forever for it! I have a pair of ERT-8.3 as you also own. These are each plugged on a mono block XPA-1 and on the vast majority of movies I saw the LED meter gone to the 3/4 of the run with FX peak in action or suspend thril, this is represent approx at 4ohms the ERT are, between 500 to 750w (the last red LED represent 1000w at 4ohms the clipping limit). When I listening music I often reach the half run on meter, approx 300 to 500w. So don't you think that your ERT-8.3 could sound different when using an other amp? |
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Aug 16, 2014 15:56:05 GMT -5
You guys should sign up for the Richard Clark amp challenge:Richard Clark $10,000 Amplifier Challenge FAQ by Tom Morrow Written 6/2006 The Richard Clark Amp Challenge is a listening test intended to show that as long as a modern audio amplifier is operated within its linear range (below clipping), the differences between amps are inaudible to the human ear. Because thousands of people have taken the test, the test is significant to the audiophile debate over audibility of amplifier differences. This document was written to summarize what the test is, and answer common questions about the test. Richard Clark was not involved in writing this document. |
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Aug 16, 2014 16:13:18 GMT -5
I have a pair of ERT-8.3 as you also own. These are each plugged on a mono block XPA-1 and on the vast majority of movies I saw the LED meter gone to the 3/4 of the run with FX peak in action or suspend thril, this is represent approx at 4ohms the ERT are, between 500 to 750w (the last red LED represent 1000w at 4ohms the clipping limit). When I listening music I often reach the half run on meter, approx 300 to 500w. So don't you think that your ERT-8.3 could sound different when using an other amp?[/quote] ====================================================================== I've had everything from a Mini-x-A100 to an XPA-2 connected to my ERTs. As long as I am using an amp within its design parameters there is no differences to be heard. So - before you try to tell me what manner of hearing I have I'll tell you this: At age 17 I joined the USN. I took a hearing test that each recruit takes - the hearing test focuses on two things - ability to hear very faint sounds at a wide spectrum of frequencies and the ability to distinguish from two sounds which is higher/lower in frequency - also taken at various frequencies. There were other aspects of those hearing tests but those were the most important to the USN. 99% of recruits are eliminated in the first round of exams. I was told after taking that battery of tests that I was in the top 5% of all that had ever taken the test. I qualified for sonar technician schooling based on that hearing test and went on to 36 weeks of intensive basic electricity and electronics school - what the Navy called 'A' school. At my current age (66) have have 10% loss in the right ear and 25% in the left ear - probably due to aging. I doubt I could have beaten Richard Clark's amplifier challenge at 17 and there is no reason to think I could today. What is being sold in large powerful amps is headroom. Sorry but I've never been able to hear headroom. And I doubt any of you can. As for distortion caused by clipping I doubt many people can hear it - and it happens much more often that you might think. I don't worry about things I can't hear. |
|
|
|
Post by frenchyfranky on Aug 16, 2014 17:52:21 GMT -5
I have a pair of ERT-8.3 as you also own. These are each plugged on a mono block XPA-1 and on the vast majority of movies I saw the LED meter gone to the 3/4 of the run with FX peak in action or suspend thril, this is represent approx at 4ohms the ERT are, between 500 to 750w (the last red LED represent 1000w at 4ohms the clipping limit). When I listening music I often reach the half run on meter, approx 300 to 500w. So don't you think that your ERT-8.3 could sound different when using an other amp? I've had everything from a Mini-x-A100 to an XPA-2 connected to my ERTs. As long as I am using an amp within its design parameters there is no differences to be heard. So - before you try to tell me what manner of hearing I have I'll tell you this: At age 17 I joined the USN. I took a hearing test that each recruit takes - the hearing test focuses on two things - ability to hear very faint sounds at a wide spectrum of frequencies and the ability to distinguish from two sounds which is higher/lower in frequency - also taken at various frequencies. There were other aspects of those hearing tests but those were the most important to the USN. 99% of recruits are eliminated in the first round of exams. I was told after taking that battery of tests that I was in the top 5% of all that had ever taken the test. I qualified for sonar technician schooling based on that hearing test and went on to 36 weeks of intensive basic electricity and electronics school - what the Navy called 'A' school. At my current age (66) have have 10% loss in the right ear and 25% in the left ear - probably due to aging. I doubt I could have beaten Richard Clark's amplifier challenge at 17 and there is no reason to think I could today. What is being sold in large powerful amps is headroom. Sorry but I've never been able to hear headroom. And I doubt any of you can. As for distortion caused by clipping I doubt many people can hear it - and it happens much more often that you might think. I don't worry about things I can't hear. Sir, Yes Sir! No I'm not gonna tell you what and how to hear Sir! Case closed, I'm also not gonna argue anymore with you on this subject. |
|
. I had a friend accuse me of having my surround speakers on once. He was embarassed when I showed him there was no speaker wire attatched.
