Repair, then improve

[[email protected]]

Hi RATs!

OK, I am a humble software geek, further humbled by disease. My
approach to Audio hardware is, therefore, restrained. Graham is sure I
am searching the bit bucket for a Zero, but, he is an SS cretin, so, I
just ignore him, normally ...

I build circuits as close to the drawing as I can, then, after finding
and fixing my inevitable bads, I listen for a good long time, weeks and
months, to hear what Music is there, good or bad. THEN, and only then,
I try and see if I can get more Music through the circuit. If you seek
more Power, you have your head up your resume ... Yes, your meters
work. No, they don't always know anything useful about perceiving
Music.

If we could measure Musical reproduction accurately, we would not need
anyone to design and build and modify components. A straightforward
software program would design perfection, or as close to it as
available technology allows, every time.

Relax, there is enough noise in our world to allow for some personal
judgements to be made and appreciated within the limits of our very
real, if not very great, available technology.

I have built a few circuits. Some even worked, sort of, eventually.

I have listened, a lot. This is improving, occasionally. Not changing
anything allows the system to mature. Sometimes this helps.

I truly love listening to live performances. I am also too sick to get
out. Home brew, or, tweak, is my only available means to the simple end
of digging the performances which have been recorded.

It is obviously much more fun to reach the big Reward than to listen
and try and find the next small step away from complete frustration. It
is also more fun to win Lotto than to go to work on Monday morning ...

The system is not the only limit to our enjoyment of recorded Music. It
would be nice if we could solder around ****ty performances and
mediocre recordings, but, grow up. It is truly hopeless, much of the
time.

Asumming the performance and recording were OK, what is stopping us
from going bat**** happy while listening?

There are many answers. The first one is we are not willing to do the
required work. You really think rich people get perfect sound? Grow up.
Nobody gets perfect sound. Some of us get more than we deserve, but, it
takes work. The ultimate four letter word :)

Haappy Ears!
Al

PS each of us can get more than we do, which is enough of a lie to keep
me trying stuff ;)

[Ian Iveson]

Stuart Krivis wrote

>>I build circuits as close to the drawing as I can, then, after
>>finding
>>and fixing my inevitable bads, I listen for a good long time, weeks
>>and
>>months, to hear what Music is there, good or bad. THEN, and only
>>then,
>>I try and see if I can get more Music through the circuit. If you
>>seek
>
> So you turn up the "Music" knob and get more "Music" through the
> circuit?
>
> Feel free to putter around and do whatever you want, but I think
> you're fooling yourself with the "more Music" thing.

Reproduction is engineering. Fidelity is art.

Music is art. Reproduction only sounds like music to artless engineers
who, having no other option, reduce fidelity to precision.

Presumably, more musical things make more music? Perhaps Al has a
hunch about the transformation of quantity to quality, and vice-versa,
but hasn't quite mastered its logic. Maybe nobody has.

cheers, Ian

[Eeyore]

Ian Iveson wrote:

> Stuart Krivis wrote
>
> > Feel free to putter around and do whatever you want, but I think
> > you're fooling yourself with the "more Music" thing.
>
> Reproduction is engineering. Fidelity is art.

********.

I dare say however many chimpanzees it is *could* type the works of
Shakespeare too.

Graham

[[email protected]]

Eeyore wrote:
>
> I dare say however many chimpanzees it is *could* type the works of
> Shakespeare too.
>
> Graham

Hi RATs!

Shakespeare is safe in this NG ;)

Happy Ears!
Al

[Engineer]

wrote:
> Hi RATs!
>
> OK, I am a humble software geek, further humbled by disease. My
> approach to Audio hardware is, therefore, restrained.

(snip)

Al, my condolences about not getting out to hear enough live audio (if
I understand you correcly.)
My situation is certainly less dire, but still a bit frustrating for me
(forgive me... not on the same scale, of course.) I work full time and
then find I don't have the time or energy to get out to concerts and
the opera here in Toronto very often to educate the ears (BTW, we have
a new, high-tech opera house in Toronto that I WILL get to soon!)
I listen to masses of classical CD's on a mid to high-end solid state
system with good speakers, lots of classical FM, too (but not vinyl,
even though I have a system and the tube amps if I want to use them.)
I also play piano a bit... Ah, ha, you say, home brewed live audio!
No, it's a digital keyboard playing through a well engineered sound
system! The keyboard has string resonance modelling... sounds very
good but it's but back to CD quality again.
Resolution:
1. Get out there and educate the ears again!
2. Look for friends with good, in-tune, wooden pianos to play on (a bit
rare!)
2. Buy a grand piano? Unlikely, too expensive, wife says no room...
Cheers,
Roger

[Peter Wieck]

Stuart Krivis wrote:
> Fidelity is precision when it comes to reproducing a recorded
> performance.

I would seriously quibble with your choice of words.

"Precision" and "Accuracy" are not even a little bit the same thing.
"Precision" is a quality, "accuracy" is a level of performance.

Example: A thermometer that reads to 0.001 of a degree. It is quite
precise. Its (presumed) level of error is 0.0005 of a degree +/-.

Another thermometer that reads in whole degrees only. Its (presumed)
level of error is 0.5 of a degree +/-. Not terribly precise.

If the former is off always by some amount of degrees greater than
one, and not predictably so, it remains precise but not at all
accurate.

If the latter is always within its error level, it remains not terribly
precise, but quite accurate.

I prefer accuracy in my components. Precision is much more easily
managed.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA