Live data from Hacker News

Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

stereophile.com

41–50 of 61 posts

Re: Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

#41
post #2

Stereophile routinely recommends $20,000 'power conditioners' and multi-thousand dollar cables. FFS they've claimed CD players 'sound better' sitting on 'special' racks. ( https://www.stereophile.com/standsracks/206finite/index.html ) This is the history of a successful charlatan.

>This is the history of a successful charlatan. Agreed. Its tough though... I know of a couple times in my life I've thought something was OK until I saw something else. Examples, Glass. Binoculars, camera lenses, rifle scopes, telescopes. Glass differences are very real. You might be A-OK with some Bushnell Binos, but USE Swarovski or Vortex Razor or something lower-highend and you'll get it. Now, I didn't write LOO…

There is certainly a range of quality in audio gear, but it's a complicated thing.

Some things that are reasonably easy to notice with a stereo system:

1) Dynamic range: how loud does it get, how quiet does it get? Does it sound good when its loud? does it sound good when it's soft? Small/inefficient speakers will struggle at high volumes, resulting in high distortion. That's measurable and often not hard to hear. Big speakers with the powerful amps needed to drive them which sound good at high volume often suffer from audible hiss at lower volume, short distance listening, due to inadequate power supply noise rejection relative to the gain. Big speakers also will generally have further-spaced drivers, and that bigger geometry can have a noticeable effect on spacial coherency, especially at short distances. (Ideally you want your speakers to be a point source, not different frequencies coming from different angles)

2) Flatness in frequency response: this is easy to measure with equipment, but also quite easy to hear by playing a sine wave that slowly sweeps the audible range. If the amplitude of the wave in the signal is consistent, there shouldn't be a ton of variation in volume of the reproduction. It can be heavily effected by the room they're in, usually in the bass & mid-bass range where the wavelengths are similar to room dimensions, but some speakers will be much more consistent than others across the rest.

3) Dispersion characteristics: when you move your ears around relative to the speakers, does the frequency response change dramatically? Some speakers don't sound very good in the high frequencies once your ears go a few degrees off axis from the source.

This stuff gets a lot more obvious when doing A/B comparisons. You're right that you can't really tell how good a system is just by listening to a random song and judging it's sound quality like you can with video on a TV, and I think that stems from an inherent difference between hearing and vision. The sound you hear is ALWAYS heavily effected by the space its in, reflections and sympathetic vibrations, the angle you hear it from, and so on. Source material varies wildly in quality and recording/mastering technique. It's much harder to perceive "wrongness" in audio because it's so varied to begin with.

Re: Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

#42
I wonder what's a fair price for a pair of tower speakers? Is $10k crazy expensive? $5000?

People pay crazy amounts of money for some paintings so I don't see an issue paying crazy amounts of money for audio gear that looks and sounds nice.

I visit Stereophile from time to time to see what's new but never bothered to read all the crap. If you are into audio gear/hifi there is 10% useful content though(i.e pictures, price range and measurements)

https://www.listenup.com/shop/media/catalog/product/l/i/lili...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_9_8lCDuL3Q

Re: Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

#43
post #32

There is literally no limit to the insanity of the audiophile universe. You can spend a thousand dollars on a three foot "reference quality" ethernet cable. I've seen "audiophile" SATA cables, USB cables, and USB signal conditioners. There's a whole sub-culture around removing the stock fuses in equipment and replacing them with "audiophile" fuses. I actually once saw two guys comparing a song ripped by two different…

SATA cables? USB cables? Try audiophile electricity poles.

https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/15/japan-audiophiles-instal...

Re: Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

#44
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is the history of a successful charlatan. Agreed. Its tough though... I know of a couple times in my life I've thought something was OK until I saw something else. Examples, Glass. Binoculars, camera lenses, rifle scopes, telescopes. Glass differences are very real. You might be A-OK with some Bushnell Binos, but USE Swarovski or Vortex Razor or something lower-highend and you'll get it. Now, I didn't write LOO…

Audio is subjective but differences in quality can still be objectively measured. You play the same music through different equipment and have the listener rate them without knowing what they are . Consistent improvements will show up across different listeners, and differences that come down to personal taste will still show up across different sessions with the same listener. The most telling thing about the audiop…

Some things are very hard to measure objectively, though, despite being real. (Anything subject to chaos theory, for sure.)

I mix records. I use two different sets of monitors for mixing - a pair of Tannoy System 12 DMT monitors (equivalent would cost about $4000; they were very popular in hip-hop studios back in the '90s), and a more modern pair of Focal Alpha 50 powered monitors (about $800/pair new). Both monitors are quality professional gear. In terms of frequency response, they're both quite flat, although the big Tannoys have more bass extension.

They don't sound anything alike.

I find the Focals much more useful and predictable for the critical listening of mixing. They're also more tiring to listen to for extended periods. They're brutal, especially for transients and the very leading edge of sounds. I don't trust mixing on the Tannoys. But if I want to listen to music, rather than mix, I'll take the Tannoys any day. They treat transients more gently, and make for a much more pleasant, euphonic experience.

Internet audiophile wannabes will then tell me I'm hearing distortion. Which is nonsense. Two speakers say the same thing in different ways, and the differences are very, very difficult to measure - but they are nonetheless quite real and plainly audible.

Re: Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

#45
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially because measurements like Total Harmonic Distortion (THD) use sine waves for their measurements. People pay thousands of dollars for marginally lower THD (say, .02 % instead of 0.5%) but they listen to music, not sine waves. Well, I assume this. Perhaps people buy high end audio equipment so they can listen to sine waves.

THD is a measure of non-linearity, which adds harmonics not present in the original signal. Yes, the standard tests use sine waves, but the results are applicable to other signals. Just because most people don't listen to sine waves for fun doesn't mean it's a valid measurement. On the other hand, the highest THD in a sound reproduction system comes from the physical transducers. Worrying about the THD of an amplifie…

-I fully agree with your sentiment, except I'd like to stress that a loudspeaker provides _several_ orders of magnitude more distortion than a competently designed amplifier driven within its limits.

Re: Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

#46
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can measure the difference in cables though! I can put them through a scope or analyzer and I can even show you real hard differences between them. What we can't do is prove that makes a difference to your ear vs mine and that's the real problem. So there are two difference classes of scam here. The one where it's true there is a difference in this $10 and $10000 cable, but they're effective identical. And the sca…

At audio frequencies (and well beyond), you won't be able to measure any meaningful differences: https://www.lifewire.com/speaker-cables-make-a-difference-31... And the absurdity becomes much more obvious when contrasting with the differences in speakers and speaker crossovers...

That depends on impedance behaviors between components, too.

As a guitarist, I did guitar cable listening tests. With passive guitar pickups (high impedance, low output devices), different cables have easily audible fingerprints. With active pickups, there's no difference at all. The difference between cables is no longer enough to audibly affect the signal.

And within this realm, more expensive doesn't always mean better. I've had cheap cables sound better than expensive cables.

Re: Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

#47
post #29

Stereophile is a terrific view into a culture of pseudo science and science denialism, but with extremely low stakes: it's just rich people wasting their money. It's worth reading because the prose is actually quite good and you can also see just how people determined to believe things can ignore or dismiss rational arguments.

Interestingly, it’s also one of the few sources of comprehensive objective measurements of high-end speakers and other equipment. They’re just careful to never let the actual measurements influence the glowing prose of their main review; at most Atkinson gets off a mild shot or two in the conclusion to the measurement section (“somewhat idiosyncratic measured behavior”, “even with its rather lively cabinet”, “don’t m…

John Atkinson is what sets Stereophile apart from all the other mags.

Basically Stereophile has tons of articles that are clearly nonsensical, like reviews of $100,000 tube amps. But they also do objective measurements of equipment, which most magazines do not.

That data is an absolute treasure trove; it's one of the best places to develop insight into the engineering of quality loudspeakers.

Re: Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

#48
post #2

Stereophile routinely recommends $20,000 'power conditioners' and multi-thousand dollar cables. FFS they've claimed CD players 'sound better' sitting on 'special' racks. ( https://www.stereophile.com/standsracks/206finite/index.html ) This is the history of a successful charlatan.

>This is the history of a successful charlatan. Agreed. Its tough though... I know of a couple times in my life I've thought something was OK until I saw something else. Examples, Glass. Binoculars, camera lenses, rifle scopes, telescopes. Glass differences are very real. You might be A-OK with some Bushnell Binos, but USE Swarovski or Vortex Razor or something lower-highend and you'll get it. Now, I didn't write LOO…

>Its tough though... I know of a couple times in my life I've thought something was OK until I saw something else. Examples, Glass. Binoculars, camera lenses, rifle scopes, telescopes. Glass differences are very real.

-Aye. I had a rather absurd discussion with a colleague here the other day; he keeps a pair of el cheapo grande binoculars in his office, some 10x50 monsters which he proudly announced cost less than $100.

The colour cast was so bad that even I (being tritanope) immediately spotted it and found it annoying. Colour fringing like you wouldn't believe. A tiny, reasonably sharp spot in the centre of one pupil, the other was nowhere near acceptable. Light falloff and softening was quite aggressive as you approached the edges.

I then brought out my Zeiss Victory 8x32s, as they happened to be in my office that day after a field trip. His first impression? 'The colours are off, and it looks unnaturally sharp.'

Sigh. Never mind that one could read the (comparably) small print on a sign across the sound on the 8x Zeiss whereas even the headline was a smudge on the 10x cheapos.

At the risk of sounding elitist, I think that for some people, low cost makes for excellent quality in the same way as high cost equates same for others.

Re: Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

#49
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is the history of a successful charlatan. Agreed. Its tough though... I know of a couple times in my life I've thought something was OK until I saw something else. Examples, Glass. Binoculars, camera lenses, rifle scopes, telescopes. Glass differences are very real. You might be A-OK with some Bushnell Binos, but USE Swarovski or Vortex Razor or something lower-highend and you'll get it. Now, I didn't write LOO…

There is certainly a range of quality in audio gear, but it's a complicated thing. Some things that are reasonably easy to notice with a stereo system: 1) Dynamic range: how loud does it get, how quiet does it get? Does it sound good when its loud? does it sound good when it's soft? Small/inefficient speakers will struggle at high volumes, resulting in high distortion. That's measurable and often not hard to hear. Bi…

Power response is a really fascinating metric, and people don't bring it up very often.

The interesting thing about power response is that it's one of those things that you can't fix with an EQ.

IE, if I have a speaker that's too "hot" or it's too rolled off, I can address that via EQ. But if your power response is bad, there is very little you can do about it.

It IS possible to improve the power response by tweaking the crossover, but that is one of those things that separates the good engineers from the great ones: nearly anyone can make a speaker that measures flat on axis. The hard part is getting it to behave on axis AND off.

If you look at brands like KEF and Genelec, they've paid a lot of attention to this.

Re: Stereophile: A Personal Odyssey

#50
post #2

Stereophile routinely recommends $20,000 'power conditioners' and multi-thousand dollar cables. FFS they've claimed CD players 'sound better' sitting on 'special' racks. ( https://www.stereophile.com/standsracks/206finite/index.html ) This is the history of a successful charlatan.

> This is the history of a successful charlatan. For two summers in college, I worked at a Home Theater company. They did custom home theaters, distributed audio, and a ton of mixed AV stuff. Needless to say, the majority of our clients were very rich and most of the theaters we installed were in the 300K-500K range. The funny part was the owner constantly talking about how much better a $25K pair of speakers sounded…

> The funny part was the owner constantly talking about how much better a $25K pair of speakers sounded than a $15K pair of speakers.

The funny thing is that it's actually the complete opposite. Due to the law of vanishing returns, the difference between a $25K unit and a $15K unit can be subtle.

It is astonishing how good speakers are these days. I'm running a set of Behringers that cost $300 and they exceed anything you could buy for a $1000 in Y2K.

Of course, this assumes that you buy new. If you buy used, there's a lot of great stuff under $1000.

Post reply on HN