Latest Posts

ته خط خبرها

جمعه ۳ اردیبهشت ۱۳۸۹
/ / /
Comments Closed

نمایشگاه سیستم های صوتی در آلمان Highend in Münich 2010 از تاریخ 6 تا 9 ماه May برپاست و ویتوس هم اونجا حضور داره با یک بلندگوی جدید که من اسم برندش رو نمیشناسم . یک سری عکس اینجاست ببینید.

رومی که مشغول جابجایی بلندگوهاش هست و من پیشنهاد میکنم اون پستش رو دنبال کنید چون مطالب جالبی رو نوشته.

مایک هم مثل من انگار بیخیال های فای شده و خیلی وبلاگ و مجله اش رو آپدیت نمیکنه.

FM Acoustics هم یک آمپلی فایر 70 واتی کوچک زده که برام جالب بود دیدم راستی یک بلندگو هم جدیدا معرفی کرده که میتونید اینجا ببینیدش.

سایت های دانلود موسیقی هم مثل BSO و Passionato , RR دارند کم کم زیاد میشن و بنظر میاد در آینده نه چندان دور بجای سی دی خریدن باید از این جور سایت ها دانلود کنیم .

نمایشگاه AKFEST 2010 هم یکم و دوم ماه می در میشیگان برپاست.

وب بروزر http://www.enjoythemusic.com/browser/ هم جالبه ببینید.

شاید جالب باشه بدونید خیلی از solidstate سازها از ترانزیستورهای ژاپنی Sanken استفاده میکنند مثل Krell Evolution One آمریکایی ، Soulution 700 سوئیسی و Absoluta Sound and Space ایتالیایی.

یک سایت جالب که عکس های سیستم های صوتی توش هست هم اینجاست، ببینید:

http://cybwiz.zenfolio.com/

عکس های جالبی گذاشته و چیزی که تو این نمایشگاه ها به چشم میخوره اینه که خیلی از کمپانی های بلندگوسازی مثل TAD ، Marten ، Peak Consult ، German Physiks ، Tidal ، Kharma ، Amphion ، SW Speakers ، Focus Audio حتی بعضی از هورن سازها از ویتوس برای دمو استفاده میکنند.

نکته خنده دار اینه که این سایت از سایت من عکسهایی رو برداشته و تو سایتش قرار داده ، البته من ایرادی نمیبینم ولی جالبه که عکس سیستم صوتی آقای ابوعلی و آقای کیهانی هم اونجا حضور داره. 😀

حتی عکسهایی که آخرین بار از خوانه آقای ابوعلی گرفتم هم اونجا هست ببینید :

http://cybwiz.zenfolio.com/p19920223/h214aa8f6#h3e8afcbf

احتما لا تا چند وقت دیگه عکس های مارتن سوپرمی هم اونجا سروکلش پیدا میشه. 😉

فعلا این عکس ها رو از سایت http://www.euphonia-audioforum.se/forums/index.php?act=home ببینید :

اما مهمترین مطلبی که باید مینوشتم مربوط به مجله Audio Perfectionist بود که این آدم هم خیلی آدم حسابی هست و هم چقدر زیبا در مورد اهمیت آکوستیک مطلب نوشته اونم در اولین شماره نشریه اش :

Premier Issue:

This introductory issue of the Audio Perfectionist Journal will present the basic philosophies and precepts which will become the basis for all J o u r n a l a rt i c l e s.

It will lay the foundation for the info rm a t i o n that will be presented in future issues. In this first J o u r n a l we’ll discuss some of the misinformation that is rampant today and I’ll offer logical arguments to refute this propaganda. As a prelude to the articles on speaker placement and room treatment that will be included in Journal #2, we’ll lay outsome specific goals for assembling an audio system that can provide lasting musical satisfaction and we ’ l l discuss some of the problems that music lovers may encounter in their quest for that satisfa c t i o n .

The series of Journals that fol low will suggest solutions to the problems and provide info rmation to help a c h i eve the goals presented here.
The foundation of the Audio Pe r fectionist Journal i s my high fidelity approach to home audio. This philosophical position is presented in the article titled “ The High Fidelity Ap p ro a ch to Home Music Rep ro d u c t i o n .”
All info rmation in the Journal is based on the high fidelity approach which requires that a home audio system accurately reproduce the recorded signal. Proper system set-up is integral to the high fidelity approach and proper set-up starts with the preparation of the listening room.

Your listening room is a fundamental element of your home audio system and the acoustics of your room must be considered even before you start to choose audio components to accurately reproduce the recorded signal in that room.

Room acoustics cannot be corrected by electronic gadgets that alter the recorded signal and the response of the speakers The sound from the speakers and the sound from the room must be considered separately.

The article Equalization Can’t Fix Your Room :
Acoustics is the first in a series about getting the best sound from the components that you already own. It debunks the popular idea that all your acoustic problems can be electronically corrected and explains why room acoustics must be corrected acoustically.

It lays the groundwork for future articles about both system components and room acoustics by explaining why these two major aspects of sound—system and environment—must be treated as separate entities .

There are two major elements of the sound that you hear from a home audio system:

the sound that comes from the speakers—which is influenced by the quality of the system components—and the sound that comes from the environment in which the system resides—which is influenced by the room coustics.
These two major elements of sound can be further divided into two parts: bass frequencies up to about 140Hz and everything else. Speaker placement and room acoustics will be covered in future Journals but first we have to establish some fundamentals.

Before I suggest where you should place your speakers, you need to know why they should be placed there.
Before I suggest how you should treat your room, you should understand the goal.
You are wasting your time spending big money for small improvements in component performance before you’ve realized all the performance possible from the equipment you have now and the room in which that equipment is used.

A screwed up system in an untreated room may prevent you from hearing the improvement that an expensive component upgrade of f e r s .
But when you insert a better-sounding component into an optimized system, a subtle sonic improvement becomes a significant advance in fidelity and satisfaction.

The article titled The High Fidelity Approach to Home T h e a t e r :
proposes that a high fidelity audio system that accurately reproduces the recorded signal can be effectively utilized for home theater, too. If you want to really hear what the filmmakers intended, you’ll want to hear the signal just as they recorded it.

The popularity of home theater has been responsible for the biggest setback in the cause of high fidelity music reproduction since the introduction of the compact disc. T h a t ’s because the marketeers decided to offer a false paradigm as the standard for home theater fidelity in order to license and sell more products .
The article Home Theater Myths describes this false paradigm and explains why it has caused a division in the ranks of audio enthusiasts that really makes no sense at all.
This article presents arguments that counter the many heavily promoted “truths” about home theater performance that go largely unchallenged today. If you love music and want an audio system that serves double duty for music and movies, this article is a must read.
Home theater is a lot of fun and there is no reason that music lovers have to be at war with home theater buffs. High fidelity sound is what the Audio Pe r fectionist Journal is all about.
There is no caveat about what that sound has to represent, and there is no rule that says we have to use our hi-fi systems only for music. We can have it all if we get our priorities s t r a i g h t .
Future articles will describe how to use your high fidelity audio components for home theater sound without sacrificing musical performance in any way.

We’ll discuss the fidelity of film sound and I’ll tell you how to add home theater capability to your audio system without wasting money on components that claim to deliver more than the film medium allows.

Product Reviews :
I intend to do some product reviews but they will not be like the ones you’ve been reading elsewhere. Relying on reviews is a crutch that you should learn to do without. When you have firmly established your own sonic tastes you’ll realize that someone else ’s subjective impressions of an audio component are useless to you.
The influence of product reviews is a primary reason that so many music lovers are frustrated with their audio systems.
Seeking that magic component that will transform your system into a sonic wonderland is a futile pursuit.

Some audio components sound better than others but many people have systems that are so poorly set-up, in rooms that sound so bad, that the subtle differences between competing components will be all but inaudible. An inferior component may actually be preferred if it compensates for a flaw somewhere else in the system.
I have visited many rooms where the best components available were making the worst imaginable sound. Set-up is far more important than the choice of equipment. The sonic dif f e rence between a good component and a great one is subtle compared to the huge difference between a bare room and one with proper acoustic treatment.

Equalization Can’t Fix Your Room Acoustics :
Getting good sound from your home entertainment system requires attention to set-up. You can choose the best equipment in the wo rld and still be disappointed by the sonic results unless you devote some time to adjusting the system and the room that you put it in.
The contribution from the environment in which it resides can make or break the sound of a hi-fi system. Yes, your room is an important component and if it sounds bad, your potentially great-sounding system may be overwhelmed. Nothing I’m going to say in this article is meant to imply that the room is not an extremely important aspect of the total sound. What I am saying is that you can’t fix a poor-sounding room with electronic
equalization that alters the response of the speakers. Y o u must fix poor room acoustics acoustically. Learning why you can’t fix room acoustics by equalizing the speakers is important in order to understand how to do it correctly.
Please don’t jump to any all-encompassing conclusions. I don’t have a problem with equalization per se. Recordings are equalized to compensate for flaws in the equipment used to make them and play them back. Speakers can be equalized to correct response errors that should have been fixed in the original design. In fact, that’s what well-designed crossover networks are supposed to do—equalize driver response errors. Using an
equalizer as a tone control to tune your system to suit your specific tastes or to make poor recordings sound listenable is a reasonable concept, although I think that there are better ways to do this. I don’t mean to condemn all forms of equalization—just so-called “room EQ,” also incorrectly called “room tuning.”

I have a problem with the idea that you can compensate for poor room acoustics by altering the response of the loudspeakers to make them inaccurate in a complementary way. In a room where the speakers and the listeners are properly placed, well-away from the room boundaries, “room EQ” simply does not work.
As powerful digital signal processors become ever more economical, magic computer boxes designed to fix all your acoustic problems will be springing up like weeds. They work just like traditional room EQ. They falsely assume that the ear/brain mechanism can’t distinguish between the sound from the source and the sound from the room. When we start to actually tune the room with acoustical treatment, you’ll see that the sound from the speakers and the contributions from the room are separate entities.

Does the Piano Sound Different in Different Rooms?

My piano has been in many different rooms over the years. If I positioned the piano in a bare room and played it before placing other furnishings in this room, the sound of the room would be overly reverberant and the long decay time of this reverberation would blur and confuse the sound from the piano somewhat.
However, when placed in a variety of normally furnished rooms with very different acoustic characteristics the sound from the piano remains exactly the same. The environment sounds different—you can certainly differentiate one room from another—but the piano sounds exactly the same. No one would ever confuse the sound of my piano with the sound of a Steinway or a Bösendorfer. And no one would ever confuse my playing with that of Chopin.
A familiar voice is another real-world example. My wife’s voice is clearly identifiable whether she speaks to me in the kitchen or in the bedroom. When she shouts to me from the den, I can tell where she is by the sound of the room acoustic, but her voice remains clearly hers. Regardless of the acoustics of the room in which she speaks, her voice is easily recognizable.
The room contributes to the overall sound of the experience but makes virtually no difference in the sound of the piano or of a human voice. Why is this? What about all those dreaded “standing waves”? If we need to electrically equalize our home audio systems to compensate for room acoustics, why do the piano and my wife’s voice work just fine without EQ?
I’ll give you a couple of good reasons: there is a big dif f e r e n c e between our ear/brain mechanism and a microphone/spectrum a n a l y z e r, and there is a big difference between music and voices (or sound effects for that matter) and a continuous stimulus, whether it’s a sine wave or pink noise. In simple terms, the measurement system used for “room equalization” is completely bogus. The sound from the room and the sound from the speakers don’t sum because these sounds originate in dif f e r e n t places and they arrive at the listener at different times. A m i c r ophone integrates these signals but the ear/brain dif f e r e n t i a t e s between them.

Read More

کپی برداری

پنجشنبه ۲ اردیبهشت ۱۳۸۹
/ / /
Comments Closed

جادی عزیز مطلبی رو در مورد کپی مطالب وبلاگ ها نوشته که پیشنهاد میکنم بخونیدش ، کلا بحث کپی برداری فقط به این شکل محدود نمیشه و کسانی هستند که نظرات و تجربیات دیگران رو از زبان خودشون نقل میکنند بدون اینکه به شنونده بگویند این نظر نظر خودشون نیست.

سایت من نتیجه تجربیات خودم هست و اگر بخوام نظر کسی رو بیان کنم حتما مینویسم این مطلب رو چه کسی گفته و لینکش رو میگذارم و در مقابل دوست دارم همه آدمها هم به همین شکل رفتار کنند و اگر مطلبی رو مثلا از زبان فلان Audiophile و … بیان میکنند منبع رو ذکر کنند.

من کلا خیلی حساسیتی روی این موضوع کپی برداری ندارم اما فکر میکنم اگر منبع هر خبر و یا نظری مشخص باشه وضعیت بهتری رو خواهیم داشت.

اینکه چرا برخی به این شکل رفتار نمیکنند یک بحث جداگانه هست که از حوصله این بحث خارجه و منم استعدادی برای پیدا کردن پاسخش ندارم.

به نظر من زندگی بهتر وابسته به حقیقتی بسیار ساده هست : راستی و درستی به تمام معنا (چیزی که ما ایرانیها به حد کمال ازش برخورداریم 😉 )

Read More

We Support Real Stereo

جمعه ۲۷ فروردین ۱۳۸۹
/ / /
Comments Closed

منم فکر میکنم بهتره از این حرکت حمایت کنم. مجله TNT نوشته :

The concept of stereo sound recording and playback was invented by Alan Dower Blumlein more than 70 years ago and, as a result of his genius, the world has enjoyed the reproduction of musical events in a domestic setting with a realism never previously imagined. Blumlein’s invention was much more than simply two channels of sound.
It was a method for capturing the spatial information inherent in live performance, including the sound and positioning of instruments and voices and a sense of the acoustic in which the performance was taking place.
When reproduced by two appropriately sited loudspeakers, a facsimile of the original performance, including this spatial information, could be produced. Like many brilliant concepts, stereo sound recording and reproduction was elegant in its simplicity.
With just two correctly designed and positioned microphones it is possible to capture a wealth of information about a given aural event, be it a musical performance, theatrical play, the sounds of nature or the spoken word.
If we consider the immense pleasure that this invention has given to generations of individuals over the years, we must surely conclude that the world owes a huge debt to Alan Blumlein (of course, it also owes a huge debt for his work on radar, television and much more). The invention of stereo also helped to create a thriving industry for audio enthusiasts, providing a wealth of stereo components from which to choose.
Ironically, the consumer electronics industry, which was given such a gift in the invention of stereo, is now shifting its attention more towards home theatre and the multi-channel sound developed primarily for that medium.
Home theatre indeed represents an interesting development which will similarly bring much enjoyment to consumers the world over. However, there are many who believe that it has little to do with accurately reproducing a musical (or other live audio) performance in the home.

True stereophonic sound, as devised by Blumlein, is quite capable of reproducing such an event with just two channels and two loudspeakers, so why complicate the issue with more channels and more speakers? The problem is, that as consumer electronics manufacturers and media providers concentrate their efforts increasingly on home theatre, stereo is being increasingly sidelined. We can already see this happening, with a rapidly diminishing choice of affordable stereo hi-fi components, the market being polarised towards low-cost, all-in-one mini systems at one end of the scale and exorbitantly priced specialist components at the other. Similarly with recorded media. Apart from the stream of re-issues, how many contemporary recordings are made using the real stereo techniques which have served us so well in the past?
There is a distinction of course between multi-track recordings mixed down to two channels and stereo. The latter provides a completely different listening experience – an experience which is now in danger of disappearing if the industry believes there is little future in it.
Hence the Campaign for Real Stereo. The objective of the campaign is to draw attention to the often passed-over benefits of real stereo and, if sufficient support is forthcoming, highlight to the industry the fact that many people do not want Alan Blumlein’s wonderful invention to be neglected and forgotten in the relentless commercial drive for new consumer market technologies.

If you are sympathetic towards this view, either as a consumer or music industry professional, and do not want to see stereo disappear, then please add your name to our list of supporters using the e-mail address below. We will provide a “link back” to your site, here on TNT-Audio. Audio dealers and music retailers, please copy the “Real Stereo” logo from this page and feel free to use it in your own marketing. A smaller version is provided below for use on web sites. Please provide a link back to this site in order that others might join in the campaign.

Here you can find a temporary list of websites that are already supporting our campaign.

Read More

Audio Note UK Factory Visit

پنجشنبه ۲۶ فروردین ۱۳۸۹
/ / /
Comments Closed

من Audio Note UK انگلیس رو خیلی دوست دارم و فکر نمیکنم Audio Note JP ژاپن چیز خیلی بهتری باشه چون صدایی که از Ankoru شنیدم واقعا بی نظیر بود.

من Audio Note ژاپن رو هم با الگزاندریا شنیدم اما شرایط دمو خوب نبود و اون آمپ بیچاره داشت زیر فشار الگزاندریا له میشد. برای درآوردن صدای یک لامپ (منظورم آمپلی فایرهای لامپی کم توان درست حسابی هست و منظورم گنده هاشون مثل Audio Research 610 نیست) قبل از هر چیزی باید یک بلندگو با حساسیت بالای 94 و امپدانس خطی نزدیک 8 پیدا کنید.

درسته ویلسون الگزاندریا حساسیتش بالای 90 هست اما امپدانس خیلی ناهموار و پایینی داره و عملا نمیشه باهاش لامپ شنید اونم با موسیقی هایی که تو فرکانسهای پایین انرژی زیادی دارند.

یک چیز رو بگم، من ممکنه خبری رو به پست قبلی “چند خبر” اضافه کنم چون نمیشه برای هر خبری یک پست جدید بگذارم ، کلا خوشم نمیاد پست زیاد کنم و اگر دیدید چند روزی سایت خیلی پست جدید توش نبود به یکی دوتا مطلب قبلی اش سری بزنید ممکنه مطالبی رو بهش اضافه کرده باشم.

سایت dagogo (باید با وی –پی–ان ببینیدش) یک گزارش از کمپانی AN گذاشته که جالبه :

Strange, how sometimes things that are the least anticipated are ultimately the most enjoyable.  I had occasion to travel to London on business in August and decided to try to contact Peter Qvortrup in hopes that he might have time for dinner at the hotel where I was staying, a 150-year-old former manor house on Richmond Hill overlooking the Thames.

The current chef was rumored to have come from a well known Michelin starred restaurant, so dinner seemed to be a good idea.  Given Peter’s busy schedule and international travel, I did not hold out much hope that he would be available.  As it turned out, he responded almost immediately, suggesting that he pick me up on Sunday morning at my hotel to give me a factory tour followed by a listening session at his office.  At some point, he felt certain that we could intersperse a meal.

On Sunday morning, Peter drove up in a vintage black Mercedes SL500, one of a number of Mercedes which he owns.  From the hotel we spent the next hour driving to the factory, the first of what was to be a day of many surprises.  I am not sure what I was expecting, perhaps a Porsche-like factory where the floor was clean enough to eat.  The reality was a small, very well maintained, one-story white building in an industrial park surrounded by a formidable wrought iron fence.  The building has about 4500 square feet of useable space that must provide room for storage, manufacturing, shipping and accounting.  Every inch of space is occupied by storage racks overflowing with chassis and other parts necessary to build the Audio Note products.  Except with respect to Level Four and Five products, most others are built in small runs rather than on a one-off basis.  Consequently, at any point in time, there may be five to ten of a model in various states of assembly.

The factory has recently moved production of its speakers to a factory in Austria to alleviate part of the space problem.  The last room that we visited prior to leaving was the burn-in room where every piece of Audio Note equipment is subjected to lengthy burn-in, re-measurement and recalibration.  At this point, we left the factory and drove to another location closer to his home where Peter maintains a separate office, listening room and storage for the more valuable parts used in assembly of Level Four and Five products.

After a short drive through residential areas, we stopped in front of a row of connected shop fronts which appear to have been constructed in the early part of the twentieth century.  The most likely resident would probably be a small restaurant or perhaps a green grocer.  Peter’s space is rather non-descript with no signage or other indication of what the building may hide.  On opening the door, the first view is floor-to-ceiling record storage racks on both right and left interior walls, and as a wall separating the listening area from the actual office, which as you may have guessed, is very small and incredibly cluttered space with the detritus generated by running a business.  On closer examination, one begins to realize the enormity of the record collection (of which this is only a part), its breadth and its depth.  Think more collectible British vinyl than you have ever seen in one place including an almost complete set of Decca SXL 2000’s and 6000’s, mostly the original wide-band pressings; early EMI’s with the wheat colored label; Columbia SAX’s; early stereo DGG Tulips, British RCA’s and Mercury’s, Lyrita’s and many , many more.

The next stop was the basement vault.  Think here the treasure cave from Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves.  Neatly arranged on shelves were all the Level Five parts that go into the construction of very topmost AN equipment: Blackgate caps, hand built silver foil capacitors, spools of silver wire, silver wound transformers and last but certainly not least a separate room filled with vintage tubes.  Again, not a few dozens but crates of 1950’s and 60’s Mullard, Telefunken and Siemens small signal tubes.  Hundreds of Western Electric drivers and regulators and ultra-rare 211 output tubes.  I asked Peter about this and received an interesting answer with respect to the need for such seemingly massive inventories of high cost parts.

Most businesses believe in “just in time” procurement that minimizes the cost of inventory.  Peter’s answer was two-fold, 1) the need to guarantee an Audio Note customer that in the future their unit can always be re-tubed or parts replaced with exactly the same parts that were originally provided in the unit, and 2) the desire to guarantee that once a product is issued, it can be manufactured using the same parts throughout the entire product run even if that run is 15 to 20 years.  That guarantees that the sound of a particular product will remain unchanged for its entire life whether bought today or in ten years.

I have purposely left the best until last, the equipment that we listened to, the music we heard and the sound.  The system was relatively simple consisting of the M9 preamp/phonostage, a pair of 211 based Gakuons, a CDT 3 transport, a DAC 5 D/A converter, AN/SPe Signature speakers, SOTTO and SOGON interconnect, SPX speaker wire and custom stands for the speakers.  The speakers were located in the front corners of the room, oriented to fire so that they crossed in front of the listener.  Unfortunately, we did not have a turntable as Peter had loaned it out for the weekend prior to my contacting him.  The M9 and DAC 5 had massive tube based power supplies, the AN/SPe speakers’ sizeable outboard, silver wired crossovers were sitting atop the much larger and heavier SOGON crossovers..  This was that most unusual of audio beasts, a complete system designed and manufactured by a single company, totally handmade, with at least one of the components having been marketed for twenty years with no changes in parts or design.  For better or worse, this was one of those very rare moments when the manufacturer was completely responsible for the sound that was heard.  He had even chosen the room.

The M9 was specifically designed to be a phono preamp to capitalize on a unique new design for lossless RIAA equalization whose accuracy is within a tolerance of less than 0.1 dB.  The inputs and outputs are transformer coupled using  oversized Level Five silver wired transformers using a core material with a high nickel content.  The volume control is hand-built using the highest quality resistors.  The outboard power supply is massive, essentially a single chassis version of the power supply used in the M10 with about 70% of its capabilities.  The amps inputs use balanced symmetrical silver wire wound transformers.  The signal path between the input transformer and the oversized output transformer is comprised of five parts and two tubes, including a NOS RCA 211 and a driver, a silver wound interstage coupling transformer and two resistors.  About as simple as you can get but with a massively overbuilt tube power supply.

The DAC 5 is a non-oversampling design provided with a separate massive tubed power supply.  It dispenses completely with the usual digital filters and is coupled to other components via silver wire wound transformers.  When used in conjunction with the CDT-3 transport, the performance sounds utterly non-digital, effortless, liquid and unbelievably dynamic.

The speakers are not visually impressive except for the large outboard crossover, although the 8″ deep blue paper/hemp woofers are eye catching.  You do notice that the speakers are heavy and non resonant.  According to Peter, the walls are three quarters of an inch thick and well braced.  What you cannot readily see is the attention to detail such as the almost fanatical matching of the drivers, or for that matter the depth of understanding of acoustic and electrical theory that goes into them, but you can hear the difference.  When properly set up, utilizing the corners of the room, these speakers are able to energize a room in the bass in a manner that nothing short of a monstrously large horn can do, and this is not the over-damped one-note bass that many audiophiles think of as state-of-the-art. They are also capable of flat response well below 40 Hz but do have limitations in this area.  Likewise, they have a smooth, extended top-end but are not in the league of the Acapella ion tweeter.  They are however extremely coherent even when one sits in the near field where something like the larger Acapella needs a larger room for the drivers to properly blend.

And now, finally, to the sound of the system.  My host’s taste in music is quite eclectic and the CD’s which we played reflected that, ranging from a Grieg piano concerto to Puscifier’s (no, I am not making this up) ” V is for Vagina”.  Note that all material was standard redbook CD’s sourced from the local stores.  With respect to the Grieg, the system had very believable image height and differentiated well between the height of the piano and other instruments.  The string tone on violins was very natural.  PRAT was good as was the integration between the upper and lower frequencies.

The next cut was ”MUD” from the album We Can’t All Be Zingers by Primus and “Slipknot” from Subliminal Verses using a track called “Pulse of the Maggots”, both of which could be characterized as very aggressive rock.  Drums were very taut with excellent impact.  Again, the top seemed extended and detailed without any bite or harshness.  Most noticeable was the ability of the 8” driver to create pressure gradients within the listening room which were noted as momentary density changes in the air of the room.  I have heard few large systems capable of doing this as effectively as these drivers when corner loaded.  I should also note that the bass was not ”one note” or overblown.  This system had no problem separating the bass lines.

We next listened to a series of male vocals and acoustic instruments including cuts by Michel Jones, Jacques Brel and Nils Lofgren.  Male voice was excellent, particularly in capturing the expression of the singer.  The vibrato on the soprano voice on parts of the Jacques Brel was absolutely superb, as was the acoustic guitar on the Nils Lofgren.  We concluded the session with the track “Du Hast” from the Ramstein album Sehnsucht, which translates as longing, Nirvana’s Unplugged and Alice in Chains’ Unplugged.

In each case, the system played effortlessly, drawing every single detail from the CD but never sounding bright or edgy.  While much of this is music that I would not have chosen, I found myself drawn into the music and my foot tapping.  This is probably the best digital performance I have ever experienced.  The sound was totally non-digital and effortless, unbelievably liquid and incredibly dynamic.  Had I not known better, I would have been searching for the subwoofer.  The power of the amp was more than necessary to drive the speakers to listening levels that were painful.  Unlike many transistor amps, the Gakuons produced depth on the kick drum and other bass instruments.  This experience has caused me to re-think what can be achieved in a small to medium sized room.  With respect to recreating the gestalt of a musical performance (and here, I mean accurately conveying the emotional content/sense of involvement) in the typical European home, this is one of the best systems which I have heard.
Peter was also nice enough to play several tracks from an in-house CD which Peter had recorded with a comparison between an industry standard professional analog-to-digital recorder and the patented Audio Note analog-to-digital converter. The conversion in the newly patented unit is not done with either a Phillips or Sony chipset but with a unit built totally in-house with discrete parts. If the sound on the CD is representative of what Peter’s new technology can do, then the commercial unit should be a revelation.

مجله Dagogo گزارشات جالبی از نمایشگاه ها داره که بد نیست ببینید. این مجله در مورد آئودیو نت یک جمله تبلیغاتی داره میگه :

Money can’t buy happiness! But it can buy the Audio Note Kegon Balanced.

این آمپلی فایر آئودیو نت فقط دو تا Stage داره دقیقا مثل ویتوس 101 البته ASR هم تو طبقه Power فقط 2 stage داره و یک stage هم برای Pre که میشه کلا سه تا. همه این طراحان میدونند هرچقدر مسیر سیگنال کوتاه تر و سیستم ساده تر باشه بهتره.

تو تحلیل این آمپلی فایر میخونیم :

It became clear early in the listening that the number of watts specified for each of these amps was not an accurate indicator of how well a particular amp would perform into the load presented by the Triolons. Peter Qvortrup ,  the owner of AN UK,  has stressed in the past that many high-power designs lack the dynamics of  lower power, well designed amps because the higher power amps are unable to deliver their power with equal efficiency at all frequencies. He refers to this ability as “unrestricted linearity”.  At no point after the initial break-in period was there ever any question that these amps had more than enough power to drive the Triolons at the levels at which I normally listen with no sign of clipping or reduced dynamics.    Indeed, the KBs had better micro- and macro-dynamics than the two Edge solid-state behemoths.

و در ادامه برای کنترل ناحیه پایین میگه (دقت کنید بلندگوی دمو شده یک هورن هست نه یک بلندگوی بد درایو اندازه خرس) :

The KBs do an excellent job of controlling the bass of the Triolons, but do sound very different from high powered transistor amps.  The bass of the KB is fuller, warmer, and carries more natural bloom, yet they also sound somewhat less damped.  The KBs do an excellent job of differentiating drum heads, exhibiting a  tonal richness and complexity, coupled with the  ability to differentiate timbre,  that is a hallmark of single-ended triodes.    Their ability to control the transducer, particularly dynamic drivers, is one of their defining characteristics.  By this, I mean their ability to start, rapidly accelerate, and stop the movement of the driver which translates into added clarity and temporal coherence.  While there are transistor amps that can do this, almost all of them truncate decay and sound over damped.

Likewise,  there  are  tube  amps  that  get the decay right but soften the leading edge.  The KBs are able to reproduce the leading edge without any truncation of the reverberant tail. On the Roger Waters CD Amused to Death, the third track begins rather quietly, then out of nowhere there is the sound of an ax hitting a block of wood.  The effect, if properly reproduced, will literally cause the listener to jump.  This requires an amp that has both excellent dynamic range and the ability to create a very well defined leading edge.  The KBs in combination with the Triolons are explosive!

بعد در مورد میدرنج ببینید چه حرف باحالی زده vibrant warmth معنی این عبارت اینه ما فیدبک منفی نداریم که صدایی soft و Warm بدون میکرو دینامیک داشته باشیم :

The Kegon Balanced’s reproduction of human voice is superb in the way that it conveys nuance and emotion.  The midrange and lower treble are particularly natural, rendering male voices with a vibrant warmth and richness that is seductive.

یک خبر دیگه هم بازدید از کمپانی آکوفیض هست برای کسانی که برخلاف من آکوفیض دوست دارند اینجا:

http://www.dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?hArticle=342

یک گزارش خیلی جالب هم از طراح بلغاری سورس دیجیتال APL ببینید آقای Alex Peychev که esoteric رو کامل modify کرده :

لینک زیر:

http://www.dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?hArticle=328

یک جمله هم در مورد ویتوس فرمودند :

Female vocals were very nice as was top-end extension.  The Vitus electronics were very tube-like in the best sense of the word.

چقدر خبر نوشتم، خسته شدم.

اینم شیار روی یک صفحه Vinyl از دید میکروسکوپ الکترونیکی از وبلاگ مارتن :

خبر دیگه در مورد سورس دیجیتال Play Back Design هست که طراحش Andreas Koch همونیه که تو EMM LAbs هم بوده ، صدای این سورس مثل Lavry کمی به سمت صدای حسی تر میره تا Real و شاید دلیلش تا حدی اینه که فیلتر دیجیتال این برند خیلی تو Time Domain پاسخ خوبی داره.

مایک هم سعی کرده از EMM Labs خودش در مقابل این سورس دفاع کنه چون تحلیل گر Positive Feedback گفته بود In every category of audio virtue, what the EMM Labs DCC2 SE/CDSD SE did extremely well, the MPS-5 did better و مایک هم جوابش رو اینجا داده بود :

http://www.audiofederation.com/blog/archives/478

چیزهایی هم استریو فایل نوشته :

http://www.stereophile.com/hirezplayers/playback_designs_mps-5_sacdcd_player/

آخرین خبر هم تحلیل مجله Dagogo از عشق من Jorma Prime هست :

http://www.dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?hArticle=652

اینطور مینویسه :

Jorma Design is a small Swedish company that manufactures loudspeaker cables and interconnects at a variety of price points.  The Jorma cables utilize very high purity copper wire, non colored Teflon dielectric, WBT Nextgen silver connectors and in some instances Bybee Quantum Purifiers. All are handmade and evidence a level of fit and finish that would not be out of place in a top quality German automobile.  The Prime interconnects and speaker wires are Jorma’s statement products.  They were initially shown at the 2006 CES as part of a Swedish Statement System that also featured the Martin Coltrane Supreme speakers.

The Jorma Prime differ from other Jorma products in their use of 99.999999% pure copper,as a conductor, the use of the Bybee Slipstream Golden Quantum Purifiers encased in a non-resonant walnut enclosure, and in their geometry and shielding.  The material used to separate the conductors is a special, ultra thin ceramic glass fiber.  Inside the conductors are hundreds of these fibers.  The conductors, tiny high purity copper or gold threads, are wound in parallel around these fibers.  The conductor therefore forms a tube that has a thickness of 0.1 mm.  As Jorma points out in their literature, a hollow tube would be even better but is not practical in normal use.  These cables also employ sophisticated shielding which rejects radio frequency interference (RFI) and electromagnetic interference (EMI) and stabilizes the cables against vibration and microphonics.  The shield is heavily braided, tin plated copper that works very effectively in conjunction with the special geometry conductors to reject incoming RFI and EMI.

In reviewing/listening to cables, it is natural for the ear to focus primarily on tonal balance, whether light or dark, ying or yang.  To do this is to severely limit the comparison.  A number of other aspects of the sound are equally impacted by the choice of cables: phase accuracy, leading edge, timing, dynamics, harmonics, distortion mechanisms, etc.  Perhaps even more importantly, resolution.  There is a common misconception that more detail means thinner, sharper or more intrusive in sonics while less detail might go hand in hand with a warmer, smoother sound.  This is certainly not the case with Jorma Prime cables which are significantly more detailed than with other cables that I have tried, but at the same time warmer and more liquid than, say, Nordost Valhalla.  The enhanced resolution is at all frequencies and not at some narrow band of frequencies that has been elevated.

I am always somewhat suspicious when another reviewer claims that the insertion of a single piece of interconnect transforms the sound of their system and that subsequent substitutions of the “magic cable” result in noticeable but less significant improvement.  Nonetheless, I did start with a single piece of the Prime which I tried in various locations and then added one piece of interconnect at a time until all interconnects in the signal path were Prime.  Separately, I inserted a single length of the Prime speaker wire into the system, then added additional pairs until the system was tri-wired with Prime speaker wire.  In another listening session, I was able to compare the Prime against the Valhalla speaker wire and against the lower priced Jorma No. 1 speaker wire.  While the results were predictable, they did suggest that when replacing cables in an existing system, there was a clear order in which cables should be replaced.  The single most significant improvement came with replacing the speaker wire which was roughly equivalent in magnitude to changing all the interconnects in the signal path.  Changing the interconnect from the source to the preamp also made a greater difference than changing the interconnect between the preamp and the amp, although each was dramatic.  In a situation where the speakers benefit from bi-amping, replacing jumpers with a second run of Prime speaker wire was also clearly audible but less dramatic than the initial run to the speakers.

There is also an additive effect, particularly with respect to changing out all interconnects in the signal path as well as speaker wire so that the entire signal path from source to speaker is cabled with Prime.  This is equal in impact to changing out the cabling from the preamp to the amp.  I am tempted to say that any other wire in the signal path obscures to some degree what the Prime is doing.  Given that the cost of changing out two pairs of interconnect is roughly equivalent to changing out the speaker wire, I would suggest beginning with the source to the preamp and changing that first, followed by the preamp to the amp, and then the speaker wire.

I compared the Prime to a number of other cables, including the William E. Low Reference, Audioquest Sky, Jorma No. 1 and Aural Symphonics. The comparison with Nordost Valhalla was quite telling.  I have always had great respect for Valhalla’s speed, extreme bandwidth and detail/resolution but have shied away from using it in my system because of its tonal balance which has always seemed a bit thin and lacking in the midbass and a touch aggressive at the top.  The Prime in comparison with Nordost Valhalla seems like an ideal mix of the Valhalla’s strengths, but with more body, a better foundation in the lower frequencies and an extended, but less aggressive top-end.  The Jorma retains all the air and sparkle of the Nordost but with increased resolution and enhanced leading edge definition.  They are more musical, more dynamic and quieter.  By quieter, I mean that sounds emerge from a blacker background.

I have noticed that “blacker background”, particularly with respect to power cords, often means that all low-level sounds whether musical detail or noise are equally attenuated, so that the end result is less resolution which often manifests itself as a loss of ambience and low-level detail.  In other words, the loss of those things which tend to make a performance sound more like a live event.  In the case of the Primes, the attenuation of EMI/RFI is not at the expense of the loss of musical information.  The Primes are by a considerable degree the most resolving cables that I have used.  By the same measure, they are also the lowest in noise.  Dynamic shading is also considerably better on the Primes.  This is particularly evident at the soft end of the spectrum.  Bass has more power without being overblown.  The Prime also does an excellent job of capturing the sound of struck instruments, favoring neither the initial strike  nor the reverberant tail.  Voices are more real, more fully fleshed out and contain more of those subtle details that suggest to the brain that you are listening to a live performer in a reverberant space.  Lyrics are easily intelligible.

In comparison to the Aural Symphonics Chronos, the Prime was voiced differently.  The Jorma has a natural warmth and richness in the upper bass through the lower treble that gives a very realistic body to stringed instruments. Struck instruments have both air and articulation. Size and placement of instruments on the stage is quite believable. The Jorma is virtually perfect in the midrange. Struck bells have somewhat more presence on the Aural Symphonics but suffer from a slight thinness not present with the Jorma. While the Aural Symphonics does an excellent job of separating the voices in a massed choir, the Jorma is equally discerning but again richer and somewhat better at catching the interplay of different voices, and more emotionally revealing. The AS is equal to the Jorma in recreating ambience but has a slight edge or bite, actually more of a brass-like sheen.  The reedy sound of a saxophone is a touch more prevalent on the AS than the Jorma.

With respect to the William E. Low (Audioquest) Reference versus the Prime, the Audioquest has a more prominent upper bass/lower midrange.  This is particularly evident in the sound of a bow drawn across the strings of a violin, viola or cello.  The Prime has significantly better leading edge definition and is much faster, with the AQ sounding a bit slow and soft in comparison.  Staging and depth are very natural on both.  To the extent that the AQ has a weakness in comparison to the Jorma, it is in ambience retrieval and top-end extension.  In particular, the top-end of the WEL is comparatively soft or rolled off.  The resulting sound is euphonic and less accurate subjectively.

Conclusion

The Prime provides a level of resolution, refinement and clarity that in my experience embarrasses every other cable which I have tried in my system.  This, combined with a natural warmth and richness in the upper bass through the lower treble, gives a very realistic body to stringed instruments and voices.  It has an ability to convey the richness and warmth of live, unamplified music without sacrificing detail or articulation. Percussion is also very well served, preserving leading edge but not at the expense of truncating the reverberant tail.  Size and placement of instruments on the stage is quite believable.  The stage created has nice width and depth perspective.  Depth is layered.  Image focus and edge definition are again excellent.

These parameters are also extremely software dependent.  The cable itself does not seem to impose a particular acoustic on the music played.  Instead, the nature of the piece of music, the recording venue and the manner in which it was recorded dictate the size of the stage.  An orchestra performing a large scale work will occupy the full width of my room extending far to the outside of the speakers, and depth will seem to push the back wall into the yard.  With respect to more intimate works, the stage will appear much smaller.  Not every CD or record has an expansive stage or incredible depth.  In general, well recorded instruments are surrounded by a blanket of air and appear three-dimensional with believable body cavities.

This is a cable that gets the midrange right.  Baritone, as well as massed female voices, are well served.  If this cable sacrifices anything, it may be some extension in the top most octave; however, the cables with which I am familiar that have a bit more extension at the top are also plagued by various amounts of what I would term a metallic shade.  Likewise, it may exhibit slightly less power in the lowest octaves than some competing cables although this is not really a lack of extension.  In my system, I find the Jorma Prime’s reproduction of the bottom two octaves to be almost perfect.  The Primes are more musically “right”, more truthful and less fatiguing than any competing product with which I am familiar, and infuse musical performances with a degree of liveliness and energy that suggests the real thing.

This cable also handles dynamics well.  It can play loud, but more importantly given its low noise floor, it does an excellent job of differentiating shifts in volume at the softest end of the dynamic spectrum.  To the extent that the Primes have a negative, it is clearly the elevated price.  While the Primes are expensive, they sound better than most, if not all, cables that cost even more—sometimes significantly more. Not surprisingly, Jorma’s less expensive cables bear an unmistakable family resemblance to the Prime, and stand in a similar relation to the competition.

Postscript
Shortly after I had finished the initial review of the Jorma Prime interconnect and speaker wire,  Dan Meinwald, the importer, contacted me to let me know that Jorma had a new Prime product.  My initial response was of dismay, thinking that the months spent listening might be invalidated by a new Prime product.  As it turned out, the “new” product was an AC power cord which supplements the existing cables, and resembles the interconnets.

I immediately launched into a series of listening sessions, comparing the Prime power cord against others that I have on hand: First those which do not incorporate Bybee technology, such as the Nordost Valhalla and Isoclean, then switching to cords which did incorporate Bybee modules, such as the latest Tweek Geek (incorporating ebony encased Bybees and plugs) and Bybee’s own cables (various versions all using the latest SE technology).  While I have no desire to bore you with extended comparisons, I can say that on instruments like the saxophone and double bass, their sound with the Prime AC was more detailed, more resonant,  and more tonally and harmonically complex.  As one listener commented, the sax was more expressive and did a much better job of conveying rhythm and emotion.  Voices were also particularly well served.

In comparison to the best of the cords incorporating Bybee SE modules, the Primes had more presence and detail, somewhat less bass (particularly with respect to the Tweek Geek cords) but much better control in the bass.  Most importantly, the Prime AC gets the midrange right.  It also handles dynamics well and has an extremely low noise floor.
Not surprisingly, the Jorma Prime AC cord is consistent in approach to their interconnects and speaker wire and enhances their effectiveness.

Read More

Subjective Audio Glossary & Audio Reviewing بخش پانزدهم

چهارشنبه ۲۵ فروردین ۱۳۸۹
/ / /

در ادامه بحث تحلیل صدا به دسته بندی زیر رسیدم :

  • Presence of Sound in Space (Static)
  • Harmonic Structure (Static)
  • Dynamic Structure (Dynamic)
  • Transparency & Neutrality (Vertical Parameter)

من قبل از توضیح موارد جزء جزء در هر بخش سعی میکنم یک نمای کلی از هر بخش ارائه بدم تا یک شروع بهتر داشته باشیم.

اولین بخش به شکل حضور صدا در فضا برمیگرده و من اسمش رو Presence of Sound in Space گذاشتم و سعی میکنم با مثال هایی این بخش رو بهتر مشخص کنم.

ببینید من چند تا مثال میزنم و سعی میکنم این دسته بندی رو توضیح بدم اما باید بدونیم هر شنونده ای خودش باید در این تفاوت ها دقیق بشه و کم کم بفهمه چی به چیه و درک شاخص های صدا مثل آموزش زبان نیست که همه بتونند خیلی راحت بفهمند بلکه درک صدا نیاز به تمرین و استعداد خود شنونده داره. اگر هنوز هم کسی کل درکش از صدا به باس و تریبل محدود شده حتما استعدادش بیشتر جواب نداده و یا خودش خیلی تو صدا دقیق نشده ، به هر حال شروع میکنیم :

ببینید اصلا کاری به سیستم صوتی استریو نداشته باشید، دقت کنید ببینید یک منبع صدا در اطرافتون چه خصوصیاتی داره، مثلا سیستم شنیداری ما میتونه جهت صدا رو تشخیص بده و بگه صدا از کدوم طرف شنیده میشه و یا این سیستم شنیداری میتونه بگه ابعاد سورس صدا چقدر هست و چه حجمی داره و حتی میتونه تا حدودی فاصله سورس صدا رو از ما به ما بگه. بد نیست از شرکت آوین آوا مقاله منگر رو در مورد چگونگی درک صدا توسط شنونده بگیرید و یا به کتاب ها و مقالات ای که در مورد سیستم شنیداری هست رجوع کنید. ما با دو گیرنده یعنی دو گوشمون و شکل فیزیکی گوش و ساختار داخلی ای که داره خصوصیاتی رو از شکل حضور صدا در محیط درک کنیم.

باید دقت کنید ببیند صداهای زنده اطراف ما بعد از انتشار در محیط و تحت تاثیر آکوستیک قرار گرفتن چه خصوصیاتی رو از خودشون بروز میدن و با تغییر شرایط آکوستیک و یا مکان سورس صدا و یا مکان شنونده صدا چه تغییراتی خواهد داشت. دقت در این شاخص ها میتونه درک من و شما رو از مفهوم “حضور صدا در اتاق” نزدیک کنه.

این حضور صدا به سه چیز وابسته هست ، یکی مشخصات فیزیکی منبع تولید صوت، دیگری آکوستیک انتشار موج صوتی و سوم موقعیت شنونده و خصوصیات شنیداری شنونده.

فرض کنید رفتید استخر کمی دقت کنید ببنید چقدر صدا اونجا حتی با اینکه سروصدا زیاد نیست اما آزار دهنده و ناراحت پخش میشه و یا تو برج آرین میرداماد نشستید و اون حوض اش چقدر صدای آب رو بد برای شما پخش میکنه و یا بر عکس بالای کوه از فاصله خیلی دور هم چقدر صداهای آروم از فاصله دور راحت و باحال شنیده میشه. تو اتاق های مختلف صدای ساز سنتور و یا هر ساز دیگری متفاوت هست و تو شرایط خوب آکوستیکی انگار آرامشی در صدا هست که در آکوستیک بد نیست.

یکی از چیزهای جالب برای تغییر شرایط آکوستیکی اینه که در اتاق رو ببندید، مثلا تو آوین آوا وقتی در پشت سر شنونده بسته میشه صدا کاملا با وقتی که در پشت سر شنونده باز هست فرق میکنه و یا حتی یک میز جلوی شنونده شکل حضور صدا رو در اتاق تغییر میده هر چند ممکنه درکش برای شنونده عادی خیلی راحت نباشه.

رومی هم این روزها در مورد پاسخ اتاقش حرف میزنه و این نشون میده مغز این آدم میتونه بفهمه اتاق چه نوع تاثیری روی صدا داره، صدا رو تو اتاق های بزرگ و کوچک بشنوید و با هم مقایسه کنید، من گاهی وقتی کسی تو خونه راه میره حرف میزنه دقت میکنم ببینم تغییر خصوصیات صدا به چه شکلی هست.

الان باید برم و از شما خداحافظی میکنم

ادامه دارد…

Read More

چند خبر

پنجشنبه ۱۹ فروردین ۱۳۸۹
/ / /

این نوشته رومی رو در مورد وضعیت اتاق جدیدش بخونید، بین تمام Audiophile ها و تحلیلگرانی که دیدم فقط رومی و مایک (البته نه به اندازه رومی) در مورد صدای اتاق مطلب مینویسند و هیچ تحلیل گری رو ندیدم که به این شکل در مورد پاسخ اتاق حرف بزنه، اگر شما دیدید به من بگید، اینم نوشته رومی در مورد اتاق جدیدش :

I recognized that I have tired for the last week like hell. Do not ask me what I got tired from – I will not be able to say. That whole moving, packing, unpacking this was too exhausting… The good thing is that I go an interesting room as a result. That all crap about ownership of the house is not very much attracts me. In fact I am not sure if I like the whole idea but the room and the arrangements around the room in this specific house is very much pleases me. What I do not know at this point how the room sound.

I pretty much do not have playback setup for a month or even more. I kind of begin to miss it, not only Sound itself but the whole experience to invoke it at my will. Unfortunately the Sound as I understand it long away in my room…

The last nigh I decided to take it easy with unpacking and with working in my new house. All those tasks not going to run away from me. My pool was attacked by frogs that made those crazy noises during their breading period. I won that little war and I decided do not do anything else to the rest of the week and just to relax, this would imply to play some music. I did not connect the Macondo and Melquiades – it would be too complex and long to make them to work properly. I took a few monitors I had but they did not make it to me. Then I took Dunlavy SC3. The Dunlavys has an advantage that they are “as is” and they do not need anything else beside the power amps.  I dumped Dunlavy in the location what I think Macondo would be, connected the Dunlavy to Yamaha D2 and setup CD player (TL0 and Lavry 924).  I used Radio Shake or any other random cables throughout – there are no need to do anything better. I do not want to criticize Dunlavy – they have own problems but I know all of them and I thought it would give me some idea of what my new room is capable of. The sound all together was despicable, literally dreadful – but this did not particularly bother me, I was looking not for the sound itself but how it interacts with the room.  I moved speakers a bit, but nothing evolved – juts to get a generally acceptable presentation.  It was “somewhere there” and it was enough to stop “working”.

Then I took the biggest cigar I had, “laid” on my couch and give a good couple hours just to listen how it works all together. I was very interesting. The room has very-very appealing friendliness – it is just a pleasure to be in there. There is no acoustic treatment of any kind in the room, the playback sucks and the speakers are crap – still it was semi-enjoyable. With Dunlavys you can play only very specific music and only in a certain way and I decided to give it a full run. I played the whole Osvaldo Golijov’s St. Mark Passion. It is not exactly my type of music but it is insanely talented music and it is the only Passion that is possible to play on Dunlavys.  The room responded very interestingly. It was very different then what I am accustomed but in the way it was the same.  In this room it is possible to make HUGE presentation. The room has a god 35 feet width and all of it; even more might be used for presentation.  I think that by using properly set diffusers on the peripherals I will be able to curve that useable 35-40 feet. The room also has some superbly interesting back of the listening sit potentials. I have a good 10-15 feet behind the proposed listening spot where I am planning to put some reflections randomizers. It will be VERY interesting  to play with it what the sound will be at the right level.

Meanwhile I recognized that I do have a small wall section, approximately 50’ by 35-45’ that I would need to treat somehow. The problem with this section of the wall is that it needs to be very attractive treatment from a décor perspective. So, I am looking for some kind of “artistic” panel with good defusing characteristics. I have seen some of them here and there. Auralex does Shockwave AudioTiles that might be useful but I am looking for something sexier. Probably the large-grain of Tectum Acoustic Panels I might recognize as some king of Kandinsky’s paintings. I am juts partially kidding. This 50 by 40 part of the wall is very prominent in the room and I would like to have the diffuser to look attractive. The whole idea it to have living room not a dedicated listening room and it’s typical dental office ornamentation. So, if anyone knows a satin looking acoustic diffuser then point me out.

The Cat

خبر دیگه اینکه رومی داره در مورد ساخت آمپلی فایر 200 واتی Class A1 هایبریدش بنام Zarathustra II مطلب مینویسه :

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=13267#13267

The amplifier is hybrid with Melquiades’ input stage in SRPP, high current (upto 60A, 90A peaks and 5A constan bias) bipolar output stage.

یک خبر جالب دیگه هم از سایت higherFi دارم که این شرکت مثل شرکت High End Palace از بین تمام آمپلی فایرهای لامپی حتی بالای 500 هزار دلار (حتی Audio Note ژاپن و Wavac سیصو پنجاه هزار دلاری) و تمام آمپلی فایرهای Solidstate بالای 100 هزار دلار مثل FM Acousticas و Gamut و … ویتوس رو انتخاب کرده و بعنوان اولین Setup اش معرفی کرده اونم با سورس dCS Scarlatti . جالبه حتی در بقیه Setup های دوم و سوم و چهارمش هم از ویتوس استفاده میکنه و اولین سیستمش به شرح زیر هست :

Speakers:
$218,000 – NTT AUDIOLAB Model 101 Mk II Speakers w/ room correction (1 pair)
$28,000 – NTT AUDIOLAB SW subwoofers (x 2)

AMPLIFICATION / TriAmp Setup:
$204,000 – VITUS AUDIO SM – 101 Monoblocks (3 pair)

TURNTABLE:
$200,000 – TRANSROTOR Artus Turntable

PREAMP:
$ 38,000 – VITUS AUDIO SL – 101 Preamp

PHONO PREAMP:
$ 34,000 – VITUS AUDIO SP101 Phono Preamp

DIGITAL
$69,000 – dCS Scarlatti System

CABLING:
$ 90,000 – MIT Oracle speaker wires (x4)
$ 50,000 – MIT system interconnects & pwr

MISC
$20,000 – NTT AUDIOLAB RC-5 STAND
$20,000 – Phono cartridge and arm
$10,000 – MAGNUM DYNALAB MD-109 Tuner
$30,000 – Electronic crossover, power conditioning and treatment

سال پیش که آقای میرزایی سفری به سوئد داشتند به Showroom بلندگو ساز معروف سوئدی Transmission Audio رفتند که این کمپانی هم در بین خیلی از آمپلی فایرها مانند Krell و Burmester و … از Vitus استفاده کرده بودند. این کمپانی بلندگو ساز سوئدی قیمت بلندگوهاش تا به 2 میلیون دلار هم میرسه.

متن زیر رو صاحب High End Palace نوشته :

I as a perfectionist audiophile, music engineer and a talented musician know when something is out of this world after a few recordings that I always take to the shows so that I can listen to personal familiar reference recordings that covers A to Z in realism, stage depth, openness, dynamics, bass extension, vocal smoothness, air, interaction between instruments, sibilance perfection, high frequency naturalness etc.

I was quite taken by the pride of craftsmanship and sound quality of Vitus Audio, you will not believe the degree of sonic perfection these components delivers. I am always looking to improve, learn if there is something to be learned, we as humans never stop learning no matter how much we know in our field or how smart we are. Listening for nearly two hours to Vitus Audio Class A components made me realize that there is another level of refinement and musicality for high-end audio lovers and perfectionist.

دو تا عکس دیگه هم از سایت رومی ببینید که اولی رو رومی درست کرده و دومی رو یکی از کاربرهای انجمنش بنام Stitch جالبند :

Read More

چند خبر

سه شنبه ۱۰ فروردین ۱۳۸۹
/ / /
Comments Closed

من تازه برگشتم تهران و فکر کردم بد نیست چند تا خبر رو به اطلاع دوستان برسونم، یکی اینکه تو کانادا نمایشگاه Salon Son & Image 2010 برقراره که هیچ کدوم از این دوستان ما اونجا حضور ندارند و کسی هم فعلا جز استریوفایل و UHF ازش گزارش تهیه نکرده، کانادایی ها خیلی تو های فای حرفی برای گفتن ندارند (غیر از استاد Ed Meitner طراح معروف EMM Labs و Bidat که اولین بار فرمت DSD با 4 بیت و فرکانس 2.8 مگ رو به سونی پیشنهاد کرد اما درنهایت این فرمت به 1 بیت با فرکانس 2.8 مگ کاهش داده شد، این آدم اولین بار فیلتر دیجیتالی طراحی کرد (بدون مشکل Gibb’s Phenomenon) که هم تو Time Domain پاسخ خوبی داشت و هم پاسخ فرکانسی اش خوب بود) البته من خیلی این حرف رو با اطمینان کامل نمیزنم اما ندیدم کانادایی ها کار خیلی خاصی در زمینه صدا انجام داده باشند.

برندهای Oracle ،Verity Audio ، Bryston ، Simaudio و Coincident که کامپوننت های با کیفیتی با توجه به قیمتشون تولید میکنند کانادایی هستند و فکر کنم آرتور سالواتوره هم کانادایی باشه، اینطور شنیدم که برند Classe Audio رو (که یک برند کانادایی هست) شرکت B&W خریده  و محصولاتش رو با اون دمو میکنه.

خبر بعدی اینکه ویتوس داره یه کارهایی میکنه که کل Marten Supreme (فکر کنم این بلندگو اواسط اردیبهشت ماه تهران باشه) با ویتوس کار کنه و نیازی به استفاده از آمپ سوئدی Bladelius برای درایو Bass Tower نباشه، چیز جالبی که ویتوس بهم گفت این بود مونوبلاک SM-101 فقط دو Stage داره و خیلی مسیر سیگنال کوتاهه (راستش کمی باورش برام مشکله). بنظر میرسه ویتوس سعی کرده تا حد ممکن کاری کنه که دمای نقطه کار ثابت بمونه (میدونید که شاخص بتای ترانزیستور با دما تغییر میکنه) تا مجبور نباشیم برای پایداری بیشتر از فیدبک استفاده کنیم، دوستانی که ویتوس دارند میدونند این آمپلی فایر مثل Krell Evo One داغ نمیشه و هیت سینک های خیلی بزرگی که ویتوس برای همین 50 و 100 واتش گذاشته نمیگذاره خیلی دمای ترانزستورها بالا بره.

سایت 6moon هم گزارشی از کمپانی های Nagra و Soulution گذاشته که جالبه ببینید. گرچه بعضی ها فکر میکنند سوئیسی ها خیلی کارشون درسته و من نباید اونها رو زیر سوال ببرم اما باید بگم بیشتر طراحان سوئیسی فقط زیر اسیلوسکوپ سعی میکنند پاسخ خوب بگیرند و اکثر طراحانشون درکی از صدای خوب ندارند (البته اضافه کنم من از طراح Dartzeel خوشم میاد) . فراموش نکنیم صدای خوب نتیجه پاسخ مدار زیر اسیلوسکوپ نیست و طراح باید درک درستی از صدا داشته باشه و برای همینه که 100 هزار دلار پول برای Goldmund و یا Wavac دادن فقط پول دور ریختن هست. خلاصه اینکه فراموش کنید با Specification ها و یا حساب کردن روی حتی سینگل اندد ترایود بودن مداری به صدای خوب رسیدید، فقط باید گوش داد و با همین گوشی که خدا بهتون داده برید جلو چون همه حرف ها و تئوری ها کسی رو به جایی نرسونده، فقط و فقط باید شنید و بدون تعصب قضاوت کرد و من بارها نوشتم حتی روی نظرات من هم حساب باز نکنید و خودتون تجربه کنید.

ما آدمها دوست داریم برای خودمون پیش فرض بسازیم و همین باعثه اکثر اوقات نمیتونیم راحت قضاوت کنیم و درست تصمیم بگیریم، قیمت های بالا یکی از چیز هایی است که روی نگاه آدمها تاثیر داره و خیلی ها فکر میکنند اگر آمپلی فایری 100 هزار دلار قیمتش هست پس حتما چیز خوبی است و یا اگر استریوفایل از چیزی تعریف کرده پس باید به حرف مجله معتبری مثل اون گوش کرد و یا اگر چیزی رو تو سوئیس ساختند پس خیلی چیز محشریه و  یا اگر آمپلی فایر لامپی ای مثل Wavac سینگل اندد ترایود هست حتما صدای خیلی خوبی داره و … این پیش فرض ها رو ما برای راحت کردن خودمون میسازیم (و بازار بشکل ماهرانه ای ازش استفاده میکنه) اما حقیقت همیشه به این سادگی خودشو تو این Specification ها و پیش فرض ها نشون نخواهد داد و کسی موفق تره که بدون پیش فرض ها و بدون تعصب بدنبال تجربه کردن و درک بیشتر باشه.

من همیشه سعی کردم با این جور پیش فرض ها برخورد کنم و با استفاده از کلماتی چون “د ر پ ی ت” اون ارزش غیر واقعی رو که این پیش فرض ها تو ذهن آدمها ایجاد کرده از بین ببرم (خیلی از این پیش فرض ها توسط بازار و همین دوستان فروشنده ایجاد میشه و تاکید زیاد این فروشندگان روی چیزی بیشتر ریشه در تامین منافع اونها داره و نه چیز دیگری) اما متاسفانه تو فضای های فای ایران نوشته های تند من گاهی به چیزی غیر از هدف من تعبیر میشه.

ببینید مایک چی میگه .

کسی نظرش (بعنوان کسی که بعد از تجربیات زیادی که بدست آورده تا حدی میتونه یک چهارچوب تعریف کنه و پیش فرض هایی رو به ما بده) مثل رومی برام ارزشمنده که اولا صداقت داشته باشه و منافعش پشت اون حرفی که میزنه پنهان نشده باشه ثانیا تو شرایط درست چیزی رو تست کرده باشه ثالثا خودش بفهمه تو چه Level شنیداری قرار داره و به اندازه دانسته هاش حرف بزنه و نه بیشتر، غیر از این حالت اظهار نظر از نگاه من فاقد ارزش هست و نه تنها کمکی نمیکنه بلکه آب رو بیشتر گل آلود میکنه. ببینید مایک با اشاره به مطلب یک وبلاگ چی میگه :

What has bloggers all upset is that someone, a pro-writer [but this is really beside the point – something that the wine bloggers do not grok. It is really passionate and knowledgeable versus casual and novice… NOT old school writer versus bloggers… that ‘about’ was NOT talking about the blogger I linked to who seems to have quite a bit of experience and passion], pointed out that a lot of people are posting their opinions even though their breadth of experience is quite lacking. I.E. they really do not have any real perspective with which to determine and describe what a wine is like … or a piece of equipment sounds like!

And this last is certainly a pet peeve of mine – that many reviewers and most forums post reviews by people who have no clue what they are talking about.

من نمیخوام با اظهار نظرات تندم در مورد سیستم ها، مجلات، برندها  ، Audiophile ها  و فروشندگان کسی رو ناراحت کنم، منافع کسی رو به خطر بندازم ، شخصیت کسی رو بکوبم، خودم رو تو جایگاهی بالا قرار بدم، نظرات دیگران رو بی ارزش فرض کنم و … من فقط دنبال حقیقت هستم و چیزی رو که واقعا باور دارم مینویسم اما اگر این نوشته ها یا به شکلی دیگر تعبیر میشه و یا با منافع دیگران تضاد پیدا میکنه من بی تقصیرم. چرا باید وقتی نمیدونیم، تجربه کافی نداریم ، صداقت لازم رو بخاطر حفظ منافعمون نداریم دیگران رو گمراه کنیم ؟!!!! طبیعتا من نظراتم رو به صراحت و گاهی تند مینویسم تا حقیقت رو بشه بهتر دید.

بگذریم، رومی هم الان اسباب کشی داره و قراره یک اتاق رو برای سیستمش درست کنه…

ASR هم حالش تو سال جدید خوبه اما به من گفت دلتنگ Tidal هست و نمیدونه تا کی باید آقا منگر رو درایو کنه، امیدوارم ASR هم یه روزی به Tidal برسه.

مارتن هم تو نمایشگاه Kaohsiung Hi-End 2010 Taiwan با ASR دمو داشته که عکسهاش رو امروز دوستی برام فرستاد :

http://www.my-hiend.com/

http://www.my-hiend.com/vbb/showthread.php?p=73042

خبر مهم دیگه ساخت DAC توسط آقای Steve هست بنام MODEL ZDAC-1 اونم بعد از سالها تحقیق :

من فکر میکنم این DAC با قیمت 875 دلار میتونه 10 برابر قیمتش صدا بده و کلا خبر خوشحال کننده ای هست اگر کسی تو ایران این برند ارزان اما فوق العاده رو بیاره.  Steve میگه میشه با این DAC رکورد های بی کیفیت رو راحت تر شنید . جالب اینجاست این طراح در سورسی که قبلا ساخته بود روشی کاملا متفاوت با DAC فعلی اش پیش گرفت و این نشون میده یک طراح خوب میتونه به هر شکلی پاسخ خوبی بگیره.

خودش که اینطور میگه :

“I didn’t honestly expect to have a sub one thousand dollar DAC be competitive with my reference and was fully poised to be satisfied with something that was just simply good, but in the end it proved to be competitive indeed.  Amazing considering there are no batteries and no tubes involved…  in the final months of voicing the analog output stage of the DAC, the right combination of OP amps supported by the right MUSE caps clearly showed the potential that was there.  Many people don’t realize that the raw sound coming off the DAC chip, even in a NOS non-filtered design, is like a lump of clay that requires hundreds of hours of molding and shaping before it can be called a work of art.  This all happens in the analog stages after the DAC chip.  Get it right and everything is there, and then some.”

-Steve Deckert

یک لینک جالب هم 6moon گذاشته در مورد آکوستیک و اهمیت اون و اینکه خیلی از ایراداتی که در صدا هست به بلندگو و سیستم برنمیگیرده بلکه به آکوستیک برمیگرده، ویلسون الگزاندریا رو طرف تو یک اتاق خوب Setup کرده و مطالب نسبتا جالبی در مورد تاثیر آکوستیک نوشته:

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/theroom/3.html

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/theroom/1.html

To get the right solution for my room, I needed a crash course in acoustics. I will share the basics and begin with a clear disclaimer. All this is purely from a lay perspective. I am neither a scientist nor an engineer. With that caveat, let’s look at acoustics as applied to our listening rooms. As a group, we crazy audiophiles spend countless hours tweaking, cryogenically treating our tubes, lifting cables off the floor, demagnetizing our CDs and records, selecting the best wood for our racks, properly orienting the wood grain (of course) while endlessly debating the ideal metal composition for our cables. Everything matters and we know it. Yet our crazed community often overlooks the most important element in the system, the effect of room acoustics.

I sure did. Maybe that was because it’s not a new shiny box. Or maybe we accept the room as fait accompli. Whatever the reason, there is one fact I now clearly understand. The ignored room is the by far weakest link in the audio chain. You will never maximize the sound of your system without attention to acoustics. The sound in your room is influenced by everything it hits and the sound hits everything. The entire room and every object in it are part of the overall sonic signature. Art Noxon contends that as the electronic noise floor of our equipment has been reduced to inaudibility, what’s left is the generated noise of the listening room – harmful delayed and reverberant sounds that are out of phase and frequency to mask and distort the musical event.

The room is the acoustic coupler which connects speakers and listener. We take it for granted because in most cases, the room just exists. We don’t question it. It’s not viewed as an active part of our system unless there’s some perceived anomaly. We take the room for granted while we change our equipment annually. We rarely take the position that the room is more important than the speakers or source component.  But the acoustics of the room are more important than any component in it. I was as guilty as others by totally overlooking the effects my room had on the sound.

Today I silently shake my head as people talk about the sound of their system without correlating it to their room. My epiphany started about two years ago when I stepped through the progression of an untreated, then partially treated and finally a fully treated room. People who deride their system as thin, hard, unemotional, lean or thick are quick to blame the speaker or ancillary equipment. As a long-term owner of Wilson speakers, I’ve read many of these online complaints. I love the look of shock on the faces of people hearing a system in a properly treated room. Untreated, the divergence figures from linearity are staggering.

Resonance peaks of 10dB add ten times the acoustic energy to a frequency. Likewise a 10dB suck-out means that a certain note is reduced in power by a factor of ten. But it’s not just single notes. The time and phase of one note actually converts into another note that mixes with the original. These are not just subtle adjustments to the musical cues, these are dynamic distortions that swamp and overwhelm the foundation of the music. For several reasons I shall focus on the low end. The actions and treatment of bass issues are the least understood and therefore often misdiagnosed.

من بعدا توضیح میدم چرا مغز ما خیلی متوجه تاثیر آکوستیک نمیشه.

خبر بعدی اینکه منم دیگه عاشق های فای نیستم و قراره سال 89 عاشق یه چیز دیگه بشم، البته سعی میکنم این بار عاشق یه چیز بهتر بشم 😉

خوش بگذره

Read More

عید شما مبارک

یکشنبه ۱ فروردین ۱۳۸۹
/ / /

عید رو به همه دوستان تبریک میگم و امیدوارم سال 1389 برای همه سال خوبی باشه.

همونطور که میبینید ظاهر سایت تغییراتی داشته که نمیدونم بنظرتون جالب شده یا نه اما بنظرم بهتر از قبلی شده. میخواستم جوملا نصب کنم که دیدم ممکنه کار سخت بشه گفتم میگردم واسه همین وردپرس جون یه تمپلیت بهتر پیدا میکنم ببینم چی میشه.

یکی از کارهای مورد علاقه من تو تعطیلات عید (غیر از خوابیدن تا دم ظهر) خوندن کتاب هست، پیشنهاد میکنم کتاب “سرگذشت من” نوشته مهاتما گاندی رو اگر حوصله داشتید بخونید.

این کتاب تاثیر خیلی خیلی زیادی رو زندگی من داشت و فکر میکنم برای شما هم جالب باشه. البته بد نیست در کنارش آلبوم نوا مرکب خوانی استاد شجریان رو هم بشنوید :

ما گدایان خیل سلطانیم شهربند هوای جانانیم
بنده را نام خویشتن نبود هر چه ما را لقب دهند آنیم
گر برانند و گر ببخشایند ره به جای دگر نمی‌دانیم
چون دلارام می‌زند شمشیر سر ببازیم و رخ نگردانیم
دوستان در هوای صحبت یار زر فشانند و ما سر افشانیم
هر گلی نو که در جهان آید ما به عشقش هزاردستانیم
تنگ چشمان نظر به میوه کنند ما تماشاکنان بستانیم
تو به سیمای شخص می‌نگری ما در آثار صنع حیرانیم
هر چه گفتیم جز حکایت دوست در همه عمر از آن پشیمانیم
سعدیا بی وجود صحبت یار همه عالم به هیچ نستانیم

این آلبوم اون سال که اومد عید خیلی برام خاطره انگیز شد…

Read More

Subjective Audio Glossary & Audio Reviewing بخش چهاردهم

سه شنبه ۲۵ اسفند ۱۳۸۸
/ / /
Comments Closed

شاخص های صدا:

از آنجایی که شاخص های صدا همان اجزای صدا هستند و مغز ما بجای مد شنیدن کل وارد مد تمرکز بر روی اجزای صدا میشود من مناسب دیدم قبل از اینکه از درک کل به سمت n شاخص برویم بهتر است یک دسته بندی داشته باشیم تا کم کم وارد جزئیات بیشتر شویم و برخلاف روش رایج (http://stereophile.com/reference/50/) یک دفعه با کلی مفاهیم روبرو نشویم. من یک مرز بندی دقیق ارائه نمیکنم و معتقدم کلا امکان این کار هم در عمل وجود نداره و سعی میکنم بر اساس درک مغزم از صدا یک دسته بندی داشته باشم و همه پارامترها را در این چهار چوب توضیح بدم.

دسته بندی من به شکل زیر هست:

  • Presence of Sound in Space (Static)
  • Harmonic Structure (Static)
  • Dynamic Structure (Dynamic)
  • Transparency & Neutrality (Vertical Parameter)

این دسته بندی بر اساس نوع تاثیر سیستم ها بر صدا و نوع درک مغز من از این تاثیرات هست و البته سعی میکنم نوشته های رابرت هارلی، مایک، رومی، کالمز، جان گوردن و آرتور رو هم مورد توجه قرار بدم و در مورد معنی مفاهیم ای که در نوشته های آنها هم استفاده میشه به این دایره اضافه کنم و در موردشون توضیح بدم.

بخش اول مربوط به مشخصات تصویر صدا Imaging , Soundstage و کلا شکل موجودیت صدا در اتاق میشود.

مثلا در یک اجرای زنده Live هر سازی از یک مکان خاص شنیده میشود و مشخصات مکانی ساز و مشخصه تصویر آن (ابعاد چشمه صوتی) یک چیز مشخص و قابل درک برای مغز میباشد.

وقتی تار را از فاصله ای خاص میشنویم مغز براحتی مکان سورس صدا را تشخیص داده و اندازه سورس صدا نیز قابل درک است ، مثلا احساس نمیکنید اندازه دهان خواننده بزرگتر از حد معمول است و یا اطلاعات مربوط به Ambience فضای اجرا در این دسته قابل طبقه بندی است.

کلا شکل حضور صدا در اتاق رو من در یک گروه قرار دادم بنام Presence of Sound in Space .

دسته دوم مربوط به اون اطلاعات ای میشه که در ساختار هارمونیکی صدای یک ساز هست و با شاخص هایی چون Timbre ، Texture و Low Level information هایی سروکار داریم که کلا به وضعیت هارمونیکی یک صدا مربوط میشوند.

دسته سوم به خصوصیات داینامیکی صدا توجه داره که بیشتر به میزان انتقال صحیح انرژی در طول زمان وابسته هست. در این بخش ساختار دینامیکی صدا بررسی میشود و حس حرکتی در استرینگ های صدا مورد توجه قرار میگیرد.

دسته چهارم به میزان ره یافت شنونده به صدا ربط داره ، یعنی چقدر فلان شاخص مورد نظر صدا خالص ، و شفاف و تمیز هست و من عبارت Transparency و Neutrality رو بعنوان یک عبارت کلی برای این نوع از شاخص ها انتخاب کردم که عبارت Transparency برای میزان ره یافت ما به اون شاخص صدا اشاره داره و Neutrality به نزدیکی اون شاخص به حد تعادل یا همان خط بالانس.

در سه بخش اول ما با سه دسته شاخص ها در صدا روبروییم اما در بخش چهارم ما به ره یافت شنونده در سه شاخص قبلی توجه میکنیم که حالتی Vertical داره تا یک دسته موازی با بقیه دسته ها.

البته این توضیحاتی که دادم خیلی اولیه و شاید گنگ باشه، اجازه بدید بطور مفصل همه این دسته بندی ها رو توضیح میدم و سعی میکنم با مثال هایی موضوع رو روشن تر کنم اما برای شروع همین حالا سیستم رو روشن کنید و به این چهار بخش دقت کنید، شکل حضور صدا در اتاق، جنس صدای ساز ، حس حرکتی موسیقی و شفافیت ای که حس میکنید در صدا.

تکرار میکنم این طبقه بندی مختص درک مغز من هست و مثلا با طبقه بندی مایک یا طبقه بندی گروه EBU فرق میکنه (البته من و مایک نزدیکتریم) اما در نهایت من سعی میکنم همه اونها رو تو همین چهار گروه خودم توضیح بدم. بد نیست الان نوشته های آقایان Hoeg  وChristensen و Walker رو بخونید که مربوط به گروه EBU هست.

این گروه به شکل زیر طبقه بندی کرده :

Spatial impression :

– Homogeneity of spatial sound

– Reverberance

– Acoustical balance

– Apparent room size

– Depth perspective

– Sound colour of reverberation

Stereo impression :

– Directional balance

– Stability

– Sound image width

– Location accuracy

Transparency :

– Sound source definition

– Time definition

– Intelligibility

Sound balance :

– Loudness balance

– Dynamic range

Timbre :

– Sound colour

– Sound attack

Freedom from noise and distortions

Main impression

چیزی که جالبه اینه که من تو سال 1383 در دفترم یک طبقه بندی دیگه داشتم که براتون اینجا میارمش و کم کم این دسته بندی تغییر کرد تا به شکلی که در بالا آوردم دراومد و جالبه خیلی هم شبیه به دسته بندی مایک شد، از مایک بپرسم اون 5 سال پیش تو دفترش چیزی نوشته بود یا نه 🙂

دسته بندی 5 سال پیش من به شرح زیر بود :

Music Flow

Definition Across Soundstage

Control and Timing

Dynamic and Attack

Bandwidth and Background noise

Distortion

Long listening State (effect of sound on brain)

یک دسته بندی دیگه هم تو سایت TNT Audio دیدم که کمی ابتدایی بنظر میرسه :

The PRaT & emotion group

  • Rhythm
  • Timing
  • Pace
  • Tingle factor

The low-end

  • bass depth/extension
  • bass pitch/tunefulness
  • bass speed
  • bass clarity or tightness

The midrange & vocals

  • Vocal/instrument pitch/tunefulness
  • Vocal/instrument intelligibility/clarity
  • Vocal/instrument realism/timbre/naturalness
  • Vocal/instrument embodiment

The top-end

  • Treble pitch/tunefulness
  • Treble clarity
  • Treble timing/integration
  • Treble sweetness

Hifi attributes

  • Soundstage realism/stability
  • Soundstage width
  • Soundstage depth
  • Soundstage height illusion

The other essentials

  • Fuzziness (negative parameter suggested by my partner Heather during the anti-vibration shootout, described as “diffusion” by some)
  • Virtuality? (accurate instrumental timbre realism, contrasts, not that pinpoint imagery delusion)
  • micro-dynamics (subtle nuances & contrasts too)
  • macro-dynamics
Read More

Subjective Audio Glossary & Audio Reviewing بخش سیزدهم

سه شنبه ۲۵ اسفند ۱۳۸۸
/ / /
Comments Closed

میرسیم به تحلیل صدا:

اولا دقت کنید که نمیشه صدای بازسازی شده رو کاملا با صدای زنده مقایسه کرد چون مثلا همین استریو بودن محدودیت هایی مثل Crosstalk داره که نمیشه با اون بدون پردازش دیجیتال به یک تصویر درست رسید و یا تو استودیو ها اونقدر تغییرات روی یک رکورد اعمال میکنند که خیلی چیزها این وسط جابجا میشه و از حالت اولیه دور میشه. در این مورد بعدا بیشتر مینویسم اما منظور من اینه کلا تو تحلیل صدا ما یک رفرنس مطلق بنام اجرای زنده نداریم و بیشتر در فضای نسبی صدای کامپوننت ها قرار داریم.

شنیدن اجرای زنده هم در کنار شنیدن صدای کامپوننت های مختلف به ما کمک خواهد کرد تا دید بهتری داشته باشیم اما در حالت کلی یک تحلیل بیشتر بر مبنای تفاوت صدای کامپوننت ها نوشته میشه. شاید بگید خب اینکه کمی نگران کننده است از اینکه این فضا میشه یک فضای نسبی و نداشتن رفرنس درست ممکنه ما رو به اشتباه بندازه که البته نگرانی شما تا حدی در مورد تحلیل گرانی که تجربه بالایی ندارند صادقه (مثل اشتباه احمقانه ای که صنعت صدا سر جایگزینی آنالوگ با دیجیتال کرد) اما در حالت کلی من معتقدم در همین فضای نسبی میشه به درک درستی از صدا رسید.

رابرات هارلی میگوید من هر وقت اجرای زنده میشنوم هرگز عبارات  های فای به ذهنم خطور نمیکند و مثلا این حس رو ندارم که الان Texture صدا خوب است چون در اجرای زنده اصلا این کلمات به ذهن خطور نمیکنند ولی وقتی صدای سیستمی را میشنویم بخاطر محدودیت آن سیستم در مورد اجزای صدایش حرف میزنیم و در مورد محدودیت هایش.

در تجربه شنیداری بیشتر ما ها از سیستم های ارزان تر شروع میکنیم و کم کم با شنیدن صداهای دیگر به تفاوت صداها پی میبریم و درک بهتری از محدودیت های سیستم خود در زمان شنیدن صدای بهتر بدست می آوریم.

با یک کابل معمولی ممکنه مفهوم Air در صدا درک نشه اما وقتی از یک کابل خوب مانند Cardas استفاده میکنیم مفهوم Air رو در صدا درک خواهیم کرد. مثلا وقتی NAD رو به Krell سوئیچ میکنید میتونید بفهمید مفهوم timing چیه و کلا در همین مقایسه هاس که اجزا و پارامترهای صدا درک میشود و audiophile به درک مفاهیم نزدیک میشود.

هر چقدر سیستم های دقیق تر و Musical تر میشنویم و ره یافت ما به صدا بیشتر میشود بهتر از قبل میتوانیم تفاوت ها را درک و به معنی پارامترهای صدا پی ببریم. وقتی سیستمی دقت بیشتری داره با یک تغییر مثل تغییر کابل بلندگو ما تغییر صدای بیشتری از یک سیستم غیر دقیق تر و غیر شفاف تر میشنویم.

یک مثالی رابرت هارلی در کتابش زده میگه یک آدم عادی وقتی به این عکس هایی که از بدن انسان با اشعه ایکس میگیرند نگاه میکنه چیزی دستگیرش نمیشه اما یک رادیولوژیست خیلی اطلاعات از همون عکس استخراج میکنه و مغز یک شنونده با تمرین و شنیدن بیشتر میتونه اطلاعات بیشتری از صدا استخراج کنه.

مسیر مغز در دراز مدت از ماکرو شروع و به میکرو میرسه. کلا مغز اول ماکرو رو دریافت و به سمت میکرو در دراز مدت حرکت میکنه . جالبه هر چقدر از ماکرو به سمت میکرو میریم شاخص های صدا محو تر و درک اونها از عینیت به حس شنیداری منتقل میشه. تنها با گذشت زیاد زمان و در معرض صدا بودن ره یافتی به مغز در مورد میکرو صدا میدهد آنهم شنونده از روی حس اش میتواند تشخیص دهد. یک شنونده حرفه ای تر نسبت به یک شنونده مبتدی تر مقیاس عینیتش بیشتر است و دیگر چیزهایی که خیلی میکرو تر هستند را بشکل حسی درک میکند اما شنونده مبتدی ممکنه حتی مفهوم ساده ای چون شفافیت رو هم با حسش درک کنه و به شکل عینی نتونه به شاخص شفافیت توجه کنه.

Read More

Subjective Audio Glossary & Audio Reviewing بخش دوازدهم

دوشنبه ۲۴ اسفند ۱۳۸۸
/ / /
Comments Closed

فکر میکنم لازم باشه نوشته رومی رو در مورد کتاب Likhnitsky بیارم، ممکنه این کتاب توسط طراح  Audio Note ترجمه بشه و توسط آقای فاطمی نماینده Audio Note در ایران در دسترس علاقه مندان قرار بگیره، منتظر چنین روزی هستم.

رومی توضیحاتی رو تو انجمنش داده که اینجا میتونید بخونید، من بخشی از متن رو اینجا آوردم :

A few year back a Russian audiologist A. Likhnitsky’s published a book “Sound Quality: New approach to testing of the home audio equipment”.  (P&K, 1998) The book has many positive moments and altogether it was a wonderful attempt to bring into our listening audio evaluations and into the general audio practice some light of so necessary there objective rational and sanity.

Looking at the today’s audiophiles, I agree that the semantic and purposeless foolishness with which the audio people operate while they evaluate audio is staggering and the book makes an attempt to structure and to organize thinking about audio evolutions in a very civilized and very humanly-objective fashion. The book was written in Russian. Currently the book is experiencing a second attempt to be translated into English by the efforts of Peter Qvortrup (the Audio Note – UK guy), but knowing how much money/efforts he has commissioned to the project and knowing the intricacy of the Mr. Likhnitsky’s thinking/writing I do not anticipate that Peter will ever succeed. Therefore I presume that the western audiophiles will die in ignorance (just kidding) and will continue to call each other pathetically screaming: “I just bought that amplifier because the damn Patricia Barber was almost in my room!”

Actually, the audio people select audio gismos not just because their listening ignorance or their lack of audio-applied obective methodological ability. Mostly they are just victims and hostages of well-oiled machine of audio-moronisation, namely the Audio Propaganda, that deploys to audio people a set of faulty and totally irrelevant audio evaluation methods, audio objectives, audio critiques, and, weel as it offers to a target market a totally bogus, inner-brewed coordinate system of the audio thinking. It would be even OK if the audio propaganda does it’s bad thing intentionally but unfortunately it is not always the case. The audio propaganda’s composite consciousness itself is a victim of own actions and most of the power-players within audio propaganda are just regrettably feeble and disqualified people.

If you want to make a conclusion about the participants of the audio-power hoodlumhood then do not subscribe to their Internet masquerade or to their hypocritical writings. Meet them, talk with them “live”, sit in their rooms and get your own feeling of what you deal with. You will see how little is there, how afraid they are to maintain their own status-quo and how limited their understanding of what they deal with while they write their audio-doodles. You might be very surprised to meet your “favorite reviewer” and to learn how much idiocy, zombienisation, primitivism and ridiculousness s/he possesses, and particularly when audio is a subject. There is no wonder why most of the audio doodles that they spread around themselves are just the direct depictions of what they are, not to mention the numerous cases of an open untruthfulnees and perpetration of intentional fraud to pubic. I am not even taking about the frequent cases when the audio writers are the factual distributors of the products or the payrolled marketing departments. I am taking about the plan senselessness and stupidity that stuffed practically any audio publication. As an illustration I may recall the quite “popular and famous” reviewer who published a large drooling review about a multi-thousands dollars phonostage. The fun part is that he did not even have a turntable and  therefore he used a reverse-RIAA filtered analog output of his SACD player to feed the phonostage. Well, now get the punch line: when I “gently” informed him that it was not a correct way to drive a phonostage the reviewer replied: “Why not, what would be the difference?” (nd the guy was damn serious!) Is anything else should be said? I would not even go into the fact that the most of the “industry sponsored audio judges” have no necessary cultural level, musical acquaintance and practicly no absolutely-required humane sensitivity in order to evaluate the methods and means of Music reproduction.

Anyhow, what Likhnitsky did with his book was an attempt to take the audio evaluations and audio judgments from the ignorant hands of a commonly moronic audio-oligarchy: manufacturers, dealers, reviewers, editors, audio-heaters and the rest residue of audio industry (not all of them but the dominating majority of them, approximately 80%) and give the correct audio-evaliation keys to wide public, and to help them, to the ordinary listeners, to become the owners of their hobby,  their actions, their judgments, their listening ability and talents.

As I said, the book with more or less success (more frequently “more” then “less”) covers various aspects of audio evaluations. I suspect that the minor drawbacks and the too-simplified approaches that Mr.Likhnitsky did in his book were due to the fact that he targeted wide and mostly none-prepared addressees and therefore we was forced to go as simple and as easy as possible. The book is still mostly too complicated for an average audiophile audio-zombie.

Anyhow, I do not write a review on the book, but would like to embrace it and to offer a comparable vision to one of the strategic aspects of the Mr. Likhnitsky book. I refer to the book’s approach to stricture a listener’s progress into a played material. If to abridge everything tremendously then according to Likhnitsky a process of communicating with the musical messages is a multifaceted process and contains 4 hierarchical levels.

I will be paraphrasing:

At the first level of musical perception a listener deals with Sonic Accuracy: tonal balance, tonal purity, space resolution, sounds clarity, sounds distinctions, sounds details, voices separation, sounds characters, sounds connections, dynamic contrast, dynamic colorations and many others. Most of High End lives within this domain and most of playback systems introduce so much of “sonic contaminations” that any further musical perception remains locked out. In case of none-negative result from the first level and an absents of a sonic dissatisfaction in here a listener’s awareness has no impediments to go further to the second level.

The second level of musical perception has deal with tone and timber. This is much more complex quality related to neutrality, individuality, timber beauty, humanity, harmonization and many others ingredients of music. If a playback system does not screw up at the second level that a listener could fly further.

The third level is an emotional communication with music. At this level a listener deals with the capacity of a system to be transparent for emotional charge of music, musical energy, and the most important the correctness of emotional rendering. Most of the playbacks (if they ever reach this level!) introduce the emotional distortions but should a system still remains the emotionally transparent and “honest” to the source then a listener could go further (assumingly that the source-music has within itself something more then just the tonal and timber contents)

The last, forth level of musical perception, deals with esthetic content of music: the purposefulness of all elements of playback, the connectively of musical events, the meaningfulness of the messages and so on.

What Mr. Likhnitsky offered was very good and he illustrated the subject in his book quite well, offering many useful practical recommendation and examples. However, I consider his vision not exactly accurate, not particularly because it wrong (it is not) but because it is not inclusive and becose it portrays a slightly twisted picture.

Within this thread I will elaborate on my interpretation of the Likhnitsky’s visualization. I’m calling it “Six-Leveled-Listening Benefits”, as I have mentioned it in the description of my playback, (the emails with the questions that I’m receiving since I deployed the description made me to initiate this thread).  The name “Six-Leveled-Listening Benefits” is totally irrelevant and actually it has not six levels but seven levels (more on it – later on). They are the gradual steps that listing awareness takes almost sequentially while we are trying to evaluate the elements of playback.

the Six-Leveled-Listening Benefits™ contains the stratification of the listening experiences within seven virtual levels.

The Six-Leveled-Listening Benefits (I will use SLLB from now) is a totally simulated representation according to which a listening perception identifies the result of a reproduced music listening. This structure could be productively used during evaluations of playback elements or the evaluations of the enter systems, as well as it provide a solid framework for audio semantics and practice. The SLLB is applicable not only within audio. Many of the SLLB’s elements are acting while we’re insisting “live” music well. I would intentionally omit some very minor SLLB alternation that would fit the SLLB model perfectly for “live” musicality and will concentrate explosively on the music reproduction – the audio world.

The Six-Leveled-Listening Benefits (SLLB) implies that our reaction to reproduced music might be explained within 7 boundaries. Those boundaries or levelers are:

1) Static perception
2) Dynamic perception
3) Emotional perception
4) Esthetic perception
5) Ethical perception
6) Re-Creative perception
7) Not Named Level

The first level of listening perception is Static Level. At this level a listener perceives musical information as a collection of the individual sounds and a listening awareness tries to evaluate the “convince-ability” of those sounds. At this level the evaluations of Sound is not necessarily related to the preceding or following sounds/event and instead of Sound a listener deals with an array of  the secluded sounds/tones.

Certainly even the static sounds do have own dynamic/vibrant inner-life but it all included into a definition of Static Sounds at the First Level. Actually the best phrase to describe “it” would be not the Static Sounds but Disconnected or Isolated Sounds.  The ketch in here that any vibrant or “animated” tone without a reference to “something else” is completely irrelevant and has no pointers to its values. The “isolated tone” has just an instant charge, a modal value, it frozen in time and space and it has no relation to anything else. Therefore I called it Static, meaning having no progressive formation.

A listener during his/her playback evaluations at the Static Level pays primary attention to pitches, sharpness, harmonic context, tonal and timber authenticity, neutrality, transient characteristics, granularity and many other properties of reproduced sounds. Interesting that a listener, in fact, do not care about a correctness (how it compare to the “live”) of the reproduced Sounds but rather s/he concerns if s/he does not get within reproduces Sound something else, namely the Alien Sounds. A listener is unable to recognize destroyed sounds but only the original sounds and “something else”. This “something else”, the added superstructure atop the original sounds, is a delta between the  “correct” sounds and what a playback system presents to a listener (the distortions or aberrations). It is important to identify that those distortion/aberrations do not mix inside our consciousness with the  “correct” sounds and they just perceived as a totally separate recognizable-effective entry. So, while evaluating a playback at the Static Level a listener do not search, recognize or analyze the “correct” sounds, as those “correct” sounds are entirely transparent, “consumption-free” and non-detectable by our awareness (at the Static Level but the have own value at the higher levels).  What the listener’s awareness does is scanning the reproduced sound in search for those show-stopping Alien Sounds.

In the audio the primary contributors to Alien Sounds – the Static Level Detectable Differences are individual parts of the audio components, primary the passive parts. Each and single particle of audio signal (to name a few: resistors, capacitors, cables, magnetics, dielectrics, the spaces around the currents flow, electrical and mechanical signatures of active elements, contacts, diaphragms, suspensions and hundreds other contributors) do their contribution to the Sounds and do inject into Sound the Alien Amendments. The Amendments are the signatures of the mechanisms that invoked tem. As the result, we do not recognize the distortions themselves (in my vocabulary “distortions” are not the alternations of Sounds but an appendage of Sound with a residue of the linguistic manipulations) but we hear a language of the conversion processes that created the distortion, or according to the Beach Effect ™ the “language of a parallel process”.

Our listening awareness has an ability to filter out those amendments or to recognize them as the static, fixed amendments with a permanent delta. Sine the delta is acknowledged as delta, the listening awareness activates a static perceptional antidote, that sine it was called help to disregard the amendments or make their presents less influential. The effectiveness of the antidote is in direct dependence how the “language of a parallel process” differ from the language of Reality. If the languages use the similar linguistic algorithms then the effectiveness of the antidote is incredibly high and could completely compensate the presents of the Alien Sounds or the Amendments in Sound at the First Static Level. I have to note that some of the amendments at the Static Level have deep relationship with the amendments that take place at the Second, Dynamic Level (phase-related amendments) and the second-level amendments has way more powerful and more devastating affect to the listening awareness.

Well, if we have such a great ability to tune ourselves out from the Static Alien Sounds then what kind harm they could do? If to simplified everything tremendously and for a sake of illustration to compare our listing awareness with a computer then the awareness runs a multithreaded execution and the amount of cognizant force spent to run one thread take the juice (in case of a computer the processor time and a few other things) out of the parallel threads. Ironically our awareness acts almost similar and while we are filtering ourselves from the Alien Static Sounds we’re masking out  (minimizing) our capacity to be deal (be concentrated) with the content of the original messages.

The audiophiles call the Static Level’s Alien Sounds as the Sonic Colorations. The Colorations from their point of view are the “correct” sounds presented via a prism of Distortions but it is very far form Truth as the natural, original Sound of Reality never mix with the Alien Sounds of a Linguistic of Reality Transformations. Sound and the Sounds are recognized by our awareness separately. The Static Tonal Colorations are practically irrelevant; they have as much unconditional values as the none-existing murky Absolute Tempo in music. Therefore if a person evaluates a playback only at the Static Level then the result is totally extraneous and the person let itself to be engaged into a perpetual chaise of the meaningless and semi-hallucinational Static Level sonic differences.

The contemporary so-called audiophile movement and the entire audio industry concentrated and fully dedicated to analyses, recognition and selling to public the Static Level sonic differences. The audiophiles subscribe to one or to another pattern of Alien Sounds and perpetually chase the patterns as a dog chase own tail. The audio industry well understand this, wonderful for them, marketing situation and deploy an army of the ignorant-heaters-writers, whose audio-awareness are able to operate primary at the First Static Level. Those reviewers, the marketing cheerleaders, continuously propose to the prospective audiophiles-consumers the  “new remedies” or just the new psycho-virtual patterns of the Alien Sounds.

The industry operates quite simple: the most horrible audio element is and the more revolting pattern of the Alien Static Sounds it construct the less audio-intelligent person would be deployed to the “mission”. Any editor of audio publication knows how to mate a misery of a component (need to be “publicly evaluated”) with the personal audio-idiocy and ignorance of a prospective reviewer. The more horrible component get more loaded-with-Mormonism analyst-reviewer, and the “selected” reviewer uses his/her own “talents” to submit the poison-spreading-audio-gismo to public by building a necessary verbal wrap around a product. The consumers, with theirs consciousness operating at the First Static Level, mostly do not even buy into the different patterns at the Alien Static Sounds but they fish for a verbal marketing BS-wrapping around the Alien Static Sounds.

Based upon my experience and my unfortunate observation of those countless audiophiles, the so-called High-End audio has approximately 50% of its participants whose audio objectives concentrated explicitly at the First Static Level. I call them audio-zombies and they pretty much are a boring waste in audio. I have to note that there is no direct relation between the audio-zombies’ audio limitations and their general intellectual or spiritual competence. There is some indirect connection but to cover this subject is not the scope of my current application.

The next post will be covering the Second SLLB’s Level: the Dynamic Level.

The listening perception at Level #2- the Dynamic Level

Well, here is (if you “got” what meant in the article about the First Static Level) a loaded statement: if a listener did not “hear” (acknowledged audio wise) anything at the First Level then the Second Dynamic Level takes it’s turn. The loaded is there was the part “did not hear anything”. Whatever was audio-heard (positive or negative at the First Static Level) was in fact bad. If a listener was audio-wise “unconvinced “ or “impressed” during perceiving Sound at First Level then it means that a playback did something very wrong. Once again: the best possible outcome from the First Level is not hearing any result. BTW, those thousands and thousands pages with the descriptions of what was auditioned from the playbacks written by the industry reviewers who primary operate at the First Listening Level is an indicative evidence now horribly audio performs in the reviewer’s rooms…

The second level of listening perception is a Dynamic Level. This Level includes two sublevels that deal with totally different properties and form my perspective should be evaluated (acknowledged) differently. I intentionally combined those two sublevels into one Dynamic Level: it simplifies the stratification and helps to emphasize that that the sublevels are fundamentally dissimilar form the First Static level.

The Dynamic Sublevel “A” is a Dynamic External Level.  At this level a listener perceives musical information as an arranged sequence of pitches inherited form the First Level and the listener’s awareness recognizes the heard not as the binary succession but as a continues variations of tonal influences.

The Dynamic Sublevel “B” is a Dynamic Internal Level. At this level a listener does not deal directly with the sounds from the First Level but deals with the inner-managerial characteristics of sound reproduction. The Level “B” is a metadata, a structure, a template for the Level “A”.

The next post will look a slightly deeper at what sonic properties are essential and what should be paid attention at the each SubLevel (“A” and “B”) of the Dynamic Level #2

Read More