Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article , Robin
wrote:
On 29/04/2018 15:07, Java Jive wrote:
On 29/04/2018 10:50, John Hall wrote:

Speakers traditionally used to claim to have a range of from 20 Hz to
20 kHz. I believe the typical person of our age can't hear any
frequencies higher than about 8 kHz. I once found a website that
would play sounds of different frequencies to allow one to assess
how high a frequency one could hear. Of course that would rather
depend on how good the PC's speakers were.

Any chance of you finding it again?

There are many. One I have used for some years now is

http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/hearing.html

But note it does need Adobe Flash Player enabled; and only goes up to
16kHz.

If you use Linux or RISC OS you can get software from here

http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/software/index.html

which will let you either generate wave files of test tones or use your
computer as a signal generator via its sound output port, etc.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article ,
TonyGamble wrote:
On Sunday, April 29, 2018 at 6:30:36 PM UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
Java Jive wrote:

John Hall wrote:

I once found a website that would play sounds of different
frequencies to allow one to assess how high a frequency one could
hear.

Any chance of you finding it again?

https://youtu.be/H-iCZElJ8m0

Foregive me but you are wasting your time.

You may not hear them conciously but they are there.

I didn't make this stuff up to challenge you folk and I am not going to
argue with scientists. I speak as a musician who has studied the
subject.

Having studied the subject you will also be aware that:

1) For HF tones the main contribution about about 20kHz from LP replay will
tend to be distortion products introduced by the replay stylus, etc. (OK,
some will come from the cutter as the head will have bugger all feedback
above 20kHz.) So yes, play music from an LP and you will see extended HF.
But it may not have come from the source tape. :-)

If you doubt this, go look at the reviews which publish distortion versus
frequency plots for cartridges and weep at the HF peaks they show.

2) Unless someone picks their cartrige with *great* care, it will have
mechanical low-pass resonances at or below about 22 kHz. (I'll ignore the
electronic ones that also limit the bandwidth of most cartridges.)

3) That most people can't hear 22 kHz or above. I've seen various claims to
the contrary, but except for unusual cases like very young children the
test methods tend to be badly flawed. Given that Bill is, like me, an "old
fart" I doubt it he has heard 20 kHz in a long time.

Up to you if you want to "argue with scientists" or not, though. :-)

If you want to discuss why some LPs sound better than their 'equivalent'
CDs (sic), that's a different matter. There are various well known and well
measured reasons why that can arise. None have anything to do with what you
wrote.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article , Vir Campestris
wrote:
On 29/04/2018 12:56, TonyGamble wrote:
Don't forget that only an LP is storing the sound above 20 khz and
most, if not all, musical instruments produce harmonics way above that
level.

Two points: - Most of us can't hear harmonics that high - DVD can have
higher frequency limits. 48kHZ sample is standard, I'm sure I've seen
96k (with 24 bit!) and I've a feeling even 192 is possible.

Depends what you mean. A while ago I bought a 'CD' which came as two discs.
One a CD of the music. The other a 'computer' DVD with 192k 24bit wve files
of the music. Useful for comparison purposes.

The 'frontier' these days, though, is for rates way above even 192k.
Although by analysis you can show this adds 3/4 of SFA to the information
content. 8-]

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article , Robin
wrote:
On 29/04/2018 21:12, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 29/04/2018 12:56, TonyGamble wrote:
Don't forget that only an LP is storing the sound above 20 khz and
most, if not all, musical instruments produce harmonics way above
that level.

Two points: - Most of us can't hear harmonics that high - DVD can have
higher frequency limits. 48kHZ sample is standard, I'm sure I've seen
96k (with 24 bit!) and I've a feeling even 192 is possible.


plenty of samples you can play (sic) with - eg

http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-test-files.aspx

"These files are available for you to test which audio format is
compatible with your system. You can choose between ALAC, FLAC, CD
Quality and MP3 formats and Studio Master (also known as HD, hi-res or
high definition) formats from 192kHz, 96kHz and 44.1kHz sample rates."

IIRC the Norwegian '2L' label also provides a range of 'high rez' test
files. Many of which sound excellent. Well worth finding and trying.
(Sorry, I can't recall the URL offhand.)

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article ,
TonyGamble wrote:
Vinyl is better theory was debunked decades ago by actual measurement.
Signal to noise (IIRC 96dB in CD, ~45dB on vinyl), frequency response,
channel separation, wow, hiss and flutter (immeasurable on CD) were all
miles better on CD than vinyl, and this is very evident if I listen to
the few tracks I have on both (on a decent deck for vinyl). Indeed MP3
is almost indistinguishable from CD. Only cassette tape was worse.

Indeed R Mark.

But you do not mention harmonics. On all your points I will concede you
are right.

What is sad about this conversation is that nobody has had the grace to
say 'oh yes, we forgot about harmonics'. They are there. They are the
difference between the pub piano and a concert Steinway. Does anyone
understand me now?

Do you understand that seeing HF above 20 kHz from an LP doesn't mean they
are harmonics from the source? Indeed, have you checked to see how many are
intermod products added by rhe cutting and replay processes?


The measurements you mention cover the topics you list. They do not
cover the full frequency of sound that comes out of a musical instrument
and there is the difference.

Only if you can actually hear it. :-)

One advantage of the distortion I guess is that to some extent it can
'fake' the lost HF given that our ability to determine frequency is pretty
poor at extreme HF above 20 kHz *when* we can hear it.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In message , Bill Wright
writes
On 29/04/2018 20:54, tony sayer wrote:
https://www.actiononhearingloss.org....th/check-your-
hearing/

Ohh that's good.

Bill

It is. Though I could only make out about 50% of the numbers, I got the
result: "Your result suggests that you do not have a hearing loss." I
suspect that it doesn't test one's ability to hear high frequencies,
though.
--
John Hall
"Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history
that man can never learn anything from history."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article , Java Jive
wrote:
That is what is behind the much argued difference between vinyl and
digital recording. Vinyl has its problems, such are rumble, but get
the turntable right and you will have a much fuller sound than off any
digital source that cuts at 20 khz.

As with global warming, the only 'arguments' are propagated by
denialists. AFAIAA, no independent, properly controlled blind listening
tests have ever found in favour of analogue over digital. I have
digitised over 100 LPs at CD sampling rates, and have never, ever been
able to hear any drop-off in quality between any original and its
resultant digitisation.

The problem in practice is that, with commercial recordings, the CD has
often been prepared and tweaked in a totally different way to the LP. Hence
the information 'written on to them' differs. The results are measurably
different. No need to invoke "stuff above 22 kHz", etc.

In particular, with rock/pop music the tendency is to excessively level
compress *and clip* CD versions whilst *not* doing this when cutting the LP
version. In effect, our old friend, optimod on steroids applied to a format
which would otherwise have a 90dB+ dynamic range, but with content squashed
into a tiny fraction of the top-end of that.

Unfortunately (as per an ongoing thread on uk.rec.audio) the music biz has
an absolute and rigid faith that 'LOUDNESS SELLS' for pop/rock CDs, but
then views LP as a niche market to exploit. Nothing seems able to get
though to the people doing this that they have no real evidence for their
faith because they don't ever offer a same-format informed choice to
buyers.

I don't doubt that for *some* genres and *some* customers, LOUDNESS is,
indeed, preferred. But this doesn't justify it being larded on more
generally.

In essence, someone may then prefer the LP because it wasn't *willfully*
ruined by the makers like they did the CD. This has *nothing* to do with
the capabilities of the formats. Just the faith system of the people who
produce the CDs. Trying to explain this to people in the biz is like
talking to a wall.

I do have some superb LPs. But I also have many more superb CDs.

BTW if someone wants to hear really well made LPs, look for the 'Chasing
the dragon' label. The direct cut LPs I bought from them are superb.
Interestingly, they used old mics which have booger all response above
about 20kHz. This is for jazz/dance band music with brass, etc, plus
vocals. Given the mics used (which people tend to forget) there is booger
all that is genuine above about 20 kHz, yet the sound is excellent.

As with cutters and cartridges, many 'favourite' mics have a mechanical
resonance somewhere around 14 kHz, then show at least a 2nd order roll
away. Extended HF *ain't* the reason they sound good. If anything, quite
the opposite! 8-]

Whereas the BBC at proms do tend to use 'measurement' quality mics. Listen
to that via the iplayer and you may get more up to 24 kHz that is genuinely
from source than on an LP. Its digital, though, innit. No level
compression, though. 8-]

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article ,
TonyGamble wrote:

AR and LWT - and music enthusiast.

Can you expand the AR and LWT. I'm not sure what they stand for.
Artists and Recordings? London Weekend Television? or what?

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 10:38, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Java Jive
wrote:
That is what is behind the much argued difference between vinyl and
digital recording. Vinyl has its problems, such are rumble, but get
the turntable right and you will have a much fuller sound than off any
digital source that cuts at 20 khz.

As with global warming, the only 'arguments' are propagated by
denialists. AFAIAA, no independent, properly controlled blind listening
tests have ever found in favour of analogue over digital. I have
digitised over 100 LPs at CD sampling rates, and have never, ever been
able to hear any drop-off in quality between any original and its
resultant digitisation.

The problem in practice is that, with commercial recordings, the CD has
often been prepared and tweaked in a totally different way to the LP. Hence
the information 'written on to them' differs. The results are measurably
different. No need to invoke "stuff above 22 kHz", etc.

[more in same vain snipped]
Yes, yes, as I recount on my page that I linked, which links in turn
your site.

Thank you, Jim, for not answering the question that was asked of you,
specifically, by name!-)

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On Sunday, 29 April 2018 21:53:30 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 29/04/2018 11:11, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
These days almost all speakers will be ± 3dB from ~35Hz to 20kHz. This corresponds to the hearing range of a young adult.

I'm very surprised by that 35Hz figure.

I just looked at a B&W brochure (we have some older B&W speakers).

Most of them seem to be -6 at 45Hz or so. OTOH, they go up to over 30kHz....

Andy

Sorry - all decent speakers - low end does vary a bit and IMO not that critical.

I can't remember what mine are and anyway I have a sub woofer to do that as such low frequencies are not as directional.

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 09:59, Jim Lesurf wrote:

3) That most people can't hear 22 kHz or above. I've seen various claims to
the contrary, but except for unusual cases like very young children the
test methods tend to be badly flawed. Given that Bill is, like me, an "old
fart"

A nicely matured fart actually, ripened by age.

I doubt it he has heard 20 kHz in a long time.

I couldn't hear it twenty years ago. We had a test CD and the kids could
hear every tone but I couldn't. In a rage I turned the volume right up
and broke both top tweeters.

But when I was a little lad helping my dad fix aerials I could always
hear line whistle (the 405 variety).

Bill

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 10:10, Jim Lesurf wrote:
3/4 of SFA

Baffling us with science again!

Bill

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 10:16, Jim Lesurf wrote:

Signal to noise (IIRC 96dB in CD, ~45dB on vinyl), frequency response,
channel separation, wow, hiss and flutter (immeasurable on CD) were all
miles better on CD than vinyl, and this is very evident if I listen to
the few tracks I have on both (on a decent deck for vinyl). Indeed MP3
is almost indistinguishable from CD.
I wonder if those with huge collections of 78s used to say that they
sounded better than 45s and 33s?

Bill

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 29/04/2018 22:35, TonyGamble wrote:

[accreditation snipped by previous poster]
Vinyl is better theory was debunked decades ago by actual measurement. Signal to noise (IIRC 96dB in CD, ~45dB on vinyl), frequency response, channel separation, wow, hiss and flutter (immeasurable on CD) were all miles better on CD than vinyl, and this is very evident if I listen to the few tracks I have on both (on a decent deck for vinyl). Indeed MP3 is almost indistinguishable from CD. Only cassette tape was worse.

But you do not mention harmonics.

Again Jim Lesurf is probably the person here most technically able to
discuss this, but as he has chosen to go off at something of a tangent,
although a very relevant one, I'll do my best based on my memories of
studying the physics involved.

Harmonics are covered by the testing that Mark and others including
myself have mentioned. Note the audio specification Total HARMONIC
Distortion, which is measured by comparing the signal that comes out of
an audio system with the one that was originally put in, thus revealing
what harmonics the system has added and/or removed. Note that it is
small fractions, a few hundreds or even thousandths, of a percent for
most digital systems, including CD, whereas it is many orders of
magnitude worse for the process of cutting a master, pressing a vinyl,
and playing it back. I've only ever seen few figures for the latter
published, but ISTR they were about 5-7%, so 2 or 3 orders of magnitude
worse than digital systems.

On all your points I will concede you are right.

What is sad about this conversation is that nobody has had the grace to say 'oh yes, we forgot about harmonics'.

You concede others are right, yet persist in claiming that there is some
'magic' that the rest of the world has missed. There is no 'magic',
only human failings, both your own to understand the physics, and of
those who make bad, overly compressed CD because they think that's what
their 'market' is all about. As I, R Mark Clayton, Jim Lesurf, and
others have explained, there is no audio specification for which LP
exceeds CD, on the contrary for most of them it is way behind. A
well-mastered CD will always be able to convey the musicians' intent
better than a well-mastered LP. The chief failing with the format, as
with any other, lies with the humans making some of the CDs, who
deliberately ruin the sound because they think that is what 'sells'.
Read the page on my site that I linked previously, and what JLeS has
written in reply to my previous post.

They are there. They are the difference between the pub piano and a concert Steinway. Does anyone understand me now?

We understand that you don't understand what you are talking about.

The measurements you mention cover the topics you list. They do not cover the full frequency of sound that comes out of a musical instrument and there is the difference.

They cover the full range of audible sound that comes out of any
instrument, in the absence of any meaningful data to the contrary, the
rest is snake oil.

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 12:30:55 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

Signal to noise (IIRC 96dB in CD, ~45dB on vinyl), frequency response,
channel separation, wow, hiss and flutter (immeasurable on CD) were all
miles better on CD than vinyl, and this is very evident if I listen to
the few tracks I have on both (on a decent deck for vinyl). Indeed MP3
is almost indistinguishable from CD.
I wonder if those with huge collections of 78s used to say that they
sounded better than 45s and 33s?

It seems that people like what they are accustomed to, regardless of
any objective assessment of realism. When VHF/FM first became
available many preferred medium-wave AM, some people can't be bothered
to type 101 instead of 1 (etc) on their Freeview receivers to see the
HD version, I've lost count of the number of times I've seen stereo
speakers at the side of a room or next to each other on a high shelf
so that nobody can possibly hear a proper stereo image, and some
people prefer black and white photography to colour, even with digital
cameras that normally record colour information unless you
deliberately discard it.

Rod.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 03:07, Bill Wright wrote:
On 29/04/2018 20:54, tony sayer wrote:
https://www.actiononhearingloss.org....th/check-your-
hearing/

Ohh that's good.

Bill
Mine is stuck on 'Audio still loading ...' for some reason.

How long does it take to download its files ?

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 03:07, Bill Wright wrote:
On 29/04/2018 20:54, tony sayer wrote:
https://www.actiononhearingloss.org....th/check-your-
hearing/

Ohh that's good.

Bill

Oh, Chrome says 'This app needs Flash'. Bugger.

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 03:21, Bill Wright wrote:
On 29/04/2018 22:35, TonyGamble wrote:

What is sad about this conversation is that nobody has had the grace
to say 'oh yes, we forgot about harmonics'. They are there. They are
the difference between the pub piano and a concert Steinway.

The main difference is the pianist.

Bill

And whether the joanna is in tune :-)

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 12:30, Bill Wright wrote:
On 30/04/2018 10:16, Jim Lesurf wrote:

Signal to noise (IIRC 96dB in CD, ~45dB on vinyl), frequency response,
channel separation, wow, hiss and flutter (immeasurable on CD) were all
miles better on CD than vinyl, and this is very evident if I listen to
the few tracks I have on both (on a decent deck for vinyl).Â* Indeed MP3
is almost indistinguishable from CD.
I wonder if those with huge collections of 78s used to say that they
sounded better than 45s and 33s?

Bill

Since the sense of taste is conditioned by a sense of smell,
maybe the smell of hot valves and associated components
'improved' the sound.

Better not mention this to Russ Andrews or he will 'develop'
a range of plug-in scent generators to give that authentic
hot valve, rubber and bakelite ambience.

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 13:10, Java Jive wrote:
On 29/04/2018 22:35, TonyGamble wrote:

[accreditation snipped by previous poster] Vinyl is better theory was
debunked decades ago by actual measurement.Â* Signal to noise (IIRC
96dB in CD, ~45dB on vinyl), frequency response, channel separation,
wow, hiss and flutter (immeasurable on CD) were all miles better on
CD than vinyl, and this is very evident if I listen to the few tracks
I have on both (on a decent deck for vinyl).Â* Indeed MP3 is almost
indistinguishable from CD.Â* Only cassette tape was worse.

But you do not mention harmonics.

Again Jim Lesurf is probably the person here most technically able to
discuss this, but as he has chosen to go off at something of a tangent,
although a very relevant one, I'll do my best based on my memories of
studying the physics involved.

Harmonics are covered by the testing that Mark and others including
myself have mentioned.Â* Note the audio specification Total HARMONIC
Distortion, which is measured by comparing the signal that comes out of
an audio system with the one that was originally put in, thus revealing
what harmonics the system has added and/or removed.Â* Note that it is
small fractions, a few hundreds or even thousandths, of a percent for
most digital systems, including CD, whereas it is many orders of
magnitude worse for the process of cutting a master, pressing a vinyl,
and playing it back.Â* I've only ever seen few figures for the latter
published, but ISTR they were about 5-7%, so 2 or 3 orders of magnitude
worse than digital systems.

On all your points I will concede you are right.

What is sad about this conversation is that nobody has had the grace
to say 'oh yes, we forgot about harmonics'.

You concede others are right, yet persist in claiming that there is some
'magic' that the rest of the world has missed.Â* There is no 'magic',
only human failings, both your own to understand the physics, and of
those who make bad, overly compressed CD because they think that's what
their 'market' is all about.Â* As I, R Mark Clayton, Jim Lesurf, and
others have explained, there is no audio specification for which LP
exceeds CD, on the contrary for most of them it is way behind.Â* A
well-mastered CD will always be able to convey the musicians' intent
better than a well-mastered LP.Â* The chief failing with the format, as
with any other, lies with the humans making some of the CDs, who
deliberately ruin the sound because they think that is what 'sells'.
Read the page on my site that I linked previously, and what JLeS has
written in reply to my previous post.

They are there. They are the difference between the pub piano and a
concert Steinway. Does anyone understand me now?

We understand that you don't understand what you are talking about.

The measurements you mention cover the topics you list. They do not
cover the full frequency of sound that comes out of a musical
instrument and there is the difference.

They cover the full range of audible sound that comes out of any
instrument, in the absence of any meaningful data to the contrary, the
rest is snake oil.

Inside every square wave, is an army of sine waves just crying to
escape.

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 17:46, Andrew wrote:

Inside every square wave, is an army of sine waves just crying to
escape.

Yes, as per Fourier Analysis. This morning I got half-way through
writing, for the benefit of the radicalised vinyl disciple that's
wandered in here, a paragraph or two explaining about Fourier analysis,
square waves, and their role in measuring THD, but decided I was
probably wasting my time!

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 13:42, Roderick Stewart wrote:
even with digital
cameras that normally record colour information unless you
deliberately discard it.

And even then the file size stays the same, yet the colour info is lost.

Bill

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 17:10, Andrew wrote:

Oh, Chrome says 'This app needs Flash'. Bugger.

It's good stuff is Flash. I did a carpet with it this morning and it
looks terrific.

Bill

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 17:40, Andrew wrote:
On 30/04/2018 03:21, Bill Wright wrote:
On 29/04/2018 22:35, TonyGamble wrote:

What is sad about this conversation is that nobody has had the grace
to say 'oh yes, we forgot about harmonics'. They are there. They
are the difference between the pub piano and a concert Steinway.

The main difference is the pianist.

Bill

And whether the joanna is in tune :-)

That doesn't matter so much after about 10pm.

Bill

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 29/04/2018 09:23, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?

You can certainly assess which ones you may prefer or dislike when
comparing them playing the kinds of music, etc, you want to hear.

Did you want to do something else?

Jim

Good point.

Bill

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 30/04/2018 17:10, Andrew wrote:

Oh, Chrome says 'This app needs Flash'. Bugger.

It's good stuff is Flash. I did a carpet with it this morning and it
looks terrific.



No Bill, that was 1001. Flash strips you-know-what off the bog!


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article , johnt
scribeth thus

"charles" wrote in message
...

There was, in the early 1990s, a hifi magazine that I'd though quite
reputable until it ran an article which stated that gold plated mains
plugs
gave better stereo separation.

And you must have the correct fuses for the plugs:

http://www.russandrews.com/5a-superf...use-pack-of-5/

25 bloody quid for a 13 amp fuse??..

Then it gets much worse:(

"Very Worthwhile Improvement."

Curiosity finally overcame scepticism and I tried a Superfuse in the
mains cable to my integrated amp. The improvement was immediately
apparent - more transparency in the sound picture, more body to the
instrumental sounds. I have since added Superfuses to the mains cables
of my phono-stage and CD player and again the improvement is readily
apparent. The whole listening experience is so much more compelling

Wonder what the reviews would be like if he sold bog paper;?...


--
Tony Sayer

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 21:15, Woody wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 30/04/2018 17:10, Andrew wrote:

Oh, Chrome says 'This app needs Flash'. Bugger.

It's good stuff is Flash. I did a carpet with it this morning and it
looks terrific.

No Bill, that was 1001. Flash strips you-know-what off the bog!

That's Harpic. Flash "cuts cleaning time in half" (with a Scottish accent).

--
Max Demian

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:46:36 +0100, Andrew wrote:

====snip====


Inside every square wave, is an army of sine waves just crying to
escape.

In a perfect world, that would be an infinite army of sine waves.

However, getting back to the gritty reality of CDDA 44.1KHz sampling
rate with its Nyquist limit of half the sampling rate upper frequency of
the analogue signal being quantitised into pairs of 16 bit samples for
our later enjoyment, a 1KHz square wave will comprise a mere 22 such sine
waves, about a section or patrol's worth I believe (A 20Hz square wave
would be about a small regiment's worth).

--
Johnny B Good

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 21:15, Woody wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 30/04/2018 17:10, Andrew wrote:

Oh, Chrome says 'This app needs Flash'. Bugger.

It's good stuff is Flash. I did a carpet with it this morning and it
looks terrific.



No Bill, that was 1001. Flash strips you-know-what off the bog!


"One thousand and one, one thousand and one, cleans a big big carpet,
For less than half a crown!"

Flash did work though.

Bill

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
On 30/04/2018 10:16, Jim Lesurf wrote:

Signal to noise (IIRC 96dB in CD, ~45dB on vinyl), frequency
response, channel separation, wow, hiss and flutter (immeasurable on
CD) were all miles better on CD than vinyl, and this is very evident
if I listen to the few tracks I have on both (on a decent deck for
vinyl). Indeed MP3 is almost indistinguishable from CD.
I wonder if those with huge collections of 78s used to say that they
sounded better than 45s and 33s?

I know someone who has a houseful of pre-electric '78s' (sic). He thinks
they sound vastly better than LPs, and has done since the 1970s.

They *do* sound good on his system. But then he has a complex eq setup,
etc, ending in a pair of quad esl63s.

But then, processed with care, they can also sound good transcribed onto a
CD. 8-]

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article , Roderick
Stewart
wrote:
It seems that people like what they are accustomed to, regardless of any
objective assessment of realism. When VHF/FM first became available many
preferred medium-wave AM, some people can't be bothered to type 101
instead of 1 (etc) on their Freeview receivers to see the HD version,

In early DAB days when R3 was 256kbps I did some comaprisons versus FM
(Yamaha CT7000). And preferred the FM.

....at least for a week or so of repeated comparisons. But I then got
curious as to why the FM sounded 'warmer', but I was starting to change my
mind abiut which was 'better'.

Measurements shows the FM at the time had about 5-8 dB of peak compression
compared with DAB. This altered the peak-sustain behaviour of instruments
like piano, making them sound 'nicer'. But the DAB was clearer for
orchestral music.

So my initial preference was caused by habituation to the 'warmer' sound of
FM cause by some amount of peak limiting.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article ,
says...

There was, in the early 1990s, a hifi magazine that I'd
though quite reputable until it ran an article which stated
that gold plated mains plugs gave better stereo separation.

Are you sure that it wasn't the April edition?

--

Terry

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article ,
says...

In article ,
TonyGamble wrote:

AR and LWT - and music enthusiast.

Can you expand the AR and LWT. I'm not sure what they stand for.
Artists and Recordings? London Weekend Television? or what?


Associated Rediffusion, surely?

Compulsorily forced by the ITA (sorry - Independent Television
Authority) to merge with ABC to form Thames Television. At the
same time, the ITA forced the new London Weekend Television to
buy Rediffusion's Wembley studios.

https://tinyurl.com/AR-LWT-ITA which tranlates to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London...evision#Creati
on

--

Terry

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 20:00, Bill Wright wrote:
On 30/04/2018 17:10, Andrew wrote:

Oh, Chrome says 'This app needs Flash'. Bugger.

It's good stuff is Flash. I did a carpet with it this morning and it
looks terrific.

Bill
Curious that the Flash advert with a talking labradoodle and
a blond female has been replaced by one with the same sex dog,
but a bloke doing the cleaning. I wonder why ?.

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On 30/04/2018 21:15, Woody wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 30/04/2018 17:10, Andrew wrote:

Oh, Chrome says 'This app needs Flash'. Bugger.

It's good stuff is Flash. I did a carpet with it this morning and it
looks terrific.



No Bill, that was 1001. Flash strips you-know-what off the bog!


Actually when I spilt a bucket of really dirty water on my
porridge-coloured berber carpets, the only thing that cleaned
it up was neat liquid Flash.

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On Tuesday, 1 May 2018 11:03:06 UTC+1, Andrew wrote:
On 30/04/2018 20:00, Bill Wright wrote:
On 30/04/2018 17:10, Andrew wrote:

Oh, Chrome says 'This app needs Flash'. Bugger.

It's good stuff is Flash. I did a carpet with it this morning and it
looks terrific.

Bill
Curious that the Flash advert with a talking labradoodle and
a blond female has been replaced by one with the same sex dog,
but a bloke doing the cleaning. I wonder why ?.

Dog could not get an Equity card?

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

On Tuesday, 1 May 2018 02:34:40 UTC+1, wrote:
On 30/04/2018 21:15, Woody wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 30/04/2018 17:10, Andrew wrote:

Oh, Chrome says 'This app needs Flash'. Bugger.

It's good stuff is Flash. I did a carpet with it this morning and it
looks terrific.



No Bill, that was 1001. Flash strips you-know-what off the bog!


"One thousand and one, one thousand and one, cleans a big big carpet,
For less than half a crown!"

Flash did work though.

Bill

Flash does not work. We had a small grill pan fire and greasy black smuts got all over the place in the kitchen.

I set to work with double strenght Flash and a scouring pad and after ten minutes of elbow grease had just about cleaned a patch about the size of my hand in a [laminate] cupboard. Virtually useless.

I went to the cash an carry and bought a bottle of their [non caustic] commercial kitchen cleaner for about a pound. I sprayed it on an affected area, waited a few seconds and wiped off all the greasy grime with a kitchen towel - just like in the Flash adverts.

The basic problem is that anything strong enough to work, could harm the hands of general public purchasers who use it without reading the instructions or wearing rubber gloves.

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

In article ,
Terry Casey wrote:
In article ,
says...

There was, in the early 1990s, a hifi magazine that I'd
though quite reputable until it ran an article which stated
that gold plated mains plugs gave better stereo separation.

Are you sure that it wasn't the April edition?

absolutely

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

Can I, aged 69, really assess hi-fi speakers?
 

Associated Rediffusion, surely?

Compulsorily forced by the ITA (sorry - Independent Television
Authority) to merge with ABC to form Thames Television. At the
same time, the ITA forced the new London Weekend Television to
buy Rediffusion's Wembley studios.

Spot on Terry.

I was there as Associated Rediffusion changed its name to Rediffusion Television following the withdrawal, due to lack of confidence, by Associated Newspapers. At the first contract change the ITA had to remove at least one of the big contractors and picked Rediffusion as it was city financed (whereas the others were media spawned) and the ITA felt that the pain would be easier to bare by a city company.

London Weekend did eventually build their own studios on the South Bank but the Wembley studios provided a good short term fix.

Tony