Most dealers recomend this and it should even say so in the instructions that came with the amp.
I do not know the precise reason for this, but what it means is that because the components are new, they need 'breaking in'. Compare it with any quality product - such as a pair of bespoke leather boots or gloves.
Your new NAD contains only slight variants of the old fashioned MOSFET transistors, which haven't changed in years, because they are the best compared with the newer minaturized circuits. So even after the initial run-in period - many amps are reputed to sound best when they've warmed up to their proper operating temperature. About an hour is usually sufficient. Then you will start to percieve a 'widening' of the stereo effect and slightly deeper, smoother bass.
Varney, I didn't see it in the instructions, but I'm glad he mentioned this to me. Nice to hear about some of the engineering particulars about this NAD amp. I did not know this in regards to transistors. Thank you for sharing that knowledge with me, and for the compliment. :D
A AMP needs "run in" ? I have never heard that and from a electronics background that sounds like BS to me. I know speakers do need to be broke in for the suspension to become more pliable for a better sound and it improves the transient response. The transistors HFE gain and other characteristics of conduction do change very slightly as a amp warms up but to hear a noticable change in the overall sound is unlikely.
All equipment needs running in, whether it's electronic or mechanical. Even cables need running in! It's not BS, just observed fact which is well known in the HiFi industry.
Once the kit is run in, it still needs a warm up period when you switch it on - and the higher end you go, the more time it takes. In many cases, it simply isn't worth turning of a lot of high end kit since th ewarm up period can extend into days.
Tust me when I say a dealer would far rather be able to just plonk some kit in front of you, switch it on and go. If he does that, you're not hearing it at its best. Dealers spend ages running in their demo kit to make sure it's got the best chance of achieving a sale. It's a real killer when you get something like a Naim or a Chord amp or CD player which actually take a couple of weeks to break in and start sounding 'right'. It's a real pain in the butt.
Oh and for looney tunes fringe, how about a cable that takes time to settle? Townshend Audio make a speaker cable called the Isolda DCT. They claim it doesn't need run-in, but it DOES need to settle. I've tried two sets of cable, one which was laid and allowed to settle for a week, the other which I brought into the room and connected. They sounded different. After a another week, the differences had reduced to nothing. Weird...I know it sounds like snake oil again, but it is an observed fact of everyone in the industry.
Keith, 40hours is the minimum on a 773, switched on all the time with a low to medium volume setting and a signal going through it on repeat. Feel free to play stuff loud, but keep something going through it for a week and you'll notice the sound has become more coherent and better controlled.
I may have too many years in electronics to beleave that one! Its a load of crap, can you seriously hear differences in a speaker wire, lol! The cable does need time to break in to become flexible but that don't affect it's conductive properties. If speaker wire mattered so much why don't everyone have solid silver wire. Just run a larger gauge of wire that will be just as good.
Now with the amps electronic i know they do get affected by warming up but for it to be enough to be audible is highly unlikely. Its dificult enough to get a reading with a oscilloscope, then with your ears that are no were near as sensitive!
I have used a pair of darlington transistors in balenced bridge circuit with one in a parabolic reflector. It was to detect radiated heat from short distances. The change was in the micro volts and wasnt that significant. The heat source had to be fairly intense to work. I had tryed it as a personal project years ago to compare the cold and warm difference in a amplifier circuit. To try and prove the urban legend that you say is true. It does hold to be true that it happens to the circuit, but its inaudible to the human ear. Even a side by side camparsion with the same speakers switched back and fourth I doubt a unbiased listener could tell the difference.
Some people have more $$ then brains, send some my way when you need some speaker fluid, or mabe you need some double 00't cable for your sub woofer, LoL.
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
FryGuy.ca - You have unmitigated gaul to tell someone they can't hear what they have just described as their experience. Observation is part of learning and to deny a stated observation is to lessen your ability to learn not the other way around. You are being less than helpful when you begin with the attitude that someone, possibly someone who might consider shopping at your company, is stupid. Maybe you have more money invested in not hearing the differences that can be found by anyone willing to open their ears to what is presented to them. That is most often why your senses get ignored. I have been involved in audio for over 30 years, 25 as a salesperson/technician, and have heard all the crazy ideas and concepts for making your system sound better. Some are about making money for someone, some are about sharing information in an open minded forum and some are system sensitive concepts that when applied to a wide variety of systems are less successful. But I cannot let you tell a forum poster that they have not just experienced what they feel to be fact. I own electronics and accessories that I feel do their job better after they have been allowed to settle into my various systems than I can say follow the opposite path. My system is left on 24/7 because of that effect. I hear what I hear and whether you can measure it doesn't mean I am not hearing this quality of reproduction. Maybe you should get out of the mass market gear that is making you money and step into the world of just listening with an open mind. There are too many people who believe in their ability to hear something that your measurments cannot explain. To simply ignore that fact shows less sense than needed in replying to a question on this forum. To insist that those of us who can hear what you can't measure are foolishly throwing away money is insulting. I am not here to defend costly wires or accessories; but, instead, to prevent you from insulting anyone who disagrees with you. If you wish to continue to present your "informative" articles that is your right as this forum allows diversity of opinion. But please do not insult the intelligence of the other listeners on this forum.
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
And, by the way, the dielectric of a cable will be influenced by the temperature of its environmnet more than the voltage or current running through it. A cable will be more flexible if left, with no signal, in a warm room than a cable with signal in a room 20 degrees cooler. That is a fact. Your scientific observation leaves much to be desired. To use Darlington transistors as your basis for comparison to all other circuits is simliar to comparing the peformance of a lawnmower motor to that of a high performance vehicle. Make valid comparisons or none at all.
I'm being helpful by telling people not to believe the hype that other audiophiles suggest about gear, like speaker wires. I know it's your job with selling audio gear and you take it personally. Speakers do need a break in period and the electronics do need a short time to stabilize. The time for electronics to burn in and stabilize is shorter then you think. By the time the testing and calibration is done it should be almost fully burned in. On power up it does take a short period for it to warm up and stabilize its temperature, but not that long (you got a tube amp?). Wire dielectric properties do change with temperature as does the resistance (you even know what dielectric properties are/is?). But its so minute and won't make much (if any) difference unless its a very long cable run. A magnetic field around the conductor will have more of an effect then temperature will on the over all sound. You honestly believe that your ears can hear something that a dual channel oscilloscope can't see (I can measure the timing of the speed of light with a circuit I made and 20 meters of fibre optic cable, can your ears measure that!), get real.
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
"I'm being helpful by telling people not to believe the hype that other audiophiles suggest about gear ..."
It seems you missed the point of my post. I really don't care what you can measure or what you can hear, or can't, hear. I know what I hear and what I have experienced in my system and others that I have observed. My point was you seem to have the attitude of, "I am right because I can measure it". As I said, I don't give a crap about what you can measure.
Information is what this forum is about. Information can be given freely and without any bias. When information is discredited with the attitude that the poster cannot possibly be sane that crosses the line of civility. If you want to continue to give what you see as information go ahead, I have no desire to stop you are others like you. I have, however, tried to keep my comments civil until I am attacked. If you are going to continue to denigrate the ability and logic of other posters on this forum then you are in the wrong place. Either accept with an open mind what is presented as information or do not post at all. This is not a forum for insulting others.
"The time for electronics to burn in and stabilize is shorter then you think."
How, sir, do you know what I think?
"you got a tube amp?"
Actually I have several tube amps, pre amps and tuners and have, over the course of 30+ years had many tube products to listen to and own. I also have several solid state products, though I wouldn't want any that had Darlington Pairs, and I use them also. What's your point?
"you even know what dielectric properties are/is?"
My, my. I take that as a jab at am I as smart as you? Well, how do you know what I know? I know more than you think, sir. Who knows what is not the point. I grant anyone the fact that they are in possession of knowledge I don't have. You should do the same. This forum is not about who knows more than the next guy. Get off your high horse, you fool. I know that I don't know everything. I also know that when someone says something has been observed I can't tell them it has not. I have respect for other people's opinion, you do not. Don't try that crap with me. That is insulting! AGAIN!
"A magnetic field around the conductor will have more of an effect then temperature will on the over all sound."
What's your point here? That is exactly the logic the objective folks use. It takes time for the dielectric to settle and the magnetic field to stabilize. Don't try to use a false argument here. It shows your ignorance. AGAIN!!!
"You honestly believe that your ears can hear something that a dual channel oscilloscope can't see ..."
Uh, let's review. I think I can hear what I can hear. I don't care what you can measure. Your oscilloscope is a machine, I am not. So I guess that makes my answer, "Yes, so what are you going to do about it; insult me again."
"I can measure the timing of the speed of light with a circuit I made and 20 meters of fibre optic cable, can your ears measure that! ..."
Am I to be impressed by that? That is a mine is bigger than yours attitude that I don't want to be involved with. It's stupid and juvenile and again shows a lack of respect and integrity. Grow up!!!
"get real."
I have been real. You have been extremely rude!
I'm not trying to get into who is correct and who is the fool here. All I ask is that you treat the respondents to this fiorum with a little respect and not insult them or call them liars. That is all I am concerned with. I wish you would do the same.
FryGuy, I think by now it's clarified that in this forum we like to discuss but in a friendly and constructive way. I see measurements as a way to explain why I experience things, and help me looking for certain characteristics at next purchase.
Mr K., did you noticed any "breaking in" for your HK receiver? My Marantz still sounds as good (or bad) as new, IMHO.
"I'm being helpful by telling people not to believe the hype that other audiophiles suggest about gear ...
It seems you missed the point of my post. I really don't care what you can measure or what you can hear, or can't, hear. I know what I hear and what I have experienced in my system and others that I have observed. My point was you seem to have the attitude of, "I am right because I can measure it". As I said, I don't give a crap about what you can measure. "
I thought the point of a stereo was the hear sound and improve on it? Maybe I'm wrong.
"Information is what this forum is about. Information can be given freely and without any bias." That's true a forum is about information to be given freely. You have a bias opinion to only accept what you learned is how works in the real world.
"When information is discredited with the attitude that the poster cannot possibly be sane that crosses the line of civility. "
I apologise for being so upfront and rather rude towards you personally, but the information is not valid in the "real world" perspective of the buyer.
"If you want to continue to give what you see as information go ahead, I have no desire to stop you are others like you. I have, however, tried to keep my comments civil until I am attacked. If you are going to continue to denigrate the ability and logic of other posters on this forum then you are in the wrong place. Either accept with an open mind what is presented as information or do not post at all. This is not a forum for insulting others. "
There are some legitimate points you have mentioned and I agree with you on them. The main point of the discussion was on if you got a better sound after the burn in period. Speakers do need burn in for the suspension (spider and surround) to loosen and become more compliant for proper sound. A amp does need a short burn in to stabilize then a warm up period each use to stabilize the operating temperature. The burn in I agree with to a degree as well as the warm up, but not with the times that you suggested. Again I apologise for the personal verbal assault.
"The time for electronics to burn in and stabilize is shorter then you think.
How, sir, do you know what I think? "
Someone had mentioned warm up times above, that's how.
"you got a tube amp?"
Actually I have several tube amps, pre amps and tuners and have, over the course of 30+ years had many tube products to listen to and own. I also have several solid state products, though I wouldn't want any that had Darlington Pairs, and I use them also. What's your point? "
only that a tube defiantly needs time to heat up. They do sound different until they are at a stable temperature unlike solid state electronics. That's because of the nature of them, that temperature affects the conduction properties more then compared to solid state electronics.
"you even know what dielectric properties are/is?"
My, my. I take that as a jab at am I as smart as you? Well, how do you know what I know? I know more than you think, sir. Who knows what is not the point. I grant anyone the fact that they are in possession of knowledge I don't have. You should do the same. This forum is not about who knows more than the next guy. Get off your high horse, you fool. I know that I don't know everything. I also know that when someone says something has been observed I can't tell them it has not. I have respect for other people's opinion, you do not. Don't try that crap with me. That is insulting! AGAIN! "
It's just that a person that knows about dielectric properties would know its affect on the audio spectrum is non existent. I don't know what you know... but your statements on your facts lead me to wonder. I don't know everything either and I would be a fool to say so. Your field testing must be tainted; it must not be a controlled set of variables for you to get your results. I respect that others have an opinion and I like to challenge them in order to get the real scientific non biased facts. An opinion on gear is only just so good. Most people want to know what actually is better or is going to make a difference, don't you think so?
"A magnetic field around the conductor will have more of an effect then temperature will on the over all sound."
What's your point here? That is exactly the logic the objective folks use. It takes time for the dielectric to settle and the magnetic field to stabilize. Don't try to use a false argument here. It shows your ignorance. AGAIN!!! "
Yes I have an objective point of view I want to know what's really is fact, not what people think is fact! Doesn't everyone want that when they are talking about audio gear and technology in general? I'm not even going to comment on the rest of what you wrote, maybe I will now that you think I'm ignorant. You think I'm ignorant on magnetic fields. You have no idea about a magnetic field around an AC conductor if you think it stabilises, lol.
"You honestly believe that your ears can hear something that a dual channel oscilloscope can't see ...
Uh, let's review. I think I can hear what I can hear. I don't care what you can measure. Your oscilloscope is a machine, I am not. So I guess that makes my answer, "Yes, so what are you going to do about it; insult me again."
No, but I can. Let's just say an oscilloscope can show far more than what you can possibly perceive with your hearing that's fact. When you can hear a RF signal then I'll believe you on that.
"I can measure the timing of the speed of light with a circuit I made and 20 meters of fibre optic cable, can your ears measure that! ...
Am I to be impressed by that? That is a mine is bigger than yours attitude that I don't want to be involved with. It's stupid and juvenile and again shows a lack of respect and integrity. Grow up!!! "
It wasn't intended to impress you; it was an example of the precision timing its capable of and the detailed view of a waveform it can show. I see that you took that personally as a low blow and I fail to see how that's stupid or juvenile. It does however have the possibility of showing a lack of respect towards you with the ending.
"get real.
I have been real. You have been extremely rude! "
That's debatable. Yes I have been a bit rude towards you with my comments I suppose.
I'm not trying to get into who is correct and who is the fool here. All I ask is that you treat the respondents to this forum with a little respect and not insult them or call them liars. That is all I am concerned with. I wish you would do the same."
I'm not trying to prove that either, I admit I did get off on the wrong side of the bed this morning when I answered the posting. I have a heavy scientific approach to everything and you had flipped my switch on the subject. I'm not calling you a liar but I am questioning your results you came to. Again I apologise for the personal comments aimed towards your intelligence.
The following is quoted by Roger Russell, (engineer and executive formerly of McIntosh)--
"The DC resistance of a typical 8-ohm speaker system is about 7 ohms. This resistance is due to the wire in the woofer voice coil. It may be a total shock to some people to know that a typical 8-ohm four layer woofer voice coil contains about 120 feet of number 28 solid copper wire. This wire is all in the circuit with the speaker system hookup wire. It's also much longer than a normal run of hookup wire from the amplifier to the speaker. Even a mid range speaker can have about 30 feet of number 33 solid copper wire and a tweeter can have 20 feet of number 35 solid copper wire."
So unless you are using enormous runs of speaker wire, it borders on being pointless for the consumer to buy any expensive speaker wire. Any well-coated 12-16 gauge wire with clean connections will have far less effect on speaker performance than the wire in the drivers, as this wire is much thicker than that used in the speaker and almost always much shorter.
arnold I did not notice much if anything at all on my hk reciever.
now hk's are generally known for being pretty mellow and laid back. same is usually said about marrantz so you may not notice much as usually when something breaks in they get smoother and if you have something that's pretty mellow to start with it may be hard to tell.
Thanks for your comments folks. I'm going to go with the majority, that it does need a break-in period. I trusted the dealer on this also. Its just that had been the first time I've heard it. I've been fooling around with stereos since I was a kid. As I moved up to higher end equipment I began letting my equipment warm up for around 15-30 min. before I would even start listening to it. I don't even know what started me doing that. Call it electronic common sense?
Since I originally started this thread, I have left my stereo on all day while at work and at night, except when I went to bed. This amp sounds great, so any improvement on the sound is icing on the cake.
I've talked to another person who has been working with stereo equipment for 35 years. He even went furthur to say that some equipment takes over 100 hrs of burn-in before you'll get the best sound, and that it has always been known throughout the industry. It surprised me, being so interested in high end equipment, that I'd never heard this before. There is always something knew to learn!
Good points Kegger. Though I'd say my Marantz is more "linear response" than mellow. Can be edgy on high frequencies, but that's when I mismatch other components (believe it or not, even for just a simple thing as a pair of cheap-o cables for the mains).
Cheers AL
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
I didn't get into this discussion to argue what is right or wrong. Let me say this one more time; you have your "facts" and I have mine. Whether or not we agree on any of them is not important. The only thing that is important on this forum is that all ideas are expressed with a consideration for the other respondents. The issue of can you "hear" cables has been beaten to death on this forum and really needs no further discussion in my opinion. Whatever answers are needed can be found with a little work on the part of the questioner, be that reading or just listening.
If you don't believe what I believe; I leave it to you to decide whether you need to look further or merely file my opinion in the trash. I have had my opinions discarded before and I will again. That doesn't hurt my feelings. It seems disagreement does bother you. That's too bad.
I am only asking that you not discount the observations and experience of other posters simply because you don't believe it to be true. There was a time when most people thought the world to be flat based on scientific theory. Those opinions were in need of a change a while back. So I often have little use for scientific theory that is in disagreement with what I percieve to be true. But I don't discard it and discredit the individual that uses the information to further their knowledge. All I ask is that you provide the same courtesy to those who look to this forum for information. If you want to get into an argument you are looking in the wrong direction here, sir. I am trying to keep this civil. I ask only that you do the same.
****************************
Quickly:
"I thought the point of a stereo was the hear sound and improve on it? Maybe I'm wrong."
You are.
*************************
"I apologise for being so upfront and rather rude towards you personally, but the information is not valid in the "real world" perspective of the buyer."
You were rude; and, the perspective of the buyer is their's, not yours.
*************
"You have a bias opinion to only accept what you learned is how works in the real world."
I have to say I believe the only bias I interjected into this discussion was one of fairness and courtesy to others. I do believe you are reading things into my statements.
*************
"The burn in I agree with to a degree as well as the warm up, but not with the times that you suggested. Again I apologise for the personal verbal assault."
I suggested no time what so ever. You are misreading my statements. I accept the apology and hope you see my point about being rude to other posters.
*******************
"'The time for electronics to burn in and stabilize is shorter then you think.
How, sir, do you know what I think? "
Someone had mentioned warm up times above, that's how.'"
Same answer as above.
*****************
"a tube defiantly needs time to heat up. They do sound different until they are at a stable temperature unlike solid state electronics. That's because of the nature of them, that temperature affects the conduction properties more then compared to solid state electronics."
I disagree. And none of my tubes are defiant; somewhat brash sometimes (they're Russian, you know), but not defiant. No, definitely not defiant.
********************
"It's just that a person that knows about dielectric properties would know its affect on the audio spectrum is non existent."
I disagree and would point you to the white papers on cables by many of the cable manufaturers, AudioQuest being the most predominant. They may have a vested interest in promoting their product but that does not discount their assertions. Does it?
*******************
"Your field testing must be tainted; it must not be a controlled set of variables for you to get your results."
Seems the classic dodge to accuse the other of not being able to set up a trial properly.
**************
"An opinion on gear is only just so good. Most people want to know what actually is better or is going to make a difference, don't you think so?"
I think that is why they turn to forums like this. For informed opinions not hyperbole. But attacking someone who does not share your opinion does no one any service. Let's keep it civil.
*******************
"You think I'm ignorant on magnetic fields. You have no idea about a magnetic field around an AC conductor if you think it stabilises, lol."
It's true, when a curent is flowing through a conductor the magnetic field is in constant flux. My bad for not being more specific. But you are wrong in your assertion. It's not about magnetic fields I think you are poorly versed; but, rather, in how to frame an argument. It is proven by your constant misinterpretations of what I put in print.
By the way, that response was rude also.
*****************
"'You honestly believe that your ears can hear something that a dual channel oscilloscope can't see ...
Uh, let's review. I think I can hear what I can hear. I don't care what you can measure. Your oscilloscope is a machine, I am not. So I guess that makes my answer, "Yes, so what are you going to do about it; insult me again."
No, but I can. Let's just say an oscilloscope can show far more than what you can possibly perceive with your hearing that's fact."
Oh, my, where to start. (Now you have me sounding like Dick Cheney.) Let's repeat; I can hear what I can hear and the oscilloscope is a machine.
And by golly, you did insult me again. This is turning into a habit with you, isn't it?
Let's just say an oscilloscope can show far more that I can hear. I was never fond of listenning to square waves. How about you?
*******************
"When you can hear a RF signal then I'll believe you on that."
I guess I've been away from the bench for too long. Do oscilloscopes hear RF now?
******************
"It wasn't intended to impress you; it was an example of the precision timing its capable of and the detailed view of a waveform it can show."
Let's see. ........ Oh, yeah. I don't give a crap what you can measure.
"I see that you took that personally as a low blow and I fail to see how that's stupid or juvenile."
All I can say is YOU seem awfully thin skinned about all this. Not to mention not too quick to catch on.
**********
"It does however have the possibility of showing a lack of respect towards you with the ending."
You got me. I don't know who's arguing what with that one.
**************
"I'm not trying to get into who is correct and who is the fool here. All I ask is that you treat the respondents to this forum with a little respect and not insult them or call them liars. That is all I am concerned with. I wish you would do the same."
"I'm not trying to prove that either, I admit I did get off on the wrong side of the bed this morning when I answered the posting."
Yes, you did, and THAT was the reason for my post. Nothing else.
******************
"I have a heavy scientific approach to everything and you had flipped my switch on the subject."
Sorry to hear you have a scientific bent towards being civil. That's a dangerous disease.
********************
"I'm not calling you a liar but I am questioning your results you came to. Again I apologise for the personal comments aimed towards your intelligence."
No, I think you were calling me a liar. But it didn't bother me as long as I thought you just disagreed with my opinions on how to respond in this forum. Now that I find you think you insulted my intelligence, I'm REALLY steamed!!!!!
*****************
I see no reason to cary on this game. If you would please just keep in mind that everyone here has an opinion and it gets to be heard without being attacked this can be fun. Just sate your opinion without saying someone else's opinion is a load of crap. OK?
******************
"'The DC resistance of a typical 8-ohm speaker system ...'"
Gregory, glad to see you're still here. But what the heck does that have to do with break in time. That was the subject, old boy.
JV that has got to be your best post yet! I laughed so hard my ribs hurt! You are so self centered its funny. BTW you must be stuck in time when they had 250 kHz scopes, they are will into the GHz range now! That's into the well into the RF spectrum.
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Ah, my trusty little indian buddy. I hope you haven't been drinkin'; you know how you get when you've had a few.
I got to get to bed, peoples ignorence makes me tired.
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
"JV that has got to be your best post yet! I laughed so hard my ribs hurt! You are so self centered its funny. BTW you must be stuck in time when they had 250 kHz scopes, they are will into the GHz range now! That's into the well into the RF spectrum."
Glad I could offer a chuckle. But I still don't think oscilloscopes can hear RF.
Far be it for me to want to enter into a slanging match over some bits of copper and plastic, as I have bigger fish to fry.... Please excuse the unintended pun, FryGuy!
First, Fryguy, let me thank you for your your answer to my 'impedance / bi-amping question. I now feel I am making the best out of my two amps. It sounds very good and I have peace of mind.
To be fair, I have a tendency to think a few things about your position on the cabling quality debate.
Firstly, if I'm not too mistaken, it seems you spend a lot of time at the test bench and, although obviously knowledgable in both theory and practice, I wonder how much time you have to actually sit down and listen in a quiet room, to a system without any other distractions. I believe there are those who listen to their music and those who listen to hi-fi. I think I make a valid distinction there.
Another factor may be the type of gear you generally deal with and use personally. Much of today's mass market electronics are miniturized, to the point that I'm sure they will all sound alike and perhaps won't measure up to many audiophile standards. I see you mention tubes and solid state, so perhaps I am wrong there - but the point is: How much time is actually spent listening over and again, intently to the music through different setups? Testing aside - your ears and brain combine to form a different kind of instrument entirely to any testing aparatus you have in your workshop.
I also notice, from our discussions in the car-amp thread, that you are very much the make and mend type. I've already said I applaud this - but my question is why, if you disbelieve so much in cable differences, would you even bother spending on such cable, only to be proved right - that there is no difference? Therefore, I venture that you haven't really sat down and tasted the pudding with all available flavour toppings to see which is the nicer.
If, for instance you spend a lot of time playing with car amps, is it remotely possible you haven't spend a lot of time sitting in a stationary car without the engine running? There are all sorts of distractions from the music whilst driving, such as vibration, outside noise, noise from the engine and your mind may often be more on the traffic, rather than on the intricaces of Schubert's strings.
Which brings me on to the last point. I believe these subtleties are more likely to be found in intricate music, rather than dance, techno, rave, HM or many of the so called 'driving music' I'd pick for a stonk down the M5.
When I'm at home in the studio, I'm surrounded by virtual silence and am in a totally different listening environment to the car, or a workshop for that matter. Cars tend to be full of soft furnishings which are known to absorb bass and so you might be forgiven for skimping on absolute quality when the listening environment destroys the subtleties. What would be the point?
In the studio, I'm more focussed, more relaxed and I'm not listening to the hi-fi so much anymore - I'm listening to the music. Even with the relatively cheap gear I can afford, I can definitely say my quality interconnects are worth the money, even if I'd had to buy them at normal RRP, for this very reason. My music system doesn't just get used - it's on almost 24-7 if I have to work long hours. With a few silent breaks, I'm really getting down and listening for long periods.
I'm not interested in having an argument about this - I'm simply putting forward some possibilities as to why quality cabling might not be for everyone and every single listening circumstance.
Word! You do have good points and where I spend most of my time in the car audio section that would lead you to those assumptions. I just like the car audio section because they generally are the ones with the most problems due to bridging, impedance matching, etc. I also love to take crap (lower end gear) and make it sound like a $3000+ system, not that it will ever replace one because it can't. There are so many variables with a system that need to be controlled for accurate measurements. Yes the over all measurement to use is your ears. But to think that an expensive scope can't see what you're hearing for a comparison is a bit off base. Sure the scientific method is my way but I do also listen to my music to appreciate it, not just a test bench jock. I also like to bust myths and compare with that of other people, just to prove them right or wrong. I just get set off a bit when something like "oxygen free copper wire sounds better" is mentioned and "that the human ear can tell the difference between a 196kbps+ MP3 and a CD" these are old and have been proven over and over to be false. I know it's a pet peeve of mine. The human ear isn't that sensitive and its spectrum is very narrow. A DB meter can have a resolution of 0.1 DB or greater on some, I wish the ear was that sensitive. An oscilloscope and Frequency Analyser can show things in the wave form far before the ear can perceive it. If you have a bit of electronics background and worked with audio gear for a few years, I'm sure you would know where I'm coming from. Then take a close look at the previous postings, you'll see things that are amiss. (This is not to start an argument. I have better more constructive things to do with my time and I'm sure you do too.)
Now i'm to bed after reading all my e-mail, to hell with the rest its going to have to wait. lol. catch you later tomorow.
I don't have a background in electronics or audio, yet I can see where you are coming from.
I take a stance which suits me and my setup really, by matching the quality of the gear with no more or less quality than is needed for the pricerange of audio I'm using.
I just feel the wire must be the weakest link especially when a lot of time and effort has been spent in the design of these contraptions. The designer has perhaps put in good internal cabling and skimped on the facia to make a good performer at the price. I would want to maximise the potential of the system, without getting too sucked in to the hype surrounding ancillaries.
While I'm on this, I might start a thread on the advantages of 'spikes' and rubber balls under yer speakers. I want to build some nice hardwood platforms for my floorstanders you see - and see how some 10inch nails work underneath the lot.
I agree with you on most of those points. I'm not saying that there aren't valid points mentioned above by the other posters. Just that the effect the things have on the sound is so minimal its hard to measure and you defiantly can't hear it. The cones or balls I can't argue about, if that what you were getting at with "I'm sure you can't resist that one". They do make a measurable and very noticeable change in your sound. That's a fact and I myself have cones under my speakers because they are on a wooden floor, which has widely spaced joists that worsens the resonance problem. It's under used in speaker systems for sure. Though people with a solid concrete floor probably won't notice any difference when compared to just some thick felt pads. Just because solid concrete don't vibrate easily (yes it can and does), so the box itself is more likely to colour your sound (Concrete and rebar speaker box, anyone? -- that's a very bad joke). Is that what you were looking for?
Ah yes.... I have a solid concrete floor! A friend told me this was (almost) the best thing for floorstanders. I am about to make a bunch of mini sand bags to drop down inside the cab and then pop 'em on home made spikes. I'm not paying for a lump of wood with spikes in.... No way!
V
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
"I also love to take crap (lower end gear) ..."
Please, lower end gear would have sufficed.
***********
"I also like to bust myths and compare with that of other people, just to prove them right or wrong. I just get set off a bit ..."
" I know it's a pet peeve of mine."
Why, what are you trying to prove? Why not let everyone have an opinion?
************
"An oscilloscope and Frequency Analyser can show things in the wave form far before the ear can perceive it. If you have a bit of electronics background and worked with audio gear for a few years, I'm sure you would know where I'm coming from."
I have, probably more years than you, son, and I do. And it's boring to be around someone like you.
****************
"Then take a close look at the previous postings, you'll see things that are amiss."
?
***********
"This is not to start an argument."
No, you are continuing to argue.
************
" ... you defiantly can't hear it."
Good Lord, learn to spell.
**************
"a scope can show "or hear" an RF wave form."
I drew a picture and my friend heard it. Look, a scope can represent a waveform, it cannot hear it. If it does, there are problems and it needs to be serviced.
Stop beating a dead horse. Just answer a question and go on with your life.
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Varney - Be careful with putting sand bags inside the speaker cabinet. You will be changing the volume of the cabinet. The three basic factors that a designer works with are efficiency of the system, bass extension and cabinet volume. By changing one, you affect the other two. You will not change the efficiency of the system, that is determined by the drivers and the X-over. You will affect the bass extension if you now change the cabinet volume. You may end up with tighter bass response but not as much bass extension. I've seen this tweak mentioned and have always wondered why it was considered a good option when there are much more effective ways to accomplish what you are trying to do.
Honestly, I don't know where I'd be without this forum....
I didn't stop to think about internal volume of the box. Actually, come to think of it - I was starting to wonder about the sandbags getting in the way of the rear firing port. I have yet to discover if it's a speaker, or simply a hole in the rear, driven by the air pressure inside the cabinet.
They do wobble around, 'cos they are not the most expensive speakers on the planet. I do think they could be improved upon at relatively little cost.
So, do you think it would be a better idea to make some weights to put on the top? I saw some advertised years ago, but I'm handy enough with wood to make some nice matching boxes that can sit on the top. Fill 'em with sand, or perhaps even cast in some concrete; lead; bricks - god - anything would do as long as they're heavy and stained nicely to match.
Thankyou for warning me about this.
V
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Excuse the sound of the response; but, what you do depends upon what you are trying to do. In other words, if you are merely trying to add mass to the speaker, you can easily achieve that goal by placing weight on the top of the speaker cabinet. Two things to consider though are; 1) is the speaker well secured to the surface it sits on and 2) will weight at the top make the speaker unstable? First, by using spikes you are mass loading the speaker to the surface beneath the cabinet. You have taken whatever weight the speaker has and you have put all of it on the tip of a few spikes. That means the effective mass loading is greater than the weight of the speaker. Kind of like the idea that a runner puts several hundred pounds of pressure on their knees and heels each time they put their foot down. So those spikes are important when they are levelled and placed on a solid surface. The way to tell whether you have achieved the desired results with spikes is to, before the spikes are in place, push on the top of the cabinet in several directions to see how much movement you can elicit with the speaker just sitting on the floor. Most speakers will have some play in this area. When you have the spikes in place and levelled, try pushing again and it should feel, if things were done correctly, as if the speaker is bolted to the floor. This works the same no matter the weight of the speaker itself. If the speaker still wobbles in the slightest amount without you trying to push it over, you need to do more to level the spikes until you get the locked in feel. The idea of puting the speaker on top of felt pads is counterintuitive to what spikes are trying to achieve. Allowing the speaker to have movement in the cabinet will decrease the focus of the speaker as it will want to wobble when you play music above a whisper. The decoupling is OK if you're in an apartment and not trying to meet your neighbors at 2 A.M. but, otherwise you want the speakers to be secured in their position. Second, by placing the weight on top of the speaker you are placing mass at the point where it is the most likely to make the speaker unstable. The lower the center of gravity the better, the higher the C.O.G. the less stable the speaker will become. So a weight on top of the speaker may help some but, it has the potential to do damage to what you are trying to achieve with the spikes. Remember that the spikes are securing the speaker to the floor with a downward force that is greater than the weight of the cabinet, so you have "increased" the mass of the speaker in virtual terms with the spikes. How much will additional weight help? Well, only you can tell. I think I would just try some weight on top of the speaker and see what you think you are hearing. If the weight is helping just by being weight then you can think about how to make that weight work without making the cabinet less stable. If, on the other hand, the weight is acting as a damping device and taking down cabinet vibrations, then, no matter how much weight you add, you still have a cabinet that is making noise. This is much more common than a speaker that just needs more mass. I've used bags of lead shot and/or diver's weights to tame the boxes on speakers; but, of course, each case of how to go about this is different depending on the speaker and the "look" that is acceptable. Not everyone is going to enjoy 10 Lb. diver's weights sitting on top of their speakers. Of course, if they were enclosed in a nice box with some sand poured in around the weight to keep it from resonating/vibrating that might work. The vibrations in cabinets are usually worse on the long panels (normally the sides) and you have to decide how to deal with that on a case by case situation. It works well, with bookshelf speakers, to turn the speaker on its side and use weights on the side panels.
There's a good junk of information. Think and cogitate a bit and then, if you have questions or ideas that you want to run by me, let me know.
Let me add this postscript, if you want to add something to the bottom of the speaker you can use what is called BluTak or PlastiTak, etc., and this will create a bond that is very strong, does not allow lateral movement, but, will allow you to lift the speaker off the base easily. You can find this material at hardware stores or from several of the after market audio stores like Audio Advisor.
Thankyou again for such another detailed and informative answer, J.
I'll be thinking about it in terms of less weight now, probably. The only way to really find out is to experiment - and experiment I will.
I've decided to start with the spiked platforms and work my way up from there - if necessary.
Hah! Blu-Tack is indeed very useful. Household name, here in the UK! I use loads of it in the studio for a myriad securing purposes. One less well known use for this stuff, is that it makes THE most superior pencil erasor for picking subtle highlights in detailed drawings - and it's cheaper than putty rubbers.
Anyway, I digress....
Regards,
V
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Just a reminder. Don't change the height of the speaker too much. Depending on the tweeters in your speakers you may cause the high frequencies to roll of if you raise the tweeter too much above ear level. And instead of nails why don't you go to a sporting goods store and get some arrow tips.
Yes - I have a pair of Gale Minis that are slightly above ear level in the computer room on shelves. They are about as high as they can go before the treble rolls off. Sadly no room for stands, so may be making/buying brackets / dedicated shelves for each.
Can you PLEASE stop the arguing? J. Vigne, thanks very much for jumping to my defence, but please stop it!
FryGuy, I apologize for tweaking your nose on what is obviously one of your pet peeves. I'm saddened that you didn't take my observations at face value. They were offered as a "what a strange world we live in" rather than a "take this for your useless oscilloscope".
The thing about wire is that different configurations contribute to different results. These are repeatable consistent results. My observations are borne of 8 years in the HiFi industry as a retailer. I always use particular combinations of electronics/wire because over time, I've worked out which work best. I'm sad that you think that any changes of wire would only result in very small changes. My experience tells me that a Chord Electronics amp driving Naim NACA5 wire is a hopeless combination, whereas the same wire driving Townshend Isolda is a great combination. To me, the difference would be enough to make the combination either worth buying or not, so I believe it makes a big difference. This isn't belief through perceived 'wisdom' on the 'net or through magazines. This is something I worked out myself - even Chord didn't know about it.
There are those (and I'm one) who will tell you that if the speaker cables aren't a matched length, then you'll get phase problems and the system will sound wrong. If this were true then all that wire in the speaker counts for nought in terms of length. I believe this is true because I've heard the difference it makes, and I believe the extra wire in the speaker goes to make up the speaker components which have an overall effect of capacitance and resistance, and have nothing to do with the effect that a speaker cable can have on the system because they are performing different functions.
As to the break-in issue, I had it from a TAG McLaren engineer that they could actually measure break-in on their amps. He didn't give me the details but that was a real surprise because up until then I had never heard of break-in (or running-in) being measurable, and it remains a unique comment - no other manufacturer has been able to measure it.
Finally, on the subject of human hearing, we are still learning what and how humans do hear things, and the human ear is one of the least understood organs in the human body. However, there are also debates in medical circles about whether we listen with just our ears. There is one theory that says that tall people are more sensitive to bass because their physical size allows them to resonate more with the bass note that's being 'heard'. There is another theory going round which says that the middle ear is sensitive to 80khz. I remember Ken Ishiwata (Marantz) saying that in tests, he found that the only time he couldn't discern differences in sound quality on a given set of equipment, was when he had a sampling rate above 500khz.
None of these are more than theory or observation. If you wish to discuss further, in a reasoned sensible tone, feel free to do so, but please stop the slanging match - especially since I was the original party who got 'told off' by FryGuy.
I think the way it's turned out, it's a very informative debate. If we were ever unsure as to whether these issues were myth or reality, there is at least plenty to read and make up your own mind from.
I'm afraid there are many, like myself, who wouldn't be able to measure anything; the only 'testing' instruments available to us being our ears and our only info sources being that coming from the mouths of dealers and the pens of reviewers.
Some Quantum physisists claim that because a wave stops doing whatever it was doing, when it is observed; then carries on again when you 'look away'; that there must be some kind of intelligence in the base matter of our universe. Well, you can make what the hell you like of that one! - Or perhaps you can assume the equipment is interfering somehow with the natural effects of the wave?
Trust your ears. How do you know THEY don't need time to settle and 'run in' to the particular character of the new equipment you've just bought? How would you go about testing THAT?
The brain is probably the most complex part of the whole system, and you should count them as components of it - without which the system would not work.
I'm probably babbling complete nonsense now - but then perhaps I have a point? I don't even know myself, so It's up to you to decide.
V
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Frank - Sorry I jumped in your puddle. I thought the forum allowed input from anyone. I really wasn't trying to defend anyone or any position. If you can't take the answer you get, don't bring up the subject. Correct? I didn't care if your feelings were hurt. My original post was made to ask for civility. When the response to my post seemed, to me, to be directed at my intelligence I thought I would respond. (Being insulted is one of my pet peeves.) I have no interest in a slanging match. You seem capable of defending your position. I would be happy to enter into a discussion that is carried on in a reasoned and sensible tone. That was all I was trying to achieve in my first post.
I believe instruments are meant for testing and calibration and other things in this catagory, to fine tune the units for a final result...the human ear, which is the final complete test. Even then, and more so for the audiophile, you have to train your ears to listen to enjoy your music to the fullest. This is my belief, but may not be your own.
