[nathanm]

I can't tell if you're serious about the rope caulk and expanding foam?

Well no, but don't let that stop you from maximizing performance using Josephonian techniques!

My ceiling is totally packed w/ standard yellow fiberglass insul. above my audio room. There's nothing else in that area. Does that mean anything to you vs. expanded foam?

Oh yes, that's very good, but not quite as effective (nor as practical) as 1000 cans of expanding foam sprayed up there.  Besides, congealed yellow stalagtites of Great Stuff hanging down from above has incredible WAF.

'IF' you're serious about the rope caulk, are you saying to wrap all my wires in caulk to sheild them all?

Well, I am not a Wire Damping Expert myself, but from what I have learned from the masters is that this will damp external vibrations as well as guard your audio from evil spirits, gamma rays and Chupacabra attacks.  It also serves as a powerful attractant of dirt and hair, which enhances dielectric absorption.  Remember, electricity flows through wires like a vibrating guitar string.  Good luck!

[randytsuch]

Hi,

A few more thoughts.

On digital vs analog volume control.  An analog control will just attenuate the signal, just make it smaller if you will.  A perfect analog volume control will produce an exact copy of the signal, only smaller.   Obviously, nothing is perfect, a good volume control won’t mess up things too much.

A digital control chops off the lower order bits to attenuate the signal.  The effect of this is the output signal will have little steps in it, because with the lower order bits missing, it is harder to replicate the input signal.  Another way of looking at it is if you have 15 bits versus 16 bits of data, the 15 bit data can only have 50% of the information of the 16 bit data.  14 bits would be 25% of the information.  Ends up the two data words that would be different in a 16 bit data word could be the same in the 15 bit data word.  This is what causes the little steps as you drop bits of data.  As you drop more bits, it gets harder to track the input signal, and the output signal looks more and more jagged.

What this does to the sound I cannot say, but it can’t be a good thing, in the end.

Not sure how many bits you are dropping, don’t know how to get from DB to bits.  What I do know is a 16 bit data word can go up to 65,536.  This value would equal full scale, if you measured the full scale output.  Then, if you measure the –6db output, and create a ratio to the full scale output, then you could figure out how many data bits you lost.

Randy

[azryan]

Oxia,

I had been wondering about input/output matching for a long time and had specifically asked about it here and got no technical responces, so I'm glad you posted those comments about imp. matching.

The Outlaw's rated at less than 600 Ohms so I guess that's not 30 but it's in the 10:1 range you mentioned.
BTW... the eAR manual doesn't list output imp. Did Peter tell you that number?

The cheapo Pio. (suprise suprise) doesn't list anything in the manual, but I don't find any high end roll off in either the Outlaw or the Pio. so if you were saying that's a prob. you might find if the Pio.'s got a high output Imp. then I think I'm ok.
If anything (since nothing's perfect) they both tilt on the brighter not warmer side of nuetral I'd say.

Randy,
can you point me maybe to any link about that digital vs. analog volume? I'd like to look up more about it.

I know 1 bit is 6db or dynamic range so 16 bit is 96 and 24 bit is 144, but since no player can actually output that high a S/N ratio they say the best DVD-A/SACD players are only 18 to 19 bit max resolution.

I'm still thinking the 'bits' that are dropped w/ digital volume are the bottom more inaudible levels of information and since you're making the overall volume lower you couldn't hear what's dropped anyway over the high level info (the rest of the info)?

Analog obviouly working in a totally diff. way, but I thought the same result. Hmmm?
I guess I'll have to find more info about what the output signal looks like w/ digital volume control. Like you're saying it gets more 'jagged'.

But I'm thinking that's like a non-oversampled non filtered 16 PCM output. If you've seen pictures of measurments of that it's REALLY jagged, but your ear actually can't tell, plus your speakers can't recreate that either so it ends up being a smooth analog wave that you actually hear.

Hmmm... I gotta read more on this before I open my mouth again though! heh

Thanks

[audiojerry]

But I'm thinking that's like a non-oversampled non filtered 16 PCM output. If you've seen pictures of measurments of that it's REALLY jagged, but your ear actually can't tell, plus your speakers can't recreate that either so it ends up being a smooth analog wave that you actually hear.

That's definitely being ANAL-ytical!  
I'm not sure you mean. Does this mean that once speakers have converted the signal to sound waves, the human ear can't tell that the source of the music is digital? I'm sure you're not suggesting that, are you?

Assuming that we can all hear the difference between an analog source and a digital source, I think it makes sense that a digital volume control will leave a sonic signature that differs from an analog control, even if both are flawed.

Similarly, it's generally easy to hear the difference between a tubed output stage and a mosfet or bi-polar. Solid state devices generally measure better, but the tubed device is generally much less stressful to listen to, despite the presence of high measured distortion. I bring this up because you advocate measurements to support or justify what we hear. This is not always possible. Some folks strongly favor the sound of tubes, while others strongly feel the opposite. No measurement tools can explain this phenomenon.      

My point is that perhaps all of your careful, painstaking analysis is being corrupted by the Pioneer cdp (sorry, I thought the Pio was your preamp), and by your multi-channel? preamp. I suggest trying to replace both pieces with others that are considered an upgrade. There are several sources that offer very generous trial periods.

We can agree to disagree, but I still emphatically hold to the notion that one's final determination on the merits of any component evaluation is whether the overall music experience was enhanced, disregarding all the details. Yes, analysis of the finer points is valid and has it's place. Looking specifically to hear if symbols or sibilants sound right, evaluating bass control or image specificity, or vocal nasalness, are valid aspects when comparing the performance of one component against another. But after all the analysis is done, one must spend a significant amount of time as a music listener and nothing else. I have found that often, though not a majority of the time, the music listener in me could not support my detailed analysis, and the music listener always has the final say-so.

This has been a good discussion, and no one has started any denegrating,
contentious bickering or name calling yet...

[Oxia]

The Outlaw's rated at less than 600 Ohms so I guess that's not 30 but it's in the 10:1 range you mentioned.
BTW... the eAR manual doesn't list output imp. Did Peter tell you that number?

Azryan,

600 ohms is high enough to potentially be a concern, especially if you're using long cables between your amp and preamp. The longer your cables are, the higher its capacitance will be, and the more likely you'll experience rolloff especially given a marginal impedance match. I think it's best if you email Peter to ask him what his feelings are on the matter. You should ask him if your preamp's output impedance is an acceptable match with the eAR.

I had another thought after I considered the seemingly contradictory experience you have, in that you don't preceive your Pioneer & Outlaw combo to lack HF, and in fact you feel that they are on the bright side of neutral. I wonder if you've ever tried your Pioneer in a friend's system that you know has a neutral to warm balance, just to see if your DVD player is bright. The funny thing is that if you really are getting HF rolloff in your system due to a bad impedance match, it may perversely work out in your favour by disguising any brightness that may exist in your front end.

BTW, the 8500 ohms input impedance for the eARTwo was posted by Peter on HD a while ago.

[Juan R]

I do not know about that specific dvd but I have  the 47a universal, few months ago I had a conversation with Modwright, his comment was tha the pioneer are famous for low output. And was right because I noted the diference with the Marantz 8260.

[randytsuch]

Hi,
Sorry, can't give you any webpage links to look it up at.  The stuff I said was just stuff I made up   .  Seriously, I just know that stuff, but you might find more info if you search at diyaudio and AA.

And BTW, I agree with audiojerry, I would think the digititus people complain about could easily be caused by the jags caused by only having 16 bits of resolution.  That's where analog has an advantage.

Good luck,
Randy

[eico1]

Randy, you should check out dither if straight 16 bits is killing you. On a technical comparison, digital 16 bits with dither is not much problem...

steve

[azryan]

Jerry,

Hmm... I do think we're kinda on two diff. sides of a fence, and I'm sure we can't convince the other to 'defect' in this thread! heh

There's the pretty famous test where the head of Linn had his turntable sent clean to his speakers, and then passed through a A/D/A conversion and he couldn't tell the diff.

And then Linn started making CD players (and highly raved about ones). I think that's the story?

What I was saying about the very rough measured signal from an unfiltered digital output is that a speaker can't recreate that 'jagged' digital signal. It has to convert the signal to an analog wave.

Also, that's what your ears do so you can't hear the 'jaggies' in the measurment.

If you like vinyl (pure analog) better than CD's that's a diff. topic than what I'm saying.
There are certainly lots of traits/factors to a digital signal and vinyl that go beyond bits vs. grooves.

"-I bring this up because you advocate measurements to support or justify what we hear.-"

Well. kinda. Mostly. I certainly don't claim I'm sure that's correct or that we can in fact measure every possible variable, but we can measure a great deal of them right?

"-This is not always possible. Some folks strongly favor the sound of tubes, while others strongly feel the opposite. No measurement tools can explain this phenomenon.-"

Hmm... at least somewhat I think there are.
S'Phile (not that I dig that rag) often measures assorted tube amps and solid state and I've seen the PS Audio digital amp measured there, and you can totally see the diff. in the square waves they produce and other assorted measurments like what they output at diff. ohms etc...
I don't think we know enough to read those and understand what then the amps 'sound' like, but I do think they say something as far as 'see.., we can show they ARE different.'

I've seen several tube amps in there recently and they all round off the square wave. And overall freq. response isn't what most solid state are.
They just reviewed a Levinson SS amp and it's square wave was almost dead square.
That PS Audio's wave overshot/peaked the corner of the wave.

And they never measure turntables that I've seen? Not that I use a turntable.

Anyway...

you said -"My point is that perhaps all of your careful, painstaking analysis is being corrupted by the Pioneer cdp (sorry, I thought the Pio was your preamp), and by your multi-channel? preamp. I suggest trying to replace both pieces with others that are considered an upgrade. There are several sources that offer very generous trial periods.-"

Yeah. That's exactly the thought in my head that got me to try the M.F. DAC, and assorted combos of the two cheaper components and I said the results so far, so I'll just have to think about getting a AC approves preamp and DAC at the same time in my system.

While there are trial periods for those things, trying to get both at the same time I think might be a bi- uh... hassle. heh

"-We can agree to disagree, but I still emphatically hold to the notion that one's final determination on the merits of any component evaluation is whether the overall music experience was enhanced, disregarding all the details.-"

That I totally agree with that. Maybe I was not clear. sorry.

My thing is that since each 'thing' effects the sound tilting it this or that way that it seems like it'd be easy to randomly get this of that 'thing' and then the next and the next all based on flat out sounding better to you, BUT what if some other 'thing' was actually more accurate and sounded better, BUT not in your system because of some other 'thing'.

Ok... that was confusing to me even! heh

Oxia,

"-600 ohms is high enough to potentially be a concern, especially if you're using long cables between your amp and preamp.-"

I thought you said ~10:1 was good?

"-The longer your cables are, the higher its capacitance will be, and the more likely you'll experience rolloff especially given a marginal impedance match.-"

And capacitance would roll off the bass right? Anyway... the Outlaw cables are 1/2 meter. But would say a 1 meter cable really add much capasitance to be audible?

"-I think it's best if you email Peter to ask him what his feelings are on the matter.-"

Hmmm.... I have a feeling his feeling would be that I should buy his preamp! hehe

"-You should ask him if your preamp's output impedance is an acceptable match with the eAR."

I think I'll ask 'what is a correct imp. range to match'.

"-I had another thought after I considered the seemingly contradictory experience you have, in that you don't preceive your Pioneer & Outlaw combo to lack HF, and in fact you feel that they are on the bright side of neutral.-"

I thought someone might take that like that.

I don't think my system sounds bright at all. Not in the least, but was just saying that 'if anything' it tilts on bright, not rolled off, dull, warm, etc...

Sorry. I couldn't think of a better way to word that.

I know my system didn't sound any birghter to me of my buddy when we heard the rm-40's in town here, but those have l-pads to adjust the mids and super tweeters. It was set to what other owners typically seem to have them set to though?

"-I wonder if you've ever tried your Pioneer in a friend's system that you know has a neutral to warm balance,-"

No. I don't know anyone with a high end system. And really, without measuring it, how do you say which is correct beyond preference right?
 
"-just to see if your DVD player is bright. The funny thing is that if you really are getting HF rolloff in your system due to a bad impedance match, it may perversely work out in your favour by disguising any brightness that may exist in your front end.-"

I have thought of that myself. Good point. I was thinking that this might be along the lines of people swapping this or that cable which isn't designed to be (or just doesn't happen to be flat) and slightly e.q.-ing their sound that way?

Boy, for no fights in this thread so far, I'm sure opening several big ass cans 'o worms 'eh?

Anyway...
Thanks everybody!

I'm actually very happy where I'm at so I think I need to just accept that and deal with it! heh

But the sickness is fighting me!! Upgrade! Upgrade! heh

[wshuff]

I believe that you have hit the wall, more or less, and are now flat up against the old point of diminishing returns.  What you need to do, in order to satisfy your desire to upgrade and tweak, is start all over.  The general consensus seems to be the the Outlaw is a weak link, so keep that as a nice starting point, and the Pioneer you can keep since it is a budget player.  But the eAR amp and those speakers, well...they are holding you back from really improving.  They are too good (for you), but don't worry, I have a suggestion.  In order to help you out, I propose that you box up that eAR amp and crate those Alphas and I'll send you my address.  In return I'll send you an amp and speakers that more evenly match your Outlaw and Pioneer.  Deal?  

[audiojerry]

Ryan, are we getting closer to being on the same page.  

Let's try to clear up a couple more points:

S'Phile (not that I dig that rag) often measures assorted tube amps and solid state and I've seen the PS Audio digital amp measured there, and you can totally see the diff. in the square waves they produce and other assorted measurments like what they output at diff. ohms etc...
I don't think we know enough to read those and understand what then the amps 'sound' like, but I do think they say something as far as 'see.., we can show they ARE different.'

I've seen several tube amps in there recently and they all round off the square wave. And overall freq. response isn't what most solid state are.
They just reviewed a Levinson SS amp and it's square wave was almost dead square.

I guess the point I was trying to make wasn't very clear. I completely agree that SS amps almost always measure better than tubed amps. Tube amps never get the square wave right. Based on measurements such as those performed by s'phile, the SS is clearly a superior technology. I'm aware of these measurements, as are most bottle amp owners. Yet we chose to own tube amps in spite of poor measurements, maintenance issues, and other idiosyncracies. Why? Because they seem to satisy some sort of internal musical requirement for us. We are apparently hearing something good in the tube amp that overrides the measurement  shortcomings. Conversely, we are hearing something in the SS amp that troubles us despite its glowing measured performance.
Your Ear2 may be fantastic, I'd love to hear it, but I consider it a newer technology than traditional SS.

I have also owned many speakers. Some have had great measurements, while others have been diss'd by Stereophile. An example was the Red Rose R3 monitor, which used a Dynaudio 5 1/4" midbass and a ribbon tweeter. JA did not have much good to write about this speaker, but I enjoyed it thoroughly.

My point is that it's good to be concerned with measurements, but I would not let measurements dictate to me which components to consider, except perhaps dacs. I have never heard a dac or cd player that had less than great measurements that I liked.            

Like Wshuff and I suggested, you may be into diminishing returns territory. A great amp and speakers definitely completes a major portion of the puzzle, but getting the smaller pieces to fit can still incrementally elevate your pleasure, but only you (and your wife?) can know if it makes enough of a difference to go through the effort. But if you are as obsessed as most audiophiles, you are nowhere near done tweaking.  

[wshuff]

See, AudioJerry agrees with me!

[Best Jedi mind trick voice] Send you equipment to me.  You don't need it anymore.

[azryan]

Jerry,

Yeah, I think we're going along the same lines in some ways and just disagree on others. That's cool though.
Diff. issuse, but I'm still thinking it's at least part of that smoother rounding sound of tube amp and their measured harmonic distortion that's adding anf filtering the audio in a way some people totally love.

And hey, no crime in that. I'm thinking it's not so much a 'mystery' though like you seem to be saying, but we're not too far apart I guess.

Wshuff,

Sorry. Keep dreamin'! hehe

Stay tuned for my new can 'o worm opening thread about TRON bikes!
You'll see....