[Scotty]

Just dealing with the subject of amplifiers.  As long as amplifiers which measure well and sound bad can still be built it is arguable that perhaps our understanding of what needs to be measured and our measurement tools could stand some improvement. The thread referring to this article was only read 730 times.
The article details some of the procedures used by the IC industry to determine what a chip sounds like and what makes a good sounding product. Listening panels composed of Golden Ears are used by TI to decide if the their product is competitive and has the desired house sound.
Here is the link again. http://www.edn.com/article/CA6418209.html?nid=2431&rid=243880419#Can%20you%20even%20measure%20that?
Empirically speaking,I have found that the composition of a 6in long piece of hookup wire used between the RCA jack and the selector switch in a preamp can have a noticeable impact on the sound quality of the preamp. I don't care why or how wire effects the sound,I use the best sounding piece of wire
for this application I can find and move on. It is easier and faster than denying reality.
Scotty

[rabpaul]

Synergy = working well together.

There are things that you can measure to indicate if some components will work together.
A speaker's lowest impedence has to be matched with the ability of that amp to be able to deliver power at that low impedence otherwise the amp will clip.
A speaker's efficiency becomes very important if you happen to match it with a low watt amp.
A pre's output impedences become important when matching with a power amp.
Etc.

Things you can measure however are by no means any indicator that two components or more will actually have synergy that appeals to you. Combinations of components are  usually based on trial and error, chance, the experiance of others, reviews and manufacturers recommendations.

Synergy cannot be measured but you can arm yourself with some information to ensure that there is an even chance that they will be at least electronically compatible.

[BubbleChamber]

Wow, just revisited the forum and I am overwhelmed by the amount of responses. Thank all of you for your inputs. Some are helpful, some are knowledgeable and some are just flat out funny.

I didn’t realize the topic could bring up a debate on measurability and subjectivity. But the posts are quite interesting and there is a lot being learned. I am fairly new to AudioCircle and still learning to be an audiophile like most of you folks.

Getting back to the topic, I didn’t mean to stir any waves so let me elaborate a bit and perhaps I shall rephrase the question entirely as some of you suggested.

I got a bonus a few months ago and decided spend the surprised money on setting up a 2 channel system strictly for music. Since I was starting from scratch with a limited budget, I’ve been asking for opinions and recommendations on different components. Somehow the word ‘synergy’ always pops up one way or the other. My last encounter with the word ‘Synergy’ was when I was trying to acquire a pair of Anti-cables. So I was wondering what exactly it? It can’t be entirely a personal preference. There must be some fundamental specs that one can compare to determine if two pieces of equipments are synergistic with each other, such as matching the impedance and voltage between a phono cartridge and the phono preamp. Perhaps I got synergy mixed up with compatibility?

Some of you folks were talking about measuring individual components. As Rabpaul indicated above, isn’t synergy all about connecting individual components?

Much appreciated.

[JohnR]

Kevin,

Do you have enough confidence in your numbers that you could design a speaker to the best measurements you could get and then put it on the market without ever listening to it? If the numbers are that good then the human ear test is just superfluous. Of course I doubt that you would ever do that, it's just a discussion point.

Raj

I could do it and be relatively certain I'd have something that people would like. I don't do it though because loudspeaker voicing also has a personal preference component.   

Kevin, I challenge you to design not just a component, but a whole system, without ever having listened to it and based solely on measurements, and put it on the market. The "personal preference" caveat is a furphy -- surely that can be accounted for too with suitable measurements. Just design something "neutral."

If that is too hard, then I challenge you instead to provide specific information on what exactly it is that can be measured to demonstrate "synergy." Not "sure we can measure it" or "you wouldn't understand" or "go read a textbook" or "go read what I already wrote (not much, usually)," or other Banquerisms -- how about some actual substance.

[Dan Banquer]

"If that is too hard, then I challenge you instead to provide specific information on what exactly it is that can be measured to demonstrate "synergy." Not "sure we can measure it" or "you wouldn't understand" or "go read a textbook" or "go read what I already wrote (not much, usually)," or other Banquerisms -- how about some actual substance."

If you can't be bothered to investigate further, than I certainly can't be bothered to respond further. I will not "spoonfeed" on these forums.
                 d.b.

[JohnR]

Thank you, Dan, for providing a perfect example of the kind of response that I would not expect from Kevin.

[Kevin Haskins]

Kevin,

Do you have enough confidence in your numbers that you could design a speaker to the best measurements you could get and then put it on the market without ever listening to it? If the numbers are that good then the human ear test is just superfluous. Of course I doubt that you would ever do that, it's just a discussion point.

Raj

I could do it and be relatively certain I'd have something that people would like. I don't do it though because loudspeaker voicing also has a personal preference component.   

Kevin, I challenge you to design not just a component, but a whole system, without ever having listened to it and based solely on measurements, and put it on the market. The "personal preference" caveat is a furphy -- surely that can be accounted for too with suitable measurements. Just design something "neutral."

If that is too hard, then I challenge you instead to provide specific information on what exactly it is that can be measured to demonstrate "synergy." Not "sure we can measure it" or "you wouldn't understand" or "go read a textbook" or "go read what I already wrote (not much, usually)," or other Banquerisms -- how about some actual substance.

Ha!   That is more than I'd bite off to chew.   How about a wimp out on the overall challenge and just accept the part I'm comfortable with?   

I'm confident I could design a loudspeaker with only the measurements that sounded awesome.  It is done all the time with systems like DEQX which audiophiles have embraced as a great solution.    Would I do that?   Nope... the reason I design loudspeakers is to listen to them!   For me personally, I couldn't sell something that I didn't have a more than that vested in the project.    The measurements alone are just too impersonal and the products I make are a personal extension of me.   I'm not comfortable just measuring them.  I want to use them too.   

This thread has crept off topic.   The question was about measuring synergy.   I think in theory we could measure it.   My reason for thinking has to do with the fact that you can do studies that statistically examine virtually any subject in one way shape or form.   It may be a statistical analysis of preferences and not give you any explanation of the physical causes but it is still a measurement.  Is that practical?   I'd say almost positively no.   

Also, if I had enough resources, I'm sure I could study systems in such a way that I could start to catalog and measure the basic physical phenomena that the statistical study uncovered as systems with synergy.   It would simply be a matter of applying enough research to the subject to uncover the cause and effect properties. 

[gooberdude]

Hey BC,

your orig post shouldn't have used the word 'measurable'...all the guys with PHD's who regularly contribute here get all hot & bothered by that word!

I'm a newbie too, but have experienced compatibility/synergy & also lots of un-compatibility.   I think for most, the fact is you can't measure what sounds good.  It must be experienced personally...

When that new piece of gear, new cable or even new CD makes you smile & raises the hair on the back of your neck...then its compatible.

Sure, there are ways to cut your losses...you mentioned phono compatibility.  Matching impedences and loads is quite important in relation to getting your cartridge to work with your phono preamp & your preamp.

In terms of pure synergy, in whatever form the word has come to mean by this point, I know of 2 good examples:    I had anti-cables for a few years + mapleshade clearview interconnects.  When i instered an Anti-IC in the mix, removing the Clearview, a big soundstage came forth & gushed with music.  Before, it wasn't that engaging.   Going all Speltz had major synergy to me, for me.

On the flip side I demo'd a friends super stereo that had matching tube monoblocks, tube preamp & phono preamp all from Wright Sound.  This guy also bought the Promitheus TVC that folks rave about, me included.   Well, with the TVC in the chain the sound sucked...plain & simple.  Boring, lifeless, small....
Inserting his matching tube preamp in the chain wrought out a bad-ass soundstage and true-to-life sized musicians.   As much as i hated to experience it, a piece of gear that made my set-up really broke another!

So, one 1 level its a 'to each his own' sorta thing...in other aspects you must match according to specs.
the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle for most folks.


matt

[macrojack]

I think all you guys talk in absolutes. That's why you can't agree. Just acknowledge that everyone is offering opinion and nobody has facts, then we can all work together. We are all aware, I believe that these conflicts yield no progress. Synergy is also subjective because we determine whether or not we have attained synergy by whether or not we like the sound.
It's like matching colors. We are all going to have our own opinions about the synergy, or compatibility, of colors. None of us is actually wrong and I'm still going to wear my shirt and tie together if my wife and I both like the combo regardless of how the colorometer assesses my choice or what the colorometists say about how the respective colors measure.

[Dan Banquer]

Well here's a hypothetical question or two for you;

If it was attainable would you be interested?

If it was measureable would you be interested in the measurements?

            d.b.

[miklorsmith]

Attainable?  Under what conditions?  If I could subscribe to a service where I could ask about two or four pieces of gear and their liklihood to match then yes.  If I have to buy a laboratory and the equipment to measure it to tell me if they're compatible then no.

If it's measurable, same scenario.  I'm not interested in acquiring the piece to find out if it blends with my other gear, I already do that with my ears.  "Descriptive" is useless to me, "prescriptive" is hugely valuable.

[opnly bafld]

Well here's a hypothetical question or two for you;

If it was attainable would you be interested?

If it was measureable would you be interested in the measurements?

            d.b.

Who exactly is going to do ALL the necessary measurements for ALL of the gear one might consider buying?
No one you say?
I guess we are back to using our ears.

Of all the equipment that I own (a lot ) only one piece I know of was "reviewed by a magazine with the ability to test it" and they think it is a really good amplifier, but it is dead last in "synergy" out of the 3 that I have tried with my speakers.
Now, if I could have had access to all 3 amps and measured them thoroughly with equipment that I don't have maybe, maybe I could have picked out the best of the 3 without listening.
I.E. measurements ARE great, but pretty useless in most situations because I don't have them.
I guess my ears will have to do because I don't have the measurements I need.

In case someone gets the wrong idea I am NOT against measurements, but not having access to the measurements I need to make a sound decision (pun intended) makes them mostly useless to me.

Kinda like if I had enough money I could pay off my house, so what good does it do me IF maybe somebody else has it, but I don't?

Lin

PS Miklorsmith posted while I was typing....YES what he said too.

[Daygloworange]

Of all the equipment that I own (a lot ) only one piece I know of was "reviewed by a magazine with the ability to test it" and they think it is a really good amplifier, but it is dead last in "synergy" out of the 3 that I have tried with my speakers.

Dead last to your ears. But maybe not somebody else's. Therein lies the paradox. Personal preference. It has nothing to do with whether or not the gear in question is performing to high (measureable) standards.

Microphone selection in the studio has all to do about how it sounds on a particular instrument, for a particular application, and for a specific context, not how well it measures.

But, the audio playback system in a studio is designed with hopes of not imparting any coloration to the sound of microphones. That part of the system would be chosen and measured very carefully. In that scenario, the system measuring well is the goal, so that you can make all the subsequent decisions subjectively, with the assurance that what you are subjectively choosing, is indeed what you want.

[macrojack]

Measurements are numbers and I like numbers. Phone numbers, map co-ordinates, time and temperature all help me accomplish my daily goals. I use a calendar and a thermometer. I kinda buy shoes by size but I find I really have to try them on. Same with hats even though they are actually calibrated in inches rather than just size 9 or S, M L, or XL. But when it comes to flavors, scents, personalities, or penchants, I can't find any help in numbers. And so it is with audio. Broad assumptions can be made about speaker efficiency figures but you have to first believe that the guy who printed them is from the lab and not the ad agency. Amplifier power might be the same. Break-in time is estimated, at best,  but many of us don't believe there is such a thing.
We might just as well be discussing whether or not a particular salsa is HOT. People in Vermont will likely have a different standard than those in Texas. But that isn't really important because neither of them knows what I consider hot, or musical, or pretty. And I bet they can't speak for you either.
If someone gets comfort or reassurance from measurements, that's cool. I know people who are religious about other things. Get your good feelings where you can but remember that everyone else has that right and responsibility to do so as well.

[Dan Banquer]

"Microphone selection in the studio has all to do about how it sounds on a particular instrument, for a particular application, and for a specific context, not how well it measures."

It may seem like that initially, but if you do a thorough investigation you will find the reason.
I'm on a selected thread with many pro designers and recording engineers. They do find the reason.
          d.b.

[opnly bafld]

Of all the equipment that I own (a lot ) only one piece I know of was "reviewed by a magazine with the ability to test it" and they think it is a really good amplifier, but it is dead last in "synergy" out of the 3 that I have tried with my speakers.

Dead last to your ears. But maybe not somebody else's. Therein lies the paradox. Personal preference. It has nothing to do with whether or not the gear in question is performing to high (measureable) standards.

I understand what you are saying DG, I guess I left out (trying not to write a novel) that the speakers have multiple drivers, are 4ohms and seem to thrive on current. All 3 amps are claimed (measure) to be high current, but the one that I liked the least just did not drive them as well as the others, although it did some other things better than the 2nd place amp (treble).
I am confident most would agree on the issue of bass, subjectively of course. 

Lin

[Daygloworange]

Dan,

For the purpose of the discussion in this particular thread, I was speaking in general terms. Just trying to make a generalized point. Yes, you are correct though. But that's a whole nother thread.  

Cheers

[Daygloworange]

I am confident most would agree on the issue of bass, subjectively of course.

Lin,

I understand what you're saying as well. But since I've been hanging out with local audiophile guys over the last little while, and listening to various setups and gear, I've had to come to grips with a broad range in what people find subjectively good. I had no idea that it would be so different. In some instances, practically night and day. I'm still trying to reconcile that.

That's what prompted my comment.

Cheers

[Karsten]

As mentioned before, I do have a feeling that a good part of the synergy issue has to do with never exceeding any components capability of transient response. I have been through a LOT of equipment, and what my experiences boils down to is that if you are using speakers capable of handling really fast micro dynamics, it is possible to make a very clean front end sound extremely good. The exact same front end on less capable speakers would sound very harsh in the highs.

I guess the same would happen if your source exceeds the performance of the preamp, or source and preamp faster than power amp etc. Cables can then act like filters adapting the components performance capability to eachother.

I do not have any real scientific proof of this, but it would not be too difficult to verify through experiments and measurements.

Karsten

[konut]

As mentioned before, I do have a feeling that a good part of the synergy issue has to do with never exceeding any components capability of transient response. I have been through a LOT of equipment, and what my experiences boils down to is that if you are using speakers capable of handling really fast micro dynamics, it is possible to make a very clean front end sound extremely good. The exact same front end on less capable speakers would sound very harsh in the highs.

I guess the same would happen if your source exceeds the performance of the preamp, or source and preamp faster than power amp etc. Cables can then act like filters adapting the components performance capability to eachother.

I do not have any real scientific proof of this, but it would not be too difficult to verify through experiments and measurements.

Karsten

This has been my experience as well. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. In an audio system the weakest link is sometimes elusive. If one is paying attention and gathers enough experience, one can track down the weakest link and fix it.