[Danny Richie]

I am an audiophile, and also an audio and video producer and musician. Why do you think a producer can't also enjoy listening? Some of the best mastering engineers come from an audiophile background. I'd go further and argue that the more one understands about production and music performance, the more they appreciate recorded (and live) music.

My 5.1 home theater / hi-fi system is modest by high-end standards. I have Mackie 624 bi-amped speakers with a killer SVS subwoofer. All of this is controlled by a $150 Pioneer receiver. My home studio in a different room has large old-school JBL professional speakers. Both systems are extremely clear, and can play cleanly to very loud volumes. Come on over for a visit! 

--Ethan

That explains a lot.

So you are an Audiophile, and an "Audio Expert" and your system consists of some powered studio monitors and a $150 receiver. 

Yeah, I am a fine art expert. I don't have any. I may not have ever seen any, but my kids used to bring art work home from school so I know all about it. 

BTW, I have a local buddy with a recording studio. He came by once with a CD that he had recorded the music to, or produced it, or whatever the correct term is. Anyway, he listened to it on the system in the GR Research listening room and was ruined from then on.

He heard a lot of things in the music that he wasn't hearing when he did the mix work.

He then brought in the speakers that he used for mixing and they were those same Mackie's that you (Winer) just posted as having.

I set them in our Anechoic chamber and took some measurements of them. They weren't exactly accurate and certainly not something that anyone that I know of would want to mix with. The response fell within +/-3.5db but there were some rough spots. At least it helped him to see where to set his little control levels on those things to get them back to being as close to flat as possible. They also tended to smear much of the original signal and cover over and hide many details. Vocals especially were pretty muffled.

So he wound up purchasing a pair of our speakers to mix with. They were much more accurate at +/-1.5db and they allowed him to hear the things that he was missing before.

And FIY, if you did add a high quality power cable to a powered studio monitor, a $150 receiver, a clock radio, or any other entry level product, then you may or may not notice any difference. So if you say that you don't hear a difference, I believe you.

[Quiet Earth]

I am an audiophile, and also an audio and video producer and musician. Why do you think a producer can't also enjoy listening?

I don't think that Ethan. I just wanted to know what gear you listen to when you are enjoying music, not working on music. It helps to know where you are coming from when I read your comments, that's all. Now I know a little more.

Danny,

I believe your story. I sold my Mackie 824s a few years ago because they made all of my music sound the same. There was no contrast. I don't know how guys can mix with those. (They have more skill than I do, that much is certain.  )

Just thought you'd like to know that.

[Steve]

I think he means speakers but I say air. 

Hi Chris,

That is what I thought but was hoping he would chime in with more explanation by what he meant. With speakers the peaks and valleys are usually limited to narrow ranges. According to Rane Corp, it takes about 1/3 of an octave bandwidth

(examples of an octave: 20-40hz, 400 to 800hz, 3khz to 6khz)

before perceived differences are noticed, although if a particular harmonic (depending upon the harmonic, 2nd, 5th, 9th for example and amplitude of the harmonic) fell in the 1/3 octave window (peak or valley) one may a notice a difference.

In contrast, an electronic component with a frequency response deviation usually covers many many octaves so is much more noticeable. Such rising or falling response over many octaves affects many harmonics so perception of timbre accuracy is more difficult to achieve. Even worse, as the harmonic number increases (2nd, 5th, 9th etc) the harmonic (as a general rule) becomes even more important if the instrument/voice is to be perceived as accurate.

Another problem besides timbre problems is masking distortion. Masking distortion covers inner detail and affects soundstage, depth, width etc.

Cheers.

[Danny Richie]

Hey Quiet Earth,

I looked up some of those Mackie's and the pair that my buddy brought by looked just like this one:



I am not sure what model that one is.

[andy_c]

What precisely is a "null test"?

I'm not sure who originally invented it, but it was popularized by David Hafler.  A description and schematic of the test setup for it can be found on page 9 of the Hafler XL-600 manual (PDF file).  In that schematic, the pots of the voltage divider are adjusted so the combined gain of the voltage divider plus test amplifier is as close to 1 as possible.  In this way, the voltages at the two nodes marked "red" will be very nearly equal.  The speaker across the two "red" terminals then plays the residual error signal.  This can contain sound due to differences in frequency response between the through connection and the voltage divider-amp combo, distortion of that combo, and whatever residual sound might be there from not setting the gain of the combo to exactly one.  The idea is to be able to listen to what the error sounds like.  There is an internal frequency response adjustment on some of the Hafler amps that allows the frequency response-induced error to be minimized so the error signal contains only distortion when the pots are properly adjusted.

A similar thing can also be done with software when two WAV files are available for comparison.  A program called Audio DiffMaker by Bill Waslo will compute the combination of delay and scale factor that minimizes a measure of the magnitude of the difference between the two files.  It then shifts and scales one relative to the other and performs the subtraction so the difference can be listened to.  The difference can also be amplified by a desired factor among other things.  He did a demo of this at an AES convention in which he recorded a Souza band 80 dB down from a music track and added them together.  I don't think anybody has been able to tell the difference between the original recording and the one with the added Souza band, but when you run DiffMaker on it and specify that it amplifies the difference, it's very easy to hear.

[Quiet Earth]

Danny,
That looks like the original HR824 (mark 1) which is what I owned.

I really appreciated the high value for dollar that those speakers provided, but I ultimately realized that I could never learn how to get my mixes to translate when I was using them. However, I am a total amateur when it comes to mixing, I just do it for fun! I totally respect a professional mixer's ability to mix well with whatever is available. 

FWIW, I also did not like my Mackies as a primary speaker for listening to music for fun, especially for an extended period. Again, I felt as though they homogenized the sound, and offered very little contrast. Just my amateur opinion of course! Still, a good bang for the buck product.

[S Clark]

...Sometimes people take offense at direct statements that contradict their beliefs. So I go out of my way to 1) be polite, and 2) back up everything I say. Again, most relevant here is the null test. It proves that power cords do not alter the sound quality through the connected equipment. If people are offended by this proof, they need to re-think their position...
--Ethan

Let me get this straight.  You are telling me that I don't hear something; my ears tell me I do.  Please don't "take offense at this direct statement that contradicts your belief".  Regardless of your test, power cord changes have an audible effect on my system.  I agree that someone's position needs to be "re-thought".  I find it fascinating/irritating when people tell me what I can and can't hear, and expect their arguments to be given credence over my personal experiences.

[neekomax]

Let me get this straight.  You are telling me that I don't hear something; my ears tell me I do.  Please don't "take offense at this direct statement that contradicts your belief".  Regardless of your test, power cord changes have an audible effect on my system.  I agree that someone's position needs to be "re-thought".  I find it fascinating/irritating when people tell me what I can and can't hear, and expect their arguments to be given credence over my personal experiences.

If someone comes up to you and tells you they hear something that no microphone (or any measurement tool) is picking up, and you humbly disagree that there is anything to be heard, are you being arrogant, or just reasonably skeptical given the circumstances?

Problem with your objection is that you are comparing your subjective experience of 'hearing a difference' with the measured result of a scientific test. It's fine for you to hear what you hear, but if doesn't line up to measurements, don't expect others not to be skeptical.

Just sayin...

 

[Rclark]

 Thanks Danny, thanks Ethan, and everyone else. Very satisfying debate going on now. Keep keepin' it above the belt 

[AJinFLA]

So what is your point?

Cheers.

That ultimately, our pinna need soundwaves for something to be audible...in the classic sense.

cheers,

AJ

[face]

If someone comes up to you and tells you they hear something that no microphone (or any measurement tool) is picking up, and you humbly disagree that there is anything to be heard, are you being arrogant, or just reasonably skeptical given the circumstances?

Microphones are perfect devices? 

[Steve]

Regardless of your test, power cord changes have an audible effect on my system. 

I agree with you Sclark. The fact that both left and right channels have signal current flowing through the AC power cord ground wire (pin 1), and the mixing of the channels is dependent upon the resistance and inductance of the AC ground wire (pin 1) VS the shields. This is frequency dependent. Different brands, models of  power cords are going to have different resistances and inductances.

One has to also consider solid wire VS stranded wire as micro arcing occurs between strands. Stranded wire can have a softer, smeared sound than solid wire. So right there we have a sonic difference in wire.

Plus in post #119, I explain other problems with null testing.
In essence null testing is flawed.

So I do not see how null testing a power cord ground wire (pin 1) can possibly be accurate, be at odds with scientific principles, and then be viewed as science and accurate.

Cheers.

[AJinFLA]

He then brought in the speakers that he used for mixing and they were those same Mackie's that you (Winer) just posted as having.
I set them in our Anechoic chamber and took some measurements of them. They weren't exactly accurate and certainly not something that anyone that I know of would want to mix with. The response fell within +/-3.5db but there were some rough spots.

That's odd Dan, are you sure they were to spec and not a broken sample?



http://dtmblabber.blogspot.com/2010/08/mackie-hr624-mkii.html

cheers,

AJ

p.s. still not sure what this has to do with the Poppy...excuse me, thread video/title....

[Steve]

If someone comes up to you and tells you they hear something that no microphone (or any measurement tool) is picking up, and you humbly disagree that there is anything to be heard, are you being arrogant, or just reasonably skeptical given the circumstances?

Problem with your objection is that you are comparing your subjective experience of 'hearing a difference' with the measured result of a scientific test. It's fine for you to hear what you hear, but if doesn't line up to measurements, don't expect others not to be skeptical.

Just sayin...

The problem is a null test of the power cord is not a scientific test by any stretch of the imagination. Check my previous post for violation of scientific principles. 

--------------

As far as Hafler's null test setup. It also violates scientific principles and is therefore usless. Maybe for marketing purposes?

Cheers.

[neekomax]

Microphones are perfect devices?

No. Are ears?

To what degree are any of the things perfect that we use to observe the laws of science and the world around us? Do we demand perfection of a measurement system, but then assume that our own perceptions are perfect (while research would suggest otherwise)?

[mfsoa]

I had Tommy from the Digital Amp Company over listening to one of his amps. I swapped the PC and he was absolutely floored at the difference. "That's not possible. It's simply not possible. It happened, but it's still not possible!" The engineer in him was flummoxed but the music listener knew what he heard.

So I tried it on my wife, although she had no idea what I was actually changing (she assumed I was changing amps). Swapping from PC "A" to PC "B" (I think the much-ballyhooed original Volex and  Black Sand Silver Ref MK V) , she said "You Suck - I can't believe that two amps can sound so different"  I tell her I'm not switching amps. "Now you really suck (that there just might be something to this audiophile-dom) - I really can't believe that swapping interconnects can make that much of a difference" I'm not swapping interconnects. When she heard I was swapping out something that the signal didn't even go through she was truly amazed.

Based on the description of Ethan's system, it is clear that he is unaware of what we (the audiophile community) are trying to achieve, and the extent to which many of us have achieved it in our homes.

Ethan, you are doing your company a great disservice by admitting that you do not at all understand what your client base is after, while making your disdain for them perfectly clear.

Now, off the find the Ferrari dealer who has never driven anything but an old Toyota...

[AJinFLA]

Microphones are perfect devices?

For capturing recorded music that you use to hear cords, caps and whatnot effects with...sure. I would hope so.

[AJinFLA]

The problem is a null test of the power cord is not a scientific test by any stretch of the imagination. Check my previous post for violation of scientific principles. 

Cheers.

What scientific test would you suggest Steve? For audibility?

cheers,

AJ

[S Clark]

If someone comes up to you and tells you they hear something that no microphone (or any measurement tool) is picking up, and you humbly disagree that there is anything to be heard, are you being arrogant, or just reasonably skeptical given the circumstances?

Problem with your objection is that you are comparing your subjective experience of 'hearing a difference' with the measured result of a scientific test. It's fine for you to hear what you hear, but if doesn't line up to measurements, don't expect others not to be skeptical.

Just sayin...

 

By all means, I agree with being skeptical.  I don't expect your belief in my appraisal, as your evaluation doesn't change my experience.  However, I do expect your respect that my appraisal was honestly given. And if honestly given, how am I to deny what my senses tell me?  Will you also tell me that I cannot tell a Steinway from a Baldwin if a microphone fails to confirm my differentiation?

Scott

[Steve]

What scientific test would you suggest Steve? For audibility?

cheers,

AJ

Why ask me? However, I will say this. If sighted listening violates a scientific principle, how can a test that also violates scientific principle(s) be considered scientific? I do not think it can.

Cheers.