John DeVore goes on a rant about the High End Audio lie that inspired him to start his company
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 09. 2020
- How specifications can be accurate and still be a lie. Some facts about sensitivity.
Welcome to the DeVore Fidelity CZcams Channel.
Let us know what you'd like to see in future videos. In the comments below or through our website:
www.devorefidelity.com
/ devorefidelity
/ devorefidelity
I think the youtube algorithm is wildly overestimating my understanding of physics.
Ha! Sorry about that! Most of my vids are far less tech, far more music.
@@DeVOREFIDELITY totally fine. I've never watched any videos of yours so far, i'm just perplexed by youtube's suggestions ...
@@SentaAerger comon dude, all that sould be understandable, and if u wanna understand tech u need to go through a little physics stuff :D
@@gopnik638 you clearly didn't understand my comment.
@@gopnik638 the irony of your comment is amazing.
This is not ranting... this is called educating. Thanks for this. We have become so accustomed to handed down information we rarely stop to wonder "Why"!
Nowadays educational content and speaking the raw truth is a rant and you labeled as a hater. I got use to this for at least 8 years on the net. Back in a day you could have a healthy educated conversation with someone today it's all about being the most toxic as possible, braindead memes and similar content. Truth, facts and coherent information is irrelecant... I mean for the masses on here, there are few people who are normal but even they sooner or later go insane from all the garbage...
The whole marketing thrust is snake oil. All sorts of gimmicks and Chinese numbers. Room acoustics will wreck the finest calculations and design work before you can say "That speaker's a piece of shit." The most significant offender is the biggest hard surface in the room, the ceiling. Near-field listening is one of the ways you can stop that from influencing the sound. The other is to pad the ceiling. I don't think it really matters what you use. Get a roll of foam and glue it on. Or staple slices of bread up there. I'm sure someone's selling a high-priced product but I don't think it makes a hoot of difference. I use a near-field set-up and also earphones. The near-field setup is so good that casual listeners stop talking and ask why it sounds so good. And they're not even interested in sound or music per se. It's a show-stopper.
@@DJGodaryD86 Sad times but let's keep it real for our own sanity ;)
I'm formally educated in the physics and application of acoustics, and am professionally experienced as an acoustics technician and a live audio engineer.... THIS VIDEO IS SPOT-ON CORRECT! The degradation of sound QUALITY in current times is appalling! Thank you for making this video. I hope many people share it and maybe begin conversations about this topic
Hmm you missed the fact he does not apply ohms law on amps. He thinks some amps won't put out 2 watt in 4 ohm. They will but the specs are maximums. Ofcourse it can deliver the current for 2 watt
Just one complaint- this is no rant. Heck its not even promoting his business. Its just an extremely well-informed and impeccably reasoned take-down of this one aspect of audio measurement. I know it is, because I know enough and experienced enough to know just how right it is. A huge amount of what people today think they know about speakers and amplifiers is wrong, and this explains why. Good stuff.
Bravo John Devore
@Phil Allison Watch it again. Only this time, try listening.
@Phil Allison Its not the simplest stuff to understand. We all have our levels. Its okay to admit its over your head.
Ignorant.
You clearly indicated your ignorance by your statement. Go back to high school physics.
Trying to buy speakers today, whether they be high end or low end, is a bit of a crap shoot.... You just don't know how they are going to sound until you get them home.
yes, so make sure whatever speakers you invest in will allow you to return in the event they aren't sounding right to you. Once you dive into the 5 grand and above pair of speakers there are so many out there that will make ya smile. Speakers cosing less than that (unless used/which ya souldn't rule out) are disposible speakers to me, but I done got picky as hell! Good luck in the search Joe! Hope all is well!
@@tophatjohnny Just got my Dayton AUdio T652 AIR speakers.... Cheap!...But damn good for the money. I've worked in recording studios and radio stations my whole life... I've heard "good monitors" and yet I can enjoy the low end as long as it isn't completely atrocious. :)
@@EzeeLinux are you from Mn Joe ?
@@tophatjohnny No. Easy coast, mid Atlantic. :)
@@EzeeLinux I’m from MN knew a bass player with your name years ago! Now I’m 15 minutes from Parts Express and live in Dayton Ohio
I think you've missed the connections between a few important concepts here. First, as you are no doubt aware, the impedance (Z) of a speaker varies dramatically with frequency (f). A common way to assign a single number is to look at the Z versus f curve and use the first minima that occurs after the resonance peak of the woofer. Power amplifiers are designed to have constant *voltage* gain versus frequency. Their output *voltage* (not power) will remain constant despite the varying impedance of the speaker. Driving a loudspeaker at constant *power* across frequency would result in truly awful response because amplifier output voltage would vary wildly across frequency. Think about a speaker with a "nominal" impedance of 8 Ω (which requires 2.83 V to produce a power of 1 watt). At its bass resonance frequency, its impedance rises to 80 Ω (not untypical). It would now require 8.94 V to produce the same power of 1 watt - but the speaker's acoustic output would rise 10 dB because the speaker was designed to have flat response with a flat *voltage* input. It would sound very "tubby" because of the resonant bass peak.
The varying impedance versus frequency of speakers posed a similar problem in measuring the sensitivity of speakers using constant *power* - measured sensitivity numbers were dependent on frequency (impedance) of the speaker. Plotting sensitivity across frequency produced a curve with little resemblance to the speaker's actual "frequency response". Measuring with a constant *voltage* produces numbers that are far more representative of the way speakers are driven in the real world. Therefore, testing at 2.83 V (equivalent to 1 W at 8 Ω) was adopted as a standard.
You are also likely aware that making the voice-coil length longer than the magnetic gap length in a dynamic loudspeaker is one way to reduce distortion at high cone excursions (low frequencies at high power). This technique has a tradeoff in that it also reduces sensitivity (since a smaller portion of the voice coil is in the magnetic gap). Therefore, speakers capable of high loudness (SPL) at low frequencies tend to be less sensitive. I don't believe there's any "conspiracy" to force audiophiles to buy larger and larger power amplifiers. It's simply one of the complex design tradeoffs in designing speakers. Acoustic suspension (sealed box) speakers generally are less sensitive because of the distortion-reducing voice-coil design as well as losing the added bass output from the vent in a vented box enclosure. It's also worth noting that the bass roll-off in a sealed-box system is at 12 dB per octave, while that in a vented box is at 24 dB per octave. The former is a 2nd order high-pass filter and the latter a 4th order. Higher order filters always have poorer time-domain (phase) distortion. That explains the audible quality difference at bass frequencies ... and one reason I love my old Acoustic Research speakers!
- Bill Whitlock, Life Fellow of the Audio Engineering Society
Ventura, CA
As the magazine that endeavors to provide the most accurate measurements, which is partly why we use a real anechoic chamber for measurements, I am glad to read what you wrote here. The connection missing here is, as you pointed out, that most speakers are designed assuming constant voltage, not constant power. That's why, when you run 2.83V in, you get a "flat-ish" line from the speaker (or should). If you delivered constant power instead to these speakers, you'd get a wildly erratic response. As you said: "It would now require 8.94 V to produce the same power of 1 watt - but the speaker's acoustic output would rise 10 dB because the speaker was designed to have flat response with a flat voltage input. It would sound very 'tubby' because of the resonant bass peak."
So while we can appreciate the intent of the message in this video, it leaves out these crucial connections and itself becomes misleading. As far as we're concerned, 2.83V is the correct way to go. What the actual solution is, as John said in the video, is to do what Atkinson did way back and take that 2.83V sensitivity spec and convert it into the same spec expressed in watts and simply represent both. As a result, let's say that a speaker had a nominal 4-ohm impedance, all that would mean if you got an 88dB sensitivity for 2.83V input is that it is equivalent to 2W input, not 1W, which is what it would be for an 8-ohm load.
Doug Schneider
www.SoundStage.com
Y'all are the lone voices of reason here.
@@soundstagenetwork Agreed Doug, there's nothing misleading about the 2.83 V standard. This fixed voltage has been part of international standards (AES and IEC, for example) for decades.
Didn't read your comment before I wrote mine above, you're much clearer in expressing some of my points, and adding a few extra points that I forgot to mention. Though in all fairness I believe the power sensitivity was always pegged to a certain frequency or frequency range. Else it would not have made any sense at all, because of the impedance curve of a speaker, which heavily depends on the cabinet too.
@@markuskarner2156 Thanks for your kind words! Yes, frequency is yet another variable in all this. My personal preference is to use pink noise simply because it gets closer to real-world application and human perception. It also eliminates a manufacturer's urge to "cherry pick" a frequency to get a higher number. But, like all specifications, *ALL* the test conditions should be clearly stated so that fair comparisons can be made. This is one of my pet peeves with manufacturers of audio gear of all sorts. As the owner and chief engineer of Jensen Transformers for 25 years, I tried to set a good example by publishing the most rigorously complete data sheets in the industry - it's maddening when a competitor claims a spec that can't possibly exist under anything but laboratory conditions. But the bright side is that, when you educate your customers, they tend to become very loyal!
About 5 mins into this I was seriously questioning how much John knows about engineering, but I decided to stick with it and came to realize he's making a valid point. Almost all audio power amplifiers are voltage amplifiers and are rated in watts into an 'ideal' load. Some Amplifiers include figures for 8 ohm and 4 ohm loads, some go further and include impedance below 4 ohm. However, a significant number of amplifiers are not capable of driving loads much below 4 ohms without either current limiting (if they have output protection) or a significant increase in distortion. So deliberately designing speakers that are a 'difficult' load is bad engineering.
However, given that most amplifiers are voltage output devices, specifying speaker output at a known voltage would still be more meaningful that trying to calculate the watts (which would vary by frequency). The other challenge would be the need to specify the sensitivity at several frequencies. However a good review (and a properly constructed product data sheet) would point out worst case impedance so that a potential purchaser would understand how well a speaker will be driven by a particular amplifier.
I love listening to knowledgable people explain things. Even though a good portion of this was over my head, it was still a great message worth listening to.
I cancelled my Stereophile
subscription when I discovered that the writers were complete shills for uber expensive manufacturers.
That goes for the majority of magazines.
@@koyaanisqatsi316 Same in retail. We were generally starving, so any rep who bought us pizza got the business.
That's how they make their money
What's a magazine?
@@James_Bowie It's that thing that you hold up sideways to see a picture of a lovely woman...
After years of never really getting speaker Ohms I now totally get it and why it’s really important. So eloquently explained. Subscribed and ready to soak up more of your wisdom! Thanks
That was an excellent presentation. It ties up one of the problems with audio specifications which lead to the smoke and mirrors sometimes found in this industry.
This was simple, inspiring and a great stroll through memory lane. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to get to know you're great essence.
Yes!, about time some one called the industry on these practices! Very grateful for this information !
Makes me happy as a guitar player that speaker builders in that part of the industry still used the 1W/Meter rating.
Many industries do this, audio is a good example. The establishment of 'standards' is good for consumers to help make apple to apple product comparisons. Manufacturers don't want standards for the reasons you mentioned. Thanks for the video, I'm glad you found a motivation to start your own company.
I'm late to the party, but it's about time someone said this out loud and in detail.
John, thanks so much for doing that!
Love your channel steve, great content.
Now, I see what happened.
@Luis Abreu great idea! Steve, it would be great to hear an "outsider's" (i.e. not a manufacturer) take on this!
After owning Legacy Audio stuff, nothing else does it for me
Hi! Steve!
I absolutely agree with your rant. I am an ex musician who is intimately familiar with how real instruments (like upright bass or un-amplified piano) should sound and spent years trying to build a satisfying audio system. I also have a physics degree and am able to see through the spec bullshit that is used to confound uneducated audiophiles. Even though I was able to use my technical knowledge to build the most cost effective systems available (in the audiophile world) I was ALWAYS left unsatisfied by the results (and the many trade offs the came on a limited budget of $20,000 - $30,000). That's when I discovered the pro studio recording world that audiophiles have ignored. In particular Genelec's top of the line digital active speakers were a revelation. They utilized built in dacs to to time and phase align the drivers and tune the speakers to the environment. These things (8240a monitors and a 7260a sub) could absolutely annihilate any combination of high end dac, preamp, amp and speakers you could come up with (under $200,000). That includes Wilsons, B&W, Sonos Faber, Mark Levinson, Krell, YBA etc etc etc. The most shocking thing about this was that the entire Genelec system cost me less than $10,000. Naturally, Stereophile and virtually the entire audiophile press ignored what was going on in the professional recording industry. Had they acknowledged what was possible and the utter superiority of Genelec's (in terms of both cutting edge technology and sound), it would have destroyed the entire high end audio industry which, in my opinion is a complete and utter con that takes advantage of the gullibility of clueless audiophile suckers.
P.s At one point I had a pair of Thiel 2.4s driven by a massive Bryston 4bsst amplifier. (the Genelec's easily obliterated this combination)
Beautifully and simply explained, John. I only have 2.83 complaints about what you said.....
Ha! NOOO!
1.414 comes to mind X2 inevitably!
😆
Cool T-shirt! Thanks for the info. I'm gonna listen a couple more times now. :)
I truly adore your channel. You are so calming to listen to.
Thank you John, the audio community is in need of education. Keep up the good work! I'm so glad that you decided to make your creations available to everyone and share your thoughts with us.
Not in this regard. Using volts is the better way to do it.
@@dizzywow Using volts is better when you have a high current amp that does not mind impedance dips. John's issue is that the industry is moving toward the assumption that everyone uses high current solid state amps.
Speaker manufacturers should give a proper db/w/m spec and an honest Z spec (or better yet a Z curve. But as Billy Joel said honesty is hardly ever heard.
I worked for a Medical devices company as an electronics tech straight out of college. There was a tongue in cheek saying among the techs concerning the variance of component specs we had to deal with through our suppliers. The saying was "When in doubt, don't scream and shout. Just change that spec, and ship it out". Since some of these chips and power Transistors were being driven very hard, our suppliers found it difficult to supply batches with consistent performance. Thanks for clarifying the Speaker debacle.
Fantastic! Not sure why it took so long for this to show up in my feed, but I am very grateful for it! You have earned my respect and a new subscriber!
Thank you!
in the old days JBL used pink noise for measuring efficiency. That's much more useful and realistic than the narrow frequencies used by a lot of manufacturers.
Just like horsepower, output is the area under the whole curve. How many watts it takes to create that output is efficiency.
Jim Lansing really knew his stuff and was one of the true geniuses of audio IMHO.
Thank you for explaining the sensitivity background. It is this historical knowledge that makes for better future in speaker and amplifier production and reference standard!
Great.
Also important - that t-shirt WHERE? 😍
I was into the audiophile thing back in the early 80s when I had money to burn. I bought 'good' speakers once (JBL 4311B) and still use them 40 years later. I was also an electrician so it was neat seeing those formulas again.
I so wish I hadn't sold my JBL 4311Bs. Great speaker. I guess I'll just have to make due with my Tannoys. First world problems...
What an absolute pleasure to listen to your thoughts. One on the industry's gems.
Great insights and explanations. The 90’s were such a different time for 2channel audio. I’m still a 2 channel guy to this day.
Jon Doscher
the 90 ish years, different? what did you meant? AM Stereo? Cassette tape?
How you playback modern codecs on 2 channels, just skip all the of the other channels, only use spotify 2 channel tracks?
No rant, this is the most useful video I watched today. You have succintly described something I suspected but had not investigated. Thank you.
Wow. I just came across this channel. This was like walking down memory lane. I remember all of those models you mentioned. And I’m still rocking a pair of AR TSW910 speakers to this day!
Absolutely brilliant video, John. Thanks very much!
The requirement for very high power amps was one of the reasons that weighed in my decision to leave high-end audio. Glad someone pointed it out.
I found this after getting a recommended video of a million dollar system. Companies just want your money and they just market themselves to get the most out of you.
@@headkase11 bingo. I spent a considerable amount of money for high end audio until one salesman said that they're cables can improve my system and cost only as much as half the price of the pair of speakers I own. That was the only cue I needed for me to realize I better drop all this gear-chasing bullshit and start learning to enjoy what I have... and I did.
@@automachinehead there's a video on here about high-end cables and the guy said manufacturers make those $100-$30000 cables because they know someone will buy them for their super expensive system. But they actually don't improve the sound for how much they cost
Excellent Rant!!!! This is absolutely one of the explanations I have heard.Thank you for your contributions
Man, that makes sense! Thanks for this simple and clear way to get to understand this problem.
Most of the stuff here is as clear as the sun and I’ve been aware of it for years. I’ve also spent a lot of time explaining this stuff to my friends and customers (when I used to work in Hi-Fi many years ago). But today as a well informed Hi-Fi enthusiast I pay very little attention to this kind of stuff. More important for me is how does it sound and how long it’s going to work without causing any technical problems. But it was a great pleasure to listen to this “rant”. Excellent job! Thanks a lot.
Thanks Greg!
The part that I found most important was that many amps (class D and tube) will have a disproportionate power output into different cones in a speaker rather than tracking evenly across impedances (assuming that a woofer has a very low impedance and the mid/high range speakers are much higher). That kind of dictates an equalizer be used in such a situation and the room be measured
I really learned something from this video. I am an EE, and I was unaware of this. Thanks for the excellent explanation!
From one EE to a fellow EE, most curricula do not cover audio electronics explicitly. But, audio amplifiers are in effect linear amplifiers with voltage outputs proportional to voltage inputs. Speakers exhibit capacitive & inductive reactances as well as resistive components as a result of mechanical and electrical impedances. Watts for all intents and purposes are meaningless when specifying speaker parameters. I disagree with the premise of this rant.
@@stephenmead5488 I believe you to be a _bona fide_ electrical engineer based on what you say. You are correct, Vout is proportional to Vin and it's voltage that matters with loudspeaker sensitivity. A ratio of electrical Pin vs. acoustic Pout is a measure of loudspeaker _efficiency_ and that's a different thing. If we used a fixed wattage rather than a fixed voltage to measure sensitivity, that would favor the lower impedance, and so it wouldn't be a fair (and therefore not meaningful) test. Loudspeaker manufacturers would (and did, I owned several "8 Ohm" speakers that were more like 6) be able to manipulate speaker impedance to produce more impressive sensitivity numbers, and because efficiency is rarely if ever stated, nobody is the wiser. Specifying a _voltage_ that corresponds to 1W into an 8Ω resistive load (what is used to measure amplifier power) is an elegant solution that makes cheating via lower impedance impossible, and neatly eliminates the need to deal with the calculus of reactivity of the load. Win-win.
@Christopher Grant "electronic datasheets" _should_ be in MATLAB format, or at least CSV for import into anything. The Internet has an unlimited ability to present more, and more important data to technical buyers. What do vendors do? Make a PDF of the one-page flyer that they used to have in stores when those existed. I used to get 3-ring binders full of product data from manufacturers before the Internet, no longer. It's a shame.
@Christopher Grant well, _any_ data beats a photo of a model pretending to be overjoyed by some industrial product. IMO, corporate websites should be places where the various design engineers can place tons and tons of data for systems integrators to use, so they don't have to use trial and error. IJS
Wow! I completely understand, and have always understand this with speakers and amps. Just never found anyone that could even communicate this, or even cared! I've been an amateur audiophile most of my life, even went to school for it. I'm thankful to have found your channel. Thank you!
Thanks for watching!
Don’t normally leave replies but you were spot on and this has been pissing me off for a long time !!! Thank you 😊
I was/am a bass head of the 90's so I just operated on the principle of dropping impedance until the amplifier melted or the fuse blew 😬
I've never heard DeVore Fidelity speakers but just listening to him talk really makes me want to hear them.
Me too
There's a video on CZcams where he talks about the listening parties he has at their shop which made me seek out his speakers. I liked his vibe so I ended up getting some 0/93's, they're pretty fantastic.
It's going to cost you....pricey is an understatement for them.
Thanks John stumbled across your channel (or did I) and enjoyed the rant and found it informative cheers
I love this sort of industry insight and breakdown. Good job.
You explained why i always sought high efficiency drivers. Free spl, with less amp
Worker smarter, not harder
One of the most annoting thing to me in the audio industry is the companies that blur the lines of their power output by using a "max" power output instead of an RMS output. Not to mention the fact that when tested, they usually don't ever even make the power they claim on paper.
Thank you for this. You laid it out clearly in an easy to understand fashion and without undue passion. I usually just say they lie.
Great video. A real breath of fresh air. Thank you.
I looked at one damn video on speakers! all of a sudden this gets recommended 🤷♂️
The algorithm is crazy aggressive..
I sometimes refuse to look up something because I don’t want hundreds of those recommendations
@@RCRitterFPV I work around that by opening up a Private window in Firefox so that CZcams won't map things to my account. Note: this may not work even in an "Incognito" windows in Chrome as Google has been caught (multiple times) tracking through the "Incognito" mode of their browser.
I was watching Chef John making individual Beef Wellingtons and this got recommended :)
Nice! John has a youtube channel. Still remember fondly my Gibbon Super 8s from 2006.
The way I became an audiophile is that my dad gave me a petty sick sansui 9090 with some old pioneer four way speakers. Remember the Columbia house CDs? My parents ordered me some CDs and after that he decided to give me the system. It was the best sounding system me and my friends had heard. Fast forward ten years I ended up selling the system for drugs. Then ten more years later I got sober. And wanted to hear music again. So I bought a Yamaha amplifier and I could not describe how disappointed I was with it. So I did my research and found out my sansui was probably the best thing I’ve ever owned. Yes I eventually got another one. I had to have it worked on and it was a total of 1200 to get restored. I love it. Reminds me of when I was a teenager. My parents are very old. My dad has a pioneer vintage stereo in his den connected to some octogon shaped end table speakers. He was an audiophile and didn’t even know it.
Those Sansuis from that era were awesome. Glad you were able to come full circle, very cool story. Happy listening!
Thanks, I just about kept up, I'll have another watch later. Love your shirt by the way, where did you get it?
The same thing happened to Operating Systems. The got bulkier and slower as processors got faster. What happened to optimization? Whether it be speakers, computers, etc. Nice review!
Thanks!
PoseMotion
OS? bulky? you meant Windows i guess, Watt Ohm? the same????
You need UNIX, forget Windows!
Optimization your speakers? new connes, what do you do here?
The less the connes move? the less Watt you need? Ohm?
Just saw this comment, and you put my own thoughts into words perfectly! Too many electronic AND software developers simply push the hard work onto other components. Operating system developers go wild like drunk frat boys with the code bloat and feature creep to push a multi-core, multi-gigahertz CPU down into the mud when it should be supercomputer speed. Speaker engineers just place ever higher demands on the amplifiers rather than creating more efficient designs. Customer needs don't seem to be much of a concern to any of them.
@@terryc7142 To be fair to them, they aren't exactly provided with the development time required for someone to care.
I built my first stereo system in 1961 using those AR speakers of which you speak! Driven by an EICO 70-watt kit-built amp. I used to peruse Hi-Fidelity magazine religiously and I loved the pretty graphs showing the frequency response, IM and Harmonic distortion throughout the frequency range. My rant is that you can't find that information anymore. Most reviews just go "WOW! This new speaker sounds great! You need to use my affiliate link and buy them RIGHT NOW!"
Love my old dual-18" cabinets. Only problem is I can't move into a smaller house...
The measuring people lost the battle to the “but hey this sounds better” crowd. Once Audio magazine disappeared, normal hifi disappeared and was taken over by expensive well styled products built for maximum profit. I pretty much ignore the entire industry now. I play around with vintage JBL speakers and 70s era solid state amps.
your explanation of acoustic suspension gave me answers to questions i’ve had for years and didn’t know how to ask
Cool!
Thankyou for this. And going into impedance variations with different frequencies becomes more complicated!
Love that T-shirt! :)
Thanks for this video John, I had actually wondered about all this. I still get nervous hooking up any speaker with a lower load rating than 4 ohms 😁
Thank you for educating us on these knowledge.
Thank you so much for going back to basics. This basic knowledge has missing for decades.
I just love a clear minded rave from experienced folks.
My neighbours would be pissed off way before my lovely quads reach anywhere near their peak
405?
Stopp bying and build a voight horn.. you'll see..
@@Thode-R I built 4 Klipschorns in the early eighties and still love them!
Who'd have ever thought a guy sitting in his living room talking about Ohms law, without any music playing, or even mentioning his product (really) would end up attracting a potential new customer? I only understood a bit of what you said, but now I'm heading to your website. Nice job!
Love the cat! Thanks for this info, this is something I've not heard anywhere else!
I now suffer from tinnitus because of my audiophile equipment. Today, none of this matters.
That is the saddest story for audio enthusiasts. I hope there is modern technology to help you enjoy sound again
Never listen too loud
try earwax removal kit that uses water, i thought my right ear was bad but it turned out that i just had a lot of wax build up. I didn't think about it before hand because my left ear was fine but then realized that the inside of my ears are not the same size so they are different with how they handle wax build up.
Nah leave them ears alone. This is pshyco - sematic. Thinking about the system is engendering a feedback loop in your brain. I discovered this myself when I was listening to some rock music , the guitar played a chord and I went deaf. Very strange.
@@crh4878 There actually is a new system to help with it. I don't know much about it but there is new tech dealing with it. I think it is a play on the noise cancelling idea .
Where can I get that t-shirt? Love it!
.
Thanks for venting John, you’re a legend
Well done. I've been an audiophile since the 70's, have a degree in Physics (senior thesis dealing with room acoustics) and taught Physics in high school. I'm a little embarrassed to say I never thought about how falling impedance with frequency interacts with tube amps. I was always fond of Mark Levinson, or old NAD & Adcom, in my price range, and now I know why. Though now I have Magnepans with a really stable resistive load, and after listening to this, I understand better how, as long as you can get enough current into them, they sound so nice.
Good points! As a music studio engineer I’m not much of a Hi-Fi person. It’s a bit strange how different those two “realities” are...
When I assess whether a speaker system is “workable”, the first step is the room, the listening environment. I can work crappy speakers in a good room, but great speakers in mediocre acoustics will never work.
Second, will the speaker system actually reveal if my work is passable, or just “sound good”? I have to prefer an honest system, rather than a very “well sounding” system, or I’ll get lost as my work progresses. I will simply miss out on errors if the system doesn’t “kick back” in a truthful way.
I think this is precisely where “speakers” and “monitors” differ a bit. Some Hi-Fi speakers “lie” just a little (maybe?), and will make music sound a little “better” to the ears. In a pleasant way too, in most cases. A typical studio monitor system just isn’t the party starter it could be, but those are what all those epic tracks were mixed on. A small conundrum, that...
Third, some great studios have rooms and speakers (and amps, x-overs etc.) that both sound fantastic, and deliver the right clues as to whether an engineer’s work holds up. I guess such a place would also be considered pleasantly Hi-Fi for most avid listeners too?
On the tech side, phase coherence is more important to me than actual frequency response. The latter (if not perfect) can be learned and adapted to. The former will always fool me, any time. Another point is transient response, where the whole system must be well put together to work well. Overshoots, ringing or mild saturation may (does!) sound cool with music, but I must be allowed to create such things to taste, rather than getting them from the speaker system. Or, my work won’t translate well to a lesser or better system than what I’m using to create the stuff.
Well, that was my rant - Keep it going! 👍
John it's not often that I watch a video a m d can completely relate to what is being said. In my early speaker design years with musical instrument loudspeakers (Altec, JBL & EV) we were concerned with efficiency. Over the last 20 years of design, sensitivity was what is used to make comparisons when matching drivers in a hi-fi loudspeaker. I came across the same question about the different standards (1W@1M vs 2.83V@11M) and it became clear after getting my hands dirty with Ohms law and Watts law that as long as the impedance was 8 ohms we were good. So I created Excel spreadsheets that helped me translate between the two when matching sensitivities amongst different drivers. Also got into how this effects the use of multiple drivers and acoustic/electronic increases and decreases. To anyone that is serious about designing loudspeakers, your information can't be emphasized enough. I was working on a design with Madisound and found out the hard way. So pay close attention, John's information is critically important. Thanks for making this video. I don't consider it a rant. It's more a good educational starting point...
Thanks for the great comment David! And thanks for watching.
Great video. I have a question, or a small request. I like speakers with wider frequency, as mine Raidho’s are 40-50 000. My previous speakers were GamuT and ones before B&W, but my experience with B&W after replacing them with GamuT are not as satisfying as they announced them. How important is the frequency high and low frequency drivers (ribbons, radiators etc) and what is your experience with them?
Hi John, thank you very much for this info, I learned a lot.
Do you know about the technology behind Devialet Phantom speakers? if yes, can you explain how those work?
Lets talk about how the sensitivity spec is measured by a single sine wave at 1k. How realistic is that? Kinda like how equal loudness curves of the ear were first measured by sine waves, 80 years later people learned that complex spectral content radically changed our perception of volume.
Any self respecting speaker manufacturer would rate the sensitivity of their speaker using a broad spectrum signal like pink noise at a given reference voltage. Typically 2.83Vrms.
@@stephenmead5488 That would be the way to do it, but are people really doing it? I heard different
It's not realistic with respect to frequency response linearity, but that's why people like to have their speakers tested for freq. response from 20 - 20kHz. It's a lot easier to spec at a single sine wave than to create some kind of broadband resolution specification that no one understands.
Actually, I would impulse response analysis if I wanted frequency response data.
@@stephenmead5488 What kind of pulse would you use? Is this because the transient has broad frequency content? I've done tests in the past with a flat sine sweep to provide a transfer function of the harmonic response, so I'm curious as to what improvements this can offer.
I'm very confused why CZcams recommended this to me 😂. I have a soundbar lol
It wants you to get into real audio
Lol
Time to get real!!
Now that's funny
This is Brian Kim Keenan. John, Thank you from a man who owned a 40 watt , 4 channel solid state receiver with Utah 3 way 12 inch speakers. Very high sensitivity. Very loud, very clear and you nailed it. Everyone should have high sensitivity speakers and hear your lecture with proof provided to back up the theories.
Very informative. And it just shows how much we need simple rules. NO SPECULATION!!
Also i would like to point out is that the sensitivity spec was always a Lie for example you know klipsch heresy it says 99db efficient but really its under 95db most of the time. Instead we should have sensitivity charts like speaker drivers has you know 1w1m chart.
I think 99db is the Max
During the 70's I went to our local stereo shop, every town had one, and got a receiver , turntable and a set of speakers, all for $500 that rocked my world. The speakers were Cerwin Vega made in America. Sansui receiver and turntable made in Japan.
Great stuff. In the early 90's, I was into car audio. Companies like Orion and others came out with amps that would run a quarter ohm, so there were guys running a 50w (at 8 ohms) amp and running 10 speakers on it (just an arbitrary number) and would have that little Orion able to fry an egg, but it was loud and the bass was out of this world. I just started hobbying with home hifi and it's amazing how different things are done. Great episode.
Just wished to thank you for explaining in so simple terms something I myself was a little confused about. Much appreciated.
You're welcome!
Q: What is an audiophile? A: Someone who likes expensive audio equipment.
a side note: Jay Leno likes vehicles, so he bought four Piaggio Vespa motor scooters; he never rides them; he keeps them locked in his warehouse; I can give a link to a CZcams video, where you can see his scooters
Someone obsessed with audio fidelity
I'd say someone who is looking for the purest sound
Hahaha - so true. Just expensive, not good (or the speakers may actually be good, but the audio quality is mostly not...). As someone who have a hobby of recording sounds at high quality, I can't for my life understand why you would buy an expensive audio equipment, for listening on commersially produced recordings. Most mastered music sucks big time, and they prioritize loudness over audio quality. Expensive speakers and amplifier doesn't help against that. Shit in = shit out. Also - most of those people do nothing about room acoustics. Just put a speaker in a box and see how that sounds.
A normal room distorts the sound in the same way, just on a lower pitch (because of it's bigger size). It may not be very noticable on a bad recording - but on a good recording, a normal room without acoustic treatment to minimize reflections, resonances and reverb, will completely ruin the experience (regardless of how good the speakers are).
@@Speeder84XL AC/DC sounds good regardless of what speakers (usually) and play it LOUD. The louder and more distortion, the better.
I just like music, why is it so difficult to put together a stereo without this much math?
You are probably overthinking things a lot. It is only "difficult" if you want to understand it. Find someone whos an audiophile that isnt sponsored or trying to sell you something and ask. Honestly i dont know all of what he said but i understand car audio well enough to know how to choose equipments for sound systems and tune it properly and how it should be installed.
If you have a bit of money and want to take it seriously, reddits audiophile groups are probably the best places to learn. See what people are saying is best at your price point for your use then validate through other sources such as purchase reviews and whatever.
Forget maths. Your own ears don't lie. If it sounds good to YOU... That's all that matters really.
I'm a 42 year audio veteran, I only want ot point out two things. One, you buy a system, that system has to work synergisticly together, so if you love a speaker that has a serious impedance dip at the crossover point, you should buy an amplifier designed to deal with that to deliver flat frequency response. Two, even in 2020 the time of this posting there were and continue to be Digital switching amplifiers that do double in power as the impedance is halved. (I'd point to two measured by Stereophile from main stream company NAD, the M10 measured @ 155 into 8 ohms and 290 into 4 ( this from a 100wpc spec'd amp per NAD ) , the M33 over 200 into 8 and over 400 into 4. Otherwise we've been preaching this to our customers for decades, nice work John!
Wow. I learned so much from this. Really appreciate you taking the time to put this out there.
A good rant that I enjoyed listening to but one minor complaint that made your presentation look a little unprofessional is the use of capital M for meters. We only give capitals in the case where the unit is named after a person.ok. With the complements of Birchwood Acoustics,UK.
What makes me laugh about the whole hifi thing is that the engineer mixes the music on studio monitors using standard studio cables etc. yet audiophiles are told they need to listen to music on $3k speakers, through this or that amp with hundred dollar cables 🤣
Coming from a music/producer background and expanding into hi-fi audio this fact has puzzled me to no end... It’s also funny to see endless amounts of money poured into a set up that has no acoustic treatment whatsoever. People don’t realize that the room itself is just as important as any other piece of hardware in your setup.
Wait... I thought studio engineers mix on great, top quality speakers and use generally top notch, expensive equipment?
Depends on which studio. There are those that use what you refer to as audiophile speakers and cables. Abbey Road being one of them.
@@465marko They absolutely do, but there’s a difference between studio monitors and audiophile speakers. Monitors are created to be balanced and tuned in a neutral matter so that the songs entire mix can be heard as clearly as possible and so the producer can create a mix that sounds great on any speaker or device. Audiophile speakers however are not neutral and can themselves sound “beautiful” but in doing so the mix is slightly altered. If a producer used audiophile speakers to mix their song, it wouldn’t sound the way they intended it to on anything except the speakers that were used. A lot of producers will have a variety of headphones and speakers to test their mix on only AFTER it’s been tuned in with the monitors, just to make sure that it sounds great on everything that they test it on before releasing it. But if you want to hear what the artist was hearing when they gave this track the green light, you’ll want to try professional studio monitors. If you can do so in an acoustically treated room even better... audio quality isn’t really about how good or bad anything is, there’s just an incredibly wide variety of ways to enjoy music in hi-fidelity. If we use a food analogy, the producer is a chef who makes your food as true to the recipe as they can, and audiophiles being the customers are arguing over which salt and peppers enhance the dish most or how much they spent on their organic black truffle hot sauce.
@@465marko the difference is that studio monitors are meant for designing the sound so that it sounds as intended on all types of speakers and speaker qualities. If you made music exclusively on super high quality equipment, you might have trouble adapting it to sound good on something like laptop speakers.
So well explained John. Thank you! We need to get Gean on this at Audioholics because I've heard him mention the 2.8 V and he is for truth in measurements/claims.
You have the best lighting ... what gear are you using? Thx.
Oh. I thought he was gonna say Monster Cable.
Anyone that mentions cables except in the context of vinyl carts can go to hell anyhow. ;)
You know that every frequency has its own impedance and therefore sensitivity. In this case volts has a more linear relation to dB than watts
Indeed, you are correct. Would the speakers have stayed in a reasonable range of dips to 3.6R for a 4R speaker, then it would not be an issue, but a solution. However, what John is pointing out, that the change to the "improved" measuring system actually allowed the manufacturers to dip to abysmal impedances that the vast majority of amplifiers cannot deal with. The whole point of measurements is to make it relatable to what you have.... and the 2.83V system makes it relatable exclusively to the monster heavy current amplifiers. Hence, our approach to high end audio been altered, and manufacturers are advertising their sub-2R impedance speakers as 4R impedance....
@@realworldaudio I guess you need a capable amp to drive these low impedance loads. What's your argument?
@@davidward5327 My argument is that 2R speakers should be advertised as 2R, not as 4R. Manufacturers should let people know that they need a capable amp to drive 2R. Advertising them as 4R is false advertising.
@@realworldaudio Sounds like they concocted a plan to build and sell us increasingly powerful and EXPENSIVE gear.
Actually it is the current which has the most linear relation with dB SPL. And the relation is via the force factor.
SPL is not a power factor, so power is the least related to SPL. (dB scale of SPL is in 20 x LOG, of acoustic power it is in 10 x LOG, like electric power). If the current doubles, the power quadruples and sound pressure doubles.
This is VERY informative and enlightening. Thanks for sharing.
I am SO LOST but I can't stop watching!
I thought I was the only one still thinking about this stuff. Hehe.
In my puzzle of high end audio you just solved 1/3rd of the problems! Now lets talk about DACs
Pssst you can't tell the difference between 10 dollar Chinese DAC off eBay and a 2500 "audiophile" DAC in a DB matched ABX blind listening test. Note is wholly separate from amplifiers which can distort on peak if they have weak power supplies.
John you opened my eyes. I studied much in electronics . And have had my Speakers and and amp forever. Casta B Horn Speakers and Audiozen Alchemy Amp.
I am amazed everyday by them . 73 now cheers to you John
Thanks for the "Rant". I wouldn't consider myself as an audiophile, just as "hearing interested" but I've learned really a lot in this video.
maybe a little over concerned about sensitivity and efficiency. you ought to take a pro audio perspective, not a hifi perspective. check out Bryston, PMC, ATC, and ProAC. things to be concerned about is imaging, articulation, soundstage. the best studio monitors ($10k+) provide much more detail and imaging than any hifi speaker I've ever heard. You hear things highly focused in reverb tails and cymbals and such.
His point though is people are being misled because the majority of people don't have these massive Krell, etc amps so their speakers aren't playing to their potential, particularly with regards to bass, due to the misleading specs.
My dad was a tv repair tech starting in the earlier 60s. He bought a knight kit power amp. 22 watts rms per channel. He built two large speakers with 12" woofers. When the house was empty, I would put my drums between the speakers. At 1/2 volume, it kept up with a loud drummer!
That may not be relevant to this but I just thought I would throw that on the deck LOL
A great discussion and great visual math references. Im a subscriber now.
Man, you mentioned some serious stuff which brought back nostalgic audio vibes, in more sense than one!
I’m in the game since 1981.
At 59, I have not lost my audio lust for that crackle at the start of a vinyl record, or that low end rumble which reverberates thru’ my speakers at a low volume. Loud is not cool.
Feeling is what it is all about when you build a system.
Sensitivity is a serious business!
8ohms all da’ way👍🏼
🎼