Warm vs Bright ?? (1 Viewer)

[Chu Gai]

I'd like to correct a bit of an error that seems to propagate from time to time, that of SS devices being odd-harmonic generators. While it is indeed true that odd-order distortion predominates this is not because SS is generating these particular distortion. Rather it appears to be due to the fact that most SS devices are push-pull and hence will cancel out even-order harmonics. Hence, as you drive the even orders down, that leaves the odd orders. Tubes also have odd order it's just that they're generally not of the same magnitude as even order. Of course, if the levels are low enough that it's inaudible..well That said...

I ran across this from Usenet and offer it for your consideration. Perhaps you will dismiss it, perhaps it will cause you to think. I'm sure the conditions of the test weren't ideal, but perhaps they're much like our own listening environments in that we too have limitations.

 

[Kevin Alexander]

I throw my hat in w/ Tom Mack. I've had the exact same experience as him, and believe me when I say that I've owned every mainstream receiver made except Outlaw.

Sony ES (current), Yamaha, H/K, Marantz, Pioneer Elite, Denon, Onkyo, and others. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.

 

[Dean-P]

I have both a low end JVC 6020 and a Luxman L-235; they do sound different. The JVC doesn't have the power to give good bass so it lacks bottom end:"bright". Whereas my Luxman has the power for bottom end and gives good clear highs also:"warm". I can try to get the JVC to sound the same by using the treble at low but it still lacks the bottom end. No punch like the Luxman...I used both recievers with the same speakers.
My two cents...

 

[Chu Gai]

Maybe because the JVC is spec'd at 40 Hz at the bottom might have a bit to do with matters?

 

[PeterChenoweth]

I'd say there's absolutely such a thing as warmth and brightness in an amplifier.

Last time I was at my favorite HT shop looking to purchase a new receiver, I spent a great deal of time listening to different receivers through the exact same speakers. Switching between nearly identically spec'ed receivers produces a remarkable difference. Listening to Integra vs Yamaha vs Pioneer Elite receivers, there was a significant difference between them. I had intended on purchasing a Yamaha, but ended up purchasing a Pioneer Elite because the same piece of music, produced on the same speakers, in the same room, with the same cabling, flipping frequently (read, every 10-15 seconds) between the two, to my wife and I the Pioneer Elite produced a fuller and warmer sound than the Yamaha.

No one can tell me that all receivers of similar specifications sound the same.

 

[Chu Gai]

That was in 'direct' mode or with some sort of processing and levels were matched in some fashion?

 

[Rogozhin]

We're not even using correct adjectives.

If you attribute "warm" to an amp then the logical counter attribute will be "cold" not "bright".



rogo

 

[Kevin C Brown]

JT- The electronics comparisons go across three different speaker systems: (mains) Def Tech BP-30s, Vandersteen 2CE Sigs, and now Mirage OM-7's. Vandersteen V2W sub the whole time.

Now, I will certainly say that I could hear differences between the speakers. Vandersteens are just plain killer for 2 ch stereo, but the sins for that entire system for HT were worse than the sins of the Mirages for 2 ch listening. If that makes sense. Just not any appreciable differences between the electronics themselves.

Yeah, see Yamaha is my other favorite example. Most people say their receivers are bright. (I had an RX-V793 I used as a receiver, then added a Nakamichi PA-5AII for the mains and an Acurus 100x3 eventually for the remainder.) I did not find it bright. I found it perfectly neutral, and I really liked some of the DSP modes for HT.

The one comment I have for people who compare receivers and amps in terms of warmth or brightness is (uh oh): unless you do it with a blind A/B/X test, with matched levels within 0.1 dB, then you simply cannot be sure. Just like with Rotel, if most people *think* that they are supposed to be warm, then more than likely that's what you're going to hear. If you *think* that Yamaha receivers are supposed to be bright, then again more than likely, that's what you are going to hear, because you *know* when that component is playing. Has nothing to do with what you're actually hearing but with what your perceptions are. Psycho-acoustics an' all dat.

I've seen other studies like the one that Chu referenced, and they all have similar conclusions: just not that much differences between electronics, *unless* they are pushed hard enough that *that's* when the differences become apparent. (4 ohms speakers with 82 dB efficiency in a big room and no sub, you better spend a lot of money to get a quality, powerful amp. )

I actually honestly believe that the bulk of a person's perception of the sound quality of a component has more to do with the following, than the actual sound quality itself:

1) Build, fit, and finish
2) Did you get a speeding ticket on the way home, and now you will forever have a bad experience associated with that component
3) Double boxed with quality premolded foam inserts, or single boxed with cardboard spacers inside
4) How well the manual is written
5) How much you paid for it
6) Reputation of the company that built it
7) Where that company is located
8) Where the component was manufactured
9) Quality of the binding posts
10) Etc.

I heard about another stat, that people who spend more for their gear are much less critical of it in terms of faults than people who spend less, because the people who spent more do not want to think they made a mistake or that something that costs so much *could* have faults, or even when they are confronted with the faults, they just rationalize the faults with some thinking that they are "quirks" to be put up with because of the otherwise awesome sound quality.

Like I said, I'm not 100% sure, but another question could be, OK, if brightness and warmth do exist, why can't it be measured?

 

[Angelo.M]

My experience as well. If I want to modify the "sound" of my system, I think speakers, room treatments and software...

And then I choose the right beer, of course.

 

[Chu Gai]

Interesting points. Human nature is a funny thing and the way we make decisions is something that's studied and taught in areas like marketing and psychology. Most of our decisions are made knowing only a small amount of data and information (5% or less) that's available. Essentially what happens, is that we fall in love with whatever it is, then we search for the data or justification to support that decision. Furhter we'll ignore, trivialize, explain away, rationalize, denigrate, etc. any evidence that's contrary to what our decision is. It doesn't matter that it's overwhelming, we'll just plain ignore it in order to justify our purchase.

Consider people who do something like buy speakers on the internet without ever having heard them. Yes, you can get your money back but repacking them is a hassle and then there's that issue of having to eat the s/h. Next thing you know, they're raving about them. Coincidence? Not at all. They'll seek approval for their purchases by having their friends come over and essentially give them a pat on the back. They'll join forums such as this one and announce to the world what they've bought and hope that others who've bought the same thing come around and share their experiences. There is after all, strength in numbers. So we rationalize and tailor that peg to fit the hole that we've created. This is one of the reasons why some manufacturers have their own forums (Klipsch for example) so that owners can feel part of a community. Now I'm not saying useful information doesn't come from these forums. They do. But they serve more than one purpose.

I recall from a movie I saw sometime back called Dave where Kevin Kline, as the stunt-president, is holding a meeting to see where he can come with the money he needs for a governmental program he's considering. One of the areas he sees where he can get several million is a program where the US government is running ads so that people who've bought a particular item can feel good about their purchace. "Crazy People" also delves into the marketing aspect of products.


I'll just say if it's in amps (no signal processing) the first thing you need to do is establish the ability to reliably differentiate between two products. Once you've done that, you look for measureable differences. Let's say that measureable difference has to do with a gross difference in output impedance of the amp. OK, now you take the amp that has a low output impedance and add some impedance to the amp (perhaps through a resistor) with the lower impedance and repeat the evaluation. If now you can no longer reliably tell the difference, then I'd think you've probably nailed the primary reason for the difference. But this is work isn't it? This means going way beyond the 5% information that most people base their decisions on. And now we've taken the magic out of it all. That's not fun :frowning:

 

[Angelo.M]

Kevin:

Your last post (#28) is dead-on and one of the best I've seen in this part of HTF in a long time. I reiterates the same points I've made in threads like this for a while now.

Expectations and biases. That's what it all boils down to. If you get an emotional response to the software, then the battle is won.

 

[John S]

Charles...

I don't have such a great room, the room had typical issues, the real amazing flatness I was really using for the example, was at 1 meter, 1 channel driven, I only did this on the two fronts.

All, I can say is, in nearly 20 years of audio engineering live sound, I have never gotten even close to the flatness I was observing.

It has been more than two years since I played with all this but I think I remember how it all went down, I probably had two many glasses of Mead by the end of the experiement too.

But the flattest by far was putting the mic at 1 meter in front of the speaker, and running the mono source just to that channel. It seems from memory that it went down to 30hz-35hz on the low side, before it really just started rolling off at all. I did this first with the two fronts, just to get a real idea of how the Denon and the JBL S-Series were really performing.

The room did cause the typical type peaks and valleys that rooms cause, when I placed my mic at various real seating positions, and with all channels being driven from the same mono source sweep generator, I actually did have to do some placement work, and minor eq, to get it back to the +-3db flatness neighborhood.

But in contrast, most rooms with the respective systems that run in them would be all over the place in my experiences anyways.

 

[John-Tompkins]

Some people dont want to hassle with trying different products because of the hassle they will have to go through, like Chu said.They just get on board with whatever they happen to have and start raving about it as to make them feel better and save the trouble of resale etc.

Others however including myself WILL go through the hassle, WILL a/b products in house, WILL make decisons based soley on what they heard and not on reviews of said equipment or how much it cost's in comparision to another product.

This subject to me at best is laughable that there isnt real differences in sonics between equipment. I gurantee I could double blind a/b 10 out of 10 times between say a 135 watt parasound and a 135 watt bryston.

Whatever though, When I actually stop hearing the differences I will just sell my equipment and get a bose system or home theater in a box..because unlike some others I dont give a hoot about the fancy packaging or the price or the build quality...its all about the sound.

 

[Shane Martin]

I agree the differences do exist and not for pyschological reasons as some would have us believe. A reason test I was privy to convinced me that this was the case but it had 2 factors that I also expected:

1. 3 of the 4 people heard the difference. The 4th who didn't is 2x as old as us and has some hearing issues at the higher end. His Klipsch setup is quite fatiguing to my ears but he absolutely loves it.

2. When the financial aspect of the test came out as far as what products cost what(this was a cable test), 1 of the participants who heard a difference wasn't willing to pay for it. Was the different that great? To him it was but it was down to $$ where his bias lay(lie?) He is what you would call "frugal".

3. The other 2 people including myself bought the "better" cable.

4. The 5th person ran the test and just wanted to jot the information down for a Psych paper he is doing.

Could case #2 be the case on the internet sometimes or alot of the time? I believe it. Alot of people out there want to "persuade" you to spend your money they way they would. Heck I had a cheap friend of mine in college try to convince me to not tip..

 

[Angelo.M]

Amen.

 

[Chu Gai]

Care to share the details of the test?

And Angelo, let's not forget the beer, shall we? Salud!

 

[Shane Martin]

I'll get a friend of mine to post on a seperate thread with the details if he wants to. He was doing for a Pysch test which oddly isn't part of his major.. He's an engineering major. He did all the testing. All we did was show up and listen.

As far as Beer is concerned, I love Tres Pistoles from Canada and recently Negro Modela(sp?) has been the beer of choice but alas I don't drink that much.

 

[Chu Gai]

Thanks, it'd be of interest to hear the details.