High Damping Factor and Bass Output

[mulester7]

.....which came first, the chicken or the egg?....if we reach the point we accept what meters or scopes tell us over what we hear, we don't have a love for music....one of these days I'm going to borrow an SPL meter and see what it does for balances....but guys, why don't you trust yourself for seeking balances?....it's just like fine-tuning a camera lens....you go just past clear into fuzzy, then back up through clear to fuzzy, and do that about four times, then split the difference....then, if you stop down your lens at all, you're virtually assured of good focus and the best image-quality possible....it's the same with bringing a sub against mains, or rears against fronts.....go just too loud, then back off a hair low, then settle between....why do I need a meter to help me do that?....you guys with 7.1 should bring up the center first, and have it almost pegged....then bring the mains against the center....then bring up surrounds to widen....then bring up rears to bring the front soundstage closer, and I would wire the rears in series off one amp section receiving mono for presence to the front soundstage....never peg anything, stop short one click or an 1/8 of an inch....focus?....boffus?, haha....old joke......

 

[mulester7]

.....and I would wire the rears in series off one amp section receiving mono for presence to the front soundstage....

.....you need to hear this one time....the mids and highs of the front soundstage become crisp and defined with much more clarity....once again, seek the correct "balance" with the rears behind you as you watch your screen....you 7.1 guys could have four speakers in series receiving mono....two from the rear, and two up high on the sides....you will be much more content with lower volume levels....and thrilled when you crank it.....

 

[Dan Banquer]

Damping Factor

My statements adhere, as stated, to most amplilfiers and in conjunction with most speakers. Exceptions in the minority do apply, as my statement never said 'all' , but instead 'most'. Also, will append the former statement to not include switching amplifers, as I have not examined the characteristic behaviors of typical switching amplifiers. I still forget that they even exist in some cases.

It seems you have been disgusted for a while now, based on your replies in the past few months. You have yet to substantiate your assertions from that point in time, in which you seemed keep alluding to mysterious factors that are unknown to the general population, but you refused to divulge the precise nature and audibility coorelation of these when asked for specific information on these factors.


-Chris

Nothing mysterious here, DBX found this to be an issue in the 80's, and there is nothing mysterious about the laws that govern electronics. There does seem to something mysterious about people who can't get off their chairs to go to a library to research the information because they prefer to just google something instead.

I do suppose that it's good thing I don't take mulester seriously, from you however I expect a bit more. Guess I'll have to put you in the same category as mulester and read your posts for entertainment. I'll be happier and leave you to, well........whatever.
d.b.

 

[WmAx]

Nothing mysterious here, DBX found this to be an issue in the 80's, and there is nothing mysterious about the laws that govern electronics. There does seem to something mysterious about people who can't get off their chairs to go to a library to research the information because they prefer to just google something instead.

You still continue the elusive references? And while it may not be a mystery to you, it certainly is to anyone else reading, since you have never actually stated what you refer to, not a couple of months ago, and not now. As always, I gladly await the appropriate references and supporting credible perceptual research that demonstrates a parameter's audibility relevance.

-Chris

 

[Buckle-meister]

...if someone asks me what I think about something, and all I can do is tell them what someone else thinks about the subject, I didn't have an opinion, did I?

People tend to form opinions after they've heard other people's opinions.

...if we reach the point we accept what meters or scopes tell us over what we hear, we don't have a love for music...

That's not true Mulester7, at least not for everyone.

'Meters and scopes' allow as flat a response of sound to be obtained as possible, which hopefully is the same (or as near as damn it) as the response of the room where the music was originally recorded, thereby allowing you to hear as the recording engineer intended. 'Meters and scopes' cannot tell you what sounds good and what does not, as these terms lie firmly within the province of each individual.

 

[Dan Banquer]

Damping Factor

You still continue the elusive references? And while it may not be a mystery to you, it certainly is to anyone else reading, since you have never actually stated what you refer to, not a couple of months ago, and not now. As always, I gladly await the appropriate references and supporting credible perceptual research that demonstrates a parameter's audibility relevance.

-Chris

They appear to be elusive to you for two reasons, you have no background or technical training in electronics, so therefore you read and quote papers that you don't understand. There is no shortage of documentation available; there is a shortage of people willing to learn the basics to understand them.
d.b.

 

[WmAx]

They appear to be elusive to you for two reasons, you have no background or technical training in electronics, so therefore you read and quote papers that you don't understand. There is no shortage of documentation available; there is a shortage of people willing to learn the basics to understand them.
d.b.

It appears that the elusive but cricitcal to audibility amplifier parameter game continues.

50 points to the first person here that names that parameter!

-Chris

 

[mulester7]

Nothing mysterious here, DBX found this to be an issue in the 80's, and there is nothing mysterious about the laws that govern electronics. There does seem to something mysterious about people who can't get off their chairs to go to a library to research the information because they prefer to just google something instead.

I do suppose that it's good thing I don't take mulester seriously, from you however I expect a bit more. Guess I'll have to put you in the same category as mulester and read your posts for entertainment. I'll be happier and leave you to, well........whatever.
d.b.

.....I couldn't care less what you think of me, Dan, but your dig on WmAx at the last here confirms you're about half as sharp as you've tried to represent....very disappointing post.....

 

[Dan Banquer]

Damping Factor

It appears that the elusive but cricitcal to audibility amplifier parameter game continues.

50 points to the first person here that names that parameter!

-Chris

The parameters are frequency response into a reactive load, impulse reponse into a reactive load, and distortion into a reactive load. All of which have already been proven to be measureable and audible.

Thanks for an easy 50 points. I suppose that and $1.50 will buy me a cup of coffee.
d.b.

 

[WmAx]

The parameters are frequency response into a reactive load, impulse reponse into a reactive load, and distortion into a reactive load. All of which have already been proven to be measureable and audible.

Nothing new here; you only listed some standard measurement conditions/methods. I'm aware of the critical amplifier parameters as documented and reviewed by credible references. I was wondering if you had some new parameter to share since you have put so much effort into making elusive parameter references. No points. I am familar with the perceptual studies on all of the signal parameters demonstrated to be relevant to human audibility. It should be noted to readers here that amplifier audiblity is blown out of proportion , since most modern amplifiers perform sufficiently well to remain transparent to human listeners with music program when used within their power limitations. TIM, THD, IMD, Output Z, frequency, phase response; and output power vs. distortion into a typical load that varies +/- 45 degrees in electrical phase through the bandwidth are not an issue of audiblity with most modern amplifiers. Richard Clark and Tom Nousaine have made that clear with countless double-blinded tests.

In retrospect, I suppose that 25 or 35 years ago, that it may have been unusual for most amplifiers to remain transparent under typical loading, before the perceptual studies were complete and widely known. But this is not evidenced to be the case in modern day.

-Chris

 

[mtrycrafts]

One more consideration in DF

Mtry,

Where does Tom Nousaine and Ed Mullen stand on damping factor issues? They've contributed quite a bit to Secrets, which I'm surprised if it's such a voodoo issue. They're pretty well respected in the audio world.

Most of the time people forget to add the wire resistance tot he amp impedance and other components along the way:

http://www.prosoundweb.com/studyhall/lastudyhall/df.pdf

http://www.trueaudio.com/post_013.htm

This will affect DF and not be anywhere what the amp maker publishes. I guess those high DF Mc will be back to 2 digit region

 

[mulester7]

Most of the time people forget to add the wire resistance to the amp impedance and other components along the way

.....ok, so that means everybody's playing in the rain.....

 

[mtrycrafts]

.....ok, so that means everybody's playing in the rain.....

Not sure. those days are over for me, playing in the rain

 

[PENG]

Most of the time people forget to add the wire resistance tot he amp impedance and other components along the way:

http://www.prosoundweb.com/studyhall/lastudyhall/df.pdf

http://www.trueaudio.com/post_013.htm

This will affect DF and not be anywhere what the amp maker publishes. I guess those high DF Mc will be back to 2 digit region

Good links, thanks!

The examples used seem extreme though, people who worry about DF likely use thick cables that have much lower d.c. resistance. Inductive reactance (2πfL) of those cables are very low as well at frequencies that matter.

As for woofers, I think I am sticking to my SVS.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Good links, thanks!

The examples used seem extreme though, people who worry about DF likely use thick cables that have much lower d.c. resistance. Inductive reactance (2πfL) of those cables are very low as well at frequencies that matter.

As for woofers, I think I am sticking to my SVS.

10 ft of 12 ga is .0324 ohms. Don't forget the round trip. How about the other comonent in that link?

 

[jneutron]

.....ok, so that means everybody's playing in the rain.....

Nope.

Some bypass the speaker wire inductance, capacitance, and resistance entirely by pulling the feedback from the speaker using a quadaxial cable.

Or, second best, run an 8 ohm, 8 guage coaxial wire to the speakers.

I so love these DF discussions. I do wish, however, that the players would learn about four quadrant DF considerations, the inherent limitations caused by pushing of a current driven device by a voltage source, and frequency based time distortion along with the freq dependent ITD sensitivity..

So much to learn, so little time.

Cheers, John

 

[mtrycrafts]

Nope.

Some bypass the speaker wire inductance, capacitance, and resistance entirely by pulling the feedback from the speaker using a quadaxial cable.

Or, second best, run an 8 ohm, 8 guage coaxial wire to the speakers.

I so love these DF discussions. I do wish, however, that the players would learn about four quadrant DF considerations, the inherent limitations caused by pushing of a current driven device by a voltage source, and frequency based time distortion along with the freq dependent ITD sensitivity..

So much to learn, so little time.

Cheers, John

And the question is still: is it audible?

 

[jneutron]

And the question is still: is it audible?

Actually, the real question should be...is what audible.

Without understanding the concept fully, it is not possible to measure the effect with equipment. Without measurement, what does one correlate to audibility? Good looks??

The treatment of damping factor as a simple rms level/phase shift entity, is too simplistic. Unfortunately, the real models are too complex for the amp designers out there. So instead, everybody argues endlessly over rudimentary ones.

Cheers, John

 

[mtrycrafts]

Actually, the real question should be...is what audible.

Without understanding the concept fully, it is not possible to measure the effect with equipment. Without measurement, what does one correlate to audibility? Good looks??

The treatment of damping factor as a simple rms level/phase shift entity, is too simplistic. Unfortunately, the real models are too complex for the amp designers out there. So instead, everybody argues endlessly over rudimentary ones.

Cheers, John

Well, we could start comparing amps with different DF and see if one can audibly differentiate between them, no?
There have been a few amp comparisons in the past, nothing have been found to attribute known audible differences to DF but to other well known issues. The rest, all null.
I like to start with a listening test first, then find answers if there is one. But, that is just me, and maybe a few other poor souls
I don't see why there would be rms issues or phase shift issues involved here.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.high-end/msg/1a35b2da043f01d5?q=author:DPierce@world.std.com+and+damping+factor&hl=en&lr=&rnum=1

 

[jneutron]

Well, we could start comparing amps with different DF and see if one can audibly differentiate between them, no?
There have been a few amp comparisons in the past, nothing have been found to attribute known audible differences to DF but to other well known issues. The rest, all null.
I like to start with a listening test first, then find answers if there is one. But, that is just me, and maybe a few other poor souls
I don't see why there would be rms issues or phase shift issues involved here.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again, but yet, still expecting a different outcome.

Comparing amps audibly? Why expect a different outcome? It's a waste of time until a clear definition of what to look for has been established.

I have not seen anybody define actual measurements which are capable of discerning the damping factor of an amp while it is pushing a reactive load. In point of fact, most amplifier designers are clueless as to the relevant die temperature and the instantaneous parametric changes that occur on the silicon die during the wild dissipation swings of reactive loading...it would take a while to teach them what is going on within the first coupla hundred microinches of the silicon during reactive loading, as well as the e/m enviro of the amp. Unless these issues fry their designs, they will remain oblivious to them.

They do not believe they need to learn this, so there is no use in trying..

As for audibility, I've also seen squat with respect to how we compensate for subtle alterations of imaging parameters, especially with respect to the settling time for our perceptions, so again, we use a slowly responding instrument to measure a rapidly changing signal.. More listening tests..insanity, by definition.

So, even if somebody thought they heard something different, regardless of the inadequacy of the listening regimen, there is nothing out there to actually correlate the audibility to with respect to actual ele measure..unless one considered the color of the amp faceplate perhaps?

RMS and phase: Look at what damping factor is...a measure of the ability to control the load. Simple sine based frequency response and delay are the only measures to date?? Geeze, can't remember last time I listened to sines..

The learning curve in front of us is steep enough to bump our nose..

Cheers, John