Jump to content
Computer Audiophile


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About gmgraves

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  1. Did I not just say that? Tonal quality will not change with volume as long as you A) don't run out of power, B) don't operate your speakers in their non-linear area. I don't do that because it's not necessary. If your system does that then I suggest that either your amplifier is insufficient for your system or your speakers are. That's too bad. If I'd had an amp like that, I'd have dumped it for something better.
  2. Again, there would only be dynamic compression if the amp compressed dynamics up near its power limit, or if the speakers compressed as the music got louder (I once had a pair Acoustat electrostatic speakers that did that because the transformer driving the ESL panel wasn't big enough and saturated at higher volumes). As long as you operated the playback equipment within it's limits, there should be no compression, certainly if the recording has some compression it would be compressed irrespective of the playback volume. This is getting somewhat silly!
  3. Why Class D Sucks

    Jud, you just did what W. C. Fields told us NEVER to do: "Smarten-up a chump!" But well done anyway.
  4. That's sort of like saying that a Stutz Bearcat was poorly engineered back in 1920 because it couldn't go 250 Mph like a modern Bugatti Veyron. Let's just say that the engineers who designed the "Usual Suspects" didn't know as much about designing with solid-state as they do today.
  5. Of course the tonal quality doesn't change. Why would it? Of course, if you come close to clipping the amplifier by overdriving it, or run the speakers out of their linear range, so that they distort, THEN the tonal quality will change, but I'm guessing that wasn't what Frank meant. There is no way, with current technology, to accurately capture the sound of many brass instruments, trumpets and coronets being chief among these, but french horns, while a more "polite" instrument can be difficult as well. The reason? The explosive and very complex transient attacks and harmonic structure in a trumpet (or other brass instrument) blast are faster than the diaphragm of any microphone can follow, would be my educated guess. Anyway, whatever the reason, no recorded trumpet(s) has ever fooled anyone, no matter how good their playback system, into mistaking it for a real trumpet in the room.
  6. See that doesn't make any sense. Because the brass will get louder or softer as one would expect, but the shortcomings of the recording (any brass recording) and it's inability to accurately record the sound of live brass in a real space, doesn't change one iota. Now what?
  7. Once again, Frank. You are wrong! I would love to "understand you" but - and here's the crux of the matter - YOU HAVEN"T SAID ANYTHING! All you do is boast about your results and post in vague terms; and the things you do actually say, make no sense in the realm of electronics, acoustics, or even Newtonian or Einsteinian physics! Bad analogy. Lewis Hamilton does not win F1 races by tweaking the air (pardon me, the nitrogen) in his tires! He has the best car, with the best engine and the best solid engineering in the team behind him (not to take anything away from his talent as a driver, you understand). What wins in motor sport as well as Hi-Fi is good, well designed and well made equipment. Again, Lipstick applied to a pig or a tuxedo on a goat does nothing to alter the fact that they are still a pig and a goat.
  8. THEN TELL US ALL HOW TO FIX IT! Since you "obviously" know. Well, you can put lipstick on a pig. But it's still a pig. That's my opinion of worrying over the last soupçon of "Fi" just too play topical "pop" crap.
  9. This is Dave Wilson's belief as well. That's why he uses some strange mix of epoxy and other "stuff" for his cabinets to make them very heavy and very inert. It must work because to me, the best cone speakers I've ever listened to for any amount of time was the WATT/Puppy 5. After all, even Dave Wilson admitted that the drivers he used were nothing special and were off-the-shelf from a European supplier (he tweaked them somewhat though, especially the tweeter. I think by injecting ferro fluid into the voice-coil gap, but I could be disremembering here). My M-L ESLs don't have a cabinet above about 400Hz, but I have wondered how much better they might sound if the bass cabinet could be eliminated...
  10. No worries, mate. I just didn't know to what you were referring! Of corse I do. Both my Krell and my H-K amps do the same thing, but then my speakers have nothing like 118 dB/watt/1 Meter sensitivity either! Of course I have plenty of power, so it doesn't really matter. Not really. I follow the part about the open inputs, but I really don't know what a FireFace800 is, or if I knew once, I've certainly forgotten! I can see where a very small signal (like an electronic noise component) would be amplified greatly with very efficient speakers. When I was in high school, a friend or mine's dad had a Klipschorn (mono) in his basement. One day we wired up a length of line cord to a transistor radio earphone plug and connected the other end to the Klipschorn. When we connected it to the radio and turned it on, it surprised the hell out of us by being really loud (they sounded awful, of course)! A year or so later I was given a pair of Altec Lansing A7s (Voice of the Theater) speakers out of a local movie theater that was being demolished. They could do a similar trick, (not so loud though) but sounded equally as awful - I didn't even like them connected to my two hi-fi amps. I ended up donating them to my high-school as stage speakers. I see lots of folks on they forum say that their stereos sound better with preamps. I have to believe them, but I don't see how that's possible. Every active gain stage one adds to a system, the more the signal quality deteriorates. This is simple electronics. There is no such thing as "a straight wire with gain". There is always a price to pay for active gain. It has always been my experience that removing a preamp and replacing it with a passive volume control always improves the sound by lowering the noise and distortion (providing the passive volume control is designed correctly, that is. IOW, a T-Pad). It's not so much that Frank can't explain it, it's that he doesn't (won't?). The things he has revealed are nonsense. He might not know that, but there are lots of people here who do. Most interconnect cables (even many cheap ones) are dead flat up into the 10 MHz range. That's plenty for audio. I find that Coax SPDIF is good through 192 KHz, and Toslink through 96 KHz. I've never been fond of USB, although my DragonFly v.1.2 , connecting my desktop computer to my desktop stereo and I'm listening to it right now (through an IFi iUSB power supply) and for it's purpose, it's OK.
  11. And a good euphemism it is too! Another is Maui Wowee, Humbolt Hemp, etc.
  12. Why Class D Sucks

    Now, THAT'S funny!
  13. Why Class D Sucks

    I generally don't turn my DAC off. But I do if I go away for any length of time. That's just prudent.
  14. Why Class D Sucks

    Did I not just say that?
  15. I'm afraid that I have no idea what you're on about with this post! Where in the world did you get a figure like -3dB at 70 Hz? What does it have to do with my reply to Frank about what constitutes a realistic recording? Have you been smoking Mexican laughing tobacco, Peter?