UK Vintage Radio Repair and Restoration Powered By Google Custom Search Vintage Radio and TV Service Data

Go Back   UK Vintage Radio Repair and Restoration Discussion Forum > General Vintage Technology > General Vintage Technology Discussions

Notices

General Vintage Technology Discussions For general discussions about vintage radio and other vintage electronics etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 4th Aug 2020, 1:27 pm   #1661
Ted Kendall
Dekatron
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Kington, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 3,657
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehertz View Post
I've bought new hifi speakers and out of interest, and against my better judgement, I've just been looking at an audiophile forum to see the views of others. Never have I witnessed such a self identifying bunch of non-musical, non-technical, cerebrally deaf, full of audiophoolery catch phrases, bunch of phools in my life. One of the biggest things seems to be this infatuation with an amp having to 'match' a pair of speakers. Ok, basics aside like speaker impedance vs amp current capability, speaker sensitivity vs amp power capability (those are basic and a given) then what rubbish those guys talk about in terms of amps and speakers having to match. I mean, a 'bright' sounding amp needing to be paired with 'dark' speakers? most, even half decent amps have very straight frequency response curves so it's plain ridiculous. Also, if there wasn't this 'garlic to a vampire' attitude towards amps with tone controls, then many speaker and or room anomalies could at least be improved with a tad of judicious EQing. But of course, the great god 'signal' must be as pure as a mountain stream, and passing through tone controls will destroy valuable fidelity.. The fact that the signal has already passed through many and various forms of tone controls, graphic equalisers, compressors, limiters, noise reduction circuits, distorted valve amps etc etc is lost on them. And of course, no two studios have the same playback system and room acoustics, let alone the tonal and balance preference of those who mixed down the recording. So, each and every recording has a different sounding mix in terms of them being bright or dark, lacking in deep bass, whatever. What would go a long way towards sorting that out? tone controls. Most hifi speakers start to droop below, I dunno, say 100Hz. So personally, I always use a tad of bass boost to lift the low end response of the system in order for the bass to be heard as it was in the studio that had those massive monitors with their ground shaking low end capabilities. No tone controls? then you're stuck with a system that is always at the mercy of the recording studio in which a given recording was made, or the choices of the broadcaster in the case of radio.
Couldn't agree more. If your speakers sound right to you, and I take it you wouldn't have bought them otherwise, that should be the end of the matter.
Ted Kendall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 4th Aug 2020, 1:42 pm   #1662
stevehertz
Dekatron
 
stevehertz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rugeley, Staffordshire, UK.
Posts: 8,809
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by turretslug View Post
I feel rather sorry for the uninformed but genuinely interested in better audio reproduction who end up resorting to reading through such hi-fi comics- a long time ago, there would have been genuinely useful and cost-effective advice to sift through, now they are just another arm of the all-pervading "conspicuous consumption through social intimidation" marketing strategy- and it has plenty of "useful lackeys".
I agree, gone are the days when the likes of Angus McKenzie provided reviews based on sound technical lab results and his own impeccable ear. His HiFi Choice A5 size equipment review books (not the mag) are my bible.
__________________
A digital radio is the latest thing, but a vintage wireless is forever..
stevehertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th Aug 2020, 1:45 pm   #1663
stevehertz
Dekatron
 
stevehertz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rugeley, Staffordshire, UK.
Posts: 8,809
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John_BS View Post
Quote:
I've bought new hifi speakers and out of interest, and against my better judgement, I've just been looking at an audiophile forum to see the views of others. Never have I witnessed such a self identifying bunch of non-musical, non-technical, cerebrally deaf, full of audiophoolery catch phrases, bunch of phools in my life.

Oh dear Steve, your re-education is going to prove a challenge....


John
(Laughs) indeed. Count me as un-re-educational. But happy knowing what I know yet glad to learn more from those who do know, not those who write poetry instead of equipment reviews.
__________________
A digital radio is the latest thing, but a vintage wireless is forever..
stevehertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th Aug 2020, 1:54 pm   #1664
stevehertz
Dekatron
 
stevehertz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rugeley, Staffordshire, UK.
Posts: 8,809
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beobloke View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehertz View Post
I've bought new hifi speakers and out of interest, and against my better judgement, I've just been looking at an audiophile forum to see the views of others.
Well, come on then, what are they? Let us know so we can take the mickey!

I'll start with:

- Ooh, I wouldn't have bought them if I were you.
- They won't match your amplifier.
- Your cables aren't good enough for them/are too good for them
- They're too small/too big/the wrong colour for your room

They're ATC SCM 11 speakers. I like them very much, and was drawn to them initially as a result of their very low distortion figures, smallish size and their heritage. I used ATC 12" sound reinforcement drivers in the 70s when ATC had not long been formed. I fitted them to my band's stage monitors for their clear sound, efficiency, and low distortion characteristics that beat all other 12" drivers in a test/review in a magazine at the time, including JBL and Altec. Ever since, I have watched the company grow, it's product range expand, and the excellent reviews they have received. I got these at a great price as ex demo ones. They're actually the very first production pair, serial numbers 1001 and 1002.
__________________
A digital radio is the latest thing, but a vintage wireless is forever..
stevehertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th Aug 2020, 2:09 pm   #1665
Ted Kendall
Dekatron
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Kington, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 3,657
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Well, there you are - I'm not a great fan of ATC midrange, as judged by the two pairs I owned, but then the PMC LB1s by which I swear for professional purposes have been pilloried here for "funny bass" and other crimes. So what? They're both properly screwed together speakers, and we're each happy with what we have. Let the phools phool...
Ted Kendall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 4th Aug 2020, 3:53 pm   #1666
Beobloke
Heptode
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Southampton, Hampshire, UK.
Posts: 816
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehertz View Post
I agree, gone are the days when the likes of Angus McKenzie provided reviews based on sound technical lab results and his own impeccable ear. His HiFi Choice A5 size equipment review books (not the mag) are my bible.
I have the first HFC A5 issue which was speaker reviews by Angus Mackenzie. As I recall, he hated all of them except the Yamaha NS-1000 and the Spendor BC-1!
Beobloke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th Aug 2020, 4:06 pm   #1667
stevehertz
Dekatron
 
stevehertz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rugeley, Staffordshire, UK.
Posts: 8,809
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beobloke View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehertz View Post
I agree, gone are the days when the likes of Angus McKenzie provided reviews based on sound technical lab results and his own impeccable ear. His HiFi Choice A5 size equipment review books (not the mag) are my bible.
I have the first HFC A5 issue which was speaker reviews by Angus Mackenzie. As I recall, he hated all of them except the Yamaha NS-1000 and the Spendor BC-1!
Well, he probably wasn't far wrong there then! Or at least, they are both amongst the 'best of the best' speakers ever made. In the 70s myself and a couple of lab gurus where I worked made some very close Spendor BC1 copies using pretty much everything exactly the same, but as the Spendor mid/bass unit could not be bought by the general public, we used the similar Richard Allan 8" HP8B Bextrene cone unit. I used them up until very recently.
__________________
A digital radio is the latest thing, but a vintage wireless is forever..
stevehertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th Aug 2020, 5:08 pm   #1668
Ted Kendall
Dekatron
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Kington, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 3,657
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

The original Hi Fi Choice issues threw more measurement horsepower at their subjects than was the norm, even at the time, and to good effect. The first issue, which dealt with cassette decks, was a masterly treatment of the limitations of the medium and the vices and virtues of the available equipment. Other authors followed the house rules closely, and the result was a solid body of reference material which remains useful today. Most valuable, I think, was McKenzie's insistence on rigour in measurement, coupled with listening tests to evaluate performance from the consumer's point of view. The present glossy of the same title is something entirely different - and worse.
Ted Kendall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 4th Aug 2020, 8:02 pm   #1669
stevehertz
Dekatron
 
stevehertz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rugeley, Staffordshire, UK.
Posts: 8,809
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Kendall View Post
The original Hi Fi Choice issues threw more measurement horsepower at their subjects than was the norm, even at the time, and to good effect. The first issue, which dealt with cassette decks, was a masterly treatment of the limitations of the medium and the vices and virtues of the available equipment. Other authors followed the house rules closely, and the result was a solid body of reference material which remains useful today. Most valuable, I think, was McKenzie's insistence on rigour in measurement, coupled with listening tests to evaluate performance from the consumer's point of view. The present glossy of the same title is something entirely different - and worse.
Exactly. I have a couple of dozen Hifi Choice books, all referred to as and when required.
__________________
A digital radio is the latest thing, but a vintage wireless is forever..
stevehertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th Aug 2020, 11:13 pm   #1670
m0cemdave
Octode
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bletchley, Buckinghamshire, UK.
Posts: 1,205
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

The other great reviewer was Hugh Ford - see old issues of Studio Sound for examples of his work.

--------

I think Steve will be very happy with his choice. I still have a pair of very early SCM20's.
m0cemdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th Aug 2020, 11:44 pm   #1671
Ted Kendall
Dekatron
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Kington, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 3,657
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Agreed. Hugh's analysis of tape transports was masterly. In a slightly earlier time, both Gordon King and Alec Tutchings provided solid evidence-based reviews.
Ted Kendall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 5th Aug 2020, 12:44 pm   #1672
Craig Sawyers
Dekatron
 
Craig Sawyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Oxford, UK.
Posts: 4,941
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

The flip side was HiFi News during the 70's, and possibly somewhat before and after, when the reviews were only lab measurements. There were no listening tests involved.

They they flipped the other way almost entirely, and based their judgement on subjective assessment only.

Of course, the danger is this. If you are going to do lab tests and listening tests - what order do you do them in? Lab tests can prejudice listening tests - if a piece of audio gear measures poorly it makes for a tendency to audition poorly too, human nature being what it is. Or the opposite way round. So you listen first, then do lab measurements. That also has a problem - if it sounds one way and the measurements the opposite, what do you then do? Listen again with prejudice, or try and measure in such a way to justify your listening test?

Craig
Craig Sawyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th Aug 2020, 12:59 pm   #1673
Beobloke
Heptode
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Southampton, Hampshire, UK.
Posts: 816
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Sawyers View Post
The flip side was HiFi News during the 70's, and possibly somewhat before and after, when the reviews were only lab measurements. There were no listening tests involved.

They they flipped the other way almost entirely, and based their judgement on subjective assessment only.

Of course, the danger is this. If you are going to do lab tests and listening tests - what order do you do them in? Lab tests can prejudice listening tests - if a piece of audio gear measures poorly it makes for a tendency to audition poorly too, human nature being what it is. Or the opposite way round. So you listen first, then do lab measurements. That also has a problem - if it sounds one way and the measurements the opposite, what do you then do? Listen again with prejudice, or try and measure in such a way to justify your listening test?

Craig
Speaking as a current Hi-Fi News scribe, I do not see the results of the measurements until after I have submitted my review copy containing the listening evaluation.

Obviously I cannot speak for any of my colleagues, but my ears are so superb, they can instantly pick up on any measurement issues with complete accuracy...
Beobloke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th Aug 2020, 1:05 pm   #1674
Ted Kendall
Dekatron
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Kington, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 3,657
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beobloke View Post
Obviously I cannot speak for any of my colleagues, but my ears are so superb, they can instantly pick up on any measurement issues with complete accuracy...
I get the impression that most of today's reviewers actually believe this.
Ted Kendall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 5th Aug 2020, 4:45 pm   #1675
Radio Wrangler
Moderator
 
Radio Wrangler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fife, Scotland, UK.
Posts: 22,800
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Todays reviewers have such highly developed and trained hearing that they can tell if anything they are reviewing has been contaminated by previously having been connected to any form of measuring equipment.

Using logic, and considering their hearing to have no limitations, I'd ask if they could then determine what it must have sounded like before it was corrupted, but I'd only be told I was being silly.

David
__________________
Can't afford the volcanic island yet, but the plans for my monorail and the goons' uniforms are done
Radio Wrangler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th Aug 2020, 7:56 pm   #1676
AC/HL
Dekatron
 
AC/HL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Heckmondwike, West Yorkshire, UK.
Posts: 9,637
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

In other circumstances, hearing things that aren't there can be a cause for concern...
AC/HL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th Aug 2020, 8:39 pm   #1677
wd40addict
Octode
 
wd40addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Stevenage, Herts. UK.
Posts: 1,515
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Scroll to the bottom of this page for more on the dirty world of 70s hi-fi reviewing. AM allegedly fiddled the results.

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Wharfedale.htm
wd40addict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th Aug 2020, 12:55 am   #1678
Craig Sawyers
Dekatron
 
Craig Sawyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Oxford, UK.
Posts: 4,941
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

I know Richard Lee well. He worked for me for a couple of years when I was CTO of Wharfedale. He eventually quit Wharfedale, not long after I left, and emigrated to Australia, where he teaches scuba diving around the Great Barrier Reef. Quite a change from running R&D at Wharfedale!

A good and very knowledgeable guy. He set up blind listening at Wharfedale. You chose the music, had a switch box, and listened in mono to speakers which were hidden behind a room width, floor to ceiling black acoustically transparent curtain. He also designed Option 1, a dipole speaker with active crossover and multiple custom Quad current dumper amps in the bass.

Details of this exceedingly rare beast attached

Craig
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	71_1.jpeg
Views:	102
Size:	15.7 KB
ID:	212802   Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_20171212_161634-621x1024.jpg
Views:	95
Size:	30.6 KB
ID:	212803   Click image for larger version

Name:	10-monstres-sacr-s---7-bis-23a2db6.jpg
Views:	105
Size:	68.6 KB
ID:	212804   Click image for larger version

Name:	10-monstres-sacr-s---8-bis-23a2e74.jpg
Views:	88
Size:	71.4 KB
ID:	212805  
Craig Sawyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th Aug 2020, 2:20 am   #1679
stevehertz
Dekatron
 
stevehertz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rugeley, Staffordshire, UK.
Posts: 8,809
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Sawyers View Post

Of course, the danger is this. If you are going to do lab tests and listening tests - what order do you do them in? Lab tests can prejudice listening tests - if a piece of audio gear measures poorly it makes for a tendency to audition poorly too, human nature being what it is. Or the opposite way round. So you listen first, then do lab measurements. That also has a problem - if it sounds one way and the measurements the opposite, what do you then do? Listen again with prejudice, or try and measure in such a way to justify your listening test?

Craig
Well, it depends on the chosen procedure. If you isolate those doing the listening tests from the lab tests, there will be no psychological based bias passed on. There was a particular issue of Hi-fi for Pleasure in the 70s that included an in depth review of 16 speakers. The lab tests were done totally separately, then a panel of experts from across associated industries performed the listening tests blind. That's about as good as gets in my book.
__________________
A digital radio is the latest thing, but a vintage wireless is forever..
stevehertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th Aug 2020, 8:13 am   #1680
Radio Wrangler
Moderator
 
Radio Wrangler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fife, Scotland, UK.
Posts: 22,800
Default Re: The Audiophoolery Thread.

AM also did reviews of amateur radio equipment. Amongst some of the retrospective comments from his ex-assistants were comments that he was not at all a pleasant person to work for.

I'm very disappointed to read of his overriding his opinions from a blind listening test once he knew what he had been listening to. Someone practicing 'good science' should have found the disparity very interesting, logged it and set about investigating the cause. Discoveries are made when you didn't get what you expected. When nature hands you a clue, chucking it away is stupid. Fudging results is dishonest and dangerous because it can circle and bite. Fudging results with other people aware of it adds stupidity to dishonesty. It comes down to whether or not we believe this account. If it did happen, exclusion from future listening panels is the right thing to do.

David
__________________
Can't afford the volcanic island yet, but the plans for my monorail and the goons' uniforms are done
Radio Wrangler is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 7:15 pm.


All information and advice on this forum is subject to the WARNING AND DISCLAIMER located at https://www.vintage-radio.net/rules.html.
Failure to heed this warning may result in death or serious injury to yourself and/or others.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2002 - 2023, Paul Stenning.