Tone Icons

[Mark Hammer]

Seeing these two in terror reminds me of taking my younger son to see the film a few years ago.  After the usual endless series of commercials in the theatre (army, Toyota, Coke, etc.) it struck me that all the trailers seemed to be for either slasher or horror films.  Weird, considering none of the kids in the audience would be admitted to such films.  Then the feature started and after 15 seconds, it was apparent that the projectionist had accidentally put on the film "Saw".  Several hundred parents, seated beside their 5 and 7 year-olds started to get very agitated.  They killed the projector PDQ, and a staff member came in and profusely apologized, while one of the parents demanded "Put the lights on.....NOW!!".  The theatre was about 30 seconds away from lawsuit territory.

Anyways, back to rambling about component voodoo....already in progress.

[petemoore]

  I guess more than half of the time, probably like 94%...
 The posts about ... well here are a couple examples:
 Which resistor type to change to in a FF to 'sound like X'
 What Opamp and which TS circuit do I use to 'become Y'
 ...@@R@ATe, the individuals asking such questions have few if any clues about...say...that they might want to look Closely and with a very scrutinizing eye at...the speaker and amp types they're using, Because changing resistor types in a TS ISN"T going to do anything execpt show how little difference [especially through a less than exceptionally responsive speaker and amp] it makes to them personally, or not, and waste aheckuvallot of time if not the TS Itself.
 IE...changing something else...like from a podunk pickup to a well balanced Tele, or LP type HB or Strat type SC...THAT might make enough of a difference where it'd matter...there is ALOT 'to' a TS, that is OutSide...the TS...IOW the TS, FF, DIST+ Do nothing without a speaker, and do only what X Speaker lets them do.
  Just my most recent Rant Roundup...it's possible we're spending WAYY too much time worrying about resistor material types...compared to the weight of discussing...just about Anything else.  

[Paul Marossy]

experimenters have found that differences in amplitude or gain of less than 1db will not be heard as changes in loudness, but rather as a difference in clarity, accuracy, etc. The experiment also works the same way if you use only one amplifier and the switch only changes the gain or volume a tiny amount. Some subjects have refused to believe that it was only the gain that was changed when shown the setup after the test, preferring to believe that for some reasons the experimenters were still performing some trickery as part of the test.

Very interesting! In my mind, that explains a lot of so-called improvements heard when replacing one little part in a circuit. 

[hairyandy]

They killed the projector PDQ, and a staff member came in and profusely apologized, while one of the parents demanded "Put the lights on.....NOW!!". 

That's hysterical.  The last time I went to a movie with my friends' kids his 9-year-old, after watching the Coke commercial with the polar bears, pointed out that polar bears live in the arctic and penguins live in the antarctic so the commercial couldn't be true.  I just kinda stared at her in awe...

Sorry for the OT, back to the regular scheduled program...

[Mark Hammer]

I have a well-worn photocopy of a 1982 J.A.E.S. paper by Canada's own Floyd Toole (yep, the guy they named the engineering building at the University of New Brunswick after) on blind listening tests.  I'm going to have to scan and post it, if only to preserve it before the toner completely wears off the pages.  For those who simply can't wait, and have $20 burning a hole in their pocket, if you enter "Toole" into their search engine ( http://www.aes.org/journal/search.cfm ) the abstracts of the relevant papers show up with links for downloading-for-fee.

If you've not been acquainted with the Journal of the Audio Engineering Society before, you owe it to yourself to take a peek: http://www.aes.org/journal/

Most recommended is a stroll through the Review of Acoustical Patents that they seem to include every couple of issues.  If you're near a university library, I believe the call number starts with TK.

[phaeton]

Now let's all finish a build, do a keg-stand and go streaking through the quad...I LOVE this place!

So for the filler in this keg, would it be best to use top fermenting yeast and make an ale, or should we lager with bottom fermenting yeast?  Should we use organically grown, imported, or locally acquired commercial grains?  What sort of ratio of barley, wheat, rice, and millet should we use? Certain strains of hops carefully guarded in Ireland, England, Germany, Belgium, or the Pacific Northwest?  Any adjuncts like roasted oat, coffee, cocoa, licorice, or vanilla?  Fruit doping?  Cold filtering, yes or no?  Cask aged or bottle aged?  Bottle fermenting or no?  Poured from tap, bottle or can?  Warm or cold?  Glass, tumbler, stein, mug, or straight from the hose?  Using a glass that's never been 'tainted' with any other product than beer?  Should the glass ever be washed, or should it be 'mellowed' with a buildup of beer funk?


Or should we just get some cheapo Leinie's and fire-engine red Solo Keg Cups and all agree that we're gonna get hammered just the same?

[hairyandy]

I vote for hammered, but then I'm just a lowly guitar tech and we're all about the "easy" fix to get through to the next gig...

[JimRayden]

Then again, why don't most of us get hammered by pure vodka all the time? I say it's still the taste that matters and grab a pint of the finest ale of yer brewery and not ask where it was made or why it tastes oh so good. Arrrgh.

Then comes along me mate Keen and starts ramblin' about bloody wheat and brewing processes, I say I don't bloody care where this John Barleycorn comes from, just let me sing those good ol' drrrinkin' songs and slide the cold and bitter yellow liquid down my oesophagus!

*back to normal mode*

Then again, it's good to know if the brew isn't made of total crapiola.

----------
Jimbo

[lovric]

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

i'm sure.
c.g. jung commented on what's subjective. subjectivity is a phenomenon of human mind, steers decisions and represents a strong and constant factor in ones living. thus it's objective.

[Paul Marossy]

I don't know if this was mentioned, but how about "point-to-point wiring" or "hand-wired"? 

[R.G.]

 

See my articles at Musician's Hotline on "What's the Point of Point-to-Point".

[Paul Marossy]

See my articles at Musician's Hotline on "What's the Point of Point-to-Point".

I've read your articles on point-to-point wiring, they're all very good. It's just funny to me how musicians think that a PTP amp is going to sound better than one that uses a PCB - or a stompbox for that matter! It's really just different methods of construction with the same end result - a reliable, working circuit!

[jonathan perez]

See my articles at Musician's Hotline on "What's the Point of Point-to-Point".

I've read your articles on point-to-point wiring, they're all very good. It's just funny to me how musicians think that a PTP amp is going to sound better than one that uses a PCB - or a stompbox for that matter! It's really just different methods of construction with the same end result - a reliable, working circuit!

i just saw an auction on ebay, with a fellow claiming how much better PTP "SOUNDS"...i emailed him the link to the page, he just said "thanks! but that man surely must not know what hes talking about."

 

[Joe Kramer]

How can it be a foregone conclusion that PTP sounds better or that it doesn't ?  Wouldn't it depend on the PCB layout versus wiring layout, the thickness of the traces versus the wire, the vibrational damping/microphonics of both approaches?  Isn't the "point" to form your own conclusion based on your own observations rather than merely absorb somebody else's prejudice and make it you own?  Will you go to lunch?  Will you?  Go to lunch!

[jonathan perez]

 

[Steben]

The greatest despise towards naive guitarist in history must be the JCM900 (a marshall for crying out loud). This "all-tube" travesty  has a silicium rectifier between 12AX7's put there to create all the "high gain amp tone".

Capital crime.

[R.G.]

i just saw an auction on ebay, with a fellow claiming how much better PTP "SOUNDS"...i emailed him the link to the page, he just said "thanks! but that man surely must not know what hes talking about."

He pretty much *can't* admit that there are better and worse PTPs - he would then have nothing special to sell. He may even believe it. People have an almost infinite capacity for self deception. The sillier the belief, the more desperately it's held.

Anyone who makes money selling how much better PTP sounds, or how hand-wired is better, or how "brown" carbon comp resistors sound, or how much better 2% silver solder sounds, or some of the even sillier audio beliefs really is both intellectually and monetarily invested in what they say. I would not expect anyone who has used that for advertising copy to recant their "beliefs".

How can it be a foregone conclusion that PTP sounds better or that it doesn't ?  Wouldn't it depend on the PCB layout versus wiring layout, the thickness of the traces versus the wire, the vibrational damping/microphonics of both approaches?

Dead correct. Theoretically the entire three dimensional space the amplifier occupies makes a difference in how it sounds; all of the materials, even the air humidity in that space (which changes the inter-wire capacitances slightly) makes a difference, not to mention something like air density change with altitude. However, the vast majority of those subtle effects are far, far outside the audio band and could not be heard, ever.

And PTP proponents miss the elephant in the living room - consistency. With a PCB based circuit, the vast majority of the circuit wirng comes out the same way, every stinking time. With a PTP circuit, each one is different because each wire is in a different place with respect to all the others. How can you say that something with an inherently bigger variation of everything is better than something that is more consistent, unless what you are trying to value is diversity?   

I wonder if the guy on ebay will guarantee you that the one, special unit that *you* get is the best, most perfect example of his hand wired PTP circuits?

And if he will, what does this say about him?

[Joe Kramer]

Hey RG,

It's funny, I feel like we keep trying to high-five each other, but keep barely missing each time. 

However, the vast majority of those subtle effects are far, far outside the audio band and could not be heard, ever.

The unspoken tail of the statement "could not be heard" might presumably be filled in with "by someone" or "by anyone," or with the slightly safer qualification of simply "by me."  At any rate, this seems to me like you are eager to close and lock a door that I am just as eager to leave wide open.  There once was a time when people said "Iron sinks, therefore you cannot make a boat out of it, ever."  But then we discovered a new principle, water displacement.  True, iron still sinks, but we found out how to make it "float" anyway.  By the same token, someone may come along and say he can hear something he's not supposed to be able to hear, and may even be able to prove through experimental means that he can hear it.  And that would lead to some new principles about perception.  The audio band would still be the audio band, but we may find there is more information about sound than just that.

I'm not trying to split hairs with you here.  It's the point I've been trying (and apparently failing) to make all along, starting way back with your original post: saying that something absolutely "can't be heard"  is essentially the same as saying that something like PTP absolutely "sounds better," isn't it?

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Joe

[brett]

Hi
It's late so this might only half make sense.     But I really liked Mark's input:

Wittgenstein noted that "the description of the thing is not the thing itself".

Such a simple explanation of why (read this slowly) none of us should get confused about people dreaming up strange, weird and false REPRESENTATIONS of their stuff.  Especially if the people writing such descriptions are making money out of it (ie they might tell fibs).

Some discussions about subjectivity and objectivity have been raised.  As a scientist/researcher I am all for a good bit of objectivity.  But would it really help if we could quantify tone and be more objective?  I think not.  Here's why...  Compare the more subjective articles in Playboy with the more scholarly material in the Kinsey report.  Is audio research where we want to be at?  No.

RG Keen is right when he says that Mother Nature rules the physical world, including electronics.  But Mother's rules of the physical world have no corresponding system in our individual mental and emotional worlds.  I like to think about that a lot since I learned it a few years ago.  In this context, no measurement of music or tone can ever predict whether we'll LIKE the music or tone.  Similarly, no explanation of how much or what we LIKE or FEEL or KNOW about a tone can ever let a scientist re-create that tone.  I can't help but feel that there might be people out there that create and trade in the "Tone icon" language because it provides a system for describing in the "outside" world some of the inner feelings they have about gear.  Some of the descriptions don't make technical sense, but in general life we rarely use technical language.  And sometimes even everyday life can seem outrageous and bizzare if you take a cold, hard look at it:

At a guess based on geography and age, I'd figure that half of us are working long hours, paying off excessive mortages, living in over-sized houses, driving over-sized vehicles that guzzle a rapidly dwindling resource, spending money we don't even have (in many cases to impress people we don't even like).  Sure "Tone icons" are bizarre.  Bizarre is the new, postmodern normal.
cheers

[Paul Marossy]

IMO, the most important thing about a tube amp design is not whether it's PTP or PCB, but it's really the thought put into the layout of everything. PTP and PCBs are just methods of constructing a circuit.

Just another instance of hype, fallacies and misconceptions among the circles musicians find themselves in. 

Anyhow, I think Joe Kramer's point is a very good one!

How can it be a foregone conclusion that PTP sounds better or that it doesn't ?  Wouldn't it depend on the PCB layout versus wiring layout, the thickness of the traces versus the wire, the vibrational damping/microphonics of both approaches?  Isn't the "point" to form your own conclusion based on your own observations rather than merely absorb somebody else's prejudice and make it you own?