|
| Why Do Things-That-Shouldn’t-Have-a-Sound, Have One Anyway? Part Three: The Path less Traveled Q. What do you think is the next important frontier in power conditioners? A. The next important frontier is not a product; it’s a concept. This frontier has been created by a lack of understanding concerning the dual nature of power conditioners: #1) power conditioners have an inherent “sound,” #2) power conditioners clean up AC wall power. The mainstream understanding is that the cleaning action causes the sound. This viewpoint is overly simplistic and in many ways incorrect. A conditioner’s sound is influenced by its cleaning action, but only influenced, not determined. The tonal variations of power conditioners are at least as important to the successful integration of a power conditioner into a listening system as are its power cleansing properties, and sometimes the tonality is more important. A power conditioner’s ability to do a good job of cleaning the power is not necessarily reflected in its sound; good power cleaners can make a system sound bad while ineffective power cleaners can improve the sound of a system...a counter-intuitive fact. When selecting between conditioners that are similar in their grunge removal characteristics, tonality will usually be the decisive factor in long term ownership. The common criticism of power conditioners is that they cause compressed sonics. This is usually a case of tonality mismatch and not an actual restriction of current flow through the device. When the resonance response of a conditioner is such that it will help tame some system’s aggressiveness, it will also cause other systems to lose dynamics.(see I) At the same time, conditioners that are very extended on top and those which accentuate dynamics can in the wrong situation sound too thin or aggressive. Of course, in what way something works or doesn’t is usually clouded in the catch word “better (see II).” The following statement is based on experience: I could send out for evaluation 100 of any product I make and the individual results from each audition could be grouped into one of the following four categories: 1) I don’t hear a difference. 2) It’s too dark. 3) It’s too bright. 4) It’s wonderful; I’ll take it. One product; four different general responses. What does this mean? In my opinion it means this: tonal synergy is king; one size does not fit all; there are no absolutes; context is everything. This means that ultimately, the sound quality of your listening system is your responsibility, and no one else’s. Manufacturers, reviewers, and dealers can only let you know if a product works for them; you will have to try it in YOUR system. The way the product is made and what it is made from–not its power cleaning abilities--will in many cases determine its effectiveness in making your system more listenable. (see III) (I realize that this is a rather brutal negation of the normal mental path one takes when shopping for audio equipment. However, I have noticed that the usual mental path most often leads one astray, and far too quickly back to your “favorite” retailer for a sonic fix for the new component that was “supposed” to be a sonic fix for another problem.) _____________________________ I) It is easy to increase dynamics without changing the conditioner: 1) Put metal or ceramic cones under the conditioner. 2) Use ½" metal machine-screw nuts under it. 3) Use one of my tuning kits. II) See “Better,” at the end of this article. III) Unfortunately, “better” parts do NOT automatically produce a “better” sound; also see footnote #II. Q.How did you come to this conclusion? A. It’s a long story but it starts shortly after I began building power conditioners. Ten years ago if someone had told me that today I would be building power conditioners to improve the sound of audio systems, I’d have said “Not likely.”4 If they’d said not only would I be building them but also I would make them in several different sonic “flavors,” I’d have thought they were nuts. If they’d dared to go even further and say I’d be accomplishing the flavor changes mechanically with small pieces of wood and metal, and/or lengths of wire according to their size, direction, color, and jacket flexibility, I’d have laughed and said, “Now I know you are nuts.” Q. Why did you start manufacturing power conditioners? A. Because I heard one make a significant improvement to the sound of a friend’s audio system. Previous to this event I had built a couple of audio equipment power conditioners for a local audiophile-quality classical recording group I was part of, so I had some limited experience...but it was power and as such, how important could it really be–right? These first two conditioners were used during recording sessions and for playback, and even though the first conditioner had caused a musician listening to a recital tape we’d recorded for him to say he could ‘hear the harmonics better,’ I didn’t even consider listening to a before-and-after because it was just power, as I thought then—it was nothing really important. The exact nature of the sonic improvement was easy to overlook from a procedural standpoint. Why? Because it was “just” power and as long as it was clean and you had enough, everything was “just” fine. I didn’t understand that power could make a major difference and so I didn’t stop to listen. Because of this mental dismissal, there was a 6-month hiatus between making the two conditioners I used at work and the 3rd conditioner that was built for this particular friend. He had become converted to the idea of an audio rather than computer oriented power conditioner because George Tice had just recently made a big impression on the audiophile community with his isolation transformer. When the conditioner for my friend was finished, we set up an evening to get together and install it. The evening came and 5 audiophile friends got together at the recipient’s home and we sat around eating some delicious munchies and shooting the audiophile breeze. An hour and a half and a lot of dead breeze came and went and then we decided to plug in the conditioner and at first put just the amps into it. A little background before going on: The audio equipment was on the other side of one listening room wall, not in the same room as the speakers, so we had to go through the kitchen and another room before getting to the equipment. The equipment consisted of a Luxman CD player, a VTL preamp (don’t remember which one), B&K monoblock amps, and audiophile interconnects and speaker wire. The speakers were beautifully built custom floor standing towers with side firing woofers. The overall sound of the system was less than inspiring though. Treble extension seemed to be lacking, and this constricted air and dimensionality...as in no soundstage image above or outside the speakers. The sound was good but it was about to be transformed–much to my, and everyone else’s amazement. As the speaker’s designer and I were walking into the kitchen from having put the amps (only) into the conditioner, he said, “I can hear the difference from here.” I could too. The treble extension that had been missing before was suddenly there, pleasantly in-force, which then opened up the sound. The resulting sound now had width and height outside and above the speakers, and more depth. Talk about being surprised! There is a big difference between theory and practice. In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice--well...you know. _____________________________ IV) Quotable quote: “Paradigm procedures and applications...restrict the phenomenological field accessible for scientific investigation at any given time.” T.S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd edition, p. 60. We ate fewer munchies and listened more seriously to the sound. About half an hour later we moved the CD player’s power cord from the computer conditioner to my conditioner’s digital section. As we were coming through the kitchen again we could hear the difference. This time the midrange quality was the beneficiary. Whew! I had no idea. From then on we paid total attention to the sound. The speaker designer/builder summarized the evening thus: “The difference is, before we had sound, now we have music.” This is when I started thinking about the possibility of manufacturing power conditioners. Q. Why did you start making custom power cords? A. After I had been building conditioners for a month or so, I started noticing differences in the sound from conditioner to conditioner. They were subtle differences, but definite differences all the same. Now this was, I thought, another impossibility, but I could hear it. (see V) While a degree in geology isn’t heavy in electronic theory, the core classes include enough physics to have made me sure that power is just a matter of having enough. And then after my experience at my friend’s house, it seemed that clean power was nirvana....and now something else was going on! I hadn’t changed the design, but the conditioners didn’t sound alike...same parts...ah! Different internal wire! Mmmmm, wait a minute. At the low current values involved, three inches of almost any copper wire from 18 gauge to 12 gauge will have equally negligible inductance, capacitance, and resistance at 60Hz... so it couldn’t make a difference– but I heard a difference. At that point I decided to investigate something else I thought I had noticed, but at first dismissed: change the power cord wire and the sound changes. First had come mental hesitation, a little agitation, and then reluctant curiosity. I didn’t think it was possible but I thought I should go ahead and check it out. So I built six different power cords with different materials and several different construction techniques. What--they all sound different! Wait a minute...it can’t make a difference–but I hear a difference...it can’t make a difference! –OK, but I hear a difference! There I was at 3AM one morning, ping-ponging between those two diametrically opposed viewpoints–except one wasn’t a viewpoint, it was what I was hearing, and therefore reality. It wasn’t what I had expected, at all, much less something I wanted (who needs another @*&#! variable?), but it was there all the same. When I finally let go of what “should be” and accepted “what is,” I decided to let the materials and construction techniques tell ME what they sounded like, rather than the other way around. I wound up with a basketful of physically different, heavy duty power cords (all were 14ga. or heavier) that all sounded different from each other. I used to bet people that not only did power cords have a sound, but that after a 5-15 minute demonstration, they would be able to tell me which power cord they preferred. I never lost that bet...even to those who said I was nuts and that power cords absolutely could not have a “sound.” Q. Electrically, why do power cords and power conditioners have a sound? A. Investigating this was obviously the next step after making enough of them to notice differences. It was equally obvious that it wasn’t magic. What I found out was: they must. _____________________________ V) Quotable quote: “In science...novelty emerges only with difficulty, manifested by resistance, against a background provided by expectation.” T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolution. 3rd edition, p. 64. The most common misconception about power is that it is (just) 60Hz and 120 volts. These are merely the frequency and AC voltage ratings and do not fully describe power. Also, many people understand that as the music gets louder, more power is drawn from the wall. As we will see, this too is an overly simplistic concept. Power = Voltage X Current. We know the voltage but what do we know about the current? I found out that the key to understanding “what is going on” lies in the nature of the current drawn from the wall. The first step I took was to use a quick and dirty approach to getting a signal that let me analyze the current flowing through a power cord. A resistor in series with a power cord (in this case a 10 watt 0.1 Ohm resistor) will have a “voltage developed across it” in direct proportion to the current that is going through it. By selecting the neutral wire for the location of this resistor, the resulting voltage has an equivalent ground reference because the neutral should have zero volts between it and ground. This was true in my case, and the resulting signal could be looked at with oscilloscope and spectrum analyzer. (See fig. 1 below.)  Here is a little refresher on some basic electricity: a wall outlet’s voltage is sinusoidal in nature. This means the voltage changes in a smoothly varying way: from zero to a maximum value; from this maximum the voltage varies just as smoothly back again to and through zero volts where it mirrors its previous path but this time in an electrically negative way to a minimum value; just as soon as it gets there it heads back to zero and starts the cycle over again. It repeats this zero-to-[max value]-to-zero (the positive half of the cycle) and then zero-to-[min value]-to-zero (the negative half of the cycle) over and over again continuously. In this way, half of the time the voltage is positive and causes current to flow in one direction; the other half of the time the voltage is negative and causes the current to flow in the opposite direction. Hence the name Alternating Current (AC; see fig. 2, below.)  Audio equipment usually runs on AC wall power and because of this has transformers, diodes, and filter capacitors. (See fig. 3.below) The audio component’s transformer usually transforms the 120VAC from the wall to a lower and more useful voltage for solid-state electronics, and the diodes allow energy from the wall to “fill up” the storage capacitors without it leaking out again back the way it came. Diodes can do this because they allow current to flow in just one direction, and this only happens when the power transformer’s voltage is higher than the voltage stored in the capacitor. This occurs for only part of the cycle, which causes power to flow impulses, not continually. These pulses of power can be seen on an oscilloscope (see fig 4 below) and analyzed with a spectrum analyzer (see figs. 5a,b, c below). From these graphs we can see that the power going through a power cord is NOT just 60Hz, but is made up of many different frequencies at the same time. These measurements put to bed the notion that power is “just” 60Hz. So what does a wall outlet’s 60Hz designation really mean? It means that the door to the energy “cupboard” (the wall outlet) is opened part of the time every time half cycle (2 times 60 or 120 times a second) and during this time an audio component’s power supply is able to get the raw materials from which it makes all the sound we hear coming from our speakers.    These graphs (5a,b,c show that the energy going through a power cord is not just at 60Hz.  The energy extends across the entire audio spectrum - bass, midrange, and treble.   Once everything was hooked up it was almost anti-climactic to see that part of the energy going through the power cord varied with the frequency of the amp’s input signal (the volume stayed the same; (see figs. 7a,b,c below).    An amp is made up of: 1) a power supply that takes wall AC voltage and converts it to DC voltages; 2) an input stage of electronics that takes a small signal voltage and makes it a large signal voltage; 3) an output stage of electronics that takes the now large signal voltage and makes it have large current capability (something the input stage can’t do) so the amp can drive a speaker. The current delivered from the output stage to the speaker comes from the storage filter capacitor right? Wrong. It comes from BOTH the filter cap and the wall! (see fig 8 below)  While it’s true that the current delivered from the output stage to the speaker comes only from the storage capacitor PART of the time, part of the time it comes from BOTH the filter cap and the wall. When the diodes are allowing energy to flow into the storage filter capacitors, this energy can go not only to the storage capacitor, but also directly to the output stage and on to the speaker. Electrically speaking this is called current sharing. There are then, two sources of energy, the filter cap and the wall, and they must both share the job of sourcing energy in proportion to their respective impedances. Now that we see that the wall has an influence that is bigger than we might have thought at first glance, let’s broaden it still more. This is where an analogy might come in handy for understanding some more of the background information. Imagine you’re out in the middle of the Gulf of Mexico on an oilrig. You can climb down one of the legs low enough to touch the tops of those big wave crests as they pass under you. If you had a dipper in your hand, the wave crest could care less if you got one dipper full each time it passed or whether you got 20 dippers full. Whenever the wave crest (power) comes by, you pick the frequency of putting the dipper into the water (acquiring the energy). From this, you can see that while how often the wave comes by (its frequency) has influence, it is only part of this particular equation. In the same way, the frequency of wall power (60Hz) is only a piece of the puzzle, not the whole thing. Here is some more information that will help: if you put the right kind of light bulb in series with the DC power line going from the amp’s power supply to the output stage, you’d see it light up whenever there was a loud passage of music, and dim down again whenever the music became soft. In the same way, if you happened to be amplifying a very low frequency signal you would also see the light bulb glow and dim along with the movement of the woofer cone; the light would glow brightest when the cone excursion was at maximum, and glow least when the cone was at its zero or rest position. This would show you that the energy coming from the amp’s DC power supply has another controlling factor: the frequency of the input signal. The current the output stage draws from the power supply and sends to the speaker is a direct result of not just the volume of the music, but also the frequency content of the music. The wall can be thought of in the same way as the wave crest out in the gulf. When power is available it doesn’t matter at what frequency you want to get it, it is available. So now we see that the energy supplied by the wall is not only dependent on the volume of the music you’re playing, but also on the frequency content of the music: if there is a cymbal crash there will be more high frequency energy drawn from the wall; if there is a bass drum hit there will be more bass energy drawn from the wall. The notion that a power transformer isolates the audio component from the outside world is misleading at best. (see XI) Interconnects and speaker cables are obviously conductors of wide-band audio frequency energy; this energy level varies with the volume and frequency of the music. These signal path cables make audible differences in music systems. The power flowing through power cords and power conditioners is also wide-band audio frequency energy that varies with the volume and frequency of the music. Granted, you wouldn’t want to listen to this “signal,” but the similarities to a music signal are clear. Many of the same factors that cause interconnects and speaker cables to have their own unique sound will in turn cause power cables and power conditioners to have theirs. All of the energy coming from your speakers has to come from the wall. It passes through power products (power cords and for some, power conditioners), where it is shaped and sonically defined to the same extent as if passing through an audio signal cable. In a very real way, power cables are signal cables. Q. The energy flowing through power products has an audio bandwidth and is partially determined by the music. This is the electrical part. What is the mechanical part of the equation? A. From my previous work The Art & Science of Audio System Tuning: AXIOM #1: Because of the tunneling effect (see VII) and piezoelectric and triboelectric properties8, wire is microphonic (microphonic-like). As a result, energy from a mechanical resonance affects the flow of electrical energy through a conductor in such a way as to audibly emphasize the notes and overtones that coincide with the frequency of that resonance. If we change the way a conductor (wire or PC traces) vibrates and/or resonates, we change the way it sounds. Thus, in a sense, wire can be thought of as a "mechanical" tone control. Audio components such as preamps, amplifiers, and speaker cables are made from materials with mechanical resonances. Power products are made from materials, which have mechanical resonances; they will have a sound just as all other audio components do. Resonances are not bad, despite what you’ve been told. What is bad is when the distribution of these resonances in the listening system is uneven. Why? Because we simply cannot get rid of them all...getting rid of just some of them can actually make things worse. The road to good sound is to have an even distribution of resonances. Resonances act like tiny tone controls set to +1, each one working in a vary narrow range of frequencies. If we have a resonance at every point in our music scale, then each note is treated the same as every other note, and the sound will be neutral. However, when there are too many resonances in one area and too few in another, well, your system definitely won’t sound neutral. By merely changing the thickness or material of any part of a product, its sound must change; several well regarded equipment manufacturers have confided that prototypes do not sound like the production version--even if they use the same electronic parts and circuit. But!! _____________________________ VI) There are some things that transformers can do in the way of isolation, but this has been misconstrued to encompass other things that transformers simply can’t do. See also Part Two of this article in Positive Feedback Volume 8, No. 2. VII) From a conversation with physicist Jack Bybee. VIII) See Low Level Measurements from Keithley Instruments (216-248-0400), pages 3-33 to 3-35. Not everyone will be able to hear the difference. Not everyone who plays golf makes par, and fewer still make birdies. Listening is every bit as much of a skill as is playing golf, and there are excellent as well as poor golfers and listeners. (see IX) We can see similarities in the methods that practitioners of other sciences and crafts, like acousticians and musical instrument makers, follow when dealing with resonances. They know that eliminating them is impossible and/or undesirable, so they distribute them as evenly as possible across the intended spectrum, much like road builders do with asphalt. A smooth road doesn't call attention to itself, while a bumpy road constantly vies for your attention. When the bumpy road is your stereo system, it can be a tough job trying to enjoy the music. Q. What sound should power products have? A. A transparent sound. “Transparent” means that you have no problem hearing the strengths and weaknesses of the other components in the system. This is not the same as “neutral” because neutral products don’t really exist. (see X) Not only that, but audiophiles won’t buy a product if they can’t hear it doing something different. Power products have mechanical resonances just like any other audio component, and just like any other audio component they have a sound. There are as many ways to change the sound of power products as there are for any other component. Every tuning product when used with a power conditioner will have the same tonal effect as when used with, for instance, a preamp. (see XI) The tuning product will not affect measured performance, as it is not the electrical filter circuit that has been altered. The mechanical resonances have been altered, and because of this, so has the sound. (However, this is a trick answer to a trick question. A power product is most transparent when its innate resonance response isn’t in conflict with its host system. It’s really a question of balance.) Q. What is a balanced sound? A. Balanced means just that. Enough of everything and not too much or too little of anything. You can’t have more of everything...well, you can, but it’s called turning up the volume. AXIOM #2: The "Resonance Response" of an audio system is always a major factor in its musicality. The most musically neutral systems will have their resonances spread out evenly with no clumps or gaps in their distribution...just as the best listening rooms have an even distribution of standing waves. An even distribution of resonances establishes a level playing field for all of music's notes and overtones, allows the proper harmonic balance of the music to be preserved, and maximizes listening enjoyment. (see XII) The best answer to “What is a balanced sound?” will involve the concept of teamwork. In the many arenas of life, it usually takes teamwork to win. When fighting for sonic “truth,” this _____________________________ IX) With the possible exception of those who are predisposed to not hear or care about sonic subtleties and therefore would never be able to acquire high levels of listening skill. X) Every product thought to be neutral today will in 6 months or so be shown to be colored by a newer component...at least this is what has been happening in the popular magazines for many years, and it will probably continue to be this way. XI) “Better” is not a tonal effect, it is a response to change. The tonal shift will be constant, your response to it can vary. XII) From my previous work The Art & Science of Audio System Tuning. is especially true. Many players have to work together in the proper balance if the goal is to be met. In this case, the team goal is sonic “truth,” or neutrality. The players in the sonic “truth” team include: Midrange Purity, Natural Warmth, Bass Extension & Weight, 3-Dimensionality, and Details & Nuances. If the balance shifts from the team goal to the glorification of any one-team member, sonic “truth” is lost. The sonic details inherent in a recording can be only be correctly portrayed when there is a balance to the spread of the mechanical resonances in an audio listening system: they must be distributed equally. The fight shouldn’t be for more and more detail (or bass weight, or warmth, etc.), for that way ultimately creates imbalance and defeats the concept of system neutrality. The fight for neutrality is only won when balance is achieved between all the starting players. Regular light is a chaotic mix of photons heading in many different directions. It takes a concerted effort to make them line up in a straight line like those in a laser beam. The mechanical resonances in an audio system can be compared to the chaos of the photons in regular light; it takes effort to make them line up into an even distribution so that the effects from these resonances are equal for every note in the music that we wish to enjoy. However, sound that isn’t neutral can still be enjoyable, depending on the amount and direction of the shift from neutrality and the listening tastes or philosophy of the listener. In fact, subtle changes in balance can provide a fresh approach to listening and highlight new vantage points from which to view and enjoy your music. A new component or “accessory” with the right flavor will allow you to hear something new in (and rekindle the joy of listening to) even the tired-est war-horse in your collection. Q. How can we change the balance of our systems? A. In the live sound and recording businesses, it’s a well-known technique to get more of one thing by lowering the level of something else. This is often necessary because you can’t always keep turning things up. Why? Because eventually you either run out of clean signal, and thus into heavy distortion and/or feedback (usually only OK for rock guitarists), or destroy your hearing to one degree or another (an altogether too common occurrence). For instance, to satisfy a musician who wants more highs in their monitor mix it is common practice to turn down the bass. In the same way, for the person who wants more bass it is often possible to satisfy them by turning down the highs. By adjusting the balance of highs to lows you have accomplished the musician’s desire--not by turning something “up,” but by turning the other extreme “down.” Sometimes, with the way we talk, a non-audiophile would think there were 10-15dB differences between products. Room/speaker interactions and differences between different brands of speakers are the two largest areas in terms of measured differences and can cause these kinds of Sound Pressure Level variations. However, with most electronics–especially solid-state & low output impedance tube types–the actual frequency response differences are quite small. While the sonic differences between any two products whose specifications are indistinguishable from each other exist on a level that is not significant for some, “not significant” isn’t the same thing as “there is no difference.” Balance is quite often a matter of subtleties. As listening skill evolves, smaller changes in magnitude cause larger and more significant shifts in perceived balance. (The fact that small changes can cause large subjective shifts in balance often causes confusion in that a “huge” (usually positive) change in one system caused by the introduction of a particular component, may, to another listener in another system, be a negligible change because of the relative starting sonics of the two systems and/or the listening biases of the two listeners.) When looking for a balanced sound, first you have to determine what is “balanced” for YOU. There are four distinct categories of people’s sense of taste where the identical item can be “yum” for one person and “yuck” for another. It may well be that there are similarities for the aural senses. You may have a preferential taste for a high treble or top octave sheen on your music; or an emphasized low bass; or love a prominent middle midrange. It really doesn’t matter which balance you prefer; there are several ways to achieve it: First method (Addition only): Make that part of the spectrum louder. One does this by creating either electrical resonances or mechanical resonances at that frequency in order to create more energy there. An analogous situation might result if you were to place several bricks under one man in a line up of men whose heights are similar. This will make the man significantly taller and be sufficient to call attention to that particular man (frequency area). For example: By placing metal feet under or on top of a component, we are adding the metal’s resonances to that of the resonance response of the system and metal instruments will be emphasized. Second method (Addition & Subtraction): You can also make that one man seem taller by moving the men on one side away from him and putting a single brick under him. Either way, you call attention to the man (frequency area) in relation to the men standing along side him. Here is a real example: By placing two oiled oak blocks (both 1.5" x 1.5" x 3") under a power cord you will have two resonators of the same frequency (the “box”) and with the gap between them you will create a string resonance. (see XIII) The size of this oak “box” will add warmth to the lower midrange area, and by creating a low-to-mid bass string-resonance13 between the two blocks, you can add a lower resonance in the bass area. This will accentuate the effect caused by the oak resonators by creating an area between the two resonances that has less of an emphasis. In this way you will create the effect of moving the men apart and standing the one man on a box. The same principle can be used with cable supports of any material. Metal and ceramic cable stands will increase dynamics because of the characteristic resonances of those materials, and depending on the spacing between them, create a string resonance anywhere from the midrange to the lowest bass. Wooden blocks under the cables will resonate according to the species, size, and shape of the blocks of wood, and in the same way as metal or any other objects placed under cables, also according to the spacing between them. Q. Is it possible to overemphasize any one “team player” such as detail? Can we really have too much detail? A. Yes. It is very easy to achieve more “detail” in playback than the source had in the beginning. Just use detailed electronics, high-definition speakers, analytic wire accessories, metal or ceramic cone feet, and glass & metal equipment stands in an under-damped room. It’ll run you out of the room in 5 minutes or less with all that “detail.” How can there be too much “detail?” The answer is easy: When the recording or playback equipment puts in more detail than the-sound-of-the-musicians-playing had in the first place. Audio equipment is supposedly designed so as to have as little contribution from the electronics as possible. This goal has, for the most part, actually been met. Disputes arise when the acoustic properties of electronics are mistakenly thought to result from variations in electric and electronic circuit topologies. At the high level of today’s electronic design, sonic differences are just as often the result of mechanical resonances as they are from circuit variations. (Axiom #1 in action.) There is a common desire to hear all the “detail” that resides in an audio recording. It’s a fair and understandable goal. We strive to acquire the proper equipment and recordings that will take us ever closer to the holy grail of “being there” and yes, Detail & Nuance is important. However, there are a couple of details about “detail” that aren’t commonly known or truly understood. The first follows from an understanding of the acoustic nature of electronics. Yes, electronics are supposed to be neutral and not contribute to the sound of a system...too bad this is completely and unequivocally incorrect. Why? Because wire is a mechanical tone control; if you change how it vibrates by coupling a new resonance to it, you change how it sounds. In previous writings I have used this as my main working premise. Some will reject it because currently it is without measurements to back it up. However, this premise has shown itself to be an accurate predictor of effects, and because of this it is scientific...a lack of measurements does not mean it does not exist, it does mean we don’t know enough about how to measure it. _____________________________ XIII) With the possible exception of those who are predisposed to not hear or care about sonic subtleties and therefore would never be able to acquire high levels of listening skill. The second detail is a consequence of the first: the sound from a recording is a composite of 1) the electrical and acoustic sound of the artist’s music, and 2) the electrical and acoustic sound of the recording equipment. Luckily, the contribution of the electronics to the sound of most modern recording (and playback) systems is quite neutral. This leaves, and raises the relative importance of the acoustic contribution of the equipment, which is a result of the sum total of its mechanical resonances. What an acoustic instrument is made from and how it is made determines its sound; as a result of my research I have come to believe that it’s much the same in the case of electronics. Midrange enthusiasts will prefer a system that has either more mechanical resonances in the midrange or a smoother sounding distribution of midrange resonances than they feel they need in the bass or treble regions. In the same way, those who prize detail above all else will often have a system whose sound is unnaturally detailed. In the fight to get “all the detail off the recording,” they build, recommend, or buy equipment that may be flat electrically but has an unequal distribution of mechanical resonances (i.e. too many in the “detail” region of the audio spectrum [upper midrange to upper treble]). They have fallen into the trap of believing that audio equipment is neutral because they believe that it is what the measurements mean. However: the map is not the territory. (There are often problems in driving from Point A to Point B that don’t show up on a map.) It is easy to achieve more “detail” in playback than the source had in the beginning, and it often results from an imbalance of mechanical resonances. While in the end it comes down to what you want, and although you can’t argue against what someone likes it would be advantageous to train one’s self to know the difference between “personal taste” and “sonic truth.” Either path is perfectly correct from an individualistic standpoint...the sticky part is learning which is which. In conclusion: Power conditioners are more than just power cleansing devices. They must have tonal characteristics, a “sound,” and this inherent sound is as important to the overall sound of a system as any of the traditional components in the signal path. By paying attention to the sonic flavor of power products and by striving for synergistic matches, you can lower the noise level and achieve a higher level of performance and enjoyment from any listening system. The word "better" does not indicate a universal condition. All too often this short but woefully under-descriptive term appears without adequate explanation. "Better" in what specific ways? Without a specific description it is hard to recognize trends. A clear description of why something is better is necessary. For example: it always made the vocals shrill; sometimes with the wrong cables it made the vocals muffled; it bloated the upper bass; its top end extension is good but too much of a good thing in the area below it causes cymbals to be excessively edgy; etcetera. Few people realize that this term is all too relative, "better" is situational: it has to do with a particular product in a particular system with a particular person. What sounds "better" to one person WILL sound worse to at least one other person...and that one person could be you! There are too few sentences/paragraphs/articles educating and emphasizing how and why "better" often (only) means, "better in this situation." For every manufacturer in love with one brand of part, there will be another who says, "it stinks." Superior quality resistors such as those from Vishay and Caddock are not universally loved or preferred. In the same way, some high-end manufacturers having previously tried steel chassis prefer aluminum chassis for their products, while other high-end manufacturers having previously tried aluminum prefer steel chassis for their products. I have brought this up before but I think it bears repeating: I’ve heard from more than one who has heard a system made from class A components that is not musically satisfying, and from others of systems made from class B, C, & D components that in terms of musicality and listen-ability trounce much more expensive systems. Why? Because the lower priced system’s components are, through careful selection or serendipity, those that have this necessary and elusive quality: they work exceptionally well together. The scientific and engineering communities have accepted system Dynamics, which concerns the primacy of a SYSTEM, for at least 20 years. Unfortunately, it is still in its infancy in audio land. A number of reviewers, editors, and magazines are starting to explore the systems approach…more “power” to them. Version 2.9.4, Copyright 1999, 2000, 2001 Mike VansEvers |
| back to Technical Page |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |