Paul's Posts — 13 March 2012
By Paul McGowan
We just released some new software that changed the sound of our PerfectWave DAC. As is normal there’s debate on whether or not those changes are better or worse. For me there’s no question they are better in every respect – but only after I retuned my system to take advantage of the changes.
I think it’s instructive to remember that your system has been setup and tuned to optimize the equipment and environment at the time you did the work. It is therefore illogical to assume that changes in equipment or environment can be effectively judged without revisiting your setup.
For example, when I first auditioned the new software I liked everything I heard – greater soundstage, better depth, improved space and separation of instruments – but there was also a slight added harshness and over emphasis on the top end that sounded unnatural.
I could have simply assumed it was wrong and went back to the drawing board or – and this is important – I could have reexamined my setup. It turns out that when I originally setup the Maggies I didn’t have enough top end and solidity of the center image so I toed them in slightly. Bingo, the image popped into focus. But that was a few months ago.
With the recent change in software I simply removed the toe in and the slight upper harshness vanished and in its place and even deeper and wider soundstage appeared with an even more convincing three dimensional image.
So it begs the question – which was correct? My first setup and the original software or the new setup and the new software?
The answer is both as long as you are willing to redo your assumptions.
Forward to a friend and help us engage more readers
Related Articles
Share
About Author
(11) Readers Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Soundminded
These are the kind of things I read from audiophile hobbyist magazines over the years. They purport to be the independent objective informed views that cut through the advertising hyperbole;
1970: The AAA (You fill in the brand) model 111 (you fill in the model) is the finest product of its type we have seen to date. It seems so perfect in every way we were reluctant to turn it off and go to bed at night. We were very sorry when our testing period ended and we had to return it to the manufacturer. If you are among the lucky few who can afford its extremely high price and your reaction to it is like ours you won’t be sorry owning it. We give it our highest recommendation.
1980: The AAA model 111B is a clear improvement over the excellent model 111. It eliminated its predecessor’s occasional slight tendency to midrange honkiness, its slight shrillness with some recordings, extends its already excellent bass, and provides clearly better imaging. Although the price is considerably higher than the 111 we think the difference is well worth the extra cost.
1990: The AAA model 111B although an outstanding product is rivaled by others equally fine. None of them are inexpensive but the others we recommend should be given serious consideration.
2000: The AAA model 111B was a fine model in its day but has been surpassed by others including those created by the same designer who has gone on to bigger and better things. Those who appreciate vintage equipment will do well to seek these out but for those looking for state of the art there are better choices.
2010: The AAA model 111B was judged in its day decades ago to be an outstanding example of its genre but frankly it simply isn’t up to today’s state of the art standards. Except for those who have wanted one for sentimental reasons serious audiophiles should look elsewhere. There’s much better to be had at more affordable prices. We don’t recommend it.
You’d hardly know that the ostensible goal of high fidelity is NOT a moving target. Considering that the price of the most expensive equipment on the market has risen from where the cost of the best sound systems went for the price of an American luxury car 40 years ago to the price of a very large house today one should read the old magazine reports and ask why anyone should believe anything anyone has to say about any of it anymore. Where does obsession leave off from reality and cross the line into insanity? I just read a report that suggests to me that one high end speaker system playing Tchaikowsky’s 1812 overture could very well blow a hole right through the walls of your house with its sound alone when the cannon shot is fired just as though it was a real cannon. But can it sound like music? It’s not likely I’ll ever find out.
Andy Stoneman
Soundminded, you write long and eloquent monologues practically everyday on this site and you are clearly experienced and passionate about the topic.
But so is everyone else here, and we already understand that HiFi will never equal reality, that it’s a compromise for all of us, be that financial, personal preference, WAF etc.
We know the HiFi press has the “best ******* ever” and “the ultimate ****** comparison” every month and that they use ridiculous similes and jargon, it’s how they make a living and clearly there is a willing target market.
And none of us are compelled to read it, believe it, or buy the product.
Manufacturers strive to make better products and new products; they are passionate too. Technology and innovation offer new opportunities, plus society and competition demand constant change, otherwise they quickly go bankrupt.
The world will eventually end, we will all eventually die, HiFi will get ever expensive and never reach it’s ultimate goal – but in the meantime it’s a hobby, it’s fun!
Paul McGowan
Well said Andy!
Soundminded
“Soundminded, you write long and eloquent monologues practically everyday on this site and you are clearly experienced and passionate about the topic.”
Thank you for your compliment on my writing style. I’ve always enjoyed writing. I find it helps when you have something to say. The reason my posts are longer than many others is that by nature I am not a sound bite person. I’ve never sent a text message in my life. I don’t tweet, I woof. A barking dog gets more notice than a chirping bird. He may be more annoying but whether you like his message or not he has something to say. He usually gets more attention especially if his voice is a deep growl that suggests it’s backed up by large sharp teeth.
“…understand that HiFi will never equal reality…”
That is a most absurd statement. It flies in the face of both an understanding of history and of technology. Most of what is taken for granted in our everyday lives today would have been considered absolutely impossible as recently as 150 years ago. That was not just the common wisdom but informed opinion. Even as recently as 50 years ago things I never imagined I’d have lived to see are now the ordinary. This industry is the rare exception to what has become an almost universal rule in this regard. Not only has technology advanced in power exponentially, its cost has dropped like a rock…except here.
“We know the HiFi press has the “best ******* ever” and “the ultimate ****** comparison” every month”
“Manufacturers strive to make better products and new products”
“And none of us are compelled to read it, believe it, or buy the product.”
I no longer believe any of what I read about it and I no longer buy any of their products. I build my own instead. I guarantee you that mine sounds nothing like theirs no matter who they are. Let’s talk about expectations since that’s today’s topic. My first expectation of people is that they tell me the truth at least as they believe it. When I’m convinced they haven’t I no longer give them credibility. Once lost, credibility is perhaps the hardest thing to regain. BTW, when you come right down to it, manufacturers are in business for one purpose just like everyone else in any other business, to make money. When you can’t innovate, you produce new variants that are merely tweaks of old products and pretend they are innovations. That’s what they do. Then you get someone to agree with it to help you sell it, that’s what the hobbyist magazines do.
“……otherwise they quickly go bankrupt.”
Psst. Just in case you haven’t noticed…..example, last quarter of 2011 Sony Corp. lost $2 billion. That’s a lot better than the previous last quarter of 2010 when they lost $6 billion. I guess things are looking up over there. Now that he’s straightened out the company, Howard Stringer just resigned as their CEO.
Think of my postings as an entirely different point of view, a sharply dissenting one, an alternative, a rare discordant rebuttal to the popular wisdom even if it is sometimes strident. Refute it if you can, ignore it or….”none of us are compelled to read it, [or] believe it.” It would be a very boring world if everyone agreed on everything, don’t you think so?
Andy Stoneman
‘Think of my postings as an entirely different point of view, a sharply dissenting one, an alternative, a rare discordant rebuttal to the popular wisdom even if it is sometimes strident’
I’m sorry, Soundminded. To me at least, your postings often come across as negative, patronising and pompous lectures; you shoot everything down but never offer an upside. At best, you simply ask further questions that we all know have no answer.
Please give us some credit. I am confident the demographic of this forum is predominantly male and middle aged+, with reasonable disposable income and above average intellect. We arrived here through years of our own trial and error and happen to share an interest in music, the equipment and, perhaps most interestingly about this site and PS Audio products; an interest in the development of Digital music.
Of course, we share your scepticism where it’s due. But I do refute the notion that ‘all’ businesses are solely to make money.
Remember Herzberg’s Hygiene theory? Money is a necessity; maybe making one need to get out of bed, but not to jump out of bed with a new idea and take satisfaction from realising that idea. You know this, I am sure, from making your own equipment and the enjoyment I expect you get, both from its design/construction and from its usage. I’m sorry if you haven’t experienced that in your working career.
I’m not sycophantic, so when I praise the likes of Paul and his team for creating innovative and interesting products, it’s because I like and buy their products and admire that they are making an effort. I hope there are two consequences of that; one that they enjoy their work and two that they make a decent living from it. Being selfish, I hope those same two things mean they carry on making interesting products – that I may consider buying!
Psst. Just in case you hadn’t noticed, Sony were sitting on US$100bn in cash10 years ago. Through poor choices, competition, probably some complacency, natural disaster, economic circumstances and the natural flow and ebb of life, they have lost their dominant position. In the meantime they survived by eating into that ever dwindling cash pile. Most companies work with a tight cashflow and limited capital and go bankrupt very easily – especially SMEs in niche industries like HiFi.
My turn to potentially sound patronising, but I do mean this; I think you have a lot offer here. You are clearly knowledgeable, experienced and have a lot to say. I’d much rather read about how you’ve solved problems and give us an insight into what you know. Some dissent and different points of view are part of any healthy society, but balance is better. It would be a very boring world if everyone disagreed on everything, don’t you think so?
Soundminded
Andy Stoneman your posting is not worthy of a response from me.
Paul McGowan
Jeez. Andy I think that was a well written well thought our response. Soundminded, I am surprised you didn’t answer – unless you found yourself offended? I didn’t see anything offensive. Oh well, perhaps time to let it rest.
straylight
I am so happy to see this exchange and it gives me great hope for mankind & audiophile-kind. Here’s why.
Years ago my wife dragged me to an ‘art show’ outside of Boston, MA and we visited a museum showcasing some of the most influential and up & coming young artists of the time. The most talked about piece was a ‘sculpture’ which consisted of a slightly undersized “Uhaul trailer with a rocking chair sitting next to it…the rocking chair was empty. The entire point of this seemingly meaningless eye-soar was to make the point that the DIYers of our world were in danger of disappearing and as a result mankind may be at risk without them.
So you see there is room enough for Soundminded’s view and all the other ‘audio-press’ views. In fact Soundminded is no different than Paul, they are both designers in slightly different clothing. Open-mindedness is needed to embrace all perspectives, and this makes the world a better place. I view it this way…each designer allows you to glimpse their version of audio reality…by embracing each you may find it a little closer to your own understanding of sonic reality…explore them all, even if they seem contradictory. You can audition a 20k speaker without owning it outright. So go live, audition, explore!
I recently asked Bob Carver (who made a pair of tube monobloc amplifiers for me) which of your amplifiers is closest to reality and he replied “I embrace them all, just like my children”. I agree and really like that guy.
Soundminded
Paul, I will not be provoked into a flame war. I’ll be happy to discuss and even debate technical points but that’s as far as my contribuitons will go.
Paul McGowan
Understood and your view is appreciated. We also value highly your contributions.
Soundminded
Flame wars often start with ad hominem attacks on individuals, not challenges to ideas. In my experience when they occur on the internet they are disliked by others who ordinarily participate in a conversation and eventually result in the blog owner or moderator deleting all of the offending posts and warning the participants not to do it again. Even though I invariably win such wars on the substantive arguments nothing good ever comes of it. I was on the verge of a sharp reply, merely a click away but thought better of it.