Sorry? Are we going to regret low resolution images?

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

....The fact is, its actually the relative pitch that is distorted by hifi systems and as it various across the frequency range and the errors are all uneven, it makes for a very difficult listening experience...  sing along to a piece of music in your head simultaneously and you will find that although your brain can 'play in tune' (regardless of how out of tune your natural voice is!), the system you are listening to will be unpredictable and literally out of tune.

 

It's called 'silent sound repetition' and is an interesting thing to just try sometime. Do it with live (acoustic) musicians, even on music that is unfamiliar, and you will find it relatively easy. Try it on a hifi system and most of the time it will be nearly impossible! ....

That's the first time I've ever seen that mentioned, and I don't think it's true. I don't even see how it possibly could be true. 

 

I agree that the different harmonics can be out of phase and this would certainly influence how we perceive the timbre of the instrument. We all know that in some kinds of music they started to correct the pitch of some singers which is to me much worse than correcting the distortions of a lens in post.

 

In an all-analog audio chain, there is no way how the frequencies of different parts of the signal could be altered by differing amounts, unless you refer to the wow and flutter of the mechanical parts. In a partly or completely digital chain it would certainly be possible to selectively alter the frequencies of parts of the signal, but who would do so in record which was supposed to faithfully reproduce a given audio event? I certainly don't think it happens on its own. 

 

You may have a case in point when speaking about midi instruments or otherwise generated music which was not recorded but electronically, well, generated. But even so it would take an unusual configuration to produce audibly distorted musical scales, I should think.

 

About Karajan's tuning: this reminds me of a part of a novel by Douglas Adams where a software developer made a piece of software which converted business charts into music. Japanese corporation - so the novel goes on - greatly loved the software even if most often the music produced by the software turned out to be quite cheesy and rather shrill towards the end.

[Bill Livingston]

If you find it hard to believe that your can hear this in a system, well, I assure you, it is true. It doesn't take a much to change the perceived pitch in electronics... It's a combination of the fundamental and then how the harmonics are reproduced. If those harmonics are changed in level then you can change the perceived pitch upwards slightly. Obviously this varies depending on the frequency and therefore the changes are 'uneven' for want of a better word.

 

In an acoustic musical instrument these changes don't happen in quite the same way, but each instrument does have its own 'distortion' which is why all pianos sound different in terms of timbre, made up of the fundamental and then the way that sound is made up and is affected by pretty much everything else, such as the materials it is made from and so on. Two guitars playing the same note, WILL sound different. So will two violins. 

 

Where does that difference come from and why does a middle C played on a piano sound different from that same note playing on a guitar? Because each instrument has its own sound and character... The fundamental is still the same, but the rest of the note is made up with a myriad of other frequencies all based around that fundamental. Thats timbre. Not the same thing as I am talking about, but it has the same root. At least in an instrument it is relatively stable although you can change the perceived pitch in an instrument if it's resonant frequency is at at point where it impacts on the perceived pitch of the closest note (or harmonics of that note).

 

In a HiFi system, that happens all the time... although not actually resonant frequencies very often, just its ability to respond to very fast leading edges of signal. And those signals are very complex. Look at a piano note on an oscilloscope. It's not a sine wave... which is what it would be if it was a pure 'note', it's made up of a massive number of varying frequencies and a massive number of varying amplitudes, each of which has to be reproduced by the system with absolute accuracy across the entirety. And that's before you have taken into account the effect of the microphone and the oscilloscope on the signal in the first place.

 

To be honest, it's a miracle any HiFi system works given the complexity of the signal! 

 

As as far as decent quality systems is concerned, most of the time, if you get the fundamentals right and aim for accuracy rather than 'character' you end up with something that approximates music... enough at least to fool you into similar emotional responses as you would listening to that same music in real life... But no HiFi REALLY plays music to the degree that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

 

A lot of people say to me that they couldn't tell the difference from two competing HiFi systems or HiFi components.

 

To be honest, if you can tell the difference between a real instrument and a recording of one, then that's perfectly good enough in terms of hearing ability. You should then not 'compare sounds' as they will invariably be different. And if you then take that same sound and play it in a different room, then the acoustics of that room will have a bearing on that 'sound'. However, if a great pianist plays a Steinway in one room, moving to a different acoustic will change the 'sound', but it won't be a less good musician and you will still be able to respond to it naturally as your brain very quickly compensates for the change unless it is truly dreadful. But either way, the musician is still as good, as is the piano. A lesser piano or musician has a LOT more to do to hold your attention. I would argue it/he/she simply wouldn't be able to. Because we are programmed to understand music naturally. Even if you had never heard it. Weird, but also true. And it can be very complex such as a different scale, different rules, even atonic music. Why? Because it is a pattern and the brain responds to pattern - it spends its life looking for pattern. That's why even the most free form of music can be appreciated and responded to, whereas someone just banging out random notes gets old very quickly!

 

What people do at the highest level is to compare what they hear to how they respond to that same music if it were 'live' by literally pitching the notes they hear in their head simultaneously as the music is being played and then listen to the second component and do the same thing. You are comparing your own internal reference to what you are hearing and constantly asking yourself 'can I follow that music, actively and is it easy and natural to do so... can I make an educated guess at where the next note will be (pattern recognition)' And then do the same with the alternative. 

 

If if you respond to one naturally and easily, and the other one less so, then you will know which is better. If you can't tell any difference, or there is a difference in sound, but it doesn't make it actually easier to follow, then buy the cheaper option!

 

I spent my life lecturing about this, from studios to universities and its actually a really interesting subject... but not particularly loved by the audiophiles of the world as they prefer to think of HiFi as a matter of taste and choice... The reality is, no HiFi plays music like real instruments, the moment you put a microphone in front of any instrument you change the sound and therefore it's accuracy which then leads to it actually getting in the way of how our brains interpret the music itself.

 

A good HiFi that actually plays music fundamentally better than a cheap system is a rare thing indeed... and is very expensive. I have heard systems costing well over three or four hundred thousand dollars/pounds and they all sound different. 

 

If if they are actually trying to play accurately and reproduce recorded music accurately, wouldn't the very best all sound very similar?

 

The reality is, a system that allows you to listen to music of choice and introduce you to new music and allow you to respond to it naturally is a very rare thing indeed. It's. Or just about raw data, it's also about not messi g up the data you have. 

 

The very best systems mess it up the least. That's about as far as you can go.

Edited November 23, 2015 by Bill Livingston

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama