Now this is a pretty awesome quote

heiney9

AR: In 2011, have we reached a point where amplifiers won't be getting much better or does amplifier design have a long way to go towards perfection?

NP: There is progress to be made, and the necessary tools are already on the table. From a strictly objective standpoint we are largely finished - adding more zeros to the usual distortion numbers isn't going to improve the sound very much. What remains is the need for clearer insight into subjective effects. Our brains are very much different from test equipment and are easily fooled by some phenomena and very sharp at discriminating others. Reading the literature in cognitive psychology, it's clear that we don't know very much about musical perception. As a practical result we have to emphasize critical listening with potential designs. The necessary tools for this are experienced ears and perseverance.

A recent interview with Nelson Pass and I LOVE his answer to the question.

Here is the full interview

http://audiophilereview.com/amps/nelson-pass-interview.html

tonyb

While I like his answer also, Me thinks it's time you and Nelson Pass get a room......just ball bustin' bro.

audiocr381ve

tonyb wrote: »

While I like his answer also, Me thinks it's time you and Nelson Pass get a room......just ball bustin' bro.

LOL

Although the quote is good, I don't understand how their could be any mystery to this. I'm not trying to start an argument here, I just want to hear some different perspectives. When an engineer mixes and masters a song, he's not thinking "let me leave some room here just in case an amplifier wants to interpret."

I say let the expert sound engineer at the multi-million dollar facility work with the bands music producer to come up with the character of the recording. I don't think that's an amps job.

I'm not trying to take away from Nelson Pass' genius at making amps. I'm just saying perhaps the line may be blurred between the artists interpretation of his or her music and our audiophile sound systems way of interpreting that music. There is absolutely a need for a brilliantly designed amp to deliver the artists and engineers work in achieving a certain sound for their song. I'm not saying the opposite. The problem I'm pointing out is a problem with the audiophile thinking that there is something more than a recording. I'm all for getting things to sound as bad **** as possible, I just think so many audiophiles are on the crazy train wanting to hear things that the artist or sound engineer weren't even thinking about.

I guess I'm just ranting now :redface:

inspiredsports

That interview was a great read.

I love his statement answering the last question of the interview about future projects . . .

"At the past two CES we have shown the "concept amps" which will be our largest Class-A offerings at 300 watts. They are also the largest and heaviest amplifiers we've made. They will be available this fall and represent some new tweaks we have in mind for future products."

I'm happy to hear Pass is going heavier instead of toward the doily and lace weight others are currently developing.

I've always loved freaking big, huge, heavy ball-buster amps and will own a couple some day!

VR3

What a bromance

BlueFox

Sounds like he has been reading DarqueKnight's work.

tonyb

Musical perception is different to so many, how can you tackle it ? Variety is the spice of life.

SDA1C

The producer makes the sound based on the equipment thats available. Albeit probably the most state of the art stuff its still what it sounds like in the mixing room that he's worried about. Now think of the time you heard your favorite song on some killer rig. It was something you'll not forget and what is truly referred to as "reference". Now think of the time you heard your favorite song on an am radio. what did your brain do? It remembered the time it was on the killer rig and tried to make up the difference. Its true to the letter that our brain is easily fooled but not consistantly fooled to the different brains by different sources. That is, mine may be fooled but yours isn't based solely on what your "reference" is.

Bad **** quote though to be sure!

1C

headrott

Nelson Pass has many great quotes I find. Not to mention many great amplifiers.

Greg

drumminman

heiney9 wrote: »

AR: In 2011, have we reached a point where amplifiers won't be getting much better or does amplifier design have a long way to go towards perfection?

NP: There is progress to be made, and the necessary tools are already on the table. From a strictly objective standpoint we are largely finished - adding more zeros to the usual distortion numbers isn't going to improve the sound very much. What remains is the need for clearer insight into subjective effects. Our brains are very much different from test equipment and are easily fooled by some phenomena and very sharp at discriminating others. Reading the literature in cognitive psychology, it's clear that we don't know very much about musical perception. As a practical result we have to emphasize critical listening with potential designs. The necessary tools for this are experienced ears and perseverance.

A recent interview with Nelson Pass and I LOVE his answer to the question.

Here is the full interview

http://audiophilereview.com/amps/nelson-pass-interview.html

I totally agree with this. Often people into audio get too caught up in measuring and numbers and don't use their ears enough to form opinions. Understanding how our musical perceptions work, both positively and negatively, will allow reproduction equipment designers in the future to develop some interesting stuff.

Look at Polks SDA's. I don't know that the SDA effect can be completely quantified, and yet there is no doubt it is real. For most of us here it makes recorded music much more fun to listen to because it puts one right there with the performers. It also conveys the emotion of the recorded performance unlike any speaker I've heard. How do you measure that?

pearsall001

Who the hell is Nelson Pass???? :twisted::redface:

cnh

Nice quote, brilliant designer, but he should stay away from those cognitive psych boys...talk about a "pseudo-science", that IS certainly one and they don't even realize it.

I agree of course, but subjectivity is not easily quantified and qualitative approaches in the behavioral and social sciences only lead to arguments and differences of perspective/opinion. So what we're really saying is "best" summed up in the very last phrase:

The necessary tools for this are experienced ears and perseverance.

But then the question becomes...who decides who that is? A thorny field there!

cnh

nooshinjohn

pearsall001 wrote: »

Who the hell is Nelson Pass???? :twisted::redface:

Nelson Pass is a rube.:twisted::cheesygrin:

headrott

cnh wrote: »

The necessary tools for this are experienced ears and perseverance.

But then the question becomes...who decides who that is? A thorny field there!

cnh

It could be you, me or anyone with the pereverance to gain the experience necessary to listen to the music accurately. That is, allowing your conscious "mind" gain that experience by sitting and listening over multiple sessions. Your intuition can also play a role, but that gets into an even more subjective area. Experience through listening is the sword to cut through that thorny field. Also, your counscious mind is your guide to gaining experience.

Greg

gdb

Sounds a lot like Carver-style self promoting puffery to me. Pass ever produce any tube gear, was it any "good"? :-)

heiney9

gdb wrote: »

Sounds a lot like Carver-style self promoting puffery to me. Pass ever produce any tube gear, was it any "good"? :-)

Some people get "it", some people don't. Maybe someday you'll be in the former group.

H9

mhardy6647

pearsall001 wrote: »

Who the hell is Nelson Pass???? :twisted::redface:

Not who, what. It's just a hoot and a holler north of the Donner Pass. No cannibalism though.

;-)

on topic, FYI and FWIW, for popular accounts of the neurophysiology and psychology of music, I recommend Daniel Levitin's books:
http://daniellevitin.com/publicpage/

cnh

I've heard of this fellow. But I have not read these works. I can tell you, though, as an Anthropologist that when most individuals outside our field make "evolutionary" claims for the development of certain "human" abilities and talents that are riddled with cultural "specificity" that, they are usually NOT aware of how much CULTURAL baggage their interpretations "Transport" back in time.

Perhaps the "simplest" and most graphic example that comes to my mind was when Yo-Yo Ma went round the world meeting and trying to play with "other" musicians. Among a gatherer/hunter society in Africa, the great Yo-Yo Ma seemed like a child because he was SO "out of his element". He was child-like in his understanding of "their music" and "their instruments"--They were just too different and Yo-Yo Ma encountered what every anthropologist does in the first encounter with the "other", ie., humility. And that was, from an anthropological point of view, to be expected. But it reveals the essential problem and shortcomings inherent in both cross-cultural research and also in the attempt to recover the forces, traditions and conventions that shaped the human race over millions of years.

I have a lot of friends who are very interested in neuro-science approaches to these questions and they usually do not fair well, when I begin to question them at length? Too many "assumptions", far too many if they are "Hard Scientists" because they don't understand that Science is not "pure" but also has a "history" located in a particular place at a particular time.

There are some "wonderful" studies showing how major college Biology textbooks reflect conceptions of sex and gender that are SPECIFIC to the time and the society that they were written in. How the egg and the sperm become little homunculi (male and female). And how these ideas/descriptions change over time as our conceptions of what is male and female change; but gametes are hardly "persons" nor do they behave as such?

But now I'm just rambling. Carry on!

cnh

gdb

heiney9 wrote: »

Some people get "it", some people don't. Maybe someday you'll be in the former group.

H9

As long as you've got "it" ......please answer my question about tube gear. You are the resident Pass scholar, are you not?

heiney9

No he has stated before that there are plenty of tube designers out there and he doesn't really have an interest in designing tube gear.

As far the self promotion and puffery, if you know anything about him that's not really his style. More laid back and extremely honest when discussing his craft, completey lacking in pretense. He designs and does things to satisfy his own curiosity and has given more to the DIY community than any other popular designer. He gives away insight, schematics, and help for free, no strings attached no $$$ to be made if you as a curios DIYer want to try and make your own NP amplifier. Unfortuneatly recently he's had to curtail some of giving away free schematics and designs because DIYer's saw fit to try and profit from his name and designs.

H9

Face

It's nice how he doesn't contradict or sell himself out like some other designers. He's one of the few people in this industry(along with Andrew Jones) who I'd love to meet.

heiney9

Face wrote: »

It's nice how he doesn't contradict or sell himself out like some other designers. He's one of the few people in this industry(along with Andrew Jones) who I'd love to meet.

I am right there with you Mike. He has an attitude and approach that I admire considering the legacy of audio knowledge he has provided in solid state amplifier design. Based on his accomplishments he could easily be pompus, brash, self absorbed, w/attitude but he's not in the least. He also could have made a boat load more money if he choose to sell out or rely simply on his name and past accomplishment. But he doesn't. He does things and pushes the design envelope because that's what he loves to do, not to make money or gain recognition. He obviously has done well in both area's but that came because he loves what he does and he loves to share his insight and enthusiasm. I just really, really love his approach to audio circuit design and the truthfulness in his answers.

He seems genuine and not like he's trying to sell a box full of goods.

H9

inspiredsports

gdb wrote: »

Sounds a lot like Carver-style self promoting puffery to me. Pass ever produce any tube gear, was it any "good"? :-)

Did you follow the link and read the interview ??? If so, did you understand it?

gdb

inspiredsports wrote: »

Did you follow the link and read the interview ??? If so, did you understand it?

I must admit that I based my comment mainly on previous N.P. interactions with the media. But....there was this...."Lastly, this my fortieth year doing audio projects for the DIY audio community which should see the release of "The Beast With a Thousand Jfets", "Burning Amp #3" and "BOB - the Big Open Baffle Project".
Puffery ? I say, slightly. I find it more than a little ironic that the biggest N.P. promoter here ultimately needs non-Pass gear(tubes) to obtain his ideal amplification/preamplification. Go figure. I think he's an OK guy and a genius level IQ, NOT a God figure, that's reserved for Hendrix. Now for liquid refreshment ! :-)

heiney9

You are entitled to your opinion. I am betting you never owned any Pass gear, especially his amps, let alone listened to one. If you read the interview you would see he doesn't design his pre-amps any longer, Wayne Colburne does. He did with the Aleph series but that was awhile ago. I suppose you ONLY listen to Hendrix music and nothing else..........:rolleyes:

gdb

heiney9 wrote: »

You are entitled to your opinion. I am betting you never owned any Pass gear, especially his amps, let alone listened to one. If you read the interview you would see he doesn't design his pre-amps any longer, Wayne Colburne does. He did with the Aleph series but that was awhile ago. I suppose you ONLY listen to Hendrix music and nothing else..........:rolleyes:

How in the name of Christ did you come up with thatsupposition from what I wrote?? I'm only sayin that it's funny your being a cult-level fanboy and still require non-Pass tube gear to tickle yer tuna ! And yes....the true artists (musicians, not techs) are far more worthy of "blind" devotion and adoration. I lived in proximity the Great Fu@king Amp-555 and compared to smooth tube-like Carver & Kycera gear.....it sounded like pure ****, gritty,harsh ****. I'm certain he's got lovely products (for a price) that I'd probably like, if, like you, I smoothed em out a tad with tube buffering. Good thing you weren't a young man in 1930's Germany !! Jeeze. rolleyes indeed :-0

Tour2ma

^ It's easy given that he knows that you don't know that you don't know... You know?

cnh wrote: »

Nice quote, brilliant designer, but he should stay away from those cognitive psych boys...

I always thought audio was a better fit with the Gestalt school... that whole totality of the experience thing...

gdb

"^ It's easy given that he knows that you don't know that you don't know... You know?"(Tired old quip that's not really very clever.)




To imply that you or Heiney know what I do, or do not know, is highly presumptuous and more than a little.....amusing.

cnh

For an even "older" take on that paradox, read Chuang Tzu's "Joy of Fishes". Old but very clever. Daoist (Taoist) philosophy at its best!

cnh

Tour2ma

gdb wrote: »

"^ It's easy given that he knows that you don't know that you don't know... You know?"(Tired old quip that's not really very clever.)
To imply that you or Heiney know what I do, or do not know, is highly presumptuous and more than a little.....amusing.

Just as I thought my post was... I guess it needed a smiley... or :idea: maybe just the emphasis I added to the quote you think blasted you...

gdb

Tour2ma wrote: »

Just as I thought my post was... I guess it needed a smiley... or :idea: maybe just the emphasis I added to the quote you think blasted you...

Doh....OK, now I'm in understandment ! :-)