Double Bass Four-letter word beginning with "B"

[seamonkey]

Specs via measurements are good. They help QA the product. Closes the loop on the design.

Education on the specs is good. And as I pointed out in another thread... We'll all have buddies that understand and can interpret the specs and we'll buy them beers.

 

[drurb]

Specs via measurements are good. They help QA the product. Closes the loop on the design.

Education on the specs is good. And as I pointed out in another thread... We'll all have buddies that understand and can interpret the specs and we'll buy them beers.

Okay, I'll sign up for that! It's not green beer, is it?

 

[FredH]

I think DRURB’s point (and please excuse me it I’m wrong) is that specs can be misleading. Unless you have a governing authority defining the test measurements used to derive specifications, each vendor is free to gin up their results to make their products shin. For example the FCC, which oversees a lot of radio and TV equipment, sets specific parameters on how devices are measured and additionally what the operational performance envelopes should be. These rules put everyone on the same playing field so that comparative research of the specs of different products has value.

With music equipment it’s the Wild West. Each vendor can underline beneficial performance numbers and hide bad ones. They can even lie, I mean, who’s going to reprimand them if their wrong? I’m not suggesting that the producers of music stuff are unethical I'm just saying that no one is holding their feet to the fire and human nature and the cost of home mortgages state that you put the best spin on your product. Product specs are a marketing element just as the front panel layout and chassis color.

I can’t image who could devise the test parameters which music equipment would be judged by, perhaps NAM and the major music gear retailers, who know?? And I’m not sure that it would be a good thing in the long run since testing is very expensive and a major component to pricing of the FCC governed stuff.

Different issue – Look and Feel
Quality gear makers go to great length to look different, GK, Trace Elliot, Ampeg, Eqifani even Fender has unique packaging, and you know who makes it at first glance. Cheap stuff that looks like someone else’s gear is called “knock-off”, trust me I live 10 miles north of Tijuana, a fake Rolex might look a like a Rolex, but it ain’t.
Miles and Gil Evans covered Gershwin songs, but it was unique art, no one was confused as to who was playing the horn. In short - they don’t give Grammy’s to Elvis impersonators.

 

[drurb]

...For example the FCC, which oversees a lot of radio and TV equipment, sets specific parameters on how devices are measured ...

I agree! Now about the FTC. As I've mentioned before, back in the late '60s and early '70s, they came in to clean up the mess. Amp companies were quoting all kinds of power specs for their amps. Some would just give the spec in watts, some would note that it was "peak music power," some would give continuous RMS ratings with no mention of distortion.

So the FTC comes in with firm measurement parameters. Only the fools decide that each amp must go through a warm-up period (can't recall the # of hours) at 1/3 power. Turns out that's an awful thing to do to a solid-state amp. Many just overheated and, as a result, their power specs were down-rated because they had to be "warmed up" at a different level. In time, the manufacturers accomodated. All-in-all, the FTC really did straighten things out.

Your point about quality manufacturers is well-taken. For example, McIntosh would always rate their amps VERY conservatively. Often they could develop substantially more power (at a given level of distortion) than advertised.

No, I don't know who would oversee all of this for musical instrument products. As far as amps and electronics go, however, I would think the ratings/procedures could be quite straightforward. Then there is the issue of reliability, build-quality, etc. Yes, even if we had the specs, it's wise to use your ears, eyes, hands, and brain.

Note in edit: Actually, one of the best things we have going for us is each other! These threads seem to ferret out crap pretty quickly while identifying the winners. This community was invaluable in terms of my decision to buy my new EA equipment. Then there's all that wonderful advice we get regarding strings...

 

[bannedwit]

inside sources at nationwide guitar chain stores informed me that they push the "B" gear because they buy it for CHEAP! and they get a HUGE amount of profit off the sales... Other bigger companies have a small window, if any, so the stores buy for one price and not much higher is the actual retail value which they won't budge on.

That stuff is great for the price when you have a teen or someone who may need the stuff now or maybe they won't be doing anything pro or for a long period of time or whatnot...

Also great for the guitar player who wants a decent bass setup to goof around on...

I know that a certain compressor from a "B" company contributed to blowing my one cabinet a long ways back...

 

[fdeck]

Okay, my friend, you and I have agreed in these threads on just about everything. I believe you have missed a couple of important points here. First, let me say that having been an audiophile since the age of about 12 and having "grown up" to be an auditory scientist, I firmly believe that objective measures should be provided and that they are important. Anyone who followed the hi-fi world closely through the '60s and '70s (as I did) knows well the various pitfalls and problems.

One very important aspect of the measures is that they be the relevant ones. In addition, there must be education regarding what they mean and how to use them properly. The manufacturers are typically of little help here. Many companies focus upon the importance of differences in specs when those differences are meaningless. This results in a "spec war" in which the uneducated consumer becomes the victim. A case in point is the total harmonic distortion (THD) spec for amplifiers. Hi-fi manufacturers used to love to paste that one up there and try to convince you that their amp was better because it had a THD of 0.0001% rather than 0.001%. It wouldn't matter-- no human could tell the difference. What was worse was what they may have done to the circuit to achieve that figure! Often, they caused other problems.

The uneducated consumer can also be a source of the problem. I think some manufacturers fear this (and rightly so). Two honest manufacturers might publish specs for their amps showing that one develops 110 watts (continuous, into X ohms, at X% distortion, over a bandwidth of.....) while another developes 100 watts. Joe consumer wants the first one because it has more power. Great, he just bought himself 0.4 dB more. Now we have a spec war...

Worse still are the cable-company engineers who will thrill you with science. Their cables alleviate the dreaded Miller-effects, skin-effects, etc. You know what? They're probably correct. This would be important if your passband stretched to 1-MHz and beyond! We are, however, concerned with audio frequencies where those effects are IRRELEVANT!

Now, as far as amplifiers go, specs will take you a long way in a practical sense. Speakers are another matter entirely. Here, specs can be very helpful as well BUT things are far more complicated. The almost infinite number of possible types and degrees of interactions between speakers and rooms added to the variations in listening positions make such specs a rough guide at best. YES, they are important but here education is needed as well.

Finally, having specs for amps and speakers is all well and good but they interact as well. To this day, we can take two very high quality power amps that, according to their bench specs, are, for all intents and purposes identical and almost ideal. When we attach a set of speakers that present a particularly complex and varying load (in the impedance sense) they can behave somewhat differently, leading to real audible differences.

The bottom line is that specs, in and of themselves, are not a panacea. I agree that they ARE both necessary and desirable. In the end, however, you must use your ears AND your brain.

I agree with your points. My call for specs should have been tempered by the fact that we don't have an agreed-upon set of practical and believable specs.

I think that many of the problems you mention will arise from spec wars. Hopefully a few knowledgeable and impartial people will come forth with explanations of how the specs affect performance. Consumer education will be necessary, but I think it is facilitated by having some information to work with, rather than groping in the dark.

And of course some makers will still try to beat the system. There will be cheaters, but there will also be people making esoteric claims to justify inflated prices -- oxygen free copper and so forth. But at least if person wants to ignore those claims, they will be able to make a more informed decision.

In terms of speaker ratings, I would guess that we don't have widely understood ratings for how speakers behave in real rooms, because it would be hopeless to get the information out of manufacturers anyway. This would be a fascinating area of research and debate. It's also where my expertise trails off. I know how the signal gets to the input terminals of the speaker, and I understand the electromechanical model, but I am definitely not an acoustician.

By the way, the FTC has dropped back to a warm-up period of 1/8 rated power. A spec would not necessarily have to be imposed by the gummint. A trade organization, such as IEEE or even NAMM, could promulgate specs.

For power amps, one idea I have is to give a rating for how much power the amp can put out for 1 second, 1 minute, and 1 hour, at a given THD level.

 

[fdeck]

That stuff is great for the price when you have a teen or someone who may need the stuff now or maybe they won't be doing anything pro or for a long period of time or whatnot...

Also great for the guitar player who wants a decent bass setup to goof around on...

Nothing against low-priced gear. But I don't think any teenager will miss out on the gift of music if they can't get a Bass Limiter / Enhancer for $20 instead of $60.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

http://www.bossus.com/index.asp?pg=1&tmp=27

Go down the entire product line from these two brands. It is simply stunning.

 

[fdeck]

But like I said before--imagine some band makes nearly identical copies of the tunes recorded by your favorite artists. Same arrangements, same solos. And they sell them for cheaper, wiithout compensating the original band. Yes, you'd get the cd for cheap. Would it be ethical?

I have a better analogy. Imagine some record company duplicates the packaging of an album made by your favorite artists. Similar look, duplicate wording. And inside the packaging, they put a scratchy album recorded by a bunch of hacks. And people say that they like being able to save a few bucks for basically the same album.

 

[seamonkey]

I have a better analogy. Imagine some record company duplicates the packaging of an album made by your favorite artists. Similar look, duplicate wording. And inside the packaging, they put a scratchy album recorded by a bunch of hacks. And people say that they like being able to save a few bucks for basically the same album.

I don't feel this is true from what I see and hear from the evidence. The past suites are public. Independent people have done measurements on B stuff shown the insides are good. For any piece of gear there's anecdotal testimony about how good or bad it is. Measurements speak truth.

All kinds of gear from multiple manufacturers looks the same. Copyright laws, international and all, protect that which is unique. It's already been established they work well. A lot of gear just isn't unique as people think it should be.

Behringer has a research and development and has it's own IP protected by laws. Check their site out, and reviews, they have some unique products and features no one else has.

In any case, Behringer is a successful company that is going to be around. Their competition could do better by publishing specs, measurements, details of their construction - general reasons why they are superior, or they can continue the empty hype. Behringer is riding their coattails because of the hype. I'll avoid the hype from Behringer or any company, or at least I hope to.

 

[seamonkey]

Nothing against low-priced gear. But I don't think any teenager will miss out on the gift of music if they can't get a Bass Limiter / Enhancer for $20 instead of $60.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

http://www.bossus.com/index.asp?pg=1&tmp=27

Go down the entire product line from these two brands. It is simply stunning.

One's a photo, and one's a artistist rendering.
Don't forget to look at digitech also.
http://www.activemusician.com/store/product.asp?sku=EM.XBS&nav=p-simt&c=

But even Boss is take off on MXR and ....

 

[seamonkey]

For power amps, one idea I have is to give a rating for how much power the amp can put out for 1 second, 1 minute, and 1 hour, at a given THD level.

I'd love to see this.

 

[ToneRanger]

I was talking to tech who repairs lots of 'B' gear - he said it's clear they have three design teams. One team is very good (in his opinion) and some of 'B's' original designs are excellent. There's another team that's mediocre and the third is the quick & dirty 'fast response' team.

 

[seamonkey]

I was talking to tech who repairs lots of 'B' gear - he said it's clear they have three design teams. One team is very good (in his opinion) and some of 'B's' original designs are excellent. There's another team that's mediocre and the third is the quick & dirty 'fast response' team.

That's good info from somebody on the inside

A virtual beer if you can find out which models are in which category.

 

[fdeck]

I suppose I could always put my money where my mouth is, pay $20 for one of those pedals, and see what it looks like inside. The pictures on their website could be artist's renderings, and my $20 would tell me what the real product looks like. The picture in the owners manual is identical to the artists renderings.

So here's a new predicament. Suppose I have $20 to spend on a Behringer pedal. Which one? The limiter and equalizer both seem potentially useful. Or should I go with one that would just be fun to play with?

All I am saying is, don't assume the product is a copy, just because every effort has been made to make it look like a copy. I have yet to decide what I think about going after a competitor by virtually duplicating their product line. Part of me wants to say that Boss's designs are publicly disclosed, and therefore fair game. The other part of me wants to say that the practice is predatory. I just don't know. And I acknowledge that maybe the entire business is predatory... another reason to go with Seamonkey and start using PA gear. Or DIY everything.

Given my own uncertainty on this issue, I certainly would not want to diss anybody who buys B gear. I just want their gear to break down, so I can justify spending more than I should have

I am on a design team for high-tech gadgets. If asked by an employer to take apart and duplicate a competitor's product line, I would not feel very comfortable about that. Such a sentiment is prevalent in the culture of engineers, at least here in the US. I would wonder what it said about my own skills, if duplication of existing designs was the only thing the employer trusted me to do.

 

[drurb]

I agree with your points. My call for specs should have been tempered by the fact that we don't have an agreed-upon set of practical and believable specs.

I think that many of the problems you mention will arise from spec wars. Hopefully a few knowledgeable and impartial people will come forth with explanations of how the specs affect performance. Consumer education will be necessary, but I think it is facilitated by having some information to work with, rather than groping in the dark.

And of course some makers will still try to beat the system. There will be cheaters, but there will also be people making esoteric claims to justify inflated prices -- oxygen free copper and so forth. But at least if person wants to ignore those claims, they will be able to make a more informed decision.

In terms of speaker ratings, I would guess that we don't have widely understood ratings for how speakers behave in real rooms, because it would be hopeless to get the information out of manufacturers anyway. This would be a fascinating area of research and debate. It's also where my expertise trails off. I know how the signal gets to the input terminals of the speaker, and I understand the electromechanical model, but I am definitely not an acoustician.

By the way, the FTC has dropped back to a warm-up period of 1/8 rated power. A spec would not necessarily have to be imposed by the gummint. A trade organization, such as IEEE or even NAMM, could promulgate specs.

For power amps, one idea I have is to give a rating for how much power the amp can put out for 1 second, 1 minute, and 1 hour, at a given THD level.

You and I remain 100% in agreement. The cosmos is in order.

 

[mje]

I suppose I could always put my money where my mouth is, pay $20 for one of those pedals, and see what it looks like inside....

Don't know what they look like on the inside, but the outside is a rather brittle plastic. I wouldn't use one in my stage setup.

Do they clone other designs, down to the circuitry? Dunno. I briefly owned one of their amps that had exactly the same switch configuration as a Tech21 Trademark 10. I sold it cheap to a poor young rocker and bought the Tech21.

 

[mje]

As DRURB points out, specs can be not only misleading and inappropriate, in the case of musical amplification they may not even measure what we're interested in. Is THD a good spec when we're buying amps with tubes in them precisely because we want nonlinearities like harmonic distortion?

There's a market for information; people who want it will pay for it. Sophisticated buyers will always seek out sources of information, like TB and the various magazines. Sure, they're of varying quality, but there's nothing that says a government mandated test will be any more useful. It's not like they're going to set up a national standard for Funkiness.

I wouldn't mind seeing all speaker makers publish sensitivity figures, like EA does, but I'm still gonna play a cabinet or an amp before I buy it, so does it really mattter?

The most useful stat for most gear is reliability, and that's the sort of thing that comes best from a community of users.

 

[drurb]

I don't feel this is true from what I see and hear from the evidence. The past suites are public. Independent people have done measurements on B stuff shown the insides are good. For any piece of gear there's anecdotal testimony about how good or bad it is. Measurements speak truth.

All kinds of gear from multiple manufacturers looks the same. Copyright laws, international and all, protect that which is unique. It's already been established they work well. A lot of gear just isn't unique as people think it should be.

Behringer has a research and development and has it's own IP protected by laws. Check their site out, and reviews, they have some unique products and features no one else has.

In any case, Behringer is a successful company that is going to be around. Their competition could do better by publishing specs, measurements, details of their construction - general reasons why they are superior, or they can continue the empty hype. Behringer is riding their coattails because of the hype. I'll avoid the hype from Behringer or any company, or at least I hope to.

Okay, I started this thread and I never expected it would generate all of this. I certainly appreciate all of the information provided. Given all I have read, I believe this comes down to more a matter of business ethics rather than of law.

It seems to me that, after reading a fair amount here and elsewhere, the evidence that Behringer has violated, or violates in a wholesale manner, various patents is scarce or non-existent. Regardless of your view on that point, the issue seems to be whether it is acceptable practice to copy, in large measure, the aesthetics and function (if not the circuits) of other's products. That Behringer has done that and continues to do that is, in my judgment, undeniable.

The question is whether they are heroes for making otherwise over-priced products avialable to the masses or thieves for copying designs and using (perhaps) inferior circuits. I think it depends upon your opinions regarding what constitutes ethical business practices. I will not pass judgment on that point here. It does seem to be the case that other manufacturers also copy designs in a similar manner albeit on a much smaller scale. Behringer receives attention for doing such as a result of the magnitude of their operation.

So here's an interesting and fun question for the group. Legal issues aside, and assuming for the sake of argument that such practices are legal, what are your thoughts regarding the ETHICS of the type of duplication in which Behringer engages?

 

[WalterBush]

Business Ethics? Real-world business ethics include whatever makes a buck for the company, legal or no, and by that standard, Behringer is doing just fine.

What matters here are your ethics, and mine. I believe that the capitalist system only works when people reward a company's behavior, products, and services with their money. I don't like Behringer's products, behavior, or customer service, so I will not patronize them. If enough people decide the same thing, Behringer will lose money, and either change their practices, or die, and show other manufacturers that this way of doing business won't succeed.

By way of comparison, I love Peavey and PreSonus products, their service, and the fact that they take care of their employees while keeping manufacturing in the US. They also offer many products of original design in a lower price range than comparable products. When Marshall sued Peavey in the '80s for copyright infringement on a cabinet design (I believe Peavey's use of white plastic piping around the grill cloth was a Marshall trademark), Peavey responded by issuing a public apology, and changing their design, not simply paying the fees and continuing to market something that may confuse an uninformed consumer as to which brand was which. So I buy their products, and thus show my support for the way they do things.

Voting with one's wallet is a concept that really works, IMO, so I "vote" for companies that I believe are worthy of my hard-earned dough. Behringer may one day be one of those companies, but that day isn't today.

EDIT: This is obviously just my opinion, and my experience. It's certainly not calculated to offend, impune, or insult anyone.

 

[fdeck]

As DRURB points out, specs can be not only misleading and inappropriate, in the case of musical amplification they may not even measure what we're interested in. Is THD a good spec when we're buying amps with tubes in them precisely because we want nonlinearities like harmonic distortion?

There's a market for information; people who want it will pay for it. Sophisticated buyers will always seek out sources of information, like TB and the various magazines. Sure, they're of varying quality, but there's nothing that says a government mandated test will be any more useful. It's not like they're going to set up a national standard for Funkiness.

I wouldn't mind seeing all speaker makers publish sensitivity figures, like EA does, but I'm still gonna play a cabinet or an amp before I buy it, so does it really mattter?

The most useful stat for most gear is reliability, and that's the sort of thing that comes best from a community of users.

All good points. I will give a technical reason why I care about THD. Maybe this only applies to solid state amps. An amp reaches "hard" clipping at a certain power level. Going beyond hard clipping, the distortion goes up, and also the RMS output power. Driving the amp from just below clipping to 1% THD does not increase the output power very much, so a 1% THD spec represents the actual hard clipping limit of the amp.

Driving the same idealized amp to 10% THD raises its output power by somewhere around 30%, if my calculations are correct. Thus, my 180 Watts at 10% THD is the same as another amp's 140 Watts at 1% THD. I know that's only a dB, but it points to the likelihood that a power rating without an accompanying THD spec is subject to considerable variability.

At least for idealized solid state amps, a 1% THD rating tells me what I am really getting, whereas a 10% requires me to guess.

For my use, a 1% rating lets me estimate what I really care about, which is the the peak output voltage. But that discussion is for another time.

The "market for information" concept is useful. Maybe some amp makers will respond to this market. I have a related experience, having made an extremely small sideline selling electronic gadgets to hobbyists. My business model is to publish not only specs, but the complete design. I think this information has resulted in more sales, as it helps establish my credibility, and so far nobody has tried to compete with me.