Linearity

[MylesBAstor]

Linearity is another very important term used by reviewers and audiophiles alike to evaluate the sound of a component or system that can have several meanings. J. Gordon Holt defined linearity as, "the accuracy with which the output from any system follows changes in the amplitude of its input signal." (Note how many people out there online when tossing terms around confuse transparency with linearity!)

The first thing that comes to mind when discussing linearity is any aspect of the musical spectrum emphasized (or say sucked out) relative to the other? Does a component sound the same from the top to the bottom of the music spectrum? For instance does a component favor one frequency range, say the midrange area, over the rest of the frequency spectrum?

But linearity can be used to describe other factors. For instance, does a speaker's performance change (or even an amplifier) as a function of listening level? Does the speaker sound the same playing at 90 dB as it does playing at 110 dB? Or even 120 dB? An electrostatic speaker may sound better at low listening levels than a dynamic speaker and vice versa. For a speaker, these changes may be traceable to driver compression. Or a power supply issue in an amplifier or preamplifier. Components are generally built to a price point and the designer must balance out the difference design areas to reach the final product. And in some cases, the power supply may be one area where cost savings occur.

Linearity can also be applied to dynamics. Does the device under test (DUT) maintain its dynamics as a function of volume. Is there dynamic compression as the playing volume increases? Does the low end have the same dynamics as the rest of the frequency spectrum?

What say ya all?

[Bruce B]

This is one of the basic fundamentals I use in mastering. The first time I audition a piece of music, I look for frequencies or anomalies that stick out. Sometimes it's a night/day experience that you can immediately tell the song was mixed in a poor environment and the engineer tried to compensate for the room/equipment.

[MylesBAstor]

This is one of the basic fundamentals I use in mastering. The first time I audition a piece of music, I look for frequencies or anomalies that stick out. Sometimes it's a night/day experience that you can immediately tell the song was mixed in a poor environment and the engineer tried to compensate for the room/equipment.

That's fascinating Bruce. Never quite thought about mastering in that sense. Should have!

[ack]

Excellent topic! I agree with both of you

[MylesBAstor]

I think linearity is one area that's improved in equipment over the years. Yesteryear's gear always seemed to one or more readily identifiable deviations from linearity. Nowadays, one has to focus much more closely on the component's sound to identify the same errors.

[microstrip]

No system is perfectly linear - so what we must consider are "the non- linearities". The word is too broad and can often be meaningless, unless it is specified extensively or by context - just what Bruce did. Almost all manufacturer marketing departments will tell us their systems are more linear than the competition - linearity sells.

IMHO no one has shown that electrostatic speakers sound better at low volumes than box ones because they are more linear, it is just a rumor and perhaps an interesting debate. And Myles, I do not care if a speaker plays better at 110 dB than at 100 dB.

[MylesBAstor]

No system is perfectly linear - so what we must consider are "the non- linearities". The word is too broad and can often be meaningless, unless it is specified extensively or by context - just what Bruce did. Almost all manufacturer marketing departments will tell us their systems are more linear than the competition - linearity sells.

IMHO no one has shown that electrostatic speakers sound better at low volumes than box ones because they are more linear, it is just a rumor and perhaps an interesting debate. And Myles, I do not care if a speaker plays better at 110 dB than at 100 dB.

I think what I was trying to say is do the speaker's have the same resolution at all listening volume levels? If not, that to mean was a deviation from linearity. And I understand that oversimplification comes back and bites you in the behind and becomes like Parkinson's disease. The same symptoms caused by many different things.

[microstrip]

I think what I was trying to say is do the speaker's have the same resolution at all listening volume levels? If not, that to mean was a deviation from linearity. And I understand that oversimplification comes back and bites you in the behind and becomes like Parkinson's disease. The same symptoms caused by many different things.

Yes, the loudness level at which speakers play better differs from speaker to speaker - my old Magneplanar 3.3 stayed for a short time because they did not manage to sound good at lower levels. However I have read from people - I think it was Ki - solving this problem with a proper choice of electronics. So perhaps it was not a linearity problem at all ...

Poor linearity results in distortion, but I think we are addressing it mainly in the subjective sense of perceived dynamic compression. It is interesting you refer to resolution - yes, we feel it that way, but I can not figure how a very small amount of compression results in such large perceived change of resolution. But it is a real fact.

[jcmusic]

Guys one really important fact is that we all hear a little different also!!! The word/term Better is subjective depending on who is listening...

[MylesBAstor]

Guys one really important fact is that we all hear a little different also!!! The word/term Better is subjective depending on who is listening...

[mep]

One thing I have noticed over the recent years is that the better your system is overall, the better it will sound at low levels compared to systems you used to have. And I do think it's a system thing more than just a speaker thing.

[MylesBAstor]

One thing I have noticed over the recent years is that the better your system is overall, the better it will sound at low levels compared to systems you used to have. And I do think it's a system thing more than just a speaker thing.

I think equipment and systems have markedly improved in that regard but many still have a ''sweet spot." Whether that's the system or room is a question. And of course, it's also medium/front-end dependent. That information has to be there to hear too.

But I still feel electrostatic speakers do reveal more at low listening levels than most dynamic speakers. I think it was Francisco that brought up the Maggies and that's one reason I modded mine.

[david k]

In context of subjective analysis, I always thought that "linear" had a somewhat negative connotation mainly because I never heard of linear music !

[MylesBAstor]

In context of of subjective analysis, I always thought that "linear" had a somewhat negative connotation mainly because I never heard of linear music !

I think that over the years many terms that initially had positive meanings became associated with negative connotations. For instance accurate became associated with solid-state and hyperdetailed. And musical became associated with tubes and technicoloring. Or even like the old Koetsus. Or like the early SE tube amps. And so on.

[david k]

I think that over the years many terms that initially had positive meanings became associated with negative connotations. For instance accurate became associated with solid-state and hyperdetailed. And musical became associated with tubes and technicoloring. Or even like the old Koetsus. Or like the early SE tube amps. And so on.

My favorite meaningless term these days is "professional", used at nauseam these for any old thing.