intermusic.

com Page 1 of 5

What The Hell Are: Specifications?

What you need to know when running down that all important
list of specs...

Funny isn't it? We live in an age of unparalleled technological growth; the digital revolution affecting virtually every
aspect of our lives; shops stuffed with electronic gadgetry of every type. But admit to being able to understand
specifications and you might as well have 'geek' tattooed across your forehead.

Avoiding instruction manuals and spec sheets is no longer an admission of laziness (or being a bit dim), it's a
political statement; a shield to deflect criticism from those who would accuse you of tech-headedness. It seems
that the reconstructed 90s' man is more concerned about being in touch with his feminine side than understanding
what his equipment can do [we have got some female readers, Nigel - Ed].

Unfortunately, political correctness isn't an awful lot of use at three in the morning when you're trying to figure out
why a couple of your MIDI devices have just broken off negotiations. Or why, after turning up the bass on that new
amplifier, your speaker cones are now lying on the carpet, twitching and smouldering like bats on a barbecue.

You need specs

As unfashionable as it may sound, knowing something about what your equipment is capable of has much to
recommend it. To begin with, it means that you're not at the mercy of the guy in the shop whose job it is to sell you
the gear, but who'll probably be sinking a couple of pints in the pub by the time you get it home and discover it's
not compatible with the rest of your equipment. It also means you'll have a good idea of how much, or how little, to
spend on each component in your system, and not end up with odd pieces of gear which are under (or over)
specified.

In many cases, specifications - those things listed in red text on our reviews pages or found in gear manuals -
provide the quickest, easiest and most accurate method of finding out what you can and can't do with your gear.
Knowing this doesn't make you a nerd, it gives you control over your system and leaves you with more time to get
on with the music.

And while we're about it, there's another myth that needs to be dispelled: the one about specifications telling you
nothing of how your equipment will actually perform in the real world. It is often said that because qualities such as
'musicality' and 'usability' are impossible to quantify - the specification sheet can't be relied upon to provide an
accurate assessment of performance.

While I'm not denying that specifications are of little help in determining whether or not you're going to enjoy
listening to music through a certain piece of equipment, they can tell you something about what it is you're
listening to and whether you can believe your ears. This is a pre-requisite for accurate monitoring and vitally
important for musicians faced with the task of producing sound that other people will listen on different gear.
Rather than pretending that specifications don't matter, we should spend our time learning how to interpret them
more fully... and perhaps even putting pressure on manufacturers to include only clear, accurate data with their
equipment.

As things stand, it is perfectly possible for unscrupulous companies to massage specs until they read the way
they'd like them to, leaving you with a hopelessly inaccurate picture of what to expect. Conversely, other
manufacturers, by sticking to more rigorous standards, often sell themselves short and end up with equipment
which performs much better in the real world than it appears to 'on paper'.

This is undoubtedly what has prompted our mistrust of specifications and why, in many cases, we prefer to 'go it
alone' using the evidence of our own ears. The fact is, taking time to gain a little understanding of how to interpret
specifications can enormously beneficial use, particularly when you are assessing equipment that doesn't lend
itself to subjective appraisal.

http://www.intermusic.co.uk/print.asp?ReviewId=3308&ArticleTable=Features&Feature... 25/06/2001
intermusic.com Page 2 of 5

Mechanical specs
Though there's comparatively little mechanical equipment around these days, there are a handful mechanical
specs that you should know about, particularly if you're thinking of buying a cassette multitracker or you're a paid-
up member of the 'back-to-tape' movement. You're no doubt familiar with the expression, 'wow and flutter' but, like
most people, you probably wouldn't know it if you heard it, and certainly wouldn't know the difference between the
two. Wow is described as the changes in pitch (to a recording) caused by slow(ish) changes in speed of the motor
and/or transport system. Flutter is caused by similar problems, but produces rapid changes in pitch.

Both are measured in percentage terms and exist in all tape systems to a greater or less extent. Generally
speaking, anything under around 12% is considered acceptable; anything above, isn't. But age plays a part here;
wow and flutter becomes more apparent as components in the transport system begin to wear, so some
allowance has to be made for older equipment.

Winding time is another of the specs you might want to check; there's nothing worse than sitting around waiting for
tape spools to rewind. Obviously, where reel tape is concerned, tape lengths vary, so it's not always easy to give
precise figures. Cassettes, however, are of standard length and easy to measure. On this basis, you should be
looking for a rewind time of under 120 secs (from end to end) of a C -60 cassette.

Finally, we come to tape speeds and widths which, though they aren't really specifications, are usually included on
the spec sheet of analogue tape machines. Here's the list...

Tape widths (mm) Tape speeds (cm/s)

50.80 152.4 (now very rare)
25.40 76.2
12.70 38.1
6.35 19.05
3.81 (cassette) 9.525 (double-speed on multi-trackers)
4.762 (standard cassette speed)

Amp and speaker specs

Amplifiers and speakers are subject to same specifications as most other audio devices... except for power and
impedance. Amplifiers require a relatively low 'load' impedance (the impedance presented to them by the speaker)
in the order of two to 16 Ohms; four and eight Ohm systems being the most common.

The rule with amplifier outputs is that you must only connect them to speakers offering the same impedance or
higher; never to a lower impedance than they are capable of delivering their load into. Maximum power is
transferred when impedances are matched. As speaker impedance is increased (relative to the amplifier's output
impedance) power transfer falls. By contrast, as speaker impedance falls, power levels rise, but this can exceed
the maximum permissable power transfer for an amplifier, causing it to overheat and eventually blow.

In terms of choosing the correct output power to match a particular speaker (or vice versa) there are two schools
of thought. The first holds that it is better to ensure the speaker has enough power to handle anything the amplifier
can push at it. The usual rule of thumb here that your speakers are rated some 50 per cent higher than the
maximum output power of the amp. In other words, a 100-watt amplifier should be matched with 150 -watt
speakers.

The other school of thought is that because an amplifier running flat out causes clipping of signals (producing
large numbers of potentially dangerous high-frequency harmonics), it is better to use a much higher powered
amplifier and never have to drive it too hard. This means that your speakers aren't ever at risk from amplifier
distortion but, on the down side, they may still be damaged by accidentally turning the volume too high and
blowing them with too much power. Personally, I favour the former approach as it doesn't depend on such
mistakes not being made. In any case, provided your amplifier is capable of delivering sufficient power, it shouldn't
ever need to be running flat out.

When it comes to interpreting audio power specifications, things are rather more straightforward: ignore
everything apart from the RMS (Root Mean Square) figure. Peak power, music power, 'maximum' power: all of
these sound like they should tell you what you need to know, but are virtually meaningless. 'Watts RMS' is the
only true measure of an amplifier or speaker's power rating.

Analogue audio specs

Conventional (ie, non-digital) audio specifications are among the easiest to understand. The lowliest salesperson
in any high-street store should be able to tell you how an audio system is likely to perform by looking at the spec
sheets. They probably won't be able to find a mains plug for you to switch it on and listen, but they know their

http://www.intermusic.co.uk/print.asp?ReviewId=3308&ArticleTable=Features&Feature... 25/06/2001
intermusic.com Page 3 of 5

woofers from their tweeters and could recommend a particular system because it has "bigger Watts" and probably
"more Hertz per second".

Most analogue devices - speakers, amplifiers, mixers, etc - share a common core of specifications which can be
interpreted in exactly the same way. This includes figures for level, input/output impedance, frequency response,
noise and distortion, etc. Certain devices will have additional specifications (such as output power for amplifiers,
crossover frequency for speakers), but these are usually quite straightforward, providing the manufacturer has
made no obvious attempt to conceal the truth.

Let's take a Tascam 414 Portastudio as an example. I've chosen this as it incorporates a mixer, recorder and
monitoring system, which between them should cover most of the specs we're likely to encounter in analogue
audio. In the mixer section we are given figures for input impedance and both nominal and maximum input levels.
Though it is useful to be able to understand factors such as impedance and sensitivity, it's not essential if all
you're doing is comparing specifications to determine whether two devices may be connected together.

The normal impedance of line level inputs is 10K½ and that's what the 414 offers. In general, line level outputs are
much lower in impedance than the inputs to which they are connected, but this presents no problem (on the
contrary, it's actually desirable). Like all devices offering high input impedance, the 414 will happily accommodate
signals for synths, keyboards (typically around 1K½), and even low-impedance mics (around 600½).

The main difference between these two types of signal is level, and that's why you'll often find equipment has
either switchable input level sensitivity or continuously variable input level control, as in the case of the 414, which
is adjustable between -10dBV (0.3V) and +5dBV (1.8V). Don't worry too much if you're unfamiliar with the units
here (dBVs are used to compare signal voltages); all that's really necessary is that you check the maximum output
level of the device you wish to connect, to determine if it falls within the range quoted.

Better out than in

Of course, Portastudios send out signals as well as receiving them, so figures are also included for output
impedance and level. Impedance on the 414 is kept low (100½) - so there shouldn't be a problem connecting to
the high impedance inputs - and output levels are variable across the same -10dBV to +5dBV range. This is done
so, even if an external device has a fixed input sensitivity, the 414's output level may be adjusted to match.

On the specifications for the phones output, there are very different figures. To begin with, the impedance is
quoted as 30½ - much lower than line output impedance - and output level is measured in milliwatts (mW) rather
than volts or dBs. This is because headphones are designed like miniature loudspeakers which offer very low
impedance and are rated in terms of the power they can handle.

Though it's not going to be top of your list of priorities, it's always worth checking the phones output of any
equipment, particularly if you already own a pair of headphones. Wide variations in both impedance and output
power can often mean levels are not high enough for many monitoring applications, leaving you with no other
choice than to use a separate headphone amplifier... or buy a new pair of phones.

Keep this frequency clear

In normal circumstances, a single figure would cover the frequency response for an entire device, but because
this is a Portastudio with several possible signal paths, Tascam has quite correctly quoted figures for each.
Needless to say, this is one way in which a more unscrupulous manufacturer could make a device appear better
than it actually is. By taking the best of these figures and quoting only that, he couldn't be accused of not telling
the truth but, by omission, he certainly wouldn't be telling the whole truth.

Frequency response specs take the form of a stated range of frequencies - from low to high - which a device can
reproduce. Simple enough. But unless these are accompanied by a qualifying figure which tells you how loud
frequencies are in relation to each other, the specs are next to useless. This is because most audio equipment will
reproduce the range of audio frequencies, but signal levels may be substantially reduced at the lower and higher
ends of the range. In fact, there may be all kinds of idiosyncrasies in the frequency response of a particular device
which mean certain frequencies are boosted or cut in relation to the rest.

For it to be meaningful, frequency response must include a figure for the maximum level by which any frequency
is allowed to deviate and still be counted as being within the range of the device. Given that this is a comparative
level, the dB unit is chosen to represent the degree of deviation, and given that a change of 3dB is generally
considered to be just about noticeable by your average set of ears, a figure of +/-3dB is usually quoted.

In the case of the 414, frequency response for signal paths in the mixer is 20Hz to 20kHz +/-3dB. This means that
it will reproduce all frequencies within this range (which, incidentally, is acknowledged to be the minimum and

http://www.intermusic.co.uk/print.asp?ReviewId=3308&ArticleTable=Features&Feature... 25/06/2001
intermusic.com Page 4 of 5

maximum levels of human hearing) to within 3dB. A couple of the specs quote +/-2dB, which is marginally better,
but the difference would scarcely be noticeable.

A more important frequency response for the 414 is quoted in the recorder section of the specifications; that is,
the range covering signals arriving at the tape heads. It's significantly lower than the mixer's frequency response,
but this is to be expected, given the format of the machine. In any circumstances where a dB figure doesn't
accompany the quoted frequency response, you should treat the claim with scep-ticism. Indeed, it could be
argued that this wouldn't be a frequency response at all, just a frequency 'range', which is quite different.

Hi, mid, low...

Related to frequency response are the figures quoted for EQ (equalisation) levels. Generally, these will indicate
the frequency at which cut or boost is applied (or range of frequencies, in the case of sweep or parametric EQ)
and the degree of cut or boost available. Typically, low-frequency (bass) EQ takes place around 100Hz and high-
frequency (treble) EQ at approximately 10kHz.

This again makes the 414 seem quite typical, but the quoted cut or boost range of +/-10dB is lower than you might
(or should) expect. 12dB is much more common in the design of EQ sections, and it's not unusual to find up to
16dB. As the 414 only offers you 10dB to work with, this could be counted as something of a black mark against it,
although given its budget status (it comes in at a reasonable £349) that wouldn't entirely be unexpected.

Signal-to-noise ratio is another apparently straightforward specification but, again, unless it includes certain
qualifying information, it can be misleading. Signal-to-noise ratio is measured by comparing the level of noise in
relation to the audio signals emerging from a particular device. This is necessary because noise levels change as
gain rises or falls, making it impossible to quote a fixed level.

Obviously, background noise level will usually be lower than the level of the audio signals and therefore signal-to-
noise ratio is normally expressed as a negative quantity, using a minus sign in front of the quoted figure. For
example, a signal-to-noise ratio of -80dB would indicate that noise is some 80dB lower than the level of the signal.

The 414 quotes signal-to-noise ratios for a number of signal paths in the mixer section which vary from -58dB up
to -70dB. The range of figures reveals the varying noise levels you'd encounter when using different inputs with
different sensitivities, but in all cases is actually rather poor, reflecting the comparatively low quality of the mixer
stages in this type of machine.

At -85dB, the signal-to-noise ratio of the recorder section is considerably higher, but if you read the figures
carefully, you'll see this is achieved through the use of the built-in dbx noise reduction system. Without it, you'd
find the signal-to-noise ratio would be much closer to -55dB, which gives you some idea of the kind of
improvement noise reduction can bring.

Quite often, where you find poor -quality signal-to-noise specs, you also find disappointing distortion figures. As
you may be aware, there are several kinds of distortion which can affect signals in different ways. But generally
speaking, we stick to measuring the distortion caused by the creation of unwanted frequencies harmonically linked
to the original signals. We refer to this as total harmonic distortion - or THD - and express it as a percentage of the
overall signal.

Tests have revealed that we become aware of harmonic distortion over levels of approximately 0.5%, and a figure
of 0.1% is considered the maximum desirable for high-quality audio. The 414 quotes distortion at 0.5% for the
mixer section and a much higher, 1% for the recorder. This would certainly be noticeable, but it has to be put into
context: distortion on all budget multi-trackers is high - the 414 is probably no worse than any other.

Bleeding crosstalk
The final specs to look at are crosstalk and channel separation. In fact, both refer to the 'bleeding' of signals from
one place to another within a piece of equipment. In the case of the mixer section, it occurs between in channels;
in the case of the recorder section, it's between tape tracks, and it's just as likely to occur between the two
channels of any stereo device.

Like noise (which it is, effectively), crosstalk is expressed in decibels as a relative value, usually in negative form.
In other words, we refer to the crosstalk signal as being '-xdB' in relation to a normal channel or track signals.
Acceptable levels of crosstalk (or 'separation' as it's often known) vary according to application, but in general
terms, a figure of -70dB would be considered necessary for good reproduction. As far as the 414 is concerned,
we're again confronted with good news and bad. With a little help from the dbx system, the recorder can boast a
perfectly acceptable -70dB, but the mixer rather lets the side down with a lacklustre -55dB.

http://www.intermusic.co.uk/print.asp?ReviewId=3308&ArticleTable=Features&Feature... 25/06/2001
intermusic.com Page 5 of 5

So would you buy the Tascam 414? Well obviously that's not the real object of this exercise. But hopefully, if you
are looking at cassette multitrackers or, indeed, any other sort of audio equipment, you'll know a little bit more
about what to look for in the spec sheet. As an indication of the quality and compatibility of a given piece of
equipment, this information speaks volumes.

Of course, you may have made the decision to go digital, in which case, take a look at part II and we'll dig into the
world of bits, sample rates and Nyquist Theorems... Hmm, can't wait.

Nigel Lord 01/98

http://www.intermusic.co.uk/print.asp?ReviewId=3308&ArticleTable=Features&Feature... 25/06/2001