|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
199.10.28.20
Of course, the easy answer is 'both'. But that's easier said than done.
I keep discovering that it is very challenging to upgrade/tweak my system and make equally significant improvements in both the quality of the tone and the details retrieval. Usually the tweak/upgrade is asymmetrical. Either it improves the tone of the system, at the expense of some details retrieval, or the other way around.
And it's not only me; I've noticed similar trajectory as I'm following upgrades/tweaks that my buddies are making. Some of them tend to lean more toward favouring detail retrieval and are okay with sacrificing some of the tone density and thickness, others are more into chasing after lovely tone, even if it means some of the finer details get lost.
I'd be curious to hear what others on this fine forum think about this issue. Or, maybe it's all just a figment of my imagination? Maybe all power amps sound the same?
Follow Ups:
Cant have proper timbre without Both ....
If you're a true audiophile, you want proper tone and genuine detail retrieval, What you get with low and mid-fi, and with bad HiFi, is high order harmonic distortion, which accentuates detail (and artificially, adding detail that didn't exist in the original performance).To a certain extent an elevated high frequency peak in a loudspeaker can also enhance the impression of detail retrieval.
Countless auditory studies show ordinary listeners prefer high order harmonic distortion upon first listen, which fades after approximately an hour of listening for most people, where listener fatigue sets in as the brain tires of the math.
So, your typical car stereo has artificially enhanced detail as that would be the preferred system for short commutes. It's also what most people would conclude "sounds better" if auditioning car audio speakers and head units or amplifiers in a store, which is a short time period activity.
In fact the store will deliberately have an audition display set up so that potential buyers must stand rather than sit comfortably. It sells typical Car Audio quality very well.
I know many audio enthusiasts who prefer components with relatively high levels of odd order harmonic distortion. They like the enhanced, but artificial, detail.
I prefer what was in the original performance, notwithstanding that the art of recording and production is a performance in itself, and added artificial detail may be a feature of such an album or song. But if it is, I want to hear it as such, and if it isn't, I want it to be absent.
Edits: 03/27/17 03/27/17 03/27/17 03/27/17
Because I have near-perfect pitch. I suppose you could say that's tone, but I think it's something else. I can't relate it to music reproduction electronics, but Linn seems to place special emphasis on it.
For me it is details-retrieval, as there is so much data, buried in both LP/CD/SACD discs. It would be a shame to not extract every single nuance.
When I go to listen to live music (A symphony or Jazz) I don't really hear a lot of detail. I don't hear chair squeaks, hyper precise location of individual instruments - as far as I'm concerned that stuff is just an artifact of high detail enhanced components- an interesting circus act but not really real reproduction of music. What I hear when I go to a live concert is lots of tone a - warm enveloping event. I try to reproduce that in my home to the extent possible. For me that means tubes and Magneplanars. YMMV.
how much live acoustic music a person hears and how much they attempt to come as close as possible to that at home. Still, no cigars are handed out.
When I attend a symphonic concert I don't hear score "pages being turned" as some like to reference. Nor do I hear all the precise instrument placement others rave about. But then I prefer to sit more than 10 rows back to be enveloped by the whole orchestra as a cohesive sound. Others may prefer to sit directly up front (like Harry Pearson) where they experience a different soundstage.
Such individual preferences may be reflected in our choices for components. More than once I've auditioned components which seem to over-emphasize detail, but at the sacrifice of more believable tonality. I pass on those since I prefer the latter.
"The piano ain't got no wrong notes." Thelonious Monk
At this point in my audiophile life, I'm about sonic "balance" more than anything else. Sure, I like hearing details I've never heard before--that's really cool, and I'm still a sucker for that trick--but detail without tone is just a crooked assemblage of sounds. And tone without detail is just a musical blob. So I've tried to stake out a midpoint. Who knows how successful I've been. I guess it depends on whom you ask. But it's not easy, and it's taken a lot of time and experimentation, and a whole lot of money!
This is a public service announcement . . . WITH GUITARS!!!
.
And, many instruments don't DO continuous tone, ever.
The two aspects you raise are orthogonal.
Most recordings are mostly pop, and are close miked which distort both.
Tail chase.
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
...is achieved by retrieving all the details.
A really good system will give you everything
Alan
Are you a face, tits or legs guy?
Answer: The whole package!
:)
butts
all the best,
mrh
> Answer: The whole package!
But such women are far and in-between!
As I chased my ideal, I lost a bit of proper tone. IE my system was a little lean.
I fixed that 100% with the last upgrade of $$$$ cables.
I spent %5000 on three IC sets.
I need detail, I like tone.
I have no use for gut massage bass at all.
-
nt
"I know just enough to get into trouble. But not enough to get out of it."
I'm a tone guy this time around. I do a lot of listening live and very close and don't believe I hear the kind of etched or hyper detail that one often gets in a stereo. I't may be that the two characteristics you bring up are somewhat mutually exclusive. Just a theory. T456
"The Borg is the ultimate user. They're unlike any threat your Federation has ever faced."
- Q, 2365
...you can have it all.
My priorities:
Tone/harmonics
Dynamics
Detail
The notion of "musical vs. analytical" tends to be based on dynamics vs. detail rather than tonality/harmonics which are vital aspects of detail retrieval rather than that of dynamics which has more to do with PRAT a.k.a "boogie factor", which is a vital aspect of musicality.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: