The number of pianos I've "bumped into" over the years, umm, - not that wrapped in Steinways, there are "nicer" instruments out there. A teenage friend had an old Bosendorfer grand in the family home, regularly worked on by a piano technician, which I heard quite a bit of ... and next door right now is newish Yamaha grand, which was regularly played for some years by a highly talented youngster - I could just go outside for a good dose of "concert quality" music.

In the late 80's I heard some concert pianist playing at the Sydney Opera House, and to this day can recall how lacklustre the experience was - like listening to an "ordinary stereo", . By contrast, in the same place, one day I was literally in the front row, for Beethoven's 7th - and that was amazing, the energy was off the scale; shredded strings on bows were flying everywhere, from the violins being hammered.

It's about, intensity. Good playback can do that as well as the "real thing"; a sub-par standard rig trying to do that will just make a listener want to walk out of the area ...

A chap in another forum groks what I'm talking about, with regard to achieving convincing SQ; and just now, out of curiosity, tracked down what his playback chain is like ... ah hah! A Big Daddy CD player from the late 1980s, with digital volume, directly driving the power amp - Gollleee! ... as Gomer used to say, .

I wonder how many people have tripped over this solution ... the best circuitry and machine setups of that period, in the simplest chain that works, as regards controlling sound levels. The biggest, ongoing headache with digital playback has been the desire to over complicate the process, which IME usually means a net loss - only those who stumble across the right combo which, thankfully, has the necessary low enough amount of digital jabbering, which will always gum up the sound from the noise interference factors, will be lucky enough to hear what's possible, .

3 hours ago, fas42 said:

A chap in another forum groks what I'm talking about, with regard to achieving convincing SQ; and just now, out of curiosity, tracked down what his playback chain is like ... ah hah! A Big Daddy CD player from the late 1980s, with digital volume, directly driving the power amp - Gollleee! ... as Gomer used to say, .

 

I wonder how many people have tripped over this solution ... the best circuitry and machine setups of that period, in the simplest chain that works, as regards controlling sound levels. The biggest, ongoing headache with digital playback has been the desire to over complicate the process, which IME usually means a net loss - only those who stumble across the right combo which, thankfully, has the necessary low enough amount of digital jabbering, which will always gum up the sound from the noise interference factors, will be lucky enough to hear what's possible, .

The playback chain, which that chap is obviously quite happy with, confirms the hypothesis that the music happens not in the hardware, but in the head. 

1 hour ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

The playback chain, which that chap is obviously quite happy with, confirms the hypothesis that the music happens not in the hardware, but in the head. 

Yes, the music happens in the head - but the 'quality' of the experience depends on whether enough cues are aligned, and our listening minds are pretty sharp at this ... you are at the door to a room, and you hear the sounds of a piano within - but can't see it yet. Could you put big money on getting right whether it's a real instrument, or playback of a recording ?

No one can control what goes on in their head. It is possible to try, and even to believe, that some success has been achieved, but all too often we are reminded of the contrary. It is all the more impossible to control what happens in the mind by influencing the objects that arise in perception. Shamanic drum dancing and its varieties. So it's best to relax and go with the flow.

Just a titbit from https://alpha-audio.net/review/purifi-eigentakt-eval1-vs-nad-c298-twee-keer-uberklasse-d/2/,

Quote

The reproduction of this stereo power amplifier is incredibly good. We hear loads of detail, control and above all: layering and spaciousness. It is unprecedented how spacious this amplifier plays. Far above its class, we dare to say. Yet it does not sound artificial. As we also wrote about the NAD C298: Eigentakt lets the speaker be heard. And the input signal. The amplifier itself basically disappears. And that is also the case with this EVAL1. A very nice feature for those who like absolute transparency.

My goodness! Accuracy!! Who woulda thunk it ... .

Yes, Virginia, transparency to the waveform of the recording is good stuff ... so, it's bizarre that so many setups never really approach this realm, for a variety of reasons - next life, perhaps .

Audiophiles are still stuck in the same groove, as evidenced by some of the comments with the current Axpona show - that is, gear has to have, "a certain sound!" - that's the measure of whether something is worth commenting on. That the system 'disappears' and just leaves the music "hanging in the air" is something that appears to confuse many - and so they simply move on, . People want to say, "this speaker is better than that speaker!", and that type of thing ... I just shake my head ... .

An interesting post,

Quote

Excellent -- heck, even good -- sound was the exception rather than the norm

The story of audio ... 40 years since digital came out, and still it's so hard! The bright spots prove that enough people grok what it's about, to keep the flame alive - but it's remarkable that no deeper understanding has evolved, in the industry, about what you really have to worry about to get competent SQ ...

Some audiophiles will struggle to understand what it's about ... and here's an example, part of a post on another forum in a thread discussing whether their tweaking had achieved enough ,

Quote

 

My new audio rack has cut down the noise by a lot. I found the SQ is getting smoother to a point of being too polite. I spent the morning to readjust the sorbothane rings, various PC supports, and equipment supports.

I replaced quite a few sorbothane .5" discs with 1/8" sorbo. sheet at many locations to bring the SQ alive again. Sometimes too much vibration damping may deaden the sound too much.

 

Huhh!!? Too polite ... sound deadening? Ummm, that sounds like they need their rig to add some zip to the recording, which otherwise is too dull - this is where a combination of flaws in the chain manage to cancel out, the zippy ones compensate for the dulling ones; change one side of the equation, and you are no longer happy, .

Umm, recordings accurately reproduced have all the energy you could ever want - providing the musicians performing are not completely dead . The big trick is to know where you're going, and whether you are moving in the right direction with any updates - this may not be easy, if you haven't been exposed to "how good it can get". A good mental approach: think of the very best you have ever heard a recording you have play on some, perhaps spectacularly expensive, setup - did the last thing you tried get that recording closer or further away from that peak experience, in the subjectively important areas?

Found this review of the PS Audio MkII DAC, https://theaudiobeatnik.com/review-ps-audio-directstream-dac-mk2 ... what's interesting is his emphasis on those qualities in what you hear that makes the listening worthwhile. And that this component did it for him. As mentioned in another blog entry, I just heard this DAC at an audio show, and though of a good standard it didn't tick all the boxes. This, unfortunately, is most likely the result of the difference between an optimised, and non-optimised rig setup - with digital chains that's where the money is, so to speak; the system at the show would have needed work on it, to bring it up to a more convincing standard - this review, as have other experiences I've read, strongly suggest that relatively minimal effort would be needed on this unit; perhaps more conditioning time is all that's required.

A good paragraph,

Quote

I’ve mentioned in several reviews how it has always amazed me at the symphony when the percussionist strikes the little triangle, and I can hear it so clearly even with all of the other instruments playing. This is what a system with great detail should do for you. It’s not that everything should have its own etched-out space, but that you can hear everything distinctly as part of the whole. The more easily you can hear these little percussion instruments, the more natural music sounds.

Yes. That's how it works. Blurring of the sound cues degrades this sense of what's happening, within the listening - and what's surprising, or would be for many, is that even the 'grungiest' of recordings do indeed have these cues encoded in them; get the rig working well enough, and those giveaways of what the musicians are doing are, "clear as a bell" ... .

I just heard the updated PS Audio DAC, at a show - first time exposure to that brand of gear. And though it performed quite well, the last piece was not in place - it didn't deliver, convincing music. And that most likely was due to something from a huge range of factors, which I obviously could do nothing about ...

That the unit, as can just about any component in a chain, can be coaxed to the necessary standard is indicated by this experience of someone who inserted one of these DACs in his chain,

Quote

“The short form is simply,” Holy Sh*t! However to be a little more expansive: This is one extraordinary piece of gear. Well actually two but I consider them as a singular set. Who would have thought those little silver discs contained so much musical information of such high quality. Truly analogue like and then in some ways even better. Smooth as the finest silk, dynamic as a thunderstorm , three-dimensional as virtual reality, transparent and grainless as museum glass and detailed and revealing like the space telescope. Listening to Coltrane and his band performing A Love Supreme live in Seattle was as though I had stepped into a time machine putting me live in the club with absolutely no hifi artifacts, just pure musical excitement and enjoyment. Bravo! Congratulations! All the Best, Sandy Gross.”

Yes. That's what's further down the road - as I discovered over 3 decades ago. The gear that will get you there is easier than ever to acquire, will steadily become cheaper to purchase; and most importantly, will require less extra tweaking to pull the proverbial bunny out of the hat, .

A comment an audiophile just made elsewhere,

Quote

If I reviewed products like DACs for a living I would use the highest resolving speakers available to me. No one would say the [well regarded small speaker] are particularly high resolving.

Well, this is the strange space that many audio enthusiasts inhabit - having the belief that there is a magic category of "speakers which are highly resolving" ... ummm, no ...

There are systems which are "highly resolving" - and this has only a little bit to do with the speakers; yes, you can make the latter have characteristics which interact with the systems driving them to do the equivalent of TV sets which are adjusted to have super saturated colour - but it ain't anything to do with accuracy, .

A well sorted electronics chain driving a 'mediocre' speaker will be so far beyond a 'mediocre' set of electronics driving a well sorted speaker, in terms of delivering satisfying SQ - it will be, chalk and cheese. The speakers are about as important as the set of tyres on a high performance super car - if they are well down in quality, you'll notice; but vastly more important are the capabilities and design of just about everything else in the build of the vehicle.

A comment in a post in another forum,

Quote

I did see in the latest Stereophile mag that one of the big players - D’Agostino I think - said they pay no attention to the measurements. SQ coming out of the machine is their primary concern. I like it.

Which may or may not be correct, in the sense that that person actually said that ... doesn't matter. The significance is that the 'wrong' measurements are normally used to evaluate performance, and hence have almost zero relevance to subjective qualities. Which is why many very ambitious designs barely tell you anything about how well they measure in the lab; the specifications page is mainly white space ... .

So, what can the poor consumer do?!!  Ummm, read about over people's experiences is the usual solution ... and give it a go yourself ...

What's going on?? ... Same ol' story ... noise and interference artifacts make or break the SQ; especially these days, where basic implementations and power supplies are now good enough to get most things working to a decent level - like it's always been, finessing to push past the integrity bottlenecks that cripple the ability of a playback chain to offer up a convincing experience is where the real action is; and that is something that the industry is still loath to discuss .

And no-one measures this. Because it's hard to do. No Audio Precision manual says, just set up the audio gear and our analyser just so, and out will pop a lovely set of numbers that will give you the story. Which is not the same thing as saying, "It can't be done!" . No, the problem is, the slightest perturbation or variation in the setup, meaning combo of audio rig and measuring stuff, will throw everything into another state - and the readings will now mean nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Which was highlighted by the last visit to the local audio friend, a few days ago. His third and latest rig, and the one in play (groan), could go from listless and a bit of a throwaway, to pumping some magic out into the room - on the same recording! Why? Purely because of the sequence and method of initiating the output from some track - now, how can one "measure this"? Hmmm?? Yes, there would be some variation in what's coming from the speaker; and with a lot of time and work you could probably nail the crucial detail ... but what use is that?! You now know that the chain works slightly, and critically, differently depending upon circumstances - and that's all! You have progressed absolutely nowhere in actually stabilising and enhancing the abilities of the setup, to always perform well ... which is the real point of having a "hifi system!" ... or isn't it?

Just saw this, in another post - originating from the the Grimm Audio company,

Quote

We are very excited that this design reproduces micro-details so well that it allows a deep emotional connection to the musical performance.

Well, whaddya know ... !

But seriously, this points to good things ... firstly, that steadily more and more companies are grokking what the end game is: to improve accuracy to the necessary levels so that it no longer constantly reminds you that you're listening to a machine. And secondly, that the recordings have always had this magical "micro-detail" embedded in them, just waiting to be unleashed on an unsuspecting listener ... unless, of course, this new standard of immersive quality is in fact, oh horrors, a 'distortion' created by an exceptionally capable AI engine inside the DAC, .

Unfortunately, the truth is, that until recently most rigs either blurred or simply chopped off the 'deeper' or lower levels of detail - rendering the listening either slightly unpleasant - or boring. Comparing the last two audio shows I've been to shows that the progress is there - the earlier one was, "deep emotional connection? What are you talking about??!", the just past one had many rooms that ticked a lot of boxes - whether other visitors were aware of this improved accuracy or not is another story, .

Elsewhere, this comment ...

Reverb used in a recording can be "as big as you like" - providing the playback can do justice to it. This is an example from the current Munich show, which some in the comments to the clip completely misunderstand; they believe that the sense of space is due to the room being used for the playback - the situation is, that you would hear these qualities, irrespective of the room it was in,

A fundamental of, umm, audio conjuring  is that a chain of technically just OK components, which may be very low cost, which has been carefully optimised and all necessary integrity issues resolved, will easily outperform the most expensive, visually OTT rig as a means of enjoying satisfying listening to a huge range of recordings, if the latter has a single significant weakness. Even if the ratio of cost of these rigs is, gulp!!, 1000 to 1 ... .

Those who believe in million dollar systems sounding like a million dollars won't be happy about this - but that's the way it is: the playback is a window, or should be, onto the captured musical event - which is the valuable part ...

Think about this: you have a "million dollar" view somewhere, on some road: you drive up in a, literally, million dollar car, and then someone turns up in a 'thousand dollar' car, and parks beside you; you both wind down the door window, and poke your heads out to look at the view. At this point you both immersed in the same reality, a "million dollar experience" - you might be more comfortable, have much greater creature comforts in your vehicle; but from the POV of being able to appreciate the specialness of your surroundings, there is no difference.

And that's it works in audio, too ...

Interesting comment elsewhere - someone who has "sorted out" his rig, , clarifies what happens when you "play setup games", with the speakers,
 

Quote

 

Yes, when my setup monitors are toed-in close to my sweet spot, tonality, focus, and details become Very sharp and precise, but at a loss of 3D realism, soundstaging naturalness, spacial imaging, and point-source divorce.

I actually use a 5 degree toe-out that still preserves 99% of the timbre, resolution, and imaging in the music. This adds that beyond-room boundary, holographic magic that makes the system/room disappear as I'm transported into the recorded venue!

 

Now, I have done this never sort of thing, the "zap the sound directly into your forehead!" "method" - but it most likely would happen for me, if I tried it . But like him, it's not a turn on - the being with the event is far more important, to me.

I've read where people have played with this sort of exercise with live sound, using panels and other things, and, yes, it does do some interesting things - an 'aid', like using one of those ancient hearing horns ... but does it get you closer to what's on the recording? In my book, it doesn't ...

An article that is a nice summing up of many audiophile traumas, https://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/can-a-system-be-too-good.

And the answer? No!! A resounding, no ...

If one can never forget that an audio system is a mechanism for providing a completely transparent window onto the recording, then you have a good idea of what the goal is - under no circumstances should you be aware of the devices in front of you as being the origin of what you're hearing. If that contract is broken, then all bets are off ...

I was curious to read some reviews of the CH Precision M10 amplifier,and found this, https://hifiplus.com/articles/ch-precision-l10-line-stage-preamplifier-and-m10-twin-chassis-power-amplifier/. I could quote some bits from it, but the overall tone, for me, highlights important points, especially in the last 2 or 3 paragraph prior to the very last one, that I've been making over and over again.

So I'll leave it up to those who are interested, to digest the whole thing, .

Said elsewhere,

Quote

The truth is, that modern day equipment is all so good, that properly set up, in a good room where the speakers size are properly matched size for that room, with very few exceptions, any of us could be very happy with. 

This is largely true; the recent audio show demonstrated, for me, that the age of abysmal, downright weird, PA standard, or just plain vanilla mediocre SQ is largely behind us, at least as far as shows are concerned, .

Are We There Yet ? Not quite ... the size, depth, integrity of the presentation can always be lifted - and just putting on a 'difficult' recording at lifelike levels will tell you what the true status is; does it fully work as an intense, immersive, satisfying sound experience - or not? When an adequate means to achieving that is available, off the shelf, at reasonable prices, then we can say the job is done.

Jay, who's very active in the high end online reviewing, etc, scene, gave an account of his favourite setup at the Munich show - the key part, for me, starts at 10:20 in the clip,

The type of presentation he describes is why I have no interest in surround sound; a correctly functioning stereo does all the necessary work, anything extra just starts veering towards the gimmicky - only relevant if the surround element is very specifically part of the creative intent.

Why does one get the "surround sound" sensation, with just two speakers? Because, with a well performing rig one automatically turns up the volume, to feel more immersed in the event; that sound bounces around the room, comes at one from all directions, "it surrounds you" . Why doesn't it work with a lesser replay? Unfortunately, the volume needed for it to happen makes it obvious that the reproduction has defects, and all the bouncing around only reinforces that fact; now you're uncomfortable with the sound, so you turn the volume down, start playing with speaker positioning and other room stuff to try and 'tame' the anomalies - which only partially works ...

Part of me is now pretty sure that "audiophiles" will be the last to "get it", ... that is, the audio industry will steadily evolve the quality of ordinary, so called mid-fi, gear to the point where it does a pretty excellent job of being 'transparent' to the recording. But audiophiles still won't be happy ... because all the rituals will be sucked out of the practice, they will no longer be necessary - and these systems, most importantly, won't do that absolutely vital job of making you aware of how special(!!) are audiophile albums - the "bad" recordings rubbish bin will no longer be required ... and isn't that a terrible thing!

Most people won't care less; they will just think, isn't it fabulous listening to this "old" music and getting a huge kick out of it, while doing other things more important to their lives, .

Okay, now back to being a bit serious about all of this ...

This post inspired me,

The "emotional connection"? IME, this only comes about when the playback is clean enough - 'dirty' reproduction gets in the way, and only works if you really know the composition or track well, or it is a style which you like, where you used to 'roughness', and expect it to be part of the package.

Speakers are only a small part of getting "clean sound" - if they happen to be a good match, in "compensating" for weaknesses elsewhere in the chain, then getting the "right speakers!" may be the answer ... but I wouldn't rely on it!

Just seen elsewhere, in a post on another forum - the member had done just two things:  simplified the rig, by changing to a passive pre-amp, and made a swap to the much better sorted out, version 2 of, the DAC,

Quote

What I’m hearing is a huge improvement in overall realism and sense a performance is taking place before me. Peaks that used to sound hard or brittle now reproduce with ease. I listened to Rachmaninov Symphonic Dances on Athena (96k DAD rip) Dave Brubeck take 5 sacd and Koyanisquasi Phillip Glass soundtrack.

Yes. This is the "good road"; a major step towards better accuracy - this automatically delivers all the "good stuff", because you're that much closer to hearing what's actually on the recording ...