How Loud is 1 Watt?

[Confused]

14 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Note, if one wants the play, "the biggest number wins!" game - then it's very easy to produce impressive stuff. Take that chip amp I did years ago - I pushed the voltage rails right up to next to the absolute max the component was rated to take, so a touch over 40V. And the output stage was current limited to just 10A, to prevent internal damage - now, I'll be ultra simplistic about it; I'll measure when the voltage clips, and the crossover in the speakers is sucking 10A, doing nothing useful  ... let's see, 40 times 10 - my goodness, a 400W peak, isn't ... that ... amazing!! 😝

400W?

 

Easier to win with this: 🙂

 

[Confused]

On 12/8/2020 at 11:58 PM, fas42 said:

So, how come this happened? The Klipsch were their typical a bit above average sensitivity, 96dB or so, with a very benign 8 ohm impedance - a walk in the park for the very ordinary, 'mid-fi', Japanese amplifier unit - so, dynamics to burn were on tap - and, were delivered. My takeaway thought was, how superior this was as a listening experience, compared to the usual weak-kneed effort from an 'audiophile' setup ... 😉

 

14 hours ago, fas42 said:

Largely disagree. The most impressive setup I've come across was high end Dynaudio speakers, driven by the biggest Brystons - this was PA level sound, at a superb quality standard; doing a live drum kit, only a couple of feet away 😉. Ordinary sensitivity, reasonable power handling, nothing special in the size of the drivers.

 

So, we either need high efficiency, undemanding, speakers with modest amplification, or modest efficiency, more demanding, speakers with very powerful amplification.  I think I fully agree with this. 

 

I would point out that the Dynaudio's have twin 8" woofers, which is reasonable for domestic use.  I have seen modest PA rigs with single 12" drivers, which is much the same thing in terms of driver area.  (I have never heard a PA that sounds as good as the C4's though)

 

14 hours ago, fas42 said:

I have a CD of well recorded pipe organ music - and every time I try this on some person's system, it's always disappointing - lack of scale, majesty, power, visceral impact - not even close, most times.

 

Perhaps you need to try a few systems with high efficiency speakers?  Or maybe systems with big speakers you like and very powerful amps, that should do it.

[sandyk]

8 hours ago, Confused said:

Perhaps you need to try a few systems with high efficiency speakers?  Or maybe systems with big speakers you like and very powerful amps, that should do it.

Perhaps we need to go back to basics with speakers more like 90dB /1W/1M that don't need very powerful amplifiers to drive them to realistic levels ?

We need to get back from the "my xxxx is bigger than yours/Greed is Good" mentality , just like we have had to do with automobiles that some from other countries used to refer to as gasolene guzzling "Yank Tanks."

Gone are the days of cheap fuel (unless you live in the UAR?) and cheap electricity generated by fossil fuels .It's obscene to use such high power consumption electronics and large amounts of fossil fuel when the planet is overheating already.

Unfortunately some politicians are still  Climate Change deniers  , or only play lip service to it in order to win more votes and stay in power. 

 Let's not also forget the reasons why SMPS evolved, and there was a legislated requirement for non incandescent lighting.  

[fas42]

10 hours ago, Confused said:

400W?

 

Easier to win with this: 🙂

 

 

Quite trivial these days to fill a box with ultra high value for money class D amplifiers - say 2,000 plus genuine, RMS watts ready to fire ... so, getting high amounts of decent power is easy, these days - now, just get the rest of the engineering right ... 😉

 

9 hours ago, Confused said:

 

 

So, we either need high efficiency, undemanding, speakers with modest amplification, or modest efficiency, more demanding, speakers with very powerful amplification.  I think I fully agree with this. 

 

Yes, it's a sliding scale - just pick a point along the range which is a sweet spot, for you.

 

9 hours ago, Confused said:

 

I would point out that the Dynaudio's have twin 8" woofers, which is reasonable for domestic use.  I have seen modest PA rigs with single 12" drivers, which is much the same thing in terms of driver area.  (I have never heard a PA that sounds as good as the C4's though)

 

The size of the woofers is everything - for some people ... and it means, sweet bugger all 😝. If you like the visuals, go for it 😉 ... but it don't mean nuthin' ...

 

9 hours ago, Confused said:

 

 

Perhaps you need to try a few systems with high efficiency speakers?  Or maybe systems with big speakers you like and very powerful amps, that should do it.

 

I'm sure they're out there - just haven't come across any yet ...

[fas42]

This is what I'm looking for ... this is about the best clip I've come across of a rig doing it properly,

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

On 12/10/2020 at 3:29 PM, phusis said:

but that you don't find the lowest frequencies to be "musically [..] very interesting" to me is indicating that you haven't experienced what this range, when reproduced effortless and cleanly via lots of displacement area and properly implemented, can do to the musical enjoyment.

It should be noted that Frank explicitly doesn't want any reproduction under a 100Hz.

Beats me why.

IOW, you will be correct there.

[PeterSt]

10 hours ago, fas42 said:

The size of the woofers is everything - for some people ... and it means, sweet bugger all 😝. If you like the visuals, go for it 😉 ... but it don't mean nuthin' ...

 

Frank, my man, you don't get it at all;

 

The larger the woofer surface, the less excursion, the less distortion.

The louder you want to play without distortion, the larger the woofer area has to be.

 

You are fake news with bookshelfs which would be able to do this, because of your non-interest in the lower frequencies. You miss out severely.

Yes, indeed, because I tell you. 😏

[PeterSt]

On 12/10/2020 at 12:00 PM, Confused said:

I found another clip showing the CH Precision power meters.

 

If you ask me, the amp is going to use more and more Watts for the same produced level.

Of course this is my story so possibly I want to see that, but ...

[Confused]

10 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

If you ask me, the amp is going to use more and more Watts for the same produced level.

Of course this is my story so possibly I want to see that, but ...

I am not sure if I fully understand the point you are making here?  Are you referring to power needed for the production of transients?

 

Maybe something else?

[PeterSt]

5 minutes ago, Confused said:

Are you referring to power needed for the production of transients?

 

With the same passages (no instruments added), the amp is showing more and more Watts. Up to over 1100 in the end without clear reason (compared to earlier in the track).

 

Something else is, if you watch the beginning, you can see that the more transient instrument use more Watts indeed (observe the hand clapping or whatever it is). So sure, more transient requires more power (which is no news to me because again: it will contain more "frequencies" as such - the squarer the more)

[Confused]

28 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

With the same passages (no instruments added), the amp is showing more and more Watts. Up to over 1100 in the end without clear reason (compared to earlier in the track).

 

Something else is, if you watch the beginning, you can see that the more transient instrument use more Watts indeed (observe the hand clapping or whatever it is). So sure, more transient requires more power (which is no news to me because again: it will contain more "frequencies" as such - the squarer the more)

That's what I thought you meant.  Earlier in the thread I mentioned a dealer event that I attended a couple of years ago, this was attended by Devialet's Chief Engineer for the Expert range, Mathieu Pernot.  This was exactly the kind of thing he was talking about when he was explaining that his theoretical "perfect" amplifier would have "infinite power". (which seemed to me at the time to be a very curious thing to say)

 

He also talked a lot about quoted power ratings for speakers.  Explaining that there is no agreed standard for how such ratings are specified and can be measured, and that the real world performance and capability of speakers varies vastly between examples with similar on paper specifications, with the possibility of very transient powered levels being far in excess of a given speakers "rated wattage".  It was a very interesting talk.

[Confused]

13 hours ago, sandyk said:

Perhaps we need to go back to basics with speakers more like 90dB /1W/1M that don't need very powerful amplifiers to drive them to realistic levels ?

We need to get back from the "my xxxx is bigger than yours/Greed is Good" mentality , just like we have had to do with automobiles that some from other countries used to refer to as gasolene guzzling "Yank Tanks."

Gone are the days of cheap fuel (unless you live in the UAR?) and cheap electricity generated by fossil fuels .It's obscene to use such high power consumption electronics and large amounts of fossil fuel when the planet is overheating already.

Unfortunately some politicians are still  Climate Change deniers  , or only play lip service to it in order to win more votes and stay in power. 

 Let's not also forget the reasons why SMPS evolved, and there was a legislated requirement for non incandescent lighting.  

Isn't this more of a case of efficiency?  There are many high powered amps available these days that are actually very efficient.  

 

Yet at the same time, there are some that will say that there is nothing better than Class A amplification, and in terms of audio performance this is arguably correct.  But class A amplifiers are incredibly inefficient, a typical 100w class A amp will need to dissipate 400w or so of heat when just idling.  The much improving but still disliked by some class D is far more efficient, and critically class D does not consume lots of power when it is not needed to produce the watts.

 

I am not sure that audiophile amps are the most significant issue facing the planet at the moment, but I guess it does all help.

 

This also makes me think about woofer size.  I have seen it claimed that the general reduction in speaker efficiency is directly related to the modern trend for narrow / tall floor standing speakers.  These tend to require less efficient long through drivers to get decent bass response from the smaller cone.  (although the coils / drivers might be relatively large)  They also tend to have relatively low impedance.  In the pro audio world there are many 15" drivers and similar that have efficiencies in the true 95+dB/1W range and genuine 8 ohms impedance.  So it looks like the pro's are doing much better a much better job for efficiency than your typical at home audiophile.

 

As an aside that made me chuckle this morning, the car with the largest engine I have ever owned was built in Australia....

(To be fair, the actual engine was American built though) 

[Summit]

2 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Frank, my man, you don't get it at all;

 

The larger the woofer surface, the less excursion, the less distortion.

The louder you want to play without distortion, the larger the woofer area has to be.

 

You are fake news with bookshelfs which would be able to do this, because of your non-interest in the lower frequencies. You miss out severely.

Yes, indeed, because I tell you. 😏

 

It is not true that the larger the woofer surface, the less distortion! The larger the woofer the more mass it will have, and the harder it will be to start and stop it (momentum). A big woofer is also much slower and it’s why it only is used for the lowest frequency’s, which by nature is slow and most important where humans hearing is substantial less sensitive (to distortion, THD etc).

[phusis]

On 12/10/2020 at 10:35 PM, fas42 said:

 

Must say, to this day, I have not experienced a single horn speaker setup sound good, in the 'home environment' - all the ones I've heard so far all suffered the malaise of sounding, well, horny 🙃. As in, baby, you want SPLs - well, I have SPLs to burn ...

 

Which is not saying that they can't sound magnificent - merely, that I have not yet come across such a rig, in the flesh.

 

Which is what it is (i.e.: that you haven't horn-fitted speakers sound to your liking), but something tells me you've only heard a limited array of horn speakers, as they don't all of them sound "horny." Though if what it comes down to is about the issue with something sounding different compared to small bookshelf speakers, then you better (or regrettably, depending on one's view) stick to your guns. As I said: high SPL capacity - that large, horn-fitted high eff. speakers can deliver - isn't about hammering away to the max. at every juncture, at least not in my case, but about having the fuller envelope for effortless reproduction at most any SPL. Small bookshelf speakers won't give you or any other that, end of story - unless you fitted them as headphones ;) 

 

Quote

 

 

Largely disagree. The most impressive setup I've come across was high end Dynaudio speakers, driven by the biggest Brystons - this was PA level sound, at a superb quality standard; doing a live drum kit, only a couple of feet away 😉. Ordinary sensitivity, reasonable power handling, nothing special in the size of the drivers.

 

I have a CD of well recorded pipe organ music - and every time I try this on some person's system, it's always disappointing - lack of scale, majesty, power, visceral impact - not even close, most times.

 

Don't know which Dynaudio speakers you're referring to here, but going by "Ordinary sensitivity, reasonable power handling, nothing special in the size of the drivers," it would be erroneous to think of them being capable of delivering "PA level sound," which is not to say such (smaller, I guess) speakers couldn't produce high SPL's in limited spacing and lots a clean power available. While my current speaker set-up (incl. subs) is considerable larger and can generate SPL's that far exceeds anything I had in the day of smaller bookshelf speakers, it's not as much about playing louder per se than the ease, impact, scale, tone and enveloping, visceral feel of the sound. By comparison smaller speakers at a given SPL just sound.. smaller.

 

Organ music with the whole trimmings, so to speak, is likely one of, if not the biggest challenge to reproduce in any way that remotely approximates and resembles its live counterpart. Getting that (closer to) right involves many parameters, and if you know what a real organ concert sounds like there's no going around the need for a for a big, well-implemented speaker set-up with prodigious subs capacity in a moderate to large size room. Anything else - i.e.: believing a small set-up could get you the same result - would be diluting oneself, I'd say. 

 

Quote

 

 

 

Because of what happened over 30 years ago, I have always come at this from a completely different angle - I find most rigs with huge speakers pretty hopeless - all that size, and money, delivering very little that's genuinely satisfying.

 

 

 

Going big isn't any guarantee of good sound, in fact oftentimes it can do the very opposite going beyond 3-way topology and involving more complexity. Listening to a pair of the original Snell type J (8" woofer and a 1" dome tweeter) with a Sugden amp many years ago sort of formed my reference to work from in my following hifi endeavor; the coherent, lively, musical and natural fashion they produced sound is something, at its core, I'm trying to achieve with my current set-up - just scaled up. It's also why I'm sticking to 2-way main speakers (plus 2 subs) to have that overall "simplicity" of reproduction. I would certainly agree that many larger (low to moderately sensitive) speaker set-ups I've heard were quite blah sounding, but that doesn't negate that it can sound great. The fiscal side of going big I'm avoiding with the choices involved of DIY sub designs and (used) pro cinema speakers. I've had smaller 2-way speakers that were more expensive than my current mains + subs combined (incl. digital XO + subs amp)..

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, Confused said:

Isn't this more of a case of efficiency?  There are many high powered amps available these days that are actually very efficient.  

We need to realise that the main limitation of output power isn't so much governed by the amount of current an amplifier can deliver from it's power supply, which can be achieved by the use of parallel banks of large value capacitors such as 10,000uF, but the fact that to get extremely high output we also need to have higher voltage supply rails.

These are normally seen as 80V rated types, or occasionally 100V rated types kept well within their ratings., but the better 10,000uF 100V types are damn expensive, and will also give specifications for their slew rate , which means how fast they can supply current on transients. Due to practical supply voltage ratings, we then need to use VERY low impedance speakers to achieve these overkill power levels. However, power transistors suffer from Beta droop (decreased gain)  when working into  very low impedance loads, with a resulting increase in distortion. Yes, we can use more parallel output transistors, but this then causes increased loading of the previous stages, as well as the previous stage seeing a much higher capacitance load, thus causing the amplifier to have higher distortion compared with what can be achieved into a more sensible speaker impedance.

 

 G'night from NSW Au.

[phusis]

13 hours ago, fas42 said:

This is what I'm looking for ... this is about the best clip I've come across of a rig doing it properly,

 

 

 

 

Very nice sound, from what I can assess with cheap earphones, and a lovely piece of music. 

[PeterSt]

5 hours ago, Summit said:

It is not true that the larger the woofer surface, the less distortion! The larger the woofer the more mass it will have, and the harder it will be to start and stop it (momentum).

 

Admitted, I said "the larger the ...", which is of course not true. My point would be that you'd still lose by far on the doppler and similar distortion because of the massive excursion the smaller woofer requires vs. the larger one. Anyway, I have 3x 15" in my speaker instead of 2x 18" because the 18"ers show more distortion on the mapped excursion (say to produce the same SPL ad 3x 15"). Somehow 21"ers perform better again.

 

Please notice that the (self-) design I use, was preceded by a 3x 12" incarnation, but this was not able to show the impact a kick drum has in real live (and thus at realistic levels), at the excursion allowed for distortion figures (per my own standards). So it would be quite foolish to re-design the lot into 3x 15" if that would have been useless.

Btw, the 3x 15" was calculated for displacement the kickdrum displaces too. But then without distortion (so to speak). I recall that at the calibrated 89dBSPL the excursion is 3mm one way (of the 3 in parallel connected drivers).

 

Anyway ... no way one 8"er can do what 3 15"ers allow for distortion-less sound (btw, open baffle in my case).

[bluesman]

14 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

this was not able to show the impact a kick drum has in real live (and thus at realistic levels)

Kick drum heads vary from 14” to 22”+.  Most of the jazz drummers with whom I work use 18” kits for most dates.  The heads are less stiff than speaker cones, and the excursion of a bass drum head is both much shorter than a speaker’s and extremely nonlinear because the circumference is fixed to the drum shell and doesn’t move at all - and excursion is greatest where the beater hits the head, which is not usually at its center.  I’d expect a single speaker cone close to the same size as the drum being reproduced to be able to recreate its sound with minimal added distortion at the same level reached in live performance, given an adequate motor (voice coil + magnet) driven with sufficient power.

 

I’ll try to get over to my son’s house to record some beats from his Pearl Masters Custom 18” kick to see what its spectrum contains.  He and his girlfriend are pretty Covid-sensitive & they’re trying hard to minimize risk. So they may not want me to do this until our local case rates come down (they’re high & rising right now). But it’s a noble endeavor that I’ll pursue.  The findings may surprise us.

[PeterSt]

51 minutes ago, bluesman said:

I’d expect a single speaker cone close to the same size as the drum being reproduced to be able to recreate its sound with minimal added distortion at the same level reached in live performance

 

Love that post. Really.

Somewhere I wrote out the math to do this (I forgot where).

What I recall of it, is that it is to be incorporated that the kick as such (stamp your foot) will be faster than what the driver cone normally will be able to do. But three doing the same will mimic it.

 

Since I have this right, I am able to hear all over the tension of the skins. Those of my kit are rather weak. Many drummers have it like that. But many also have it the stiffest as possible, which makes all ultimately fast (Charly Antolini ?). To have this rendered well is really an extra dimension.

 

PS: I mentioned several times over the years that the recording I have here of my own kit, can not be distinguished from reality (enter the room eyes closes). At first I told the same, but then visitors could feel the difference (stomach). This is how the math was done and the 3x 15" emerged replacing 3x 12".

[fas42]

13 hours ago, PeterSt said:

It should be noted that Frank explicitly doesn't want any reproduction under a 100Hz.

Beats me why.

IOW, you will be correct there.

 

Not correct ... as examples of what I'm after, the bottom end of a pipe organ has to be right, as does the bass line of a piano ... the number of rigs I've come across, until recently, that can do this was mighty, might small ...

 

Sorry, synthesizer 16Hz rumblings don't interest me in the slightest ... I like the sound to be about music, rather than vibrating various things around me, 😉.

13 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Frank, my man, you don't get it at all;

 

The larger the woofer surface, the less excursion, the less distortion.

The louder you want to play without distortion, the larger the woofer area has to be.

 

You are fake news with bookshelfs which would be able to do this, because of your non-interest in the lower frequencies. You miss out severely.

Yes, indeed, because I tell you. 😏

 

Ummm, just use plenty of smaller diameter drivers ... guess what? Quite a few speaker manufacturers have worked this out, you see, 😁.

 

The Edifiers I have are remarkable; I'm very impressed with their deep bass - which had to be tamed. Meaning, it shouldn't there unless it's on the recording, and if it is there, it's overpowering, with the volume at the right level ...

[sandyk]

14 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Sorry, synthesizer 16Hz rumblings don't interest me in the slightest ... I like the sound to be about music, rather than vibrating various things around me, 😉.

 

These very low frequencies (if pure) can't be heard directly , and can only be felt as vibration. 

  I also wonder what they can do if powerful enough to the heart rhythm ?

[fas42]

11 hours ago, phusis said:

 

Which is what it is (i.e.: that you haven't horn-fitted speakers sound to your liking), but something tells me you've only heard a limited array of horn speakers, as they don't all of them sound "horny." Though if what it comes down to is about the issue with something sounding different compared to small bookshelf speakers, then you better (or regrettably, depending on one's view) stick to your guns. As I said: high SPL capacity - that large, horn-fitted high eff. speakers can deliver - isn't about hammering away to the max. at every juncture, at least not in my case, but about having the fuller envelope for effortless reproduction at most any SPL. Small bookshelf speakers won't give you or any other that, end of story - unless you fitted them as headphones ;) 

 

It's never about "hammering to the max"- it's about, being effortless ... did you watch the video earlier I posted a link to,

 

Note precisely how he talks of the experience of listening to a Led Zep I track - this is what I got from bottom of the line bookshelves, over 30 years ago; I understand and know exactly what he heard.

 

Which if a 'mega speaker' can't deliver, means, that it's a fail ...

 

Quote

 

 

Don't know which Dynaudio speakers you're referring to here, but going by "Ordinary sensitivity, reasonable power handling, nothing special in the size of the drivers," it would be erroneous to think of them being capable of delivering "PA level sound," which is not to say such (smaller, I guess) speakers couldn't produce high SPL's in limited spacing and lots a clean power available. While my current speaker set-up (incl. subs) is considerable larger and can generate SPL's that far exceeds anything I had in the day of smaller bookshelf speakers, it's not as much about playing louder per se than the ease, impact, scale, tone and enveloping, visceral feel of the sound. By comparison smaller speakers at a given SPL just sound.. smaller.

 

These ones,

 

 

Most physically small speakers do indeed sound small - which has a lot to do with their mass, and how they're stabilised. Which is the reason for the tower of paper I use, as a quick fix for testing the potential of the equipment.

 

Quote

Organ music with the whole trimmings, so to speak, is likely one of, if not the biggest challenge to reproduce in any way that remotely approximates and resembles its live counterpart. Getting that (closer to) right involves many parameters, and if you know what a real organ concert sounds like there's no going around the need for a for a big, well-implemented speaker set-up with prodigious subs capacity in a moderate to large size room. Anything else - i.e.: believing a small set-up could get you the same result - would be diluting oneself, I'd say. 

 

Incorrect. I've heard setups with "prodigious subs capacity" trying - and they were hopeless. Tell you what, I'll get my current Edifiers working nicely, and record that organ track on a smartphone - should convey what the sense of the reproduction is like, when small speakers are on top of it ...

 

Quote

 

Going big isn't any guarantee of good sound, in fact oftentimes it can do the very opposite going beyond 3-way topology and involving more complexity. Listening to a pair of the original Snell type J (8" woofer and a 1" dome tweeter) with a Sugden amp many years ago sort of formed my reference to work from in my following hifi endeavor; the coherent, lively, musical and natural fashion they produced sound is something, at its core, I'm trying to achieve with my current set-up - just scaled up. It's also why I'm sticking to 2-way main speakers (plus 2 subs) to have that overall "simplicity" of reproduction. I would certainly agree that many larger (low to moderately sensitive) speaker set-ups I've heard were quite blah sounding, but that doesn't negate that it can sound great. The fiscal side of going big I'm avoiding with the choices involved of DIY sub designs and (used) pro cinema speakers. I've had smaller 2-way speakers that were more expensive than my current mains + subs combined (incl. digital XO + subs amp)..

 

Yes, that's what it's about - "coherent, lively, musical and natural" first, then scale it up. Except, you don't need to go big on the speakers - it may help, a lot of the time ... but there are other ways.

[fas42]

11 hours ago, sandyk said:

We need to realise that the main limitation of output power isn't so much governed by the amount of current an amplifier can deliver from it's power supply, which can be achieved by the use of parallel banks of large value capacitors such as 10,000uF, but the fact that to get extremely high output we also need to have higher voltage supply rails.

These are normally seen as 80V rated types, or occasionally 100V rated types kept well within their ratings., but the better 10,000uF 100V types are damn expensive, and will also give specifications for their slew rate , which means how fast they can supply current on transients. Due to practical supply voltage ratings, we then need to use VERY low impedance speakers to achieve these overkill power levels. However, power transistors suffer from Beta droop (decreased gain)  when working into  very low impedance loads, with a resulting increase in distortion. Yes, we can use more parallel output transistors, but this then causes increased loading of the previous stages, as well as the previous stage seeing a much higher capacitance load, thus causing the amplifier to have higher distortion compared with what can be achieved into a more sensible speaker impedance.

 

 G'night from NSW Au.

 

My original Perreaux had 90V rails - but relatively poor current delivery, and noted so in the specs; not much better than the chip amplifier I built ... which was a clue, straightaway ...

[fas42]

4 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

PS: I mentioned several times over the years that the recording I have here of my own kit, can not be distinguished from reality (enter the room eyes closes). At first I told the same, but then visitors could feel the difference (stomach). This is how the math was done and the 3x 15" emerged replacing 3x 12".

 

Well done. But the amount of work, and cost, to get the feeling in the stomach to precisely match - is this worth it, with the vast majority of recordings you have? ... That's the question I would have ...

[fas42]

This video I just found, with those speakers again, that did Led Zep,

 

 

All the clues are there - you can hear the vinyl noises, but they're not a problem 🙂 - the sense of scale, the connection with the acoustic spaces that the instruments were in; the overall fullness and density of the sound - it's effortless, and takes over the room the sound's happening in ...