Jump to content
IGNORED

Audio reproduction is a matter of taste?


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, hopkins said:

 

All this is true, and we can blame both the recording process and the playback system for degrading the sound. But let's put aside this idea that we would want to recreate the original musical event in your living room. Is it not possible to agree on the relative quality of various equipment and systems? Let's forget about "sounding real" and focus on what qualities we seek in systems. Resolution, noise floor, dynamics...these are not characteristics that we can compare and evaluate? 

 

 

Noise floor and dynamics, absolutely. Resolution is a more difficult matter. Let me use the God Only Knows example. I thought it was an empty soda can (which is actually part of the percussion elsewhere on the album), before I read differently.

 

So imagine if I was looking for a system that was more "resolving" in the sense that it made the percussion on God Only Knows sound more like an empty aluminum can than an empty plastic bottle. I'd be on the wrong track. To me, "resolving" depends too much on what you think the sound should be, which we cannot really know in most cases.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Jud said:

 

Noise floor and dynamics, absolutely. Resolution is a more difficult matter. Let me use the God Only Knows example. I thought it was an empty soda can (which is actually part of the percussion elsewhere on the album), before I read differently.

 

So imagine if I was looking for a system that was more "resolving" in the sense that it made the percussion on God Only Knows sound more like an empty aluminum can than an empty plastic bottle. I'd be on the wrong track. To me, "resolving" depends too much on what you think the sound should be, which we cannot really know in most cases.

 

If the sound of a violin, let's say, sounds "richer"/fuller/has more nuance..I think it necessarily means that the system is more accurate (revealing all the information, no more no less, so more resolution and less distortion). How could the system systematically "add" information that is missing in another? Highly doubtful this could be the case. 

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, hopkins said:

 

If the sound of a violin, let's say, sounds "richer"/fuller/has more nuance..I think it necessarily means that the system is more accurate (revealing all the information, no more no less, so more resolution and less distortion). How could the system systematically "add" information that is missing in another? Highly doubtful this could be the case. 

 

I'm a big Jordi Savall fan, and he tends to use traditional instruments in his ensembles.  These very often sound "thinner," less full and rich, than modern instruments.  If you heard some of Savall's Bach recordings with a speaker that did not have an especially well controlled bass driver, or an amp that either didn't control the bass so well or a tube amp that added pleasing harmonics, the sound would be more rich and full but less accurate and resolving.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

There is absolutely no point in chasing "what's that sound?" rabbits - I have a DG CD of Schubert string quartet pieces, which when the volume is up, and you choose to be obsessed about such, you are constantly aware of the musicians breathing, exhaling, etc - to be blunt, it sounds a bit like a gym workout, heaving away on some apparatus. Which has absolutely zero to do with music ... but if you want to play those games, your choice! 😉

 

Where it does get interesting is a set of "incredibly boring" meditation CDs I have - they're full of Easter eggs; only when the volume is right up, really high, then way, way in the distance now and again you hear that little mice are running around, making faint skittering noises; knocking over things; tapping on some object - at random, and always interesting, because you don't know what's going to come up next ... 🙂.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

just offering a personal experience with "resolving systems":

 

The Styx album Grand Illusion contains the track "Man In The Wilderness".  While I'm felling mildly sheepish to admit it now, I listened to Grand Illusion a LOT when it was released in 1977.

 

A few years ago, I was listening to an Audio Fidelity remaster of "Man In The Wilderness" through an OG Yggdrasil , a Violectric V281, and HD650 headphones.  I was shocked when I heard (presumably) Tommy Shaw clear his throat at the beginning of the song. It's subtle, but it's there.  So I probably went for something like 40 years not ever knowing that was there.

 

Am I better for having heard it?  Probably not.  But it does speak well to the potential benefits of high resolution playback.  If I'm hearing that, I'm hearing other subtle things as well.

My question is, now that you've heard that stuff, can you now also hear it when you listern to less high resolution playback? Or can you unhear it?

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Jud said:

 

I'm a big Jordi Savall fan, and he tends to use traditional instruments in his ensembles.  These very often sound "thinner," less full and rich, than modern instruments.  If you heard some of Savall's Bach recordings with a speaker that did not have an especially well controlled bass driver, or an amp that either didn't control the bass so well or a tube amp that added pleasing harmonics, the sound would be more rich and full but less accurate and resolving.

 

I was expecting this reply. I don't think a tube amp adding pleasing harmonics sounds "rich and full" - the illusion  compared to the same track played without distortions would be immediately obvious. There is no way of demonstrating this however! 

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, hopkins said:

 

I was expecting this reply. I don't think a tube amp adding pleasing harmonics sounds "rich and full" - the illusion  compared to the same track played without distortions would be immediately obvious. There is no way of demonstrating this however! 

 

One of the great myths of audio - tubes, on the playback side, add niceness, as a uniform pick-me-up! ... I have never come across a rig that has performed this "miracle"'; and therefore have never had the slightest interest in using this technology - one pretty screechy setup I came across used an Audio Research Reference combo; because, it was accurately conveying weaknesses elsewhere in the chain, 🙂.

Link to comment
On 9/14/2021 at 10:53 PM, Jud said:

 

Let's move from the theoretical to the specific:

 

- Does better imaging or slightly flatter frequency response throughout the audio band sound more realistic to you in a speaker?

 

- Does a faster (higher slew rate) amplifier or one with more limited bandwidth and thus lower IMD sound more realistic to you?

 

- Does a DAC with lower IMD or one with less group delay sound more realistic to you?

 

Of course appended to each of these questions are two sub-questions: (1) If you know, and (2) How much of these sorts of distortion are we talking about?

 

Many audiblity studies use tones for testing and they isolate the specific parameter at play.

Hardly anyone of us audiophiles has ever performed such a test (you often mention that blind test at RMAF but the conditions were hardly ideal).

 

It would require a very methodical approach for one to say that a speaker produces more audible group delay or IMD, and ideally it would be supported by or correlate with measurements.

Personally I hear differences and effects (generally negative), and then I try to correlate those with measured performance. It is not always clear which particular parameter is producing a specific effect.

 

Electronics are a whole 'nother story, trying to pin down the cause of an audible issue with contemporary equipment which produces measured distortion that is below current audibility thresholds. But most of us will report audible differences which according to those thresholds are not audible, et pur...

 

In my opinion, not only do we need to optimise methodology in our own assessment protocol in order to limit any potential bias or distortion, but we also desperatly need a review of the audibility thresholds.

Listener/ear training is also important because it makes audible issues a lot more obvious (in other words we are trained to listen for particular issues).

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
18 hours ago, firedog said:

My question is, now that you've heard that stuff, can you now also hear it when you listern to less high resolution playback? Or can you unhear it?

 

The "artifact" that I speak of is subtle.  So subtle that (presumably) the producer let it go in the final mix.  That's odd, he could have brought that mic track slider up after the event when doing the mixdown.  The intro goes for quite a while before the vocals begin.

 

Or the other way to look at it is that the producer didn't hear it or didn't care, because they knew no one had a resolving enough system to hear it. 🙂

 

There's a LOT of layers to this onion.  The entire album has a compressed, "radio friendly" sound.  No one would ever use it to "test" their system.

 

TL;DR: it's hard to hear without headphones.  But if it's audible, then lots of other things are presumably audible as well with that setup that I detailed above.  My musical tastes have changed somewhat, and I don't find much 70s pop/rock to be as engaging as it used to be.

Link to comment
21 hours ago, Jud said:

 

Listened once through my main system. The higher frequency instrument sounds like a kora (acoustic African stringed instrument) to me. It sounds like it has nylon rather than metal wound strings. The lower frequency instrument sounds like an acoustic bass guitar - could be nylon or metal wound.

 

Nice find. 🙂 Now I'll see if Shazam can identify this. (I won't tell, though.)

 

Good job! 

 

Listen to the release Ali & Toumani by Ali Farka Touré on Qobuz https://open.qobuz.com/album/ul6wnj8sazpob

Track 4.

Link to comment

The only way I can express how I feel about listening to various levels of distortion is to compare it to dancing. The difference between mediocrity and greatness is a split second, a few millimeters in an arm or hand movement. Perfection is always obvious. If we don't believe so, then we have not seen it yet 🙂

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
20 hours ago, hopkins said:

I don't think a tube amp adding pleasing harmonics sounds "rich and full" - the illusion  compared to the same track played without distortions would be immediately obvious.

 

If the difference compared to the same track would be immediately obvious, then what mattered would be whatever was closer to your notion of what a violin ought to sound like.  With period instruments, there is no assurance this would be the reproduction that was more faithful to the recording.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, hopkins said:

 

Good job! 

 

Listen to the release Ali & Toumani by Ali Farka Touré on Qobuz https://open.qobuz.com/album/ul6wnj8sazpob

Track 4.

 

Thank you for the very nice music.  I didn't really nail it, though.  Yes, I got the kora - I listen to African music, the track had just enough of an African flavor to make me start thinking that way, and the kora has a pretty unique sound (kind of a cross between a harp and a lute, for European folks).  But as far as I know, Touré would have been playing a regular acoustic guitar rather than the acoustic bass guitar that I guessed.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
57 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

If the difference compared to the same track would be immediately obvious, then what mattered would be whatever was closer to your notion of what a violin ought to sound like.  With period instruments, there is no assurance this would be the reproduction that was more faithful to the recording.

 

It would require quite a lot of distortion to transform the sound of one instrument into another! With this level of "inaccuracy" I believe there would be some other "hints" to indicate that the sound is degraded. That's why the exercise of recognizing instruments does not really prove or disprove anything. There are things we know from a recording. You don't need to know the person who is speaking to guess from a recording of his/her voice whether it is a computerized voice or a human voice, probably the sex of the speaker, have an idea of their age, perhaps their origin... That's because we recognize patterns. In a similar way, once you've heard a number of string instruments you understand the pattern of their sound - the attack, decay, etc.... There are variations but in some ways we know what sounds "natural" and what does not. 

Link to comment

To be a little more clear in my comparison with dancing... Look at the video, for example at 5:12, and think of that spin that Fred Astaire performs in less than a second. What makes it so perfect? What makes it so graceful? Anyone could approximate the movement. Aside for the position of his body, it's all about timing and the change in pace from fast to slow and coming to a stop. Now introduce minute "distortions" in that rhythm or in the position of his arm throughout the movement, for example, and I can assure you that the end result would look very different. 

 

Now imagine the string of a guitar being plucked is like Fred Astaire spinning around. It's a perfect movement in a sense - though of course the note itself, or how and when it is played, can be imperfect in the context of the track. The string can be plucked with different intensity, slightly differently (I am more familiar with hitting piano notes than plucking guitar strings). We initiate the movement, but then the instrument takes over and executes its own "figure" perfectly.

 

When and how the note is played is what makes us appreciate the performance, and for that we don't need a high end system. How perfecly the note is heard is what makes a good recording and system. 

 

If that perfect movement is slightly distorted, I believe we can recognize it. Maybe not consciously, but with some training we can be aware of those minute differences - just like you can learn to appreciate Fred Astaire :) 

 

And that's it for me on this topic. 

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, semente said:

 

Interestingly you'll often hear people complain that these speakers sound "dull" or "lifeless", that a certain amplifier sounds more "exciting" and "involving".

My view is that those people have gotten used to or enjoy reproduced music which sounds like, well, reproduced music.

 

Indeed they have - in fact, they are disturbed when it doesn't sound reproduced ... "it has no right to sound like it's not coming from a hifi!" 😄.

 

Over the decades I have found it remarkable how audio enthusiasts are so obsessed with the technical details, and "can't see the forest for the trees" - IMO, first job of a rig is to present the captured event with the least amount of added, disturbing distortion ... once you've got that under control then you can fuss about the minutiae of how precise is the frequency and phase responses; and perfect the low bass behaviour -  otherwise, it's always obviously just a stereo ...

 

Vocals sound lifelike because the distortion levels are low enough; it has nothing to do with wiggles of the FR - once a system is working well enough, it's trivially easy to 'sabotage' the integrity of the chain, and have the perceived quality of the vocals collapse; which demonstrates how sensitive our hearing is to anomalies - if the voices are 'wrong', then our minds immediately reject them as 'fake' ...

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Jud said:

 

I hate to be That Guy in response to your very good point, but consider this: What if you're hearing the vocals better because the speakers have a presence hump in the vocal range?

 

@PeterSt said something once that has stayed with me, which is that if you hear an audio system performing impressively, something is wrong.  Think about it: Someone sits in front of you in a small room playing an acoustic guitar and singing - do you throw up your hands and say "My god, how resolving! What detail!"?  Then why should a system which faithfully reproduces a good recording of that scene cause you to do so?  With live acoustic music, it is the music itself you are involved with.  Consider (though I am certainly ready to listen to counter-arguments) that perhaps a really fine music reproduction system will do the same rather than calling attention to itself.

No.

First, I didn't say the system called attention to itself. You made that conclusion. I simply noticed that I could understand lyrics I never could before, on recordings I've heard hundreds of times. 

 

Second, the system doesn't have a presence hump. It's also setup with DRC to give perfectly flat response. 

 

Third, live acostic music is something else. It's a different experience and we react to it differently. I've been in plenty of live venues where the sound isn't good. I notice that, but I don't react to that bad sound the same way I would if the sound at home was bad. Same for good sound live. It's a different experience - it's not just the music, it's watching the performer, reacting to other people in the audience, etc. And per your example, if someone sits in front of me with a guitar, I expect to hear all the detail and do, so there's no reason to react the way you described. I know that an audio system isn't the real thing, so I'm impressed when it comes close. 

 

I've also heard people playing live in front of me and thought - this isn't good sonically, or the acoustics here have an echo, etc. But I'm trying to pay attention and enjoy the performance, so I don't think about that a lot. 

 

Different seats in a symphony hall sound very different. I'm aware of that, and possibly even aware that my seat isn't the best sound. Doesn't mean I don't enjoy the performance and the exprience of the live symphony. 

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, firedog said:

No. First, I didn't say the system called attention to itself. You made that conclusion. I simply noticed that I could understand lyrics I never could before, on recordings I've heard hundreds of times. 

Second, the system doesn't have a presence hump. It's also setup with DRC to give perfectly flat response. 

Third, live acostic music is something else. It's a different experience and we react to it differently. 

 

Sorry I didn't make clear I wasn't referring to your system in particular. I was just talking about the possibility there might be other explanations than lack of noise for any given system where one notices the ability to understand lyrics.

 

Live acoustic music is indeed a different experience. But should it be? Many people say it's the goal to reproduce that experience, and if so we're falling short (audio-wise).

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Jud said:

 

Sorry I didn't make clear I wasn't referring to your system in particular. I was just talking about the possibility there might be other explanations than lack of noise for any given system where one notices the ability to understand lyrics.

 

Live acoustic music is indeed a different experience. But should it be? Many people say it's the goal to reproduce that experience, and if so we're falling short (audio-wise).

Okay, but I think my point still stands.

And of course we are falling short, and always will. I don't expect home audio to perfectly reproduce live, I expect it to give me a convincing illusion of one, but not so much that I'm unaware that it's an illusion. I edited my response above, and gave a few more reasons I don't really agree with what Peter said. 

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment

Thought of something else. There's a community building where I live - doesn't have the greatest acoustics. 

I've heard chamber music performed there live. It's obvious to me that there's something off about the sound. But the live sound, all the detail I CAN hear (in spite of the problems with the acoustics), and the presence of the performers - makes it a great experience. Looking at the fingers of a cello player and hearing the exact effect that produces is a different experience.

 

If an engineer close miked those intruments and mixed the result, it would probably be technically better sound played back than what I experienced live. But it wouldn't sound like the live performance I heard in the room itself.

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...