Garrard 301 with OL Encounter and DL 103R. It has jump, jive and wail in spades
23 responses Add your response
Yes, my system has jump.
Although proper vibration control, line conditioning, cabling, and decent or better full range speakers contribute significantly to the quality of 'jump', none of these improvements, even as a collective whole compare to the overall 'jump' factor provided by my amplifier and its associated dedicated line.
The dedicated line is essential because without it, the dynamics flatten, even at lower volumes.
Personally, I think it would be rather silly to say the music has jump. Especially in light of the fact that the topic of this thread is about equipment providing the 'jump' factor, thus implying (and rightfully so) that some systems don't.
I would think anybody who's around a while, would have already realized that the vast majority of systems out there ain't got no 'jump', PR&T, absolute bass control, and/or macro-dynamics worth mentioning.
Good afternoon Stehno-
Silly or not, it's still the music. It really doesn't matter what you hear it through (sometimes I forget about equipment elitists). Do your toes tap "only' in front of "special" systems or can you chair-dance while driving down the road? And, like much of audio, "jump" is subjective. Do I think my system has "jump"? Sure. Do you think my system has "jump"? Maybe not. Do I care?
Mt10425, I believe the elitist attitude started with you when you made your first unqualified and rather smug post above.
That somehow no matter what kind of system (whether it be in an elevator or transistor radio) one listens to it's the music that has the jump. You are certainly free to think silly thoughts, but your first post above would seem to be far outside the intended realm of the original poster.
Good evening Stehno-
It's interesting that all of your posts end with IMO. Initially, i voiced a simple opinion about what I think actually jumps. You personalized it by calling it silly. So be it. Apparently the only opinion that counts is yours. I responded to an unwarranted personal attack and you didn't like that and so you attacked me again. I don't remember pissing you off in a previous life but, who knows? Seems you went out of your way to make friends with Rsbeck in another post too.
Mt10425, I saw your first post as smug. If that was not your intention, I am sorry for misinterpreting.
But labeling a statement you made as silly is not a personal attack.
Just like if we were conversing in person and I told you you had a booger hanging out of your nose does not necessarily translate to a personal attack either. Or does it?
As for Rsbeck, that's a whole nuther story. The man pops up in every cable thread attempting to sound like some cable authority. Yet, by his own admission, he cannot tell any sonic differences between cables. Go figure.
I don't go looking for him, but if he pops up in a thread I've participated in, rather than engage in meaningful monologue, I now simply ask him what his personal experience is. And of course he never responds to the question. Except in the third person and hypothetically.
-IMO (I'm just as entitled as the next guy to be wrong)
Good morning Stehno-
I'm all for a truce and clarification of any misunderstandings. It seems that when somebody puts a label on someone else's opinion, it's taking a shot at that belief and, intentions aside, putting that belief down. As far as using longevity and experience as a validation for advice, I'm 52 and music listening and audio started for me seriously when I was about 15. So, when I state that the equipment is less important to me than the music, I mean it. Truck, transistor or clock radios, it doesn't matter, although my home systems are preferences. If it doen't make me and my family dance, allow us to sing along or set a mood, then I've got my priorites screwed up because I have to do "serious " listening on "serious" equipment for enjoyment. I always read your posts and usually learn something useful and I expect to continue to do so. I can be serious (reluctanly), but I'm allergic to REALLY serious. ;))
So far, I agree with Mt10425.
The music is what makes the 'jump'.
If I had a system that made all the stuff I play 'jump', no matter what, I would say that system was a bit unrealistic in it's presentation. And would become rather tiring after awhile.
So maybe we don't actually all agree on what 'jump' means.
As I could see other ways of looking at the term, and maybe agree taht some sort of 'thing' a system has IS important.
The squabble between Stehno and Mt10425 WAS STARTED by Stehno "JUMP'ing on Mt10425 statement. So maybe "jump" is something to be avoided? At least in posting!
Please better define what you mean by "JUMP" and we can all start over, in a way Miss Manners would approve of.
Some systems can not jump no matter what. A typical stereo is washed out in comparison to the real thing having only a fraction of the dynamic range found in live music.
To me this is what is meant by jump.
It is hard to find the proper words to describe these effects and I think we should try to answer posts in the spirit and respect to the original poster and their intents and stop the squabbles.
Mt10425, Elizabeth is correct as I did jump on you. I am sorry for that.
Thanks for your kind words and for not responding in like manner.
As for defining 'jump', Philjolet seems pretty accurate and I think I stated something like that in my previous post above.
I would define 'jump' as having everything to do with the macro-dynmaic reproduction of music, but with some serious weight behind the punches.
While my view is not definitive by any means, the notion of jump can be characterized as the ability of the system to convey the dynamic swings of the music. Thus one might construe the system as possessing the characteristic of jump in that it is able to transmit such qualities inherent in recordings. The problem of language of course is that people infer different meanings based on reference to varying experiences and value sets. There is a great book on jazz that describes this kind of music as that which has a "swinging feeling." Now who knows what exactly constitutes swinging? Yet perhaps we might say that we know it when we hear it.
For me the preamp has always been the weak link. I journeyed through many preamps and realize one, I prefer tube amps and two, overall synergy is best left untouched once one finds a happy equilibrium. As for what others have said, I like Rowland preamps for their timbral accuracy but the sound was a bit constrained dynamically.
As for music, it happens regardless of the system which is being used but in this hobby of audiophiliacs the question is not whether my boom box or iPod has jump but whether the object of our lavish attention is able to capture and convey this inherent aspect of music. If you read Aaron Copeland's primer on music, he observes that before anything came rhythm and I agree.
NO! the visit to the dentist can't conclude while the patient still has teeth we haven't pulled.
Classicjazz - you should try a DHT preamp sometime. DHT preamps tend to have a purer tone and faster attack. If you like small ensemble jazz in an intimate club setting you will especially appreciate the qualities of a DHT preamp.