Over the last few years, I've invested in my first high end system. It's been a far costlier affair than I'd initially conceived. I started off simply wanting to listen to music in my home. At this stage of my life, I was fortunate to have some resources to invest which led me down the path of reading forums and reviews, while also having the opportunity to visit a few audio stores to demo equipment.
And down the rabbit hole I went... Once I realized all the nuances of equipment and their impact on the listening experience, I became fascinated with creating the most satisfying musical experience in my house. I ended up purchasing several amps, three sets of speakers, NOS power tubes, and a myriad combination of power cords.
With each investment, I would often remark to myself "yes - I hear an improvement..." But sometimes a doubt would cross my mind. Is this some sort of confirmation bias I've got going? Am I just throwing money away? Do I need to see a shrink?
Admittedly, I was largely convinced things were improving, but a small part of my brain recognized I might be have been chasing windmills...
Which brings me to this question: "How do you know your system is improving after you've made a system change or hopeful upgrade?"
For me, a moment came last night when I put on a piece of music - Beth Orton - and played a track that a year ago sounded muddy or poorly recorded. There have been several system changes since I last played that Beth Orton track. As I began streaming over Quboz, I could hear details in the music which had been previously fuzzy and hidden. The tone of her voice was more real. Guitar strings came out of the fog...
I guess the concept I often read about here, "using a test track" had become my new litmus test on whether my system was improving. It was inadvertent, but I think I'll default to this approach more consistently moving forward, going back to a few tracks that have proven to be challenging with the current system and giving them a go when a new component gets added.
Yes, I know... nothing radical here. But would welcome how many of you benchmark improvements in your own systems!
For starters, you only need to please yourself, so if you’re happy or "happier", your system is good and/or improving.
You’re also only as good as your reference. Getting exposed to systems that exceed yours can be useful. So can listening to live acoustic music like piano, guitar, voice, or orchestra.
Expectation bias can certainly come into play, but it should be temporary. Usually if I’m making a change, it’s because I’m trying to eliminate an area of concern, or improve a specific region. It can take time to determine if the change had the desired effect, and did it without causing another area of concern. Give the changes a good long listen to overcome the day to day variables we encounter. Listening is a skill. On any given recording, pick out things you like or dislike about the recording itself. If some of the undesirable characteristics are a repeating pattern, it could indicate a problem area of the room or system (like sibilance or boomy bass)
Most importantly, enjoy the system, enjoy the music, and enjoy the fun of changes. If you’re happy when you listen, all is well. 😎
Improving your audio system is a very long term endeavor. In the beginning what you don’t know is nearly infinite. Necessarily the process involves learning. As you learn your tastes change. This has certainly been my history. It is a path with many dead end forks. I have followed a few.
In the beginning there are some aspects of sounds that you are attracted by. For me, detail, slam, and an emotional connection (which I was not really conscious of). So, when I went out I would listen for improvements in this. Then I learned about micro details and tonal balance. Then… etc. So my repertoire of parameters I look to improve increased.
I assembled a few CDs to be my official audition discs. They were a few of my very favorite albums at that time. I was currently into electronic music. This was a huge problem. I was able to maximize the ethereal nature of that music and made it really magica to me, but unfortunately, all other genre sounded worse… much worse. There was so much detail that a vast majority of albums would sound terrible. This made me realize that if you are too ruthless at pulling detail off the media the result would be a lot of bad sounding albums. So I backed off from that and tried to walk a line where enough detail came, but not too much.
After pursuing this for about 10 years, I ended up with a system, which was not too ruthless, but somehow I had lost the soul of the music. It was still too analytical. So I started listening to live acoustic musical events. I would listen to pianos, cymbals, etc, individually. I attended the symphony for 10 years and seventh row center seats. All this led me to realize that my system was way too detailed with lots of good slam, but very unmusical. The venue and miking techniques stuck out… but this isn’t what happens at live musical events… it is the music and the emotional connection that are emphasized. That’s when I finally learned what rhythm and pace and mid range bloom were. The following 10 years I completely reconfigured my system. It is all tube electronics now and sounds like real music. It has the heart and the soul of music. It makes me want to tap your foot and close my eyes and get lost in it. After my max of three hours a day, I have to drag myself away.
So getting to a great sounding system is long process. I think it can be shortened considerably by emphasizing training your ear with real acoustical venues so you know what real music sounds like and then working to achieve that through your system. You have to listen enough and deeply in the real world to develop a deep knowledge and long term memory of it. This keeps the emphasis on the music and not just amazing technical feats.
Also, my system while having great detail, imaging and bass is extremely forgiving. So, unless an album is really a terrible recording it will sound great. To do this your system must focus on reproducing the key elements of the music… not just easily perceived parameters. There are companies that are dedicated to getting the music right some of these are Audio Research Corp., Conrad Johnson, VAC, and Sonus Faber.
I hate to say it, but there have been times I have listened to a particular track and thought, "Wow!" But then on a later date I have come back to listen to that track and never heard what I had heard the wow-time. And that is without any equipment changes or alterations in between sessions. I don't know what it is that causes that with me.
I'd also say that generally speaking: I have found that the better my system became, the worse that poorly mastered or poorly mixed or poorly recorded source material sounds.
One way to find if your system is improving is live-recording. I have >200 live-recordings of my systems over last 10 years in my YT channel. I can watch/hear the history (10 years) of my systems in YT.
Human ears are easily biased and get tired with different sounds. Also, human ears trick us too. But microphones are never tired and recordings always let me hear consistent sounds. I compare a recording of my speaker sound and the original music after the each fine tune of my speakers. And I adjust my speaker’s balance, tone, brightness, sound depth, forwardness, pressure of vocal, image height, musicality, openness, details of woofer and tweeter, naturalness, clarity, cleanness, etc. One can’t remember all these information by aural memory. Live-recording is only way to perform fine-tune of sounds in reproduction audio.
The ability to hear those delicate information can be acquired with experience and training. The capability (adjustability) of speaker and ability to fine-tune the speaker according to those information are a different topic. Alex/WTA
Things can sound "changed" without sounding either better or worse and sometimes it just comes down to preference. And preference can change.
The caveat is that sometimes you just prefer something a bit different because it’s different. Regardless of how good a perfectly prepared steak tastes, would you want to eat it every day?
The problem is that if you set your system up so that some cuts sound "perfect," others will not, but could sound better under slightly different parameters.
I learned one thing : the way we learn how to install any system together in a room matter way more than the separate piece of gear and their price tags... ( basic synergy for sure matter it is a starting point )
The second thing , there is no way for me to understand with my ears how to improve my system by buying pieces of gear for a so called "upgrade" ...For sure the soundfield may improve with any upgrade but it is not enough at all ...
Acoustics experiments, vibrations-resonance controls and electrical noise floor decreased are the three goals...Nevermind what is the cost of your system...😊
Once this is understood you can be happy even with a relatively low cost system...
But probably a costlier system than mine will be needed ... Why ? Because my speakers shine once modified and my headphone shine once modified... Then without modifications the cost for the same S.Q. will be much higher .,..But at a relatively low cost anyway if you learn the basic you will cure upgraditis ... ...
Things can sound "changed" without sounding either better or worse and sometimes it just comes down to preference. And preference can change.
I know what you mean by preference. But I’m not talking preference. One is actually better than another. You can compare the voice of below 2 videos. I can clearly hear one is more real human voice. Once you hear the better one, you won’t want to hear another by preference. It took me 4 months for improvement between below 2 videos. Alex/WTA
One thing I’ve stopped doing is calling anything in this hobby an "investment." Investments grow, they don’t depreciate. ;-)
"Investment" is a word I've used to tacitly apologize to myself (or my wife) for an expenditure which is completely, fabulously discretionary. In effect, I'm throwing money around to have some fun. I've chosen to not feel guilty about that anymore. So, no more "investments" for me. Just living.
@OP. I use a small number of recordings that reflect different aspects of sound quality. I've used these recordings across many different systems to give a broader set of benchmarks rather than just internally benchmarking my own system.
+1 to GHD Prentices's advice especially re listening to live music.
This has all the signs of someone jumping in the deep end of the pool before they learned how to swim. If I were you, the main thing I would force myself to do going forward is changing only one item in your system at a time. That will do a couple things, first control your obsession of getting better sound at all cost, second, teach you exactly what each piece of equipment does well or not in your system. For now it sounds as if you are running around in circles, not knowing which end is what. One thing you started figuring out, is using reference records for testing your system. I have some selected for low frequencies, some for details and some for overall presentation. But I only use the best recorded material to do that, never poorly recorded stuff. That would be another way for my head to spin. IMO the main thing is for you to slow down, you will enjoy your audio journey much more. I know, easier said than done, but worth trying if you really want to know where your system is heading.
Generally I change one item at a time. I have several tracks that I am very familiar with that I listen to after the change. If the piece is new one has to consider the break in aspect. That said, if the upgrade has true merit the improvement presents right away. This is most true when one is looking for a certain improvement and makes a purchase that is suited towards that.
If you have a foundation (room, gear, power delivery, etc) that puts you above a minimum threshold of satisfaction, there is a lower chance of rabbit hole surfing and getting caught in the weeds.
The human ear likes to be in certain types of spaces/rooms (w/ pertinent treatments) as a baseline to enjoy music. When it isn’t there, you are inside a rabbit hole, to begin with and will continue the rabbit hole diving..
W.r.t gear, if you heard some guy’s rig that blew your mind (acquire some points of reference), ask him how he got there, look at his room, look at his stuff, etc and make life easier by reducing the number of gear permutations. Discard brand loyalties (whatever is the forum hype train for the month), preconceived notions of which brand gave you more audiophile street cred, etc and try to keep an open mind.
In general, there is a correlation between a higher level of listening satisfaction and the physical size of things. Typically, it will come from large rooms, large speakers, subs, etc. Life is large dude... If you can’t get to that, i.e., stuck living in a tiny apartment with a speaker the size of a coffee mug, other waf restrictions, etc, just lower your expectations and find additional fun hobbies.
A mindblowing rig+room doesn’t care much about "test tracks". Just listen to the type of music/artist you like.
@barts Oh, I'm with you. But that word bugs me because it's so frequently a cover-up word. And I've heard the word used so often in the financial way that I thought it's better to not have illusions. That said, I bought my XA25 used for $3700 and I could probably break even or make a little money on it. But nothing else in my system is like that.
I am a good example of changing things and many times not improving anything, Part of the process, I guess. One needs the skills, the funds and the time to make meaningful improvements. Maybe that's why the majority in this hobby is people with time and money.
I'd like to add that your senses, mind and attitude are all part of your endeavor. Sounds cliche but your mind will expand and learn over time, your senses will become more acute because you're are focusing your energy on them. Your attitude or self may change based on how thinly you are stretching yourself, continued interest in the hobby, support from those around you (WAF), etc.
Try to figure out what you like, read about what others like on forums, etc, and see if you can bridge the gap and narrow your path. Jump paths occasionally (go from single ended to 250 wpc ss) mix it up. Learn the different types of drivers (compression, horn, etc) and give them a listen.
Be careful about reviewers and some types on this site that feel like everything they get is "the best ever," they don't explain themselves well and should generally be ignored. It's fun to be excited but when they start drooling at the mouth you kind of wonder who they are supporting or what else might be lacking up there.
Move slowly in and out of gear unless you don't want to turn on the power. If that's the case start a forum thread of research what could be missing in the synergy of the system.
Don't spend your mortgage payment on a box with holes in it or trade you Porsche for a 6 foot pair of speaker cables. Not yet anyway.
Enjoy yourself that's the only reason to be in this unless you are making money. Making money in this business is good but they have their influencers, scotch buddies, flaws, families, beliefs, etc just like everyone else. They have to pay the electric bill same as you, so as you love or hate gear try to keep an honest perspective and don't go renegade on some guy just trying to make a living making his art. Probably not a terrorist.
Bluethinker - I tried to look at your virtual system but it is blank. That might help with getting advice here from those way more knowledgeable than myself.
I learned the hard way that the wrong tube amp paired with a non-tube friendly speaker (or vice-versa) can be an expensive mistake.
Be wary of the cable-chase - you need decent cables to progress, but significant gains can be made without spending silly money on the right used cable (safest bet in used audio IMO, pretty hard to destroy cables). As a recent example (only), a used Voodoo power cable and Acoustic Zen speaker cables bested all previous purchases. Both examples were from recommendations by fellow AG members. (thank you!)
Lastly, use good reference material - tracks you know well, and don't rely on a quick a/b test. Take time - 3 days later you might just turn your head and think wow, never heard that before, and I like it...that's a good indication you are going in the right direction.
I used to think I knew when my system was improving when I wanted to spend more time listening to it, and when I spent more time looking forward to listening to it.
Changing one gadget at a time is probably the definition of a rabbit hole and it’s what I have done. Every change sounds better but I would argue that the best way to approach it is to go to a high end shop and try to identify the sound you relate to and not necessarily the most expensive. For me I like a warm sound so my speakers are updated 40 year old McIntosh and amp and preamp Conrad Johnson. Everything else is new and clean sounding so I can pick up the clear signals. Was that the right approach? Probably not. Better is to identify the sound you want to achieve and target it. Otherwise you’re probably chasing rabbit holes.
" One needs the skills, the funds and the time to make meaningful improvements."
Totally agree. As kids are going to college, I’m finding myself more challenged regarding the funding part. I’ve done a ton with room acoustics, measuring, experimenting, including buying and making acoustic treatments. At the end of the day, though, it takes money to try higher quality things -- or different things at the same level of quality. (Case in point: I am interested in trying much more sensitive speakers, the Cornwall IV's. These are not more expensive than the speakers I own, but even used, they are equal in cost to mine.) We might not even be taking about components; we could be talking about kits. But even kits, to be decent, are not cheap. Good parts cost money, good used gear costs money, good treatments cost money, etc. Anyone who claims it can be done on the very cheap is just in denial.
@grislybutter That's kind. Thank you. When I got permission to do my system during covid, I had a basement with 6' 5" ceilings to work with. That meant that I had to figure out first and distal reflections and bass modes. That lead to a lot of research about room acoustics, etc. Had I had a kinder room (height wise), I might have skirted that research. But what I wound up learning is now transferable, so I hope to move rooms.
For me, the next question is the higher efficiency speaker, lower power tube amp match. I'm halfway there with my present speakers...
If you're in Denver, let me know. I have beer in the fridge at all times. (And an espresso maker.)
You have to know where the target is in order to hit it. Also the target must be real not just a pipe dream that can never be realistically achieved
In this case the target is the sound you seek. You know whether you improved or not if the new sound is closer to the target than prior.
That’s it in a nutshell. The rest is up to you.
It helps to listen to a lot of different things over time to help understand what a realistic sound target actually sounds like. That’s called training your ears. Untrained ears have least chance of ever hitting the target.
You have to know where the target is in order to hit it. Also the target must be real not just a pipe dream that can never be realistically achieved
You are exactly right...
It is why nobody can achieve for example "listener envelopment" acoustic concept and experience without knowing what it is and how to reach it and it will not help here to only upgrade toward always costlier pieces of gear...
Amplifier or speakers or dac design dont replace mechanical, electrical and acoustical basic knowledge...
You have to know where the target is in order to hit it. Also the target must be real not just a pipe dream that can never be realistically achieved.
The problem of knowing what the target is goes back at least as far as Hume's argument that "taste" depends on educated critics who help the rest find the way.
Only judges with a more refined taste will respond to the “universal” appeal of superior art. Because refinement demands considerable practice, such critics are few in numbers.... the standard is normative: it must explain why the sentiments of some critics are better and worse. It does not follow that sentiments are true and false in any absolute sense.
These reflections lead Hume to postulate five criteria for identifying good or “true” critics:
“Strong sense, united to delicate sentiment, improved by practice, perfected by comparison, and cleared of all prejudice, can alone entitle critics to this valuable character” (SOT, 278).
After several stabs at identifying the standard of taste, Hume identifies it as the consensus or “joint verdict” of “true critics” (SOT, 278–79). However, such critics are “rare” (SOT, 280) and “few are qualified to give judgment on any work of art” (SOT, 278). Consequently, it is not the verdict of contemporary critics that constitutes the standard, but rather the consensus of qualified judges over time and from multiple cultures (SOT, 271; SOT, 280).
You have to know where the target is in order to hit it. Also the target must be real not just a pipe dream that can never be realistically achieved.
The problem of knowing what the target is goes back at least as far as Hume's argument that "taste" depends on educated critics who help the rest find the way.
Taste is a factor implied but completely secondary .😁
Anyway "taste" must be trained: ask a musician, an acoustician or an experimented audiophiles.
Because the target in optimization process is some specific balance between all acoustic factors and some ratio aimed toward a specific acoustic concept with the gear limitations used in a specific room ...
The main core concept is "timbre"...
After it is the "spatial characteristics of sound which information is encoded with the "timbre " perception phenomenon .....
After that "listener" envelopment factor and the source width auditory ratio are important to create...It is written as : LV /ASW in acoustics articles. There is almost no reviewer who spoke about that. guess why ? they sell a product they dont teach how to properly use it with acoustics nor they teach us how to optimize a product working toward his peak quality.
If you dont know these acoustics concepts and experience you dont know how to optimize your system/room and you will resolve the problem by the throwing of money i9n useless upgrades( half at least upgrades are completely useless in any audiophiles life ) And as a children in fron of a soup bowl unable to appreciate the cooking refinement you will say : "i dont like it , it is my taste " ...taste must be educated and trained...
it is not Hume we must consult here about"taste" but Helmholtz...
Then you are not even wrong here because "Taste" must be trained and play a role as gear marketing dudes and reviewers know very well and use this fact to attract us toward their product not toward knowledge in acoustics.They know how to frlatter the consumer in the right way, the way that suit them : expanse and expansive. They will never spoke about acoustics importance. They will sing the word "taste" in chorus.
«I love McIntosh amplifier as my mother soup because it is my Taste» -- Anonymous subjective deluded audiophiles 😋
«I hate McIntosh amplifier because they measured bad on my tool»Anonymus objective deluded audiophile 😎
I’m trying to follow, so is this what you said, basically? (I tried to rephrase it.)
"While personal preference plays a role, it’s ultimately secondary in optimizing an audio system. Developing a discerning ear takes practice – just ask any musician, acoustician, or experienced audiophile.
The key to optimization is achieving a specific balance between all acoustic factors within a room’s limitations and using your equipment to achieve a desired sonic concept. Timbre, the character and quality of a sound, is the cornerstone of this concept. Next comes the spatial information encoded within timbre, which creates the perception of a sound’s location and movement.
Following that, the listener’s sense of envelopment and the ratio of source width to auditory scene width (LV/ASW) are crucial for creating a realistic soundscape. Surprisingly, few reviewers discuss these factors. Why? Their focus is often on selling products, not on teaching proper acoustic integration and optimization for peak performance.
Without a grasp of these acoustic principles and experience, you might resort to throwing money at unnecessary upgrades. This approach, much like a child struggling with a complex dish, leads to the dismissive statement: "I don’t like it, it’s just not my taste." However, taste can be developed and refined.
Forget David Hume’s philosophy of taste; for audio optimization, we turn to Hermann von Helmholtz. By neglecting this crucial aspect, you miss the opportunity to truly appreciate the nuances of your system.
Marketers and reviewers exploit this lack of knowledge by emphasizing personal preference to push products instead of acoustic education. They cater to the consumer’s desire for grand, sweeping sound, all while ignoring the importance of acoustics. The word "taste" becomes their mantra."
I hope you don’t mind me saying this … both @hilde45@mahgisterare two of the more thoughtful members on this site. I enjoy reading posts from both.
This supposed rivalry is downright silly.
Having said that, one of you does have the tendency to be repetitive. I mean how many times are you going to say the same thing :) But that’s a minor irritant, I still enjoy reading the philosophical musings.
both @hilde45@mahgisterare two of the more thoughtful members on this site. I enjoy reading posts from both.
This supposed rivalry is downright silly.
Since more than 1 year nothing will do...😁
I even apologized for my bad english many times... In private and in few threads...I think that he was wise and interesting person for discussion.. I dont think that anymore.....
He is coming back more arrogant each time...
He never replied with an argument to any of my post answering his reasoning..He decided then to use sarcasms and patronizing as he just did correcting my writing or complaining by my number posts,he harassed my postings about an acoustic revolution right now , just 2 weeks ago with no reason to do so and he never read one anyway..He is too dumb it seems to understand the 6 articles i posted about an earth shattering revolution in acoustics...
Why is it doing this with me and not others?
Many others wrote a not so good english here...
The reason is simple this dude who boasted to be a very world well known corrector, as he said, is an arrogant narcissist who cannot support that i cited and used many philosophers or scientists and any content over his head...
if i am wrong why only my bad english posts and only my posts could attract his arrogant patronising sarcasms ?
I apologised to him at least 6 or 7 times to make a friend for discussion sake,since more than a year even in private...I will not do more...I am no more interested by this empty head patronizing corrector...
it is an hypocrit who calculated well his replies...He knows that i reacted thats my character...
😁😊
By the way in my 8 years here i only encounter two narrow minds...
One who is no more here who accused me of killing people ( science gave me reason now) and our "corrector"...
It is a good score... Even in heated discussion everyone here is likeable... Anyway i entertain no gruges against anyone... But i reply if someone say that "tastes" is the center of audio which is not even wrong and misleading ..I gave arguments not mere sarcasms...
For those looking for improvements and a frugal way to make the “ investment “ consider a used copy of Jim Smith’s book on getting better sound ( and enjoyment ).
Two guidelines have served me well over the years - both are good indicators that my system is improving: 1) I find myself turning up the volume. Generally, as distortion goes down, I’ll be inclined to listen at louder levels. When I turn down the volume, I’m more likely to be objecting to some artifact of distortion rather than decibels. 2) I find myself watching less TV.
I’m trying to follow, so is this what you said, basically? (I tried to rephrase it.)
Then I put in an extensive rephrasing.
Does anyone see how I'm trying to understand Mahgister? Is that so unclear?
But instead Mahgister says:
Since more than 1 year nothing will do...😁
I even apologized for my bad english many times... In private and in few threads...I think that he was wise and interesting person for discussion.. I dont think that anymore.....
He is coming back more arrogant each time...
QUESTION: What is arrogant about asking someone if I am understanding them? That is sympathetic and kind, in my world.
Instead, we get a triggered response from Mahgister. Take a deep breath and try to see sympathy when it comes your way.
How am i supposed to take the "correction" without any warning thats it is there only to help me, since for more than a year you mocked me or my posts , never giving any counter argument to my posts for the sake of good faith discussion as i already asked you for many times even after apologizing to you for my clumsy syntax?
Now suddenly after more than one year of harassment i must take your last "correction" truncating my post and without any word of explanation as a good faith gesture?😋
( the last harassments about my posts concerning an acoustic revolution just days before your unasked for "correction" are not cold yet by the way in the thread about "sound experience is a mystical facts")
Any person of good faith explain himself BEFORE correcting someone else or during the process of doing so, especially after mocking him few times just days before.. 😊
It is not what you did poor dude...
You bait me knowing perfectly well that i will react as i did ...😁
You are an hypocrit for me .... Prove me otherwise and i will do what i did in the past about my clumsy syntax i will apologize...
Your now public show of good faith and protestation was intended for the other posters here not for me ...😊
After one year of your "good faith" , i am no more interested to you as a thinker...
Do what you do as one of the "best corrector in the world" correct syntax...😊
QUESTION: What is arrogant about asking someone if I am understanding them?
And dont lie in front of others they are not idiots:
Putting a corrected truncated new post as a better version of the post of someone WITHOUT EXPLANATION after one year of harassment about this one person posts is not good faith question... You never ask me a question poor dude...
Go back in your hole !
By the way i dont entertain grudges but i cannot stand hypocrital person...
Sorry ...
it goes with one of my human defect i am spontaneous in my reactions...
i apologize to all for that as well for my clumsy syntax...
Sometimes a change will bring out certain details in a recording and my immediate reaction may be that I have moved one step closer to the Holy Grail. However, to paraphrase Joni Mitchell, something lost may be something gained. It’s a change in perspective, and may or may not be an improvement. It takes several weeks with multiple recordings to finally make the call, and there have been a few times where the latest component was voted off the island
Will the Wave Touch system be demoed at T.H.E. Show in Costa Mesa in June?
Yes. Please visit my room (#272) at THE SHOW 2024,OC. Costa Mesaaudio show on June 7-9. I look forward to meet many members. Please, all members, introduce yourself at the show. If possible, members will be served a beer (non-alcoholic)? Let’s have a fun. Alex/WTA
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
