"Air, Extension, Resolution" Music or Hi Fi?


I have mentioned in other threads my efforts to tame the treble on my Tympani IV a's which has led to a number of upgrades:

tweaky resistors in line with the tweeters
MYE stands
a Musical Fidelity tube buffer
new tubes for the Audio Research SP11
new Signal Cable speaker cables and interconnects

Once in a while, with the right recording, late at night, the system sounds very, very good, and although not quite the midrange magic of my Apogess Stages with Jadis preamp and Aragon 4004 MK II, probably some of the best "sound" I have ever heard.

But to be honest, I dont find myself compelled to go and listen to the system and often, the system still sounds fatiguing.

Ever the audiophile, I have wondered if

Rives Audio room treatment and/or
Replacing the SCD-1 with a TURNTABLE

would really restore the passion that got me into this hobby nearly 30 years ago.

But reading an ad for Tympani 1-Ds on ebay a couple of days ago gave me a Eureka?! moment:

As much as the ribbon tweeters sound really impressive, with air, extension and detail that the non ribboned models clearly dont have...

...I am suddenly wondering if all of this comes at the expense of the MUSIC.

I cant ever remember, for example, listening to my Magneplanr MG-1Bs, for example, and saying:

"I stayed up all night listening to MUSIC, but sadly the experience was ruined by my craving for more "extension" "air" and/or "inner detail".

All of this is making me wonder if the evolutionary push for "transparency" "lifting veils" "inner detail" "resolution" is exactly what turns music into hi fi, and if I might enjoy a newly restored pair of Tympani 1D's more than my Tympani IVa's.

Just my latest thought.....thank you for listening.
cwlondon

Showing 1 response by glenn_garza

Enjoying music and high fidelity reproduction can be, but are not necessarily the same thing. For instance, I used to like driving around in my dad's 67 Comet because I enjoyed the heck out of listening to his AM radio: it was a blast, though certainly not high fidelity. I enjoyed the music and songs themselves because of what they did for me mentally and emotionally. I got into them in my head, and my mind made them sound, not like they did on the radio, but the way they had to sound to be what I needed them to be. My mind completed what the radio could not. I guess it worked that way for the music I wanted to hear when I wanted to hear it.

However, I surely did enjoy live performances too, and of different kinds of music: rock, religious, classical, jazz. But not all live performances were good or particularly inspiring. In these instances though, I only heard what was actually there, which was usually mediocre. But when it was good, it was like nothing else. Man, I could listen to that stuff all day. That's what drew me into high-end audio: trying to create that magic anytime I wanted.

Of course, as when live, not all recorded performances are particularly good or inspiring. Then too we have some terrible recording sound quality. And when our electronics get better and more resolving, we hear the mediocrity, noise, and distortions all the better. But I also think that some high-end equipment is designed to sound a certain way, or create a false illusion of reality. I have heard sources, electronics, speakers and cables that, IMO, colored the sound unacceptably. And when the sound is so influenced, it is covering up the actual recorded performance, regardless of how live, pretty, or clear and extended it may seem.

But if we are going to enjoy music reproduction, it has to be about the music. If it isn't, then we became audiophiles by accident: we all want to have something good, and maybe we wandered into a highfi shop instead of a camera shop or computer store. Of course there is more and I could go on, but I won't.