What exactly is textural density??


I’m sorry, I am new to the high end audio world. I read this sentence and could not understand any of it. Can you help?

This enhanced textural density seemed good because when I’ve experienced it before, it indicated that the transducer was tracking the signal like a race car with fresh, sticky tires.


https://www.stereophile.com/content/gramophone-dreams-45-ta-solitaire-p-headphones-ha-200-dac-headph...

erik_squires
It's related to inner harmonic intensity.  If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand.
Where is my salad dressing?
That's Herb Reichert's style of prose! That's what he gets paid for! 
Well he's the Parnelli Jones of the stereo review world... Now think if he was a sanitation worker of the stereo world.. "Did you see that pile of shi%, smell like shi%, sounds like shi%, it's just a big pile of ..... LOL

Style indeed!! Tap Tap.. The Waltz

Regards
It is related to textural layers(Timbre) within a musical passage.

Happy Listening!
the transducer was tracking the signal like a race car with fresh, sticky tires.

Throwing up rock chips? One thing for sure, Erik is happy- found someone with worse prose.
Once again someone is trying to learn something audio from an audio forum and they get slammed by a couple of snobs. Good job.
This means nothing.Good luck with that.
There is a blank space to be filled before submittting for publication and, eventually, getting paid. "It sounded much better than model XY" does not do it.

As far as tires go, maybe it is not the best comparison.
Struggling a bit with the polarity between "enhanced" which could imply a level of exaggeration, compared to "tracking the signal like a race car with fresh, sticky tires" which implies a level of precision and exactness.....so, which is it, exaggerated or exact?
A rich harmonic structure to the presented signal.

as in the depth of the harmonics and micro harmonics.

rich meaning not light and peaky, but lots of harmonic and sub harmonic layering of signal. the richness of resonance that real instruments can create and generally not properly presented by reproduction equipment. eg, early digital ,where all cymbal strikes tend to sound more similar than different, which we know is not true in the real world of hearing real cymbals.

we hear mostly via transients, micro transients and the timing between those peaks. Our ears are like positive peak edge sensing diodes, and we combine all these peaks together, in timing differences and levels of intermixing, to form the heard signal in our ear/brain system. How the cilia function re neurological input tied to cilia function.

that we hear only about 10% of the signal, which is all we really need to hear. We make up 100% of our impression interpretation of signal in that approximate 10% heard. so that 10% is required to be exceedingly accurate, otherwise we get huge shifts in what is heard, where we can then differentiate nearly microscopically. 100% of our hearing analysis is in that small 10% of the signal.


This small areas of signal heard, are the parts that are damaged in reproduction via the source points for the the vast majority of distortion in reproduction, in an engineering measurement sense,and in the mechanical or real world inference and integration sense of electricity in high delta as it integrates with various materials on the shape and atomic levels..

Where slew and so on becomes all important. where the micro differentials imparted by the complex LCR of the mechanics and the atomic aspects of the materials involved, all come into play.

eg, magnetically sensitive materials and their phase distortions in how they shape signals in high delta. note the hysteresis like curve of the complex impedance response (as charted) to transient function in cheap resistor materials, like steel end caps. then the molecular level self noise on loading and release of all materials, steel, dielectrics, and so on. The inherent noise considerations of transistors. how the shape of the materials shapes the complex field and current flow response and materials integration.

proper gear with lower distortion in these all critical aspects, will tend to have a non peaky rich and unobscured by distortions in complex harmonic and sub harmonic layering, in the presentation. Not just even ordered harmonics and less odd ordered harmonics but a simple better presentation.

Every peak and micro peak unobscured and placed exactly in shape and timing and level, exactly as close to the orignal aspects of these signal components, as can be.

thus a textural density of signal. Moving in that direction, in what is heard.

How can that be so hard to understand when all of the data points are squarely in the wheel house of published understandings.... of how the ear works .....as compared to signal reproduction in electronics and loudspeaker systems?

All this has been open accepted science and on the record, for what, getting into decades now. Piece it together. It’s all right there.

Btw, most cables screw up in these areas, that is the nature of cable distortions when dealing with complex transient signals in cables, so that is why differences can be heard. it’s all we hear, is the areas where a cable distorts.

the teo audio liquid metal distorts these areas of signal the least, compared to that of ’wire’. I could explain that in detail but those understandings are hard to come by and represent serious IP value.

I’ll go as far to say that it is definitely there but I’m not obligated to explain it to anyone. Science should be free, IMO and IME, but this is conflated business, in this case...
Wait, is this an introduction to the next thread about semantics and poetry?

"I could explain that in detail but those understandings are hard to come by and represent serious IP value.

I’ll go as far to say that it is definitely there but I’m not obligated to explain it to anyone. Science should be free, IMO and IME, but this is conflated business, in this case..."

Sounds like mental ‘thickness’ to me...
How can that be so hard to understand
Only 13 paragraphs of explanation - followed by a sales pitch, smooth....
This thread has turned into much more of a mirror of Audiogoners than I had imagined. 
Just guessing but...

Does it have anything to do with friction?

DeKay
Well Erik, is that a two way mirror, how do I look.. Don’t answer that.. LOL

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

dadork
121 posts02-01-2021 3:48amOnce again someone is trying to learn something audio from an audio forum and they get slammed by a couple of snobs. Good job.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

dadork, do you know what da dork means in German? The Dick

Choose your words wisely. It’s a VERY derogatory term. I mean if you want to learn, that is.. You are "The Dick" after all, by your own admission..


Regards

"...do you know what da dork means in German?"

Hmmm, even if the "dork" were correct, where would "da" fit in there?
Post removed 
Erik
I think it could be heard this way. If you listen to a acoustic guitar being played at 15 feet. Then put your ear up close to the guitar when being played. You will hear a much richer harmonic structure. That is something I really enjoy about my system. I think it is why tube equipment is preferred many times.
You know what a "thin sound" sounds like?

Well, this is the opposite.
Good analogy @twoleftears. Art Dudley was fond of this kind of phrase as well, and both he and Herb used it in their reviews in Art's 90's mag, Listener. I've always taken textural density to mean a full-bodied sound, akin to color saturation in photography.
How can that be so hard to understand
Only 13 paragraphs of explanation - followed by a sales pitch, smooth....

Everything’s a sales pitch. Even our bladder’s push to get us to the washroom is a sales pitch.. A pretty darned convincing one, too.

Eg, that one could be filed under spleen venting, with a side order of sales pitch.
Reviews are there to sell...

It is a bit easy to mock "metaphor" about product...

I will not go there, i dont push doors that are already opened... 😁


But speakin of" textural density" CAN and COULD make sense... It is not necessarily a metaphor for selling a product but a way to convey a complex acoustical and musical concept in 2 simple words:


See points 2 and 3 and 4 in particular in this 5 characteristics of " timbre" from wiki :

  1. Range between tonal and noiselike character
  2. Spectral envelope
  3. Time envelope in terms of rise, duration, and decay (ADSR, which stands for "attack, decay, sustain, release")
  4. Changes both of spectral envelope (formant-glide) and fundamental frequency (micro-intonation)
  5. Prefix, or onset of a sound, quite dissimilar to the ensuing lasting vibration



Figure it by yourself if the reviewer is genuine or not , pro or not, i dont know....I just wanted to defend his choice of words.... Nothing else.....By the way the mathematical modeling of these 5 factors are a precise mathematical acoustic problem, about with i have a book of 700 hundred pages....

Then sometimes using 2 words is more than poetry....But sometimes it is a sales pitch.... Decide yourself....
I looked into the mirror and it turned away.
i will summarize my post in 4 words:

Vibraphone decays never lied.....





Then bash the review.... Not  the 2 words that perfectly make sense.... 😁
Sometimes "Words" are the pallet of wisdom and understanding.
Other times they are just that, "WORDS".  

Call me simple, I don't want it to be, that hard to understand..

Regards
Sometimes "Words" are the pallet of wisdom and understanding.
Other times they are just that, "WORDS".
You are wise.... that is my point precisely....

But the fact that some words are used in a review dont means that these words dont make sense.... They did.... The review perhaps dont make sense, i dont know....

The OP wanted an understanding of these words.... I give what i think what "texture density" could mean acoustically.... But perhaps his motives were other than my simple supposition in creating the thread....i am myself too simple mind to figure it out.... 

Anyway any audio thread can be interesting....
"Eg, that one could be filed under spleen venting, with a side order of sales pitch."
Has anyone actually ordered a sales pitch? Ever?
Music might have textural density but not speakers. Sounds like detail. A good system overall probably delivers it better.
The speakers ALWAYS get all the credit. 😤
Music might have textural density but not speakers
Bingo! that was my point about "timbre" which is an acoustical phenomenon not and electronic one mainly.... But electronic design can help for sure....
Listen to a cello or a bowed bass live. THAT is  textural density.

Now, when we figured out what textural density is, we have to connect it to tires. Any takers?
oldhvymec posted:  “dadork, do you know what da dork means in German? The Dick
Choose your words wisely. It’s a VERY derogatory term. I mean if you want to learn, that is.. You are "The Dick" after all, by your own admission..”

Well hvy one, in case you haven’t noticed, this site’s language is English, and the English definition of dork is as follows:

“Slang. a silly, out-of-touch person who tends to look odd or behave ridiculously around others; a social misfit: If you make me wear that, I’ll look like a total dork!”

Chose the comparative language wisely, I mean if you want to learn, that is.  You are “The Dick” after all, by your own inability to recognize the language being written, and going out on a linguistic limb to insult someone who was making a valid point.  dadork is right, when someone asks a question there’s no need to be rude, condescending or snobbish, as I’ve seen done over and over on here, typically by the same people.  I wouldn’t call them “dicks,” they’re more like something that’s anatomically close, but having to do with solid waste.


I am still wondering about accuracy of the statement about "da dork" in German. For one, it would be "da Dork". If the statement were accurate somehow, assuming one of the localized dialects.
Fruit cake. 
Sponge cake. 
@oldhvymec It's not derivative of German though I've heard it used as a term for whale penis as well if you'd like. It came from the common usage as was stated by @anotherbob and for the very same reason. Luckily I grew out of it, served in the Army though never went through what you did, fortunately. I own a small paint contracting company and enjoy the same pursuit as presumably everybody else does on this forum. Wish I'd chosen another username, didn't plan on sticking around but oh well...
Herb is the best!! Love that guy.
"...never went through what you did..."

A course in German it was not.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean —neither more nor less.""The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

- Through the Looking Glass, and What Alice Found There (apologies to Lewis Carroll)
If you are a hi-fi magazine writer, you are largely describing sound.
This is certainly not easy and you need real talent, nay imagination, to invent hundreds of expressions to do that.  Otherwise every month's copy would be much the same.
It appears that the creators of the most flowery, ambiguous and vaccuous expressions are the most successful hi-fi writers.
My advice, Erik: read John Atkinson, not Herb Reichert, as I have done for more than 40 years.
It’s perhaps described as a combination of textural density tone and weight IMHO. A note has a beginning middle and end and it is the ability to fulfill these
@erik_squires 
Anything in music that doesn’t sound like an AM radio. And then like anything else there are different degrees. 
Hope that helps!
John Atkinson's writing may be clearer, but his conclusions are inscrutable.
+1 to cheeg!
We've all used adjectives like "threadbare", "thin", or the old standby, "tinny" to describe sound reproduction that reduces the "richness", "color" or "warmth" of the music.  This is just another positive adjectival phrase in the same vein.  All this for those of us with BA degrees not EEs. 
“Textural density” in audio is the (partly successful) appropriation of a term in music which refers to the way that instruments/voices and their respective musical lines in a musical composition are used. Each musical line is a “layer” and the “density” of the composition refers to the overall character of the sound as determined by the number of layers employed in the composition. One or few layers results in a “thin” musical texture. Many layers, a “thick texture”.

I think one can then extrapolate and in audio, if one thinks of the naturally occurring harmonics in musical sounds as “layers” themselves, a reproduced musical sound which expresses an accurate (natural) number and combination of harmonics can be said to be “texturally dense”. One that is lacking in full harmonic expression can be said to be “thin” or “threadbare”.

You are right i think about the musical origin....

In acoustic concept speaking about "Timbre",  it is the difference between pure tone/noise and the spectral envelope and the time envelope in an instrument playing a note and the particular  way this instrument body vibrations  will  give the note in an acoustical context like a room, but it is my own interpretation only....



The fact that a reviewer use this concept meaningfully or not,for other motives, dont deprive it of his deep possible meanings...


What I like most about this thread is that none of the well meaning and generous definitions posted so far can be proven to be anything like the others.
it is also sometimes easy to put aside dead trees to discover living one .....

Textural density is a concept in music and in acoustic....It does not takes hours of brain power to figure it out....

What else? It is not an assembly of words by chance....

Even if a reviewer use it like an accidental coining of words, which i dont know, dont deprive it of his meaning....

You simply have chosen the wrong set of words to criticize the reviewer, thinking that these 2 words in his mouth means nothing, but they means something in any mouth.... Sorry.... 😁

These words make sense, but i dont know if the reviewer use them accurately and honestly....

i am sorry, I am new to the high end audio world. I read this sentence and could not understand any of it. Can you help?
I forget that many of your thread are only bait for discussion in a sarcastic way sometimes....I apologize for being slow brain...

I am too direct person to be swift zig- zaguing

Anyway your thread are interesting.....
Erik, actually, I think that Ohnwy61 got it right in the first post here. My definition (the audio part) mirrors his.

Good points, mahgister.