What steps forward were actually steps backward?

Onhwy61, Good try, as far as it goes, at explaining why low-fi systems sound more musical than many (or even most) high-end systems. Apart from the tacit admission that low-fi systems do in fact appear to have better timing/musicality, you miss the fact that by cheap systems I include also cheap "audiophile" systems, which also, overall, manage to convey the timing/rhythm/musicality of music far more often than high-end systems do, without all the distortions you list. Which is why we probably end up in this obssession. As well, many high-end systems feature mini-monitors which have no bass to speak of, and yet still manage to lose the musicality/dissect the music. Through my years of various audiophile components and systems, I was always astounded at the direct musical communication which comes from my sister's Rotel receiver/Optimus LX5 system, which I set up(!), which is overall quite sophisticated (that superb ribbon tweeter), yet which communicates the music directly and without effort, making everything sound good. I always left her house with doubts. I know this is a very common experience for all of us (c'mon, admit it), and when we return home we convince ourselves on the basis of more air, better imaging, more detail, and so forth...and then we head out to the stereo store to see what we can improve. I think the plain fact of the matter is what I stated: designers with clipboards and textbooks and no real gift. Perhaps there is an unknown ingredient X which gets washed out with improved power suply regulation and so on, or perhaps it is simply the relationship I set forth earlier: amount of information is inversely proportional to musicality, overall (which is kind of like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, come to think of it...).

It may sound corny, but we have to learn to listen with our hearts instead of our heads, and demand the same from audio designers, or else Pack your Bags, Scum! Now, having inherited high-end speakers, I am faced with spending thousands of dollars to gain - maybe - that musicality I had when I retired from the game with a pair of Sound Dynamic speakers and a pair of Wave 8s driven by a Pioneer preamp. I did the tour of the shops, considering expensive Tannoys, the Reference 3As, Energy Veritas, all of which sounded impressive....and then I had the idea to see what the new Athena Technologies incarnation of the Sound Dynamics were like, specifically the AS-F2s at $600. They were hooked up to a Harmon Kardon receiver, the guy turned them on (I wasn't expecting anything), and when they sarted to sing, my soul started to sing. And I immediately heard that ingredient X which put a huge smile on my face. I foresee a lot of audio fun in the near future. I don't known what it is (certainly timing is a part), but I think damn the high-end neutral speakers (I'm going to sell them), I'm buying the AS-F2s tomorrow, I think (they're enormous, however), and I bet they'll sound terrific with my new Wave 20s. You see, I am upgrading! But I can't stop thinking about how good that HK sounded as well. I lifted it to see what kind of transformer there was inside, and it weighed a ton. Damn it sounded good, is there someone with talent working at HK? Hmmmmm.....I'm at my sister's right now, and I can't believe how good her system sounds right now, as she happily plays music for hours without thinking anything but "this is a good album!", playing Santana right now, I think I gotta buy this one....

I think that much (not all, but much) high-end equipment gives out an increase in detail and so forth but sacrifices the music. Since all this detail is impressive, many do not even realize that their upgrade has, musically speaking, been a disaster. Not understanding the difference between being impressed and having the music wash over you and carry you away, most defend their purchases and present them to the world as significant upgrades, and the more money they pay, the louder they sing their praises. Many who have invested enormous amounts of cash (because they were, at bottom, not satisfied but couldn't find the spot to scratch) are in this boat now, but not having heard systems (except cheap ones, which preserve the timing more often than not) which can present the subtleties of timing which is the core of musical expression, they simply are not aware, and keep dreaming of that next, significant "upgrade."

Drubin, the siren call of "impressive" is paved with misery, but it is a siren call. However, having one's cake and eating it too is possible, but I believe that amount of information is, for the most part, inversely proportional to how much music survives. To put it otherwise, the more detail a system retrieves, the more difficult it is to hold the music together, bordering on impossible. The late and lamented "Listener" magazine once ran a photo of a top-of-the-line Wilson speaker with the caption "There is a use for these!" - the photo showed one being hoisted up from the water at the end of a chain on a boat: it was an anchor! We reduce the importance of timing by dubbing it "Prat," thus offhandedly dismissing it. But a system without timing is good for nothing but boat-anchors, as Listener believed. Which is why that magazine attempted to review only musical equipment, with that missing "magic" factor.

An argument for Downgrading!

Drubin: Ah-HA! You have noticed the better timing of cheap systems! Actually, I am not the first to make this observation, as several intrepid audio reviewers (who soon thereafter were flipping burgers) comment on this phenomenon as well, one explanation being not a distortion of timing ( this reminds me of the old "Do Tubes create musicality that's not there" debate), but the fact of cohesion due to fewer parts, a single loudspeaker driver (what tannoy markets as Coincident) and so on. Your old Quads share in this single-driver approach as well.

Having thought about this phenomenon myself over the last several years (and about the fact that while impressive, sound in high-end shops almost never tempts me to stay and enjoy the music, with stuff playing like Spectral and so on), I have come to the conclusion that the neurotic search for ultimate detail is just that, and that it ultimately dissects the music, except in the hands of a genius of some sort. The problem with today's designers (for the most part) is that they have no talent (as in no unexplained "gift"), but instead a clipboard with a list of dos and don'ts: Do: use acrylic, use thick faceplates, use Hovland Musicaps and so on.

While stereo is just electronics, music is much more, and rather than the purely technical approach used by businessmen cashing in on the latest fahion (now single-ended) these days, audio needs men of passion with the unexplained gift, such as the designer of the unfortunately expensive Jadis equipment, or the genius (whoever he is) of the ASL equipment, or the greats of the old days like Saul Marantz. This is why so much of the old stuff is gaining in value: it is set against a background of soulless business propositions. Let go the detail and be free! Besides, even the Wave 8s give me almost too much detail to deal with with sensitive speakers, and they're so much damned fun I forgot all about audio nitpickings for two years and simply listened to my entire record collection (and to hell with Linn recordings!): I have never had so much fun with music in my entire existence (unless it was those old reefer/Pink Floyd days). And the more sensitive the speakers, the more responsive, and the more responsive, the smaller wattage you require, and the smaller wattage translates into excellent timing, and lots of luscious detail.

Soon, an old Sherwood tube integrated I found will be restored and I will see what special magical ingredient it may have: 32 tube watts and a phono stage! Then, I will buy the Rega Ela or Naos speakers: very sensitive (92 db) and I know from experience nothing times like these - and they're reasonably priced! Think small, not big, think sensitive, not power hogs is my suggestion. Of course, sensitive speakers come in many flavours too, and you'll have to find the one which appeals to you, assuming you don't already have sensitive speakers. And you want to hear supreme timing on the cheap? Get yourself an old AR-XA and put a decent low-mass tonearm on it (Grace etc.), and then put a good MM on it. Cheap, fun, and educational, like this audio hobby should be, at least in part: Mitch Cotter of AR was another genius...and youll be astonished at the amount of detail this can retrieve. No timing, no fun, too much money, no fun. Sorry for the rant, but someone had to say it. But thanks for the discussion Drubin and Nrenter: a blast!

The trick to downgrading or buying "budget" equipment (due to the ridiculous prices of cables these days the concept of "budget" has become distorted in this hobby: recently two high-end dealers in this area said that people spending $1500 on a component were cheap - but I put it to you all, while many on this website label $1500 components "budget", you'd go apopleptic if your mechanic tried to screw you with a $1500 bill for repairs, wouldn't you?!), is to focus on musicality and timing, and forget about all that audiophile bullshit (which a good budget component will give in good measure anyway) in which a budget component will of course fail to measure up. But given a truly musical piece, you just don't care about all the missing "information". Now if we all followed this philosophy in buying this equipment, maybe there would a "Trickle Up" phenomenon, and we could expect all high-end components not to disappoint us in the long term, and the designers to start listening instead of measuring. I know I'm pie-eyed.