@uncleang I’m not surprised with your sister in law’s experience. It is all relative after all. There are some with systems with a 10-12KHz high frequency extension that call it “Natural Sound”. If you are also old enough and you have lost your high frequency hearing then you will not miss that last octave. If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it…….
Striking a balance between musicality and resolution
As my years and experience in this hobby continue to grow I notice a divergence between those seeking extreme resolution and detail from their music reproduction systems and those in search of maximum musicality.
In theory, high-end audio systems should provide more than garden variety stereo systems. In my view that means more detail and information should be heard from a high-end music reproduction system than one hears from ordinary HiFi stereo systems set ups. BUT is there such thing as too much resolution and detail in a stereo system’s sound presentation?
Some people feel that a less detailed presentation that is easier for your brain to process has better flow and provides more enjoyable listening.
So there is the dichotomy. Should one pay more to hear less? Can a frequency response performance that is curtailed at both frequency extremes be desired and praised?
Those that seek a “more musical” presentation usually point to their belief that that is how they hear live un-amplified acoustic music in the real world. In nature, high frequencies attenuate and decay with distance from the source and sound waves get absorbed, diffracted, reflected, and diffused by the environmental factors and landscapes; so they are not wrong in stating that in the real world the sound of music is less detailed and extended. The issue is that when we listen to our music reproduction systems at home we are not listening to live un-amplified music in a concert venue, but rather professionally produced audio recordings typically recorded with close-microphones techniques.
So the question is, do we want our systems to reproduce the sound on the commercial audio recordings accurately or does one want hear the sound the way one thinks that it should sound?
Lucky for me, I have enough systems at home that I have been able to design, set up, and tune them for different targeted resultant sound, sound presentation, and sound qualities. For instance, my OKTAN6 ultimate horn system is a dissecting microscope, my Pinnacle horn system aims at extreme musicality, and my WAAR reference system is a chameleon, which can be adjusted to sound exactly how you want it to sound in real-time.
My “test-bed” system takes on the sound character and sound qualities of the components in use and it is excellent for evaluating what new components have to offer or bring to the table in terms of sound qualities. But with the Acapella TW-1S ION plasma super-tweeters extending the high frequencies, the TBI Emperor subwoofers extending the low frequencies, and the highly detailed & nuanced Digital Audio Denmark AX24 DSD dac streaming HQPLAYER as the source, the “Test Bed” system is a highly resolving system.
As with everything else in life, is there a happy medium or compromise that gives you the best of those worlds? I believe that there is and that great music reproduction systems can be tuned to strike a balance between musicality and resolution. If one listens to the evolution of my OKTAN6 ultimate horn system for instance you can hear that the fine tuning is driving the sound in that direction.
So during last night’s listening session I adjusted the sound of my “Test Bed” system to a more musical sound presentation. The “Test Bed” system is always in flux so it allows me to experiment, explore, tweak, tune, and have fun with it.
Here is an audio recording from last night’s listening session that captures the revised sound presentation and conveys the sound qualities that exemplify a more organic sound versus a more delineated & resolved sound presentation:
- ...
- 512 posts total
@carlos269 You ask, " Do we want our systems to reproduce the sound of the commercial audio recordings accurately or does one want to hear the sound the way one thinks it should sound?" The question should be, what did the commercial audio recording really sound like straight from the recording studio, and how do you know what mindset the recording engineers at the recording studio had when recording? Was the goal to produce a more musical recording or a more accurate recording? On top of that, all commercial recordings have to be played back through some kind of source/audio system. All audio systems sound different from one to another, and they all alter the sound of the original recording in to some degree. So what is accuracy or a more musical presentation to the original commercial recording? Now, since we have no way of knowing what the original commercial recording really sounds like, unless you were there in the recording studio when it was recorded (and still, it will sound different on your audio system than it did at the studio), IMHO, striking a balance between accuracy or a more musical presentation to the original commercial recording at home on our home audio systems is purely subjective. So, in conclusion, you don’t have a choice but to listen to the original commercial recording the way you think it should sound LOL!!! Happy listening.
|
The alternative choice between resolution and musicality is a false dichotomy which has nothing to do with acoustics. It is more related to audio gear design marketing,
Acoustics is not mere room material acoustic but also psycho-acoustics and here the goal as audiophile is creating the best possible acoustic "translation" from the recording set of trade-off sonic spatial and timbre information recorded by the sound engineer and when conveyed through your system/room limitations and trade-off choices make possible the best translation modulo some acoustics conditions...
Edgar Choueiri is one of the best to explain and describe what could be the best musical acoustic experience...I had not the budget to buy his system,but i meditated about his ideas and few years ago in my room with a relatively low cost system i experimented in acoustics ( i am retired and i did it almost 2 years 7 days on 7) ...
I use mechanical tools. ( tuned resonators specifically located grid modifying the room pressure zones and i used a mechanical crossfeed for my ears between the speakers with the placement of some resonators to makes my ears/brain able to sense each speakers differently which imply some distortion level for sure but my goal was not "perfection of sound" but understanding of sound)
Using these resonators i was able to modify my room and it make me able to approximate very imperfectly with some level of distortion for sure the acoustic 3-D perfect experience described by Choueiri which is rooted in acoustical electronical control of crosstalk with no mechanical crossfeed..In a word i used crossfeed instead of crosstalk as did Dr. Choueiri...But my results so imperfect they were were spectacular and surreal...
( each of my speakers driver was near tuned resonators of different size then my ears A perceive the speakers a and b and my ears B perceive them with a greatest sonic differences between them the speakers a and b making for my my brain easier the task of localizing the sound spatial cues around my listening position not just in front of me )
Then i could understand why a top system room cannot be described by the erroneous duality or opposition between musical or resolution...It is not even false. This distinction made sense for sure but miss the acoustics principles and parameters which can make a system/room able to translate the recording trade-off into a three dimensional experience where musicality and resolution participated of another like the gear system is integrated in the room for your specific ears and like the room is designed for your gear system by your ears...( my grid of resonators was tuned by ears for my listening position as we tune a piano but it takes me a long time
If i had the budget i will buy the few thousand dollars system of Choueiri...
Right now i had sold my house and i am into near listening in a basement corner with a very low cost speakers system which do not compare to my first room.My main listening is with my TOP headphone which optimized do not rival my first room but rival most system in a non controlled room...( the K340 hybrid was designed by another genius in acoustics Dr. Gorike it is why i bought it read the patent and optimize it , it is low cost vintage but when optimized better than all headphones i ever listened too )
Then acoustics experience and concepts is not about gear, taste, musicality or details, it is about hearing 3-D sound as in real life or hearing a recording spatial information translated in your room...
Here a short video which is very clear explanation of acoustics basic used by Dr. Choueiri a genius in acoustic:
I recommend to anyone to meditate Dr. Choueiri concepts...
It was inspirational for me...
|
@kennymacc I agree with everything you wrote. That is the basis for debunking the pursuit for “The Absolute Sound”. How would one verify and validate the authenticity? If this is all subjective and simply about enjoying what you have then the house of cards falls apart when you realize that the audiophile pursuit is like Scientology. |
@mahgister You bring in spatial cues and while they may be important for dimensionality, space, and immersion, I’m not sure that they are necessary for emotional engagement and musical enjoyment. |
- 512 posts total

