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:
FWIW: There is a million+ dollar system on YouTube doing Landslide by Fleetwood Mac. The highs are extremely rolled off and the system lacks detail. This is OBVIOUS from the YouTube video and there are $10K systems that will easily outperform what is being posted. Yes, when you hear the dialog you can tell that the mic is doing a bit of the roll off, but the way it is set up... So to say the videos are worthless..., at over a million dollars, I wouldn't even be able to listen to this. |
This is incorrect. We do not seek out the nth degree of either resolution or musicality but rather seek maximum subjective enjoyment. |
Well I’m glad that I finally made it back to my thread, as the original poster, I can tell that @flash56 @mahgister @cleeds all require a course on reading comprehension. First of all, only delusional individuals believe that they know the artist or mastering engineer’s intent. As I have repeated a million times here and elsewhere, there is no such thing as “The Absolute Sound” as the term is used in the audiophile world. The best one can hope a home audio system can achieve is being accurate to the source material at the output of the source component. Second, no one ever claimed that you can asses a home system in absolute terms through audio recordings on YouTube or otherwise. The principle here is, if your brains have the capacity to comprehend it, is that the audio recordings allows one to make “relative” comparisons of the resultant sound of the recorded home audio systems. @mahgister I didn’t reply to you earlier to let you off the hook since in a way I feel sorry for you and your situation, of being enamored with DSP filters that you have not even experienced for yourself and I will leave it at that. I have been playing with studio spatializers for years, from the original Roland units with the joysticks to the Desper Mastering Digital Spatializer, and my favorite the Quantec Room Simulator. The BAACH system has taken advantage of the higher processing power of today’s DSP’s but this isn’t ground breaking work. @flash56 Not only have I been in the world’s best high-end mastering studios but I actually own more capable mastering processing equipment than even those fine establishments have on hand. And here is the kicker, I know how to use the equipment better than anyone I have ever met; you know why, because most of the studio professionals do not posses my understanding of the science and engineering behind the fundamentals. They have adapted to use the equipment but ask them about the principles and science behind it? Any time you want to talk shop let’s do it and let’s see how far into the weeds you can go, that will be the real car wreck with bloods and guts. Have you ever heard the saying, “know your audience’? When I say that some of my designs are over your head I mean it literally, look up, as some of my designs are orbiting above you on the Space Station. |
So, we have a diversity of opinions here. When debating an issue like this, a common strategy is to either appeal to authority (an expert says so) or appeal to peers (everyone says so). In this case, we don’t have an expert present, nor does everyone necessarily agree — so the debate continues. In my opinion, I am open to listening as long as the recording is of high quality, capable of capturing spatial cues, and retains the original fidelity, as I mentioned before. Room interaction can be softened by placing the microphone close to the speakers — a technique used by many acoustic professionals, reviewers (including Stereophile, Erin using Klippel), and speaker designers (including Andrew Jones) to simulate measurements in an anechoic chamber. However, my main point is not about the recording. My main concern is with the OP’s claim regarding a conflict or trade-off between musicality and resolution. These are not mutually exclusive. For example, a common method to enhance the smoothness of sound is to add even-order harmonic overtones to the original signal. If too much is added, even if phase coherent, the overtones may smear details and mask transients. In contrast, subtle but sufficient harmonic overtones can sweeten the sound without these adverse effects. Other methods to enhance sound quality without compromising resolution have already been discussed here, so I won’t repeat them. |
@kennyc You also seem to require reading comprehension course. In what world does “striking a balance” equal “maximum” anything? I guess reading the words doesn’t always get decoded correctly in some people’s brains. |
