1. Home
  2. amps-preamps
  3. 196294-301

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:
 

The Way It Goes

 

carlos269
toddalin's avatar
toddalin
672 posts
 

 

Kevin:  It comes down to a few things.

As always, first is cost.  I’ve picked up a slew of the Audyns on ebay for little coin over the years.

I do have larger values (up to 100 mfd), but they are too big to fit in the cases whereas paired smaller values do fit.

As I said, I’ve been through countless iterations and in one go-round I used the 441P 10 mfd conjugate cap on the 2241 because I had it handy.  These are vintage and I got the 10 mfds from my neighbor (a retired NASA engineer now passed), and I could instantly hear a difference.  I liked it so I went on-line and was able to find the 441P in 15 mfd and the 3 mfd so these replaced the Audyns.

As for resistors, R1 is replicated because I want the total load to be 28.1 mfd, and this is not a readily available value and two 56.2s split the load so they can handle the wattage.

BTW, it is really not so simple and there are probably no/few other crossovers that work quite like this.

The Heil does not play nice with the 2251 and these require fairly substantial slopes to avoid crosstalk.

To increase the slope on the 2251, I "over-capacitate" it.  This then creates a very steep slope, but also a hump just below the slope.  The hump falls in the critical area for vocals/detail.

Sound going to the 2251 goes through a choke as part of a second order crossover. But the signal also by-passes the choke (R2/R4/VR1) and this is not in phase with the hump.  So the more that is allowed to pass, the flatter the hump becomes, but the steep crossover slope is retained.  On the 30 ohm resistor, the system is flattest.  As resistance is added through VR1, (starts at ~31 ohms when paired with the 20 ohm series resistor), more of the hump comes through bringing out the vocal range.  This pair can go as high as ~52 ohms before going to infinity which removes this portion of the circuit entirely.  Note the schematic says "contour" and not volume.

The Heil is treated such that it hits a "brick wall" at the bottom of its range (~2.5KHz) and the addition of the "brilliance" cap does not extend the crossover frequency down, as one would expect, but rather raises the volume in that area just above the crossover frequency, ~3-5KHz increasing detail. 

bubba12's avatar
bubba12
503 posts
 

@carlos269 I prefer the 2nd recording. Resolution.

mihorn
911 posts
 
atmasphere  YT is a terrible place to do any sort of assessment at all. The recording system can be quite varied (smartphones are bad at that as they have limiting and compression, and their tiny little mics are no good at capturing bass), where the microphones are placed is a big deal and YT itself has a compression algorithm. The biggest variable is the room itself.  

YT videos of people’s sound systems are an unfortunate waste of memory.

Those are always a good excuse for bad sound systems. 

In below, my system is playing free YT downloaded MP3 files (very low quality, see at 2:45, Eric C, 130~150 bit). I record and upload Eric C music file again (compress again as you mentioned). I don’t think YT sound is terrible. In YT, you can find many my system videos by others.  Alex/Wavetouch audio

Eric Clapton - Tears in heaven, Krall - Temptation, Wavetouch audio live

Townes Van Zandt - My Starter Won’t Start,

carlos269's avatar
carlos269 OP
483 posts
 

@bubba12 I’m right there with you. Given a choice, or if I had only one system, I would go for the most resolving system every time. I have fun tuning my various systems to different target sound qualities just to challenge myself to see if I can achieve the sound that I set out to do, but after the yield, I always gravitate back to my OKTAN6 and WAAR reference systems as they have the highest resolutions. I do understand why some find the “ from the audience perspective” sound appealing as it is less attention grabbing, smoother, and slightly defused. If you are into DHT tubes, like the 71A sounds compares to the 45; one is dense, smooth, & cohesive, while the other one is extroverted, discontinuous, & with texture. 

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
15,059 posts
 

Your sound  seems good to me milhorn, especially Diana Krall...

But your room seems more convenient for the speakers /system you own and sound good through my system here ...

The impression is balanced timbre and details but  no resolution for the sake of resolution which is very important... Resolution for more resolution is like a woman with too much make-up hiding visible small parts of his face, we forget the whole...

For the spatial qualities we must hear at the real listening place not from the computer ...

 

Congratulations! 

Your recording are better than some i heard in the past  and now i can understand why you were so enthusiastic for your  system... It is good for me too ...

But how is the spatial distribution of the sound sources  which is important for immersive perception ?  This i could tell only where you are not from here ...

 

 Anyway i am pleasantly impressed by the timbre natural and realism  as well as it is possible to say from your  well done recording ...

 

 

 

 

In below, my system is playing free YT downloaded MP3 files (very low quality, see at 2:45, Eric C, 130~150 bit). I record and upload Eric C music file again (compress again as you mentioned). I don’t think YT sound is terrible. In YT, you can find many my system videos by others.  Alex/Wavetouch audio

Eric Clapton - Tears in heaven, Krall - Temptation, Wavetouch audio live

Townes Van Zandt - My Starter Won’t Start,

 

More to discover