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
mihorn
910 posts
 
lanx0003  @mihorn  The built-in microphone in your camera is stereo, so it can capture a left-right sound field, but its frequency range is limited. Nikon does not disclose the exact range, but it is generally around 100 Hz to 12 kHz. This is why the bass in your recording is cut off. While your recording is better than the OP’s, it still isn’t convincing enough.

I guess you’ve never seriously recorded and analyzed your system (or any show audio system). Unlike many people here who are looking for euphonic, I look for the original sound. I think your ears are tuned (biased) to your system and you can’t hear my system and the original music correctly. Human ear drums become harden (with harsh/harmful sounds) and can’t hear soft and delicate organic sounds well which are the real musicality of music. *Many people like to listen only Rock music because their systems sound harsh. It takes more than few minutes to soften your ears but you can try. Please listen to the original music and compare to my recording. **remember the MIC in the original is 3 inches from singer’s mouth. My MICs are 7ft from speakers.

Original Chris De Burgh - Lady In Red

Chris De Burgh - Lady In Red, Wavetouch audio live recording

Alex/Wavetouch audio

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
15,052 posts
 

Not bad Carlos...

But i hear too much of the uncontrolled room to your music...

It was less the case with Milhorn recording ...

Anyway it is evident your gear pieces are well done ..

But i cannot be enthralled by an uncontrolled  room impeding the recording ..

 

@lanx0003 Since you present yourself as someone who understands how to asses audio recordings and as someone who is  knowledgeable on how to make good audio recordings, can you please make an audio recording of your system playing the following song and post it here on this thread so that we can all hear what an optimized recording sounds like:

Lullaby

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
15,052 posts
 

I am not an engineer at all...

Once this is said i am flabbergasted by the fact that so much people can think that a system had a sound of its own, out of any room acoustic content ...Out of any ears measurements...

Room controls can de done mechanically ( the hard way with specifically located tuned resonators ) or with DSP ...

In the two cases anyway  it is mandatory to have a minimally optimized ratio between absorption/reflections and diffusion  ...

 

Then how in the world can we assess the real potential of a system in acoustically  anonymus room as like in show or many living room ? 

it is audiophile superstition to forget  acoustics and psycho-acoustics which is the more  half important part of the complete job...

Anybody can purchase relatively good synergetical gear pieces ..Anybody with the money....

We must be proud of our room not just of our gear pieces ... Creativity for us who do not design the gear pieces is there in acoustics creativity ...

And anyway acoustics is a very deep field  matter in us human ... In a way gear design cannot be ...

clustrocasual
145 posts
 

Creating a hi-fi system is like building a gallery in which to hang paintings. People who restore paintings work under scientific flat lighting in labs, but no person on earth has ever wanted to view or create paintings under those conditions. Instead we view art in museums with combination of lighting, such as warm halogen or skylights, so we can admire the luminance of the oil in a Rembrandt and have an emotional experience. Technically, we aren’t seeing the painting as correctly as in a lab. We also don’t perform or listen to live music in an anechoic chamber, even though it the only way you'll hear the instrument correctly. 

If we each had enough wealth to build a physical gallery to hang our favorite paintings, we each would do it a different way. Same as hi-fi. Its about transparency, but to a point.

joelepo
28 posts
 

Mapman distills this discussion into two statements that are logically correct. 
My translation: if you don't prefer high fidelity sound [literally, the faithful rendering of an electronic signal as sound], just accept your logical disconnect and buy whatever biased sound reproduction you prefer. 

More to discover