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
mahgister's avatar
mahgister
15,051 posts
 

Astounding post!

A person with go nuts trying to optimize each of these individual contributors to the resultant sound as they are many times a function of each other and as one adjust one item it inadvertently effects something else. There are so many variables that contribute to the resultant sound, at the listening chair position.

Most audiophiles do the same thing you are doing and focus on one or more of the contributors and attempt to address and optimize them.

Then there is me, I simply accept all of these individual contributors as they are and accept them “as is”, for what they are, “the given”. I simply ignore ALL of these individual contributions that make up the “composite” resultant sound, at the listening share position, and instead I focus ALL of my energy on ONLY addressing the “composite” resultant sound that I hear at the listening chair. I then make real-time adjustments to the sound until the “composite” resultant sound that I hear matches the sound that I want to hear, the “target sound”.

Again, I do not care to get bogged down on addressing the contributing elements because at the end of the day, THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS THE COMPOSITE RESULTANT SOUND THAT ONE HEARS AT THE LISTENING CHAIR POSITION!!!!!!!!!! It is all baked into the sound heard by the ears and perceived by the brain when seated at the listening chair.

In a word you are like the Munchosen Baron which succeeded in lifting himself out of the ground by his own powerful hand...

I now understand you...

Acoustics and psycho-acoustics are useless for you , the resulting sound of any room from the listening position only matter ...

Acousticians are useless...

Any sound reach my seat anyway, nevermind the room...The speakers speak ...

Your powerful hand lift yourself no matter gravity, no matter acoustics nor psycho-acoustics , only matter the resultant sound as only matter the powerful lifting hand ...

Ok ... smiley

 

I get it now: sound exist out of any acoustics without any necessary useless acoustics or psycho-acoustics laws..

You are smarter than me for sure ...

You use gear modifications No DSP, no mechanical room controls, no passive room treatment...No need for all these silly audiophiles obsessions as for this mahgister ignorant ...

Wow....I am speechless ...

i am no more surprised that you call mechanical or DSP acoustics perspective a rabbit hole...

And myself like prehistoric man i used Helmholtz resonators to control a room like Egyptian priest... i must be a primitive ...

angel

I developed my approach as “There is a smarter way” of getting things done in audio. I’m always looking at doing things in a smarter way and find the whole audiophile approach pretty silly and lacking intelligence so I developed my own way of executing adjustments to get the sound that I’m after from ANY “capable” system.

 

cleeds
6,582 posts
 
clustrocasual

... 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 ... 

That is completely mistaken. Musical instruments and presentations actually rely on sonic ambiance to achieve their characteristic sound. Some instruments are especially dependent on reflections for their sound - French horn is a good example. The instruments of the orchestra are situated specifically exactly for that reason.

If you’ve ever been in one, you know that an anechoic room is a very freaky place. The sensation is bizarre.

carlos269's avatar
carlos269 OP
467 posts
 

@mahgister I tried, but you still cannot comprehend. Keep on you way of filling the room with mechanical resonators. You are not alone in not having the capacity to take in and understand my concept. Maybe some can explain it to you in an even simpler way that I was able to put it in, because your comprehension of what I wrote is way off.

mihorn
909 posts
 
lanx0003    @carlos269  Record the same track, i.e., lady in red, and listen it with your headphone or earbud.  Is there left and right?

Again, when you try to make pitch about presenting your system over YT, enhance the quality of your recording.  The burden of proof is on you.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NELvyX822IU&t=2839s

YT video sounds smooth and musical. As I mentioned, your ears are tuned to those sounds. Simply, those reproduced sounds are broken sounds to me. It’s vague and confused. Probably, you don’t know what you can’t hear and all people here (audiophiles) hear same way except Carlos, me, and non-a’philes. Though Carlos and me are different from non-a’philes since we’ve been through a’phile times for few decades. It’s like you are listening the appx. outlines of music. Like you are only concern about only the tone and timbre of music. You aren’t listening to the core of music. Like Carlos mentioned in above post, the most important sound is the sound from speakers. Simply, Carlos system sounds solid and not broken. More I listen Carlos’ system, more I satisfied with sound/music than all others.

To get into immersive sound as some mentioned, you must blur your vision on eyes and ears. I can do that when I listen others systems. But coming back to natural mode is painful that my brain has to work hard. If I stay in immersive sound stage continue, it’s painful too due to the brain-fog, more Tinnitus, dizzy at times, blur vision, headache, etc. I simply avoid those broken music sounds. Alex/Wavetouch audio

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
15,051 posts
 

By the way you are not alone being completely misunderstood , i am with you here brother...

Most ignorant think that i boasted about my past acoustic room as "a proposed model for all"..

It was not, my dedicated first room  was un-esthetical and impractical for anyone..

 Why did i created it then ?

It was to learn  basic acoustics concepts by hearing them so to speak... it was my laboratory to explore what is completely ignored by most : the power of acoustics controls over sound experience..

I never boasted about my system as such. it was average and good but vintage and low cost..

I never boasted about my room as such . i am not a fool and i never post photos of this "tin foil hat" laboratory of mine completely unesthetical...smiley

If i boasted and in truth i boasted about knowing the extraordinary power of acoustics in the listening experience..

 If you read all my posts articles and books propositions since many years here it is all about acoustics and psycho-acoustics importance in audio...

Others boast about their recorded systems, brand name one, costlier one, some boast about real beautiful room and there is many to see here...

I boasted about the discovery of basic acoustics as a revelation for me and hopefully to others...

 Audio threads are full of gear discussion at most some about room acoustic, almost nothing about fundamental acoustics concepts and experiments ..

This is what interest me...

 I know how to optimize now any system for my own usage and i am satisfied...

i am interested mostly by what matter for all time and must matter  for everyone : acoustics (with an "s" then more than mere room acoustic) ...

By the way i was not interested by Dr. Choueiri DSP filters which i cannot afford and dont want to buy rightnow, unlike you i was interested by his acousticals ideas and understanding... The rabbit hole is not his understanding of acoustics but your own head ...

 

@mahgister I tried, but you still cannot comprehend. Keep on you way of filling the room with mechanical resonators. You are not alone in not having the capacity to take in and understand my concept. Maybe some can explain it to you in an even simpler way that I was able to put it in, because your comprehension of what I wrote is way off.

 

 

More to discover