@toddalin The “line feed” version of the song tracks are meaningless. The tracks stream from Tidal and what is sent from HQPLAYER to the dac is not bit-perfect, I have made it “better” to my ears, so comparison to the “line feed” version are irrelevant from a “match” confirmation perspective. I’m not trying to reproduce the “line feed” version, I’m listening to to a better, to my ears, version than the “line feed” one on YouTube.
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
deep33 has mastered the art of sarcasm. He forget that sarcasm damage more the source than the target when we use it too often... He harassed me for 1 year with child mockings ..One big brain with a too active small ego, or a small brain with a big lazy ego. I dont know which one sometimes he posted intelligent posts... Here his target sarcasm is adressed to everyone who participated to the discussion. Everyone is stupid by participating without concurring with his implicit judgement : Carlos is stupid...I dont think so... I think indulging too often in sarcasm at the expanse of others is stupid.
|
When I was getting my degree in Physics I had a chat with my favorite professor, Dr.Ernst, and him and I were talking and he said the simple truth about Physics is “either you get it or you don’t”. This thread reminded me of that conversation with Dr. Ernst, who also happened to be my guidance counselor. Whether it’s Laplace transforms in classical mechanics, or electron tunneling in Quantum Mechanics, or resultant sound on audio recordings, or limiting oneself to the commercial recordings or trying to hear more of the recording…..Dr. Ernst was right, either you get it or you don’t! If you cannot comprehend the concept then none of the discussion will make any sense. |
@carlos269 clever-ish. You have I’m going to guess 20-40 times the retail investment in electronics compared to what I have invested - so yeah, if I had one of your systems in my house, it would very likely sound more like your system when recorded and played back there. But how much more? Have you actually done this exercise yourself, and are you satisfied that YouTube recordings of your system played back through your system approach the playback quality of the original source material through your primary digital or analog sources? If so, then that kind of tanks the whole “source first” theory of system building and the entire audiophile recording/phono cartridge/turntable and hires file/high quality streamer/DAC ends of the audio equipment market. 128kps forever, right? The bottom line for me is this, regardless of playback device, YouTube recordings are an unreliable medium to gain deeper or even helpful insights into how a piece of audio equipment or system will sound “live” in a room. Thanks for sharing. It was interesting but not in my mind definitive or something that is meaningfully comparative across gear and systems. It would have been sufficient in my mind for you to say: “hey, listen to this and tell me what you think”. Persisting in challenging others to put YouTube recordings of their systems on line for cross-comparison (or shut up) says a lot, and maybe more than you might have wanted. kn |
...
- 512 posts total