Striking a balance between musicality and resolution

@kennyc The only one of my systems that I have shared audio recordings of that utilizes some of my specialized mastering equipment is my WAAR reference systems. My OKTAN6, Pinnacle, and Test Bed systems only use standard consumer audio components, typical to high-end and DIY Audio type systems.

After implementing the real-time transfer function adjustment system on my WAAR reference systems, I set out to develop, design, and implement other methods to adjusts resultant sound on these three other systems.

This matches what I’ve perceived at my main listening position in my room regarding spatial cues and timbre. At the 1-minute mark, I turn the iPhone vertically, and you can immediately hear the soundstage width shrink—very similar to what you recorded in your space. That happens because the two microphones are no longer spaced horizontally, which clearly demonstrates how microphone placement plays a crucial role in recording quality.

The way it goes (use headphone) 

The second recording also aligns with what I’ve perceived at my MLP in terms of timbre and soundstage width and height. However, the depth was significantly reduced. To capture that level of depth, you would need a figure-8 bidirectional microphone such as the Schoeps MK 8 (around $1k) used by Alpha Audio.

Zulu Voodoo (use headphone)

The third recording is for you to compare my setup with the second track (at the 3:00 mark) in Alpha Audio sample tests, where they place microphones very close to speakers to ahieve the highest possible fidelity to the original recording.

Tennis Court (again, use headphone)

@lanx0003  thanks for sharing the audio recordings and analysis. I completely agree the microphone placement will change the captured sound. Spaced microphones are subject to comb effect. My recommendation for the best and easiest way to capture the sound of a system is always the X-Y or M-S microphone arrangements. There are very inexpensive external microphones that can be used to the iPhones.from a “tool” perspective the key thing is to be consistent with the way one captures our own system’s audio recordings.

What I found most interesting about your post was “This matches what I’ve perceived at my main listening position in my room regarding spatial cues and timbre.” that’s quite an achievement. Again, thank you for sharing your audio recordings and analysis as this will give those participating or reading this thread something new to think about.

Why do you request headphones for playback? Since the audio recordings were made from the listening chair position, our own unique and individual Head Related Transfer Function (HRTF) is very important for our assessment and it will not factor in if headphones are used.

@carlos269  Why do you request headphones for playback? 

It’s about playback quality. Most music streaming apps (except on TVs) don’t support YouTube, so most people—including myself—end up listening to YouTube content on a PC or laptop, where the small built-in speakers aren’t capable of producing good sound quality, especially in the bass. Even if you cast YouTube music to your audio system, you’ll find that all of the recordings presented here, including mine, sound poor overall (tiny glitches become much more noticeable). Using headphones is the best compromise I’ve found, and many YouTubers recommend the same.

The recordings from Alpha Audio are exceptions. The over $3k microphones and audio interface (AI) they have used for recordings are of very good quality.  When I cast their YouTube content to my system, the sound quality still isn’t close to the original, but it’s much more acceptable than what are produced by cell phones, video camera, etc.

With that said, although I don’t have the disposable income to invest in expensive microphones or audio interfaces, I believe there are affordable alternatives that can reproduce about 90% of the quality. I’ll keep exploring those options until good YouTube content can be produced. I encourage you to do the same. As I said before, this is a well-intended and long-overdue effort that’s worth pursuing so everyone can share their systems on the same platform. You and several others are doing the right things, and I fully support it. However, I can’t stress this enough: the quality of the recordings needs to be acceptable.

In my experience, there are components that simultaneously improve detail, resolution, and musicality - in the sense that the sound is more natural.  In a great recording you hear the totality of the performance (e.g. the Levine Vienna Phil Mahler 2 live recording).

I have perhaps been fortunate in that my analog and digital journeys over the last 10 years have exemplified this.

I used an Esoteric X-03SE SACD player from 2008 for about 10 years and then found a used (actually NOS) K-01XS at a good price.  A definite improvement in the resolution of small details and a more natural feeling.  That was then replaced by a K-01XDSE giving an increase in dynamics, musicality and air & space.

Similarly, in the analog chain,  I had the Koetsu Black and a tube phono stage.  I switched to the Sutherland Duo phono stage and the resolution and noise floor were much improved without losing the essential sound of the Black.  I replaced the Black with the Rosewood Signature Platinum; the mid-range became more luscious and enveloping.  Reviews have suggested that the RSP was less resolving of detail than the Black but I did not hear that, maybe because I added a headshell weight when installing the RSP.  The breakthrough then was the replacement of the Duo with a Dos Locos.  The impression of "being there" was dramatically different, in choral work the singers blended - or you could hear the individuals.  The space in which the recording had been made was brought out, at the same time the timbres of voices and instruments became more real.

That said, I am still pursuing the end game in a power amp.  I switch between solid state (XA25) and tubes (SE Elekit TU-8900 with 2A3 or 300B tubes, or a pp 300B home brew) and in all cases I hear certain aspects of recordings that I think are brought out, though in each configuration, with good recordings, I am enthralled by the performance.

The above might give the impression that I am listening to the SQ and the music is a vehicle to appreciate the SQ but (I hope) it is the SQ that allows me to fully appreciate the performance.