If Warmth Is a Distortion, Why Do So Many Audiophiles Still Defend It?

I sat in front of a string quartet quite recently. It sounded warm.....

Scram back under the rock with the [warmth = distortion] gibberish.

Over time, a few things have stood out to me:

• Warmth is pleasant, but it’s still coloration.
Beautiful, yes — but not accuracy, not transparency, and not always the artist’s intention.

• Warm gear enhances some tracks but softens accuracy in others.
Especially vocals, piano, violin, guitar, and other acoustic instruments. Some people hear this, some don’t, and some just prefer it that way.

• Modern Class D deserves more respect than it gets.
Many older audiophiles dismiss it based on outdated assumptions. But the latest designs are already extremely neutral, fast, and precise. I’m not sure how much longer Class A/AB will remain relevant beyond nostalgia and brand loyalty.

• Price reflects real quality only up to a point.
Beyond that, it becomes about branding, house sound, and personal bias. Preference is fine — but preference isn’t the same as absolute fidelity.

But you didn’t acknowledge my other statement that a passive attenuator will be more transparent AND cooler than an active preamp in tonality.  

@viber6 Actually I did and I can add more: when you use a passive volume control, if there is a coupling capacitor at the output of the source, you might introduce a timing constant. That might not roll of bass at audio frequencies, but might introduce a phase shift which the ear interprets as a loss of impact. In so doing, that will tilt the perception to the highs, thus producing your ’thin’ sound. 

’Thin’ is a coloration and therefor is not neutral. 

The introduction of a control in this fashion can also result in a loss of transparency. It is actually possible for a thing to be too simple and this is an example. 

Odd question. Some people prefer the sound of distortion. That’s why so many people listen to vinyl. Why does that matter? 

FWIW Dept.:

I used to run an LP mastering operation. One thing I found out doing that is the LP itself is much lower distortion than most people realize. The distortion comes in during playback, not the mastering process. The typical LP cutter head might have 30dB of feedback wrapped around it and the mastering amplifiers, which have their own feedback as well. The result of all that feedback is very low distortion. Most of ’the distortion of the LP’ is really just poor tonearm setup, poor tonearm design, tracking angle errors, skating force errors and issues with the phono section.  

 Dave Belles in the early amps I used had only single ended RCA connectors.  He thought that balanced connections require double the amount of circuitry which would result in loss of detail.  

If he really thought that he was simply wrong. You don’t need double the circuitry for a balanced line setup. Our preamps have been fully balanced and differential since their inception in 1989. There isn’t twice the circuity. For example, in our phono stage there are only two gain stages, despite the phono section being able to work with LOMC and having passive EQ. Most single ended phono sections that might do that would have 3 gain stages unless an SUT is employed (which have their own complexities). 

@atmasphere,

Thanks for your interesting comment that loss of bass impact from the passive volume control can thin out the sound and tilt the balance to HF.  Actually, I've never used a passive volume control in my own system.  I went to a home dealer who used the Music First passive transformer volume control in his system.  He then disconnected the Music First and ran the source directly into the power amp with the appropriate CD track to get a comfortable volume level.  I couldn't hear any difference with the Music First back in.  This same comparison test with any line stage showed obvious veiling added by the line stage.  And yes, the veiling added warmth.  So that experiment showed that any added electronic stage colors the sound with added veiling.  My own experiment at home without the line stage showed the same thing, as I previously described.  It wasn't that I heard less bass which created more prominent HF.  No, without the added stage, there is improvement in everything--tighter bass, midrange, HF.  Put another way, less distortion, less electronic fuzzy warmth.  Much more reminiscent of real life--the woman in the well fitted dress rather than body features hidden under an oversized winter coat, the cool snap of the golf club instead of the softness heard in a video system. 

@deep_333,

I agree with all of your statements in the box.  To be clear, I know that there is natural warmth from the tonal structure of larger instruments such as piano, pipe organ, tuba, cello, string bass.  Certain singers do have warm, rich voices, but most other singers heard live have somewhat raucous voices as though they almost have a cold. I enjoy the natural warmth from those instruments and the gifted singers with rich voices.   As a beginning violinist 60 years ago, my violin sound was scratchy and distorted.  Nowadays I have acquired skills to produce a warmer, sweet sound when I want that.  But my improved skills have also enabled me to get a more precise attack and sharper sound for certain types of music. 

But most of this thread has been a discussion of electronic warmth from audio systems.  I hate all of that.  This type of warmth is NOT the warmth of natural instruments.  It can be described as electronic warming of the naturally warm tonalities from overlay of electronic fuzz and hash.  The biggest contributor is dynamic speakers which add colorations and distort the natural harmonics of the music being played.  Electrostatics and ribbons are more neutral and impose fewer colorations.  Audio system warmth is NOT accuracy aka high fidelity.  That electronic warming reduces the detail of the warm natural sound.  The string quartet you heard certainly has warmth for certain pieces like gentle classical.  But Shostakovich and Bartok are harsher, and there the sound would not be warm.  Those pieces are gritty and hard sounding.  A confusing factor is the wooden stage floor and walls, carpeting in the hall, all of which soften and warm the sound.  I have been in Boston Symphony Hall close to the stage, which is not as warm as Carnegie Hall.  Boston has no carpet on the floor or plush seats.  Carnegie is the opposite.  

There is no "HiFI" system that is not coloured in some way. The misnomer of sounding as the arist intended is unobtanium. Nobody, not even most artists have a handle on how a recording should sound. We are humans and have both a limitation and a personal reaction to what we hear. Microphones have never been better, yet  they have very real limitations physically and electronically. There is no perfect recording because that suggests everything was captured and can be reproduced exactly as it was played, it cannot. Often, musicians and other contributors were not even in the same country, let alone the same room and yet they could be mastering the recordings for various formats. DSD 512 raw files can sound unlistenable for humans, as our auditory and processing is fatigued very quickly by them, which is why such a DSD file cut to vinyl is often more enjoyable but not necessarily "better" than the raw DSD file. I can testify to this as I have bought several recordings in both formats and the human reaction not just to me, but is often quite viceral to fellow listeners in my room.. I liken it to my work as an engineer with Sony, working on 8K and higher projection system’s and screen resolutions for cinema. When you are exposed to the level of detail our test files were producing on screen, it scrambles your senses as you cannot process all the information that is coming at you. It becones fatiguing and almost nauseating to watch. Back to the sound we hear, all recording and playback systems introduce distortion and colouration. I have no doubt that system matching and room acoustics as well as mood and ambience, even time of day can influence what we humans percieve as the most enjoyable playback systems. I have a mix of vacuum tubes and digital electronics and I am accustomed to how my system sounds. I couldn’t care less what others may think of my system, although it is nice when a visitor feels its touched something in them because I won’t pretend it doesn’t give me a "warm" sense of satisfaction and a little validation but to me it sounds wonderful with most recorded music. And even better when in the evening with the log burner and the valves (vaccuum tubes to my American friends) glowing in harmony. That’s when it sounds best of all. Warm - cold - Analytical - transparent - ad nauseam, to me its all "wine club tasting word acrobatics". Listen to some familiar favourites across  genres if possible on a few combinations of equippment, and what your ears and heart tell you. Spend as much as you can afford, pay attention to system matching, speaker placement and your rooms liveliness, you don’t need huge ugly room treatments; soft furnishings rugs and curtains will do a great job of calming a live room and in my circumstances keep accumulating brownie points with the better half. Remember, all recorded music is simply a facsimile and never a perfect reproduction and like it or not the same is true of the reproduction equippment. Now, I think I need me a  10.5" Reel to Reel. Listen to Pink Floyd - Money, it is educational 😉