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

@mahgister @kerrybh Here is a perfect example of not understanding the technical underpinnings and principles of what is perceived. When an audiophile uses the the terms “transparency” or the “gets out of the way of the music” to describe a component or a system they have no real measurements or real knowledge if said component or system is altering the signal or not, or to what degree is that component or system is imparting its “sonic signature” or transfer-function on the input signal. For a component or a system to be truly transparent it would have to be neutral, in technical terms have a transfer function of H(s) = 1.

What audiophiles really hear when they perceive a component or system as being transparent or “transparency” is actually a boost in the spectral content in a certain frequency range produced by the transfer-function or “sound signature” of said component or system.

I once had an exchange with one of the owners of the WhatsBestForum who actually thoughts there were veils of haze with each added component to a playback chain. In an analog chain the signal gets consumed along the way, that’s why there is a need to amplify the signal at certain stages along the reproduction chain, digital on the other hand maintains its integrity along the way.

The takeaway is that what is perceived as “transparency” does not equate to “neutrality”, it is actually a “color”, in other words and in audiophile terms.

Earth is more an even distortion smoother more natural to the ear ,

that’s why vacuum tubes are liked in the mix , even vinyl has its warmth and texture 

which has far more distortion then SS DIGITAL, WHERE GOOD DIGITAL IS FINALLY VERY GOOD IF YOU INVEST FROM THE ROUTER Power  SUPPLY, 

ETHERNET HUB, AND CABLES , THIS TOO APPLIES TO VINYL 

COOLNESS OR NEUTRAL IS NOT MUSICAL, EVEN IN RECORDINGS A VACUUM TUBE AMPLIFIER OR MIXER IS MUCH MORE PREFERRED.! 

@carlos269 while we are fortunate to have you to tell us what we hear, you clearly misunderstood my words. Carry on

@kerrybh don’t be dismissive, please explain how I misunderstood your words. I made my explanation of “transparency” universally applicable and was not directing only to you. My comment was in response to to your comment but not to you individually.

The takeaway is that what is perceived as “transparency” does not equate to “neutrality”, it is actually a “color”, in other words and in audiophile terms.

I think we are on the same opinion here about the acoustic  link between color and transparency as twin concept seen from different perspective ...

If you  have read my post discussion with A.I. :

Transparency and color are vocabulary inherited from gear pieces design & marketing impression of customers reviewers, and designers, they are not opposite at all , they are labels  subjectively put on a continuum created from an idealized "reproduction" idea which are deceptive to some extent if we instead try to understand the acoustical translation from the live recorded event to the playback room ......