2. cables
  3. 1350463025

How Black is Your Background?

The term "black background" is bandied about quite a bit by cable makers. But has anyone actually ever seen one? Of course, this a visual metaphor because the sound of music is not black, nor is the absence of music black.

If we change the wording, what does that elusive "silent background" actually sound like? The only times I have ever hear a silent background in my system are before the music starts playing and after it stops. Are cable manufacturers and reviewers just pulling our collective legs with a wonderful marketing term -- selling the concept of a "black background"? Or is there more to this than meets the ear?

Here are some of the terms that cable manufacturers and reviewers use to describe the "black background". Can you pick out which term applies to your system? Can anyone explain the differences between these multifarious descriptions of blackness?

“dark background”
“black background”
“blacker background”
“blackest background”
“an almost eerie, black background”
“super-black background”
“liquid black background”
“black hole background”
“exquisitely black background”
“inky black background”
“surprisingly black background”
“absolutely silent and black background”
“velvety black background”
“naturally black background”
“jet-black background”
“totally black background”
“deep black background”
“wonderful dark blackground”
“drop-dead silent background”
“pitch black background”
“quiet black background”
“blacker quieter background”
“blackest background possible”
“blackest background that you have ever heard”
“darkest blackest background”
“very black background”
“darkest and blackest background possible”
“blackest of backgrounds”
“blackest of black background”
“enhanced black background”
“deep dark background”
“impressive dark background”
“ultra black background”
“dead black background”
sabai
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Gbmcleod,
Of course, black refers to the quality of silence but ain't it odd that there are so many ways to describe that silence? Black is black. Silence is silence. You cannot have something that is more silent than silent. The fact that a whole lexicon of superlatives is used to describe that silence makes one wonder about the whole matter of silence -- and how truthful those descriptions are. I used to be in the advertising business. What you read about silence and blackness is ad copy. It has nothing to do with the real thing. There is no such thing as a black background, IMO. It is merely a concept that is used to sell products.
dayglow
1,748 posts
 
Gbmcleod-Great post! Studio or hall acoustics can determine the type of blackness one hears when heard live or in a recording. All concert halls do not sound alike. So why is it difficult(for some) to believe there are different characteristics of blackness?
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Dayglow,
If you check the list in the OP you will get an idea of what I mean by this. "Blackness" is a marketing term for silence but there is no silence -- except when the music is turned off or when the musicians stop playing during a cut. We are being sold a crock with all the talk about blackness. Black is black. You cannot get blacker than black. Silence is silence. You cannot get more silent than silent. What is really at issue are qualities of detail/definition, imaging and sound stage. We are not talking about blackness or silence at all -- except as marketing terms. IMO.
b_limo's avatar
b_limo
2,273 posts
 
Gbmcleod, thanks, that actually makes sense! You taught me something new! Thanks :-)
mlsstl
1,395 posts
 
We've basically got three different reference points going in this discussion: 1) the definition of complete silence; 2) what's going on in the quiet parts of a recording; and 3) the background noise and linearity of the playback system.

For number 1, Sabai is absolutely right - silence is silence and you cannot get any "blacker" than nothing.

For number 2, Gbmcleod is correct in that different concert halls sound different, but that really isn't complete silence, whether it is the rumble of the HVAC system or a nearby subway or the decay time involved at various frequencies. You hope the recording you have has accurately captured that along with the rest of the music. But there are often limits. This is particularly true with analog recordings, since a 60 or 70 dB dynamic range is about the best they can do. (Some people do get all excited to hear chairs creak and mike stands get bumped, but that's not really "music".)

Number 3 is the only one really tied to something a listener can control with his choice and setup of equipment. One aspect of that is background noise, but most modern equipment is very quiet in this regard. The source does require care since turntables can rumble and suffer feedback, tapes hiss and low-level signals can suffer RFI issues. Linearity is also an issue since some components, particularly speakers and their interaction with the amp, can compress or otherwise exhibit non-linear behavior as the volume dynamics scale up and down and change frequencies.

The catch with number 3 is, as with many things in audio, some people may prefer those non-linear colorations and describe them in glowing terms. That's fine -- people like what they like -- but I just wish they could scale back the hyperbole a bit.
More to discover