2. misc-audio
  3. 1257469878

How do you judge your system's neutrality?


Here’s an answer I’ve been kicking around: Your system is becoming more neutral whenever you change a system element (component, cable, room treatment, etc.) and you get the following results:

(1) Individual pieces of music sound more unique.
(2) Your music collection sounds more diverse.

This theory occurred to me one day when I changed amps and noticed that the timbres of instruments were suddenly more distinct from one another. With the old amp, all instruments seemed to have a common harmonic element (the signature of the amp?!). With the new amp, individual instrument timbres sounded more unique and the range of instrument timbres sounded more diverse. I went on to notice that whole songs (and even whole albums) sounded more unique, and that my music collection, taken as a whole, sounded more diverse.

That led me to the following idea: If, after changing a system element, (1) individual pieces of music sound more unique, and (2) your music collection sounds more diverse, then your system is contributing less of its own signature to the music. And less signature means more neutral.

Thoughts?

P.S. This is only a way of judging the relative neutrality of a system. Judging the absolute neutrality of a system is a philosophical question for another day.

P.P.S. I don’t believe a system’s signature can be reduced to zero. But it doesn’t follow from that that differences in neutrality do not exist.

P.P.P.S. I’m not suggesting that neutrality is the most important goal in building an audio system, but in my experience, the changes that have resulted in greater neutrality (using the standard above) have also been the changes that resulted in more musical enjoyment.
bryoncunningham
ebm
9,311 posts
 
Wow that keeps me up all night.
tbg
5,263 posts
 
Lohanimal ,Your niece says, "The MC's were picking up and amplifying background ambiance. It may well explain our love of MC's that may well deliver that 'hyper-fidelity'." How do MCs amplify? Should ambiance not be reproduced? Also many MCs recommend rolling off the top end.

I find that most high end cabling has little high end extension. So cable manufacturers are pursuing making the sound less like the recording studio and more like row N or O rather than closer.

I have a pair of Murata supertweeters that have little or no response below 15k Hz. But is demonstration the audience requested that they be put back in to enjoy the music. There is a good deal of research suggesting that human can "hear" somehow well above 20k Hz,
scvan
99 posts
 
Who knows what hi-fi/ audiophile mean anymore. There are some crazy claims out there.

Ideally speakers would have superflat response curves from 20-20k, electronics would have no distortion and the noise floor would be at -infinity. That would be a perfect "system", however many things fall into play here.

No passive speaker is perfectly flat. No one's hearing is perfect. No electronics are distortion free. Of course a little bit of "issues" hear and there do not take away from enjoyment for most of us necessarily.

I view modern hi-fi to almost the point of being like ice cream, everyone has their preferred flavor, and there is no best flavor. I feel most audiophiles are not going for a perfect replication of the original signal, instead they are going for their preferred flavor. I imagine if a perfect replication were built many people would prefer more colored solutions. It is human nature, we all have preferences and like different flavors.

A good example is the MM vs MC discussion. If you just look at the SNR of those two options, you would see that MC is much worse. I believe the SNR of MC is similar to a 9 bit recording and MM is 11 bit. If you were given an option to buy a digital player than was 9 bit or 11 bit you wouldn't buy either because they stink, but many people are buying TT's and vinyl. Personally I really like the sound of my MC and it maybe because that high noise floor is like a warm blanket, but whatever it is it is not accurate.

Having said that, there still is a nice engineering pursuit that will never be satisfied in making that perfect "system". The engineering is probably already there that is much more accurate than our ears can detect and better than anyone needs but we all like a little different spice in our food.
lohanimal
659 posts
 
TBG - it was not my niece that told me about the background ambiance.
It was reading the Regon Audio website page
http://www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html
you might want to read this first as he develops the point further and better than I have in this thread.
Simply put the bacground ambiance and cues are highlighted and accentuated more than the original mastertape recording. Drawn against the discussion I had with my niece - these little cues and extra ambiance is what I am coining the phrase 'hyper-fi' in the way I explain 3D above.
bifwynne
2,206 posts
 
This thread is too long to re-read, but here's a new addition to the audiophile tool box that will bring one's system closer to "neutrality" (whatever that means): DEQX. Read the various threads on A'gon that speaks to and about DEQX and see why. If interested, look at the DEQX web site too.

IMO and IME, the DEQX PreMATE has squeezed about all there is out of my Paradigm Sig 8 (v3) speakers and achieved a modicum of "neutrality" that was not otherwise possible. Not just because of deficiencies with my speakers, but also because of anomalies caused by room ... an all too often overlooked "component part" of one's system.

Although in the end, one must rely on their ears, FWIW, after correction, my speakers are pretty flat out to 30K HZ and closer to being time coherent. How do I know?? The DEQX set up entailed using a high quality mic which measured my speakers in-room response.

The neighborhood dogs are in doggy heaven.

As Ronald Regan used to say, "trust ... but verify." And that's why I boldly write this post. My system sounds better and measures that what too.

Cheers,

BIF
More to discover