How true, one man's detail is another'sOne man's accurate system may be another's bright and shrill.
ear-bleeder. That's our hobby, extremely personal.
Last edited:
How true, one man's detail is another'sOne man's accurate system may be another's bright and shrill.
Bright IS a coloration, a very severe one, so don't tell me about 'zero coloration' or 'accuracy'. Live music rarely sounds bright, and if it does, in a bright acoustic, it is a different kind of brightness than on a 'bright' stereo system.
Warm and fuzzy is a coloration too, at least the warm and fuzzy from some systems that has no resemblance with live sound either.
Modern dry bass or vintage round bass, what I find a little scary, half of our beloved treasures were mixed on Yamaha NS-10's.
Audio has more BS, and nonsense, than any hobby that I know of!
I know what you're trying to say, but it's not accurate if it's bright. Accurate may seem bright to those who are used to warm, but accurate is accurate. I could leave you with the impression that my system is bright or warm, simply by the choice of recordings I play. If you can't do that with a system, it's probably colored.
Tim
Bright IS a coloration, a very severe one, so don't tell me about 'zero coloration' or 'accuracy'. Live music rarely sounds bright, and if it does, in a bright acoustic, it is a different kind of brightness than on a 'bright' stereo system.
Warm and fuzzy is a coloration too, at least the warm and fuzzy from some systems that has no resemblance with live sound either.
One man's accurate system may be another's bright and shrill.
I hear the same thing not only at shows but at dealers as well. I got off the merry ground in the late 90's, other than upgrading my digital. The system sounds great and I never come home and listen and wish I had anything else. I have heard some reviewer systems that quite frankly sucked. I don't know where the hobby ran off the rails, but count me as one who thinks we have. It makes me wonder who has recently heard live acoustic music recently. One of the reasons I attend quite a few classical performances in small venues such as St. Martins in the Fields. Gives me a better grasp on what a system sound sound like.
Exaggerated high frequencies and etch = "details"
Biting unnatural attacks = "fast transient response"
Unnaturally dry bass = "taut" and “tight”
This is what I hear at audio shows over the last several years!
Have "new" audiophiles lost their way, in relation to what "natural sound" of "non-amplified acoustic" music sounds like?
This "type" of sound is increasingly selling as current "State of Art".
Audio has more BS, and nonsense, than any hobby that I know of!
And as "Crazy" becomes acceptable, it drives more "Crazy".
I have been in this hobby since the 70's and heard it all.
Maybe those that kept their older systems, and got off the "marry-go-round", of latest and most expensive is best, are the most intelligent!
....
Orb, parts choices can color the sound warm, it's really easy to do if that's your goal. Components that do this usually sacrifice detail though. Cables too... I can make a cable sound however you want.
Gary, even being an older guy, 56, I can still hear to 17kHz. Perhaps that is why so many of the new expensive speakers drive me nuts being way too bright. Some of the speakers issues I have heard can probably be related to the amps used too. I heard the Anats mentioned by Peter and the sound changed with a change in the amp. The less powerful, the worse the sound. Tubes sounded shall I say less than stellar on those speakers.
Been using ear protection my entire life.
Anyway my post was in response to how some suggest accuracy is one specific variable and warm-lean-bright-etc (even though the scale of this has not been touched upon) are anomalies, when it is much more complex due to the artificial nature of producing "fake" stereo sound exacerbated by speakers that are definitely not accurate or neutral
(this also applies to headphones that are far from accurate-neutral themselves)
I appreciate there is much equipment that does not measure so, but my context is for those that do measure well on variables that are traditionally used for sound quality by forum objectivists, that then apply a specific and absolute definition on accuracy and neutrality.
I wonder if I am just reiterating one side of a debate that has happened many times on here *shrug*.
the internet and social media have made millions of experts and billions of opinions, sadly the overwhelming majority of these are worthless except to the one expressing it. I am fine with this however I am not fine with the hostility expressed.I guess that you have not been to a modern art gallery or wine tasting lately.
the internet and social media have made millions of experts and billions of opinions, sadly the overwhelming majority of these are worthless except to the one expressing it. I am fine with this however I am not fine with the hostility expressed.
Music and the reproduction of it is what I have always enjoyed and like most other things in our world the internet and social media has done nothing IMHO to improve any of them.
Listen to some live music and then go listen to a system, make your choice for your home, tastes and budget.
Accuracy is based upon variables relating to frequency and time domain. distortion,etc.Maybe I'm not following you, Orb. Accuracy is an objective, not a variable, and are you saying that because speakers are not neutral, you should try to choose electronics thats inaccuracies cancel the inaccuracies of your transducers? Why not just start with neutral electronics and pick speakers you like the sound of? That would be much easier. Of course it would also involve a lot less buying/selling/trading and tweaking which is, in itself, a hobby. Maybe that's the point?
Unfortunately I was talking beyond basic consumer headphones and in fact the issues relate to all headphones including in-ear.Consumer headphones, even very expensive ones, are deliberately colored, because there is no room gain and neutral phones sound unnatural to humans. Doesnt mean it can't be done. I have a pair of relatively inexpensive Etymotics that are very close to flat; neutral is a whole lot easier to achieve in headphones than it is in rooms.
Apart from the music by the time it reaches consumer audio products is not the same as being at the real event for some of the reasons I have touched upon (goes way beyond those).How can there not be a specific definition of accuracy or neutrality? It is an output, on the other side of the component being evaluated, that matches the input, and yes, it must be measured. That doesn't mean it can't be heard.
As I keep saying listen to the MBL C31 and tell me why it is not neutral when it measures extremely well even though it does sound rich-warm in various systems and by various reviewers and those who audition it.I'll say this again, because it bears repeating: Give me a neutral system (and I understand that's a goal that hasn't been achieved in the absolute...) and I can make it sound warm or bright with the choice of material. Neutral = accurate reproduction of the recordings. Some are great. Some are pretty awful. But accurate is natural. Accurate is life-like (given that you're listening to a recording at that moment in your life). And accurate, when the recording is exemplary, is the most musical possible presentation, in the real sense of that word.
Tim
I wouldn't fly anywhere without my Bose Noise cancelling headphones. Have been using them for years. Makes a huge difference, especially on international flights.
Interesting, I find international flights to be much more comfortable and much more quieter than domestic flights.