Doctor's Orders-Part Two-The New Listening Room Of Steve Williams

[the sound of Tao]

Yes we can do that Tim and you do a lot to show how it can be done... but I believe we need to encourage people to communicate in the best way they can. I’m not sure about the salon posing. We are each different.

One of my students is high functioning autistic spectrum. In a design presentation I traditionally try and give students a clarity and structure. It didn’t work for him. When I adapted and instead just listened and tried to understand his process and his language it was remarkably rich and involved and complex but deeply valuable.

We can’t just mould everyone to our ways, we risk losing original thinking when we make the boundaries of communication rigid.

 

[highstream]

What I got from this discussion is that Steve found affinity for the KR RK and used it as a reference point. That allows me to make a good estimate of what he likes in sound and thus to what (little) degree the Philco tube would work with my tastes. Mission accomplished, thanks.

 

[the sound of Tao]

Posing in the salon is preening with one's own vocabulary while expecting others to understand you. Yes, (up to a point) we are indeed each dfferent. That is why a shared vocabulary or at least shared connotations are important. Language is rich, fluid and variable - no one needs to be 'boxed-in'. Many can enjoy an infrequently used word, well-turned phrase, or clever analogy but the feedback loop is whether communication actually occurs. A shared vocabulary is a touchpoint for mutual engagement in a media otherwise abstracted and removed from in-person conversation.

I agree that where we can have shared language that is great, but sometimes we need to interpret as well, we are engaged in synthesis also.

I’m also unsure about the notion that this is caught up in ego and preening... some people just have a different perceptual mindset and it simply isn’t at all hubris, it is a difference in perception and even sense of reality.

I would go back to our need to let go sometimes, to not grasp it all, some like communication a certain way but some things can go unsaid or not understood, this isn’t the same in its value for all. Not everyone is always searching for the same thing.

 

[PeterA]

For me, perhaps only for me, moving away from the audiophile glossary of terms to a more simply understanding of my goals and how my system is evolving, a sense of clarity came when I began to understand the term "natural" and how it relates to what I hear with live music and what I hope to increasingly hear from my system. It is about a holistic approach rather than about bits and pieces. ddk often writes that music is not "bits and pieces". This was an "a-ha" moment for me. Breaking down my sound lead to a no longer relevant or important direction for me.

 

[Steve Williams]

From another angle: Are we in the salon posing or in the forum attempting to communicate? <smile>

Describing sound is difficult. Many audiophiles enjoy talking about it. If we don't work at or toward some shared vocabulary then more time is spent talking about meta-issues of language and less time talking about the subject at hand.

My definition is pretty simple Tim. Any one can understand it. My objective when changing or adding something to my system ts that "nothing " stands out. Rather that there is a top to bottom overall improvement. If something stands out that never did before, that's not natural but rather colored

 

[Steve Williams]

For me, perhaps only for me, moving away from the audiophile glossary of terms to a more simply understanding of my goals and how my system is evolving, a sense of clarity came when I began to understand the term "natural" and how it relates to what I hear with live music and what I hope to increasingly hear from my system. It is about a holistic approach rather than about bits and pieces. ddk often writes that music is not "bits and pieces". This was an "a-ha" moment for me. Breaking down my sound lead to a no longer relevant or important direction for me.

I totally agree Peter. Chasing the sound in that manner has completely changed my direction in music. This talk about "natural"all started when I changed a rectifier tube on my DAC that for my ears created a far more natural sound than the RK-KR 5g4u which when I mentioned it seemed to light up the ears of all of you naysayers. I defined my feelings about "natural" here many times only to have the same people clamoring for a definition of natural which I have stated here countless times in this thread,. So please, if you have nothing to add, other than getting your knickers in a wad please start a thread somewhere else. This is my system blog. Read my definition as well as that of Peter and anyone for that matter who has had a chance to spend some time with ddk. Your preconceived notions might just change. But please, stop this argument on my system thread about natural. If you think it to be something else, that's your prerogative. Just don't do it here. I was talking about the change I heard in. a rectifier tube. No one seemed to care other than the Lampi users who knew what I meant. FWIW ddk has named his rack "The Nothing" as nothing is added and nothing is removed

Enough said.

 

[Steve Williams]

I totally agree Peter. Chasing the sound in that manner has completely changed my direction in music. This talk about "natural"all started when I changed a rectifier tube on my DAC that for my ears created a far more natural sound than the RK-KR 5g4u which when I mentioned it seemed to light up the ears of all of you naysayers. I defined my feelings about "natural" here many times only to have the same people clamoring for a definition of natural which I have stated here countless times in this thread,. So please, if you have nothing to add, other than getting your knickers in a wad please start a thread somewhere else. This is my system blog. Read my definition as well as that of Peter and anyone for that matter who has had a chance to spend some time with ddk. Your preconceived notions might just change. But please, stop this argument on my system thread about natural. If you think it to be something else, that's your prerogative. Just don't do it here. I was talking about the change I heard in. a rectifier tube. No one seemed to care other than the Lampi users who knew what I meant. FWIW ddk has named his rack "The Nothing" as nothing is added and nothing is removed

Enough said.

as a final comment, my entire system is tubes. FWIW I have said countlessly here that I am not a tube roller as I find a sound that for my ears is the most natural sounding. This tube was made in 1946 by Philco and I was stunned how much better and more natural sounding my system became. It was not my goal to rehash the meaning of "natural" for all of you who think of music as bits and pieces hobbled together. As Peter so eloquently stated, one's goals change when they try to break down the sound. You can have it any way you want. For me, and as ddk states, "above all else it must sound natural". I spent a week with him 4-5 years ago as I realized that everything he stated made sense to me and that is the end of "natural" here on my system blog. Please go argue somewhere else

 

[Steve Williams]

What I got from this discussion is that Steve found affinity for the KR RK and used it as a reference point. That allows me to make a good estimate of what he likes in sound and thus to what (little) degree the Philco tube would work with my tastes. Mission accomplished, thanks.

I seriously think you have over read. You don't know me from Adam nor do you have any clue what I like so for you to state such inference IMHO is nothing more than conjecture.

 

[Steve Williams]

Marc

you can discuss whatever you want. I just don't want my system blog polluted with arguments. Of course you were the first to reply yesterday as to how natural your system sounded

The notion of natural I suppose can mean many things to different people. I know what it means to me and if any of you have followed my system blog over the years, the concept of natural has been discussed here ad nauseam so if I react the way I do, it's because everyone is once again taking up yet again what I mean by natural. This is my system blog.

I suggest starting a thread on your own and discuss what it means to you. I have given my definition here countlessly so yes it irks me to read arguing in my system blog about something that has been asked and answered. But thanks for your comments Marc

 

[highstream]

I seriously think you have over read. You don't know me from Adam nor do you have any clue what I like so for you to state such inference IMHO is nothing more than conjecture.

I haven’t known all the others from Adam who have responded to my question about where on the tonal continuum a piece of gear or system falls either. What I do know without fail over the years is the sonic result, directly or via others, of those who have responded the way you did, not directly to the terms of question — so much for common language — but talking about natural. Since in this case I have experience with the comparison piece, the RK, and pay attention to what’s not said as well as what is, I was a step ahead. Short of being able to listen to your fine system, that’s what I have to work with. It’s always satisfying when a single tweak has an impact on the sound that one has been yearning for. Yet, what the Philco tube did in your system is for your ears and your tastes, not mine. I aim to be protective of the latter, along with the time and money involved, although like the rest of us, especially those of us dealing with tubes, I’m not batting anywhere near 1000 (as evidenced by the 20 or so tubes currently on the floor in front of my system’s cabinet). Thanks,

Gene

P.S. My primary goal is to be listening to the music, to be drawn unconsciously and thus emotionally into it, not to be focused on the (audiophile) sound. After all, it’s for my entertainment, not to meet a set of goals defined by others. And we’re talking here about reproduction, very many intentional and unintentional changes away from the original performance, even if the latter was singular, vs. a compilation which is so often the case.

 

[Steve Williams]

so you have heard the Philco tube?? BTW I have no concerns about your differing opinions as one man's fancy is another man's poison. I respect that.

 

[Steve Williams]

Pass on the dedicated thread. But thanks for your suggestion Steve.

If you do a search of all the threads on WBF you will find countless comments and arguments as to what it means to different people. That's OK with me BUT for me and my ears and my goals I have proffered my definition here many times so to see arguing about it in my system blog where it has been asked and answered is IMO just not necessary. Starting your own thread about it is what most people do

 

[ALF]

I haven’t known all the others from Adam who have responded to my question about where on the tonal continuum a piece of gear or system falls either. What I do know without fail over the years, is the sonic result, directly or via others, of those who have responded the way you did, not directly to the terms of question — so much for common language — but talking about natural. Since in this case I have experience with the comparison piece, the RK, and pay attention to what’s not said as well as what is, I was a step ahead. Short of being able to listen to your fine system, that’s what I have to work with. It’s always satisfying when a single tweak has an impact on the sound that one has been yearning for. Yet, what the Philco tube did in your system is for your ears and your tastes, not mine. I aim to be protective of the latter, along with the time and money involved, although like the rest of us, especially those of us dealing with tubes, I’m not batting anywhere near 1000 (as evidenced by the 20 or so tubes currently on the floor in front of my system’s cabinet). Thanks,

Gene

Nicely said Gene...

Adam, BTW, is the nicer of the twin brothers...

vbw,
a

 

[Steve Williams]

P.S. My primary goal is to be listening to the music, to be drawn unconsciously and thus emotionally into it, not to be focused on the (audiophile) sound. After all, it’s for my entertainment, not to meet a set of goals defined by others. And we’re talking here about reproduction, very many intentional and unintentional changes away from the original performance, even if the latter was singular, vs. a compilation which is so often the case.

On this we totally agree. That is precisely how I listen. I don't want to be focused on the audiophile sound but to be drawn in and sit uninterrupted listening to the music. If there is something that stands out, to me it is distracting and not natural. I guess we do agree. Like you I am very protective of my sound. I rarely add or change anything in my system and as far as tube rolling I am not a proponent. There are only now 2 tubes in my entire system thatI have changed out.....my amps 12AX7 was changed for a Telefunken NOS ECC803S and most recently the rectifier on my DAC. My point has always been that all too often changes are made to a system that causes some good changes but accentuates or negates others. This then results in the user now looking for another piece of equipment to nullify or modify what was missing or found to be too much with the previous addition and before you know it you are down the rabbit hole. At this point you have a choice of emerging from the hole or to continue to dive deeper.

 

[highstream]

On this we totally agree. That is precisely how I listen. I don't want to be focused on the audiophile sound but to be drawn in and sit uninterrupted listening to the music. If there is something that stands out, to me it is distracting and not natural. I guess we do agree. Like you I am very protective of my sound. I rarely add or change anything in my system and as far as tube rolling I am not a proponent. There are only now 2 tubes in my entire system thatI have changed out.....my amps 12AX7 was changed for a Telefunken NOS ECC803S and most recently the rectifier on my DAC. My point has always been that all too often changes are made to a system that causes some good changes but accentuates or negates others. This then results in the user now looking for another piece of equipment to nullify or modify what was missing or found to be too much with the previous addition and before you know it you are down the rabbit hole. At this point you have a choice of emerging from the hole or to continue to dive deeper.

I grew up in So Cal and lived there again in the 1990s, but am off in the Northern Rockies now. Otherwise, I’d message you privately to ask to come for a listen.

 

[Steve Williams]

I grew up in So Cal and lived there again in the 1990s, but am off in the Northern Rockies now. Otherwise, I’d message you privately to ask to come for a listen.

you live in one of my favorite states

 

[ddk]

My listening chair is really comfortable! It's what I care about most in a listening chair nothing else matters in the end, do we all have to find the same chair comfortable to understand what comfortable means? Will everyone fully agree or comprehend what a comfortable chair is without ever sitting in one? "Natural" sound is a similarly common term but also requires some experience before fully comprehending it, explaining bits and pieces of the sound won't bring much clarity IMO if you don't understand it or haven't experienced it, specially if one is still thinking in terms of bits and pieces instead of a total concept. Absolute Sound was seemingly a clear concept and ideal, after decades of in depth descriptive supposedly informative system reviews ever hear anyone describe their sound as "Absolute"?

david

 

[tima]

My definition is pretty simple Tim. Any one can understand it.

Sure, Steve - as I quoted you stating it in #2803.

 

[highstream]

Absolute, natural, whatever you want to call it, we’re still listening to reproductions with a lot of hands, mechanisms, pieces of equipment and room effects reshaping them before it ever gets to our favorite listening position, let alone the inside of each of our individual heads. So what is it you want to agree on?

 

[Steve Williams]

Gentlemen

I am going to draw the line here once and for all.

This is my system blog and I am tired of all off the OT posts

This is a quote from a member's PM to me who feels the same as I........

"my system thread is a personal record of progress and changes I have made over the years to my system. We share our impressions, changes, and answer questions on these threads. The last thing I want is for people to come on, change the subject, argue with each other, or simply post noise. I can't stand that. These threads get long and going back to find important posts through the many useless posts is sometimes quite difficult. I respect you putting down your foot and asking people to stay on topic".

I have deleted all OT posts. I ask all of you to have respect when posting in a member's system blog and arguing as OT for me has to stop