Words are useful only to the extent they help us distinguish certain things from other things. In this hobby, which generally is subjective listening oriented and thus usually not quantitative or scientific oriented, we typically use words, and not numbers, to express our subjective views about, our impressions about and our evaluations of, the sonic characteristics of audio components and of high-end systems. We describe, among many other characteristics, the magnitude of improvement or degradation in one or more aspects of sound quality; our estimates of frequency ranges and sonic characteristics within each frequency range; spectrums of macrodynamics, microdynamics, brightness, timbre and speed; perceptions of relative amounts of detail; linearity or lumpiness of perceived frequency response; etc.
If someone has an elaborate, very expensive, state-of-the-art type of system which he has been optimizing, tweaking and perfecting for years, and he changes the input tubes in his pre-amp, I am sure there will be differences in sound qualities between the old tubes and the new tubes which at least some of us will be able to hear. But does that change in input tubes cause a major improvement in sound quality, a small improvement in sound quality or a tiny improvement in sound quality? Is that improvement in sound quality actually a net improvement on an aggregated basis, or has the listener improved one sonic attribute to the detriment of one or more other sonic attributes? Is an improvement in one aspect of sound quality (e.g., “less analytical”) offset, or more than offset, by losses in other aspects of sound quality (e.g., less dynamic and lower “jump factor” and, therefore, less “live” sounding)?
If a member with a revealing, dynamic, full-range and linear frequency response system tapes a two foot square piece of sound absorbing material above each of his speakers in a large, dedicated listening room, is it truly accurate to report a “significant” increase in soundstaging or a “dramatic” reduction in instrumental smearing? What is the starting point intending to be referenced? Did you explain to us that starting point in your post? Are you articulating accurately and authentically the magnitude of the difference you believe you hear, and not merely gleefully reporting your understandable and justifiable excitement about having made a very small, marginal improvement to an already stunningly believable system?
Does replacing the Stillpoint Ultra SSs with Stillpoint Ultra 5s underneath your speakers really make your speakers sound like “new” or “different” speakers? Are you trying to describe a significant increase in some sonic attribute or an incremental increase in that sonic attribute? Are they truly a “major upgrade”? How are you defining “major”? Is your description carefully thought-through, evaluated and as accurate as you can articulate? Are you sure that “like new” truly is what you mean? Is the difference really that significant? Did going back to the Ultra SSs really cause your soundstage to “collapse”?
I hereby respectfully request greater introspection about how each of us describes the differences each of us hears, and about the magnitude of the differences each of us hears. This is a plea to each of my fellow WBF members to think carefully about how you think about and evaluate and describe the changes you believe you hear and the magnitude of the changes you believe you hear.
By being careful about hyperbole and unintended exaggeration, and by thinking long and hard about the sonic difference you are evaluating and the magnitude of the sonic difference you are evaluating, and the relative importance of the change in question versus the “before” sound of your system overall, you are helping each of us to better understand what you are attempting to describe, and you are explaining more convincingly the changes you made to the sound quality of your system.
Disclaimer: The examples used herein do not refer to any particular member or any particular posting. Any similarities to any member or posting are purely coincidental and unintended.