Live music, Tone and Presence: What most systems get wrong

[microstrip]

Yes I have been planning to. I think the second track on the Mendelssohn CD is great for comparing electronics due to it's complexity. I suggest getting it

Our priorities are quite different. I have a few references for large orchestral music (Shostakovitch, Mahler and Bartok), but my main references are smaller scale music - small orchestra vocal, chamber and ancient music. Jazz for rhythm and fluidity.

I try to add new references from time to time, to avoid being excessively focused always in the same details.

BTW, large orchestral music is much harder to get right with digital than with LP - but when you get it, it is really fabulous - it can develop without ever stopping!

 

[andromedaaudio]

And i think you now have the speakers for it, to produce the swell ./dynamics of an orchestra ??
What do you reckon which is more natural considering producing the heft and weight , Tubes or Solid state ,in my view its high power tubes

Our priorities are quite different. I have a few references for large orchestral music (Shostakovitch, Mahler and Bartok), but my main references are smaller scale music - small orchestra vocal, chamber and ancient music. Jazz for rhythm and fluidity.

I try to add new references from time to time, to avoid being excessively focused always in the same details.

BTW, large orchestral music is much harder to get right with digital than with LP - but when you get it, it is really fabulous - it can develop without ever stopping!

 

[bonzo75]

Our priorities are quite different. I have a few references for large orchestral music (Shostakovitch, Mahler and Bartok), but my main references are smaller scale music - small orchestra vocal, chamber and ancient music. Jazz for rhythm and fluidity.

I try to add new references from time to time, to avoid being excessively focused always in the same details.

BTW, large orchestral music is much harder to get right with digital than with LP - but when you get it, it is really fabulous - it can develop without ever stopping!

I do have the vocal, choral, and chamber, and I used to carry a Jazz Lalo Schifrin Blues in the bassment as well as another Bluenote, but once I lost both and did not bother replacing them. For speakers if I like them on classical I end up playing some rock, and for other stuff after I run my audition I sometimes tell the guy to play something he thinks should make a difference as per his references

 

[microstrip]

(...)
What do you reckon which is more natural considering producing the heft and weight , Tubes or Solid state ,in my view its high power tubes

For some bizarre reason I do not understand completely I have to agree with you - tubes win! But why a good tune preamplifier is also welcome in this task?

 

[bonzo75]

And i think you now have the speakers for it, to produce the swell ./dynamics of an orchestra ??
What do you reckon which is more natural considering producing the heft and weight , Tubes or Solid state ,in my view its high power tubes

In average cases it will be tubes. But you can take SS to higher levels, like Mike L has done by getting a low noise floor achieved through all SS that allows recording and details to flow through giving a high degree of tonal realism and largeness - but in his case you cannot take anything in isolation. If it were an average room, a SS amp might sound plastic and sterile, and tubes might give it more naturalness. Two of the best horns I heard, Yamamura and another DIY, the Yams are driven by SS electronics and the other by SET valves. And if you combine with the ribbon of apogees, you need the high current from class A SS which improves the tone, dynamics, bass, and hence the realism.

Bionors and WE are driven by tubes, Trios by SS (also by tubes). Many large cones are SS.

The thing is, to create a large orchestra, you need speakers AND the room. Otherwise you have to be content with the midrange.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Yes good pre amp is mandatory off course .
Bonzo , SS has its own virtues i understand what you mean , i like both , but in this case i prefer the " bloom /fullness " of tubes, but i ve never listened to mike s set up so hard to tell

 

[LL21]

I know you are not planning to go analog but if you pick up 4 to 5 fro LPs it will help you enjoy a new perspective while listening to other systems, whether in private or at a show

Thanks. When i listen to other systems, I tend to be goal-oriented which is that i wish to learn about systems and setup which I can take home (in some cases literally) to improve our system at home. I have thus not focused on LP...thought i might listen to R2R just to say i've heard it.

 

[Diapason]

To understand believability you need to understand the background of the person. At least, that's what I believe

I'd share that view, and as much as I subscribe to the notion that good systems should play all music well without exception (I really do believe that) I also think my tolerance of deviations from utter perfection would more closely align with yours, Ked, than with exclusively rock listeners, for example. If you review a component using words like believability and timbral accuracy, I feel like I have a better handle on that than some others, but it's because you've stated your preferences and background clearly.

 

[morricab]

MUSICAL INTERESTS

My main musical interest is female vocals with minimal acoustic instrument accompaniment. Examples include Sarah McLachlan singing while playing the piano on Fumbling Towards Ecstasy, Jennifer Warnes on Famous Blue Raincoat and Amanda McBroom on Growing Up in Hollywood Town. I also like male vocal recordings such as Bill Henderson’s rendition of “Send in the Clowns” and Jeff Buckley’s Grace.

I like a little bit of jazz such as Dave Brubeck’s Time Out, “For Duke” and Bill Evan’s “Waltz for Debby.” I like a little bit of classical including Mozart Jupiter Symphony 41 and Mussorgsky’s Night on Bald Mountain. I am a big fan of direct-to-disc recordings by Sheffield Lab and M&K RealTime.

I enjoy a lot of perfectly ordinary rock and pop songs (e.g., Bruce Springsteen, Fleetwood Mac, Whitney Houston, Michael Jackson, New Order, Phil Collins, Elton John, Jim Croce, Billy Joel, the Cranberries) and a lot of 1980s songs from “one-hit wonders.”


AUDITION TRACKS

"The Rose" by Amanda McBroom, Growing Up in Hollywood Town (Sheffield Lab 13)

"Send in the Clowns" by Bill Henderson, Live at the Times (Jazz Planet Records/Classic Records)

“Landslide” and “Rhiannon,” by Fleetwood Mac, Fleetwood Mac (MFSL)

"First We Take Manhattan" and "Bird on a Wire" by Jennifer Warnes, Famous Blue Raincoat (Rock the House Records/Classic Records) (I know this is a digital recording.)

”I've Got the Music in Me" by Thelma Houston, I've Got the Music in Me (Sheffield Lab 2)

"Hallelujah" by Jeff Buckley

"Where the Wild Roses Grow" and "Stagger Lee" by Nick Cave, Murder Ballads

Thanks Ron:

Here are some (by no means exhaustive) that I use:

Cannonball Adderly and Milt Jackson "Things are getting better" on Riverside records
Chick Corea and Gary Burton Live in Zürich 1979 (ECM)
Chick Corea: Trio Music 1981 (ECM)
The Valkeries: 1965 conducted by Georg Solti on Decca (Royal sound)
Al Di Meola: World Sinfonia Heart of the Immigrants on cd
Self made recording of solo violin (strad) in mono on R2R tape playing 24 Paganini Caprices
Dave Brubeck: Hidden treasures Live in Mexico City 1968 (Columbia)
Kind of Blue: Miles Davis and others (Columbia)
Stan Getz and Chick Corea 1967 (Verve)
Dizzy Gillespie: Modern Jazz Trumpet (1971 on a French label...bought it in Paris and it is one of the best trumper recordings I ever heard)
Itzakh Perlmann: Virtuoso violin
Ralph Towner: Solstice (ECM)
Jim Hall: Impression of Japan (Direct to disk)
Mozart string quartets: Alban Berg Quartet 1970s (Telefunken)
Tchaikovsky: Swan Lake (Decca)
Dead Can Dance: Into the Labyrinth and Spirit Chaser (MFSL)
Chopin: Etudes and Preludes: (Deutsche Grammophone)
Schubert: Death and the Maiden: Alban Berg Quartet (EMI)
Dire Straits: First album and Love over Gold, only rock albums really worthy for review material IMO.
Beethoven violin sonatas: Maxim Vengerov (forget label...maybe EMI)
Britten Piano and Violin Concertos, (Decca, conducted by Britten himself).

For fun listening then you can add:

Moby: Play and 18
William Orbit: Strange Cargo III
Al Di Meola: The Grande Passion (love the music and sound but it is too compressed for real evaluation)
The Police: Ghost in the Machine, Zenyatta Mondatta, Synchronicity etc
Rush: All titles
ZZ Top: Deguello
Steely Dan: Aja, Gaucho etc.
Pat Metheny: Watercolors, Works, etc. (ECM mostly)
Wynton Masalis: Live in the House of tribes (Blue Note)
Wynton Marsalis: Trumpet concertos (can't remember)
Bjork: Debut and Post
Iron Maiden: Piece of Mind, Powerslave (1980s stuff)
Pink Floyd: Dark Side and Wish you were here
Lots more rock/pop
Lots more Jazz
Lots more classical

 

[bonzo75]

I'd share that view, and as much as I subscribe to the notion that good systems should play all music well without exception (I really do believe that) I also think my tolerance of deviations from utter perfection would more closely align with yours, Ked, than with exclusively rock listeners, for example. If you review a component using words like believability and timbral accuracy, I feel like I have a better handle on that than some others, but it's because you've stated your preferences and background clearly.

Thanks. I agree on good systems should play all.

I have been to multiple rock live shows of ACDC, GnR, Iron Maiden, Deep P, Soundgarden, Black Sabbath, Led Zep cover band (best of all the shows I have been to), Eric Clapton (seen him 5 times), Mark Knopfler, Bob Dylan. My gf's close friend and ex-flatmate is a folk jazz musician, her boyfriend has 3 albums to his name, his brother Charlie Winston is a well-known musician in France, and we get a lot of these small amplified gigs to go to due to this friend circle. However, would I use any of them for evaluating a system - no.

Based on what I have heard at all these shows and various venues, among the amplified rock music, only Royal Albert Hall gives a clean sound (and is the worst venue in London for acoustic classical). So the sound at RAH aside, the system requirements for a rock sound are kick drum impact, lack of clarity, immersiveness (rock sound reverberates a lot in small venues, or in open parks there are a lot of loudspeakers in front of you, and behind you, so there is sound everywhere), and then you need loud bass, which at O2 is usually the kind of boomy unclean bass for audiophiles. And midrange can get lost in these venues. So for such music there are many systems you could use, add room correction and you are done. Rest is a personal preference. Those who like rock can take the best deal and size they can fit in among Wilson, Focal, Avalon, Magico, etc... and just get on with it. Add two subs. Justin (User 211) is a rock and electronic head who wants to recreate club experiences from his 20s and prefers the Apogee Duettas.

 

[DaveC]

For some bizarre reason I do not understand completely I have to agree with you - tubes win! But why a good tune preamplifier is also welcome in this task?

Tubes maintain the fine detail better imo, preserving the soundstaging and imaging qualities of the recording. Good tube preamps generally make everything better too, I think they do a better job driving them amp. Exactly why though IDK... I have heard of some people daisy-chaining several preamps because they like the effect!

 

[Folsom]

I think tubes often exaggerate detail. I like them, but in person I never hear that much detail from acoustic sets even in a living room. It's not a huge surprise they would do that, they crank the voltage sky high and bring it back down on the output through transformers that use induction, so a little stretching of voltage is highly probable. The phenomenon occurs on classD output inductors too.

 

[morricab]

I think tubes often exaggerate detail. I like them, but in person I never hear that much detail from acoustic sets even in a living room. It's not a huge surprise they would do that, they crank the voltage sky high and bring it back down on the output through transformers that use induction, so a little stretching of voltage is highly probable. The phenomenon occurs on classD output inductors too.

Your opinion is contrary to most others concerning tubes and exaggeration of details. Most descriptors of SS are about "speed", "resolution ", "detail", "attack", "transparency", etc.

Tube amp descriptors are usually about "tone", palpability , body, "musical", "natural", "euphoric", etc.

 

[Al M.]

I think tubes often exaggerate detail. I like them, but in person I never hear that much detail from acoustic sets even in a living room.

Huh?

 

[Folsom]

If I said detail of timbre, would that help?

 

[MadFloyd]

If I said detail of timbre, would that help?

Do you mean saturation?

 

[PeterA]

If I said detail of timbre, would that help?

Do you mean "texture" or string vs wood body on violin detail that is heard on recordings because of super close miking? I also hear that sometimes if seated really close to live acoustic instruments. I also hear a huge amount of room filling vibrational energy off of strings when listening to live that is captured on great recordings but rarely reproduced to the same extent on the systems that I have heard.

 

[RogerD]

Pardon me if I have read all of this thread. Saturation is very important I believe,because I have found when it is present at a high level,the composers intent comes through much much better. Listening to let's say Sinatra and Basie,Basie's artistry is in full bloom,not to mention blue eyes too.

 

[morricab]

If I said detail of timbre, would that help?

"In music, timbre (/?tæmb?r/ TAM-b?r, also known as tone color or tone quality from psychoacoustics) is the perceived sound quality of a musical note, sound, or tone that distinguishes different types of sound production, such as choir voices and musical instruments, such as string instruments, wind instruments, and percussion instruments, and which enables listeners to hear even different instruments from the same category as different (e.g. a viola and a violin)."

So, if you are saying that tube amps exaggerate detail of timbre, do you mean that they make it easier to distinguish different instruments and voices from each other? That this is an "exaggeration" because you can more clearly distinguish an oboe from a clarinet because the "detail" of timbre is greater? That being able to tell the viola clearly from the violins in a string quartet is "exaggeration"? I can tell you that if you sit close like most microphone placements, you will easily hear the difference between a violin and viola. You can tell two makes of violins as well. If you are telling me that a SS amp does not allow you to easily tell these things because it is tonally grey and not allowing distinction in timbre, you want me to believe that is real and that the gear that let's me distinguish is an exaggeration?? Seriously? Read my original post that started this thread. I was EASILY able to tell the difference in timbre between the two cellos that were playing...it was child's play and it gave anothe level of meaining to the music to hear how the two musicians got very different sound from their ostensibly similar instruments.


Now, to be fair there are some tube amps that do color the sound by being too "warm", usually due to output transformer or driver circuit issues, and perhaps this is what you are referring to but your statement doesn't really clarify this or what I put above. However, most of the time no one is accusing this sound as having more "detail" of anything. Usually lack of detail or "resolution" is cited when an amp is well and truly colored. Coloration and timbre are not really the same, one is distortion the other is distinguishing sound characteristics.

 

[Folsom]

I'll have to think of a better way to describe it. But it sounds pretty artificial to me.