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

[DaveC]

He did not step in front of the firing squad. The way things should ideally go is, because one regularly goes to concerts, while occasionally demoing hifi he steps in front of something and goes Ah...this is closest to my concert experience

Unfortunately the way this thread started is, because I went to a cello concert yesterday, I realized the thing that I own at home is right and all others are wrong. There was no discovery of a hifi component relating to a concert, it seems to be the discovery of a concert confirming the bias of a set up owned at home

That seems quite biased and assumes a lot. While it's true that many people acclimate to their own system and think it's the best, that's a rather naive opinion, a beginner's stage most go through early on and implying that applies to morricab is kinda insulting and probably not true.

If you believe X is the best way to go why would you own Y?



I do agree with morricab for the most part, the exception being tube amps become impractical in situations that demand high power/low output impedance, which is why higher efficiency horns are unsurpassed (imo). I don't think any panel/OB/dipole type speaker comes close, so I don't understand choosing a speaker that requires high power/low impedance in an uncompromising system.

 

[morricab]

That's what I thought about the Austin Acoustics system at RMAF, but you probably saw that thread... many did not share that opinion!

However, I do think Peter B had a point when he had that meltdown. Systems get judged all the time by people who shouldn't even be expressing their opinion, let alone forming a strong opinion to express in the first place. Perfect example is Amir in the Austin thread. What he did was horrible, then claiming it was ok because he's not a reviewer. But when you own a forum, post many photos and words in the forum you own, it's a review no matter what you want to call it and bashing a system that you haven't thoroughly tested isn't fair, isn't ethical and can have very negative consequences for smaller businesses. DDK chimed in and bashed it without hearing it AT ALL, based solely on his own biases!!! The internet has given these idiots a voice, for better or worse. It seems to be human nature to make decisions and form strong opinions based on whatever evidence happens to be on hand, whether it makes sense or not. Happens in all parts of life, especially politics... I think that you can't trust a great majority of people's opinions on HiFi gear simply because they form opinions much too easily, and will give you their opinion based on hearing a 30 sec clip of a track they have never heard before. Or poke their head into a room for a minute, decide it's bad, then leave and tell everyone how bad it was. To be fair nobody is unbiased, but some do recognize they have biases and are more careful about forming strong opinions as a result. And to be fair, "different strokes for different folks" is also true, to a degree.

I totally agree with your OP as well. A quick story to make the point... I had someone over with a lot of experience in HiFi to listen to my system, my SET amp + my horn hybrid speakers. Then we went to tour Boulder Amplifier where we heard at least a $500k system in a brand new dedicated room with no expenses spared. On the way back from the tour the person said they enjoyed listening to my system a lot more. While the system at Boulder was perfect in some ways, the way the music is presented isn't as engaging and fun to listen to vs horns and SETs that cost a fraction in a rather normal, only lightly treated room. There's something there that modern HiFi just doesn't do... an immediacy to the sound, the dynamics to make it sound real. A 3-D soundstage that isn't defined by the listening room boundaries. Strong emotional reactions to the music... I think modern HiFi misses these things for several reasons, one is the complexity of the signal path, which includes amplifier and crossover, another is simply dispersion pattern, and also efficiency of the transducers, modern HiFi is too inefficient transforming electricity to SPL.

(I have not read the last few pages yet, just wanted to comment on what I've read so far)

WHat was in the Austin Acoustics room? I am curious...didn't see the thread.

 

[bonzo75]

That seems quite biased and assumes a lot. While it's true that many people acclimate to their own system and think it's the best, that's a rather naive opinion, a beginner's stage most go through early on and implying that applies to morricab is kinda insulting and probably not true.

If you believe X is the best way to go why would you own Y?



I do agree with morricab for the most part, the exception being tube amps become impractical in situations that demand high power/low output impedance, which is why higher efficiency horns are unsurpassed (imo). I don't think any panel/OB/dipole type speaker comes close, so I don't understand choosing a speaker that requires high power/low impedance in an uncompromising system.

That's a generalization. There are many bad horns out there too. And I am not debating that in most cases a SET with a good horn will be one of the best systems. Those good horns are rare. And one of the best is different from the best and only.

As for the question, if you believe X is the best way to go, why would you own Y? Loads of reasons. X might require loads of money and loads of space

 

[morricab]

What Roger is saying is especially true with Apogees. Not a Magico fan but on the S7, I preferred the vocals with the Vitus over the Kagura, reason being that the baritone chest and just the steady flow was better. When the Plinius, certainly not the best of SS, runs bridged class A into duets, the vocals are better than with SETs

Really?? Have you actually listened to Plinius amps? Vocals? Bass maybe...in a heavy handed sort of way...but vocals?? Surely you're joking Mr. Bonzo...

 

[bonzo75]

Really?? Have you actually listened to Plinius amps? Vocals? Bass maybe...in a heavy handed sort of way...but vocals?? Surely you're joking Mr. Bonzo...

Yes, at Henk's and I also compared them on YGs with Burm 911 and Boulder 2160. They were not as good. On Apogees, you need the class A power, current, whatever, for the ribbon to take off. A well driven ribbon will produce better vocals than a not well driven ribbon, irrespective of the tonal difference of the amp that you note if you use both on, say, your speaker

Edit: So I have gone from not being a scientist to Feynman?

 

[KeithR]

I was hitting 20-25w peaks on a 100 lb LM Audio 845 SET the other weekend on 91db speakers with minimum impedance of 7.5 ohms. That probably is 5% distortion on peaks if not higher. Here is the admittedly smaller tformer 845 measurements:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/...ed-amplifier-measurements#4UAVVbDHuDp7E0WU.97

The 219 should measure much better in the bass due to less output transformer saturation, but I would expect distortion to be as high at power. So consider me doubtful of any SET on panels at realistic volumes as headroom will be severely challenged.

 

[PeterA]

That's a generalization. There are many bad horns out there too. And I am not debating that in most cases a SET with a good horn will be one of the best systems. Those good horns are rare. And one of the best is different from the best and only.

As for the question, if you believe X is the best way to go, why would you own Y? Loads of reasons. X might require loads of money and loads of space

Great points. I would add that perhaps X is really rare, and unobtainable, or perhaps difficult to service, or a hassle to own. That latest Ferrari may be the best way to go, but I own a Toyota pick up truck.

Bonzo has traveled the world to hear many systems and to do many comparisons. He has heard and reported on his favorite system to date. By all accounts, that system is an uncompromising system. Yet, Bonzo will own a different system.

 

[morricab]

For a little experiment with actual data, see this post by Esldude:

I used to own some VTL trioded amps. Did a little experiment. I also had a Spectral DMA50. I loaded the VTL with a power resistor, and tapped the output with some divider resistors so the whole thing was exactly unity gain. Fed that into the Spectral. Feeding Quad ESL-63's.

My purpose was to figure out how much was lost in the VTL, which I considered the better amp. It had more space, 3d effects, smoother, more dynamic, more nuanced, more musical. The Spectral was a good sounding SS amp, but not equal to the VTL. The Spectral was subjectively about 2/3 as good as the VTL. I wondered if the VTL let 99% of the music through or 50%. So I thought taking it in and out of circuit I could get a handle on how much better things could get. Or if the VTL left little on the table.

I did not expect to fire that series arrangement up and hear the Spectral sound exactly like the VTL. Which is what happened. The spacious dynamic musical 3D sound issued forth from the Spectral amp. I later reversed position of the amps, and you could put the Spectral in or out and hear no difference. The wonderful sound of the VTL was a euphonic coloration. The Spectral could exactingly reproduce those effects if fed the right signal.

I switched a few times, listened over days. In time I did find the sound with the VTL feeding the Spectral balanced a little different than just the VTL. Bass was a bit less, and treble a touch less. I knew from measurements the output impedance of the tube amp interacted with the Quad's to raise the lower couple octaves a bit, and a resonance in the output transformer at 26 khz raised the top octave some too. Over time those were audible, but not obvious. Otherwise the Spectral could fully mimic the wonderful coloration of the VTL triode amp. So much for tube amp superiority.

Your experiment IS interesting but it begs some open questions. 1) Did you notice any change in sound with the VTL by changing the source (cd player, DAC, tape, vinyl)? 2) Did you notice any change in the sound by switching preamps? 3) If you swapped cables with the VTL did you hear any change in the sound? If the answer is yes, then would you care to explain to me how a power amp has less distortion and less change to the sound than a source level component or a cable? It is not like the Spectral is in any way a straight wire with gain or has less distortion than most sources/preamps. Possibly you didn't set up the experiment correctly?

If the answer is no, then I guess the VTL was not such a good amp and a poor example for a comparison. I never said all tube amps are good, and I don't particularly like Class AB, push/pull pentode or UL amps any better than a good hybrid or even some SS amps. They have the same flaws as non-Class A SS amps: Underbiased, negative feedback AND the added problem of the output transformer. If you are going to do push/pull at all it needs to be Class A and no negative feedback.

Probably that warmth and "euphonic" sound you liked was related to the amp having too small output transformers and saturating badly. It is common with a lot of tube amps, both PP and SET. It is a flaw for both designs and hard to design around...except to use big iron...or go OTL, which has its own issues.

Perhaps the Spectral was "perfect"...did you keep it? Or was it not enjoyable enough to actually listen to? Did you upgrade then your sources and preamp to reflect it's perfection?

 

[Folsom]

I was hitting 20-25w peaks on a 100 lb LM Audio 845 SET the other weekend on 91db speakers with minimum impedance of 7.5 ohms. That probably is 5% distortion on peaks if not higher. Here is the admittedly smaller tformer 845 measurements:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/...ed-amplifier-measurements#4UAVVbDHuDp7E0WU.97

The 219 should measure much better in the bass due to less output transformer saturation, but I would expect distortion to be as high at power. So consider me doubtful of any SET on panels at realistic volumes as headroom will be severely challenged.

Except you'll hear the saturation, and won't hear the 5% distortion.

 

[Al M.]

Your experiment IS interesting but it begs some open questions. 1) Did you notice any change in sound with the VTL by changing the source (cd player, DAC, tape, vinyl)? 2) Did you notice any change in the sound by switching preamps? 3) If you swapped cables with the VTL did you hear any change in the sound? If the answer is yes, then would you care to explain to me how a power amp has less distortion and less change to the sound than a source level component or a cable? It is not like the Spectral is in any way a straight wire with gain or has less distortion than most sources/preamps. Possibly you didn't set up the experiment correctly?

If the answer is no, then I guess the VTL was not such a good amp and a poor example for a comparison. I never said all tube amps are good, and I don't particularly like Class AB, push/pull pentode or UL amps any better than a good hybrid or even some SS amps. They have the same flaws as non-Class A SS amps: Underbiased, negative feedback AND the added problem of the output transformer. If you are going to do push/pull at all it needs to be Class A and no negative feedback.

Probably that warmth and "euphonic" sound you liked was related to the amp having too small output transformers and saturating badly. It is common with a lot of tube amps, both PP and SET. It is a flaw for both designs and hard to design around...except to use big iron...or go OTL, which has its own issues.

Perhaps the Spectral was "perfect"...did you keep it? Or was it not enjoyable enough to actually listen to? Did you upgrade then your sources and preamp to reflect it's perfection?

If you had read carefully, you would have noticed that I only reposted another post from Esldude who performed the experiment…

The point is, a life-like saturated tone color from a tube amp, or perhaps even a SET, may be just a distortion, notwithstanding that the tone color may remind you more of live music.

BTW, I had a Spectral preamp/amp combo to audition in my own system. While there were some minor differences in sound, my class A push-pull triode amps had practically the same tonal balance as the Spectral combo. No euphonic coloration there.

 

[microstrip]

If you had read carefully, you would have noticed that I only reposted another post from Esldude who preformed the experiment...

I made the same mistake, and wrote an answer, but deleted it when I understood the situation. IMHO when re-posting something from another forum member we should post it as a quote.

 

[ddk]

Hi

Struggled mightily not to get in this debate... have to

...Burmester, Spectral, Gryphon, Pass, DartZeel, Soulution, Balaboo, Lamm, Boulder, Bryston, Ayre...

I'm still not getting into this debate but I have to ask Frantz, who the hell is Balaboo?

david

 

[Al M.]

I made the same mistake, and wrote an answer, but deleted it when I understood the situation. IMHO when re-posting something from another forum member we should post it as a quote.

Which is why I posted it in italics. But next time I can post is as

.

 

[bonzo75]

I'm still not getting into this debate but I have to ask Frantz, who the hell is Balaboo?

david

http://www.balabo.com

 

[FrantzM]

I'm still not getting into this debate but I have to ask Frantz, who the hell is Balaboo?

david

See!!!! SEE! ... Told you !!

It;s however BALabo not Balaboo . my mistake

 

[ddk]

http://www.balabo.com

See!!!! SEE! ... Told you !!

It;s however BALabo not Balaboo . my mistake

Thanks guys!
david

 

[the sound of Tao]

We have an experience, in this case in a concert, and we then try to correlate it to how we experience similar things in the music at home. But rather than develop a deeper appreciation of something and correlate the experience by re-evaluating we all at times just easily leap to the end by reaffirming a preconceived understanding which can simply become a further justification of our own preferences... and then of course we can use this data point to argue these preferences to the death. There is however something of the ground hog day syndrome in these instances for all of us. Bonzo earlier identified here the missed underlying opportunity perfectly.

I love a lot of the gear that Brad prefers within this thread. But also, like Bonzo, I see limits for how these can be used in terms of the variety of music we might enjoy as they can constrain you to certain types of music. I understand you can force SET onto any speaker but that doesn't necessarily give you the best final outcome in the big picture.

The virtues of SET have been broadly discussed over the years. In its better implementations I also love it as an amp type but when I put a 27 watt Line Magnetic 219ia (that is 845 based with a 300b as driver) on the Maggie 20.7s (just as an experiment to evaluate the tonality of it) I played a cello sonata and heard all the SET magic but also in the big picture, missed sufficient definition within the mid bass structure and also it left the music less coherent than I prefer. What it was is the ultimate simple limits of an amp type set in a less than ideal role for its application. Pair it with a horn or high efficiency speaker and it does what it does so much better and with the sonic profile of the Animas and the rich mid bass birch horn and it was all good. I could also have tried on the 20.7s the Manley 300B monos that I had here for the Anima horns which is similarly wattage constrained but thought the 845 with the big iron in the Line Magnetic would have had a better shot at the Maggies benign 5 amp impedance load.

Brad, I completely get that you prefer SET and horn, it is also one of my favourite combos as well. But it would be good to consider past that discussion point and explore your original post and the premise and potential opportunity to explore your experience that it sets up.

You hear cellos in an intimate setting. How does the near field experience factor in the change your of your perception of the experience of music. One of the reasons I have my 20.7s in a near field set up is that sense of being in the music in that system. Less separation from the performers and the music itself. You become more a part of the performance so easily. Everyone that listens in that room invariably get sucked into the music. It's what I find is the most enjoyable part of having put that system together.

So here is a proposition, that it is not only about the SETs natural, less smeared and more authentically natural presentation that you are experiencing the presence in similar music played at home but perhaps in part this sense of connection is also made possible through some additional avenues.

In a near field listening proposition it comes in part from the physical resonance felt through out the body. The music is felt as much as it is heard. This is part of the excitement and connection of that experience. The absolute immediacy.

Horns and SET (from my experience with the Animas in my much larger open space downstairs) are quite wonderful at that as well, but for me it is their dynamics that intensely contribute to this immediacy of presence. However the sense of presence (or being present in the music and the performance) on the full range ribbons upstairs in near field arrangement is even again more convincing, and on just about any type of music you try it with.

I figure when we set up a system the parameters of the experience are greatly set by the relative position of ourselves and the speakers within the room. Such that if we end up with a sensation of a mid hall perspective there is an experience of the music that is likely less immediately present. This is not a bad thing.

With the horns in a large room this sense of distance also allows for the full majesty of scale of music to be appreciated. When the orchestra swells in a big piece of Mahler symphonic and you sit back a bit as it comes at you like a tsunami you get time to appreciate what is happening. You get to time yourself to the experience of the wave. I swim regularly in the ocean and it is always much more comforting to see the launch of the wave ahead and sit back so you can time your dive into it. But it is always more exciting to be closer to the break when you just have to go with it. More instinctive and raw and less considered.

That same music on the ribbons upstairs you are more present and caught in the initial wave. You don't get time to prepare and are in there churning up with the resonant wave of cellos and violas, occasionally erupted out of the top of the wave by the tympani. A range of factors play in here. The dipole pattern of the wave, the algorithmic decay pattern of the ribbons, if you have the timing of the reflected sound just right within the room the ribbons can abduct your awareness completely, and you can just ride the music and see the eddies and currents apparent in the orchestration.

The benefit of a potentially more objective viewpoint of the music from say a sensation of being further back in the hall is you have more time to see the music coming at you. I view music as a series of emotional waves. Sometimes that music is calm, sometimes it is a flow like rapids. Listen to Dvoraks Moldhau or even Handels water music and that sense of water journey is absolutely specific and programmatic.

Music for many is purely emotional content that we just occasionally get some conscious sense of through intellect. But I believe as in all art, the greatest part of music is essentially below the surface of awareness. Some people distance themselves even more from music because they struggle even temporarily with the notion of giving their emotional state over to something outside of themselves. Sometimes we even drink or drug ourselves to tune in more deeply. With more abandon.

Presence for me is the lack of separation from that experience. It isn't just about tonality (that for me is more about the sound of instruments being more natural within the tonic) but presence (at least how I identify with the experience) is more about spatial and temporal perspective. That is that we are least separated when we are most together, when it presents as itself to us as most coherent. When nothing from a timing or spatial point of view is disparate and so there is no need to shift you perception to a more analytical frame to determine what is not exactly right about what you are hearing. Like the real thing in a real room. Nothing is apparently out of place.

When the timing and space are clear and seamless it is easier to then just alter where the focus of you mind is so that you can be in any part of the music at any time. This for me is being present in the music and the music itself is present with you in your listening space. That you can be the listener or that you can project your awareness to the performer or past the performer and then into the music itself. The great wave. The perfect wave.

This is just one perspective on experiencing presence in music. At this point given all the limits of any measure in a human experience this is the sum reality and the sole valid assessment (for me) of experiencing presence when I play cello music at home. It isn't something I can prove or disprove nor do I feel compelled to but its validity is solely prefaced by my experience. That is the basis of any subjective experience.

My understanding of it cannot interfere with your perception of presence in the setups you have heard unless we correlate. We could have completely divergent experiences and opposite understandings and still both be 100% right because the limits of this discussion are actually subjective. We can share our perceptions but we cannot have the same experiences. We are in this way separate universes, each existent, each valuable, each valid.

I am fairly sure though I could probably listen to any system Bonzo or Brad love and love it to. A great system and great music transcend differences. We are more together than separate in this.

 

[DaveC]

WHat was in the Austin Acoustics room? I am curious...didn't see the thread.

Lol... it's a trainwreck.

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...ow-Austin-Acoustic&highlight=austin+acoustics

 

[DaveC]

That's a generalization. There are many bad horns out there too. And I am not debating that in most cases a SET with a good horn will be one of the best systems. Those good horns are rare. And one of the best is different from the best and only.

As for the question, if you believe X is the best way to go, why would you own Y? Loads of reasons. X might require loads of money and loads of space

There's a lot of bad everything out there.

I suppose that's true, especially for full size horns. Most people do have to compromise on the low frequencies. But, I'd still expect someone who thinks SETs are that superior to own a SET.

 

[Al M.]

We have an experience, in this case in a concert, and we then try to correlate it to how we experience similar things in the music at home. But rather than develop a deeper appreciation of something and correlate the experience by re-evaluating we all at times just easily leap to the end by reaffirming a preconceived understanding which can simply become a further justification of our own preferences... and then of course we can use this data point to argue these preferences to the death. There is however something of the ground hog day syndrome in these instances for all of us. Bonzo earlier identified here the missed underlying opportunity perfectly.

I love a lot of the gear that Brad prefers within this thread. But also, like Bonzo, I see limits for how these can be used in terms of the variety of music we might enjoy as they can constrain you to certain types of music. I understand you can force SET onto any speaker but that doesn't necessarily give you the best final outcome in the big picture.

[…]

My understanding of it cannot interfere with your perception of presence in the setups you have heard unless we correlate. We could have completely divergent experiences and opposite understandings and still both be 100% right because the limits of this discussion are actually subjective. We can share our perceptions but we cannot have the same experiences. We are in this way separate universes, each existent, each valuable, each valid.

I am fairly sure though I could probably listen to any system Bonzo or Brad love and love it to. A great system and great music transcend differences. We are more together than separate in this.

Beautiful post!

I don't agree with all of it, but then that is not necessary. Your second to last paragraph says it all.