Magico M7 2023

[sbnx]

Is imaging on a recording? No. As has been stated "imaging" is our brains ability to locate where the sound souce was located. What is on a recording is amplitude and phase information that, when played back trough a pair of speakers, allows our brain to compute the perceived location of the sound source. So is imaging information is on a recording.

Do I hear "imaging" in real life? Yes. For example, if there is a small group of instruments on a stage. Lets say a violin on the left, a flute in the midle and a cello on the right. I am sitting in the middle about 3 rows back. Whether my eyes are open or closed I can hear that the violin is on my left and the cello is on my right and the flute is in front of me. Now, If I go the the DSO an sit in the mezzanine I am pretty far from a great mass of instruments. All of the sound is being blended together in the hall. So there is no real sense of imaging.

Ron mentioned different audiophile goals. Does someone have a list of these different goals? I am not sure if we are talking about the way sound sounds in our room or something else. For example, some people like to collect HIFI gear like they would fine watches. It is nice to look at. Some people like to swap gear just for the experience of different sound. Some people like to listen to sound effects for the sake of the effect. But I don't think that list represents those of us in this thread having this discussion. I could be wrong but I think we want to be able to sit down, put on a record and be swept away by the performance.

So, if I can assume that we (those participating in this discussion) want this kind of musical engagement then what are the different goals that we have in stereo reproduction (HIFI)? And how do those goals align with actual music. A requirement for music to exist is tone and timing. A lot of people talk about tone but not many talk about timing. If someone states "My goal is to not have imaging as that is not real" then I am ok with that statement. But I would be curious as to how they are achieving correct timing. As when a stereo pair of speakers are setup and aligned with one another to produce proper timing, imaging comes along with that. It is a feature or attribute of stereophonic sound.

We also need to clarify the term pinpoint. It is vague. One person's pinpoint could be another person's diffuse. Tima at least tried to describe what he meant by that term. Unfortunately, unless we all sat down in the same room with the same system we can't really know what the other person is describing as pinpoint. For example, I have listened to systems with my local audiophile group. Many of whom commented about the great imaging and soundstage. My thoughts (which I kept to myself) were that was one of the worst systems I have ever heard.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Does this imply adoption of the objective "reproduce exactly what is on the tape, vinyl or digital source being played"?

This objective might be able to be re-stated as "reproduce what the microphone heard."

it's a mistake to go down the "exactly" road. there is no exactly. just as live music has many 'hearing' variables; the recording media and mic amplification and reproduction processing package does what it does. we can only compare the experiences each with their limitations. the ceiling much higher on the 'in person live', the consistency much higher on the reproduced with it's own attractions.

There is confusion and talking past each other due simply to mutual failure to recognize different high-end audio objectives.

no doubt every home system listener and situation is unique. is 'live in person' listening more broadly the same? don't know. others might know the answer more than myself.

It makes sense that an objective of "reproduce what the microphone heard" will result in sound re-production by a stereo which will sound very different than the sound from a stereo which is attempting to "recreate the sound of an original musical event," or to "create a sound that seems live" -- each of which inherently means from the point of view of a listener in the audience, and not from point of view of the microphone.

i have recordings that achieve pin point imaging in a wonderful way which takes me to a high high. every single time. this is very valuable to me. life affirming even. i am joyous about it. i don't think about why or how it's different than live. i only live the reality that's it's real to me at that moment.....even though i realize away from the moment that a certain part of it is illusion. who gives a rip? not me. i have no need to defend the 'live in person' place. i'm just consuming reproduced music and getting satisfied.

Is it any surprise that an audiophile with the objective of reproducing what the microphone hears seeks pinpoint imaging, and an audiophile with the objective of reproducing an audience perspective* will not seek pinpoint imaging?

i can see that when you get in your head what you are hearing in the live experience, that if the reproduced experience is different that somehow one must be wrong. not the way i see it.

* I hear in the concert hall what Peter hears, which definitely is not pinpoint imaging.

hooray for you and Peter. knock yourself out. the live experience is not about deciding which attributes are checking off the boxes. it's a total experience proposition including being in that group and being swept away in the feelings. but i agree that my A/B live/reproduced give the nod to reproduced for pin point imaging. which i value. for others maybe it detracts. is that good or bad or just a thing?

one attraction of hifi listening in a group is the collective experience which can be related to the live event experience. maybe even more profound in some ways from time to time. i've been there many times. YMMV.

 

[Al M.]

Do I hear "imaging" in real life? Yes. For example, if there is a small group of instruments on a stage. Lets say a violin on the left, a flute in the midle and a cello on the right. I am sitting in the middle about 3 rows back. Whether my eyes are open or closed I can hear that the violin is on my left and the cello is on my right and the flute is in front of me. Now, If I go the the DSO an sit in the mezzanine I am pretty far from a great mass of instruments. All of the sound is being blended together in the hall. So there is no real sense of imaging.

I agree, if you sit in the sonic circle of a live venue where direct sound is still more prominent than reflected sound, you do hear concrete imaging. But that is different from pinpoint imaging where sounds come from a point. Real instruments in real space never project below a certain size, their sound is not pinpointed.

I want imaging, but I want real imaging.

So, if I can assume that we (those participating in this discussion) want this kind of musical engagement then what are the different goals that we have in stereo reproduction (HIFI)? And how do those goals align with actual music. A requirement for music to exist is tone and timing. A lot of people talk about tone but not many talk about timing. If someone states "My goal is to not have imaging as that is not real" then I am ok with that statement. But I would be curious as to how they are achieving correct timing. As when a stereo pair of speakers are setup and aligned with one another to produce proper timing, imaging comes along with that. It is a feature or attribute of stereophonic sound.

The question is, which imaging. It is not necessarily pinpoint imaging that is reconcilable with correct timing.

And i agree, timing is crucial in reproduction.

We also need to clarify the term pinpoint. It is vague. One person's pinpoint could be another person's diffuse. Tima at least tried to describe what he meant by that term. Unfortunately, unless we all sat down in the same room with the same system we can't really know what the other person is describing as pinpoint. For example, I have listened to systems with my local audiophile group. Many of whom commented about the great imaging and soundstage. My thoughts (which I kept to myself) were that was one of the worst systems I have ever heard.

Good point. Pinpoint is vague. Yet I stick with its original meaning, which is, well, "pinpoint", going to a small point in space. Real instruments never project that way; as I said their sound image never goes below a certain size. Some systems do project actual pinpointing, and that is an artifact, in my view.

 

[sbnx]

If pinpoint means literally pinpoint then I don't think I have ever heard a system with that level of imaging. Thinking of something simple like a central female vocal. When I setup a system the head is headsized. The sound doesn't come from a spot in space that is 1mmX1mm.

The two things I typically hear in systems are either the sound is like a blob. Meaning images are huge and blurred together into some unrecognizable thing. Or the images are unstable. Meaning things like the clarinet player is sometimes over in the violin section and sometimes back visiting with the horns and sometimes sitting next to the oboeist.

Image size is adjustable. But, to me, when the image is improperly sized other bad things are happening to the sound.

 

[JiminGa]

I’m not sure we are all using the same definition of imaging. To me optimal imaging for 2 channel with phantom center is achieved in the studio via the mix by manipulating the right left playback of the instrument so that it appears “over there” or “over here”. “ Pinpoint “ is a loaded term. I don’t know what it means. Speakers don’t create proper imaging.They allow it if properly made. Good mixing and proper speaker placement create the imaging. That is why it can take weeks to properly place speakers. Now if you are referring to my definition simply as soundstage and imaging referring to the shape of an object in space then “pinpoint” can only mean accurate and that can not be overdone. A larger than life image is not pinpoint. A cello is this size and a bass that size.

 

[Rhapsody]

I had a great afternoon getting lost in the music yesterday.

Scott, I know you aren't/can't do it, but if you put the A5s in this room/system (in your avatar) and put the Wilsons where you have the A5s now (pic from the other day) I bet the A5s would image very nicely and the Wilsons presentation would not be like it is in your BEAUTIFUL room.

 

[Ron Resnick]

As a PhD economist I can't help myself!

Some of the basic concepts I learned in microeconomics have enormous explanatory power for many contexts and for many aspects of life. I very often talk about indifference curves.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron mentioned different audiophile goals. Does someone have a list of these different goals?

This is the list that we developed several years ago. It is discussed in numerous places on the forum. These objectives are not mutually exclusive.

1) recreate the sound of an original musical event,

2) reproduce exactly what is on the tape, vinyl or digital source being played,

3) create a sound subjectively pleasing to the audiophile, and

4) create a sound that seems live.

 

[Rhapsody]

Might be a good idea to move the "imaging" discussion to a new/separte thread. It's a great topic but might be better served in its own thread vs the Magico M7 thread. No big deal, just a suggestion.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

in my room tuning process over years of efforts, especially the final 9 months, the room's ability to portray a complete seamless soundstage improved clearly. what exactly does this mean?

now what i get is side to side, bottom to top and above, even behind me to the sides, of coherent information. where the images are certainly different for each recording, but the images and the space around them is compete with full frequency response. sometimes a recording has things tracking side to side, or over the top. better than my Dolby Atmos 9.3.6 Trinnov object based multi-channel can accomplish in my dedicated home theater in my house.

pin point? yes, sometimes exactly that. some soundstage information is exactly at a pin point, many drum kit solos have spooky levels of clear pin point info arrayed around the room. but it's different each time. would everyone appreciate all this equally? reading some posts here maybe not. but visitors seem to appreciate it. when this is really working the gradations of energy and substance seem real. artifact? not to my senses.

and i love where it can take the music. last night i played one of my Jazz at The Pawnshop reels. we all know the recording. but it was very very real. a live club in my room and lots of pin point imaging along with depth and width and huge amounts of ambience and the sense of weight and scale of the room. very real. spooky. and very matter of fact, unlimited headroom, ease and authority. just there and pulsing with energy.

the ability of reproduced music to be real is astounding. part of it is that pin point imaging.

this post moved to the pinpoint imaging thread;

Pinpoint imaging

If pinpoint means literally pinpoint then I don't think I have ever heard a system with that level of imaging. Thinking of something simple like a central female vocal. When I setup a system the head is headsized. The sound doesn't come from a spot in space that is 1mmX1mm. From the Magico...

www.whatsbestforum.com

 

[ScottK]

Some of the basic concepts I learned in microeconomics have enormous explanatory power for many contexts and for many aspects of life. I very often talk about indifference curves.

That's because Economics is a social science. It all about measuring human behavior in a world of scarce resources.

 

[JiminGa]

Mike, totally agree

 

[Al M.]

Might be a good idea to move the "imaging" discussion to a new/separte thread. It's a great topic but might be better served in its own thread vs the Magico M7 thread. No big deal, just a suggestion.

Happy to oblige.

I moved my next answer to a new thread:

Pinpoint imaging

If pinpoint means literally pinpoint then I don't think I have ever heard a system with that level of imaging. Thinking of something simple like a central female vocal. When I setup a system the head is headsized. The sound doesn't come from a spot in space that is 1mmX1mm. From the Magico...

www.whatsbestforum.com

 

[bonzo75]

As a PhD economist I can't help myself!

in economics, very much like in audio, you can get a Nobel for saying the exact opposite thing

 

[AudioGod]

in my room tuning process over years of efforts, especially the final 9 months, the room's ability to portray a complete seamless soundstage improved clearly. what exactly does this mean?

now what i get is side to side, bottom to top and above, even behind me to the sides, of coherent information. where the images are certainly different for each recording, but the images and the space around them is compete with full frequency response. sometimes a recording has things tracking side to side, or over the top. better than my Dolby Atmos 9.3.6 Trinnov object based multi-channel can accomplish in my dedicated home theater in my house.

pin point? yes, sometimes exactly that. some soundstage information is exactly at a pin point, many drum kit solos have spooky levels of clear pin point info arrayed around the room. but it's different each time. would everyone appreciate all this equally? reading some posts here maybe not. but visitors seem to appreciate it. when this is really working the gradations of energy and substance seem real. artifact? not to my senses.

and i love where it can take the music. last night i played one of my Jazz at The Pawnshop reels. we all know the recording. but it was very very real. a live club in my room and lots of pin point imaging along with depth and width and huge amounts of ambience and the sense of weight and scale of the room. very real. spooky. and very matter of fact, unlimited headroom, ease and authority. just there and pulsing with energy.

the ability of reproduced music to be real is astounding. part of it is that pin point imaging.

Agree completely
That's why I said I don't consider any speaker without pinpoint imaging or at least a stable image a real hi end speaker .
On the other hand diffused sound is very easy to achieve

 

[Al M.]

Agree completely
That's why I said I don't consider any speaker without pinpoint imaging or at least a stable image a real hi end speaker .
On the other hand diffused sound is very easy to achieve

Maybe you can also move this to the new thread? (see above)

 

[PeterA]

hooray for you and Peter. knock yourself out. the live experience is not about deciding which attributes are checking off the boxes. it's a total experience proposition including being in that group and being swept away in the feelings. but i agree that my A/B live/reproduced give the nod to reproduced for pin point imaging. which i value. for others maybe it detracts. is that good or bad or just a thing?

That is not it at all Mike. There is no knocking out. The live experience is the truth, right there in front of you, sound and perception of a real event. The hobby is broad enough for people to have different approaches, values, and goals. You choose to pursue "your truth" instead. That is fine too.

To get this back on topic, Alon Wolf in his M7 interview video stated that his goal is to create speakers that present exactly what is on the recording, or something to that effect. I suppose he means everything on the recording as it is transcribed through the whole system right up to the speaker. In other words, faithful to the signal being fed to the speaker.

 

[treitz3]

Ladies and gentlemen, I do understand thread drift and we tend to let things slide, as this is seemingly inevitable. With that said, let's get back on topic and redirect any further responses on this recent topic redirect/thread shift to the pinpoint imaging thread.

Any further comments on pinpoint imaging will be deleted, so that we may get this thread back on track.

Thanks for your cooperation. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming...

Tom

 

[Audiohertz2]

in economics, very much like in audio, you can get a Nobel for saying the exact opposite thing

Economies of scale

 

[sbnx]

Coming back to the M7. I am sure the M7 will image very well if setup correctly.