Hi,
Okay, well that and two ears. I don't know that relative transient speed (duration? Rate?), whatever that is, is relevant to sono-location, maybe it is - I would say articulation or definition. Plucking a string is probably your best example though a sharp glockenspiel strike works too. I gather you are concerned with a possible issue of reproduction more so than how instruments are played or how music sounds to us. I can live with that while disagreeing with the original contention:
What I like about the direction of the discussions in this thread is that you and others have begun to describe the music qualities that are important to create believable home music listening experiences. I think what we see here is that being able to do this in a way that communicates with other people is really quite challenging. It takes a lot of experience with hi fi and music, a new way of talking about our listening experiences, and practice.
I have enjoyed delving into the conversation about what Blackmorec means when he uses the term transient attack as an important trigger to being able to identify the sound of different instruments in space. I think the gap in communication is in part due to a little metaphor mixing.
“Transient response” in hi fi circles is not the same thing as instrumental attack. Transient response is a measure of the behavior of an electrical circuit that has been excited by a signal. Attack is the action required by the musician to initiate the sound of a note on a musical instrument, and I agree with you that attack if we are to use it as a musical term does not mean that “the initial part of most notes from most instruments has a strongly percussive element.” Percussive elements do exist with some instruments and techniques, but percussive elements are more like seasoning than they are a universal trigger to identify timbre and space.
As a way to differentiate themselves from tube amplification companies, some transistor amplifier companies decades ago started to promote the idea that their superior transient response resulted in superior sound quality. A significant core of audiophiles began to think that dizzyingly fast rise times and DC-to-daylight bandwidths were necessary for them to hear rim shots accurately or to be able hear each individual wire on a brush drumstick skitter across a drumhead. Needless to say, because audiophilia tends to be a process of extraction, hi fi fireworks again had (have) the tendency to take a front seat. The fact that the hi fi world was also graced with “perfect sound forever” at about the time this new amplifier technology started to take hold just added to the pizzaz. Yikes! Getting music out of a system in those days was like a high wire act. I’ve been there.
As I mentioned previously, it doesn’t require a state-of-the art sound system to capture instrumental attack to a believable level, nor does it require an amplifier with astonishingly fast rise times and limitless bandwidth, but one thing is for sure. To be able to embrace the full measure of what music has to offer, we need to take an interest and study how different instruments and artistic interpretations interact to create the form of music notes, including attack.
Speaking of timbre and instruments, I ran across an incredible Decca recording yesterday:
12 Stradivari, Janine Jansen (violin) and Antonio Pappano (piano). I listened to Tidal’s MQA version. Here’s a
link to give you some background on what went into the production of this album. Yes, there were 12 different Stradivarius violins played. I was transfixed, and I would love to talk about it. There are no wrong answers here.
). But just like many others who have detailed their gear, it provides a useful metric for the readers as to her (or any user's) bias and preferences and to help the reader's context when specific discussions occur. For example, I always find it useful to learn if a user prefers SS or tube amplification, DAC's etc. I see no downside in these sorts of disclosures.
