"Natural" Sound

[Johnny Vinyl]

Why not just turn on the system put on any recording you like for the music it contains and get lost in the music?

BINGO! Unfortunately far too many audiophiles have lost that which brought them into the hobby to begin with. Many times I think these threads are nothing but a pissing match to see who is more "audiophile knowledgeable".....Music? It's only a by-product now.

 

[NorthStar]

But it's fun to talk about too...and the various experiences we all had, have, and will have. ..Being in the moment present...in the now.

I strongly believe that some of the members here are closer to "natural sound"* than most. ...David, Mike, Steve, Jack, Francisco, Al, ...

* Natural sound reproduction from the best "capture" music recordings and played back on souped up setups.

 

[microstrip]

Microstrip,

Without a context or shared experience this quote is just as meaningless as Ron’s use of “natural”. What the heck is a discrete center image? a normal room? phantom image? discrete center sound? consistent with expectations?????

Just other words to indicate anything we please when describing complex and multidimensional experiences - by what’s happening via imagination in our own heads.


Furthermore, why does one have to be educated in this hobby? Who deems is so? And what should this education consist of? And how will this consistency be enforced?

Why not just turn on the system put on any recording you like for the music it contains and get lost in the music?

Caesar,

The quote was taken from the well known book "Sound Reproduction" written by F. Toole.

All the words have a defined meaning in the context of the sentence in the book. Well known audio scholars use, explain and even study the concept of "natural" in sound quality. Audiophiles also have debated it during a long time - our notions of natural are probably influenced by others opinions.

Anyone if free to spend his time how he likes. The main problem is when other people start questioning it and giving advice on better ways of doing things.

 

[Al M.]

BINGO! Unfortunately far too many audiophiles have lost that which brought them into the hobby to begin with.

Precisely. It seems that some people always itch about finding new flaws (see just a recent exchange on this thread) and chose to be permanently dissatisfied. Why can't you for once be happy with your system and just enjoy the music?

It even went so far that one fellow member recently accused you and me of not being real audiophiles because we were not constantly upgrading our gear. Seriously? Is that how darkly perverted our hobby has become?

On the contrary, I am PROUD for not having changed my amps and speakers in 24 years, and my analog cables in 22 -- while admittledly especially the amps have been heavily modified, and also have received a substantial upgrade with external power supplies. What did change in those 24 years is my digital source (twice, almost 20 years apart), the addition of a subwoofer, my room, and very extensive acoustic upgrade thereof. And the sound is vastly better than 24 years ago. I could not even have dreamt then of achieving the sound that I have now.

 

[caesar]

Precisely. It seems that some people always itch about finding new flaws (see just a recent exchange on this thread) and chose to be permanently dissatisfied. Why can't you for once be happy with your system and just enjoy the music?

....

Psychology research shows that about 50% of happiness is determined by genetic factors. So flip a coin there. If you have the right genetics to be happy, the remaining 50% is split into 10% of life circumstances that you cannot control, but 40% that you can control. Among some of what you can do is stop comparing your system to real live music, stop comparing to folks who you think have better systems/ rooms than you, hang out with friends who have similar tastes, and be grateful for what you have.

 

[Al M.]

Addendum to my above post:

On the other hand, I can also very much appreciate what others have achieved with their systems after having upgraded much more often.

 

[Gregadd]

I was told to follow this rule. Have one friend who is better than you and one friend who is worse.When you want to improve emulate the fieind who is better. When you need to feel good about yourself think about the friend who is worse. It works for stereo systems also.

 

[Al M.]

and be grateful for what you have.

Yes, be grateful for what you have. It is also an important anchor to obtain and keep the right perspective.

 

[853guy]

A system can sound effortless and unnatural at the same time.

That aside, the most effortless and natural sound I have heard was in a system with Magico M Project speakers. These are rather demanding in power and were driven by the large Pass XS 150 amps. So I don't believe that sensitivity necessarily equals effortlessness.

Hi Al,

I think you’re probably right. Electrical sensitivity per se won’t guarantee a system sounds natural necessarily, nor effortless, and of course, there’ll be systems like the one above that perhaps can sound both effortless and natural while being on the low side of sensitive.

I think in the context of what Steve has said about David’s system, it’s inescapable to consider whether a system based on technology birthed during the early stages of last century is deemed “natural” because of those technologies or in spite of them. Perhaps it is neither, but it gives me pause to reflect that technologies are often abandoned before their zenith, and wonder whether Alon Wolf’s experience in building the Ultimate contributed to the sound you heard with the M Project. Maybe. Maybe not.

 

[Al M.]

Hi Al,

I think you’re probably right. Electrical sensitivity per se won’t guarantee a system sounds natural necessarily, nor effortless, and of course, there’ll be systems like the one above that perhaps can sound both effortless and natural while being on the low side of sensitive.

I think in the context of what Steve has said about David’s system, it’s inescapable to consider whether a system based on technology birthed during the early stages of last century is deemed “natural” because of those technologies or in spite of them. Perhaps it is neither, but it gives me pause to reflect that technologies are often abandoned before their zenith, and wonder whether Alon Wolf’s experience in building the Ultimate contributed to the sound you heard with the M Project. Maybe. Maybe not.

Hi 853guy,

While the most effortless sounding system I have heard had speakers that demand more power, and while there may be examples for effortless and strained on both sides of the sensitivity issue, perhaps there could be a statistical corrrelation between effortlessness of sound and speaker sensitivity when looked at a large number of systems.

The most strained sounding systems that I have heard were all with low-sensitivity speakers driven by high-powered amps. Coincidence? Maybe. Maybe not.

Perhaps you had similar experiences that may have lead you to make your original statement.

 

[steve williams]

Hi 853guy,

While the most effortless sounding system I have heard had speakers that demand more power, and while there may be examples for effortless and strained on both sides of the sensitivity issue, perhaps there could be a statistical corrrelation between effortlessness of sound and speaker sensitivity when looked at a large number of systems.

The most strained sounding systems that I have heard were all with low-sensitivity speakers driven by high-powered amps. Coincidence? Maybe. Maybe not.

Perhaps you had similar experiences that may have lead you to make your original statement.

I agree about "effortless". As I said previously David and I have the same electronics so I am very familiar with what I heard. As efficient as my speakers are at 95 Db the Bionor was a whopping 115 Db so when I played a song on my system on my preamp it is usually between 12-16 however playing the same passage on David's system he had the gain at 3. Completely effortless

 

[Al M.]

It doesnt really matter, one speaker is more sensitive than another, as long as the amps you are using are not being driven into clipping .

Very debatable that clipping vs. non-clipping is the answer.

 

[steve williams]

It doesnt really matter, one speaker is more sensitive than another, as long as the amps you are using are not being driven into clipping .
Just to add if you are only able to use a small percentage of your volume control, ie becomes far too loud far too quickly then your system has too much overall gain.

Keith.

Very debatable that clipping vs. non-clipping is the answer.

I agree

we have the same electronics. Played the same song at my house and at David's. To achieve the same SPL his preamp was set at 3 and mine was 12-16. Has nothing to do with clipping so yes his played completely effortless

 

[PeterA]

It doesnt really matter, one speaker is more sensitive than another, as long as the amps you are using are not being driven into clipping .
Just to add if you are only able to use a small percentage of your volume control, ie becomes far too loud far too quickly then your system has too much overall gain.

Keith.

This is an interesting comment. I remember when I owned my old Pass Labs Aleph P preamp, there were left and right gain controls and one volume control. The two gain controls allowed for channel balance and continue gain adjustment of the preamp. For best sonics, Pass recommended that I set the gain controls to the minimum setting if it allowed me to set the volume high on the dial. This also gave me the advantage of having a large range of volume settings. If the gain controls were set higher, I would have had to set the volume control lower giving me less adjustability for different recordings or moods.

The sonics did slightly improve with both gain controls set to minimum gain, but I don't know the technical reasons. I think it had to do with not having to attenuate the signal as much. I remember having the volume control near the max for most of my listening, but it was not too loud because of the lower gain. Later Pass preamps have two or so fixed gain settings and not continuously variable ones.

 

[steve williams]

So if his preamp was only turned to '1' would that be even more effortless?
It sounds like he has too much overall gain, you' should' be able to use the full rotation of the attenuator.

Keith.

he did play it at 1. First of all I have no idea whether he has any attenuator. I don't

I think if you told David that he'd probably have a big laugh. You have no idea the set up for these speakers and I believe your inference doesn't cut it with me

 

[steve williams]

as I said there is no attenuator and I can see that you aren't familiar with Lamm electronics so the conversation is moot

 

[steve williams]

actually it's not and I don't get what you don't understand that we were playing at the same spl.

 

[Argonaut]

I rather like the look of 'my own' page 29 Steve

 

[steve williams]

I understand that you were hearing the same SPL, presumably you measured it, but because one preamp was only turned to a lower value does not make the sound more effortless, it just means that his speakers are more sensitive ,or he has far too much overall gain in his system.
The fact that you have to turn you preamp further does not mean that your system is less effortless, it just means you have better control of the attenuation ( volume knob).
As long as the amps you are using have enough headroom to drive your speakers properly ,ie not into clipping then both systems will be performing as intended.
Keith.

I undertand and agree with that but perhaps we are arguing the same thing from a different view.

 

[microstrip]

as I said there is no attenuator and I can see that you aren't familiar with Lamm electronics so the conversation is moot

Steve,

Attenuator in this talk is just being is a nice technical word for volume control.

The interesting aspect of this talk is that many amplifiers and preamplifiers seem to have excessive gain and we have to play them at low volume settings. However it seems it is intrinsic to the adopted topology - anything the designer tries to decrease sensitivity reduces sound quality. The Atmasphere MP1 m3.1 preamplifier has trims to lower the overall gain, but I prefer the sound with high gain, even at the cost of using lower volume settings.