I don't know. I've never heard your system, Marc, nor do you ever post photos or videos.
Natural Sound
- Thread starter PeterA
- Start date
- Status
I don't know. I've never heard your system, Marc, nor do you ever post photos or videos.
Peter,
Why are you comparing your own thread to business activities? IMHO business has very different ways of thinking, relying on copyrights, trade marks and trade rules.
Peter's articulation of the concept of natural sound he learned from David has appeared to attract more consternation than many of the also contentious topics on the forum. Maybe people could consider introspectively why this might be?
I think Tim's response to such consternation and criticism as "faux" simply stirs the pot, and contributes more heat than illumination.
I think Tim's response to such consternation and criticism as "faux" simply stirs the pot, and contributes more heat than illumination.
I'm not nearly in the stratosphere that most of you are in but reading this thread changed my whole perspective on home audio. The title made no impression on me at all, except that is was a description of what was being heard. Didn't look at it as elitist. Just descriptive. I'm old-ish. I've been into this hobby since I was 10, inspired by my uncle's R2R deck which I thought was cool. I also work tangentially to the music business and I've heard live music being recorded, as large as 50 pieces orchestras, on a dozen occasions. I've never been able to duplicate that feeling until I started using the lessons I learned reading about Peter's visit to David. So I'm grateful for this thread.
But let me say that I've stopped reading other forums because of the (dwindling) testosterone filled negative posts and now this forum seems to be allowing more of those and it's making me sad. I wish there was a place on the net that people could just talk about audio without all that garbage. I thought the respect people had for one another was the strength of this site but that seems to be going away.
But let me say that I've stopped reading other forums because of the (dwindling) testosterone filled negative posts and now this forum seems to be allowing more of those and it's making me sad. I wish there was a place on the net that people could just talk about audio without all that garbage. I thought the respect people had for one another was the strength of this site but that seems to be going away.
Ron, stated clearly, this is my audiophile goal: To assemble and set up a system that attempts to approach the experience I have when listening to live music. I describe such a system as sounding natural. This is not my idea. I am simply following the approach of others who identified this before me and exposed it to me. It is a specific approach with a particular result. It is not likely the right approach or result for those who need to analyze the music or sound of the system to enjoy it. Nor would I describe a system as sounding natural if it encourages me to analyze its sound, or I quickly notice compromises or strengths and weaknesses. We all analyze to some degree, especially if we are trying to better understand something.
I heard this natural sound in all of David's various systems during both of my visits. My old system achieved a degree of natural sound before I sold it, but only after changing my approach to set up, and the way I wanted it to sound. The new system goes further, and continues to move in that singular direction. It is a different kind of sound and listening experience, and I suggest it is only one alternative.
I do not know if what I mean by "natural sound" varies from person to person or system to system. I have heard it in different systems, and I know people who hear and appreciate it from those same systems, because I have discussed it with them. I have heard it from some videos too. I suppose I do not really know how to answer your question or what to make of Tim's comment.
You have been to hear David's system. What do you think, Ron?
Thank you, Peter, for taking us back to the beginning and for re-stating your view. Thank you for confirming your high-end audio objective, which in our structure is Objective 4) -- the one you added to the list: create a sound that seems live.
What do I think about what, exactly?
You are most welcome Ron.
Do you think what I view as "natural sound" varies from person to person and system to system?
I take what you wrote in Post #2,965 as "natural sound" to mean exacty what you wrote: "approach the experience I have when listening to live music."
Many people have this same Objective 4). Each such audiophile believes he/she is achieving what he/see believes sounds like live music. Each audiophile with this particular Objective 4) hears live music as an objective phenomenon -- a sonic target -- the sound of which he/she believes his/her system is succeeding in replicating.
Yet, the execution of this objective results in systems which, to my ears, sound very different. So I think different people hear live sound differently, and they assemble different sounding systems to solve for what each believes is the same "live sound" equation.
In conclusion, I believe "natural sound" from a stereo sounds different to different people, and varies from person to person.
Last edited:
@tima isn't wrong Ron. What else but "faux" when people engaged in a hobby with average prices in tens of thousands $ called HIGH end in a forum dedicated to What's BEST claim enragement, elitism and exclusion over a simple phrase "natural sound", "faux" is too polite and mild IMO! If not natural sound then what's the real aspiration of high end?
If keeping the pot cool means bowing down to idiocy and hypocrisy I prefer a scalding pot that's boiling over. Do you really want to give credence to the "faux" nonsense
?david
steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
I thought Tima”s reply was spot on@tima isn't wrong Ron. What else but "faux" when people engaged in a hobby with average prices in tens of thousands $ called HIGH end in a forum dedicated to What's BEST claim enragement, elitism and exclusion over a simple phrase "natural sound", "faux" is too polite and mild IMO! If not natural sound then what's the real aspiration of high end?
If keeping the pot cool means bowing down to idiocy and hypocrisy I prefer a scalding pot that's boiling over. Do you really want to give credence to the "faux" nonsense
david
That is close but not quite right, Ron. I’m actually trying to create the experience in my living room that is similar to the experience when listening to live music. It is a distinction with a slight difference.
Last edited:
Peter, you must be doing something rightI to upset so many people.
Well, let's face it. The idea is that there are many approaches to natural sound. But in the words of the "Natural Sound" proponents, natural sound comes in degrees. And to the perception of many, including mine, there seems to be implied that only one limited approach, certain high-efficiency speakers with certain SET amps, gives you the true Natural Sound. Everything else is second rate, and contains some degree of "unnatural sound", or "artificial sound". It is this superior minded attitude that has rubbed many people the wrong way, and has caused so much controversy since the thread started a year ago. It implies that all other approaches are less "natural".
Tim's oft-repeated assertion that there should be nothing controversial to the Natural Sound idea, because it simply strives to approach the sound of unamplified live music, seems in this context just a diversion from the real issue. There are many audiophiles who strive to approach the sound of unamplified live music with their systems, but their chosen system types are outside of the exclusive circle of "Natural Sound".Thus, they appear to count only as second rate in that circle.
Peter,
A twisted, unfair and untrue comment. Marc has contributed a lot to this forum, and we have many examples of photos of his listening room and system. See Ron's visit, for example, where we are given an high quality report of Mark great listening space. https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/visit-to-marc-c-s-spiritofmusics-house-in-england.23999/
Considering videos, IMHO telling someone does not post videos to assert sound quality is a compliment.
Yes, and it is why the word "natural" has such a strong marketing value - it reaches everyone.
But when complemented with a proper exposition of why we think some specific sound is natural in our opinion, it can be an excellent topic for debate.
I appreciate the clarification. But when you suggested, and we adopted, "create a sound that seems live" that is the simpler formulation which stuck on the objectives list.
Considering the sonic validity of videos is highly controversial, why don't you make a trip to visit Marc in person, listen to his system, and write here a full report? The English countryside is nice in the Summer.
Last edited:
As I have often referred you "are trying to create the experience in your living room that is similar to the experience when listening to live music" with your closed eyes.
The closed eyes and absence of all the visual cues makes all the difference. My personal reference, surely fragile, is what I have experienced sonically, visually and emotionally.
Ron, you do understand the difference between what I said and what you said, don't you?
I may not know the definition of natural sound but I know it when I hear it
- Status
Similar threads
