Who said anything about you?
Natural Sound
- Thread starter PeterA
- Start date
Who said anything about you?
I'd love to see the survey results where audiophiles sub divide into those after natural sound, and those not, and the numbers of the former and latter deciding to spend on tweaks.
It's so good to see after a long period of this thread maintaining an uneasy truce, we're getting the first "definitive" statements that those looking for a natural sound don't tweak. Its good to know finally that I was mistaken in my quest, and indeed wasn't interested in achieving a natural sound after all Lol.
Marc,
@Folsom is correct. The "Natural Sound" we're discussing here is ONE type of of sound based on a single specific criteria. It has nothing to do with consensus or about anyone's personal interpretation. While there are a variety of systems and varying degrees of "naturalness" that qualify as "Natural Sound" there are more that don't. It is a unique type of sound and not at all what you think it is. To achieve "Natural Sound" as meant by me and some others here one needs to first understand what is. It is also a fact that not all equipment sound "Natural" as intended in this thread as it is a fact that one cat litter box, a power cord or the wrong tweak will undermine the entire sound system. People are free to choose whatever path or sound they want and hold all kinds of opposing opinions, personally I have ZERO interest in changing anyone's mind about it but don't make up what we mean by "Natural Sound" or assign your own inaccurate definition to it.
david
Sometimes I think no one actually reads the posts they are responding to, and it's certainly possible that a lot of what seem to be disagreements are actually just poor communication.
Adding euphonic noise and distortion has nothing to do with tweaks, typically the opposite. I may be extrapolating somewhat from long held stereotypes, but "traditionally" an SET/horn system has been felt to be euphonically distorted. I have no idea whether or not that holds true for anyone here's system, but it is almost axiomatic that if all or most recordings sound "real" or "natural" then the system is overlaying a significant sonic signature that obscures differences in recordings.
Note that PeterA has said that one of the characteristics of his system is that he feels it does not do that; nevertheless I'm sure we have all heard systems, some aspiring to be "high end", which do just that.
This thread is about me sharing my new system with the members here: The decisions that went into buying the new system, the components themselves including the set up, and then what it all actually sounds like. At least, these are the things that I would like to discuss here in my system thread.
If you find yourself focused on something other than what the thread is about and what other posters here are discussing, perhaps you should enjoy the many other threads on this forum.
Last edited:
David, so now we're getting to it. Peter is saying there are many ways to get to natural sound, he's trying not to be exclusionary. And to that he's to be commended in both being open minded and getting the epitome of a natural sound w his new system.
You otoh are saying you only recognise one specific definition of natural sound, and that's all you're interested in.
Capital N, capital S, if you could Trademark or Copyright it, you would.
I'm CERTAINLY NOT going to re-hash previous discussions on this subject but yes, "Natural" means David K's entire tweak-system, and nothing else. This is the issue that keeps coming up, but I don't care to debate it any further and would suggest doing so will not go well and I'd just avoid it. David is great at using language to manipulate feelings, both good and bad. That's all I'll say on the subject.
But I think it's important for everyone to know when David says natural sound he means his system, when other people say it, it certainly means something different. Like it or not, that's how it is.... " It is a unique type of sound and not at all what you think it is."
You think you know natural? You don't know natural!
Just so we have our definitions straight and are communicating clearly, as was mentioned a few times... this is an issue as much or more than any disagreements about factual matters.
The good SET's have 1% or less distortion typically, as in imperceptible. Horns are often also very low distortion because they have very little travel. But I can tell you I've heard plenty of both that wouldn't qualify as natural. While many horn-ish and SET items may be natural sounding, considerably more are not if you ask me. You don't see any advocates of "natural" saying just buy any horn speaker and you'll be better off.
But by all means elaborate on euphonically, because I don't see how that is an objective term we can discuss with at this point. And so you think tweaks inherently reduce noise and distortion? I can tell you with authority that not many do, and even often if they do they cause other issues.
Last edited:
Peter, you've asked a number of people to take their thoughts elsewhere because they are straying from your above stated parameters which are specific to your system. However the title of the thread is "Natural Sound"'
which to me invites a more wide ranging discussion.
Are you saying you don't want any probing of that concept? I think it's kind of interesting and maybe I'll eventually learn something from it.
No, unfortunately we're not getting to it at all and we wont as long as you believe that this is personal. What @PeterA and I said from the beginning is that while "Natural Sound" is specific it's not limited to only to my system or components I sell as @DaveC claims but he's right about knowing it or not even if he said it in a derogatory sense. You're commenting in a very specific thread about specific system purchased by the owner for specific type of sound quality and once again you want to expand it to your system and your concoct of the terminology I'm stopping you from doing that and @PeterA continues to ask to remain relevant and take it somewhere else. It's hard enough staying in one lane as it is
david
I'm CERTAINLY NOT going to re-hash previous discussions on this subject but yes, "Natural" means David K's entire tweak-system, and nothing else. This is the issue that keeps coming up, but I don't care to debate it any further and would suggest doing so will not go well and I'd just avoid it. David is great at using language to manipulate feelings, both good and bad. That's all I'll say on the subject.
But I think it's important for everyone to know when David says natural sound he means his system, when other people say it, it certainly means something different. Like it or not, that's how it is.... " It is a unique type of sound and not at all what you think it is."
You think you know natural? You don't know natural!
Just so we have our definitions straight and are communicating clearly, as was mentioned a few times... this is an issue as much or more than any disagreements about factual matters.
Dave, I spent a week with David Karmeli And listened to four different systems there plus some digital. You and I have a completely opposed understanding of what David thinks natural sound is.
You are correct in stating that it is a “unique“ type of sound. This is what I tried to express in my thread about visiting Utah when I described what each of his four systems share in common and how they are different from most of the other systems I’ve heard anywhere.
Marc, this is a misrepresentation of what I have been saying. I do not think there is only one way to get to natural sound, but that is very different from saying there are many ways to get to it. It should be clear from the last chapter of my last system where I spent a year and a half making that system sound more natural. The new system simply has a higher degree of natural sound. That is, it sounds more natural than my last one, primarily because it is higher in resolution, though it is also more dynamic and less constricted sounding.
Respectfully, there’s no way that you can know whether or not my new system is the epitome of natural sound. You have not heard my system. I don’t even know if you’ve heard any of the components in my system. I will say David’s main system sounds more natural than my new system. It is only a matter of degree but they share the same sonic characteristics.
Last edited:
wil, discussing natural sound and what it means is fine because that is part of what the thread is about, namely the sound of my system.
A few here simply join in to criticize and argue and change the topic and that is why I am respectfully suggesting they take those conversations elsewhere.
Last edited:
Peter, I don’t know how you define “ways” in your sentence above but if it means combinations of speakers and electronics and cabling and room configuration/treatments then I am surprised, given the unlimited combinations out there, that you think there aren’t “many” ways to get to natural sound. Or, maybe “natural sound” is not really a general term but instead “ddk’s natural sound” or “Peter A.’s natural sound.” BTW, attaching your or David’s name to it is not meant in a negative or derogatory way but more as a descriptor.
Dave, you really do need to read what I've said and not what you think I have. My system hasn't come into my thoughts here, other than suggesting on many of the descriptions Peter has listed I feel I'm doing OK; I'm certainly not making anything personal, and you give yourself too much credit if you feel you need to "stop me" doing anything.No, unfortunately we're not getting to it at all and we wont as long as you believe that this is personal. What @PeterA and I said from the beginning is that while "Natural Sound" is specific it's not limited to only to my system or components I sell as @DaveC claims but he's right about knowing it or not even if he said it in a derogatory sense. You're commenting in a very specific thread about specific system purchased by the owner for specific type of sound quality and once again you want to expand it to your system and your concoct of the terminology I'm stopping you from doing that and @PeterA continues to ask to remain relevant and take it somewhere else. It's hard enough staying in one lane as it is
david
"ONE type of sound....a single specific criteria... a unique type of sound and not what you think it is..."
I think you can describe attributes of what you call natural sound as Peter has done, but the above statements seem almost intended to be wrapped in mystery and put in a box. And, I don't know how you can dismiss "personal interpretation" when you're talking about something as complex and amorphous as a verbal concept (natural sound) which refers the human response to music as played through technology.
Dave,I'm CERTAINLY NOT going to re-hash previous discussions on this subject but yes, "Natural" means David K's entire tweak-system, and nothing else. This is the issue that keeps coming up, but I don't care to debate it any further and would suggest doing so will not go well and I'd just avoid it. David is great at using language to manipulate feelings, both good and bad. That's all I'll say on the subject.
But I think it's important for everyone to know when David says natural sound he means his system, when other people say it, it certainly means something different. Like it or not, that's how it is.... " It is a unique type of sound and not at all what you think it is."
You think you know natural? You don't know natural!
Just so we have our definitions straight and are communicating clearly, as was mentioned a few times... this is an issue as much or more than any disagreements about factual matters.
Peace!
You don't need to make it personal and aside from our direct exchanges nothing I've said now and in the past regarding "Natural Sound" had anything to do with you or your company. We have different experiences and different goals lashing out isn't going to change that. Take a step back and consider why is a mass produced power cord is so controversial and threatening.
Sorry Marc poor choice of words, I should have said to refocus the conversation.
My intention isn't mystery wil, we're on page 57 here and Peter has another dedicated a large portion of another long thread to "Natural Sound" and trying to describe it. I myself have have numerous posts in this forum attempting to explain "Natural Sound" and here we are, my intention is framing the target more. We also have to consider that some things need to be experienced to be understood. There are independent posters here that have come to same understanding of "natural sound" on their own.
david
Not really, Peter. you are defining a new paradigm of sound, expressing an ode (numerous times throughout) to it's "creator," and have posted multiple threads trying to ascribe others to this point of view. And really, David's just a dealer of a different sort - moreso in the antique vein. All the while you now espouse a theory that hifi magazines, reviewers, and the industry are basically all wrong. Many of us have tried the things you've done and feel differently.
It's really not about your system at all, the way I view it. If you wanted it about the gear, it would have been worded entirely different. In fact, the new paradigm isn't used to evaluate gear, but as a system as @rbbert says and that's its difficulty as a theory. Things like balance and everything in its right place aren't real criteria.
I realize ddk has a wealth of experience and likes particular things as a result of years of experimentation; of course I respect that. He's obviously your mentor which is great too. But you talk about things in absolutes when many of us have tried and succeeded in different directions that you quite frankly, either don't have experience in nor chose to explore. You decided to purchase a turn-key system, carefully curated, by a dealer. In many ways, the Shindo or Spectral dealers do the same thing.
So while I respect your audio epiphany, not sure why you are offended when people criticize the movement. What did you expect to occur? High fives and baptisms? You are advocating for an approach that is available at one house. Expect push back when that's the case. "Natural Sound" is basically pejorative to other systems outside the house.
If it helps with the confusion you can call it what you wish but "Natural Sound" isn't my my creation nor did I define it I'm and advocate for it.
david
I don't really know how else to explain it, and I don't know where you got the idea that "tweaks" have anything to do with what I am discussing (I'm pretty sure you brought that up, not me). Euphonic distortions of various systems and individual components has been a topic of discussion in the audiophile world for decades, I shouldn't have to elaborate on it.
Similar threads
