Natural Sound

[microstrip]

(...) I understand completely what David, Peter and Tang are saying. With sake of being redundant, I still maintain that a trip to Utah to hear David's systems will quickly make the listener understand what he is getting at. Of course this is semantics and call it what it will, "lifelike", "real", presence, etc etc. What David has achieved is different than what Peter or I or others have achieved as each system and room mandates different paths. So in my system and where I am now is a long way from what I heard in David's system but the philosophy and logic behind it are in the listening. Mine is a far cry from theirs as I don't have horn speakers with increased efficiency over my 95 Db efficient speakers BUT there is nothing in this philosophy which mandates horn speakers. So in the end when we sit down and listen, we all might say we have "natural sound". The take away with David's path is simply, "less is more"

Steve,

I find your post confusing. Are you saying that efficiency is the main think that separates you from your desired goal of having Natural Sound? Why do you keep your current system around the Lamm's you like a lot, the SME 3012R and the CC's?

BTW, David advised about the Kharma's being an excellent choice for the ML3 and they are neither efficient nor impedance friendly to SET's.

What do you mean exactly by "system and room mandates different paths"?

 

[morricab]

It is not just because it is man made, it is because of the way stereo, our current sound reproduction system is done. The real sound field is sampled at several points in space, encoded in two channels, stored and then reproduced from two points, creating a sound field in space that is very different from the original. For those pretending that it is the same as the original, please remember that the sound field is a directional entity , represented by vectors, not a field of red poppies.

In some sense, mono listening is much less artificial than stereo.

So , you have never been able to suspend disbelief when listening to your system? Then I guess you really don’t know natural...

 

[ddk]

Steve,

BTW, Peter advised about the Kharma's being an excellent choice for the ML3 and they are neither efficient nor impedance friendly to SET's.

It wasn't Peter it was me who recommended particular Kharma speakers as a good match for the ML3, nothing to do with SETs in general. Having set them up several times at CES and installed the same combination at client's homes I know it very well, no compatibility problems.

david

 

[microstrip]

So , you have never been able to suspend disbelief when listening to your system? Then I guess you really don’t know natural...

Who tells you so? Fortunately we do not need Natural Sound to suspend disbelief - it is written is too many known places, no quotes are needed.

 

[rbbert]

@ Steve Williams said:
...The take away with David's path is simply, "less is more"

"Critical Mass Systems Rack Black Diamond racks (4) for Amplifier
Critical Mass Systems Black Diamond Horizontal Rack for all front end equipment
Full loom of Master Built Ultra cables (interconnects, speaker cable and power cords and USB cable )
Center Stage Feet V2 size 1.0 under all front end components and power supplies and V2 1.5's under amplifiers-and power supplies and Taiko Extreme as well as under my Lampizator Pacific"

@ddk said:
...This doesn't mean that all "natural sound" gear are equal and even the best "natural sound" can easily be transformed into something else with one wrong power cord.


From sublime to ridiculous?

 

[Lagonda]

I would only use Birkenstocks for that... leather, cork, rubber... all natural!

Or if you own fancy Italian cables like Vida or Kuro, Versace and Gucci are they way to go !

 

[tima]

This notion that something can not sound natural if it is man-made makes no sense to me.

Me neither.

Water dripping on rocks is natural or a mouse squeaking, but a women singing is not - huh?

Even though man is a natural being, man made stuff is ''synthetic', non-natural.

That is simply part of a definition some here have or how they use the phrase. I don't think that sort of difference in usage or belief is ever going away. I don't think they are trying to force a definition on people but it does not bring any congruence to the debate.

An easy way to resolve this is to consider "natural sound" as Natural Sound, that is turn what you call your description into a proper name. I don't know you feel about that but it does point to the linguistic character of some of the dissagreement. Probably not a happy resolution, but a relatively bloodless one.

 

[Steve Williams]

Steve,

I find your post confusing. Are you saying that efficiency is the main think that separates you from your desired goal of having Natural Sound? Why do you keep your current system around the Lamm's you like a lot, the SME 3012R and the CC's?

BTW, David advised about the Kharma's being an excellent choice for the ML3 and they are neither efficient nor impedance friendly to SET's.

What do you mean exactly by "system and room mandates different paths"?

David has huge speakers and a large room. I have big speakers and a smaller room. You’d have to agree that taming both rooms is a different path for each. Plus I have a huge CMS horizontal rack with 4 columns of 4 shelves each. David has his gear well away from the speakers. Plus my huge ML3’s with their 6 transformers per channel sit between my speakers.

 

[Steve Williams]

"Critical Mass Systems Rack Black Diamond racks (4) for Amplifier
Critical Mass Systems Black Diamond Horizontal Rack for all front end equipment
Full loom of Master Built Ultra cables (interconnects, speaker cable and power cords and USB cable )
Center Stage Feet V2 size 1.0 under all front end components and power supplies and V2 1.5's under amplifiers-and power supplies and Taiko Extreme as well as under my Lampizator Pacific"

Thats correct. Thats the best way I have found for isolation I suppose isolation and noise abatement is something you don’t feel important. It pales to what I used to have for room isolation. Oh and let’s not forget I had an acoustician to plan my room and sound amendments.
I suggest to you rbbert that these are things you might want to explore rather than once again making your flippant comments about what you consider ridiculous. I’d respect your comments more if you had heard the system and then made your proclamation of “ridiculous”.

 

[ddk]

I suggest to you rbbert that these are things you might want to explore rather than once again making your flippant comments about what you consider ridiculous. I’d respect your comments more if you had heard the system and then made your proclamation of “ridiculous”.

Some people aren’t worth replying to @rbbert is that person, why waste time he has nothing to contribute.

david

 

[microstrip]

David has huge speakers and a large room. I have big speakers and a smaller room. You’d have to agree that taming both rooms is a different path for each. Plus I have a huge CMS horizontal rack with 4 columns of 4 shelves each. David has his gear well away from the speakers. Plus my huge ML3’s with their 6 transformers per channel sit between my speakers.

Yes, we know about it ... But you did not answer at all to my question. Considering Peter stripping approach of Natural Sound your system and room looks mostly like a typical high-end system, even filled with tweaks I know well and also enjoy, but David says it sounds like a Natural Sound one.

An imaginary situation - if you had to change speakers tomorrow, keeping everything else the same, what would be your choice?

 

[Steve Williams]

Zu's !

I deal in realities micro. I’m not playing these silly little imaginary “what ifs” with you. I can tell you this that there was indeed a time in the past 1-2 years that I thought I was going to buy new speakers. However I can say in all candor that the idea is long gone. I love the sound of my system
where it is now. I can listen and be completely engaged all day and love everything I play. It’s you guys that are dumping on me that seem to be making constant changes to your systems. For me to get where I am took not only a lot of doing but so also a lot of undoing. I’m at peace with my system. It took me a long time to find my way here but 95% of my system is here on permanent status. There is only one thing I’m considering and I’ll save that story for a later day

 

[Joe Whip]

Exactly! I think giving this system thread the somewhat ponderous entitlement of Natural Sound, as good as Peter's intentions, results in derailing what is most interesting -- how his system presents music relative to how how other systems do so.

Looking forward to videos of the system when it's at it's peak. Would like to hear the Peggy Lee, Fever, if possible, also to compare to the Bionars!

Which Version of Fever, the commercial release or the “other one”.

 

[Lagonda]

I deal in realities micro. I’m not playing these silly little imaginary “what ifs” with you. I can tell you this that there was indeed a time in the past 1-2 years that I thought I was going to buy new speakers. However I can say in all candor that the idea is long gone. I love the sound of my system
where it is now. I can listen and be completely engaged all day and love everything I play. It’s you guys that are dumping on me that seem to be making constant changes to your systems. For me to get where I am took not only a lot of doing but so also a lot of undoing. I’m at peace with my system. It took me a long time to find my way here but 95% of my system is here on permanent status. There is only one thing I’m considering and I’ll save that story for a later day

I could see you with a nice, really heavy TT, made in Utah !

 

[Andrew S.]

An imaginary situation - if you had to change speakers tomorrow, keeping everything else the same, what would be your choice?

Well, that would very much depend on what was heard, available, within budget and was sympathetic to the room and music listened to.

As Dr. Williams said, there are many paths.

 

[microstrip]

Well, that would very much depend on what was heard, available, within budget and was sympathetic to the room and music listened to. (...)

Yes, all these variables would make the answer much more interesting ...

 

[wil]

Which Version of Fever, the commercial release or the “other one”.

Commercial, I think? I found the same version on Qobuz as played on David's vinyl in one of his Bionor videos.

 

[PeterA]

Exactly! I think giving this system thread the somewhat ponderous entitlement of Natural Sound, as good as Peter's intentions, results in derailing what is most interesting -- how his system presents music relative to how how other systems do so.

Looking forward to videos of the system when it's at it's peak. Would like to hear the Peggy Lee, Fever, if possible, also to compare to the Bionars!

I listened to Peggy Lee's Greatest Hits on Capitol the other day. It's the same LP that David has. I'll get around to recording it and posting it. Then I will read again that all system iphone videos suck and have no value. I'm looking forward to it. The one on the Bionars sounds excellent, even if recorded at too high a level.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron, it is not my philosophy. I simply have a goal of hearing natural sound out of my system. The list of bullet points was taken directly from my notebook as I said down and listened to David‘s four systems over seven days. It is not meant as a definition of a philosophy. It is a list of observations which attempts to describe the characteristics I heard . . .

I truly don't understand why you bristle at the idea that you have articulated, and that you are implementing, a philosophy. American Heritage dictionary definition 4) of "philosophy" is: "An underlying theory or set of ideas relating to a particular field of activity."

 

[PeterA]

Of course you can



I truly don't understand why you bristle at the idea that you have articulated, and that you are implementing, a philosophy. American Heritage dictionary definition 4) of "philosophy" is: "An underlying theory or set of ideas relating to a particular field of activity."

Ron, I guess you see it as a philosophy. I don't think of it as such, and certainly not "my philosophy". I don't think I even see it as an approach to a type of sound though I see that some may think that is what I am advocating. I am simply using a term to describe the sound I want from my audio system. The list I copied from my notes is simply an observation of what David's four systems share in common and a description of what I heard. I am after that sound here.