You need to find someone with old TAS issues (I have some digitally but not the oldest ones) and read . You will find there is not much new under the sun and these debates were raging throughout the 80s and 90s. The technology in Peter’s system is old and had been largely discarded only to be rediscovered by us Latter Day Saints of horns and SETs. TAS was actually where I learned about the rebirth of SET in the late 90s. Of course at that time I thought they were crazy (how could this ancient idea sound good??!!).
Natural Sound
- Thread starter PeterA
- Start date
I think there is thinking amongst a lot of audiophiles out there that they need to maximise apparent detail and resolution and THEN they will achieve natural sound and they pursue this at the expense of what really gives natural sound. They have been lead to believe this from decades of magazines and advice from friends (blind leading the blind?). The pursuit of getting EXACTLY what is on the recording (or so they think) dominates a large segment of high end, whether they admit this or not. It is also why I think 95% of all hifi is crap for what it is supposed to be for.
As a scientist, I am very sympathetic with the technology perspective of this hobby and the need to have something tangible other than ones imperfect ears to rely on.
Getting a room setup correctly for decay, FR etc. Will help some aspects but it won’t change perceptions about naturalness and inherent gestalt of feeling like one is listening to the real thing...in that respect the measurements are relatively meaningless...and thus the difficulty in definition of terms. How to characterise a “synthetic “ feel to the sound or a leading edge that has unnatural “bite” (not just on one recording of course...it could be the recording otherwise). IMO, insidious distortions are the culprit and tell our brain “not real” or “not natural”! The best electronics largely eliminate these synthetic cues and can transform nearly any speaker to something way beyond what was thought possible. Power cleanliness has also been a key to eliminating insidious distortions.
It leaves us with trying to understand deeper why one thinks his system is natural sound. So then the guy starts writing more. Now, imagine you have two guys writing they have natural sound
Guy 1. The way Diana Krall's voice was dead in the center with luscious midrange and the stockfisch CD engulfed me with an enveloping sound was very natural, it jumped more forward than my previous X amp.
Guy 2. The second one writes about Oistrakh, Kogan, Rubinstein, and highlights why he thinks one component is colored and less naunced and the other one was showing the difference in the venues of the 3 LPs and how the piano strike with its body was seamless and the flow etc etc...
Now you have something more concrete to go with and relate to. You can then try buying referenced recordings of both and try it on a couple of components those guys highlighted to try and relate to. Once you are on the same wavelength, then sure, you can better understand one guy's natural or absolute
Francisco,
You’re accusing Tim of what you’re guilty of more than anyone else. You started a fight regarding the term “natural sound” first with me and then with Peter and you’re doing it again in this post. You’re the one weakening the forum, how many times do you attack and gnaw incessantly like the proverbial rat in every thread then either play the victim or hide behind unity of some type. Why don’t you put words, actually other people’s words in your case behind live experience instead of crying about use of terminology and “natural sound”. You have multiple ultra high end systems to talk about why don’t you take your vision or other people’s vision that you admire and put in context with your own. Tell us what great things you’ve accomplished with whatever vision you picked with your own systems that’s better, equal or worse. Why don’t you do that instead of harping about “natural sound”? No matter what you say is “natural sound” as used is an actual defined and demonstrable quality, there are simple proven methods of achieving it mentioned by a number of people here who accomplished what they wanted using these tools. What do you have? What are you offering to anyone besides complaint on semantics. Put action behind your thoughts, as they say SHOW ME!
david
Andromeaudio, are you suggesting that if one is brave enough to start a system thread and include, besides many pictures and videos, his actual thoughts on the sound and why and how he decided to assemble his particular system, no useful discussion can be had except between the only people who have actually heard the system? Is that were we should go?
Perhaps this thread should be closed to all besides me, Madfloyd, and Al M. (The other dozen or so people don't bother with WBF.) Or are you saying, discuss away, it's just useless? Why then are you here reading this and contributing to the discussion and even offering advice to someone else who has not heard the system?
I am happy you are here and encourage you to write whatever you want as long as it is on topic.
I really dont understand why you get so offensive
Your system with those older design horns and lamm gear is not a system that many people are familiar with simply because not many of them are around .
Microstrip cannot compare this to his system , neither can i .
You tube vids and discussion only takes you so far .
If you dont find my post on topic , thats fine with me .
I ll leave it at this then.
Your system with those older design horns and lamm gear is not a system that many people are familiar with simply because not many of them are around .
Microstrip cannot compare this to his system , neither can i .
You tube vids and discussion only takes you so far .
If you dont find my post on topic , thats fine with me .
I ll leave it at this then.
Last edited:
I totally agree Dave. People are interested in all sorts of different sounds. You in fact offer different cables to produce different sounds for different tastes and different gear. You send out cables for demo tours and welcome, even encourage feedback about your products. This understanding and approach seems to help you and your business and your happy customers.
You must be referring to ddk here, and perhaps Steve W. who suggested people visit David in Utah. I read various reports from those who visited Utah and decided by myself to visit and hear the systems and meet the man behind them. I felt no elitism, nothing off-putting, before the visit or afterwards. David did not deride or reject the things I enjoyed and spent my money on. Others did that freely and often in these pages. David pushed nothing and said very little during our listening.
The first afternoon, he asked me to put on one of the LPs I had brought with me. We listened, and I shared my thoughts. Sometime after hearing all of his systems, I did realize I was doing it all wrong. He did not tell me that, I understood it, and it was for me only. I realized I previously did not know any better. In that sense, it took this trip to discover it. Bonzo told me to get out more. I took his advice. I see nothing wrong with that.
It was an intense period of learning for me, that is all, and that is what I am trying to convey in my Visit to Utah thread, and here. To me, David does not come across as elitist. Others may be put off. That is for them to deal with. I do not think David cares what others are doing, and I do not either. Other systems and sounds are for their owners to enjoy. Is that off-putting or elitist?
I do think people should enjoy whatever they like, whatever type of system, sound, and music. I do not see anything not genuine about that. Of course, it should apply to me as well.
Here again you must be referring to ddk, as I am not selling anything. I am just sharing here. What the set up service provider thinks is necessary is between him and his clients, it seems to me. I do not think David is selling this service. He provides it to customers, and very generously provides it to others who contact him. He provides this information for free, as far as I can tell. I do not understand the problems caused by his lack of sharing technical data. His set up advice is based on listening. I learned that first hand by doing my experiments with my old system. I learned by doing in my own system and room what David means by Natural Sound. There is nothing exclusive about it. It is actually quite simple.
If you refer to his business of designing and selling turntables, racks and specialty items, sharing technical data should seem to be between him and his clients. I know one guy who saw a video of the AS2000 on YouTube and claimed from the image of the belt on the platter, that the turntable must be inferior. All this without listening. I heard his table a couple of years ago and compared it directly to a well known reference. That is all I needed to know about which is better. No technical data necessary. I think he sold all ten of his AS 2000 turntables before ever producing the first one. Now you can no longer get one. And the only one that ever resold, sold for an increased price. I do not see what help the guy needs.
Do you know how many audiophiles play/played instruments or go to classical concerts? Like everyone I know in this hobby. My friend has 50 guitars, both acoustic and electric, while I played clarinet/piano. Our systems are totally different - is one natural and the other not?
We all have live music references and prefer different sounds. The joy of this hobby.
btw, suspending @rbbert is a bit much, mods. it should at least be visible why it was done.
Keith, I did not know that. I was wondering why he was no longer filling up this thread. When?
BTW, not sure we all have live music as a reference. That was discussed on this thread some pages ago. I once claimed that and got lots of push back.
I agree that we prefer different sounds and that is part of the joy of the hobby. I'm just trying to describe the type of sound I like. I now realize the name offends.
David,
You are not my mentor, I decide what to write in WBF and when.
As I said before, one reason I discuss the pretended Natural Sound is that their supporters systematicaly present a false, exaggerated and misleading view on what is the alternative sound reproduction to support their claims.
Thanks for your views.
I have read and followed all of this with interest.
My thinking is probably simplistic, but often we overcomplicate things.
We are all individuals, with different cultural backgrounds and languages. In different countries, with different domestic enviroments, methods of house construction.
Sound interacts with the immediate environment,; live music, recorded.....wherever, whatever.
Furthermore, none of us are the same. We don't hear the same things. Just as we don't see, interpret colours/spectrum in the same way. We each have a unique ear. We each hear/interpret sound uniquely. What I might consider natural, you ( the "royal" you) might might consider artificial, strident... whatever. That is your opinion and there is nothing wrong with it. Each to their own.
I'm sure we all strive for what we individually perceive as probably "natural" (to us). But one person's "natural" is another's "absolute" . Neither are wrong and equally, neither are necessarily right. As long as you enjoy the music, so be it. That is all that matters.
We all have a lot invested in this hobby (or is it an obsession) and it is therefore interesting, if not helpful, and often useful, to understand what others are doing; their individual direction and choices. Who am I to criticise? The ability to ask questions is useful.
My view is recording, mixing and pressing quality has a much larger roll than is sometimes given credit. It is not always the gear, but the material. I have the same album on various pressings, some of which are unlistenable, or manifestly change the sound/emphasis of my system, in my opinion.
I have a lot of respect for HP and what he and GJH did for reviewing and the wider audio community. I grew up with the, in my opinion, ridiculous (to me) Flat Earth brigade in the UK. The damage they did was immense, and much of the equipment we hold in high regard today was absolutely derided. Pretty much anything Japanese; the Americans skated through as the class A amps gave them some street cred in the early 80's, as did Maggies; the Europeans were virtually non existent.
The arrogance of the majority of British hifi publications was unbelievable, if not disturbing. Thankfully some of us were fortunate enough to have access to media from other countries for a more balanced view.
Please let's not go back to the times of "absolute " right and "absolute " wrong. None of it is an absolute. None of it is wrong. It is all in the eye of the beholder. But what we can do is learn from others. No one is perfect and no sound is going to be universally perfect.
However, it might just be perfect in the moment.
Regards to all...Gerard
My thinking is probably simplistic, but often we overcomplicate things.
We are all individuals, with different cultural backgrounds and languages. In different countries, with different domestic enviroments, methods of house construction.
Sound interacts with the immediate environment,; live music, recorded.....wherever, whatever.
Furthermore, none of us are the same. We don't hear the same things. Just as we don't see, interpret colours/spectrum in the same way. We each have a unique ear. We each hear/interpret sound uniquely. What I might consider natural, you ( the "royal" you) might might consider artificial, strident... whatever. That is your opinion and there is nothing wrong with it. Each to their own.
I'm sure we all strive for what we individually perceive as probably "natural" (to us). But one person's "natural" is another's "absolute" . Neither are wrong and equally, neither are necessarily right. As long as you enjoy the music, so be it. That is all that matters.
We all have a lot invested in this hobby (or is it an obsession) and it is therefore interesting, if not helpful, and often useful, to understand what others are doing; their individual direction and choices. Who am I to criticise? The ability to ask questions is useful.
My view is recording, mixing and pressing quality has a much larger roll than is sometimes given credit. It is not always the gear, but the material. I have the same album on various pressings, some of which are unlistenable, or manifestly change the sound/emphasis of my system, in my opinion.
I have a lot of respect for HP and what he and GJH did for reviewing and the wider audio community. I grew up with the, in my opinion, ridiculous (to me) Flat Earth brigade in the UK. The damage they did was immense, and much of the equipment we hold in high regard today was absolutely derided. Pretty much anything Japanese; the Americans skated through as the class A amps gave them some street cred in the early 80's, as did Maggies; the Europeans were virtually non existent.
The arrogance of the majority of British hifi publications was unbelievable, if not disturbing. Thankfully some of us were fortunate enough to have access to media from other countries for a more balanced view.
Please let's not go back to the times of "absolute " right and "absolute " wrong. None of it is an absolute. None of it is wrong. It is all in the eye of the beholder. But what we can do is learn from others. No one is perfect and no sound is going to be universally perfect.
However, it might just be perfect in the moment.
Regards to all...Gerard
PeterA said:
(...) But apparently the title of this thread is very offensive to some. That’s been an important lesson for me.
My sense from the responses is that to many folks the title and the contents of the thread come across as too much of a “zero sum game”: “if my sound is natural, then yours can’t be”.
BULLSHIT! Are you now a self declared authority on "natural sound" as it relates to these threads?
Who are you to accuse people of lying and exaggeration? No one is pushing anything on you or anyone else, it's you who's providing a false narrative about something you've never experienced and bullying others that it doesn't exist. Since you're so knowledgeable why don't you layout your achievement after spending all that money buying some of the best that there is. What have you accomplished that gives you the right to call achievements of others exaggerations and falsehoods? Come Profesor, what have you accomplished spending all that money on high end gear, show us!
david
PS- I'm not telling you what to write, I'm replying to your posts.
Last edited:
How? And for whom? For it to be misleading, don’t you have to have heard the system to form the judgment? and then it is only your opinion.
It’s how David describes the performance of his four systems. I heard it too, and explained what I heard by writing that list. I bought one of those systems and I understand the description. I decided to name this thread Natural Sound to book end my former system Sublime Sound.
You don’t agree with my explanation. I’m sorry you find it misleading. And I am sorry I mislead you by what I have written. The title of the thread is what it is.
At least you profess to be ignorant of the subject, let me add a few stupid smilies since this is within your graspWell, I can not be a self declared authority on something that does not exist outside the real world, except in a few selected places!But in order to be knowledgeable we have to learn - in my case part from what I read and listen , really a lot from participating in this forum.
I will not address money expense or value for money at this moment - I bought the Lamm's consciously at used discount prices. But I enjoyed every moment of my experiences, I can assure you.
!david
Vlad, that is an important observation. It is either natural or it is artificial. If it is natural, there are different degrees of natural which is why there are different systems that achieve it. I’m only describing my system and the other systems I’ve heard that achieve it in my opinion. They all sound different, but they share certain characteristics. That is what this is about. We can all have our opinions, and I know what others thought of my former system. It’s all good.
Guys, the horse is dead already. Lay down your clubs. This thread’s original topic is one of the most fundamentally important and thought provoking for any true audiophile. Peter took on the monumental task of addressing the question of what is Natural Sound and went on to explain in great detail his interpretation of the term within countless well thought out postings. My hat is off to him for his tireless, unwavering effort.
To see the thread degenerate into this endless battle of shameless egos is a real insult to the author and the effort he has put forth to explore this subject.
To see the thread degenerate into this endless battle of shameless egos is a real insult to the author and the effort he has put forth to explore this subject.
Similar threads
