Natural Sound

[Lampie519]

No, they are also differences but in pro there other factors important. Flexibility in microphone cables (noise free is mentioned sometime as the cable is moving with the performer it changes some physics within the cable causing "noise"). Installation cables (that is what i use for mixing consoles and at home for small signals). Speaker cables i do not use (direct drive ESL's do not care about the cables used). In case i test a general power amp i just use what i have at hand as it is not my main system.
Power cables is something else as i found some "magical" SpinX cables by Spindeco (offered by the distributor via a friend of mine) He gave me some "samples" but the next day i called him and informed him that he will not get them back and that i will "steal" them from him... i made it up by reparing some stuff for him (mostly guitar amps and vintage microphones etc. as he is a musician as well).
These cables are only available here in the Netherlands (don't know why).
I contacted the manufacturer but no answer yet... maybe there is a marketing plan they do not want to disclose yet.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Cables as component always seems like overkill to me. What happens with the next upgrade from the same company ? Is it better in all systems, like manufacturers/dealers will often claim ? Different sure ! But better ? Component where voiced with certain cables, often with associated equipment, those would be the correct cables for these component, not the last generation 7 or 8 of the fancy designer cable, designed because the last model had stopped selling in sufficient numbers. I also understand why simple copper cables seem to work well in vintage systems, because that was what was being used to voice it when it was being designed, before cables became a component that had to sound different for each new generation. In the 80's and 90's a lot of cables where designed to add a little warmth to metallic tweeters and shitty sounding treble from early digital, Cardas Golden Reference and Straightwire Virtuoso come to mind. As treble improved and audiophiles started treating /over treating their rooms more treble extension/bass slam became the norm for every new cable generation, Odin comes to mind. What do we want to hear ? The equipment the way the designer heard it, or the way the cable manufacturers latest creation makes it sound ?

'cables as components' is simply an assessment made reflecting on the degree of the changes you hear. it's a viewpoint as to the significance of the change relative to an upgrade (or three) in gear.

my opinion is you cannot know whether it rises to that view until you hear it, spend time with it. i've had a handful of those experiences over multiple decades. in degrees. most such cable comparisons showed minimal differences.....maybe still important though.

also not every system can equally reveal cable changes.........not every context equals the same result for a particular cable......and perceptions differ listener to listener. cables are a piece of a larger puzzle. but an important piece for sure.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Hi Peter, I thought I'd chime in after just attending a fantastic solo piano recital of various Chopin pieces and Mussorgsky/Pictures. Our first concert for over a year, and a total thrill.
And as good an example of natural sound as you could imagine, as we sat less than 10' from the piano.
I guess I'm fair game for being a cables booster and investor over the years.
All I can say is that the brand I've chosen doesn't scream "hifi checklist". I've never bought cables for blacker blacks, incisive treble, holographic imaging, etc etc...since I don't hear these attributes live and thus don't seek them out at home.
My system being tubes based, high efficiency, single driver/full range/minimal crossover/steady 8 Ohms, has always benefitted from changes to bring me closer to the live experience, and my "checklist" is mids density, texture, timbral accuracy, tonal variation/discrimination, flow. I heard all these attributes today over 90 mins truly inspired live piano. And the cables I've chosen play in that company, and so help my sound to.
Two weeks ago I heard Blue58's Extreme for the first time not grab me by the lapels after the TAS/USBdriver/USBcard upgrades he made w Emile's help. Barry was using stock power cords temporarily, 99m per m off a reel. The sound was acceptable, nice even, but somewhat soulless and "pixellated".
Yesterday I heard the selfsame Extreme now w the top version of my power cord on it, ditto on his Aqua dac, and the sound was compelling, such realistic weight and warmth in mids, fully appropriate levels of speed and detail. No "checklist" drew attention to itself, just a fully organic and holistic presentation that so reminded me of great vinyl, and yes, somewhat of what I heard today, insofar as any home audio can start to replicate the live experience.
I've heard so many, way dearer, cables that as you've summarised pick apart and highlight adjectives in the lexicon, none of which appeal to me. And none that do what my cable choice does as concerns a natural sound. I commend you for finding a super cost effective option, I didn't get quite so lucky on saving money that well Lol. All I would say to you is that there are plenty of us not looking for checklist sound from our cables, just the flesh and blood and gestalt of live music.

 

[Lampie519]

my opinion is you cannot know whether it rises to that view until you hear it, spend time with it

So this is true for any part of the system. What works in mine can differ in yours. Just because i do not want to spent 1k Dollars on cables does not say that there are not good at all. Just for me cheap cables work ! My philosophy is that a cable is a part of a system and not making it. If you need very expensive cable to get what you want better change something else and get more for less. The "problem" with cables is that it is something you can change easy like tubes but it is actually bad practice. I do not blame anyone who does as this is technically the "only" thing many can do, hoping it will accomplish something but it is actually a desperate move ....

 

[sujay]

Hi Peter,

Firstly, I must commend you on your incredible and continuing quest thus far in search of what you call natural sound. At the very least, it’s a labor of love. I also commend you on painstakingly chronicling your efforts.

Now the question I have is a bit generic but also specific to your quest and this thread - what is your purpose of documenting this journey:

- is it to merely inform people of your journey so far and your learnings therefrom and/or
- elicit feedback, both positive and negative
- spark a debate
- any other reason I may not have been able to cover

The answer to this question may help me and hopefully others understand the reactions over the last 79 pages of this highly informative, and entertaining thread. I do apologies in advance if these have been answered elsewhere in this thread and I may have overlooked

Cheers

Sujay

 

[PeterA]

Hi Peter,

Firstly, I must commend you on your incredible and continuing quest thus far in search of what you call natural sound. At the very least, it’s a labor of love. I also commend you on painstakingly chronicling your efforts.

Now the question I have is a bit generic but also specific to your quest and this thread - what is your purpose of documenting this journey:

- is it to merely inform people of your journey so far and your learnings therefrom and/or
- elicit feedback, both positive and negative
- spark a debate
- any other reason I may not have been able to cover

The answer to this question may help me and hopefully others understand the reactions over the last 79 pages of this highly informative, and entertaining thread. I do apologies in advance if these have been answered elsewhere in this thread and I may have overlooked

Cheers

Sujay

Hello Sujay,

I described the reasons for starting the thread to Tima in response to one of his posts. I can not now go back to find exactly what I wrote, but here are the reasons:

1. To document my audio system, how it evolves and to encourage feedback and discusson.
2. To share my new system with the membership, including description, photos, and videos.
3. To describe what led up to the decision to buy these specific components, to describe the type of sound I am after, and to describe what I am hearing from the new system.
4. To publicly thank David Karmeli for his guidance and for his superior service as a dealer.

I did the same with my previous system. The first system thread is called Sublime Sound. This second system thread is called Natural Sound. These two titles were carefully chosen to show symmetry and reflect my thoughts about how I experience their sound. In the middle is my thread called David Karmeli's Natural Sound in Utah which serves as the transition moment when I was exposed to this type of sound and when I realized that I had to have this type of sound and system in my own room.

These kinds of system threads are my favorite threads to read on WBF. I enjoy learning about what others are doing, why they are doing it, and what the results are. I enjoy the photos and the videos. I thought I could contribute and add some of my own content to this wonderful audio forum. Finally, these threads serve as references for me to go back and see what I have done. Visitors can share what they have heard. They create stories about their authors and I can share links to them to my non WBF friends to tell them something about me that they might not know.

I am just sorry that the thread has devolved as it has with so much animosity and so many off topic comments.

 

[spiritofmusic]

You do talk a lot about your own system, spirit. I do not believe participants here, much less Peter claim "we're all looking for" anything. (That's the Moody Blues.) Self-righteousness does not become you. You're much more readable when your posts are not mostly about you.

Sorry Tim, self righteousness is a curse afflicting every guy with an expensive hobby and the internet to provide them an outlet to show off about it. I'm as guilty as sin. But I'm trying to repent Lol...I'll say less about my system on here since you have pointed out the obvious.
Peter has more than once talked about himself and other audiophiles chasing the dreaded hifi checklist via gear, and especially cables. I was merely trying to say that everyone's checklist is not the same. I'm also trying to express the opinion that Natural Sound on it's own is the culmination of things on a checklist. It might strike you first, and you then describe the constituents later. I mean, whatever you might call natural surely needs to be described a little in how it appears natural to someone else you're sharing the description with. It's not the term I'd have come up with, but since it's the term under discussion, surely it's worth trying to describe the Parts that make up the Whole, even though the latter is greater than the former.
I might stick around on the thread. But I do promise to mention my system less.

 

[Al M.]

I'm also trying to express the opinion that Natural Sound on it's own is the culmination of things on a checklist. It might strike you first, and you then describe the constituents later. I mean, whatever you might call natural surely needs to be described a little in how it appears natural to someone else you're sharing the description with. It's not the term I'd have come up with, but since it's the term under discussion, surely it's worth trying to describe the Parts that make up the Whole, even though the latter is greater than the former.

I think that goes to the heart of the matter, indeed.

 

[wil]

As requested, and promised, here is Peggy Lee's Fever heard with the vdH GC:

Indeed. That is fine. I am hear to learn and to share. Criticism will be what it is.

Thanks for posting the video. I asked mainly because I thought the Peggy Lee sounded great on David's Bionor system and was curious about how your's compared. I'd say overall they exhibit a lot of commonalities: great bass, presence and dynamics. The Bionar's, naturally, have a larger presence, and sense of ease, benefiting from a large room that can carry them. Also interesting that I sense I can hear the room in both recording which may illustrate the lack of room treatment beyond furniture. (I'm not saying I think this is good or bad -- just an observation).

 

[PeterA]

I'm also trying to express the opinion that Natural Sound on it's own is the culmination of things on a checklist. It might strike you first, and you then describe the constituents later. I mean, whatever you might call natural surely needs to be described a little in how it appears natural to someone else you're sharing the description with. It's not the term I'd have come up with, but since it's the term under discussion, surely it's worth trying to describe the Parts that make up the Whole, even though the latter is greater than the former.
I might stick around on the thread. But I do promise to mention my system less.

I think that goes to the heart of the matter, indeed.

Gentlemen,

I described the system in the first ten posts on page one of this thread. I also described the sound of the system on the first page with references to live music and specific recordings. I then shared my notes in list form of the sound I heard from ddk's four systems. I then posted some videos of my new system with reference tracks and videos of my former system.

People asked questions and follow up questions about the content on that first page, and I did my best to answer those questions. Ian heard the system and described its sound. Al later heard the system for himself and also described the sound.

If all of this information is insufficient to "describe a little in how it appears natural to someone else you're sharing the description with." or that it does not adequately describe "the Parts that make up the Whole," I do not know what to say. I have given it my best effort. You will have to look to someone else for the answers you seek. You can do an advanced search to find how ddk defines Natural Sound. He has done so in many places, including on his threads about the turntables and his rooms.

I also suggest you reread the first ten posts of the thread, read Ian and Al's account of the sound of the system, and listen to the videos. At this point, I am at a loss. I am quickly running out of patience and losing interest in repeating myself any longer. Others have read the thread and have told me they get it and understand what I am trying to convey.

I wrote this at the end of post #5. It summarizes my goal and what I am trying to achieve with my system.

After Utah, I realized I had to forget about hifi attributes, the glossary of terms, and breaking the music into “bits and pieces.” I needed to get back to hearing the music as it is presented in the concert hall. I wanted to experience the music’s power, its meaning, its gestalt.

Sincerely,
Peter

 

[PeterA]

Thanks for posting the video. I asked mainly because I thought the Peggy Lee sounded great on David's Bionor system and was curious about how your's compared. I'd say overall they exhibit a lot of commonalities: great bass, presence and dynamics. The Bionar's, naturally, have a larger presence, and sense of ease, benefiting from a large room that can carry them. Also interesting that I sense I can hear the room in both recording which may illustrate the lack of room treatment beyond furniture. (I'm not saying I think this is good or bad -- just an observation).

Hello Wil,

Thank you for watching the video and sharing your thoughts. David and I have different pressings, different systems, and different rooms. It is fun though to compare and to hear the similarities and differences. The important thing for me is that it is pretty easy to hear the qualities the systems share and those are the reasons I chose to get this system.

You make an interesting comment about hearing the rooms in our two videos and how this may relate to room treatment. There is a fascinating thread over on Audionirvana about sound and room treatment. The OP posts a link to a video. There follows a discussion about how the sound changes each time more treatment is added. Some find the fully treated room sounds best. I think the untreated room sounds best, but that is clearly a minority opinion. @ddk also shares his views about this video on that thread. There is an effect of the sound of the drum as more and more room treatments are added. The more treatments, the one hears of the room, and the less the drum sounds like a drum. Of course everyone has a different opinion about which level of treatment he prefers. You may find the video and following discussion interesting.

Here is a link to the thread on Audionirvana: https://www.audionirvana.org/forum/...nd-magic-rocks-to-make-your-system-sound-good

Here is a link to the YouTube video: (just click where it says watch on YouTube )

 

[tima]

"They should not be used to flavor or shape the sound to your liking." I don't think you can use this statement without appearing hypocrite. Natural sound is the sound to your liking.

Tang yours is an interesting argument and you make an interesting point. The way I understand what you're saying goes something like this:

A. Each cable has its own sonic characteristics. (implied)
B. Choosing a cable you like means choosing a particular set of sonic characteristics.
Conclusion: Therefore whatever cable you like is choosing a flavor or shaping the sound because every cable has its own sonic.

Ergo someone who says cables should not be used to flavor or shape a sound to their liking is a hypocrite because no cable does not shape or flavor sound.

I can accept the conclusion following from the premises. Seems like a sound argument.
Not sure I accept the part about being a hypocrite which implies dissemblence or feigning a posture that does not match the reality of behavior. However, I suppose that is a judgement call about intent. I see Peter as working through his approach - pehaps sometimes struggling with the words, which we all do - but without meaning to deceive.

I won't pretend to speak for him, but what I understand is the viewpoint Peter tried to express is simple: I don't choose cables that alter the sound of my electronics, or I choose cables that are neutral relative to the sound of my system.

Of course the 'problem' is we cannot know the sonic characteristics of a set of cables without actually trying them - same for any part of a system. We have to make a judgement about their influence within the system as a whole. There is no absolute neutrality and relative neutrality is still a judgement call.

 

[pjwd]

Hi Peter

Well that is a pretty weird demo !

If the idea was to create a space for live music :
- by the time you got the whole band in it would be a cacophony of reverb without treatment
- when you treated it you would not vomit random foam pads all over the joint like that but treat it more like a live music venue with strategic treatment to allow a delayed but strong reverberant field
If the idea was to create a space for hifi the material you are playing would come with its own reverb either of the recording space or artificially added and no treatments and no furniture would sound even more reverberant and just plain weird with a non correlated overlay of room and recording reverb

I don't think it helps illustrate very much but on a technical level it was interesting
Phil

 

[zerostargeneral]

Dear Peter,

I am in awe of your class, taste and first chair mind. To me the most evident character of your journey is your openness to all things experiential without weak kneed bias.

You Sir are a true scholar that never allows impulse to reign over thought, bravo once more.

Kindest regards, Fanboy UK.

 

[bonzo75]

Hello Wil,

Thank you for watching the video and sharing your thoughts. David and I have different pressings, different systems, and different rooms. It is fun though to compare and to hear the similarities and differences. The important thing for me is that it is pretty easy to hear the qualities the systems share and those are the reasons I chose to get this system.

You make an interesting comment about hearing the rooms in our two videos and how this may relate to room treatment. There is a fascinating thread over on Audionirvana about sound and room treatment. The OP posts a link to a video. There follows a discussion about how the sound changes each time more treatment is added. Some find the fully treated room sounds best. I think the untreated room sounds best, but that is clearly a minority opinion. @ddk also shares his views about this video on that thread. There is an effect of the sound of the drum as more and more room treatments are added. The more treatments, the one hears of the room, and the less the drum sounds like a drum. Of course everyone has a different opinion about which level of treatment he prefers. You may find the video and following discussion interesting.

Here is a link to the thread on Audionirvana: https://www.audionirvana.org/forum/...nd-magic-rocks-to-make-your-system-sound-good

Here is a link to the YouTube video: (just click where it says watch on YouTube )

The example in the demo is far from reality. Also, if it was a drum with rapid drum beats, in the untreated room the reverberations would have drowned out the rest of the music. For that reason alone, if this were a proper music passage with drums, some treatment would have been the lesser evil.

 

[tima]

The example in the demo is far from reality. Also, if it was a drum with rapid drum beats, in the untreated room the reverberations would have drowned out the rest of the music. For that reason alone, if this were a proper music passage with drums, some treatment would have been the lesser evil.

Which recording are you talking about? The LP or Peter's ?

 

[pjwd]

[QUOTE="bonzo75, post: 725028, member: 5331"
lesser evil.
[/QUOTE]
Thats a bit dramatic .. I am sure you could turn it an ok room with treatments focused on the dispersion patterns of speaker and tastes of the listner

 

[bonzo75]

Which recording are you talking about? The LP or Peter's ?

The demo of the acoustic panels that Peter put up in the post I quoted. It's from an audio nirvana thread

 

[bonzo75]

[QUOTE="bonzo75, post: 725028, member: 5331"
lesser evil.

Thats a bit dramatic .. I am sure you could turn it an ok room with treatments focused on the dispersion patterns of speaker and tastes of the listner
[/QUOTE]

Yes I am referring using the cheap panels shown in the video

 

[Andrew S.]

I won't pretend to speak for him, but what I understand is the viewpoint Peter tried to express is simple: I don't choose cables that alter the sound of my electronics, or I choose cables that are neutral relative to the sound of my system.

As a general philosophy, this, respectfully, seems a pretty good idea to me.