Ron’s New System

[DasguteOhr]

Even though I don't use high capacitance anything, I still wouldn't distinctly say it's dull or warm.

As with the mm cartridge, if the capacity is too large, the bandwidth and dynamics are reduced. it shifts more into the midrange and bass. Some people like this sound because open highs can sound aggressive. Usually something is wrong in the chain. You often hear in forums that Silvercable is to blame, but that's not true, it just exposes weaknesses elsewhere.
It is then quickly exchanged for copper cables and all is well again.
Only few people question it why?

 

[PeterA]

As with the mm cartridge, if the capacity is too large, the bandwidth and dynamics are reduced. it shifts more into the midrange and bass. Some people like this sound because open highs can sound aggressive. Usually something is wrong in the chain. You often hear in forums that Silvercable is to blame, but that's not true, it just exposes weaknesses elsewhere.
It is then quickly exchanged for copper cables and all is well again.
Only few people question it why?

I think someone described Ron's cables as having high capacitance. Yet, visitors describe his system as very dynamic with incredibly realistic sounding bass. Ron prizes midrange and says he is very happy with the sound he is getting. His videos clearly demonstrate a lot of high frequency energy.

Your comment does not seem consistent with the actual observations of the sound of Ron's system.

 

[Al M.]

His videos clearly demonstrate a lot of high frequency energy.

Too much so. Quite unbalanced, unlike hearing the system in person.

 

[Ron Resnick]

It was Mogami 2534. I found it competent, maybe a wee bit closed in and slightly less extended on top. The Belden is more open and reveals a bit more information. It took a few days of run-in to take the edge off the Belden

Thank you.

 

[PeterA]

As always we have different ways of living this hobby.

It is curious that you do not refer what I would consider mandatory in this subject - listening to creations of the different audio experts and then choosing one to follow. I listened to several treated rooms and disliked them - so I decided to go by myself with minimal treatments, just those needed to treat some specific interactions of my particular room with my speakers.

IMO understanding the experts objective is one key point of this subject. I can't see it as a normal executive-style decision-making process. For me it is also a process of faith and believe. If I had to build a treated large stereo room for myself I would hire SMT Acoustics to carry it and would put white acoustic cloth over it to make the room look like a common room. Audiophile friends I respect and have similar preferences told me good things about their treated rooms and I liked what I could read from and about them. But surely I would visit one of such rooms existing in my neighborhood before fully committing.



Sorry, what you have shown us are extremely limited measurements. Better to stick with the subjective listening - the interpretation of these minimalist measurements will only bias you.

Nice post, Fransisco. Ron has heard Bonnie's work at Steve's place, and he did visit David in Utah twice. He asked each of them for advice about his room. I think he used elements of each. I do not think either has visited to hear the result. He did also solicit advice for the grounding schemes and power delivery.

I do not think of the executive style decision making process either. I am married to an executive, and how she makes decisions at work is very different from the way I make decisions about my system and room. I generally rely on the advice of someone who knows more that I do, and then I assess progress based on my own knowledge and experience, focused mainly on listening and preference. It helps to have a clear reference and then actually finding and hearing various examples of that sound from particular components and systems. Then understanding what it is that makes that sound, and trying to emulate it, step by step. Same with the room.

 

[PeterA]

Too much so. Quite unbalanced, unlike hearing the system in person.

No doubt. My point is that if high capacitance emphasizes the mids and lower frequencies at the expense of the high frequencies, why would his videos clearly show emphasis on the highs? His measurements do not. One of the things I actually think videos are good at is conveying tonal balance. Ron told us that his videos are good with tonal balance.

DasguteOhr suggests we would hear an emphasized lower range on Ron's videos based on the high capacitance of his cables. Perhaps I am not following or understanding the discussion here.

 

[Al M.]

One of the things I actually think videos are good at is conveying tonal balance. Ron told us that his videos are good with tonal balance.

To both statements: They're not.

***

(I do think that in later stages Ron equalized the video result to get a tonal balance that more mimics what he actually hears in person, but I'm not sure about the result. In any case, that effort in itself indicates that the tonal balance of unequalized videos is off.)

 

[Lagonda]

It was Mogami 2534. I found it competent, maybe a wee bit closed in and slightly less extended on top. The Belden is more open and reveals a bit more information. It took a few days of run-in to take the edge off the Belden

The Mogami 2549 has that smidgen more treble energy compared to the 2534, i changed a total of 20 m for that smidgen.

 

[DasguteOhr]

No doubt. My point is that if high capacitance emphasizes the mids and lower frequencies at the expense of the high frequencies, why would his videos clearly show emphasis on the highs? His measurements do not. One of the things I actually think videos are good at is conveying tonal balance. Ron told us that his videos are good with tonal balance.

DasguteOhr suggests we would hear an emphasized lower range on Ron's videos based on the high capacitance of his cables. Perhaps I am not following or understanding the discussion here.

I placed on the front wall two 1" x 30" acoustic panels behind each ribbon panel.


View attachment 108982

BEFORE
View attachment 108979




AFTER
View attachment 108981

I haven't heard Ron's system and don't presume to judge it.
but when I see this measurement there are three possibilities.
1. The measurement or microphone is not working properly.
2 .The room absorbs too much high frequency energy on the way to the microphone.
3 .The high capacity ensures an early drop into the treble.
I just pointed out from the technical side that this can lead to these problems.

 

[PeterA]

To both statements: They're not.

***

(I do think that in later stages Ron equalized the video result to get a tonal balance that more mimics what he actually hears in person, but I'm not sure about the result. In any case, that effort in itself indicates that the tonal balance of unequalized videos is off.)

Al, are you saying that what I think is somehow wrong, and what Ron told us is also somehow wrong? Are you really not just disagreeing with our opinions? How can our opinions be wrong?

whatever Ron did to his video, he claims it is representative. I’m taking him and his word and I’m listening to the video and I’m sharing my observation. You’re telling me that my observation is wrong and what Ron is telling us is wrong?

I thought you told everyone that I am the absolutist and elitist and that I am dogmatic.

 

[PeterA]

I haven't heard Ron's system and don't presume to judge it.
but when I see this measurement there are three possibilities.
1. The measurement or microphone is not working properly.
2 .The room absorbs too much high frequency energy on the way to the microphone.
3 .The high capacity ensures an early drop into the treble.
I just pointed out from the technical side that this can lead to these problems.

thank you for clarifying your comment. I have not heard the system either and I’m only basing my comment on what I have read from others who have heard the system and describe what it sounds like. I also have heard his videos which he describes as representative of the total balance of his system. I have long questioned the inconsistency of what I hear on the video with what the measurement shows.

Perhaps Ron, or Phil, or Al, or any of his other visitors can tell us about the tonal balance of what they hear in the room. I agree, based on my own experience with acoustic panels and Tubetraps, that they can rob energy and certain frequencies from the presentation. I hear it as enhancing contrast.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I hereby officially withdraw from the record my statement that with the external microphone the tonal balance of the videos of my room is representative of the tonal balance heard actually in the room.

While I think the tonal balance representativeness may be directionally correct it still does not sound like what I and everyone else hears in the room. It's definitely not accurate enough or representative enough to base upon it the various speculations about cable capacitance and acoustic room treatments and high frequency energy being discussed from afar by people who have never listened to music in the room.

After my good faith foray into digital video recordings I remain of the view that with respect to unfamiliar recordings in unfamiliar systems in unfamiliar rooms ("unfamiliar" meaning you have not listened to familiar music on that system in that room yourself) videos are useful only for comparing a single change in an otherwise constant system. As a way to understand the sound of a system in a room in which you have not been present I think videos generate more confusion and heat than understanding and light.

 

[bonzo75]

I hereby officially withdraw from the record my statement that with the external microphone the tonal balance of the videos of my room is representative of the tonal balance heard actually in the room.

You should have just done iPhone then

 

[Al M.]

Are you really not just disagreeing with our opinions? How can our opinions be wrong?

Of course, if I disagree with an opinion, I think the opinion is wrong.

That is English language 101.

whatever Ron did to his video, he claims it is representative. I’m taking him and his word and I’m listening to the video and I’m sharing my observation. You’re telling me that my observation is wrong and what Ron is telling us is wrong?

For Ron's opinion, see two posts down from yours.

I thought you told everyone that I am the absolutist and elitist and that I am dogmatic.

I reported on my subjective opinion, based on listening over my laptop computer via my headphones.

 

[Al M.]

After my good faith foray into digital video recordings I remain of the view that with respect to unfamiliar recordings in unfamiliar systems an unfamiliar rooms ("unfamiliar" meaning you have not listened to familiar music on that system in that room yourself) videos are useful only for comparing a single change in an otherwise constant system.

Agreed. There is some limited usefulness to that comparative approach, even though it is still quite coarse.

As a way to understand the sound of a system in a room in which you have not been present I think videos generate more confusion and heat than understanding and light.

Agreed.

 

[Audiohertz2]

If one has to explain what’s being heard in a video doesn't represents whats being heard in the room then the discussion is already irrelevant .


Regards

 

[Ron Resnick]

I have long questioned the inconsistency of what I hear on the video with what the measurement shows.

This is a mystery only to people who think that videos allow you to learn and understand the sound of a system they have never heard in real life in a room they have never visited.

 

[bonzo75]

I would love to have a video argument here and on Al’s thread just to correct a few wrongs

 

[Ron Resnick]

I would love to have a video argument here and on Al’s thread just to correct a few wrongs

I would prefer you correct those "wrongs" on the Acoustically Coupled Videos thread.

 

[PeterA]

This is a mystery only to people who think that videos allow you to learn and understand the sound of a system they have never heard in real life in a room they have never visited.

I understand. I was operating on a false premise that you presented when you said the video sounds like your system. I know what I hear on your videos. My videos represent the sound of my system in some meaningful ways and I assumed videos are the same in that sense.

I will disregard your past comments which operated on the basis of this false premise and all of the discussion we’ve had based on that false premise. It is now meaningless.

You’re free to change your mind about the videos. I understand that. I don’t know enough about your measurements to know if they have anything whatsoever to do with the sound in your room.