Sublime Sound

[PeterA]

Bazelio, I remain open to whatever possibilities I may encounter in the future. For now, adjusting to not adjusting VTA for different LPs, using a second tonearm on a table designed for only one, not having to worry about inflating pneumatic platforms, and not having to stare at acoustic room treatments that have been in my living room for years, is about all the change I can deal with at the moment. I'm used to slow and deliberate change, not fast, revolutionary disruption of my norms.

Perhaps something not emphasised enough in my reports is that these changes, aside from the 3012R and Master Signature, cost very little relative to the resulting improvement in sound and listening experience.

I plan to live with and enjoy this sound for a while until sailing season starts up again. What happens after that is anyone's guess. A road trip is more likely than trying to audition different speakers and electronics in my own system.

 

[bazelio]

I love the look of your room without those tube traps, Peter. You obviously have a very understanding wife who allowed those eye sores in her living room all those years. LOL. And pneumatic platforms - who needs them. I can fully understand the sense of relief.

 

[DaveC]

Here's why the a cable like Ching Cheng that was chosen on a 100% subjective basis is much more of a "tweak" vs a well-made "audiophile" power cable.

Speaking for myself, my idea of a good power cable is one that has been optimized for it's use by using science and engineering. Here are some design considerations.

- Conductors that are rated at about 108% IACS, so are much more conductive than the copper standard.

- Insulation with much less dielectric absorption vs typical PVC, surrounded by filler material with much less dielectric loss vs typical cables. Put simply, the insulation absorbs and releases less energy out of time with the 60 Hz signal.

- Electrical specs ideal for the 60 Hz signal it carries, this means the Inductance, Capacitance and Resistance are much more ideal vs a typical 3-strand power cable.

- Shielding that keeps power supply noise from propagating into the system.

- Grounding that is not run parallel with hot and neutral conductors, not twisted in the same bundle.

- Plugs that use much higher conductivity pure copper electrical contacts vs Brass

As I said previously, I have no issue with people choosing to use whatever makes them happy, but to call CC "neutral" and other, far superior power cables "tweaks" is totally backwards. CC is the definition of tweak, it has relatively poor objective performance and preference is entirely subjective. It's cheap, and that does not make it less of a tweak. It's simply a cheap tweak.

 

[PeterA]

My opinion is that when we start as audiophiles, dealers start us with such high end defined sound on some standard amplified records. No way when you set up your first Magico system, would you have then used good classical recordings and BSO as a reference in the same way as you do now, and your progress to the next Magico would have been on the basis of being used to that sound, and possibly getting an easier trade in to the next stage. If, as you mentioned to Tima, you are now actively looking at acoustic live classical as a reference, and moving away from the previous "high end defined sound" that you yourself had chosen, you need to re-look at your auditioning style. So you need a big bang different type of audition rather than moving step by step still having a large part of what you used before for your reference.

I did not get advice from dealers when I set up my first Magicos, the Mini II. Nor was there any trade in advantage from a dealer. I paid less for my Q3s than I had for my Mini IIs, both bought used. I made those purchases based on what I thought sounded most real to me at the time. Of course I chose the sound I had. Does not everyone chose the sound they have? I chose it, enjoyed it, and am now moving toward something different.

Referencing live acoustic music is not a recent belief, nor is it something I have just started to do. That started a long time ago as described in my many posts about music events and references.

If the sound of Magico speakers has such a distinct signature, how is it possible that I feel as though the sound is now very different? Perhaps my former "hifi" sound was a result of those devices in the room and system as I described in my post above and not so much the speakers. If you blame that sound on the speakers, and perhaps the SS amps, why does it now sound so different to me? The speakers and SS electronics are still there and the sound is very different from what it was before.

 

[bonzo75]

I did not get advice from dealers when I set up my first Magicos, the Mini II. .

what were the audition recordings you were using then, and were you as active at the BSO

 

[DaveC]

Does not everyone chose the sound they have?

No. I'd actually prefer other things but I'm limited by space and money.

I'd have switched to Alsyvox panels or a larger horn system if I could manage it. I like what I have now though.

 

[PeterA]

I don't think so.

The way I see it, you're using power cables that soften and warm the sound, removing the room treatments and having no toe decreases the ratio of direct to reflected sound so you're hearing more reflected sound at higher SPL. I would also say you're adding noise via the AC line.

Further, replacing footers with specific wooden oak blocks and using carefully selected power cables and setup is simply another kind of tweak, it's NOT de-tweaking.

There's absolutely no doubt you can make the sound closer to what you'd typically hear live, I was just a show last night and listened from several different positions and unless you're near front row there is a lot more reflected sound vs at home.

So I get it, and I have no issue with it, I believe people should do whatever they want and achieve whatever sound they enjoy. However, I personally think this is not a de-tweak, it is simply a re-tweak and now it's tweaked MORE than before.

Saying this type of setup is more "natural" and "de-tweaked" is a very excellent use of language by ddk but IMO it's manipulative as who wants a synthetic-sounding tweaky system? Which is what you think you had before... laughable!

I also think we're conflating hearing detail on the recording, close-mic'ed by the engineer, that was intended for you to hear in a way you'd never hear live, and trying to make it sound more like you'd hear it live. Again, nothing wrong with this AT ALL, if you love it, I'm super-happy for you, but let's call a spade a spade.

Dave, I am describing what I hear in my system. You are describing my system without having heard it. I heard the fancy power cables before I toe-in my speakers. The speaker positioning to straight ahead was the last thing I did. The previous changes actually changed the sound more than the speaker toe-in did.

The Ching Cheng power cords and my stock Pass cords certainly sound different than the fancy audiophile cords. If you want to describe them as soft and warm sounding, I would describe the fancy cords as harder and cooler sounding in direct comparisons, but I would add that the fancy cords made the backgrounds blacker and the sound was less alive and breathed less. So, perhaps that is a preference thing. The former sound more like live music to me.

I agree about the reflected sound, and different recordings can sound very different based on mic position. I don't know much about it, but I do prefer sitting fairly close to live musicians, about 10' in a chamber setting, or seventh row at a concert hall. Actually, the sound in my room seems louder at the same volume setting without all of the acoustic treatments in the room. I guess there is less absorption and more reflection, but after careful speaker positioning, I don't seem to have many obvious room issues. (Al M. was actually quite surprised at how well the room behaved without all of the treatments).

These various changes combined have resulted in me hearing more differences between various recordings, not less changes. A close mic'd recording like the Sheffield Drum track or the RCA Appassionata is even more direct and energetic than it was before, and other recordings sound even more layered or distant than before. I did not write much about this effect, but the fancy cables, isolation, and room treatments actually made recordings sound more similar to each other than different. I actually think I am hearing more detail now, not less detail, though images are less outlined than before, and things are not as unnaturally spotlit and highlighted as they were before.

So, I guess you can describe this as more tweaked than before, but the bottom line is that I removed things, I did not add them. And sure, there is some fine tuning going on with my oak footers to balance the sound of my rack support, because in this case I am working with what I have and trying to improve the sound.

How we use language to describe what we are doing and what we are hearing is certainly a factor in all of this. And when it comes to the reasons for how and why these effects occur, I really don't know. I am not a designer and do not grasp the technological reasons behind what I am hearing. I am just trying to share my experiences without stepping on anyone's toes.

 

[PeterA]

I love the look of your room without those tube traps, Peter. You obviously have a very understanding wife who allowed those eye sores in her living room all those years. LOL. And pneumatic platforms - who needs them. I can fully understand the sense of relief.

Thanks Brian. I told my wife just yesterday how accommodating she had been all these years as I packed up the truck to put the TubeTraps in storage. She said, "Honey, the sound is what matters." I love that woman.

 

[DaveC]

You are describing my system without having heard it.

Absolutely not. I have not commented on that or disagreed with your characterization of what you are hearing, I'd never do that.

I described the OBJECTIVE changes and what they are doing, understanding them may be useful to some, especially since they are characterized as de-tweaking, when from my perspective they are simply different tweaks than what you had before.

Also, as I keep saying, I have no issue with your preferences, but I think it's characterization isn't accurate. CC cables are super-tweaky. You can't even get the same ones right now, just like the Iron-Lung Jellyfish, certain Volex power cables, White Lightening Moonshine speaker cables and all the other similar low-cost tweak products people have found by 100% subjective evaluation over the years.

I also use wood blocks for footers, SAE grade 1 and 13 wool felt and other mundane things for various audio applications. The thought they are "natural" or "de-tweaking" or whatever seems bizarre.

 

[PeterA]

what were the audition recordings you were using then, and were you as active at the BSO

I feel as though I am being cross examined on the witness stand in the horn vs Magico trial of the century.

I used the same Johnny Hartman "Once in Every Life", Carla White "Mood Swings", assorted chamber music and Beethoven 9th LPs that I use now, plus some, when auditioning my first Magicos. That was about twelve years ago.

I now go to more live music at the BSO and other settings than I did then, but I grew up going to the Chicago Symphony with Soliti and Gulini, "the best back in the business". I did not pay much attention as a child, but I was exposed to music. I heard Carla White, a scat artist in NYC many times at the Blue Note, and other places, including in Tokyo and at my wedding.

I admit that I don't know live music like you do, Kedar. I just know that what I hear in my system now reminds me more of it than before.

 

[bonzo75]

I am just saying the two of us probably desire the same thing but you just don't know it yet

 

[PeterA]

No. I'd actually prefer other things but I'm limited by space and money.

I'd have switched to Alsyvox panels or a larger horn system if I could manage it. I like what I have now though.

Dave, did someone else chose you current system for you, or did you chose it for yourself?

If I were less constricted by space and budget, I may well have a different system too, but no one else chose my current system.

 

[bonzo75]

Thanks Brian. I told my wife just yesterday how accommodating she had been all these years as I packed up the truck to put the TubeTraps in storage. She said, "Honey, the sound is what matters." I love that woman.

Did she mean honey, the sound is what matters and you will get it someday? Or is that love speak for I told you so

 

[spiritofmusic]

Ked, that's like saying you know that you and Peter both want Rita Ora. But that as of now only you fall asleep thinking about her.

 

[PeterA]

I also use wood blocks for footers, SAE grade 1 and 13 wool felt and other mundane things for various audio applications. The thought they are "natural" or "de-tweaking" or whatever seems bizarre.

Dave, I am not claiming that these "things" are natural, though an oak block certainly seems like a natural wood or product to me. What I am trying to describe is that the effect of removing these devices from my system, or replacing the air isolation with oak blocks is moving the system in a direction that sounds more "natural" to me. Sorry that seems not to have been clear.

The oak footers are a temporary experiment, to be replaced by something else perhaps in the future. This is about fine tuning the sound of my supporting rack. The oak footers do not seem to suck out the harmonics from the music the way the air isolation products and some power cords seem to.

Removing sound treatment devices from my room and not replacing them with anything seems like de-tweaking to me. But if you disagree, that is fine.

 

[PeterA]

I am just saying the two of us probably desire the same thing but you just don't know it yet

You have a funny way of sharing the love. We may or may not desire the same thing. Hard to say without defining what it is. Even if we do, there may be multiple ways of achieving it.

 

[microstrip]

Hello Tim, I consider live acoustic music to be my reference, and always have. I have written much about this in my posts about live music events that I have attended with my Boston audio WBF buddies like Al M., Madfloyd, and Ack. My more recent, "post-tweak", sound is MUCH closer to what I experience in the concert hall and chamber settings. This is because the sound from my system now breaths, is alive, fills the room, and sounds more natural, less hifi.

My "post-tweak" sound is also a new preference precisely because it reminds me more of my live reference. My old sound had been my preference because I had not yet been exposed to the sound I now enjoy from my system. I knew no better. (There is an admission for Bonzo)

I have often posted at the risks and benefits of using just live music as a reference for an illusion created from a subset of information of the real performance. The risk is that our aural memory can be very selective and influenced by our biases - remember we are comparing apples with oranges. The main benefit is that we create a personnel unique standard, no one can debate or question it! As long as you enjoy it, you will write it is "more natural and less hifi" . In some way these are the same arguments used by the people that believe and tell everyone that mono sound of the forties and fifties sounds more natural and less hifi.

We should remember that people who love and are experts in music or simply musicians are not the best listeners for system evaluation or particularly demanding - this myth has been addressed and analyzed statistically by F. Toole. But it is still used by marketing as if it was true.

 

[PeterA]

Ked, that's like saying you know that you and Peter both want Rita Ora. But that as of now only you fall asleep thinking about her.

Marc, Kedar is dreaming about his future Master Signature on his future tonearm in his future system. I listen to my Master Signature daily. We both want the same cartridge and natural sound reminding us of the real thing. I am able to listen to something resembling that goal.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Things sounding more "natural" is surely as much a down the rabbit hole concept as all our other protestations of "clarity", "natural detail", "transparency", "neutrality" etc.

For me, I've gone in the opposite direction from Peter. Way improved room acoustics, properly isolated tt, leading to the dynamics uptick of balanced power transformer/audiophile dedicated lines, tonal/timbral accurate audiophile cables and power cords, and liberating of spkrs performance w audiophile footers.

I retain "stock" options as alternatives, and other than the new room being an invariable, any move to stock isolation/power is a move back to more hash, blandness and haze.

My suggestion to Peter would be
the opposite to Ked. Maybe Peter now you've discovered cheaper better options on tweaks, you might investigate cheaper better options on components.

 

[PeterA]

I have often posted at the risks and benefits of using just live music as a reference for an illusion created from a subset of information of the real performance. The risk is that our aural memory can be very selective and influenced by our biases - remember we are comparing apples with oranges. The main benefit is that we create a personnel unique standard, no one can debate or question it! As long as you enjoy it, you will write it is "more natural and less hifi" . In some way these are the same arguments used by the people that believe and tell everyone that mono sound of the forties and fifties sounds more natural and less hifi.

We should remember that people who love and are experts in music or simply musicians are not the best listeners for system evaluation or particularly demanding - this myth has been addressed and analyzed statistically by F. Toole. But it is still used by marketing as if it was true.

Fransisco, we do not need a reference, but I find it helps, and live acoustic music is the place I want to start. I have also used other systems which I enjoy, which I suppose is more apples to apples. Kedar and perhaps others think I should get out more and listen to more systems, to have a more informed opinion about the possibilities or reproduced sound. I am open to that. I think I am slightly less lost than I once was regarding all of this.

I do find it interesting that KeithR is concluding a year long speaker search journey having heard many different types of speakers and systems. He may end up with a pair of speakers not dissimilar in typology and material to my dreaded Magicos. What does that mean?