Rexp, I thought of a better way to answer your post above. Every system has an inherent sound, which is typically refer to as the system’s “sound signature”. The goal of my system remastering concept and process is to adjust the system’s “sound signature” to match the owner’s/listener’s personal preferences. It is what we all are aiming to do when we upgrade or change components and tweak our system for that extra bit of sound qualities we are striving to achieve.
Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
Rexp, I thought of a better way to answer your post above. Every system has an inherent sound, which is typically refer to as the system’s “sound signature”. The goal of my system remastering concept and process is to adjust the system’s “sound signature” to match the owner’s/listener’s personal preferences. It is what we all are aiming to do when we upgrade or change components and tweak our system for that extra bit of sound qualities we are striving to achieve.
I think remastering is useful to fix specific recordings rather than adjust the sound signature of ones system.
Many digital files do sound dull and need help, some folks don't hear this. On the other hand some digital players introduce a dullness to the sound as in this vid:
While you can certainly make adjustments per recording, to me doing that would kill the joy in the listening experience. I rather set and forget the changes to the system’s “sound signature” then to fret over the sound of each individual track. The process is in place for track by track remastering but you would have to be insane to do that on every track. My OCD would kill the listening experience as I would spend all my listening sessions adjusting each track and that doesn’t sound like fun to me. The system’s sonic signature goes a long way to giving you the sound that you are after. HQPLAYER by itself is powerful enough to make profound changes to the system’s overall sound qualities.
Perhaps it is meant to distract us from their reasons for not posting their own videos?
Can you post a video of Lou Reed's "Walk on the Wild Side" (from "Transformers") with and without your remastering process? I will not comment on it, but I am curious to hear how it sounds. Thanks.
I have heard both of these DACs live and don’t find either even remotely natural sounding.
Bartok is quite flat sounding and overly smooth. Tambaqui, as heard in my friend's system, is quite upper mid forward in projection that can sound a bright sometimes.
Last edited:
P.S. I listened attentively to Carlos269's "Hello" video again with fresh ears this morning, using the best headphones I have (Dan Clark Stealth).
I don't get it. The main thing that differentiates it from the original track is that the vocals are not as "forward". As a result, it becomes a little less agressive, but you lose out on the texture of the voice, and some of the "presence". The introductory piano notes lose "weight" and resonance.
How does that make it more "lively"? Can you elaborate?
The poor video quality and high background noise make it very difficult to pass any judgment and I assume (and hope) that there would be a significant difference listening to the system live (hence my comments to Carlos269).
The song, by the way, is probably not the best recording there is. The recording of the vocals may lack a little finesse on top so they don't sound as smooth as they should, and there is some serious clipping in the louder segments:
In my case, poor room acoustics don't do this track any favors, and I will work again on that aspect - live and learn!
Last edited:
Hopkins, to help us further assess your listing acuity, can you please provide your comments on the sound of the multi-million dollar Magico M9, CH+ Acoustics, Nagra HD system in a dedicated custom built & acoustically treated room, professionally recorded (please note that the recording microphones are not at the listening position but at each of the speakers) and produced:
You evaluation of the sound in this video will take the personal aspect for each of us out of consideration
I think the M9 CH M 10 series ( i see the CH meters move ) sounds excellent .
Uncoloured / clean sound
Uncoloured / clean sound
Well, to me it sounds lifeless and lacking in resolution, low-level, and inner detail. Dynamically it is curtailed and lacks any sense of air and ambience. As far as uncolored, the sound of this system has a “dark” sound signature to it, due to the lack of high frequency extension, resolution, and treble energy.
If this is the type of sound you like then no wonder your taste doesn’t align with the SET/Horn group.
The Trios are the closest to what I remember hearing live...not just of this piece but of many many many other live classical concerts I have attended.
Brad, you mean to tell me that you don’t hear the “plastic” coloration produced by those Trios on the brass horns? if you don’t hear that then I’m going to have to lump you with Hopkins. Kind of obvious to me on first listen.
First of all, there is nothing personal in my comments.
What stress! Do I risk being thrown out of the forum if I fail this test?
The recording quality is superior to what we achieve with our phones. No surprise, it looks like they are using a professional microphones placed in front of each speaker. There is very little background noise on the recording, and this means that you will hear the softer sounds more clearly.
The room is obviously resembling more a recording studio than our living rooms. This affects also the quality of the recording (low background noise, fewer reflections, more direct sound from the speakers).
I see from the comments on YouTube that for some this is the closest to the "original track" that they have heard from a YouTube video.
However, it only takes listening to the first seconds of the video (the first piano chords) to note that there is less "weight" to the sound than what is on the recording. So while there is little "coloring" to the sound, some of the "foundation" is missing.
Her first phrase, "hello, it's me", (at around 00:05 into the track) sounds big and "full" and deep on the recording with some reverb added, perhaps - the video lacks some of those qualities. Not as dramatic, a little more "plain". In the very next sentence "I was wondering if after all these years you'd like to meet", she accentuates the beginning of each word in a sort of "military" way, and you lose some of the contrast in the video.
To summarize, between the original recording and the video - both heard through my DAC and headphones - the sound of the video is not as seductive.
I did not listen further
Carlos, Brad didn’t say they sound just like what he remembers he heard live. He said that particular video sounds “closest“ to what he remembers hearing live compared to all the other videos including yours and mine. He did not say it was flawless.
Attack in her voice is really good and clean.
Something is missing in the bass when Adele sings louder there are four bass tones in the last lowest octave, you only hear three. It could be because the recording is quiet. The piano could have more fullness in the lower midrange, which would make it seem smaller than it is. the whining at a high level. good recording
Peter, you are a kind person. I cannot get past the “plastic“ sound of the Trios. Not only do I think that my systems sound much better, it is clearly evident even through video. I’m not trying to sugar coat anything here. There is no doubt that the sound of my systems is superior.
As I browsed quickly through that channel, I was surprised by the sound of this system:
That is a lot of hardware to produce pretty bad sound! Metallic, cold, just the opposite of what you would expect from a Bill Evans track (and also from vinyl?). There is obviously a lot of detail, but this is what I would qualify as "lifeless", mechanical sound. It so happens that I have listened to Vivid Audio speakers (twice in good rooms with good systems), and this pretty much reflects my feeling about them - so maybe videos are not such a bad thing.
I hope I have not hurt anyone's feelings here.
That is a lot of hardware to produce pretty bad sound! Metallic, cold, just the opposite of what you would expect from a Bill Evans track (and also from vinyl?). There is obviously a lot of detail, but this is what I would qualify as "lifeless", mechanical sound. It so happens that I have listened to Vivid Audio speakers (twice in good rooms with good systems), and this pretty much reflects my feeling about them - so maybe videos are not such a bad thing.
I hope I have not hurt anyone's feelings here.
Agreed but I believe its down to the original recording. Same channel has this one, sounds pretty good:
Let's just say it doesn't bother me as much as the obvious balance issues the others have.
Similar threads
- Locked
