Visit to Marc C.'s (SpiritOfMusic's) House in England

[spiritofmusic]

XV, I believe Tang needs to get a Vyger. So, no, no laying low for him LOL.

Me? You're really not going to see me post on any system changes in the next 12-24 months.

Despite the slight overheatedness from me on recent posts, I'm the most Zen I've ever been re my sound. There is nowhere left to go, save for greater attention to room treatments, which I am not going to rush into, and potential of new spkrs, ditto as before.

I'm actually plum out of funds, have pricey non audio chapel refurb related priorities, and the Brexit Ice Age is almost upon us.

So this really is it for me, my upgrades on RevOPods footers to Zus, Siemens NOS tubes in preamp and reintroduced acoustic panels, is me done for an extended period.

 

[bonzo75]

Do you think Tango would ever make such brave predictions of laying low ?

He already has. He told me he is happy with his equipment choices now and will only be buying music.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Sujay, horns, or something horn related, seems like the next obvious destination for me, if I indeed move on past my Zus.

I'm sold on the OB concept having heard my tt designers spkrs evolve over an 8 year period.

I believe he now uses paired AE 18" drivers per side in an isobarik push-pull configuration.

Even though I'm not the greatest fan of the mids and treble in his system, his bass is the best in any of the systems I've heard in the last decade, only beaten by User211's Apogee Duettas (again, open dipole bass).

And I v nearly went for this PAP type configuration 6 years ago prior to plumping for the Zus instead, similar 15" OB woofers, but around an AMT/Heil ribbon, not a horn.

 

[sujay]

Mark, it may not be a bad idea then to take the risk and giving the PAP a shot. The price of entry isn’t prohibitive. And I gather they are highly configurable

 

[spiritofmusic]

Sujay, they're on my radar, and tick a lot of boxes that theoretically should make me happy. Not least of all, a very competitive price.

I really have to lay low on purchases for the time being. But when I re-emerge from my cave after Brexit, maybe they'll happen.

I'm minded to add one or two more acoustic treatment panels to my room for no money, and then I'm purely going to take my system in for what it is, re-engage w the crazy concept of listening more and analysing (and tweaking) less/not at all, and as I come up for air, see how I feel about new spkrs.

This'll be the first time since I replaced the whole of my first system in 1999, that I'll be sitting tight for an extended period.

1997 to 1999 was SUCH a calm couple of years LOL.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Re introducing my room treatment panels is continuing to be a real musical education.

Initially upon Barry's advice, I had absorbers back in, and built up into a double thickness 8' high column on the front wall midline behind centrally placed rack.

Immediate tightening of focus.

Subsequently moved these to three abreast the midline and raised to ear level.

Greater bass control and broadening of soundstage.

And last experiment, separating them so one midline front wall, the outer two more lateral, adjacent to corner traps.

Best result yet, all the previous upticks, but a tangible increase in ease and transparency.

My thoughts now are either to get a couple more absorption panels to in effect get the best of these last two results, with five panels across the front wall.

Or just stay as is, and add a couple of Quadratic Diffusors either side of the midline absorber.

I'm really onto something, eeking out a really natural, unforced presentation, removing the room and mechanics of reproduction.

 

[Tango]

Re introducing my room treatment panels is continuing to be a real musical education.

Initially upon Barry's advice, I had absorbers back in, and built up into a double thickness 8' high column on the front wall midline behind centrally placed rack.

Immediate tightening of focus.

Subsequently moved these to three abreast the midline and raised to ear level.

Greater bass control and broadening of soundstage.

And last experiment, separating them so one midline front wall, the outer two more lateral, adjacent to corner traps.

Best result yet, all the previous upticks, but a tangible increase in ease and transparency.

My thoughts now are either to get a couple more absorption panels to in effect get the best of these last two results, with five panels across the front wall.

Or just stay as is, and add a couple of Quadratic Diffusors either side of the midline absorber.

I'm really onto something, eeking out a really natural, unforced presentation, removing the room and mechanics of reproduction.

Is this another one of your "sit on the edge of your seat, slightly grip the armrests, and never loosen yr jaw, just waiting for the next what gonna happen to the sound of my system" moment ?

I think Sibilance is the last think you would be worried of.

Just teasing you Marc.

Tang

 

[spiritofmusic]

Tang, teasing is good to keep the audiophile ego in check.

Yep, edge of my seat, but in a good way. You're a Dean Martin man, know his voice and you know your sound is right.

I'm more a Tony Williams, Elvin Jones, Buddy Rich man. Know their drumkit, and my sound is right. And I really feel I know more about them since the panels went back in.

My comment on yr thread re sibilance of the Colibri reminded me of my Denon 103 days, and especially my Lyra Skala from 2001.
Much as I loved the Skala's verve, I could never relax with it. The Transfiguration I got after, and my current Straingauge, no problem.

Cognitive ease/lack of dissonance leads to greater musical insight, and thus relaxation. Finding how my panels are leading to this is such a revelation this late in my system evolution.

And Tang, please keep teasing.

 

[bonzo75]

Marc, I suggest the reference of your own system and that of actual live acoustic music. Those should be enough for you to gauge whether or not you like other speakers, at least as a starting point.

If you assume live music at 100, you will not know whether a component lies at 10 or 90 on a scale of 1 to 100, unless you hear enough components. Often, you will think it lies high up on the scale, and as you hear more, it will drop down the scale as others take it place. If you know live violins very well, which one of VDH strad, opus, Zyx uni p, Atlas, does a violin rendition the best? Impossible to say without listening to them all in different environments.

Similarly, where do Zus lie on a scale of 1 to 100? (Ok guys, this is not a trick question, nor is it a vote, so no need to give answers)

 

[bonzo75]

And Tang, please keep teasing.

You should ask me nicely as well

 

[spiritofmusic]

Ked, oh I'm sure Zu is Minus ten on the scale.

And on that scale, only one component I've ever heard gets even vaguely close to live, so Fifty should really be tops, allocated to one or two pieces only.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Ked, theres a difference btwn teasing and sarcasm. And that last post demonstrates that nicely.

 

[bonzo75]

Ked, theres a difference btwn teasing and sarcasm. And that last post demonstrates that nicely.

Surely the British value sarcasm more?

 

[Tango]

Are you two making out in public place again?

Tang

 

[spiritofmusic]

Tang, that is NOT a pleasant thought!

 

[PeterA]

If you assume live music at 100, you will not know whether a component lies at 10 or 90 on a scale of 1 to 100, unless you hear enough components. Often, you will think it lies high up on the scale, and as you hear more, it will drop down the scale as others take it place. If you know live violins very well, which one of VDH strad, opus, Zyx uni p, Atlas, does a violin rendition the best? Impossible to say without listening to them all in different environments.

Similarly, where do Zus lie on a scale of 1 to 100? (Ok guys, this is not a trick question, nor is it a vote, so no need to give answers)

Ked, we are discussing different things. You are suggesting a way to assess how close an individual component sounds to live music, and I am simply suggesting that Marc use live music and his own system as references when hearing other speakers to determine whether or not he likes them. As I wrote, it is a starting point only. Better to use some reference than none. You are describing your own process which is for those who are much further down the road in determining which component of many sounds most real. Those are two very different scenarios, IMO.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Peter, that's well put. I'm attending on average one live classical concert a week, string quartets, orchestral, brass band/percussion, choir, in a variety of really good sounding venues.

I'm getting a good "fix" on what I like, what my system should try and aspire too, where my system (and indeed many others) fails to live up to.

But we also all hear differently. I'm much less sensitive to, and thus less moved, by holographic soundstsging and depth. While others can pinpoint individual instruments in an orchestra, I can't, and I'm not that bothered by this.

So Barry picked up phasing issues in my system that I was blissfully unaware of. I still don't know what that all means to me as a listener.

Yet others would pick up horn honk and woofer bass/mids horn discontinuity issues in his Duos (common complaints against these spkrs).

So I've reached a point in my system building that I'm probably closer to the live ideal (better imaging, cleaner bass, better tonal and timbral discrimination btwn recordings), and as far away as ever (dynamics and jump factor nowhere near).

And since the only device I've heard that fooled me I was listening to live, the Denman Exponential Horn (27' long, flaring into a 7'x5' horn mouth, saturating a 20,000 cub ft exhibition space powered by 1.5W), is unobtanium, my comparison to a home transducer successfully mimicking live is an unbelievably tough act to live up to.

 

[morricab]

If you assume live music at 100, you will not know whether a component lies at 10 or 90 on a scale of 1 to 100, unless you hear enough components. Often, you will think it lies high up on the scale, and as you hear more, it will drop down the scale as others take it place. If you know live violins very well, which one of VDH strad, opus, Zyx uni p, Atlas, does a violin rendition the best? Impossible to say without listening to them all in different environments.

Similarly, where do Zus lie on a scale of 1 to 100? (Ok guys, this is not a trick question, nor is it a vote, so no need to give answers)

I would not say that you have to hear so many components if you can tell when it is right. You need to be VERY familiar with live music and not just from the mid-hall perspective...most recordings are not made that way and the sound is far closer to the upfront and present sound of sitting very close to a performer. If you can hold that aural memory well enough then you can judge closer to lifelike (it will never sound absolutely live...the recording itself prevents this) or further...no need for a number scale. In some cases, one piece will sound more lifelike in a certain way and another piece in another way but a truly superior piece of gear will make a wholesale improvement in that "live" perception.

For me one that destroys the perception of space (making images and/or soundstages flat for example) is one that moves further away from "lifelike" even if it does numerous other things quite well. I had a very strange experience once when reviewing preamps where an otherwise exemplary sounding preamp had one of the flattest imaging presentations and soundstage I have ever heard...baffling but quickly offputting.

 

[morricab]

Ked, we are discussing different things. You are suggesting a way to assess how close an individual component sounds to live music, and I am simply suggesting that Marc use live music and his own system as references when hearing other speakers to determine whether or not he likes them. As I wrote, it is a starting point only. Better to use some reference than none. You are describing your own process which is for those who are much further down the road in determining which component of many sounds most real. Those are two very different scenarios, IMO.

What you say, Peter, only makes sense if you getting closer to a lifelike sound makes you like something more. Of course, I think live is the only real reference... A decent proxy is very good live recordings or ones you have made yourself. This is more of a practical approach but should be combined with a lot of live listening and processing of what makes things sound live.

 

[morricab]

Peter, that's well put. I'm attending on average one live classical concert a week, string quartets, orchestral, brass band/percussion, choir, in a variety of really good sounding venues.

I'm getting a good "fix" on what I like, what my system should try and aspire too, where my system (and indeed many others) fails to live up to.

But we also all hear differently. I'm much less sensitive to, and thus less moved, by holographic soundstsging and depth. While others can pinpoint individual instruments in an orchestra, I can't, and I'm not that bothered by this.

So Barry picked up phasing issues in my system that I was blissfully unaware of. I still don't know what that all means to me as a listener.

Yet others would pick up horn honk and woofer bass/mids horn discontinuity issues in his Duos (common complaints against these spkrs).

So I've reached a point in my system building that I'm probably closer to the live ideal (better imaging, cleaner bass, better tonal and timbral discrimination btwn recordings), and as far away as ever (dynamics and jump factor nowhere near).

And since the only device I've heard that fooled me I was listening to live, the Denman Exponential Horn (27' long, flaring into a 7'x5' horn mouth, saturating a 20,000 cub ft exhibition space powered by 1.5W), is unobtanium, my comparison to a home transducer successfully mimicking live is an unbelievably tough act to live up to.

Dynamics and jump factor are the final frontier for most audiophiles...the key ingredient that is missing.