What do you think of this video. And this is not directed to those who think every mobile phone video is trash, thanks. Please listen to the end for the brass and the woodwinds
Mani, I think you need to get a second NT4 so you can record in stereo.
I'm listening to Blues In The Basement as I type this. The bass is killer.
Did you take a listen to these?
Scheherazade:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PNOOtZ3DaVzxbzlA0VsmXO9gifidsjaw/view?usp=sharing
Blues in the Bassment:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14383qKD4CHj_9P39whgLr1cFHonQHswd/view?usp=sharing
Too Damn Hot:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QLHcjDR0L5BTFQGMoLmqUBzdxGxKgkzw/view?usp=sharing
One of the useful things about recording your system in this way is that you can compare the recording with the original file (using headphones preferably) to determine exactly what your system is adding/taking away. There are a lot of differences between my recordings and the original files, but I'm not hearing any added nasality on the brass. Maybe we're just more senstiive to different things?
Mani.
It's the Rode NT4 stereo mic. In many ways it's much better than Ked's mic: much lower noise floor (something that I think is critical for good sound); much more extended top end; finer detail. What it isn't capturing correctly though is the bottom end - taut and tuneful, but not as extended as it is in reality. This has an impact on tonality.
The main reason for posting the two files was to address the criticism that some people had when viewing/listening to Ked's video:
There is no "blurring" or "nasality" on the Rode recording.
It's a shame that I can't seem to capture the sound more accurately. It's certainly the best sound I've achieved in 40 years of thisobsessionwonderful hobby. I don't tinker. I don't want for anything. I just listen to music .
Mani.
So, you've sorted that biamping project you were talking about at my visit?
The brass on Blues in the Bassment doesn't seem nasal indeed. I wonder though about the reverb-y sound in all those files, and the bare wood floor in your room that might be related to it....
Very nice minimalist looking and excellent sounding system you have there, Mani.
I'm reaching but I'm gonna' go out on a limb here. Regarding the "nasal" sound ddk and Al mention, I may know what they're talking about. First, only one of the 3 pieces has vocals, yet the "nasal" sound they think they hear seems to be across all 3 pieces, so it's not just vocals.
A nasal-like sound is easily reproduced if we cup our hands over our faces and then speak into the cupped hands. This I think is a nasal-like sound.
I could not detect any nasal-like sound from your recordings but I think it's not too uncommon for some to misconstrue a nasal-like sound with a playback presentation that is exhibiting a nice dose but still very limited amount of ambient info from well-engineered recordings.
This is no slight against your playback system. To the best of my knowledge, ambient info is the lowest of low level detail and the first to remain inaudible from a raised noise floor for which every last playback system suffers.
People think different things regarding "noise floors". To clarify, a cumulative raised noise floor is determined by the culmination of audible but especially inaudible distortions induced into our playback systems. The noise floor determines how much the percentage of music info read from the recording and processed will remain audible at the speaker. That music info below the noise floor remains inaudible at the speaker while that which is above the noise floor will remain audible at the speaker. Though the percentage that remains audible at the speaker will suffer a bit because it's lacking the audibility of the entire note, etc and the system can sound unbalanced, shouty, and otherwise distorted. Not saying your system.
That said, everybody suffers from a much raised noise floor to one good degree or another and as such many systems lack reproducing much ambient info. Your playback system seems to provide more ambient info than many but still fairly limited.
Since your playback system sounds better than many but not 100% convincingly live sounding, it just so happens to reside in a state where the ambient info remaining audible is unusual to some so they may inappropriately label this nasal-like.
Anyway, that's my guess and I'm confident others would be more than happy to correct me if I'm wrong. FWIW, I think your system sounds quite musical.
That said, everybody suffers from a much raised noise floor to one good degree or another and as such many systems lack reproducing much ambient info. Your playback system seems to provide more ambient info than many but still fairly limited.
Now that's an interesting hypothesis. I can see how that would work.
I'd like to explore this.
I have no analogue attenuation anywhere in my chain (volume is controlled digitally, at 64 bits.). So, when the system is on, it remains at full gain all the time.
My mid horns are 109dB/w@1m. You can place your ear at the throat of the horn, and you will hear nothing. Not even a bit of hiss. Nothing. You press play and the music errupts from total silence. (Hopefully you've moved your ear away from the throat of the horn beforehand .)
So... in this sort of situation, what would you do to improve the ambient info coming through?
Mani.
So I got a lot of video comments offline before I uploaded it here. Tang's video insight was the highest and pretty accurate. Following are some of the comments, since those guys had PMed me before they seem to have not responded here
Tang: This sounds very very good Ked. The dynamic and jump factor is a 10 and come effortlessly at the right time. The tone is very neutral maybe a tad more vivid would fit very well to my liking but no flaw in tone. Instrument placement and scale is also exceptional. My only skeptic is it sound a bit too clean too well organized. If it is more organic meaning the texture is more raw and less clean it would to me sound even more natural. Anyway I think this is one of the better video you sent. The software that was played might make me hear it like that too.
Hi Al,It depends on the mastering. I got my XRCD of that recording yesterday and it's pretty sensational. More organic and raw, and lots of weight to the tone; much better than a regular CD (worst) and a DSD-remastered CD layer of an SACD (considerably better than regular CD) that I heard last weekend on my system.
I'm not sure how this, I suppose hi-res, streamed version in the video would compare to the XRCD. In any case, that XRCD is now one of the best orchestral CDs that I have, sound wise.
Not all XRCD is equal though. The regular CD of Count Basie's 88th Street album, for example (available for 10 bucks or so from Amazon) is miles better than the XRCD of that same album, which just plain sucks in comparison. In fact, the regular CD of that album is phenomenal, in absolute terms. So XRCD is not a guarantee, but in the case of the Reiner Scheherazade and some other recordings it lives up to its promise.
Hi Al,
I did mentioned that from Mani's Scheherazade, I would like it even more if the tone is a little more vivid. And I speculated that if the front end and software were different the sound of the system could jump another level. I used the word "vivid" but my meaning was indeed instrument differentiation or distinction. My experience with Tidal digital is it always has certain degree of whitish or pastel or matte tone spreading through out the scene that some might perceive as neutral. For me this tone could cause the loss of vivid distinction of instrument and more degree of homogeneity. Reiner Scheherazade and Haitink Bruckner 7 are great recording for instrument differentiation when play with decent front end and vinyls. Instruments just pop from different location distinctively in sound scene. I am not saying digital cannot do this. I just never heard a Tidal could do this. I had a modest digital front before. It did not do well enough to pass my level of reference. You seem to have a really good setup of digital and much much experience with it, can you please correct me if I am wrong about generalizing Tidal as having less instrument differentiation and a better digital software could do a much better job on this regard.
Kind regards,
Tang
Now that many people in forum have the Bruckner 7 dtd you can compare mine to your own video using handphone to record this same recording from your system.
OK, here's mine...
Anima - Bruckner 7 Allegro moderato:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/18LzGAbAvcY7iWbB4k88DTIyxJjtUHBiW/view?usp=sharing
Just to be clear, I don't have a turntable in my main room (I refuse to have one - too much clutter and fussing around for my liking). But I do have a couple of (very modest) turntables and an old beaten up ADC in a small 'studio' in my basement. I've ripped the D2D vinyl to a 16/44.1 file, played back the file on my main system (all digital) and recorded using a stereo mic (but don't expect to hear any soundstage at all!).
.
Thank you Mani. Now we have two videos of this Bruckner D2D from two different systems. One thing not subjective to preference, the dynamic of this album.
OK, here's mine...
Anima - Bruckner 7 Allegro moderato:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/18LzGAbAvcY7iWbB4k88DTIyxJjtUHBiW/view?usp=sharing
Just to be clear, I don't have a turntable in my main room (I refuse to have one - too much clutter and fussing around for my liking). But I do have a couple of (very modest) turntables and an old beaten up ADC in a small 'studio' in my basement. I've ripped the D2D vinyl to a 16/44.1 file, played back the file on my main system (all digital) and recorded using a stereo mic (but don't expect to hear any soundstage at all!).
Thank you Mani. Now we have two videos of this Bruckner D2D from two different systems. One thing not subjective to preference, the dynamic of this album.
Tang
Tang's thread