What does Musicality mean?

[mauidan]

I have, however, had a Benchmark here to compare. Switching back and forth blind, I was unable to differentiate between them. Good enough for me. YMMV.Tim

Please excuse the follow up, but how were you able to compare the Benchmark to
the DAC built into your speakers?

Was the Benchmark connected to the Trends or did you use the USB input?

How did you balance out the volume levels between the digital and analog inputs on your speakers? Does the DAC inside your speakers perform rate sample conversion like
the Benchmark?

I'm surprised that you didn't hear a difference with an extra analog gain stage and analog cables in the signal path.

 

[mauidan]

I would be suprised given the quality of benchmark that one analog stage and a real proper cable would be audible to anybody!

Tom

My post was directed to Tim.

Have you heard a Benchmark DAC in Tim's system or yours?

I've tried a Benchmark DAC in my system, and I find it hard to believe
that adding its digital signal processing plus its analog output stage and a "real proper cable" plus the analog gain stage of a active speaker wouldn't sound different than the active speaker's digital input.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Was the Benchmark connected to the Trends or did you use the USB input?

Mac>USB>Trends>coax>Benchmark>analog>ADM 9.1
Mac>USB>Trends>optical>ADM 9.1

How did you balance out the volume levels between the digital and analog inputs on your speakers?

The ADM's preamp remembers the volume setting for each input. I balanced them audibly several times over the course of several days. If one seemed to be standing out, I brought it down a notch or two and experiment. In every case, I soon forgot what I was listening to. I listened carefully,for clarity, tonality, separation, but honestly, while it could be fun for a bit, most of the time I soon got distracted by the music. At times I thought I heard a difference; in favor of which varied. I listened to them a lot while I had the Benchmark here, but it was not scientific and it certainly didn't prove there is no difference. What it did prove, to me anyway, is that any differences that are there are insignificant in my system. Like I said, it was good enough for me.

Tim

 

[microstrip]

And your fantasy seems to have something to do with taking what I clearly stated as assumptions based the language that is written here, not the systems I haven't heard, and to make it into something altogether absurd and different, but very easy to sneer at. The very definition of the straw man argument, quite personal, and extremely rude and presumptuous.
(...)
Tim

Apologies, but you misunderstood me.

You wrote: "You guys like it a little warm and fuzzy. There's nothing wrong with that. It's a preference. " This triggered my post as there is no evidence in others posts of this being what we associate with "musical" .

BTW, you missed the most important part of my post when you quoted it "You could use you favorite recordings and give us an objective report of your comparative findings with your system. Perhaps then I could understand what you do not like in Audiophile (with capital A) sound reproduction. " This was the important point - unless you experience what we are debating, this is just a dictionary debate.

If by mischance the word fantasize has some hidden meaning, please accept my apologies for its use - I am a non native english writer and used it with the sense of imagine, nothing else!

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Apologies, but you misunderstood me.

You wrote: "You guys like it a little warm and fuzzy. There's nothing wrong with that. It's a preference. " This triggered my post as there is no evidence in others posts of this being what we associate with "musical" .

Yeah, I got a bit carried away there, and I tried to explain where that came from in subsequent posts, but evidently I didn't get the job done. In essence it wasn't so much related to my opinion of Audiophile systems, as with Audiophiles' descrptions of what they refer to as "clinical" or "analytical" systems. Warm and fuzzy seems to be the opposite of that, but it was a logical fallacy for me to conclude that anyone's system sounds "warm and fuzzy" based on their use of those descriptors. Sorry.

BTW, you missed the most important part of my post when you quoted it "You could use you favorite recordings and give us an objective report of your comparative findings with your system. Perhaps then I could understand what you do not like in Audiophile (with capital A) sound reproduction.

Yeah, I'm still not sure how to answer this because I'm not sure you really understand my position (which is probably my fault, not yours). I have heard a lot of Audiophile systems and I really enjoyed most of them. Most of them, in fact, are better than my own system on a couple of key fronts -- low end extension and available volume. I completely understand the limitations of my own system and am not trying to hold it up as any kind of model for anyone else (on a side note, I am, however, a huge believer in active design and do promote that as a clear advantage that the Audiophile world has almost completely missed).

This was the important point - unless you experience what we are debating, this is just a dictionary debate.

I think this is mostly a semantic debate. There are certainly "euphonic" Audiophile systems out there with, IMO, poor resolution and tonal balance, but I'm not trying to paint all Audiophile systems with that brush. I could take some favorite music to a local high-end shop this afternoon and listen to their Spectral/Wilson system (or to a friend's to listen to his Mac/Martin-Logan system, or to a studio to hear another friend's Focal midfield monitoring system, or another's Cary/Vienna set up...). I have done this before. And what I would hear would go deeper but otherwise not be dramatically different from what I listen to at home. I would thoroughly enjoy the experience. I would leave the shop having experienced the music, the recording, reproduced beautifully and, as far as I can tell, pretty accurately. Even taking away the bass response it would vary from what I hear at home, but not all that much, and I would have no reason whatsoever to declare it either more analytical or more musical than my own system.

If by mischance the word fantasize has some hidden meaning, please accept my apologies for its use - I am a non native english writer and used it with the sense of imagine, nothing else!

No harm, no foul.

Tim