My way to relax and enjoy, musicality.
Got sick of living on the edge of a chair to examine equipment and cables.
Got sick of living on the edge of a chair to examine equipment and cables.
Accuracy vs. musicality
I imagine if you have an unlimited budget you can have both ultimate accuracy and musicality.
For those of us whose budget is somewhat limited, we usually have to make a choice.
I very recently obtained speakers (which I prefer not to name so as to avoid debate. Some of you do know them.) These speakers were criticized by an Agoner for not being accurate.
Now, I heard the speakers he liked better and they we’re fine, and maybe more “etched,” but they did not convey the musical message as well to me. Indeed I compared many such speakers recommended by members (there was little love for mine) and I found them not to have the sound I hear in a concert hall. They did not communicate to me as well.
So, what’s more important: precise accuracy or musicality?
For those of us whose budget is somewhat limited, we usually have to make a choice.
I very recently obtained speakers (which I prefer not to name so as to avoid debate. Some of you do know them.) These speakers were criticized by an Agoner for not being accurate.
Now, I heard the speakers he liked better and they we’re fine, and maybe more “etched,” but they did not convey the musical message as well to me. Indeed I compared many such speakers recommended by members (there was little love for mine) and I found them not to have the sound I hear in a concert hall. They did not communicate to me as well.
So, what’s more important: precise accuracy or musicality?
56 responses Add your response
I think it's about the music that you want to hear. The music that comes out of my system makes me happy every time I press "play". There are performers making music I love in a 3D space. The vocals and instruments sound real. The speakers disappear. I've heard so-called "accurate" systems that were horrible to listen to. I've also heard "musical" systems that weren't. Trust your ears. If your system makes you happy, don't worry about anything else. |
1. Everyone hears differently. One person's accuracy is another person's musicality. Recommendations only get you to a long short-list. But then 2. False dichotomy. True binaries would be accurate vs. inaccurate, or musical vs. unmusical. Linking the two terms on opposite ends of a single scale muddies the waters... |
A big part of this is personal preference for what kind of sound you want. You can definitely get the lush and liquid coloration of Class A amps. Or go towards the unique (but not accurate) coloration of most tube amps. In either case, it’s what makes you feel good. ---- That being said, I have been able to obtain a VERY accurate and very musical system. This is a lot harder than it sounds. It is very easy to put in a forgiving "Class A" or other warm sounding amp and have things sound good. But it is extremely difficult to make a "very accurate" system sound good. There is a "fine line" that you are chasing here where you need to get enough accuracy to make the instruments/voices sound "real" and "in your room" without crossing that line into the "too harsh" and "too sterile" area. A good analogy to this is the sharpness adjustment on your tv. This can definitely increase the sharpness and crispness of your image, but if you push it too far, it can easily become over-sharp where it’s just painful to look at. In my system, changing a single fuse can be enough to "push it over the line" into too fast/bright. |
Back in the day I sold high-end equipment and learned that there are people who more listening to the equipment and others who more listen to the music. I believe we all hear differently and have different ways we enjoy the audio system experience. So, to me, neither "accurate" or "musical" is "right". If I were to give any advice, I'd say pick the equipment that gives YOU the most enjoyment. |
This past weekend I showed a speaker at RMAF that incorporates an unusual amount of adjustability. Its frequency response curve can be "accurate" (approximately flat), or it can be "something else". A significantly "something else" curve was preferred by a huge margin by those of us involved in setting up the room. We adjusted by ear (and I trusted younger ears more than my own). After the show I modeled what the response curve was after our adjustments, and it sloped gently downward by about 3 dB per decade north of 200 Hz. This isn’t news - this sort of curve has worked well for others. Point being, the ears don’t necessarily perceive what the eye expects from looking at a curve. Duke dealer/manufacturer |
Many times the quality of your sourse can make a even bigger difference in both musicality and accuracy lfor Everything starts with the sourse.any information obscured, and not correct from the start to your liking it will effect Everything downstream. from there then you have the quality of your starting point. |
In my opinion there are very good common sense/]logical replies here. Jond, that’s beautiful summation. Davidtial, yes, that’s been my point for many years. Live unamplified sound is both accurate (by default) and the epitome of musical. These two terms aren’t mutually exclusive. IMO too often dry, sterile, analytical, clinical sound quality is erroneously identified as accurate which it surely isn’t. It is every bit as much an aberration as overly warm, soft,slow and muddy. Coloration can error in both directions. A lot of what is accepted as uber detailed just seems to emphasize initial attack,transients and the upper frequency range resulting in a sharpe and edgy sonic character that isn't natural.. Charles |
Yes, my use of the term accurate should have had parentheses: “accurate.” What you say, Charles: “dry, analytical, clinical sound,” is often mistaken for accurate. Similarly, muddy coloration is often confused with musical. Actual accuracy IS musical. However, the fly in the ointment, as others have said, is one person’s reality may not be another’s. |
| Post removed |
My advice to anyone is to stop reading hi-fi magazines. Go to the library and read The Master Handbook of Acoustics by F. Alton Everest. Obtain a pair of Tannoy 15" dual concentric speakers, and build your system around them. I prefer single-ended triode tube amplifiers, e.g., Art Audio Jota or Wavelength Cardinal, but YMMV. Get a good preamp such as Cary SLP05, which is a proven design of long standing. Avoid flavor of the month components. Avoid a company that keeps redesigning its products. Treat your listening room with acoustical devices. |
Interesting comments concerning the Tannoy dual concentric speaker. Some owners say they mate beautifully and sound better with SET amplifiers and other owners say they require higher power amplifiers to get the most out of them. Definitely two schools of thought. I suspect that they sound good in both scenarios. Charles |
Ultimately it's all about the music. That's where it begins and ends. Accuracy should, in theory get you closer to the music but I've seen people get lost on that journey because the sum of all parts doesn't come out sounding the way it should. When modifying old gear I have often found that one part (resostprs. ca[s. wire, etc) can make it seem like you've gotten one step closer but the fine balance is that you really need to commit and go all the way (spend the big bucks) to get to accuracy AND musicality whereas you might find the slight tonal characteristic of one capacitor brings everything back into cohesiveness and "musicality" where you actually want to listen for hours without being overly analytical. I've been lucky enough to have experienced systems which were arguably very high on both accuracy AND musicality but that really required everything to gel and we're talking $$$$. Great systems can get you 90% of the way there and still retain the pleasant factor and that's really what it's all about. |
I maintain 2 complete systems for different types of music and of listening. One is built around Bose 901 speakers of the latest series. I have owned several sets over 40 years of 901s. I consider these the most musical of all I have ever heard. The 9 drivers mixed against the wall delivers the richest and warmest music I know. I also love my 4 foot tall 3-way towers I built myself using B & C drivers and tweeters from Italy. These are very high sensitivity units that are focused and what some call 'brilliant'. Bright sounds that allow me to listen to one instrument in the orchestra and follow that right thru. That is not as clean and clear on the till fabulous 901s. The other big difference is what music am I listening to? Leonard Coen's latest is full of deep deep bass and sound great on both, but sound spectacular on the towers. The same for the Melvins and the last couple of Qui albums out of L.A. But if I want to listen to Joni Mithchell I prefer the Bose for her style and sound. When I get a new album I, of course, always play it on both. If I had to pick one to keep and one to leave behind I do not know how I could make a choice. I can hardly wait to find a third alternative for yet another listen. It does not have to be a contest or competition. |
The OP definition of accuracy may not be as well "accurate". His definition of accuracy is probably means "overly emphasis", which is the enemy of musicality. But if we define "accuracy" as being faithful to the source, no more no less then "accuracy" and musicality can go hand in hand. In fact, "accuracy" is an important component of musicality as it allows you to see cleary to the heart of the music, bringing music closer to you. |
Picked up a pair of the reissue JBL L100’s a few weeks ago. 12” woofer, retro design, complete wall of sound - sounds like a straight up recording studio or concert in my room. I was seriously sick of messing around with tweaking for accurate sound. I’m guessing a lot of people would scoff at JBL because it’s not sanctioned high end gear. For me it beats all of the “accurate” speakers I’ve ever had, hands down. |
@audioman58 totally agree, after upgrading my source I was able to finally appreciate the sound coming out my 2 sets of speakers and amps, also I listened to tracks I have been listening for 40 years in an entirely different way. Source is key and makes as much of a difference in my opinion than most speakers. |
A musical system is balanced (through component matching) and sounds natural to our auditory senses. It’s not necessary accurate which requires true reproduction of music through each elements of the system chains (from source to speaker to room acoustics). On the other hand, a musical system with more accurate (or faithful) reproduction should be the goal towards the Nirvana since the listener will hear from recording what’s closer to true music. In my own experience, my 1st priority is to find the new balance in each attempt to upgrade my system (e.g cable switch, realign speaker placement, etc after I replaced my digital source) so I can rediscover the musicality I enjoy before the change was made. Hopefully, the “new” system will also be more accurate to give more of the key elements (e.g more dynamics, less noise) after each exercise of tweaks of mix and match is done. A truly accurate and musical system takes time, effort and dough to build. That’s what makes the journey memorable (think about how you started from day one). |
First of all, the accuracy of a speaker changes dramatically from room to room, and within a given room, from placement/positioning to placement/positioning. It changes with each component in a given system. What matters is the accuracy of the entire system within that room that you listen in. If you nail THAT, you will have great musicality. |
And there you have it in a nutshell. No matter what the "reviews" say, or other people that have heard a system, ultimately we all hear things differently. Some of it is biological -- hearing is not uniform among all people, some is environmental -- such as the synergy between components and the room, and some of it is just preference. That is why it is so difficult to buy components, and especially speakers, without hearing them in your own system. One person's "musical" system might be another person's "bloated" inaccurate one. If I purchase another pair of speakers, I am going to go to NYC, where I can actually listen to the speakers that I am interested in rather than rely on comments and reviews! That being said, my equipment is for listening to music, not to see how close to the source signal it is. Musicality beats accuracy to my old(er) too-many-Led-Zeppelin-concerts ears! |
One of the best posts/responses I’ve read on this forum!! Great answers and examples - it’s a joy to read and appreciate thoughts of others without the usual argumentative posts. I don’t believe accurate and musical are mutually exclusive, and both are influenced by so many things- equipment, source, room acoustics, and most importantly the ears. I’ll only spend money if I love the improvement in SQ I hear whether it’s accuracy musicality or hopefully both. Well done OP |
Who knows the definitions of "accuracy" and "musicality"? Do you wish to be imposed by someone's ideas on what the accuracy means? And musicality is your personal matter, what you consider or not musical. Depends also on the music you listen. If you listen to badly recorded heavy metal, for instance, I think there is no issue of musicality, roughly, it should be just loud enough. If you listen to acoustic jazz, then you may compare the sound of your system with that at a live jazz concert. Then I think the musicality and the accuracy should somehow coincide, as you cannot call an inaccurate sound of some instrument musical. Tube amplifies, for instance, normally have much higher harmonic distortion than solid state ones, but I think they are musical and mostly accurate for my ear. I think good speakers must be firstly accurate, and if they reproduce the sound as it was recorded (given that it was recorded well) then you automatically get musicality. Listen to a well recorded human voice / vocal and you will have some idea on how musical and accurate your system sounds. |
It takes time to evaluate! I've tried many times to replace my 25yr old B&W 801-S2's, only to get rid of the newer "better" speakers (at a loss) and go back to using my old 801's. No, they're NOT perfect... and there are certain things that the newer speakers did better. But in the end, no other speaker overall keeps a smile on my face and makes me want to listen to music more than my 801's. I cannot say if they are particularly accurate or musical. They are just what I like. |
Per another member - “ Picked up a pair of the reissue JBL L100’s a few weeks ago. 12” woofer, retro design, complete wall of sound - sounds like a straight up recording studio or concert in my room. I was seriously sick of messing around with tweaking for accurate sound. “. - So gentlemen , please School Me . I have a pair of JBL 4312A’s on Sound Anchor stands . They are a “ Near Field Studio Moniter “. JBL states how “ Flat the curve is , and how Accurate “ they are . I’ve run them with tubes and SS . They aren’t” MUSICAL” to me . At this point they live in the closet . I’ve run the noise CD and played with a friends $5k hand held frequency reading devise. According to his equipment at about 5khz they flipping annoy me . And again up high when the Ti tweeters shriek . So is this an “ Accurate Sound “? Is a” Musical Sound” one that’s more pleasant to listen to ? Please don’t go into cables and room treatments, I have it covered . Just school me on “ Musical “ . I currently have a broad soundstage with distinct instrument location and pleasant vocals ( not the JBL’s ). Maybe I’m interpreting Mr. Spectre’s Wall Of Sound incorrectly . BTW, this is one of the most pleasant threads I’ve read on AGON in a while , please keep up the Good Vibes . Happy Listening and Happy Halloween, Mike B. |
Musicality or accuracy? Another word that has come up is “quality” What is musicality? What is accuracy? What is Audio Quality? Here are some references. And of course, always refer to Linkwitz. https://www.stereophile.com/content/whos-right-acccuracy-or-musicality https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_matt.php When recording engineers are being taught how to listen to find the right mic for a particular instrument they begin by listening to and comparing the sustain of the real instrument to the mic’d version of the instrument. Here they hear the tonal quality of the real instrument and how the mic changes the tonal quality. This kind of is in the direction of accuracy, accurate tonal reproduction. Makes sense, linear recording and playback sounds musical. But no, that’s not all there is to it. The recording engineers are next taught to carefully listen to the attack transient that precedes the sustain. One might think of the attack transient as the sonic presentation of the sustain. It’s where the sustain comes from. The attack is very short lived, a fleeting event compared to the long winded sustain. It’s hard to concentrate on and capture such a short lived event in order to evaluate mics but it can be done. Curiously, out of 6 seemingly identical mics, only one might come close to actually capturing the true sound in the attack part of the tambourine. While all of them fairly equally represent the sustain of its little cymbals. Musicality is rooted in the clarity of the attack transients. And so, the audiophile might want to look toward the faithfulness in the attack transient instead of the faithfulness of the sustain as a clue to musicality. There is no problem hearing the attack transient if silence precedes it. The problem is to hear the attack transient within a musical piece, which is filled with many other attack transients. There have been studies relating to the speed of separate sonic events in music and is speech. The overall average rate of man-made sonic events is 8 separate events per second. Each sonic event begins with some kind of attack transient which evolves into a sustain. The attack transients occur so frequently that the much longer lasting sustains become overlaid one on another, creating a set of running complex and ever changing chords that tag along with the music, fitting and blending everything together. Ideally we will have 10 dB of quiet immediately preceding each attack transient. In a large hall the reflections of one attack transient are delayed and weakened by diffusion so as to not interfere with the next attack transient and the sound sounds musical. But in small rooms, our hi-fi listening rooms, the very early multiple reflections of the attack transient are quick and strong and they fill up the desired succeeding quiet and overlay themselves onto the low level details of the next attack transient, obscuring the listener’s perception of the next attack transient, aka sound masking. A test that measures the tonal clarity has been developed, actually back in the golden days of hifi, back in 1986. It is called MATT, Musical Articulation Test Tones and is a gated sine sweep, 8 tone bursts a second, 1/16th second burst followed by 1/16 second silence. The clear Ta-ta-ta of ascending and then descending tones is audible over headphones. But in most rooms, yodeling turns into gargling. This means that the sounds are where they should be in time but the articulation within each sound, the dynamic aspect of each sound, is lost to the excessive sustain produced by poor, undeveloped room acoustics. To get a fast (musical sounding) room you have to seriously quiet down the front 1/3rd of the listening room, the area where the sound is being created so you mostly only hear the direct signal from the speaker and the instantaneous ambience or running reverb is at least 10 dB below the direct at all times. So, what we see is people choosing speakers that can somehow penetrate the running reverb noise floor. Speakers with overly bright directional top-end might help or those with large midrange horns are very effective in delivering a strong direct to running reverb ratio signal. And yes, dipoles are excellent at this because they do not project sound vertically nor laterally, but only forward and backward. It’s the component of sound projected vertically which is then caught and stored between the parallel floor and ceiling surfaces, early vertical reverb buildup, which lingers too long and floods into the next 1/16th second of desired quiet. Same with side to side and the subsequent lateral early reverb buildup. Notice woofers and sub woofers are running totally out of high speed dynamic control. Musicality is in the record and it’s in the signal being played by the speakers. The problem is not the equipment it is the room obscuring, literally masking, our ability to hear successive attack transients which means that all we get to listen to is the running aggregate set of sustains left over from the preceding rapid set of inaudible (masked, drowned out) attack transients. Down load a MATT test for free and play it over headphones and over your sound system. Audition the musical clarity response curve of you audio system, remembering that the last link in our sound systems is the room acoustic link. https://www.acousticsciences.com/products/matt-acoustic-test-cd Enter your text ... |
I've owned speakers from manufacturers that put the science of music first. Kef in the early 90's made some speakers that measured remarkably flat in room while falling flat on their face playing music, Modern Revel that swear they have a formula for interpreting listening preferences into measurements that make their speakers sound best and I have these speakers that make JA scratch his head because by all measurements they should sound like crap yet they make me want to run downstairs to listen to songs during bears game commercials they are so captivating. It's whatever scratches your itch. |
@artnoxon. It’s refreshing to hear “uncoloured” facts. I find it revealing of the vast differences in the enjoyment of music seeing a reasonably decent set of equipment placed in the home in a way that absolutely precludes hearing what the equipment is capable of. But I too have friends that are entranced by Stingray cable channel played on the flat screen. They want the beat ma’am,or man,just the beat. |
This is not complicated. Precise accuracy will reproduce the music precisely the way it was played. If you love different types of distortions- ok. have seasons tickets to classical concerts. I often love a 2nd or 3rd row,just 2/3 seats left of center for Vancouver Recital Society events. Solo instrument and Chamber music. I hear fabulous live sound. . I would love speakers that would be accurate enough to reproduce the concert. |
They did not communicate to me as well.10-12-2018 9:39amIf I'm reading it correctly you answered your own question. The live recorded sound of my Double Bass almost never makes it past post production and mastering because the customer wants to hear things with an artistic flair so most things get altered in post. The accuracy of the released media is an unknown unless one had an opportunity to listen to the original post production playback. In my experience the released medias mass production whether its a file, CD, or LP can have another level of degeneration. If what your hearing communicates to you and your enjoying the musicality for hours isn't that the goal? |
I've had a number of speakers that were "accurate", B&W, KEF, Revel...all great speakers in their own right. My current speaker is a pair of Klipsch Heresy III and they may not be "accurate" but damn are they musical... first speaker I've owned that sounds "live" , they really sound big and musical, not like sound coming from a box. |
A while back, I had a chance to audition several, highly reviewed and totted speakers. One of the speakers that I spent some time with, was a $12K pr. of Raidhos - a smaller 2 way with dedicated stands. With their ceramic drivers, the little Raidhos have a reputation for being very accurate and detailed and are well loved by some audiophiles. At first I was impressed with the detail and impact of their sound, but after about 20 minuets of listening, at only moderate levels, I found them to be a bit fatiguing and harsh. I decided that I much preferred the detailed, but smoother, more open sound of my little $2K Gershmans. Of all speakers, I still prefer the big open, detailed, yet very musical, sound of stats and ribbons, but then - it’s good that we don’t all like the same things. If we did - it would make for a boring world...Jim |
One more thought on this topic. You’re never going to get a full symphony orchestra in your listening room, no matter how accurate or expensive your system is. The illusion of an orchestra is all you’ll get. At times this approximation is not achieved by the most “accurate” components. I’ve sometimes gotten the illusion better with lower quality gear. It’s not an exact science. |
Very few would really enjoy a perfectly accurate speaker.IME, accuracy and musical are the exact same thing. If its somehow able to be accurate but not musical- that suggests a distortion of some kind- which suggests its not accurate. Quite literally the two cannot be mutually exclusive. The illusion of an orchestra is all you’ll get. At times this approximation is not achieved by the most “accurate” components. I’ve sometimes gotten the illusion better with lower quality gear. It’s not an exact science.Yes. Setup is crucial and the room plays an enormous role. Modest equipment, if carefully vetted, can easily outperform much more expensive gear if the latter is hampered by the room. |
The more the sonic illusion of a full orchestra is created, the more it's going to fight with your perception (or at least knowledge, if eyes closed) that the room you're in could not get close to housing a full orchestra. I think that's why I tend to prefer speakers that project a more laid-back or distant soundstage--the impression is of listening from a row further back in the auditorium, from which point the image of the orchestra would be narrower. |
jhills, Fascinating. My impressions of the Raidho monitors vs the Gershman speakers I've heard was precisely the reverse of yours. The Raidho sound actually has a reputation for not being in the "strictly accurate/neutral" school of design. They deliberately depart from flat and are more designed by and for the ear, and have a dip in the upper midrange giving them a smooth, middle or further hall sound, though highly resolved. That's exactly what I heard when I auditioned them. Unfortunately I found the frequency scoop a bit too obvious and all sorts of transient information I new well (e.g. cymbals, guitars etc in certain tracks) were reduced in vibrancy and presence. On the other hand I find the Gershman sound to be competent, but more in the "fatiguing after a while" category. Go figure! |
