Aging and Treble and Income?
an excellent pair of Quad 57 ELS speakersThese produce outstanding sound within their response spectrum... Nothing to do with getting older:) I've been shopping for speakers for over a year. Noting wrong with what I have but would love something simple where I only need two amps and (maybe) no sub woofersYou probably have considered Linkwitz's design? I find the sound very good; I listened to an older incarnation of his "Orion" design. OTOH it sounds much better than it looks...:) |
This is a good forum, pleased to read there are so many members like me. I go to lots of audio shows and have for many, many years. I would say 90% of what IÂve heard is bright to the point of irritation. Some are so bad I can hardly enter the room. I've been shopping for speakers for over a year. Noting wrong with what I have but would love something simple where I only need two amps and (maybe) no sub woofers. DoesnÂt look like it's possible, at least not for anything less than the price of a second home and some of what cost that much is not musical. |
| Post removed |
I think Schubert is correct. Today's hifi industry is not at all geared toward classical music, as the original industry was. They assume that people are listening to mostly electronically produced music. This obviously makes a huge difference, as electronic timbres are much easier to reproduce than acoustic ones. This is not as much of an oversimplification as it seems. Part of it is also the recordings themselves and the digital processing. It just doesn't result in quite the right sound. Clean and detailed, yes. Really capturing all of the timbral nuances of acoustic instruments? Not so much. |
Well, it's nice to know I'm not alone!! Just as a reference (as my name probably hints..) I'm one of those audio-bores who found an excellent pair of Quad 57 ELS speakers, and as a result has given up any real intention of ever 'improving' his system. I'll never get over the fact that this ugly-looking speaker routinely performs the kind of magic that speaker makers still try to emulate - 65 years later! |
I agree. I think the high fidelity business in general is driven by ooooh's and aaaaaah's, which usually come from detail, detail, detail. There are many manufacturers out there who are trying to emphasize a particular frequency ranges. I always thought this was due to the fact that the audiophile who spent lots of money wanted to be able to show others what he got for his money. "Did you hear that?" "Whoa!" Maybe you're right, maybe it is simply due to aging geezers being harder of hearing, so the industry has to turn up the 'presence' range. I'm quickly coming up on my mid 50's, and I admit that I was chasing that absolute sound for many years. Lately though, I have been seeking more musical gear and less transparency. I realize that I'm not hearing every last detail anymore, but listening is more relaxing and enjoyable. |
I have recently attended a a couple of live performances ,the sound was bad,over amplified speakers.The days of live music without electronics aids seems to have disappeared from commercial live performances.At audio shows and at dealers the demos usually use what they deem to be exotic music with lots of highs and bass to try and demonstrate how spectacular the music system is,result for me anyway is ear fatigue and irritation.As for hearing aids as a geriatric I do not recommend them for audio enjoyment,the decline in hearing is related not just the ear physiology but to the inability of the brain to process the high frequency.The DAC in ones brain has deteriorated(not literally) |
Once again, Here is my favorite resource for understanding what I should hear when listening. I have a framed printed copy hanging in my listening room for reference when needed. Useful in this case to identify how variations at higher frequencies would affect what you might hear. Notice that air, definition, and pierce are three things that a tipped up high end might emphasize, for better or for worse, depending how well done. The key is in the "how well done" part I am willing to bet. Depending on how well done (including distortion levels), it might come across as either lovely or irritating, with a fine line between I would say from my experience. Other than "air", those over 45-50 can probably still hear most of whats going on short of "air" I suppose and be drawn in or repelled accordingly and not have to worry as much at whats going on above 12-14Khz or so. The biggest problems however are most likely in the parts indicated where our ears are most sensitive, like at ~ 10Khz or so (associated with "pierce" and "definition") which comes more into play for everyone. |
I went to a small UK show in Southern England, graced by Dan D'Agostino, no less. He gave an interesting run down on his new Momentum amps and very new Pre amp, appearing over this side of the Atlantic for the first time. The 2 "High End" rooms, had Wilson speakers, the Sasha in one and the next one up in the other, sorry I forgot the name. The point is, I have never got Wilson speakers, at all, edgy, etched, HiFi, not music. The first room with the Sashas, first had a big Krell power amp. Just my usual, teeth being drilled experience. As I was about to run from the room, the dealer changed at an Audio Research ref 150. What a change, all the detail, soundstage depth, but creamy, full bodied, lovely sound. I finally get it Mr Wilson, thanks. The other room had the momentum monoblocks and new Pre amp. Again a beautiful rich, detailed sound, wide, deep soundstage. If my eyes had been closed, I would have thought a top tube monoblock, like Lamm. So what I thought of as hard, tipped up dry treble, in this case, proved to be the matching amps, not the speakers and my prejudice against Wilson, Focal and other speakers I consider "HiFi", may have been wrong all along. I still have my doubts about Focal though. |
I've noticed a tendency towards brightness at some displays at the last audio show I went to (the Newport Audio Show). I thought it an anomaly until I read some reports and one display, in particular was rated as one of the "best in show" and it was too sterile and bright for my taste. Yes, there was lots of musical information bombarding my ears with detail aplenty, incisive highs, and sound that would cut right through butter. Yet it wasn't involving, organic, music to my ears. It engaged me at first but as I waited to talk to one of the reps, it began to fatigue me and I simply moved on. All the best, Nonoise |
The answer to your question is yes, but has little to do with the audio high end. Aging produces hearing loss, and that means at some point, if you want to hear all the sounds of life, hearing aids. Yes, there are 'hi end' hearing aids, some costing $5K each. So, invest in the major hearing aid companies, and get ready to spend. |
Perhaps some newer speakers are designed to sound more like what younger people are used to hearing: headphones--clear to the point of being bright, with much detail. One might say "nothing left to the imagination." I put on 'phones yesterday (some "okay" Audio Technicas) to finish an LP side I was already listening to when some people came home prematurely. I couldn't take a steady diet of that sound. At least for the material (classical, violin concerto) it didn't make it. Way too clinical and bright. Very fatiguing IMO. |
That's a very interesting question. Would not surprise me a bit if top ends are tipped up by design for various reasons in many cases, including to appeal to aging ears with $$$s to spend. There are ways to produce results like this in a system even if individual components are more "neutral" in nature. At a recent audio show I attended, I noticed some very expensive and well received setups like this that had that sparkling and detailed hifi kind of sound in spades. Lots of large exotic tube amps even in some of those. Sound is like ice cream. Not all like the same flavors. How good can vanilla ice cream get? Until it becomes something else perhaps similar but more unique or exotic? That's usually what sells to those seeking a new thrill or something unique or different, so wouldn't surprise me a bit if true for high end audio as well. |
I'm 38 and been spending way too much on this stuff since about 19 or so. I agree about the tilted up treble. In the 90s I was at one of the high end chains of that time and walked by a "flagship" pair of electrostats playing thinking "wow too bright" and the salesman said "that's how real music sounds". Resently I've made some system changes because what others thought was ideal tonality to me was too bright. To each their own as each of us likes what we like and that's O.K. It seems much of the touted "best of" class is what I would consider bright, and is nothing new. IMO the brighter systems demo well as the illusion is that there's more detail but once in home becomes fatiguing. |
I read once that Wilson speakers have become more accurate with respect to timbre as a consequence of David Wilson expending substantial effort in visiting the worlds major orchestras. I suspect this points to the root of the problem more than a deliberate effort to color the sound in an effort to offset hearing loss. I'm also in my late 50s. While my hearing has not changed over the last 20 years, my reference remains live orchestral and chamber music. Most of what I hear in the salons I visit don't get the music right, and no one seems to know it but me. I can remember one system in particular. It sounder just great with Elton John. It was a complete mess with a shostakovich quartet. |
