I’ve begun a project of listening to the Beethoven string quartets. So far I’ve listened to op. 18. Quartets. Beethoven’s genius is palpable in these works. He devoured the classical style whole and spit out masterpieces that surpassed even Haydn and Mozart in invention. And this is to mention only one genre he worked with.
I am on the same opinion as you for sure...
Beethoven add something to the quatuor genre very few can rival if some can...
I like a lot Robert Simpsons quatuors i begun to explore after i read his book about Bruckner...
For Beethoven quatuor i like a lot Talich, but i must go with your advice i think :
Regarding the Op. 18 works, I prefer: 1) ensembles who play them big and bold, and not like embryonic Mozart; and 2) Vibrato, please. I really dislike Quartets that eschew all vibrato (and coincidentally play at crazy speeds) and completely blow the expressive effects of the music.
My longstanding favorites are the Hungarian Quartet (stereo version)) and the Cleveland Quartet. Most of the more modern recordings I’ve heard are HIPP and therefore excluded by at least one of my criteria
|
I just listened to the Hogwood version of the Mozart Requiem on my compromised speakers. I hadn’t heard this version previously. From what I could tell, it’s a really fine reading. The “Lacrymosa” is a bit shocking in its original version, quite different from Sussmeyer’s arrangement.
My first encounter with the Requiem was with Krips and the Vienna Choir Boys. I literally wore out three LP’s, playing it every day for a very long time. Such is my reverence for the work and Mozart.
My subwoofers should be installed tomorrow. Can’t wait to hear the Hogwood with them working.
|
Don’t know the Krips record that you referenced and I really can’t remember my first recording of the Mozart Requiem . A late mono Walter was the only lp that I had; it’s usually Jordi Savall that turn to now
|
Don’t know the Krips record that you referenced and I really can’t remember my first recording of the Mozart Requiem . A late mono Walter was the only lp that I had; it’s usually Jordi Savall that turn to now
|
Well, I had the amps replaced, and when the technician was through he noticed the polarity of the speaker cables was the conventional red to red and black to black formation. It just so happens that my Conrad-Johnson preamp is phase inverting, which means the cables should be black to black on one speaker and on the other speaker black to RED. I have known this since I bought the preamp many moons ago. But somehow (I don’t know when) the cables were reversed in the wrong formation.
All of a sudden the sound opened up magnificently when I played my records.
So, the bad turned into the good!
|
Unless I am misunderstanding what @rvpiano is describing, this does not sound correct to me:
It just so happens that my Conrad-Johnson preamp is phase inverting, which means the cables should be black to black on one speaker and on the other speaker black to RED.
From what I understand, and I thought I understood it pretty well:
When a component reverses absolute phase, that means both channels reverse phase in the same way. So, in order to correct the reverse phase, each channel has to be connected to the speakers in the same way, red to black, black to red, so each channel is getting the + terminal connected to the - terminal, and vice versa. So both channels have all the speaker drivers moving in the same direction.
The way @rvpiano is describing it, he will have the drivers on one speaker moving forward, when the drivers on the other are moving backwards.
This does not seem to be correcting absolute phase, but putting each speaker out of phase with each other.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Not trying to be insulting, but just trying to clarify my own understanding.
|
To be more clear, it seems like @rvpiano is creating the top state, but the system is actually in the center state.
But by reversing each channel, would create the bottom state, the correct one.
Unless I am misunderstanding what @rvpiano is describing.
|
|
On reading the manual carefully. It appears you are right. My technician, unbeknownst to me inserted them the correct way. I got lucky!
|
I would hate to tell you how many years I’ve been listening to my system out of phase. It’s since I bought the Conrad-Johnson pre.
What a revelation to hear everything anew! It’s like the best upgrade I could buy.
VERY SAD!
|
I also once was out phase when I auditioned new speaker wire. After unhooking the sample cables I mistakenly rewired the original and didn’t notice until the order of the new cable came in a few weeks later. I had the vague feeling that something was off without being able to figure out just what
|
Since bringing my speakers into phase (even with only one subwoofer!) the sound is maybe 90% better. It’s really hard to believe the difference.
Not only that, it’s changed the equation between analog and digital. Now analog is sounding palpably better than digital.
|
@rvpiano
Some people argue that there is no sonic difference with systems being wired out of absolute phase.
But, with music like classical (and a lot of acoustic jazz), where: all the musicians are playing at the same time, in the same acoustic space, and the recording engineer took good efforts to capture the spatial cues, the ambience of the acoustic space, the musicians position within it, etc., there is a definite difference.
And of course, you are pointing out exactly where those differences are: soundstage, imaging, etc.
The human auditory system evolved to be able to discern interaural time differences between our ears as low as 7-10 microseconds. We leverage this ability when we hear soundstage and imaging on our audio systems.
This is what gives us (and our ancestors) the ability to tell if a snapping twig in a forest is in front or behind us, about how far, etc., in case it is a predator.
Our auditory system is better at this when to initial waveform of the noise is rising, not falling. So, when our systems are in correct absolute phase, sounds are rising when they should be, and falling when they should be. And we hear that difference in our audio systems as better imaging and soundstage.
I would guess, that people that don't think there is any difference, are listening to music that was recorded in a studio, with: overdubs, panning, delay, use of multiple mono mics on each instrument, etc. So, any hope of hearing natural spatial cues, has been masked by all the studio effects.
ITD PubMed
ITD
|
@simonmoon
Thanks for the scientific explanation.
Very interesting.
|
Thanks 
for this article every audiophile must read...
😊
«Microsecond differences in the arrival time of a sound at the two ears (interaural time differences, ITDs) are the main cue for localizing low-frequency sounds in space. »
ITD PubMed
|
The sound of the Triton 1’s is so unbelievably rich and detailed with one subwoofer that now I’m worried that when the amp for the second subwoofer gets installed. the sound won’t be as good.
Also I spoke too soon regarding the relative SQ of analog to digital..
Digital is also now starting to sound great as well.
|
When I first started reading about subwoofers the dogma was that one only required one, and many in addition argued that position of the sub relative to the main speakers wasn’t very important. The justification for both of these points was that bass tends to be unidirectional and the low frequency wave forms are difficult to place as to origin in a soundstage.
I quickly learned that the second part of the proposition just isn’t true as sub placement is very critical but I just use one sub in all my systems. The current dogma seems to be use 2 or 4 subs. The systems that I have heard with multiple subs don’t impress me, but their owners don’t tend to listen to the music that I prefer
|
I quickly learned that the second part of the proposition just isn’t true as sub placement is very critical but I just use one sub in all my systems.
For sure you are right.
What is called room nodes is a pressure distribution zones grid...
When i used resonators in a room location matter as the main factor as much as the mechanical tuning ...
i dont know about many subs...Or one...😊
My 2 rooms were around 1000 feet square and with my resonators i dont needed one even if for sure it would had improve the sound quality ...
|
I’ve always heard that one subwoofer is okay for a system. What’s different about my situation is that the subwoofers are built in to my speakers. Theoretically. that would mean the subwooferless speaker would not reproduce the lower frequencies of that speaker, leaving a loss of quality. But that does not seem to be the case.
|
@rvpiano
I raised the one sub issue in reference to your current problem with your Tritons. My understanding was that you currently had the enclosed sub working in one speaker only. My point was that if systems are generally well served with just one sub, do you notice a difference if only one is intact?
|
I’m going to get a new subwoofer amp delivered today. When it’s installed I’ll let you know.
|
@mahler123
Sorry for the delay in answering. Just rediscovered the thread.
Yes there is a big difference with two subwoofers. The sound is much fuller.
|
|
The New York Times had Lang Lang record the piece but unfortunately afaik only released it on the daily NYT podcast where the podcast host blabs the whole time with the music relegated to background status. I wonder why they bothered
|
It is why i put the youtube link...
The NYT is trash ...
|
