If instruments sound the way I think they should, that is an accurate system that is enjoyable, therefore musical.
133 responses Add your response
For me it's like comparing cars. A Lotus will be an exciting ride, but you probably wouldn't want it as an everyday driver. A BMW gives you a more comfortable ride and is still very enjoyable. So the uber revealing system is the Lotus, it will thrill you when the conditions are right...and perhaps irritate you when they're not. The BMW is the "musical" system that always aims to please. The unicorn is a system that can do both. Me personally, I started off in pursuit of the Lotus, but after 30 years have comfortably settled on a more balanced system that I enjoy immensely....all the time. I think the problem for a lot of folks is that they believe a "better" system will always make the music sound better. When in reality it can actually be the opposite. So the car analogy may be stupid to some, but I think it's a very accurate way to look at this. Everyone loves that shiny sports car...but do you really want one. It's all about balance. Tim |
@pauly "Fidelity and musicality are not mutually exclusive; rather there is a high positive correlation between the two." Quite so. Everything else is hand-waving bordering on a religious experience - read over how many times people "believe" or convey their feelings and memories of a variety of ephemeral experiences. Hence my initial one word post right at the start of all this. Its a trick question by the OP, @ishkabibil. |
RE: not mutually exclusive, it seems to me that, with all due respect to those whom have much more knowledge and experience than I possess, terms such as musicality and resolution are frequently bandied about here as though we all define such terms the same way. Judging from posts on this thread, we clearly do not! One can put together a system that measures really well but in the end, it's not an oscilloscope that's going to listen to the system-- it's individual human beings, whose perception of sound and aesthetic preferences can vary considerably, to say the least. We are all wired differently and it's not uncommon for reviewers to profess they enjoy a particular component in spite of less-than-stellar measurements. It's my impression that many audiophiles are fundamentally uncomfortable with the idea of simply pleasing their own ears. They somehow feel they must utilize objective baselines to justify their gear choices. As a creative person, I find this distrust of aesthetic judgement both very alien and very puzzling. I've played guitar for many decades but I do not require that my system precisely replicates the sound of my Martin or PRS or any guitar for that matter. What I require is that when I hear a recording of a guitar, that it moves me, physically and emotionally and this has far more to do with what the guitarist is playing than SQ. However, this is clearly not the case for everyone. There does indeed appear to be a divide of sorts-- on one side, those whose enjoyment of music appears to be largely determined by SQ -- how the music is presented-- and on the other, those of us for whom music is a vital necessity and who'd still listen even if we could only hear music on a transistor radio. The bottom line is, we are all wired differently and there's little we can do about it, so it's not a case of one approach being superior to the other-- to suggest that would be as ridiculous as asserting that blonde hair is intrinsically superior to brown hair. Whether this divide can accurately be described as a tug of war between musicality and fidelity, I'll leave for others to decide. . . what does seem true to me is that, in the end, each of us has to please ourselves. |
@stuartk perhaps you speak of musicianship? I'm not even sure that's a word. I am inclined to mostly agree with you. Many recordings from many genres and cultures from years long past sound as if they were recorded in a less than optimal environment. It has not stopped them from having a profound influence. Many examples, but as a guitarist you may be acquainted with folk including Robert Johnson and others similar. Anyway, back to first world issues of great import... |
"You better come on in my kitchen Well its goin to be rainin outdoors." @stuartk, you will know it when (and if) you hear it. A great system makes everything sound better, like an antique photograph looks better in focus. Even if it is black and white it can express a thousand words. Music is more than sound. It captures a moment of history. It's a long way to Tipperary. |
@mijostyn I sometimes actually prefer to listen to less than optimally recorded music (like an old photograph) on an "ordinary" system like in the car. Focus blurred. Mistakes are forgiven. Bit of road noise. Judging by the volume of traffic in other places from people finding a previously favourite recording to be found wanting or difficult when played on an uber expensive high fidelity and high musical system coupled with high sensitivity speakers in a treated listening room, I’m not alone. |
@audition............... As my system continues to improve, compression on recordings my be the single thing that bothers me the most. Thats where I am going with this if you notice increased compression when fidelity increases.......the system is less musical. There is some spectacular mid fi systems out there... |
@mijostyn: "The best systems make everything sound better, everything. When confronted with a system capable of the absolute sound everyone will think it sounds great. Everyone knows what "right" is when they hear it." I'm curious: what percentage of audiophiles would you suspect are able to afford one of the "best systems"? |
@noske: "@stuartk perhaps you speak of musicianship? I'm not even sure that's a word. I am inclined to mostly agree with you" Musicianship is mastery of expressive means. That is half the equation. The other half is having something valuable to express. There exist musicians who display dazzling technique yet who's playing communicates little-- there is an emptiness at the heart of it, Likewise, there are musicians with limited technique who manage to convey something profound. |
Define what is "musicality" and what is "fidelity." Be very specific and use objective terms, not subjective terms. Once that is finished and resolved, then we can discuss why some equipment fails to reproduce musical performances and other equipment comes very close to "you are there" reproduction. |
One can put together a system that measures really well but in the end, it’s not an oscilloscope that’s going to listen to the system-- it’s individual human beings, whose perception of sound and aesthetic preferences can vary considerably, to say the least. Agreed Everybody will have their own definition of what fidelity is, but to me fidelity does not equal measuring well on a scope. 2nd order harmonics is not distortion, 5th order harmonics is. Fidelity in audio is faithfulness to the reproduction of music, not faithfulness to reproducing a sine wave on a scope. Measurements that give the average deaf engineer wood is of no consequence to anyone with an interest in audio. |
2nd order harmonics is not distortion, 5th order harmonics is.Anything added is distortion. Piano, for instance, has overtones stretched over harmonics. Octave higher key is not tuned to double frequency but to overtone of the lower octave key (otherwise keys would beat). Tuning person is winding strings up until beat stops. Because of that piano has accumulated error of about 30 cents at both ends of the keyboard. Playing piano thru amplifier that adds second harmonic, is creating beats - exactly against tuning to avoid it . With overly warm gear piano can sound even like out of tune. |
pauly Everybody will have their own definition of what fidelity is ...What’s wrong with the commonly accepted definition? fi·del·i·ty noun: fidelityfaithfulness to a person, cause, or belief ...sexual faithfulness to a spouse or partner ...the degree of exactness with which something is copied or reproduced ... There’s no reason to make this more complicated than it is. Conversation is impossible if we can’t agree on simple terms. 2nd order harmonics is not distortion, 5th order harmonics is.Anything not present in the original is distortion, by commonly accepted definition. |
Perhaps we can find a way to kill off all acts, concepts, and aspects of individualism within the scope of humanity and all these disagreement thingies will finally go away. To put all these overly animated meat objects a nice neat simple (and quiet) box. I demand the right to stay outside of that box, of course, and do my own thing. But the box awaits you, all you problem children. Commoditization is your future. It would make my life a lot easier if you would just get in the dang box and stay there. |
Anything added is distortion. Piano, for instance, has overtones stretched over harmonics. … best we agree to disagree on that one. Technically you are correct of course, however in music reproduction I prefer an amp that adds 5% 2nd order harmonics over one which adds 0.01% 5th order harmonics. The vast majority of posters here will make the same choice in a listening test. I’m looking at distortion in the context of how we experience music vs. what a scope will show. |
@cleeds No no no, fidelity is my spouse being faithful to me, not me to her! Jeez dude. 😂🤣 Seriously though, I have no problem with the accepted definition of fidelity; it’s more a case of how that definition is applied in audio. I don’t consider high fidelity in audio as the ability of an amplifier to reproduce a sine wave accurately on a scope. Rather i see high fidelity of an amplifier to reproduce music in a way that I find it to be natural and accurate. The two are not the same, and most often some amplifiers will do the one well, the other not much. |
I prefer an amp that adds 5% 2nd order harmonics over one which adds 0.01% 5th order harmonics.I prefer amplifier that does not add any distortion. My Benchmark AHB2 has THD=0.00011% (-119dB, inaudible). Any distortion is coloring sound (reducing clarity). One might prefer to look at the paintings thru yellow glasses. There is nothing wrong with it, but he doesn't see what artist painted. |
Colours would be visible fundamental wavelengths/frequencies. Not harmonics of the fundamental.We’re not talking about harmonics in the recorded music, but harmonics added where they did not exist at all. Adding harmonics to piano, that are different than piano overtones, is distorting piano sound (creating beats). You might like it, but it is distorted sound with reduced clarity. Trying to cover bright metal dome tweeter with warm sounding gear is adding further reduction in clarity. Now, we have both odd and even harmonics added, when replacing tweeter (or speakers) seems to be the better choice, at least to me. |
@kijanki: "One might prefer to look at the paintings thru yellow glasses. There is nothing wrong with it, but he doesn't see what artist painted". Yes... BUT we are not robots with identical identical sound perception software installed! We each hear sound differently and our brains interpret it differently. And there's a further difference. Whereas, perception of visual art is a direct process-- from canvas to eye to brain, in audio, the process has more intermediate steps (recording/mixing and conveyance of the music to our ears via circuits and speakers). Is it not true that these added steps color/distort the accuracy of the original "painting ? You can have the more accurate system in the world and you are still hearing what pleased the ears of the engineer/producer in the studio-- your experience is ultimately subject to the coloring/distortion associated with their taste and this is associated with their preferences in mics, monitors, etc. Perhaps I'm missing something but I don't see how looking at a painting and listening to a recording are analogous. It seems to me that for the analogy to hold up, we'd have to compare viewing a painting in a gallery to hearing music in a concert hall. |
I prefer amplifier that does not add any distortion. My Benchmark AHB2 has THD=0.00011% (-119dB, inaudible). Any distortion is coloring sound (reducing clarity). No, you actually prefer an amp that adds distortion, and your benchmark reduces clarity. Our hearing evolved over millennia to interpret the fundamental frequency and even ordered harmonics as natural and clear sound. There is no natural sound in nature that is not accompanied by even ordered harmonics. The 0.00011% THD is achieved by dialing in large amounts of NFB. NFB results in odd ordered harmonics. Even in minute amounts, odd ordered harmonics sound unnatural, sterile and not musical. Odd ordered harmonics do not occur naturally. You make the mistake in thinking 5% 2nd order harmonics is more disruptive than 0.00011 5th order harmonics. That’s true for an oscilloscope, it’s not true for human hearing. |
The Benchmark AHB2 has pushed distortion and noise so low it is inaudible to humans. Kijanki is correct you might not like it but the AHB2 is as close to a straight wire with gain as we've gotten. All this blabbing about harmonics is nonsense with this amplifier they are inaudible , even and odd. High Fidelity means something. It isn't whatever you happen to prefer. Ideally, high-fidelity equipment has inaudible noise and distortion, and a flat (neutral, uncolored) frequency response within the human hearing range. |
No, you actually prefer an amp that adds distortion, and your benchmark reduces clarity. This is not true. Our hearing evolved over millennia to interpret the fundamental frequency and even ordered harmonics as natural and clear sound. There is no natural sound in nature that is not accompanied by even ordered harmonics.Not true as well. Piano does not have harmonics at all. It has overtones that are at different frequencies than harmonics. Clarinet has only odd order harmonics (acting like close tube resonator). Pure sine wave doesn't have any harmonics, etc. It is obvious that unique sound of (odd harmonics only) Clarinet will be altered when system adds even harmonics. The 0.00011% THD is achieved by dialing in large amounts of NFB. NFB results in odd ordered harmonics Not true. It results in odd harmonics (TIM distortions) only if NFB is recursive. AHB2 uses non-recursive feedback. Signal fed back does not come to the input section of the amplifier, but to completely different error amplifier, that runs in parallel. Even in minute amounts, odd ordered harmonics sound unnatural, sterile and not musical. Odd ordered harmonics do not occur naturally. This is wrong. Where you learning this ??? Almost all instruments (with few exceptions), produce series of even and odd harmonics. Odd harmonics do not occur naturally ??? What about Clarinet that has only odd harmonics? |
It moves or it doesn’t? We’re trying to find out why it is moving or not otherwise what is the sense in participating here. Many people believe that warm sounding gear "moves" them, while natural clean sounding gear sounds analytic, sterile etc. Read AHB2 opinion I found long time ago: "In my 25 years of of experience with mostly tube amplifiers of all sorts, I have never come across a more emotionally involving amplifier than the AHB2. It is exactly because it doesn’t "interpret" the music by adding coloration or any artificial sense of ambience or reverberation that it is so fascinating to listen to. The AHB2’s ability to reproduce the timbre and texture of acoustic instruments is beyond anything I have experienced before - just listen to brass or woodwind! - and the precision with which it reveals the actual acoustic properties of the recording venue, whether it be a small café or a concert hall, is second to none. At least to my ears. I think what captured my attention from the very first instant was how honest and genuine the sound is. If it is in the recording, it is there, otherwise not. This amplifier keeps me on the edge of my seat in excitement and anticipation even with recordings that I have known for years and not thought very highly of, so in my view it is the very antithesis of boring. I don’t remember having ever been so moved by reproduced music as with this Benchmark combo. FYI, I almost exclusively listen to classical music and much of it in hi-rez, but I have to say that well-recorded CDs are also much more enjoyable and listenable now than before. Karsten" |
| Post removed |
Peter says in response to Karsten - "I really wish that I shared this experience. Do you think my AHB2 may be a duff specimen? Surely not - these are mass produced and should all sound identical. If you’ve read my original posting "REVIEW - Benchmark AHB2 with Avantgarde" you’ll see that my experience is hugely different from yours. I’m inclined to turn down the volume or move on to the next track and am certainly not on the edge of my seat - and I’m not a tube enthusiast! Why are we hearing things so differently? Either my AHB2 is a duff, or my tube amps are much better than any you’ve had in your system..." Yes, it does make me wonder, too, especially when this is Karsten’s response (in part, its very long and jazz hands clapping) to Peter - ’..Listen to a string quartet on most tube amplifiers and it will sound big, blooming and embellished, or listen to it on most solid state amps and it will sound opaque and "twisted".’ Well, I'm glad we cleared that up. |
"I took the AHB2 along with me for a weekend at our country place, in Connecticut, to see if it would be as successful with my more modest system there. That’s where I discovered that my new hero amp wasn’t quite perfect. Oh, its power and resolution were still not to be faulted, but through a pair of Monitor Audio Silver 8 speakers, the sound was somewhat hard and thin. Could it have had something to do with the Silver 8s themselves? .... Familiar recordings of women’s voices, such as Marianne Beate Kielland singing Finzi’s "Come Away, Death" .. and Sara K.’s cover of "Can’t Stand the Rain" from her Hell or High Water.., sounded strange. Both voices were higher, not in pitch but in tonal range, as if they’d been transformed from mezzo-sopranos (which Kielland is) to sopranos. Again, I would describe it as a loss of warmth and resonance in the fundamentals of their voices. Unfortunately for the AHB2, this loss pervaded the sound of whatever recording I played. I wrote it off as an example of an amp-speaker mismatch." - Kalman Rubinson Yep, probably the speakers, despite John Atkinson's assurance that they should be fine. Again, I’m glad that’s all clear as mud. |
The Benchmark is a fine amp, and it hovers nearer the clean/sterile sound, some would say "white" sound as opposed to colored. It will not bring gobs of warmth as some prefer. This is all on a spectrum of characteristics, so opinions will vary, and that makes such discussion difficult. Now, class D amps such as the Legacy Audio i.V4 Ultra have more warmth than the Benchmark and more resolution. See my reviews of these products at Dagogo.com. It's not the speakers. It's easy to characterize an amp when you use it in, say, 8-10 systems with five or six speaker genres, but if you only use it in one or two you have less understanding of the amp's character. However, different genres of speakers will influence how strong the character of the amp is expressed. Anyone who uses it in one rig and claims they know the sound only has a general idea regarding its character. |
