2. misc-audio
  3. 148812-89202

High definition vs. tonal balance

After many, many years as an audiophile, I’ve come to a conclusion that a goal of tonal balance is far more rewarding and less crazy producing than the quest for greater and greater definition.
Of course, both together is Nirvana.  But so many audiophiles go awry in the holy quest for lucidity.
Years ago I had a system that was far less defined than the system I have today. But, tonally, it was in perfect balance.  A violin sounded like a violin, an oboe like an oboe, a trumpet like a trumpet, you get the idea.  But, it was lacking in those elusive fine points of definition that I thought I needed.
Then began a many year’s quest to find the right component, wire, fuse, what have you to get the sharpest picture I could attain.  Trouble is, I would improve one aspect at the expense of another.  More piling on of fixes and I couldn’t get to the place of happiness I had before I started.
Finally, probably by luck and after thousands of dollars I’ve reached the point of content I was at several years ago.
Maybe my system is better defined now, but it also has achieved that synergy.
My point is, was it worth the torture?



rvpiano

Showing 3 responses by erik_squires

erik_squires
16,592 posts
 
There are those who believe if the “soundstage” is right, the timbre will automatically be a right as well.


Well, kind of. The trouble is I disagree with what "right" is. I mean, yes, sound stage and timbre is intimately linked, but those who like exaggerated sound stages also like a timber which is off neutral in absolute terms, and this is what has become the high-end bias. It's not better, it's just different but it sure does command higher prices.

erik_squires
16,592 posts
 
Re: soundstaging

Yep, a dip around 2.4 kHz in the response seems to do this. It’s kind of a convenient point too, as crossovers often occur in this range so as a speaker designer, all I have to do is push the high pass and low pass filters a little further apart than optimal, and voila, exaggerated soundstage.


As I recall, some Wilsons did this.


On a related note, many years ago, budding audiophile me, did blind testing with speaker cables and neighbors. I preferred sound staging, they much preferred the more neutral and liveliness of the cheaper cables. We agreed on what we heard, but disagreed on what was more important.
erik_squires
16,592 posts
 
I agree with the OP, with data to back it up. My view is that "definition" is artificial, and deliberately enhanced.


It often happens in the frequency response curves. By using relatively tight peaks and valleys of frequency response, a speaker can bring out certain details that an actually neutral speaker would not, but at the same time, it would do so at the expense of other notes.


I have written quite a bit about the "Stereophile curve" here:

https://speakermakersjourney.blogspot.com/2016/05/stereophile-reviews-data-doesnt-lie.html

But as always, you should buy what you like, and enjoy. Whether something is objectively neutral or not is not an absolute marker of value. I just know what neutral is and I personally really like it.


There's a different kind of definition, which when executed well is just neutral you can hear through. This happens through excellent room acoustics, and a speaker to match well with it.


Best,

E
More to discover