How do I smooth out violins?

I have the CD5004 also. Even Stereophile could not find fault with it. I don't think it will be the problem.
Cheers

Jmcgrogan is right about digital and massed strings. I suspect jitter can
have a noticeable effect with sustained high frequencies as is common
with bowed mass strings, particularly violins. Some of he best massed
strings i have heard from cd came from a dcs puccini to vtl pre to vac tube
amp to magico mini. Another was an all mbl rig with a huge soundstage
where everything had lots of room to breathe.

Jmcgrogan is right about digital and massed strings. I suspect jitter can have a noticeable effect with sustained high frequencies as is common with bowed mass strings, particularly violins. Some of he best massed strings i have heard from cd came from a dcs puccini to vtl pre to vac tube amp to magico mini.

Maybe I am showing my age. But, that the idea that massed strings are problematic on many digital recording/playback (I agree with Jmcgrogan) should come as a surprise at all is, to me, the biggest surprise of all. This has been the subject of discussion for as long as digital has been around. Clearly, there are many fine digital recordings, and in some ways analog has as many problems (if of a different kind). But, the OP seems to be familiar with the sound of live strings and is looking for such. Given how common the problem is, it seems to me that the source is a great place to start. I really don't mean to turn this into a digital vs analog issue, but I have heard VERY few digital playback systems playing back mased strings, that allow me to forget that it's digital that I am listening to. Then again, I have heard just as few turntables that let me forget that am listening to a turntable. Is that pc (I don't mean power cord) enough?

Gear has a long way to go still; if the sound of live is the goal. The notion that a $400 CD player is "without fault" seems a little far fetched to me.

IMO

Hi Frogman,
You make a good point,a CD player built to sell for 400.00 retail certainly faces cost restraints.Likely small power supply, wimpy transformer and cheap op-amps and caps needed to meet budget. High quality digital can sound excellent with all types of music.Would it not be in the OP`s best interest to have a reference CD recording(he knows and can trust) to use when auditioning or comparing other players.He can develop a relative hierarchy of of various players sound quality.
Regards,

The problem with a reference recording is it can sound completely different on every system it's played on. Does that make one system bad and another good? I don't think so. Every system I have assembled gets the most from a separate group of recordings. I think it takes many many recordings to analyze a system. It would be nice if we could use one recording, but it's not that simple.

Gentlemen,
The OP says massed violins sound like crap on his system. Asks for suggestions as to how to correct the situation. Now THINK for a monment. How many VARIABLES are we confronted with here?

The CD was badly recorded
the CD was actually a transfer of a 1942 recording
The performance was subpar
It was not a top tier orchestra
he does not know what massed violins sound like
his expectations are too high for recorded music
his speakers are not up to the task

And Lord knows what else

SO, how can anyone ponder the OP's question and come up with BUY THIS, BUY THAT, UPGRADE THAT CHANGE THIS.
would it not make sense to do the easy and simple and the cheapest things FIRST.

The 349 dollar CD player owned by the OP and moi. Please google CD5004 STEREOPHILE. I will assume you gentlemen know how to 'READ' equipment reviews. Trust me, if they had found anything wrong or bad with a 350$ CD player, they would have shouted it to the roof-tops. Because it would support the firt law of high-end 'If it cost more, it's better'. The obligatory last paragraph comparison to the mega buck 'reference' player notwithstanding.

Cheers

"Trust me, if they had found anything wrong or bad with a 350$ CD player, they would have shouted it to the roof-tops."

Unless Marantz advertises in their magazine.

Bojack - I am a big classical fan and have experienced a very similar problem you describe. In fact, I posted a thread about it on AA. The problem manifested itself in both of my systems, one is a passive pre-Class D amp-Maggies rig, the other is an active pre-Class A/B-box speaker combo, so very different. The posters on AA ranged everywhere from "Maggies suck" (yeah right) to more involved discussion of the problems recording engineers face in recording orchestral strings.

I have a couple of comments:

1) My problem isn't heard with solo violin, which in fact sounds particularly good on my system. It's orchestral violins only.
2) I have improved the sound through shielded A.C cables and jitter control. I would investigate both of these routes. I would look into a reclocker for the Marantz (Empirical Audio and Audio Gd are the competitors in this space). This isn't a complete solution but it's ameliorative.
3) Following up on 2, my current working hypothesis is that the issue is one of dirty power and jitter.

So I think your observation is completely valid and I would approach the solution analytically.

01-05-13: Rok2id
I will assume you gentlemen know how to 'READ' equipment reviews.

I know how to read equipment reviews, as do most others here. It's like reading the funny pages in the newspaper. Why do you feel the need to have someone else tell you how something sounds? I realize that reviews are merely ads, I've read many in the last few decades....some are right, some are wrong, some are right AND wrong. So what's your point?

To make it easier for others who read these threads, here is a link to the precious Marantz CD5004 review.

I'm certainly not bashing Marantz, my modified Marantz SA-11S1 is still the best digital source that I have owned. That being said, it still can't reproduce massed strings like my turntable. It's not the CDP's fault, it's the limitations of the digital format. Many do get by buying tubes and cables to attempt to smooth this problem out though.

My, I see that there are quite a few variables here, and Jult52, my issue is also massed violins, so it's good to know that you improved their sound with jitter control. Ironically, I don't remember having this problem in an earlier system (different everything except Type 4s), where my CD source was CAL DX-1. I would have it to this day if it were not for my experience with 3 bad CAL players (DX1, DX2, and CL-5)...finally threw up my hands with them and hence got the Marantz.

01-05-13: Rrog
The problem with a reference recording is it can sound completely different on every system it's played on. Does that make one system bad and another good? I don't think so. Every system I have assembled gets the most from a separate group of recordings. I think it takes many many recordings to analyze a system. It would be nice if we could use one recording, but it's not that simple.

True enough, Ron. But in this case we are trying to address a single very specific problem. And IMO a problem that WILL occur with many classical orchestral recordings no matter how good the system is, as a consequence of excessive multi-miking and processing. And IMO a problem that will NOT occur with a well engineered, minimally miked, minimally processed recording unless there is a specific problem or problems in the system.

As Frogman said earlier, it is entirely possible that part of the problem is in the recordings, and something in the system is making it worse. Listening to a known good reference recording would help to isolate the degree to which the system and the recordings may be contributing to the problem. It would also minimize the likelihood that the system will be end up being changed in a manner that compensates for the problems in the mediocre recordings, but degrades or limits its performance with high quality recordings.

It is, of course, a traditional audiophile dilemma that improving the quality of the reproduction of good recordings may in some ways make run of the mill recordings sound worse. And each listener needs to optimize that tradeoff in accordance with his or her own preferences. But it would seem likely to be an exercise in futility to try to optimize that tradeoff without including one or more recordings that are of impeccable quality, and that can be counted on to not contribute to the problem that is being addressed.

Regards,
-- Al

Jmcgrogan2:

" Why do you feel the need to have someone else tell you how something sounds? I realize that reviews are merely ads, I've read many in the last few decades....some are right, some are wrong, some are right AND wrong. So what's your point?"

I don't need anyone to tell me how a CD player sounds. I knew how it would 'sound' before I bought it. And just for the record, I owned the CD5004 before I ever read the review, since I never read stereophile unless it reviews something I already own. Also, I owned the CD 5400, which is the exact same player as the CD5004 with a different face plate. So, I have owned the player since 2004. I also own the SA8001. The difference in sound between the two? There is none. The SA8001 plays SACD, that's the only difference.

And my POINT is this: Why would anyone ASSUME the player is causing the problem? There is no evidence to make the player suspect, except, it's common sense price. So knowing the audiophile mindset, that the least expensive item is always the 'problem', I thought bringing up the Stereophile review would mean something to the high-end audiophile crowd and result is better advice to the OP. It was as simple as that.

One last point. I always try to respect people who post, and will always take them at their word when it comes to the problems they state. BUT, I suspect many posters just want to be told to BUY or UPGRADE. Because the only advice anyone seems to take or even consider is the advice to replace something or buy something new. Just my perception. I could be wrong. Thanks for the post.
Cheers

Adding a tube preamp will address the issue
I would also play with replacing some caps in the dna amps
My opinion of course

Musicfile,

Good suggestions, but finances don't allow for replacing caps in the DNA and a tube pre...will have to go with just the pre for now.

A suggestion...to not assume all tube preamps will resolve your issue. Some tube preamps are not that "tubey". In my experience, certain units from Audio Research and Counterpoint sound very revealing. They will probably still be an upgrade from NAD, but may not be what you are targeting - which sounds like more of the CJ, Quicksilver type of sound. Also, replacing your Audioquest with Cardas may help too.

Gentlemen, my two cents on this. Pretty much I agree with Frogman and Al. While they are correct that some digital recordings have gotten better, and there are even a few older ones that sound fine, it is a very sad fact that most of them are extremely over-miked and over-mixed, and just REALLY suck in general. I have plenty of first-hand experience of this, watching so-called "sound engineers" with absolutely no clue what they are doing. It is truly painful, and even infuriating. Almost no one seems to know how mikes should really be set up any more - they figure it's digital now, it's easy, it's just pushing buttons. Use as many mikes as possible, wherever we want, and then mix it to sound however the hell we want later. It is truly appalling for us musicians. They have especially lost the art, though, of doing sound at live concerts, but that's a whole other rant, though it is very much related to the non-thinking, non-listening approach that most of them have ever since digital recording was possible.

Sorry, but I happened to have an especially bad experience at tonight's show with the idiots who are the "sound guys". OK, I'm done ranting now.

Rok2id,
If you notice, there`re acutually a number of posts here advising the OP to be systematic in approaching this issue.As has been say repeatedly, be sure it is`nt a 'recording issue' before changing and swapping components blindly.Take one sensible step at a time.

Learsfool,
Your "rant" is fully understood,it is a shame these 'sound' engineers won`t rely more on their ears and simply listen.
Regards,

I've said from the beginning in my first post that if the problem is equipment related that I would look first to the preamp. I stand by this recommendation. I think that its worth stating again, though, that you need to look for the RIGHT preamp, not a tube preamp. If the right preamp just happens to be tube based, that's the one I would get.

If you start with the intent to FIX a problem by throwing things like tubes, cables, AC products, etc.. into the equation, you will fail. Any time you don't use products as they were intended to be used, in context, you can't possibly expect them to do good in your system other than by luck or accident. Heres an example. A lot of people mention that you should switch from AQ to Cardas cables. Why? I have absolutely no idea. The right way to correct the problem you are having with regards to getting stringed instruments right has nothing to do with cables. In this case, cables can't fix the problem. If cables can't fix the problem, the only other thing you can try to do with them is cover the problem up. By installing Cardas cables in your system, you can hope that the cables will work in a selective fashion, targeting a frequency range that just happens to be a problem area in your system, and smooth the problem over for you; by design. Anyone who thinks something like that can work needs to give Cardas a call and run the idea by them. In all likelihood, they would tell you (while laughing), that would be a bad idea and that they design their cables to have a frequency response that is as flat as possible; just like everyone else does. I'm not saying here that cables don't sound different from each other; they do. The point I'm trying to make is that if you use cables to transfer the audio signal from component to component, you will probably be happy with them. If you get them for some other reason, you won't be happy.

FWIW, since you seem to be dedicated to buying a tubed pre-amp I will restrain my self from comments on most other things, and comment on that issue.

1) Be sure your selection is electrially matched to perform best with your amp, i.e. correct impedence values in both units.

2) Be sure that the unit you buy will give you long range satisfaction even if it proves not to be the solution to the problem you are presently experiencing. If it does, your in hog heven, if not you can go to the next possible solution, not backward.

If your budget allows, consider the Joule Electra LA100 III pre-amp. One is presently on the AG. (That is what I would do anyway.)

BTW, my most successful, initial departure from the classic upper midrange brightness issue was the purchase of a high end tubed pre-amp, and subsequently a tubed CDP, if for no other reason, that I could change tonal issues by just changing tubes. The next step was fine tuning set up issues, and very belatedly finding the right speakers (for me and my room) and the amplification for them. Took me many years and a lot of experiments. No quick fixes that I ever found.

A last, but long, comment. All of the recomendations about recordings being critical are right on point as I initially implied, however a couple of things to think about.

1) Most recordings are made with a prospective user in mind, i.e. deaf, dumb, and blind, a beginning audiophile with a mid-fi solid state system, an advanced audiophile (many who post here), and the SOTA folk who seem to listen mostly to sound effects, valuing such things as depth of image (specificity, transparency, resolution) VERY highly.

2) Consider, for example, that the recording recommended by Al, great as it probably is, may not help you tune your system. It will undoubted sound good, and unless you have heard it over a reference system, you really don't know what its true potential is. But, just taking those specific old recordings you have at hand, you can play them on your 'new' system and judge your progress in tuning out the upper mid-range brightness. My favorite reference disc is "Depth of Image" on OPUS 3. A simple miked recording of various music with a description of what one SHOULD hear on each cut. I heard this on a reference system. WOW! So it became my guide and helped immensely.

Good luck..........

Bojack,

A tube preamp may or may not rectify - lol - your situation. Multiple posts address the essential importance of the source material.

It would be interesting to document the sonic characteristics of your listening environment...audio-related anomalies can often be sourced, hehe, there.

Enjoy,

Sam

Zd,
I agree with your post but my comments about replacing the AQ4 speaker cables was based on having used them for several years. Have you used them in your system? They are extremely grainy, and really don't do strings any favors. Another person suggested replacing them with Cardas. I can't answer for why they made that recommendation. I can say that AQ 4 is the worst wire I have ever had in my system. Chances are pretty good that replacing AQ 4 with Cardas, or for that matter something else selected at random would be an improvement. Its really not good wire.

Along the lines of Brownsfan's comments on cable, which I suspect is fair comment. For a relative few bucks, you could buy Canare 11s4 speaker wire and Blue Jeans interconnect and for the near future eliminate cable issues as being a source of problems. These are excellent, if not benchmark, for cost effective quality. Neutral. And electrically speaking well spec'd cables. When you get the rest of your system down to 'excellent' then you can spend some money on trying to find something better. FWIW.

I have first hand experience switching from AQ to Cardas in many systems and am sharing my experience/opinion with the OP.Ultimately, this hobby is about our own expeiences and sharing with others what we have encountered. Not sure, why George Cardas would laugh at an person asking if his cables will calm down a bright system. I have talked with Mr. Cardas in shows and he has always been cardial. Has he laughed at you in the past?

Brownsfan,

I wasn't trying to single you out in any way. I didn't go back and reread every single comment, but I thought I saw several poster recommend Cardas; that's why I used it. Also, if you take another look at my post, you'll see that I didn't say that either cable was good or bad. I only meant to imply that using cables to fix this, or any other problem, is generally speaking, not a good way to fix things you don't like in a system. Once in a while, you may get lucky, but more often as not you won't really fix anything with cables.

As to me having the AQ4 in my system, it was a few years ago, but I have. I didn't think it was as bad as you say but overall I agree with you. I didn't like them either. That said, I still don't think its the source of the problem. I apologize for any confusion in my post.

Zd, I think we are on the same page. I really don't like the change this buy that approach to spending other people's money. Luck is a poor plan A for making improvements in one's system. In the case of the AQ 4, I had direct experience with the cable and didn't like it. Inexpensive cables like anticable and signal cable were way better, so its not likely that loosing the AQ 4 would be a waste of money.

Zd542, while I don't disagree with you in theory regarding cables, in reality, I think everyone uses cables somewhat to 'tune in' a collection of equipment to suit their personal musical tastes. Many times I will see folks who swear by cables that many others will call 'bright' sounding, inevitably, these folks usually are running gear that many view as 'dark' sounding. Then there are others who swear by 'dark' sounding cables as the truth, when I look at their list of gear I see many 'bright' sounding pieces listed.

In the end, I feel that many of us generally arrive at the same destination, though we take many different paths to get there. Since there is no one single cable that everyone agrees is perfectly neutral, I feel that such an animal, a "perfectly neutral cable", does not exist. Therefore we are all tuning to some extent.

I once emailed Cardas regarding my harsh and forward sounding system and they recommended one of their cables that would make my system more laid-back. The reply was signed by George. (I assume G. Cardas).
I'll bet he is very familiar with these situations.

FYI, here is a review from 1990 of the Chesky CD I recommended earlier for use as a reference recording, by Robert Hesson of Stereophile.

Regards,
-- Al

"...in reality, I think everyone uses cables somewhat to 'tune in' a collection of equipment to suit their personal musical tastes...In the end, I feel that many of us generally arrive at the same destination, though we take many different paths to get there. Since there is no one single cable that everyone agrees is perfectly neutral, I feel that such an animal, a "perfectly neutral cable", does not exist. Therefore we are all tuning to some extent."

I am in complete in agreement with you, John.

Hey Jeff, how are you doing my friend? It looks like there are better days ahead for your beloved Dodgers. I wish I could say the same for my Phillies. LOL. :)

Hi John! I'm doin' just fine, thanks...And after all the dough they spent, Dem Bums had better do fine too. It's been far too long since they've looked like championship material. How 'bout if you and I negotiate a trade right now here on Audiogon? You give me and the Dodgers Cole Hamels and I'll give you and the Phils Aaron Harang (LOL)

Otherwise, I sincerely hope you're feeling fit and all is well with your family too...And here's to looking forward to a stellar season for the both of us.

How about Hamels for Kemp?? ;)

That's actually a fairer deal than what I offered, but there's always Juan Uribe!

I find this whole discussion fascinating. I think many good points have been raised (by many posters).

I never find live strings harsh sounding even if I sit onstage with the players, so in my opinion the problem lies with the playback system and the distortions that it adds, that overlay (and color) the sound of the recording.

CD (it's 16 bit/44.1kHz resolution) does overlay string sound with a layer of digital grunge. SACD on the other hand, sounds noticeably cleaner and that's what why I prefer it for my most critical (string) listening.

With that said there are other (equally important) sources of distortion in your playback system that also overlay string sound with harsh sounding distortions (and many of these issues can be addressed).

Let me start by saying that your speakers are blameless. They were designed to reproduce orchestral strings and can do this well but only if fed a clean, undistorted signal.

Your overall system seems unbalanced.

The pre-amp and source are not in the same class of fidelity as your speakers and that's why the speakers are not reaching their full potential.

I like previous suggestions to upgrade the source and preamp.

For source I would recommend upgrading to one of the Marantz SACD models like the SA-8004 (or one of the Marantz Reference models).

Not only do these play the superior SACD format but the higher end Marantz models feature improved power supplies and critical components that raise the level of CD playback over the Marantz budget CD players. The Spendor SP1/2's deserve a better sounding source.

There have been many great pre-amp suggestions in previous posts. I would only add that I would be looking at a tubed, Class-A unit.

Speaking of Class-A...switching from Class AB to Class A amplification made a world of difference in my system in getting orchestral strings to sound right. The lack of crossover distortion and high order harmonics in a well implemented Class-A design results in much smoother and more realistic sounding strings.

Reference Stereophile's measurements of your amp's distortion spectrum (revealing extensive high order harmonic distortion, which result in a gritty quality over-laying orchestral string tone).

http://www.stereophile.com/content/mccormack-power-drive-dna-1-power-amplifier-1992-measurements-part-2

There are many different ways (at the source and pre-amp level) that you can address string tone in your system and a few smart upgrades will make a world of difference.

This post is to hopefully clarify my other post where I mentioned Cardas and Audioquest cables. By some of the responses by other posters, I don't feel I did a very good job at getting my point across. Here's something I should have said: In my opinion, you need to get your system sounding good, BEFORE you buy cables. If you've done a good job buying components you like, matched them to each other properly and to the room, It should sound good, even if you have basic, entry level cables, connecting everything. The problems start to arise when you are not happy with your system and you buy cables to fix it.

I'm not at all saying that cables don't make a difference or that you shouldn't use them to tune your system to your liking. Absolutely. Buy whichever cables you like. Its your money and your system and there's nothing wrong with picking cables that sound good to you. It would be foolish not to.

I hope I was able to clarify my comments. Sorry if I confused anyone.

Bojack, you want this! ;-)

http://app.audiogon.com/listings/cd-sacd-players-ah-njoe-tjoeb-4000-cd-player-2013-01-09-digital-02790

(No affiliation with seller)

the funny thing is in my case that violins sounds the best with low budged amplifier Technics a700mk2 connected to Dynaudio contour s1.4 and bryston dac.No magic wires at all,just simple ones.Overall sound is massive and very powerfull

THis would be an interesting trial application for Steve at Empirical Audio's affordable reclocker gadget. That should help assure being in a good place from a jitter perspective I would expect. HE offers a free trial period. I would be interested to know if it helps.

Synchro Mesh

Zd542, I think you have made things clear enough, and I agree. I look at it as preparing a meal. Yes, you will want to pick out the best main ingredients that you can afford and locate to cook with. These represent the system components. Then you will want to use spices (cables) to season to personal taste. In this analogy, all meals are seasoned as far as I know, since there are no systems out there that do NOT use cables.

Mapman - I'd highlighted my issues with string orchestra treble earlier and am planning on going with the SynchroMesh. I will report back in a couple of months.

I think the bottom line is that this issue - which I think is a significant one since it involves the principal frequency range for melodic presentations by the principal orchestral instrument in classical music - is a result of a confluence of sound engineering problems, format issues (redbook) and stereo system deficiencies.

There is no magic bullet.

Jult,

Great minds think alike! :-)

Looking forward to hearing your results.

01-09-13: Jult52
I think the bottom line is that this issue - which I think is a significant one since it involves the principal frequency range for melodic presentations by the principal orchestral instrument in classical music - is a result of a confluence of sound engineering problems, format issues (redbook) and stereo system deficiencies.

Very well said, IMO, as are the other recent responses in the thread.

Although it is probably clear to everyone, to be sure I just want to point out that a reclocker is not something that would be applicable to a one-box CD player such as the OP's Marantz CD5004.

And I note that in John Atkinson's measurements of the player he states that:

The CD5004 offered superb rejection of word-clock jitter, with the odd harmonics of the LSB-level, 229.6875Hz squarewave lying at the residual level, and only pairs of sidebands at ±60 and ±120Hz visible to the sides of the 11.205kHz tone in the narrowband spectrum of the Marantz's output while it played the Miller/Dunn J-Test signal (fig.7). I haven't given a numeric figure for the player's jitter level, as it was below the Miller Analyzer's resolution limit....

The Marantz CD5004's measured performance indicates that its intrinsic resolution is better than is needed by the CD medium. That it can offer this level of performance for just $350 is astonishing.

Of course, given that the sonic quality of a one-box CD player may be limited by a great many factors in addition to internal jitter, this certainly does not exclude the possibility that the player Frogman suggested may significantly ameliorate the problem. Although I still suggest that step 1 should be an assessment of a high quality reference recording, that can be counted on to not be a contributor to the symptom that is being addressed.

Regards,
-- Al

Jult, Well said. However, we can't do anything about how a performance is miked and mixed. It is what it is by the time it gets to us. Redbook limitations may be partially addressed by upsampling and purchase of DSD/SACDs. The system limitations is where we have the ability to significantly impact the end result, where those system limitations exist. At the end of the day, nothing we do can mitigate a recording that flips back and forth between 5th row center and dress circle perspecives, or mikes a Bach Partita from 6 inches, so that everytime the violinist moves the violin jumps from center to right, right to left, center to left, etc. (I prefer the Ehnes Bach partitas and sonatas, partially because he stands still during most of the recordings.)

Second what Al said again. Jitter can be introduced during the recording process and cannot be removed if in teh recording. Other things can factor in as well of course as has been outlined. A good reference recording is definitely step 1!

Is this violin sound good enough for you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-kQPEj7znE
This was recorded with a Sony HD recorder direct from speaker.

Suggested recording for test: RCA Living Stereo (SACD) Heifetz/Munch Beethoven Violin Concerto, or the Sibelius Violin Concerto also played by Heifetz.

Suggested recording for test: RCA Living Stereo (SACD) Heifetz/Munch Beethoven Violin Concerto, or the Sibelius Violin Concerto also played by Heifetz.

1)tube buffer
2)acoustic treatments
3)tape a square of toiler paper over the tweeter

The tube buffer/treatment combo certainly helped tame the violins through my system

Sai, thanks for the youtube link, Sai, as in Sai Babba? Emoting from Nirvana?

Or you could just spend a million bucks and get yourself some proper equipment (facetious)