@jay73 - jay, to start with, I am one of the belief that different people refer to the term ‘resolution’ to mean different things. There is something that could be called superficial resolution, which only speaks to a greater contrast between sounds in order to create sharpness of definition. But there is a deeper kind of resolution we can reference - a system that is highly resolving is also one that is highly realistic, because resolution does not merely refer to the contrast, or definition, of specific musical notes as suspended objects, but also to every fine point of sound information that recreates the space in-between, the relationships, between the ‘objects’. This includes with it, the minute transients of time that separate those tiny points of sound information.
A highly resolving system is also a highly realistic and ‘accurate’ one. Its ability to bring greater definition to detail and specifics does not void its ability to fill in all the other details and textures in-between, and in the time domain.
This leads on to our individual perceptions of ever increasing levels of resolution, being one of relativity. Most interpret relativity as choice being personally driven. I rather define relativity with regards to everything each of us has not personally heard, or listened to, in each of our own systems. I would say that for the thousands of audio products out there, it is difficult to say how resolving each of our systems are, due to a typically limited means for conducting comparisons, from time and budget considerations, to finding equipment examples to demo. Unless we are able to find and prepared to test multiple kinds of equipment, of pre amps, amps, cables, servers, DACs, isolation products, and power supplies, over extended periods and in the specific contexts of our particular listening rooms, it is difficult to eliminate that issue of relativity, to know where we each stand in the search for sound resolution that is our amazing hobby.
Very very little, in relation to percentage terms, separates between entry level systems and the most realistic sounding systems in the world. But here’s the thing, each percentage of improvement is huge in cognitive terms, and once heard is difficult to unhear, in returning to what we previously knew. Sometimes, it takes multiple little changes before a positive improvement of one entire percent can be heard, which is one of the primary reasons why our hobby is the most difficult one to quantify and qualify – the very matrix of right combinations that has to be made for a positive improvement upward, is boggling.
This is one of the primary reasons why some audiophiles resort to measurements -– to avoid the effort and considerable regret of having made decisions over incorrect combination of equipment changes which didn’t give that one or two percent improvement; in forgetting that the measured qualities of a single piece of equipment is the furthest thing from knowing what its contribution is to the totality of an entire system and a single percent change closer to the ceiling of what is attainable.
There is no easy road in our hobby, if a true highly resolving system is the goal, because it is wholly dependent on the very system and room we listen to our music in. Some want to believe it is easy and accessible, either due to their lack of time, patience, or inability to afford more. Others, because of their belief they know all the answers fed to them by dials and digital readouts measured from equipment divorced from its chain. The truth is that the passion of our hobby is one involving the cultivation of listening skills and that huge effort of time, patience, and expenditure it takes, to bring as many pieces of researched equipment of multiple price points into the chain of one’s own system in its specific room, one at a time, and over extended periods of listening and comparison over the years; and not the quick listening that pretenders or number engineers engage.
A highly resolving system takes tremendous effort because of the complex matrix of equipment combinations that result in different sound outcomes, and the difficulty in identifying differences in sound quality that distinguish what entry level, the most realistic sound systems, and everything else in between, have to offer within the specific contexts of our listening rooms, in reducing the element of relativity.
I hope this all made sense.
In friendship, kevin