The terms "neutral" and "transparent" are abstract in the context of sound reproduction. Unless you talk about a gear selector or a physical material, like glass, for the latter; these terms are open to personal interpretation - as they should.
Going back to the OP's reference to the Dianna Krall performance. Even if you assume the sound crew nailed it for the live audience there are so many other variables at work in the recording process for that performance.
Microphones, cables, sound boards, tape decks (or discs), etc. that endeavored to capture what the audience heard - or what the recording engineer decided was optimal (to their ear). What if the recording did not sound exactly like the live performance? So what. Does it please you? My goal is to listen to music I enjoy on a system that helps me enjoy the music. If I don't like the sound then what else matters? My circus, my monkeys.
The pursuit we engage in is to put together a system that pleases us relative to the environment we listen to our music in.
You really can't achieve that completely by grasping at equipment that claims certain specifications or measurements.
You may get closer to your ideal by targeting equipment that you believe will deliver but the only true test is to acquire and listen for yourself - in the environment that matters to you.
Frustrating at times but fun more often than not.
|
Folks, I really enjoy everyone's approach to this, so thanks for commenting. For once, there is not post touting "absolute knowledge" on a topic, or condescending comments. It's refreshing!
My purpose for the post was to see how different people approach the "quest" of this hobby and, even though the answers are highly personal, it does give some insights into what people are looking for.
Thanks again (and keep'em coming, this is fun to read) |
I'm after the most transparency I can have in an apartment.
It has to sound good at moderate listening levels and be so clear and lack distortion that I feel like you do when you are at the top of a mountain range, like you can see for miles, only with your ears.
Re-creating a live rock n roll performance is most definitely NOT my goal.
This part of Erik's post pretty much sums up where I'm at after years of pursuit, but it wasn't always this way. My taste in music has evolved over time, goal posts have shifted as I've aged and gained experience. Small Jazz clubs have replaced deafening Rock concerts. At home it's much of the same, mostly Jazz (lots of classic 50's and 60's recordings, piano trios, late-night smokey lounge, and moody Nordic stuff). Moving to a fleawatt SET/high-efficiency speaker system with its gorgeous clarity and tone has proven to be just about perfect for me now. Doubt it would have satisfied in my youth.
|
For me it eventually comes down to 'suspension of disbelief'. There simply is no way to close the gap with live music, either acoustical instruments in a dedicated real acoustic space (sometimes called 'the absolute sound') or amplified instruments played anywhere.
Let's face it folks, even from around the corner you can distinguish if the music you hear is coming from a street musician playing live or recorded music coming from a store or something. It's a different 'gestalt' that your brain immediately identifies.
Being able to sit in front of an audio system that every once in a while succeeds in fooling your brain and make you forget you're listening to a recording played through electro-acoustic devices is probably the most we can hope to achieve. It puts a big smile on my face every time this happens.
These days I seem to smile more than I used to, so this 'audiophile thing' apparently did bring me a little bit closer to the 'real thing'. Nevertheless, a visit to the concert hall is always a sobering experience, telling you exactly how unattainable that real thing is inside your home. Now with COVID-19 unfortunately also outside the home. At this point in time 'suspension of disbelief' is all we have as music listeners, so let's cherish these moments.....
|
I think the only true reference is comparing to purely acoustical live performances (classical music, chamber, orchestra, opera, rarely jazz in small rooms). Even for those, sound varies a considerably based on room/concert hall acoustics and listening position. I listen regularly to this kind of music (unfortunately not since this strange virus is impacting our lives :-() in different concert venues. I upgraded my system considerably last year (MBL 101 speakers, Electrocompaniet Nemo monos). Since then I really also enjoy listening to opera recordings. For me they are a really good reference as you have voices, all sound colors of instruments of an orchestra, and room acoustics with the singers on the huge stage behind the orchestra (for live recordings). Extremely hard to match are choirs. But for all of that, without really being able to describe in words, you can tell whether you get closer. It just sounds more "natural" or "realistic".
I found that the sound of live concerts with amplification is not what I am strieving for in my system. The live perception depends heavily on microphones, mixing, PA system, and can be anything from decent to terrible. It is never "natural". And even if you have a recording of the same life concert, it will be a totally different sound.
The funny thing is that even if I try to work towards coming closer to live acoustic sound, things become more "natural" and inspiring to listen for "modern" music (rock, jazz, ...) as well. But only if recording, mixing, mastering is done well. Bad recordings are unbearable now.
|
@bkeske +1
Well put.
For me it says it all.
No need for me to add anything
Michélle 🇿🇦
|
Easy one. You can’t trust your ears and whatever you listen to music-wise will never contain the entire spectrum. Sure you may make those songs you enjoy sound good, but what about everything else? I use a 61-band RTA with a pink noise source and just strive to get the smoothest frequency response on the couch among the cushions where I actually sit without any form of processing or electronic eq. This made me give up on the JBL L300s and build my own speakers, which I now have pretty darn flat through continual crossover refinements. This was the last photo, but just today I did more work that removes the ~1.4kHz peak and distributes this energy in the 400-1KHz range flattening that area a bit more. What you see below 250Hz is floor bounce and room nodes. There is no eq or digital processing being used. http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/DSC_000910.JPG |
I'm after the most transparency I can have in an apartment.
It has to sound good at moderate listening levels and be so clear and lack distortion that I feel like you do when you are at the top of a mountain range, like you can see for miles, only with your ears. It transports me to completely different acoustic spaces.
Re-creating a live rock n roll performance is most definitely NOT my goal. I can't listen loud and I like my hearing, but chamber music to jazz ensembles are.
Towards this, I measure and strive for a neutral, smooth FR with a lot of damping.
Best,
E
|
Have to think about it let you know in 2 weeks. |
HI,
It should be that hunting for everything else brings in the end neutrality. What is worth for me is the ability of hearing clearly everything simultaneously on a recording (good or mediocre) and that thing to bind so well together as a whole to make sense.
Learn to know the compromises of your system and how to hide them or live with them. All ears are different and set different priorities. The live event is the absolute and because we can get close with stereo or multichannel brings us joy.
|
There is no ideal sound, at least for home playback. As you move along in this hobby you should obtain better and better sound, but never an ideal sound. It’s unobtainable because there is no ideal. There is no glass ceiling. There is no such thing as getting within 5% or 2% of perfection. You shouldn’t be trying to achieve what you hear at a concert, only what is recorded on the record or CD. There is no perfection because of all the things that can go wrong in the audio system, and do go wrong. As Bob Dylan says at the end of all his records, good luck to everybody. |
+1 @bkeske. When you eat a good meal, how do you decide whether or not it lives up to reality? You don’t, because it IS reality. And you are enjoying it.
Above and beyond that there’s not much I can add to the good comments above. There is no way to get back to a neutral sound, overall, but there is some thing like the sound of a guitar or an oboe or a clarinet that we can hear live.
But even if we are trying to recapture a concert, are we talking about the front row or the back row? In what kind of room? And everybody’s hearing is different so who’s hearing are we trying to reproduce? It is impossible to get back to a single reality because there are so many different variables and perspectives. So what we are trying to do is have an experience. Question becomes, does the gear produce an experience we want to have again? |
A system that reveals all the instruments and inner details clearly can sound better than live music in these ways, much like a 4K TV looks sharper and more colorful than reality, but lacks the expansive presence of being there. A room system also cannot provide that overwhelming sensory experience of being there, but it should not be expected to. I enjoy them both as an in-home experience that can impress me in ways that being there cannot.
|
The audiophile hobby is inherently a pursuit of some ideal. That ideal might differ from person to person, but what I am curious about is how each of us define that ideal.
I kinda like where my system is at. I cue a well recorded track and think: damn that sounds good. But compared to what? Do I have a point of comparison to the original performance, the day it was recorded? Usually not. To use an overused album, unless I was sitting at the Olympia concert hall in Paris when Diana Krall performed there in 2001 and have a perfect auditory memory, how do I know my system if reproducing it with “fidelity”?
If the pursuit of perfection is useless as perfection is an illusion, how do you all define your level of satisfaction or achievement in this audiophile pursuit? Its even worse than you think. Even if you were there, and even if space aliens from the future set you up with the perfect system in the perfect room, still you play it back and wtf it still does not sound the same. Why? Because you forgot to rub the lamp and ask Genie for the perfect recording system! Okay so you do that. And... still not right!?!?!? What the...!!?!?!? So you saddle up your unicorn and fly up to the guru on the mountain top who says, you forgot to ask for the perfect recording format! D'oh! Coulda had a V8! Or you could be like me, order some new speakers, and be happy if they can just somehow manage to be less bad than the ones that came before. |
For me, one of the most important thing is tone, the correct/proper tone of each instrument and voice. The instruments and vocals must sound ‘correct’. After that, imaging, soundstage, and a ‘holographic’ presentation. And also for me, a very ‘big’, deep, ‘lush’, and ‘full range sound’, so, full range floor standing speakers are a must have.
Of course I think of what ‘could be’ to make those things better, and do try within my means and tweak what I currently have, but what is most important to me is making the system I have today meet as much of that criteria as possible, whether an LP, CD, or very occasional streaming. I try not to compare it to anything except what I listed, and to please me, and really, no one else.
Of course, the one thing we cannot control is the way the music was mic’d, recorded, mixed, processed, etc. Thus, I typically tend to play music that also checks off those boxes, as much as possible.
Bottom line, we are far from being able to obtain a truly ‘live’ presentation through our systems, no matter how much we can invest. But, of course, we do try. |
In order to get the best fidelity your equipment has to be completey neutral which isn't possible so I would say as neutral as you can afford. In the example You're not trying to reproduce what was actually performed in Olympia hall but what the sound engineers recorded of that performance. |
For me it’s a pursuit in self exploration. Being exposed to different music reproduction systems and components allows me to explore my musical priorities and embark on the journey of building something based on what I’ve learned about myself and what stirs my soul. I also recognize that musical priorities aren’t necessarily static and they can evolve over time just like someone’s palette for cuisine or wine. While our DNA stays the same there are many chapters to a person’s life. I’m just trying to enjoy the ride to the fullest. |
