@rauliruegas Yes, I chose tonality + clarity, and clarity is primarily a consequence of minimized distortion. Cheers
Top two most important sound qualities
In case you didn't know, it's 2023 and this website still hasn't implemented a polling feature, so I can't define a selection of sound qualities to choose from and see results in a grouped, organized fashion. Boo hoo!
If you had to pick two of the typically referenced sound qualities that are most important to you to optimizing the enjoyment of your system, what are they? You know what I mean, right? Could be a certain frequency range and some particular quality that you for in it, or any quality that applies across all frequencies, etc.
(Note: "Sound qualities" mentioned here do not include anything that refers to physical attributes of your system or listening room, such as acoustical treatments, types of components, types of source material, physical tweaks, etc. It's only a reference to subjectively appreciated qualities.)
135 responses Add your response
Interesting to note responses. If your listening preference is analytical, cerebral the criteria will be different than if your listening preference is for emotional impact. Nice to see that some of the responses include both. In his well known book Get Better Sound, Jim Smith writes that emotional impact is created by three things, 1) Rhythm (accurate timing, that is, when all frequencies reach the ear at the same time - this is what gets my toes tapping and my head nodding), 2) Timbre ("tonality", the precise reproduction of harmonics, overtones, what makes an "A" on the piano,violin, saxophone, acoustic guitar, electric guitar, male & female voices sound different - this is what I find to be nurturing), 3) Dynamics (the variations in loud/soft, fast/slow, flowing, continuous/sharp, percussive, compare strings to the abrupt almost harsh shimmering attack of cymbals - these contrasts are what hold my attention and keep me engaged). Decades ago I started my audiophile journey listening cerebrally, critically while noting what moved me as secondary. I was listening to my system. At some point about 6-7 years ago I found it difficult to listen to my system anymore . . . . because the music kept distracting me and after some time I'd notice my eyes were closed and my body was moving. I'd forgotten to listen for whether the new preamp improved the sound stage, or the texture of the instruments (timbre) or the retrieval of detail. Finally I gave up and learned to just float in the music. A side benefit has been that this addiction has been costing less money. I am now clearly one who listens for emotional nourishment rather than cerebral satisfaction though I didn't start here. There is no "one size fits all", no "best". May you find what you personally enjoy most. |
I understand what is meant when people talk about an emotional vs cerebral type of listening, and I have two points to make about that, which you may find interesting.
1) It’s never either/or. No person is 100% one or the other. That’s not how human brains work. We all have our unique configurations, leaning more one way than the other, but both emotions and abstract thinking are regularly involved in the human experience.
2) Why do people like to physically attend a live show? Sure, they like the natural sound, the social engagement, the sensory stimulation, the thrill, and the feeling of doing something special. But they also go to *watch* the musicians perform in a 3D space, and not *just* to listen to the sound. Even a blind person at a live music event can perceive, probably with extraordinary accuracy, the sense of space within which the performance is happening, as well as the locations of the sounds inside that space. This is one of the reasons why I prefer smaller, intimate venues over gigantic productions. When we listen to recorded music on 2 channel systems at home, all this talk about "imaging" and "soundstaging" is important to people precisely for the same reason. The experience desired is that of being "as if" we are actually watching it, in addition to listening to it. People live in three dimensions, we experience life in three dimensions, and so we naturally want to have an inner sense of space and dimensionality when we listen to and feel the music that we love. |
@vinocour 100% on your 3 part answer. Better than my comment which begins with rhythm as well. My wife will not watch opera except live performances (we have season tickets-she loves live opera) and certainly will not share my huge recorded collection (70,000-100,000 opera/classical vocal recordings). She has an affinity for 60-80s pop and rock in recorded form as after having attended 50+ concerts, she prefers a studio version absent distractions listening to her music. We share recorded classical instrumental music together. She’s not into jazz so much unless it’s live as well. |
Dear @fleschler : Rhythm and anynother characteristic is a consequence of the quality level of those transient response/time decay ( that's part of that TR ) / dynamic power. Rhythm is a controversial characteristic , obviously is critic in MUSIC as hrmony and other important characteristics and per sé depends of the overall score individual players. It's not easy to explain it but we know that " rhythm " when we are listening:
" The quality of rhythm is the quality of life; however vitally composers conceive their music, they must depend upon performers to recreate it rhythmically. "
"" After all, metres like the spondee, ♩♩, and the dispondee, ♩♩♩♩, need an accent on the first beat to keep their identity. Notwithstanding the opposite tendencies of metrical organization and stress accent, however, some metre is obviously subject to stress, so that metre and time measure become very closely linked, as in the scherzo of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, where a measure has a strong first beat and at the same time follows a metre. "" Where MUSIC start other that the composition it self, well start at that or those first beat or beats by the different players in a group or orchestra the rhythm is " formed " by those transients/decay time and each dynamic power. In MUSIC all is important and not easy to define with presicion which is the more important characteristic and that's why could be so controversial. Transients and dynamic power always exist but not always with that " rhythm " that each one of us are accustom to and I can tell you that my perceived rhythm in a specific score could be different for you or even me or you can say: no rhythm here.A good rhythm is when our body is just " dancing " it's when we really are enjoying MUSIC and not only lisnet it but as I said is a " consequence ". Is so delicated that issue that in a home system a not so good room treatment could make a poor rhythm when the same score in other same system well room treatment the rhythm could shines.
R.
|
Dear @gladmo : " a consequence of minimized distortion. "
Btw, you can put at minimum the IMD in your system/speakers taking out the frequency bass range below 100hz on your Aerial's because the woofers crossover a little high at 400hz and the IMD down there is higher than ideal. The low bass dvelops high excursion on those woofers that afects at significative level all the frequencies above 100hz and this IMD goes against the mid range and high frequency ranges. You neeed to clean up down there, remember that low bass harmonics affects the overall quality speaker response. To do that you only need not one but 2 self powered subwoofers with high and low pass crossover filters. Worth to do it with great rewards.
R. |
@rauliruegas Appreciated. I’ve been looking into it lately after this was brought up by someone else recently. My sub does have a single ended HPF 80hz output, so I plan to try this today and listen for the difference. |
@gladmo : What I suggested can't do it with out an external crossover or a subwoofer with not only low pass crossover but with high pass too, this is the one that can take out from the Aerial woofer the bass range below 100hz and puts the IMD at way lower level. With out a high pass crossover filter it does not matters what you can do with one or two subs in favor to lower IMD: just can't do it.
R. |
@rauliruegas Perhaps you misunderstood what I said. My sub has a line level output with passive HPF at 80hz. Good enough for me. Noticably less distortion in the woofers and better imaging using that route to the amp. |
Mid-range warmth which my system does well. Hear my WT system and compare with $30k Taiko Audio SGM Extreme server (with Boulder amps+ Vimberg spkr) in below videos. Original music https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=682ePZmXKMo WT audio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV8E3FqkJME Taiko Audio SGM Extreme server https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPENz0WLHPc ============ Hear it at T.H.E. Show / THE HOME ENTERTAINMENT SHOW LLC My room is # 372. Alex/Wavetouch |
I don't know if anyone here is following the Generative AI stuff. I thought it'd be interesting to ask the following question to one of the Gen AI LLMs. This is the answer I got ... Q: What are Two of the most important sound quality characteristics that an audiophile looks for in their audio system? A: Two of the most important sound quality characteristics that an audiophile looks for in their audio playback system include:
|
@bdp24 wrote:
Exactly. Much has been said about how this or that speaker - oftentime the smaller, monitor-style variant - is able to seemingly "vanish" in its mere physical existence leaving only the sound hanging in free air, but it's still glaringly obvious what's heard is a reproduction. A lot of aspects in sound reproduction, incl. the recording and acoustics, can make for an exposition and revelation of what is not a live, musical event, but there are core parameters more important than others which, when achieved in some minimum measure, are at the basis of a framework of sorts that makes reproduced music appear less of a facsimile. Size and scale are vital for this to come true, as are effortlessness, dynamic linearity and overall coherency/uniformity of the radiation bubble/sphere, and in what's supposed to be an approximation to "High Fidelity" in its true sense of wording in this hobby of ours it's beyond me how mentioned "macro parameters" aren't more readily acknowledged and pursued. |
Just for fun, I reworded the question slightly differently and below is what AI said - notice the caveat at the end: Q: What are two of the most important sound quality characteristics that a music lover looks for in their home audio system? A: Two important sound quality characteristics that a music lover typically looks for in their home audio system are:
While these two characteristics are important to many music lovers, it's worth noting that individual preferences may vary. Some listeners may prioritize other aspects, such as deep bass response, dynamic range, or tonal balance, based on their personal taste in music and listening preferences. |
I think acoustic timbre naturalness is first and second IMMERSIVENESS, i suppose your system is well designed enough to give you minimal clarity and the least distortion... Most well designed system are able to give us that now, with mature dac technology and amplification... Timbre naturalness is difficult to reach but immersiveness with headphone and speakers was harder the most to reach and asked for many, many modifications and experiments and tuning... With headphone it was more difficult for me...It takes a rare hybrid headphone to reach it AKG K340 and exceed my past Speakers Mission Cyrus 181 in his acoustic dedicated room... In this video this acoustician explain it all :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i7T1BiC-fI
|
