It's good design, good parts and careful assembly. Jeff Rowland Design Group has it all together.
Dave |
I might have to help her hold it... ;-) |
04-23-08: Mrtennis said:
"... "high resolution" does not match the experience of listening to live unamplified music."
By definition, the higher the resolution, the closer to the live experience. You're saying the opposite. High resolution is superior to low resolution.
I think your desire for euphonic coloration is being confused for accuracy. Those colorations are not desireable for many of us (most?). I hear and make live music almost every day and also want the highest resolution possible in my system. High resolution does NOT include harshness, but is as close to the actual performance as possible.
Dave |
Mrtennis has a problem with hearing how instruments actually sound. For some reason this makes him uncomfortable, but I can understand that. What I find disturbing is his insinuation that striving to hear those details results in an inferior system.
I sit right next to the tuba and double basses in orchestra and the woodwinds are just a spit ball's distance away. I like hearing them on recordings like they sound in real life. Yes, I have a few homogenized orchestral recordings that sound distant and smeared all together, but I prefer those where I hear the brrr of the brass, ring of the cymbals and every nuance of the woodwinds and strings.
If someone wants a recording made from the perspective of the back of the hall, then buy recordings made from a distant perspective, OR sit further away from you speakers. I think that's a better alternative to building a system that defaults to that sound, no matter how high the quality (resolution) of the source material.
Dave |
04-24-08: Nilthepill said:
"Details are definitely good to have and absolutely essential. It is the exaggerated details and thin, ill defined and scratchy 'tonal balance' of this details that I don't appreciate. Same goes w/ harmonics. Proper ' tonal' balance of these details and harmonics is the key ingredient of music to sound life like."
I agree, 100%.
Dave |
Oh, a percussionist, no wonder... ;-)
(Sorry, but I couldn't resist. I play trumpet and guitar, so you're welcome to come back with an appropriate rebuttal).
It takes two to agree to disagree, but I do agree to disagree, for now.
The case isn't closed however, because you'll constantly find disagreement with your position.
Dave |
|
Yeah, as you know, us trumpeters have a love/hate relationship with our soundmen. I actually worked a funk/rock/soul band for several years in Dallas that had TWO world class soundmen. One won and Emmy for sound and the other owns the original Jam studio that jingles for the likes of Dick Clark, BBC, WABC, etc. UNFORTUNATELY, they played 2d trumpet and keyboards and our full time guy was a carpenter by trade. With their help and a couple of years of seasoning he actually got decent. (I could tell stories, but we'd need a new thread).
I DO appreciate how hard your job can be and love it when I hear it done correctly. It's doubly nice to be in a band and have the stage sound wonderful and the house sound so good that people are talking about it. I know how hard that is to achieve.
I've got a great new album called "Cannon Reloaded", a tribute to Cannonball Adderley. Unfortunately Terence Blanchard's trumpet has a little hard edge due to mic choice or compression. Oh, I hate that, but I know that a big blower like Terence can drive the sound men wild.
Anyway, we're on the same page. I'm amazed that someone could hear the richness of the real thing and then want something watered down. Oh well...
Dave |
I've got several GRPs and all are well recorded. I'll order "A Twist..." next time I order CDs. I like Rit and Botti and GRP, so how can I go wrong.
Dave |
Oh man, you made the sale for sure.
Have I mentioned "Cannon Reloaded", an all star tribute to Cannonball Adderley on ConcordJazz? It's got Tom Scott and Terence Blanchard among others, but most impressive for me is Marcus Miller on electric bass. The bass is slammin' good.
Dave |
That makes sense to me. I've never heard a non-musician call it "sizzle".
Speaking of hi rez, I pulled out my DVD-Audio version of Dave Grusin's "Two For The Road -- The Music of Henry Mancini". Compared to the Grusin CDs, the DVD-A really is "organic" and "transparent". The CDs sound really good until you compare them to the DVD-A (24/96 in this case) and there's one last layer of stress stripped away. (Makes me think about getting one of those up-converting Emm Lab players).
Anyway, every last detail is there on that DVD-A when played on my system. The bass slam, the piano tone, pristine sax solos, organic harmonica solo, every husk of
Diana Krall's husky voice, all glorious. I'll never understand people that don't want to hear that.
Dave |
Ok, I just brought home my "hi rez" Rowland Continuum amp yesterday. (No wimpy tubes for me, but 1000 watts of pure sound filled the bill). The "Drum Record" will be coming off the shelf again this afternoon. (Also, that kick drum is a great way to be certain that phase is correct).
Thanks for the leads.
Dave |
Hah, I ordered "Twist of Motown" this morning, plus another Grusin album and a Ritenour.
I agree with your bi-amping, but think it's guilding the lilly in many cases. My speaker crossover doesn't allow either bi-amp or bi-wire, so it's a mute point for me.
I don't really need the watts for loudness, but to control the woofers in my floorstanding speakers. I've found that the combination of high wattage and high damping factor are really needed to control the physical ringing in larger speakers and keep that all-important bass under control.
Dave |
Yeah, I love the Duke Homage album. I've had it a long time. Thanks for mentioning it.
Dave |
There you go. The absolute first disk I pulled out after I brought my Pro-ject RM10 turntable home was Sheffield's "King James Version". That's the most realistic big band sound I've heard on recording, from the perspective of the conductor. Harry smokes.
Later in the same day, "Squibcakes" from the TOP D2D LP took center stage. Wow!
Dave |
"Sizzle" is a trumpeting term and you used it exactly right. Are you a player? I am.
Dave |
04-28-08: Dazzdax said:
"Is any of you familiar with a poweramp that has ultra high resolution (without sounding overly aggressive)? If you do, could you specify which amp you have in mind? In my opinion 95% of all amps (tubes or solid state) don't have this ultra high resolution. So this is a very rare breed indeed."
Chris, the Jeff Rowland Design Group Continuum 500 integrated amp will meet your goal, as will several others.
HOWEVER, I'm worried that you may not have your speakers properly set. The very best equipment will "shout" at you if you haven't set it up to minimize intermodulation distortion. IM distortion from the speakers is due to conflict between the two speakers (assuming a 2-channel set up) and/or the speakers and the room.
See my Review of the Sumiko Master Set. Also Guidocorona mentions it recently in his review of either the Rowland Capri or set up of his Vienna Acoustic Mahlers. After a Master Set you'll find yourself listening around 10 dB higher and the system stress will drop 100%, better than if you spent another 10-grand on equipment.
So, do a speaker set first, then consider upgrading your equipment.
Dave |
Yeah Rodman, I looked around at some of Mrtennis' other posts and that seems to be a constant theme of his. As you say, he has his right to his opinion.
He's so vociferous about it I wonder if he's got "short man syndrome." ;-) However, I have empathy to some degree, since I've heard a lot of nasty sounding high rez systems, due usually to poor set up. A low rez system is going to be way more foregiving. I CAN agree with him that I'd rather have a low rez system than a poorly set up hi rez system (assuming I weren't allowed to move the speakers or change cables on the high rez system).
Man, how can anyone say that Diana Krall's breathing isn't music????
Dave |
04-28-08: Mrtennis said:
"hi dave:
as i understand, music is pitch, timbre and dynamics.
breath is not music.
yes, my tastes have been documented and i admit to them."
You say that with such certainty. As with religion, when I hear someone speak with such absolute certainty I can't help but question their judgement. (BTW, I AM religious, just not absolutely certain about anything). It's one thing to say you'd prefer not to hear this or that, but to say that "breath is not music" is to impune those of us that hear it as inevitable part of a performance.
Do you attend operas? If so, can you hear when a performer switches between head and chest voice? Do you sometimes hear the resonance that a truly great artist can create by virtue of their incredible breath support, stress free throat and projection into the head? If not, you're missing something that opera virtuousos work decades to perfect. IMHO, it what takes them from being mere "singers" to being truly great artists, that and their interpretation.
BTW, my favorite perspective is as conductor. I didn't focus on that path, so I don't get to do it much at all, but it's incredible when working with a good band or orchestra. There ARE some recordings that give you this perspective, particularly the stuff Sheffield put out in the '70s and '80s. The first trumpet on the LA Phil/Wagner stuff will part your hair. Duck...
Your position in valid, but you're way of arguing it is flawed, IMHO. Some people, no doubt including you, prefer the sound from the back of the hall and want their 2-channel systems to mimic that. You just seem to be saying that the opposite is not right and the things that others of us listen for (somnetimes) are not part of the music. Instead, I'd say, anything that adds to the emotional impact of the music is part of it and for me, that includes Diana Krall smacking her lips and resonating her chest to get that husky sound.
Dave |
Nicely said, Mrtennis. That's what I thought you might mean.
I don't have panel speakers, BUT I bet you a bottle of fine wine that you'd enjoy my system, with the right recordings and at the right distance. ;-)
Dave |
MrT, are you saying that you don't like the harsh, shrill sound of many CDs and most CDP? Well, we can all agree on that. There are players that will eliminate that on most CDs (some old stuff from the 1980s just can't be rescued, IME). That's not hi rez sound, IMHO, it's an inferior attempt at hi rez that merely substituted one inaccuracy for another.
As for calling a recording (I'm assuming a good one) "an inaccurate representation of a live performance" consider actually attending a live acoustic performance. It'll sound different from every seat in the house. Those of us that like detail sit closer and you that like a homogenized sound sit further back. Neither position is "more accurate", it is what it is. Recordings are no difference.
Mic coloration in classical recordings, these days, tends to be very small. The Tacet recordings, in particular, are very cleanly recorded. I heard Reference Recordings from the hall and on CD or vinyl and they're very, very close. Played in high resolution, these recordings are simply wonderful.
Hi rez does not include, uptilted highs, high frequency haze or artificial harshness, IME. Many high end (read as expensive) systems DO have uptilted high, high frequency haze and artificial harshness, because there's some failure in the sytem, IMHO. This is not unusual and I'm thinking that this is what you've heard and rail against. I don't blame you.
Also I understand your seeming disgust. There's a dealer here in the Denver area that sells poorly set up Sonus Faber speakers. If you were to listen in their showroom you'd probably wretch at the etched, harsh sounds coming out of the system. When questioned, they sniff and say that's how they're supposed to sound and lots of people buy them because they're so good. I'm frankly amazed that they sell anything. Trouble is, the Sonus are not the problem, it's that dealer's poor setup.
That attitude is fairly persistant in the audiophile world and it's hard to find a really sweet sounding hi rez system (there usually in someone's home) but when you hear it, it can be a revelation.
Dave |
04-30-08: Mrtennis said:
"hi dave:
resolution is not the issue. an overly focused unnatural presentation of the sound of instruments is the problem."
I think we totally agree here. There's nothing "high resolution" about "overly focused unnatural presentation" and I think we agree that this is all too common and often passed off as "high resolution."
Dave |
Hey Rodman, I'm listening right now to "Papa Was A Rolling Stone" from "a twist of motown". Yeah, that's slammin' bass with the electric bass and synth together. A really great cut. Thanks for the lead.
Dave |
Thanks buddy, I just ordered the single-layer, two-channel SACD of "Heavy Weather". I love Jaco and Joe, but strangely I've never collected any of their stuff, so now we begin...(Oh, the half-speed was 60-bucks used, so I went with the SACD).
Yes, well defined music, of all genres, is great.
Isn't Doug Sax amazing? How old is the guy? I've been looking for his name on albums forever it seems.
Dave |
|
