Warm vs Revealing—the struggle for balance


For me my upgrade path has been finding balance between warmth and dynamics/detail.

It’s looks something like this: find satisfaction (Raven Nighthawk + Tekton), get upgrade bug seeking more dynamics, get more revealing gear (Ma 352), feel fatigued, buy new tubes (Telefunken) and speakers (SF Olympica); want more dynamics (Mc 601 + c50), I immediately get tube pre because of fatigue (c2300), still too sharp (new tubes and DAC); excellent balance, but of course sell speakers, new speakers too revealing, buy Cardas cables to replace Wireworld (ahh just right for now, but may be a little more revealing might be nice).

And oh yeah, working on fixing the damn room problems!

Chasing the unicorn. 

Anyone else doing this back and forth?

w123ale

Showing 2 responses by knotscott

Our preferences are all different, and we all have a unique "sweet spot" we need to achieve to let the music take us away. There’s not a one size fits all road map. It’s always a matter of striking a balance on all fronts (including baffle width). There’s no free lunch, and there are trade-offs with every choice. We need to pick our poison, and keep chasing down the weakest link. Sometimes "too revealing" is just excellent clarity in parts of the chain that points a finger at some other source of sloppiness or harshness, sometimes its simply a tonal imbalance that’s too bright. I suspect sometimes it’s just too loud of a volume level for a given recording. Your right though....it’s pretty elusive!

The room is significant, and so is how well your speakers interact with it. Best bet (IMHO) is to find speakers that you love that work well in your room, then buy amplification that drives them well and has a tonal balance you like. Tubes can offer great clarity, and options for fine tuning to taste.

@waytoomuchstuff 

Love this! 

IMHO, we've got push the resolution envelop past the point of "comfort" to learn which exit to get off on.  It's all part of the hit-and-miss experimental process.