I would have to agree with Csontos, Atmasphere. Even in the recording studio, it is very easy to tell the difference assuming we are listening to particularly wind instruments or the human voice. Even stringed instruments and some of the percussion should be fairly easy, assuming no amplification. Now if you get into electronically produced sounds, then yes, I agree in a studio you could be fooled. |
I will add that this ability is far more dependent on the recording than the gear. |
Imo, even that premise is relative. I have no doubt there are recordings that if they can't fool you just because you know they are, you will still conclude it sounds real. I happen to have one. |
Much as I appreciate the very best high-end audio can do, it cannot and will not ever be mistaken for a live performance, even in a world class system set up correctly in a world class space - one could tell the difference instantly. Learsfool, context plays a huge role here. If you are at home, you know already that there is not a symphony orchestra in the room. So you won't be fooled no matter how good it sounds. But what if you are at a recording studio? In this case it is reasonable to expect live musicians playing instruments live. In such a context, a good system can fool you easily! |
|
Davide256, I find nothing that you say to be true in my experience. |
My experience after playing with various audiophile components since the 80's is that the playback source is the most critical and efficiency of speakers is irrelevant in the typical home environment. You cannot get natural dynamics from the rest of the chain unless the source is clean... not jitter muddled as cheaper transports are for both analog and digital playback.
The amp has to control the speaker.. an amp with lots of watts but poor design for handling speaker impedance differences across the audio spectrum will smear the sound causing perceived poor dynamics. And components in the amp can round transients. A less efficient speaker will cause you to clip on the loudest passages if you lack the watts, but that's restriction on how loud you can play, not dynamics. |
When I use the term realistic it's relative and assumed that it isn't identical to live, just closer to that preferred natural sound than hifi's unaturalness. |
Learsfool, It has always been my use of the question of whether or not you can tell a piano heard through a wall is real or a recording. Perhaps I'm not quite there yet with the High Fidelity Cables, but I am much closer than I ever imagined was possible. |
To this "hi-fi" vs. "realistic" discussion. I agree that that is how most audiophiles use the terms. However, we should not equate "realistic" with "real" in this conversation. Much as I appreciate the very best high-end audio can do, it cannot and will not ever be mistaken for a live performance, even in a world class system set up correctly in a world class space - one could tell the difference instantly. |
Actually, I thought Hi-Fi sums up all other hi-end terminology. |
Last two posts are not in order. Charles, I truly did think that. I concur with your definition. It's just vernacular. |
In that case I would have to rate my system as 'Hi-Fi' since I am not fooled by it. However having said that, I can't help referring to a statement I made on another thread about a Charles Mingus true direct to disc vinyl recording I have that 'will' fool you. So where is the dividing line between source and gear? It seems potentials are at the center of this issue, no? |
Hi Csontos,
You asked for my definition and I gave it.You certainty don't have to agree and may have your own interpretation which is fine.I just expressed how I categorize components based on what I hear and the resulting effect and reaction they provoke.
Regards, |
Oh. I thought Hi-Fi was the highest rating. Thank you. |
Csontos,
Ralph answered your question the same as I have offered before in other threads.
Hifi=the ever present awareness that I'm listening to a stereo system. There's nothing that leads me to believe that the sound is from living people playing instruments, increasing the volume doesn't change this perception(it just becomes louder hifi). In other words, it sounds canned and simply re manufactured.
Realistic=A natural/organic awareness that live musicians are present and this is quite believable and one is able to convincingly established and maintain a emotional connection(thoroughly engaged and drawn into the musical performance). The sense of music from stereo system is much diminished. As Ralph said, it seems other people are in your room, it's very tactile and provokes startle reactions.
Regards, |
I don't think the human ear judges loudness in audio. Certainly we can sense loudness outside our listening room and there it isn't distortion. Tbg, sorry to be a buzz kill, but what you think above isn't really the way it is. *Of course* our ear/brain system 'judges loudness in audio'. And of course, we detect differences in sound level all the time :) All I was pointing to is part of the mechanism of how our ears do it (detect the odd orders in a sound) and the fact that there is a correlation to audio. Csontos, if I may, HiFi is good but with electronics artifacts that let you know its a stereo. 'Realistic' is where the system sounds so real that voices are scary, because you think someone is there when its really just the stereo playing. |
Charles, could you please explain the difference between 'realistic' and 'Hi-Fi' sound? I've seen this comparison before but no explanation. |
Ralph, my experience is exactly as you describe but interestingly, much more so when the Acoustat amps I'm speaking of are in bridged mode. Far more dynamic(or distorted). In either case, very life-like. In stereo it is much more source dependent. |
Atmasphere, I don't think the human ear judges loudness in audio. Certainly we can sense loudness outside our listening room and there it isn't distortion. I would entirely agree that more efficient speakers tend to be more dynamic, however. I once had all compression drivers in horns except for the deep bass with flyweight 1.56 watt amps. The impact on you of a snare drum would just about knock you backwards.
I really think dynamics are about the leading edge but it about low impedance ac power. Also with my recent experiences with High Fidelity Cables with the "magnetic conduction" technology, I think metals have different effects on leading edge and dynamic. These cables are substantially more dynamic than any others I have heard.
I would agree that some speakers don't sound loud when they really are. Also I am consistently playing my system at a louder volume setting and sound pressure setting than with other cables. And my wife down stairs has not once complained. |
Impact is a good term .
What I am refering to is the 'aspect' of a system that makes you want to tap your foot , bob your head , play air guitar , conduct the orchestra or get up and boogy !
I have another set of cheapy speakers that offer some of these characteristics . Now granted they don't have the extension , detail or clarity of my other speakers but they are exciting . If I could find something that combines these two speakers together that would be nice . |
Great response Atmosphere. You've hit it right on the head. |
OF course, being hard of hearing could be another explanation for the system not sounding as loud as it is. :^)
I've heard the effect Ralph describes on some amps but not others in recent years. Mostly with tube and Class D type amps. |
"However I don't normally listen very loud- this results in the system being so effortless that it has no sense of loudness at all- you can't tell how loud the system is playing unless you try to talk to someone standing next to you. This to me is the sign of a good system- one that does not sound loud even when it is. Such systems tend to have more 'impact' as well. The two qualities go hand in hand, even though it might seem counterintuitive. "
Agreed. |
There are two ways the term 'dynamics' is used by audiophiles.
In the vast majority of cases, the word 'distortion' can be safely substituted in the conversation without changing its meaning.
This is because the human ear uses odd ordered harmonics to sort out how loud a sound is. If the system adds odd ordered harmonic distortion during playback, it will sound louder to the ear than it will show on a sound pressure meter. I can offer plenty of examples.
For this reason I am careful to not use the word 'dynamics' when referring to actual changes in volume level. Instead I use the word 'impact'.
So- substituting 'distortion' for 'dynamics' above, its likely the amplifier that many will suggest and they would very likely be correct. If you want to improve the dynamic range of the system, the best way IMO/IME is to work with speakers that do not have compression at high output levels. This usually means going to a more efficient loudspeaker.
My speakers at home are about 98 db 1 watt/1 meter. But I often use amps of 140 watts; in such conditions its pretty well impossible to clip the amps in my listening room, and the speakers don't compress until I get into the threshold of pain.
However I don't normally listen very loud- this results in the system being so effortless that it has no sense of loudness at all- you can't tell how loud the system is playing unless you try to talk to someone standing next to you. This to me is the sign of a good system- one that does not sound loud even when it is. Such systems tend to have more 'impact' as well. The two qualities go hand in hand, even though it might seem counterintuitive. |
Tbg ;
I have not heard any of the Referance 3a floorstanders and
don't know if the design aspects , described by Martyk1 above , apply to them or just to the standmount versions .
Can anyone enlighten me about that ?
Thank you |
Simple question, simple answer. Speakers |
Kiddman, are you saying that the Grand Veenas aren't dynamic? |
amplifier is the main component responsible for dynamics, install a 400 watter Krell with crap CD player and crap (full range) speaker and you will still gets tons of dynamics.. it may sound like crap but still dynamics
the notion to get a higher sensitivity speaker is so that your amp can drive it properly |
Unless one is using very dynamic speakers, which as you describe, you are not, different speakers are the way to increase dynamics. Amps, preamps, phono stages, cartridges can vary brand to brand and model to model in dynamics, so you can enhance dynamics without changing speakers. But, again, for sure, speakers are the way to get major improvements. |
I still say find Grand Veenas or at least Murata super tweeters. I haven't seen |
Wow , I had forgotten about this post !
How does this sound in answering my question here ?
This is an excerp from a post asking for feedback on Reference 3a speakers :
03-29-13: Martykl
I had deCapos for quite a while. I think they employ a very specific set of trade-offs to achieve a specific result.
They combine better bass extension than most stand mounted monitors with a truly neutral octave to octave tonal balance. That's unusual IME because the lack of true bottom end energy (true of this and basically all other small box speakers) requires limiting the output thru the presence and treble region to maintain the octave to octave neutrality. Most manufacturers seem to maintain more output in the upper octaves so that the speaker sounds more dynamic. The result - to my ear - is that the vast majority of stand mounted monitors tend toward a bright voicing that would benefit from the addition of a subwoofer.
The real world result of the Ref 3a approach is a monitor that sounds really neutral. It doesn't really invite the use of a subwoofer - it would sound bottom heavy if you added one. OTOH, it definitely struck me as polite sounding and limited in dynamics.
To my ear, maintaining neutral balance at the expense of dynamic "jump factor" is a wise trade. However, IMO, that is the price that was paid in this design.
This could explain the lack of dynamics in my system .
Any comments on this explaination ?
Thank you |
Saki70, in my experience virtually everything can impact dynamics. I have enhanced dynamic with dacs, amps, ac filters, vibration controls, cables, and even wall outlets. So, I agree largely with Agear. |
The OP needs to restate the question as "what component(s)" since it is multifactorial. People have harped on the expected variables. I too believe mechanical grounding is important along with room construction and these things are often an afterthought. Also, source material plays a role, and is something we cannot control. There is no way to fix compressed Redbook.... |
Hi all ! Onhwy61: Dont think I listen much above moderate or slightly higher levels , not sure of the SPL. I dont think the 4wpc setup gets louder than the 160wpc setup , it just seems to be more dynamic and quicker sounding . Also , since I changed to the low power hi-eff route I listen to my system much , much more . And yes , there is more than one way to skin a cat...depending on the flavor you like . |
Thank you for proving my point. |
Whats to miss read? Posts about horns without any real experiences with them. Info he presents is mostly all bias conjecture here say. The guy mentions listening to square waves..... If you ask him to explain or provide more information to back his claims he resorts to insults. Seems a bit unsound to me. Hope he gets well soon. |
Tbg, because he seems to constantly misread my posts. |
Mechanical grounding is the main component, basis and foundation for dynamic expression. Material choice and geometry dictate the collection speed and termination of all things that are in motion...which is everything. Most audio devices are over damped because mechanical grounding methods are miss understood and miss applied or dismissed totally. Without proper mechanical coupling and grounding termination, dynamics are lost before anything else has started. Tom |
Thanks, Johnk. Nearing age 60 I don't hear much at all above 10-11 kHz, so I'm hoping I'll not miss anything without a supplemental tweeter/supertweeter! I'll keep in mind that the T35 is easy to damage. |
Jb0194 t35 has good sound but to me still needs to be used with a tweeter its also easy to damage thus why I don't offer them. I did use with SEAS woofer and in a TL with fostex woofer lcy k100 super tweeter. |
Hey guys, its that time of year?
Ho ho ho, Merry Xmas, Peace on Earth, and all that?
Dynamics rule! |
Only "sure" rather than "surely" would seem wrong. Why do you ask, Unsound? |
JohnK, is English your primary language? |
Johnk,
I know you've designed with the SEAS Exotic W8 woofer. Have you tried the SEAS Exotic T35 midrange/tweeter? What did you think of its sound? FWIW, I'll be using it above a Jantzen JA-8008 driver (OEM by SEAS) as a midrange with a PHL 5011 (updated version of the 5010 driver used by Nelson Pass as woofer in his original "Rushmore" loudspeaker) on bottom. Only a moderately high efficiency loudspeaker, but a true 92-93dB that'll move lots of air. |
|
Who said there`s 'only' one way to skin a cat? Folks are just stating what`s worked best for them personally,what ever that may be. There`re no absolutes. |
Unsound Which designs couldn't produce the square wave? And why do you feel all horns to be colored or that horn designs can not produce wave fidelity? Can you produce anything to back your claims? Please in detail explain how your measuring, what brand loudspeakers and with what equipment. And again maybe a list of hi efficiency designs you've had real experiences with. You do like to give your opinion on them so sure you must have vast experiences and technical skills. |
Hiefficiency speakers and flea power tube amp is one way to skin the
cat, but far from the only one.
Listening volume should be a concern. I've read regular listening above
80 db or so causes hearing loss. Hi effspeakers can be like a weapon,
and so be careful. And yes setup is everything especially with hi eff horns
which can be like listening under a microscope.
Noise floor might be more of a real issue with older analog sources than
modern digital. |
|
