What is “warmth” and how do you get it?

And it would depend who and what is playing for me to no wear I would want to sit in the hall .

"One must decide what listening position in the hall are you trying to re-create with your system"

That's a very good point that I suspect is often neglected.

THings sound a lot different depending on where you listen from. Getting this right and to your taste is a very valuable and free tweak.

Jeff,
I don't think Mrtennis is wrong, the definition he gives for warmth is correct, the point is it's a matter of usage and of degrees. His definition describes a sound that is too syrupy, rather than using it to describe the 'truth of timbre' he used to describe live music. Some might call the truth of timbre of live music 'warmth' (rich body) as you and I do, others may call it neutral and only use the term 'warmth' to describe a sound that is not neutral. That's the difficulty we face in describing sound that can create long threads of angst. To complicate things in absolute terms, the further you are from the source of live music, the 'warmer' the sound will be perceived. One must decide what listening position in the hall are you trying to re-create with your system. Some like mid hall, others like the perspective of the microphones hanging above the performers. There are lots of factors to consider. Building a system that gives you the smallest compromises on the factors you value most is not "tough", its what makes this hobby fun!

Byroncunningham,

After looking at your excellent system, I'd like you to consider one inexpensive addition that may tune just a bit more smoothness and warmth into your system without a loss of dynamics or bass slam.

I have been working for a very long time at "tuning" my system to get just the right sense of warmth so the music sounds as "real" as possible.

Using the correct footers under my components was the final tweak that took my system where I needed it to go. I would be embarrassed to admit how many different types of footers I have tried (some quite costly) that are now either being used in our videos systems or are in exile in my closet.

So what worked? Herbie's Tenderfeet from Steve Herbelin. I am using a combination of the regular version for lighter components and the extra firm Tenderfeet under my power amp.

I couldn't tell from your photos if you have footers under the Meridian and Pass pieces but I would most strongly urge you to try the appropriate Tenderfeet and give them a listen. Steve always stands behind his products. If you don't like the outcome you'll just be out some shipping.

After reading this entire thread, especially your last posting, its sounds to me like you are just close enough that the Tenderfeet could get you where you want to be.

I do not find most systems that I would describe as "warm sounding" to be natural sounding.

Pleasant, especially with acoustic string instruments, yes, but not like what I hear live.

Electronic music often suffers on a too warm sounding system.

GEtting the right dash of warmth perhaps when needed and still sounding good overall is tricky business indeed. Trail and error is the best approach.

I would recommend targeting a neutral sounding system first. Then tweak a pre-amp or source with some tube gear perhaps to get the dash of warmth if needed.

I find the ARC pre-amp in my rig does this perfectly for me. I notice that dash of warmth on occasion but only with certain music and if I am really listening just for that specifically.

...jeez, Jeffrey, spell much? Sorry, hit the wrong button.
.

IMO Hifibri's got it..."The more one listens to different types of live music, with different types of instruments, in different spaces, the more one realizes 'the sound' is always different, yet there is usually always that warmth of tone. Since this is a universal quality of live music, it makes sense to strive for this quality in a system."...
...and Mrtennis doesn't. As I said and Hifibri reinforces, the recording process removes natural, real warmth of tone from the sound of the instruments, and it's the reproduction system's job to recreate it. Indeed the system that do that are NOT tonally nuetral or 'accurate', but to me 'accurate' systems sound so much NOT like real music that they're unlistenable, so how accurate is that?

Tuning a system to have the right amount of warmth without sounding thick is difficult, but creating a great-sounding system is tough, isn't it?!?!?!
.

While most agree on the basic meaning, destinctions need to be made about the 'degree' of warmth (pun intended). I think a lot of confusion arises in the inference of the amount of warmth being described and because audiophiles do not have an exact universal definitin. As has been said, it's like trying to describe the smell of an onion or any smell. In general, live music can be described as being warm, as in alive and rich with tone. On the other hand one can describe a system as being 'warm' meaning it is too warm and not natural sounding. The more one listens to various types of live unamplified music, the more one appreciates 'warmth' (rich tone) as being closer to the truth. High frequencies and detail decay faster as distance from the source increase (including many of the attributes the OP indicates). A lot of music is closed miked which captures more high frequency energy and detail
(depening on the recording engineer and mastering of the recording), than a listener in that venue might otherwise hear, making a 'warm' system sound more real with many recordings. The more one listens to different types of live music, with different types of instruments, in different spaces, the more one realizes 'the sound' is always different, yet there is usually always that warmth of tone. Since this is a universal quality of live music, it makes sense to strive for this quality in a system. As always, it's a matter of one's perspective and is just one more aspect that makes this hobby so much fun!

Thanks to everyone for your thoughtful responses.

02-04-11: Hifiman5
"Warmth" is a very difficult characteristic to describe with adjectives. It's for me, the way real instruments sound in an acoustically neutral environment...A "lack of warmth" for me would be if the pluck of each string was unnaturally exaggerated by a "hot" tweeter and the mid and lower mids were not able to deliver the woodiness of the instruments.

Hifiman - On good recordings, my system sounds warm, according to the standard you describe. In fact, I would say the most realistic sounding instrument on my system is acoustic guitar. You may be asking, ‘So what is the problem?’ There isn’t a problem, exactly. On well recorded material, everything is peachy. But on poorly recorded material, I wonder if a “warmer” sounding system would be more rewarding. So, my goal is to expand the range of recordings that sound excellent on the system.

Johnsonwu - You've given me a lot to think about and to research, since I'm not a modder (though I have had some gear professionally modded). This approach to adding warmth is one that interests me. Maybe it’s because changing internal components (caps, resistors, etc.) is as close as it gets to single variable changes, which is appealing to me for its conservatism and degree of control.

Hi Learsfool – I agree with you and with Hifiman that, for acoustical instruments, warmth is a necessary condition for the perception of “real.” Again, on good recordings, acoustic instruments do sound warm, and hence real (to my ears). It’s the poor or merely adequate recordings that I would like to enhance, if possible.

Noble100 - I am considering adding tubes somewhere. Probably not a tube preamp, because I have recently been swayed toward the school of thought that the best preamp is no preamp (i.e. source connected directly to amp; volume controlled, in my case, by computer software). That leaves a tube amp or a dac with a tube output stage. That choice raises some questions:

For the issue of adding warmth, does it matter where in the system the tubes are located? Is the common element of “warmth” in tube components simply the addition of low order harmonics to the signal? And what are the downsides of this approach to adding warmth?

The last question brings me to...

02-05-11: Kijanki
Enhancing even harmonics does sound really nice with guitar or voice but not so with instruments that poses a little more complex than regular overtones harmonic structure...NEUTRAL sound (whatever it is) is the best…

02-05-11: Tmsorosk
Having tuned musical instruments in the past, one thing we listened for was any unnatural warmth, if you could hear warmth something was wrong. Warmth was never considered natural or desirable. It would altar pace, pitch, flow and timing and make an instrument sound less NEUTRAL, most easily noticeable on sting instruments.

02-05-11: Bizango1
I want my system to be NEUTRAL and have the capability of being true to the source. That's my preference.

[emphasis added]

You folks sound like me in another thread, where I argued at great length, against great opposition, for the value of neutrality. Some may find it amusing that I am now asking how to make my system warmer. I haven’t really changed my mind about the whole subject of neutrality. On the whole, I still believe that it is one of the most valuable attributes in a system, for the reasons I expressed on that thread. But I am interested in experimenting with changes that might nudge my system just a bit in the direction of greater warmth. Whether or not that is a nudge AWAY FROM NEUTRALITY is a philosophical question around which we should probably tread lightly, lest this thread turn into Neutrality War II.

The real question I am hoping to explore is HOW you go about making a system warmer. That is, what characteristics of system design promote the impression of warmth, and what are the drawbacks of those characteristics, if any? Part of answering this question involves answering:

Is greater warmth in a system always achieved by ADDING something (e.g., low order harmonics)? Or is it possible that greater warmth can also be achieved by SUBTRACTING something (e.g., some kinds of distortion)?

Thanks again to all.

Bryon

Well said Mr. T...Many like the warm coloration of tubes , but it was one of the reasons I got ride of my tubes .
I must say though , I have friends with excellent all tube setups , and enjoy listening to them very much
Regards Tim

here is a definition of warmth:

a slighy peak in the upper bass/lower midrange in conjunction with a dip in the upper frequencies, usually starting at about 3k.

it is definitely a coloration.

there is a difference between accuracy of timbre and warmth.

when attending live unamplified music, one usually does not use the term warm to describe a musical experience.

what distinguishes live music from listening to a stereo is accuracy of timbre .

an instrument soundws real when you hear it, but not real, maybe almpst real when you hear it on a recording.

very often "warm" is synonym for tube coloration of a euphonic nature.

it is an audiophile term which is not part of the definition of music.

'Warmth' for me is created by a tonal balance that makes reproduced large-orchestra music sound like real music played in a good hall. Of course, a 'good' hall is one that supports the lower frequencies of the orchestra so that the music doesn't sound 'cool' or 'thin'. 'Rich' is another word for warmth. I think the recording processes remove warmth from the music, and a music-reproduction system must recreate it. Warmth is defined, for me, as a tonal balance with a dB or 3 more energy in the lower MR/upper bass...mayb eup a dB by 300Hz, rising to maybe 3dB by 100Hz and maintaining that thru the bottom octave.

Of course, one can go too far on the warmth scale, which turns to 'thick', and that too doesn't sound real to me.

Systems that measure flat tonally are too thin and too bright for me.

Vacuumtubes in the system help retain natural musical warmth, but IMO the speaker system is most responsible for a system sounding warm and real...or not.
.

I am currently using a Dynaco ST-70 amp unmodified and a Hafler DH-110 solid state preamp and it gives me plenty of warmth. Instruments and voices sound natural not strained and I found I preferred this sound to the all solid state sound setup I had before. My vintage Mcintosh ma-5100 also gives me the warmth Im looking for even though it is all solid state. So experiment with vintage tube and modern tube equipment to find the sound u r looking for. Thats the fun in hifi is the experimentation and trying something new and different sounding.

Having an always "warm" system is like a preference, choice , or flavor and may not be for everyone. I have a small body acoustic guitar and if played back through my system I wouldn't want or expect it to sound warm. I also have a big bodied mellow and bassy sounding guitar and wouldn't want that one to sound thin or bright. I can choose which guitar to play for different sound but I want my system to be neutral and have the capability of being true to the source. That's my preference.

Your post should have read , " Warmth why would you want it ". Warmth is an added artifact of electronically produced music . A properly tuned acoustical instrument should not have the added warmth that you here on many systems . Having tuned musical instruments in the past , one thing we listened for was any unnatural warmth , if you could hear warmth something was wrong . Warmth was never considered natural or desirable . It would altar pace, pitch, flow and timing and make an instrument sound less neutral , most easily noticeable on sting instruments . Have A musical day

According to Technical Director of Benchmark John Siau, DAC1 that I own, was specifically designed not to sound warm but rather natural without enhancement of any harmonics odd or even. Enhancing even harmonics does sound really nice with guitar or voice but not so with instruments that poses a little more complex than regular overtones harmonic structure. Piano is such instrument (as well as percussion instruments) and when it is reproduced on very warm equipment it sounds almost like out of tune.

On the other hand SS gear often designed to sound hi-fiish or for good spects on paper enhances (because of transient intermodulation introduced by deep negative feedback) odd harmonics. Our ears are very sensitive to odd harmonics since loudness cues reside there (like 7th or 9th harmonic).

Neutral sound (whatever it is) is the best but I understand that staying a little on warm side protects from brightly recorded material. Fortunately my Hyperion speakers sound slightly warm with zero sibilants on any CD - and it is in combination with Benchmark DAC1 and unforgiving class D amp.
My older speaker had aluminum dome tweeter and was unbearably bright in the same setup.

I agree with Hifiman. Your system has to have enough 'warmth' inorder to portray music naturally and realistically. I think it's a matter of degrees: too little warmth and the result will be overly sterile and analytical, too much warmth and you get a syrupy sound (which I define as slow with an emphasis in the upper bass/lower midrange). I think of it as a continuum:

analytical___________________________syrupywarm

The trick is to first determine generally where on this continuum your taste lies and then,secondly, to assemble your system components to match your tastes. Easier said then done, for sure. I would say most A'gon members' tastes lie between somewhere, where the warmth is, with very few at the extremes.
Looking back on my system evolution, I clearly moved from an original analytical system to a current system that is much warmer without consciously thinking in these terms. But I can remember that I was looking for more realism and that illusion of 'you are there'. I know now that I was wanting more 'warmth',depth and presemce.
But your question was about how do you get more warmth. There was another recent thread about 'bloom' that you may want to read. I think the 2 concepts are closely related. In my limited experience, I would suggest tubed equipment needs to exist somewhere in your audio chain (source, preamp,amp) to obtain good, natural warmth and bloom. I don't deny you can achieve some warmth and bloom with solid state equipment but you'll need to select carefully and have deep pockets to be successful. Speaking of which, your system is very nice and I don't see any obvious cause of a lack of warmth. I don't think your Focal spkrs or Pass amp are responsible. I am definitely no expert but that won't stop me from making one suggestion: experiment. You could try out a few tubed preamps to see if this gives you the desired warmth(hopefully, there are some local dealers that will accomodate this). This worked for me. I'm not familiar with your preamp/processor or the mods but know you've made a big investment in it. But even if you substituted a different preamp, you could still utilize your current preamp as a prossessor if the new preamp has a HT passthru. Not sure if I helped but wish you good luck on your search.

Play "Light My Fire" over and over again.

Hi Bryon - for me, assembling a system that sounds "real" is automatically also going to be a system that sounds "warm." I suspect this is true for the great majority of audiophiles out there, especially those whose reference is live, unamplified acoustic music in a good performing venue (I am assuming, for instance, that this is what HIfiman means by "acoustically neutral," but I could be wrong). A good performing venue is "warm." I have never heard a system I would describe as "cold" or "harsh" that I could also describe as "real." Hifiman also speaks of the "inherent warmth of real instruments", which is certainly true, and I would also add the human voice to that. Though an actor may make his voice sound as cold as possible, there are extremely few instances where a singer would do so. Even HIP groups that don't use vibrato still have a natural warmth to their string tone. I really don't care how well a high-end system may measure, if it doesn't sound real/warm, and IMO/E, way too much high end equipment falls short. As for technical reasons why, I am certainly nowhere near as qualified as many others on this board to answer that; but this does put me in mind of something I read I think last night in a different thread where Atmasphere said, and I am probably badly paraphrasing here, that designers often have a choice between making equipment that measures well, and equipment that obeys the rules of human hearing. Perhaps he will weigh in on this thread.

Incidentally, part of the above is another instance of confusion that results from the use of the term "neutral." :)

Just a personal experience. I was at a high end salon sitting in a chair while they were setting up a system. They substituted various components and I could tell the difference as they did. The $2k cd player (Arcam) sounded fine but replacing it with a $3500(Linn) added a 3rd dimension to the soundstage. The speakers were the ones with the Be tweeter. The preamp was a tubed Audio Note 1 ($1k). Then they substituted a Linn ($1500) solid state preamp. The sound became shrill and I was pretty much driven out of the store. It wasn't even close. So warmth to me was tubes that made me want to listen indefinitely. I think they did that on purpose when they figured out I wasn't buying that evening. :)

I have no idea how you 'make' warmth, but to me it sounds full bodied, textural, with a slightly plump bottom end, strings have bite, the top end is airy and delicate, without any hint of harshness. Too many components today are the opposite - strident, lean, clinical.

I guess aside from good guts, it's in the tuning by the designer.

I think most can agree that reproduced music has warmth when violins dont sound like slaughtering poultry and piano transients dont sound like someone hitting your temple with a punching tool:

So how do I pick a pc of gear of mod a pc of gear to make it more warm?

To quote some ideas from Scott Frankland:
Warmth usually comes with
* regulated power supplies
* non inductive resistors (carbon composite)
* low odd ordered harmonics

and I would like to add to that:
* oil filled caps, be it coupling or bypass
usually they come with a more linear top end response to dynamics and a richer midrange (2nd order harmonics?)
* correct coupling cap orientation
* triode power tube config (to me Ultralinear never sound warm cos its actually anything but linear at least to my ears)
* use of chokes in power supply filter (that minimizes the unwanted spiky transient distortions from complex passages)

* Ribbon tweeters are normally NOT warm.

Warmth also comes with coherence. A poorly designed crossover will not give you the bloom and palpability of instruments that reaches out to you without attacking you when playing a wide range of pitches.

My 2 cents worth.

"Warmth" is a very difficult characteristic to describe with adjectives. It's for me, the way real instruments sound in an acoustically neutral environment. Right now I'm listening to Strunz and Farah. They are both master acoustic guitarists. I have friends who play. The pluck of each string is there but so is the "woodiness" that the guitar body imparts onto the sound of each note as it is heard. A "lack of warmth" for me would be if the pluck of each string was unnaturally exagerated by a "hot" tweeter and the mid and lower mids were not able to deliver the woodiness of the instruments.

It can be a daunting task to get a system to this point, but is it ever worth the effort! Once you "tune" your system to achieve the inherent warmth of real instruments, the willing suspension of disbelief, can, with the right music, help create the illusion that you are indeed hearing the real thing. That would be the holy grail for me!