Dear Dover, This was my fearful assumption: to good to be true. That was 'the' why of my question. But I am happy for you. I have some idea about the so called 'retip' services. To retip a stylus in the existing cantilever seems to be much more difficult then to replace the 'whole thing'. So those retip firms get from their supplier cantilevers with styli already fitted. I assume that those 'combos' have a particular lenght and the connected angle for the stylus. Considering the very unusual (short) cantilever by Dyna Karat I am glad that Axel somehow fixed this problem. My quess is that he used aluminum because the 'exotic kind' can't be bend (for the stylus angle). I never asked Axel if his 'aluminum cantilevers' are actually some 'alloy' kind. But I was already impressed with his upgrade on my Virtuoso black which was line contact pressure fitted in a aluminum cantilever. BTW my second Virtuoso got the boron cantilever with nude elliptical. This upgrade however become very expensive recently because of the (huge) incrise in Japanese prices. Ergo: those Dyna's look very attractive but the problem is obvious.
Dear Lew and Henry, To call my babys 'metalic' or even worst 'monsters' is not something that I can possible connect with the expressinon 'politeness'.
Regards, |
Nandric, I probably shouldn't have mentioned the rebuild as it was done as a special favour. I know that they have refused others, so I am quite fortunate. I can confirm that it was completed by Dynavector Japan. I dont know if mods were made to the generator system from the original design, but the cartridge seems better than ever. The current model 17D3 is the closest they have today. What cantilever material did you use ? |
Lewm, I am struggling with cartridges at the moment. I had a hiatus from audio for a few years, during which I ran a heavily modified ET2/Shure V15Vmr which was perfectly adequate. Then I got sick of the air pumps and after some contemplation I bought a Naim Aro in preference to the Graham of the day. The Shure did not like this, so I then I got the Dynavector Nova rebuilt and this combo worked very well until I knocked the arm and broke the cantilever. Then mounted a NOS Denon 103D onto the Aro and this was fantastic - fast, lucid, excellent soundstage - the owner of the Technics SP:10mkiii/ET/Shelter 901 that designed yours and Alberts mods used the word amazing when he heard this. My system has evolved considerably since then with MIT Oracle cabling and updated crossovers for the Tannoys - Teflon boards, Duelunds etc. Then I wanted to up the ante, so I bought the Ikeda Kiwame, as I had previously owned the Ikeda before, and considered it to be the best cartridge I had ever heard other than a Garrot modded Decca London. Unfortunately the very low gain and requirement of a heavy arm put me off. Tried various step ups, both passive and active, bought the Klyne ( which was less transparent than any of the tube pres I had, and got a bit frustrated. Went back to the Shure V15 mounted in my Dynavector 501 so I could forget about everything and just listen to music. I considered the Denon 103D even though it was excellent to be of concern in terms of suspension given its age. Then I bought a new Koetsu Black as a stopgap measure. Mounted in the Dynavector 501 it was just ok at best. Remounted in the Aro and the Koetsu Black opened up - more transparent, more space, air, soundstage and speed. So this was my daily runner until a few weeks ago when the rebuilt Dynavector came back. Mounted the Dynavector in the Dynavector 501 arm and was surprised at the speed and articulation, much better than the Koetsu/Aro combination. So this is what I am currently listening to. I suspect that if I mount the Dynavector back into the Aro the system will lift again, but cant be bothered at the moment. Looking at your system I like the combo of tube pre/OTL's/stats. I cant understand why you cant get a good sound out of the Koetsu Urushi. The wood and stone Koetsu's I have heard can be a bit "slow" perhaps, which is why I bought the Black - I had previously run a Black with a Zeta arm which had speed and impact. I think so much of the cartridge sound is arm/phono dependent - hence the variations in results. I never cottoned to the van den huls and the Benz's although they are quite good. With both these brands models sound quite different - there doesn't seem to be a family sound. I do wonder if the MC's of today have really progressed. Some such as Benz where the original proprietors have left may have declined. The Sumiko's from the Bluepoint onward were a disaster to my ears, they were substantially worse than the preceding Sumiko Talisman range and yet I have huge respect for David Fletcher - so I dont know what's going on. At the pointy end of the market - I have recently heard the Zyx Omega which sounded pretty good - transparent, detailed, no grain - mounted in a Raven tonearm. The Zyx Airy by comparison just sounded ok, but according to the importer, who is a personal friend, the Airy varies quite a lot depending on arm and additional cartridge mass applied to the headshell. When Peter Ledermann visited here recently I had a good listen to the Voice and the new Strain Guage cartridge. I was impressed with the lack of grain these cartridges had - thought they were pretty good. Coming back to your system, personally even though I am running the Dynavector arm I dont think it is a world beater. As discussed above, with some cartridges the Naim Aro bests it by a long way. We have quite a few L07D's down here and noone uses the arm on them. Most of the Kenwood arms I have seen either have seized bearings or loose bearings. The Triplanar to me looks the best option for a MC but given its light to medium mass of 11gm in my mind you would be best with lighter medium compliance MC's. Another friend of mine imports the Miyajima's but I haven't heard one yet. My gut feel is it needs a heavy arm. Have you considered upgrading the arm on the L07D ? Perhaps something more suited to your MC's. I would have thought even something like an SME V would get much more out of your MC cartridges than the Kenwood or Dynavector arms. As an adjunct the Zyx Omega was a new replacement for one that had a diamond mounted on a particlularly oblique angle unknown to any arm designer. Would I buy a MM - yep if I can find one with the speed & transparency of the Dynavector at least. Thats why I keep reading these posts. Would love to try a Glanz, Technics EPC100 or Acutex at some stage if I can find a decent one. Coming back to what I own - the Ikeda still remains the best but I do not use it. The new Ikeda with a cantilever may be worth investigating, I would probably take punt on it if I didn't have the cantileverless model, and an appropriate arm - read heavy. |
Dear Nicola, My experiences with Apogee were not as positive as yours? My friend had the Apogee Divas which he drove using the big Naim NAP250 amps left over from his tri-amped Linn Isobaric period. To me, the Divas sounded too much like......metal? Which to me, is not surprising since that was the resonating medium? |
Dear Raul, Whilst I agree that the bottom octaves are important in achieving a realistic presentation.....like you I have also heard 'hundreds' (not thousands) of speakers....but I disagree that almost all ( decent speakers. ) performs very good from that frequency range an up I find that almost all speakers sound like........speakers? Almost none disappears......and in doing so.... presents an illusion of three dimensional instruments/voices? Almost none creates a transparency and an 'air' around, between and behind the images? Almost none appears to be effortless in its presentation? Whilst the lower octaves are great to have.....they can never make up for the deficiencies in the mid to upper regions. One of the most memorable speakers I heard with this ability.....were the original Martin Logan CLS electrostatic panels driven with valve electronics. They had little bass.....yet managed to disappear and present a spooky facsimile of 'the real thing' which enticed one to actually walk around? |
But Nicola, two you have named above, the Apogee and the Infinity monsters, are horribly inefficient. The Apogee Scintilla, in particular, is a well known 2-ohm amplifier killer. They both do make a "big" sound, because they are physically big with a large radiating area from floor to near ceiling. And the Infinity, which comes down to us in a present day equivalent as the Nola Grand Reference, needs a whole column of woofers to produce what must be prodigious bass response. I am very curious about the Megalines, but I have heard the other two many many times, and all I got from them was their big soundfield that was not so transparent, not so "real", fun but just big.
Dover, Like the others who commented, I disagree with your summation of the nearly 9000 posts that make up this thread. I will be the first one to step up and admit it if I find a LOMC that blows off the best of the MM and MI cartridges I own. I have already investigated Koetsu, Ortofon, and van den Hul LOMCs, and none of those does the trick. I am trying to decide what comes next. Thinking ZYX, Miyajima, etc. Got any ideas? What do you like currently? |
Dear Henry, I thought that there is consensus about the 'fact' that the speakers are the weakest link in our systems. Anyway I agree with your stand. Speaking about speakers those that I consider to be exceptional and capable to delivere the needed dynamics are ( in chronological order) the so called 'line source': Apogee's(Scintilla), the big one's by Nudell's Infinity and the(newer kind) Dali Megaline. Albert owned the Megaline so he can say more about them. What I can say is that those Megaline can be get in Germany for a very reasonable price (+/- 10.000 Euro). No conventional speakers can come close to. Regards,
|
Dear Halcro/Lewm/all: I think that today we are aware that in our home systems we can't mimic that visceral/dynamics of the live music. Now, the loudspeakers in its best " encarnation/perfect " what can do is to mimic the audio system signal with out degradation and taking in count that we have to a theoretical " perfect room ".
IMHO the efficiency, impedance or other factors you named as a design targets are a desire only but not necessary a designer targets. I think that a loudspeaker designer must be free on what surround the speakers but the room. The " problem " of low efficiency or electrical impedance/phase curve and other is not his " trouble " that must be solved by the amplifier designers not the loudspeaker designer.
In the other side IMHO the most critical factors to achieve top top/first rate loudspeaker quality performance reside in the low mid-bass/low bass frequency range: how it handle how it performs there. IMHO that range frequency is the real loudspeaker design challenge where unfortunately does not exist ( till today ) the " perfect speakers that fulfil it Is in this frequency range where IMHO the " magic " comes or not.
If the speaker is a moving coil type or electrostatic or an hybrid design is in general not important or if it is multidriver design. I heard " thousands " of systems with different loudspeaker types and almost all ( decent speakers. ) performs very good from that frequency range an up but the wide diffrences on performances came from that low mid-bass/low bass, is through my experiences in this range where " home system music lives ". and if we take in count this then ( from my experiences too. ) the " best " bass design is the sealed/acoustic suspension one against ported and other bass type of designs. As in any audio system link accuracy and low distortions is a must to have and in that bass frequency range sealed are more accurate with lower distortions. Could have we the same kind of performance through a ported one design? could be but I never had the opportunity to hear it yet.
Halcro as a trasducer and like a phono cartridge the loudspeaker " mission " is way critical but I don't think that today is weakest system link, I think that in the last years that market segment was and still is growing up with improvements over the past. What maybe I could agree is that the loudspeaker challenge is the higher one: especially to " golden ear " audiophiles.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Dover, Your Dyna 13 rebuild by Dynavector looks to be a very interesting proposition. Can you be more specific about the details. I just got my Karat 17 D2 back from Axel. He somehow managed to solve the problem with the (very) short cantilever. He gets from his supplier the standard cantilever/stylus combos .I got his 'celebrated' line contact stylus pressure fitted in a aluminum cantilever. Raul recommended this cart and I am impressed with the result. But I am also curious about the diamond cantilever and the rest. Does one need some dealer as intermediary or can one deal direct with Dynavector?
Regards, |
Dgob, thanks for feedback. I have shortlisted the best MM's on the thread for trial. I have had Garrott P77, Andante P76, various Stanton's, Grace F9E Ruby, Shure V15V's, Clearaudio Virtuoso and none of these approach my Ikeda, Dynavector Nova 13 or Koetsu Black, not even remotely in the same league. The likely candidates - Glanz , Acutex 320/420, Technics EPC100, Signet TK7 - are either unobtainable, and/or unable to be restored to new. I suspect if the Technics EPC100 were produced today it would be a $2000 cartridge at the very least. So we are not comparing apples with apples. The question of how cheap are these cartridges really are when $200-300 ( or $600 for the Technics ) buys you a knackered used cartridge that may or may not be usable or repairable, it's like throwing US$300 into a lucky dip, how many times do you have to try before you get lucky. And then of course if you put a value on your time then they may well be $2000-5000 cartridges anyway. My 25 year old Dynavector Nova 13 has been rebuilt completely from the ground up, new generator, diamond cantilever etc, by Dynavector, recently for less than the price of a Clearaudio Virtuoso. |
Taste, environment and set up not withstanding.
As always... |
Dover,
"One of the gists of this thread seems to be that after sifting through hundreds of moving magnet cartidges we have found about 10, that with 30 year old rubber suspensions, with a new cantilever material and stylus shape chosen by god or by guess, without regard to the original design paramaters of coil layout etc, that these 10 examples prove that MM's are inherently superior to all LOMC's.
This is simply not the case. So I like to be provocative from time to time."
Although my personal musical pursuits have taken me in a new direction, I do not think you are being at all 'provocative'. Only a fool, IME, generalizes to the point of generic dismissal - particularly when we are talking about something as idiosyncratic and complex as hifi cartridges. What many seem to have found is that a selection of relatively cheap MM/MI/MF cartridges can perform as well as and even better than 'any' (often very expensive) MC alternative.
No drama
As always... |
Hi Timeltel/Lewm, re the "ginormous distortions of higher output MM's". Was a response to the previous comment by Halcro who seems to think that LOMC's are inherently inferior to MM's. I dont have a preference myself, hence the reason I follow this thread. My own view is that all cartridges have distortions and tradeoffs in design. Whether you swipe a magnet across a coil, or a coil across a magnet, there are going to be non linearities, resonances and phase anomalies inherent in the movement. Many folk here talk about tip resonances, resonant peak, tracking etc, but how many here would have a truly phase coherent system including amplification/cables/speakers that are capable of really telling us what their front end is doing. Now in terms of output I have compared the same model of Benz MC's with 3 different outputs - 0.3, 0.8 & 1.1. I have always run full valve MC phono stages with no fets/transformers in the path. The only exceptions to this were a Burmester phono, Klyne System 7 & and a few others. Even with a 60db total gain which many would consider marginal for MC's the loss of speed and coherence with the increased output was clearly audible on a wide range of speakers from Martin logan CLS ( modded ) to Proac Tablettes ( modded ) and Tannoy 15" Monitor Golds ( modded ). Similar results were gleaned from listening to 2 Grado's with medium and low output. Would I generalise that I prefer low to high output - yes provided the phono stage is decent and capable. As Lewm suggests, if the phono stage is not optimal, then a higher output cartridge may be better suited. Now what about compliance ? Well if we think about speed and coherence, the two standout designs I have heard extensively are the Decca moving iron and the Ikeda MC both of which dont have cantilevers slewing around. So that begs the question on high compliance - is a cantilever more prone to slewing around going to increase the probability of phase anomalies. It would seem to me to be more logical that a low compliance cartridge, provided that it is mounted in a tonearm capable of ensuring decent tracking, has going to have more controlled or less phase and timing issues from non linear movement between coils/magnets/magnetic fields. Note this independent of whether it is MC or MM or MI. One of the gists of this thread seems to be that after sifting through hundreds of moving magnet cartidges we have found about 10, that with 30 year old rubber suspensions, with a new cantilever material and stylus shape chosen by god or by guess, without regard to the original design paramaters of coil layout etc, that these 10 examples prove that MM's are inherently superior to all LOMC's. This is simply not the case. So I like to be provocative from time to time. |
Hi Lew, Yes.....you're right about the Magicos seemingly being in the same 'camp' I appear to be disparaging?......yet its efficiency is quite high, its impedance curve is not difficult, its crossover is first order (I believe).....and it isn't ported. But I mention it only as an example proving the exception to the 'rule'? |
Dear Henry, I fully agree with you that low-efficiency, multi-driver speakers with complex crossovers just about never get it right. But I would have thought that the Magico big speakers were in that group. I heard the Q5 at the RMAF two years ago. With multi-megabuck source and amplification components to back it up, it sounded "only" very good. Hard to fault but not life-like by any means. Of course the room was full of people who were ooh-ing and ah-ing the speaker. Likewise I got a good taste of the Vandersteen 7 at that show. It too was highly regarded, but to me there was a marked discontinuity between its self-amplified woofer and its upper register. I liked it less than the Q5, even though I am in general a fan of the lesser Vandersteen speakers, on a cost/performance basis. |
An addendum to my previous posting........is it just me or do others find the weakest link in audio to be 'speakers'? In over 30 years of listening.......I can count on one hand the speakers I have heard which actually sound convincing? Leaving aside Planars, Electrostatics, Horns and other specialised technologies like Ohm and MBL......moving coil 'box' designs appear to have 'lost it' (if they ever 'had it')....since the advent of SS amplification? The 'failings' IMHO appear to be linked with Low Impedance, Low Efficiency, High-Order and/or Complex Crossover design and Porting? I think the ONLY commercial speakers I have heard recently which to me.... come close to presenting a convincing 'image'.....were the Magico Q5 (which are now superseded by the M5). Is it so hard for designers to hear the benefits of High Impedance, High Efficiency, Minimal Crossover, Sealed Box designs?........or is it simply 'easier' to design for theoretical flat frequency response in the computer, using these other models? |
Hi Henry I don’t know anyone there except for the host so I don’t know what the actual impressions of that specific concert were - sorry. You can however read actual tape impressions/other feedback at this link – go to the guest book section. http://ultraanaloguerecordings.comHe produces tapes and I am a direct customer of one master tape. My understanding - not confirmed - is they (tapes) are now source material for shows. Other than the tape purchase I am not affiliated with him. His next concert according to the stereopal website is this weekend. Anyone in the Toronto area wanting to hear it should contact him. I was advised about these concerts but my time is very limited these days. I came across the stereopal article accidentally a while ago. Hi Thuchan – nice to see you back on the forum. Glad u like the images. Yes - I agree with your room comments looking at just the picture – rooms can sound so different however from the perceptions we get from pictures. Many variables. I think the feedback from people on the tapes themselves show his listening room must sound pretty good if it is his reference room for the tape monitoring/editing process. No?Maybe one day I will get a chance to hear it. I found it interesting from discussions with him that the sound in the pool room is much better with the pool cover on. Maybe its also to keep people from falling in…. Also want to clarify that when I said “sound” in the earlier post I meant it from a tone, timbre, soundstage, etc ….. Not the actual performance (people factors?) that Frogman and others referenced earlier. |
Dear Dover, Do I perceive an anti-MM bias in your remark? If so, I must have been asleep, because I did not previously appreciate your feelings on the matter. If you prefer MCs, that is one thing, and it's not for me to put you down for that, but to attribute what you perceive to be the superiority of MCs vs MMs as regards "distortion" to the lower output of a typical MC is wrong-headed, IMO. MMs make a much higher signal voltage, because the technology naturally results in a higher signal voltage, compared to MCs. This does not necessarily make for higher distortion. In fact, one might equally as well argue that MMs have the advantage, because their higher compliance makes for better tracking of the LP groove. Also, their higher output permits the use of lower gain phono stages, which also tends toward reducing distortion in the signal chain. Nor is the moving mass of an MC always lower than that of a comparable MM type (which would be one rationale to support your generalization). In fact, MI cartridges typically have a lower moving mass than do MCs. However, if you were to say that HOMCs are not nearly as true to life as LOMCs, as a class (exceptions are always possible), I would agree. I prefer the better MMs to any of the 3 HOMCs I have owned. None of them ever gave me goose bumps. So, tell me how the higher output of an MM cartridge necessarily makes for more distortion, or whatever it is you don't like. |
Dear Ct0517, nice images! The artists, the instruments and the audience seem to be fine! The listening room is far away from being benchmark - window areas etc. It may be a live performance but its hard to believe that the sound is really good... |
Yes Chris.........a lot of work? Do you know what the result was? I can't seem to find this anywhere? |
Halcro I believe that the 'secret' to approaching the 'dynamics' of 'live' sound..... Henry IMO – if you are really serious about this it will take some effort and facilities. How about bringing the live sound into your home, then playing back the recorded master tape and have the audience decide how close you got ……This is just one person's approach/method that might tell you how big the delta really is if this is your goal. I applaud his efforts as a serious music lover / audiophile. My only comment would be the rooms were different and the room plays the biggest role in how things actually sound. System used is this particular case can be seen down toward the bottom of the website link. I am not affiliated with this website and I wasn't in the audience. |
The most money I spend or lost, depending from the point of view, was on speakers and drink. I don't regret the drinks. I first fall in love with Quod 57 but because of dynamics switched to Timpany (Magi's), then one pair of Audiostatics then two pairs of Audiostatics, three pairs of Audiostatics and then I switched to Nudells Infinity but, alas, not the biggest one. If I could afford those I would gladly convert my home door in a fire department kind to let them in. My last were based on the assumption that Beryllium drivers will make (at last) the 'dynamic difference'. But alas. So to protect myself and even more so my bank account I am not in the position to believe Lew's story about his electrostatics and 'life concerts' in his living room. But I do believe in his argument about the speakers as the primary cause for this misery even before I knew his name.
Regards, |
Regards, Dover: Fleib made, earlier, the suggestion that it might be interesting to share notes concerning the characteristics of carts found to be of noteworthy performance. I'd suggest that most with an output of 3.5mv or less (there are, IMHO, exceptions) are capable of nimble transient response. In spite of it's 2.5mv output, resonance in the 12k hz region continues with the Technics EPC-U25/ML stylus and is NOT one to recommend to friends. I give up on it, perceiving a response more brittle than a poorly rendered Joni Mitchell CD. Bass however is quite good. Your comment on "ginormous" distortions due to higher output is one that may result in shedding additional light on general qualities to be aware of in selecting an unreferenced, or even referenced cart. If would you be so kind, give an opinion of the level at which output derived distortions are observed? Determined to conquer the U25, I followed up on your suggestion to examine the offerings of Peter Belt & found several fairly recent references in Stereophile, revived some memories: http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/As to the U25, the designation seems somehow submarine-like & there are several ponds on the property--- Peace, |
or you prefer the ginormous distortions of higher output MM's, ideal for listening to Mr Whippy tunes, than the tiny distortions in LOMC's, which is quite reasonable if you like the Mr Whippy flavour..... just saying.
|
I believe that the 'secret' to approaching the 'dynamics' of 'live' sound.....is the reduction (or elimination) of all possible distortions? In that belief.....I am wholeheartedly with Raul. I generally listen at 90dB or thereabouts.......but can comfortably turn it up to 95dB without strain. My speakers are 99dB efficient and are sealed boxes with only two Duelund capacitors (one for the Scanspeak tweeter and one for the Scanspeak mid driver) whilst the 12" woofer is run 'full-range'. With the addition of two Vandersteen 2Wq powered subwoofers and the M5 electronic High-Pass filters......the power demand on the two 200W Halcro DM58 monoblocks is seriously reduced. The Halcro electronics are amazingly pure but are improved even further when using the Cardas Clear XLR interconnects in 'Balanced' mode. With the reduction in distortions and the efficiencies in driving the speakers.....even the tiniest distortions heard with various LOMC cartridges are discernible. And that segues nicely into this entire Thread topic? |
Anyone in need of a Stylus guard for their Goldring G800, the slide on guard from a AT will fit with just a slight amount of trimming with a x-acto knife. I had a spare and have put it to good use. |
Part of the problem here may be in how any of us defines a "live music" performance.
Unfortunately, there has been a trend for "electronic" reinforcement to the extent where it is difficult to find a truly acoustic live performance. And once electronics enter the picture can that still be considered live music?
I attend a variety of live performances, everything from folk, world music, or jazz trio/quartet in a small venue (say seating 100 or less) to my local symphony in their own hall (seating 2,250). Many performers show up with their own amps and speakers and insist on using them, even at our best local venue for acoustics, a purpose-built room seating less than 300. Even the symphony resorts to electronic reproduction to correct for sonic deficiencies at seats under a fairly large balcony (I choose seats near the front of the balcony, a location that experience has shown to offer the best overall sonics).
So my earlier comments on differentiating between live musical performances and the experience of home systems must include a footnote. To that point I recently discovered an opportunity to sit in (as a listener) for an evenings two-hour practice session by a local 17-piece jazz band. Other than the electric keyboard, that was completely acoustic. I attended with two other members of our local audio club and we emphatically agreed none of us EVER heard a home music that came close to that experience! |
A good system needs a good room. What we usually experience when working on our units is that we reach progress and we enjoy the result but what really makes a difference - also when it comes to Live Sound - is The Listening Room. I had people in my room recently listening to a copy of the Miles Davis master tape "Kind of Blue" saying the instruments sounded like in a club, very lively. Is this Live Sound? i don't know, maybe it is the set up of single chains resulting in a sound people like - and me too. |
Nandric, Lewm's comments re loudness and how distortion affects perceived loudness are correct. Banquo wrote how dynamics connotes a relationship between peak and minimal db's. I would modify that to say that it is the relationship between peak and minimal db's AT ANY TWO POINTS IN TIME in the music, and not necessarily in the ppp to fff range only. This is, IMO, a key point in this discussion.
A key element of musical expression is the constant and constantly changing dynamic swings in every micro-dynamic range (ppp to pp, p to mf, f to mf, ff to mf, etc.); those little musical dynamic pushes and releases that give music excitement and sense of aliveness. And it's even more subtle than that. In music, p or ff are not absolutes. Musicians, in the course of preparing the performance of a piece will establish a volume benchmark for each traditionally established dynamic marking (p, mf, f, ff, etc.) based on concensus on what is musically appropriate; but between any two benchmarks there are many even more subtle dynamic gradations. Listen to the Philadelphia Orchestra's string section making a tutti crescendo in a relatively narrow dynamic range such as mp to mf; it can take your breath away in it's seamlessness and rhythmic purpose. What is it that gives Sonny Rollins his unmatched rhythmic impetus? A great deal of it is his ability to control subtle dynamic changes from one note to the other; not just the notes he plays but how he arrives at each note. Most audio components distort this information just as much or more than distortions in timbre which is what we usually focus on. That information is what gives live music that indescribable quality that tells you immediately that it is live. |
I have problem to diferenciate between 'loudness' and 'dynamics'. In any (home) listening roome there is a 'loudness level' which become unbearable. But I never experienced such a level by any concert( those with amps. not included). On my limited understanding, 'loudness' connotes peak db whereas 'dynamics' connotes a relationship between peak and minimal db's (the difference between ppps and fffs). So, it is said that radio commercials play loud (to capture one's attention) but are not dynamic (because they just remain at the peak db throughout). I have experienced the same thing as you Nandric. My system (as measured by a radio shack spl meter) peaks at about 90-95db. At around the high 80's the dog leaves the room, my wife runs out to tell me to turn it down, and I cry mercy. On the other hand, I used to have season tickets to the Met Opera and I never experienced discomfort. I've read that a full orchestra can peak at over 110db. One possible explanation is that the distortion and not the absolute level of my system makes high 80's uncomfortable, whereas the undistorted 100+db of the NY Phil make for pleasure. Seating position presumably plays a role as well, as I was never 10ft from the orchestra. Another factor is the time the piece remains at the highest db. So when I 'turn it up' on my system, the max db is reached with greater frequency (like a radio commercial) than it is with a live orchestra which hits 110db only very infrequently. The greater time spent at peak makes for discomfort: 3 minutes at 88db is more uncomfortable than 5 seconds at 110db). |
Nandric, To me, that is part of the key also; live sound can be VERY loud and yet not irritating. To the contrary, it can often envelope you in the experience. This is a quality to be sought for in the electronic reproduction of music. When the sound becomes loud, and irritating at the same time, way before one has reached the physiologic pain threshold in terms of db, the system is at fault somewhere. (That is to say any sound, live or electronically reproduced, can eventually become painful and irritating at some SP level well above 100-110db.) Typically, the speakers have been driven into distortion or the amplifiers are operating above their limitations (or the cartridge is mistracking or the LP sucks). Now I read what I just wrote, and I do realize it's probably obvious to all of you. But to me it was a kind of revelation when I first noticed that this does not happen in live performance in a closed venue, when the concert hall itself is not creating nasties, e.g., in a small jazz club when you have a good seat or in my living room with Aina playing the sax. |
We all have some carts for sale but try to sell them elsewhere. |
Hi everyone,
Thanks for keeping this thread alive.
I will be selling two NOS phono carts I don't need. Any interest?
- a Pickering UV-15/2400Q -- has a very tiny Quadrahedral diamond and small, fairly short cantilever. All packing and unopened hardware. Never mounted. Looks absolutely new. Original factory stylus assembly is the one that came with this cartridge- nice tight fit to body. 5Hz-50kHz response. For tonearms with a medium effective moving-mass.
- a Panasonic EPC-450C-II strain gauge with original Shibata stylus- this is the much-improved version of the original- much smaller diamond and better cantilever. Requires a strain gauge preamp such as Jeff Rowland used to make or a Panasonic SE-405. Original packing and unopened hardware. Never mounted. Perfect shape.
Best to all! Roy |
Loudness can be and is dynamic only if the recording is done right. |
I have problem to diferenciate between 'loudness' and 'dynamics'. In any (home) listening roome there is a 'loudness level' which become unbearable. But I never experienced such a level by any concert( those with amps. not included). |
Dear Lewm: I did it more that once. Remember that man with his horn that I meet at the street?, well that they he played for me at my place.
Yes, we have ( a must to ) these kind of first hand experiences to know the TRUE, to be aware of it.
Regards and enjoy the music, R: |
Dear Halcro: +++++ " If I were Raul....I could make some inflammatory statement to the effect that HIS system is simply deficient if it can't produce sounds able to approximate the sound of 'Live'? Mine certainly can. " +++++ " And if you haven't got it Raul.......please don't assume that others are similarly deprived? " ++++
All that is IMHO a misunderstood. As in almost any of each one audio system we " think " we are approaching the live event/music but this fact is only a best " desire " that we can't fulfil. I don't want to repeat what I posted in my last two posts that are self explaining that.
Yes, our audio systems sounds " glorious "/fantastic and I have no doubt about but this is not the main subject.
Main subject IMHO is what Lewm posted at the begin, that unique music characteristic. VISCERAL7DYNAMICS that only live music has with poor performances or great performances.
There are other music characteristics that we can't mimic trhough any audio system but that one I repeat is UNTOUCHABLE by any audio system at any price range and if you think that is not true then maybe your live music knowledge and what you perceived with is different for what others ( including me. ) perceive about.
No, your " blasfemhy " is absolutely not only tolerated but we are discussing on. |
Anyway, I got a kick out of Henry's "Mr Wippy" example. Thanks for the laugh. And he has a good point there; sometimes one can be shockingly wrong about the source of a "real" sounding bit of music. As for an outdoor performance (in Ravenna), all bets are off when you're outdoors, because humidity, wind, etc, have a major effect on what reaches your ears or does not reach your ears, in an orchestral setting. Standing 5 feet away from a solo instrumentalist in some subway station is a different story. Recently, a good friend brought her teenage daughter to our home to play saxophone for several of us. She was about to try out for a local jazz band and wanted to practice her sample pieces in front of an audience. (Either that, or her mother thought she should do it; I could not tell which.) She stood right in the middle of our listening room, between my large ESLs, and about 5 of us sat at the listening position. I have on occasion heard my system sound AS dynamic and effortless as is the real thing, but the experience set the bar pretty high for the system to emulate. (She got the gig, by the way, and deservedly so.) Saxophone is a good instrument on which to judge dynamics, because it is inherently so flexible in tone and amplitude. Try that, sometime. |
Dear Halcro: For years and through several posts I writed that many times a home system experience could and can be more " atractive " than the live event and the main factor for this is because the microphones are " seated " at 2-3 m. from the source when we are seated at 10 m.. So the micro can take almost the penultimate nuances of music that we can't and we have to remember that the best micros can take frequency ranges from: 5hz to 50khz+.
In the other side it does not matters where we are seated the " visceral/dynamics " of a live event IMHO can't be matched even for the best micro/audio systems and as frogman pointed out: this is not a factor of loudness but DYNAMICS that only live music has, remember too that live music has a natural agresiveness and natural " flavor " and natural " distortions " that can't IMHO been mimic but any audio system including yours.
Again, there are some recordings that we can say: " sounds better in my home system that in live venue ", but this is a function of what I posted and not that any system can be " there " can approach the live music DYNAMICS.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
From whence the expression "cloth ears" is likely derived. Heh heh |
Halcro, you were, in fact, discussing the quality of the performance. You mentioned how the flute trio sounded "dead and unattractive"; how the NYP's sound was "insipid". Those are all performance traits that don't have much to do with frequency range, dimensionality, sound staging, or harmonic distortion. I was indeed discussing the quality of the 'sound'. Your rules that 'dead and unattractive' and 'insipid' are not to be used to describe 'quality'.......are not my rules? |
Yet more than 30 years ago I believe......tests were conducted by Quad (I think).....where behind a curtain, a real violinist stood between two speakers and played the same piece as contained on the record.Most listeners on the other side of the curtain were unable to reliably pick the live violinist From whence the expression "cloth ears" is likely derived. |
But, good live sound (and certainly, the best live sound) is so superior to the best reproduced sound that it is I that fails to see the argument. There is no way that any audio system can get close to a live sound...period. Anyone who thinks their system is close is living in cloud cuckoo land. Well.......statements like these are obviously 'Gospel'......and so self-evident that only a fool would claim otherwise? And they are such 'safe' statements because of that very fact? Yet more than 30 years ago I believe......tests were conducted by Quad (I think).....where behind a curtain, a real violinist stood between two speakers and played the same piece as contained on the record. Most listeners on the other side of the curtain were unable to reliably pick the live violinist? Now I'm not claiming that the recorded sound can be 'better' than the 'best' sound of the real thing......... But the 'best' sound of the 'real thing' is so rare as to be an endangered species.......and our dutiful grovelling to the altar of 'live' music is doing a disservice to the advances that have been made to our reproduction systems? I have not heard a 'live' symphony orchestra performance I have attended over the last ten years which can't be bettered in every aspect......on my home system? Admittedly.......only a dozen or so records I own, can accomplish this feat but that is irrelevant IMO? Over 50 years of attending 'amplified' performances............probably only 30 to 40 remain in my memory as truly inspiring and yes........unable to be matched on my system (but this has a lot to do with live undistorted SPLs possible). The other performances......I wouldn't wish to replicate in my home? If this is not your experience......I'm happy for you......but please don't assume the mantle of righteouness as 'defender of the faith'? The 'bible' is accepted only by its believers and blasphemy is rarely tolerated? |
****Supposed (?!) superiority of live sound to reproduced sound****
Wow! I don't really know where to start. Let me put it this way: No question that reproduced music can SOUND better than live at times. But, good live sound (and certainly, the best live sound) is so superior to the best reproduced sound that it is I that fails to see the argument.
Part of the problem with these discussions is the emphasis on the SOUND of the music without taking into account that perceived SOUND is inextricably intertwined with the PERFORMANCE; the feeling. Halcro, you were, in fact, discussing the quality of the performance. You mentioned how the flute trio sounded "dead and unattractive"; how the NYP's sound was "insipid". Those are all performance traits that don't have much to do with frequency range, dimensionality, sound staging, or harmonic distortion. You can have a great flute trio in an acoustically unattractive performance space that sounds alive, attractive, and very tasteful because of great phrasing and great ensemble playing, regardless of wether the sound is bright, dark, or whatever. |
Frogman, I am not commenting in any way on the 'quality' of musical performances......just as those extolling the virtues of the wandering 'minstrel' or 'open window on live instruments' are not? We are simply discussing the supposed 'superiority' of 'live' sound to reproduced sound and it's supposed easily heard distinctions? If you've heard 'poorly' reproduced 'live' sound.......then I fail to see your argument? |
There is no way that any audio system can get close to a live sound...period. Anyone who thinks their system is close is living in cloud cuckoo land. However, as Frogman says there are many poor live performances, and let us not forget that with the advent of technology and digital engineering, these insane architects, sound/acoustics engineers and accountants are responsible for screwing up the sound in most new concert halls and sadly renovations of old ones with their new improved theories../read shortcuts/cost savings that can be construed as "improvements" given enough imagination. For me the whole raison d'etre or value added proposition for audio systems is the ability to sift through all the mediocre recorded performances, find the definitive performance and listen to those performances when we are in the mood. As in Frogman's case, I would rather listen to a recording of Heifetz version of the Bruch Violin Concerto in my flawed system than listen to some mediocre performer, with a second rate orchestra in a concert hall with bad acoustics. |
Halcro, I think you are talking about two different things. The fact that music is live does not necessarily make it a good performance; that is obvious. I will gladly mention the live music events that fail to convince; I have heard many and been part just as many. It should not be surprising that a flute trio comprised of less than top players will leave much to be desired. A recording of Rampal or Bennett playing the same music would definitely be more desirable. But Rampal or Bennett in that same room would knock you socks off, and would be superior to their own recordings. BTW, the NY Phil is notorious for not giving their best when performing with solo artists who are not top notch, or that they simply don't like. Bocelli, in the scheme of the operatic tenor world, is not a great tenor. So, it is not surprising that the orchestra did not sound it's best that evening.
****the 'Absolute Sound'. It is a myth **** I respectfully disagree. |
Dear Raul, thank you for addressing my comments. I can't disagree with anything that you wrote. My comments about the seeking perfection are not meant to suggest that there is anything inherently wrong with wanting it, but rather an attempt at suggesting that the only way to really move closer to perfection is by having a very strong sense of the only valid standard; the sound of live music. Further, my comments have usually focused on the idea that we usually concern ourselves with tonal details, and don't give as much importance to rhythm (dynamics). When "distortions" are discussed, it is usually in reference to tonality, timbre, etc.; but distortion of rhythm/dynamics is even more harmful to the music's message. I know some will argue this point, but the most important element of music is rhythm; that is what, more than anything, conveys the feeling of music. El SABOR de la musica.
Regards. |
When I read that I posted that " I respect all your opinions but IMHO that could not happened and if you heard that was because two factors: or you are near deaf or you know nothing about live music performance level ".
Well.....I think this 'glorification' of 'live vs reproduced' is self-fulfilling. If I were Raul....I could make some inflammatory statement to the effect that HIS system is simply deficient if it can't produce sounds able to approximate the sound of 'Live'? Mine certainly can. I've walked outside my place whilst a solo piano was still playing on my turntable and have had people say how lovely the 'playing' was. And yes.......we've all heard the apocryphal tales of the wandering minstrel and the solo clarinet/saxophone in the street? But I've also heard the Mr Wippy van roll past playing Greensleeves from its roof-mounted megaphones...and thought it was 'live'? No-one dares to mention the live music events which simply fail to convince?......and I mean full orchestral music. Just recently I was in Ravello in Italy sitting outdoors listening to the 88 piece Shenzhen Philharmonic Orchestra playing Wagner. There were 10 first violins, 10 second violins, 10 violas, 10 cellos and 8 double basses as the string section alone. I sat not 30 feet away in a variety of locations to see if what I heard could be believed? There was little top-end.....there was little bass....and there was zero excitement. It was as if a tinny transistor radio were positioned on a picnic blanket in front of me? And this is not an exceptional experience. I saw Andrea Boccelli with the full New York Philharmonic in Carnegie Hall. I was dead centre in a private box on the second gallery level and the sound was lightweight and insipid. I was at a function in a showroom once where they had a trio of musicians as 'background' music.....violin, cello, flute. I could walk up to them and even around them.....yet the music had none of the 'realism' of my system? It was 'dead' and unattractive. I was deeply disturbed. So please......stop this 'bleeding hearts' worship of the 'Absolute Sound'. It is a myth intended to bestow legitimacy and acumen on those who 'profess' it? Yes......really 'great' live sound is intoxicating. But it is just as hard to find as 'great' reproduced sound. And if you haven't got it Raul.......please don't assume that others are similarly deprived? |
Dear pryso; There is no doubt, you and your buddie's wife are right: no audio system will perform " like that "..
Time ago in some other threads some people ( not one. ) posted that some times and ude to the very high quality performance of very expensive audio systems in a home system/retailer room they were " foolished " on what they heard before they knew was an audio system: they thinked was a live instruments/live music.
When I read that I posted that " I respect all your opinions but IMHO that could not happened and if you heard that was because two factors: or you are near deaf or you know nothing about live music performance level ".
As you posted: we can't be confused about!!!
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |