Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


Dear friends: who really needs an MM type phono cartridge?, well I will try to share/explain with you what are my experiences about and I hope too that many of you could enrich the topic/subject with your own experiences.

For some years ( in this forum ) and time to time I posted that the MM type cartridge quality sound is better than we know or that we think and like four months ago I start a thread about: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1173550723&openusid&zzRauliruegas&4&5#Rauliruegas where we analyse some MM type cartridges.

Well, in the last 10-12 months I buy something like 30+ different MM type phono cartridges ( you can read in my virtual system which ones. ) and I’m still doing it. The purpose of this fact ( “ buy it “ ) is for one way to confirm or not if really those MM type cartridges are good for us ( music lovers ) and at the same time learn about MM vs MC cartridges, as a fact I learn many things other than MM/MC cartridge subject.

If we take a look to the Agon analog members at least 90% of them use ( only ) MC phono cartridges, if we take a look to the “ professional reviewers “ ( TAS, Stereophile, Positive Feedback, Enjoy the Music, etc, etc, ) 95% ( at least ) of them use only MC cartridges ( well I know that for example: REG and NG of TAS and RJR of Stereophile use only MM type cartridges!!!!!!!! ) , if we take a look to the phono cartridge manufacturers more than 90% of them build/design for MC cartridges and if you speak with audio dealers almost all will tell you that the MC cartridges is the way to go.

So, who are wrong/right, the few ( like me ) that speak that the MM type is a very good alternative or the “ whole “ cartridge industry that think and support the MC cartridge only valid alternative?

IMHO I think that both groups are not totally wrong/right and that the subject is not who is wrong/right but that the subject is : KNOW-HOW or NON KNOW-HOW about.

Many years ago when I was introduced to the “ high end “ the cartridges were almost MM type ones: Shure, Stanton, Pickering, Empire, etc, etc. In those time I remember that one dealer told me that if I really want to be nearest to the music I have to buy the Empire 4000 D ( they say for 4-channel reproduction as well. ) and this was truly my first encounter with a “ high end cartridge “, I buy the 4000D I for 70.00 dls ( I can’t pay 150.00 for the D III. ), btw the specs of these Empire cartridges were impressive even today, look: frequency response: 5-50,000Hz, channel separation: 35db, tracking force range: 0.25grs to 1.25grs!!!!!!!!, just impressive, but there are some cartridges which frequency response goes to 100,000Hz!!!!!!!!!!

I start to learn about and I follow to buying other MM type cartridges ( in those times I never imagine nothing about MC cartridges: I don’t imagine of its existence!!!. ) like AKG, Micro Acoustics, ADC, B&O, Audio Technica, Sonus, etc, etc.

Years latter the same dealer told me about the MC marvelous cartridges and he introduce me to the Denon-103 following with the 103-D and the Fulton High performance, so I start to buy and hear MC cartridges. I start to read audio magazines about either cartridge type: MM and Mc ones.

I have to make changes in my audio system ( because of the low output of the MC cartridges and because I was learning how to improve the performance of my audio system ) and I follow what the reviewers/audio dealers “ speak “ about, I was un-experienced !!!!!!!, I was learning ( well I’m yet. ).

I can tell you many good/bad histories about but I don’t want that the thread was/is boring for you, so please let me tell you what I learn and where I’m standing today about:

over the years I invested thousands of dollars on several top “ high end “ MC cartridges, from the Sumiko Celebration passing for Lyras, Koetsu, Van denHul, to Allaerts ones ( just name it and I can tell that I own or owned. ), what I already invest on MC cartridges represent almost 70-80% price of my audio system.

Suddenly I stop buying MC cartridges and decide to start again with some of the MM type cartridges that I already own and what I heard motivate me to start the search for more of those “ hidden jewels “ that are ( here and now ) the MM phono cartridges and learn why are so good and how to obtain its best quality sound reproduction ( as a fact I learn many things other than MM cartridge about. ).

I don’t start this “ finding “ like a contest between MC and MM type cartridges.
The MC cartridges are as good as we already know and this is not the subject here, the subject is about MM type quality performance and how achieve the best with those cartridges.

First than all I try to identify and understand the most important characteristics ( and what they “ means “. ) of the MM type cartridges ( something that in part I already have it because our phonolinepreamp design needs. ) and its differences with the MC ones.

Well, first than all is that are high output cartridges, very high compliance ones ( 50cu is not rare. ), low or very low tracking force ones, likes 47kOhms and up, susceptible to some capacitance changes, user stylus replacement, sometimes we can use a different replacement stylus making an improvement with out the necessity to buy the next top model in the cartridge line , low and very low weight cartridges, almost all of them are build of plastic material with aluminum cantilever and with eliptical or “ old “ line contact stylus ( shibata ) ( here we don’t find: Jade/Coral/Titanium/etc, bodies or sophisticated build material cantilevers and sophisticated stylus shape. ), very very… what I say? Extremely low prices from 40.00 to 300.00 dls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, well one of my cartridges I buy it for 8.99 dls ( one month ago ): WOW!!!!!!, so any one of you can/could have/buy ten to twenty MM cartridges for the price of one of the MC cartridge you own today and the good notice is that is a chance that those 10-20 MM type cartridges even the quality performance of your MC cartridge or beat it.

Other characteristics is that the builders show how proud they were/are on its MM type cartridges design, almost all those cartridges comes with a first rate box, comes with charts/diagrams of its frequency response and cartridge channel separation ( where they tell us which test recording use it, with which VTF, at which temperature, etc, etc. ), comes with a very wide explanation of the why’s and how’s of its design and the usual explanation to mount the cartridge along with a very wide list of specifications ( that were the envy of any of today MC ones where sometimes we really don’t know nothing about. ), comes with a set of screws/nuts, comes with a stylus brush and even with stylus cleaning fluid!!!!!!!!!, my GOD. Well, there are cartridges like the Supex SM 100MK2 that comes with two different stylus!!!! One with spherical and one with elliptical/shibata shape and dear friends all those in the same low low price!!!!!!!!!!!

Almost all the cartridges I own you can find it through Ebay and Agon and through cartridge dealers and don’t worry if you loose/broke the stylus cartridge or you find the cartridge but with out stylus, you always can/could find the stylus replacement, no problem about there are some stylus and cartridge sources.

When I’m talking about MM type cartridges I’m refer to different types: moving magnet, moving iron, moving flux, electret, variable reluctance, induced magnet, etc, etc. ( here is not the place to explain the differences on all those MM type cartridges. Maybe on other future thread. ).

I made all my very long ( time consuming ) cartridge tests using four different TT’s: Acoustic Signature Analog One MK2, Micro Seiki RX-5000, Luxman PD 310 and Technics SP-10 MK2, I use only removable headshell S and J shape tonearms with 15mm on overhang, I use different material build/ shape design /weight headshells. I test each cartridge in at least three different tonearms and some times in 3-4 different headshells till I find the “ right “ match where the cartridge perform the best, no I’m not saying that I already finish or that I already find the “ perfect “ match: cartridge/headshell/tonearm but I think I’m near that ideal target.

Through my testing experience I learn/ confirm that trying to find the right tonearm/headshell for any cartridge is well worth the effort and more important that be changing the TT. When I switch from a TT to another different one the changes on the quality cartridge performance were/are minimal in comparison to a change in the tonearm/headshell, this fact was consistent with any of those cartridges including MC ones.

So after the Phonolinepreamplifier IMHO the tonearm/headshell match for any cartridge is the more important subject, it is so important and complex that in the same tonearm ( with the same headshell wires ) but with different headshell ( even when the headshell weight were the same ) shape or build material headshell the quality cartridge performance can/could be way different.

All those experiences told me that chances are that the cartridge that you own ( MC or MM ) is not performing at its best because chances are that the tonearm you own is not the best match for that cartridge!!!!!!, so imagine what do you can/could hear when your cartridge is or will be on the right tonearm???!!!!!!!!, IMHO there are ( till today ) no single ( any type at any price ) perfect universal tonearm. IMHO there is no “ the best tonearm “, what exist or could exist is a “ best tonearm match for “ that “ cartridge “, but that’s all. Of course that are “ lucky “ tonearms that are very good match for more than one cartridge but don’t for every single cartridge.

I posted several times that I’m not a tonearm collector, that I own all those tonearms to have alternatives for my cartridges and with removable headshells my 15 tonearms are really like 100+ tonearms : a very wide options/alternatives for almost any cartridge!!!!!!

You can find several of these MM type cartridges new brand or NOS like: Ortofon, Nagaoka, Audio Technica, Astatic, B&O, Rega, Empire, Sonus Reson,Goldring,Clearaudio, Grado, Shelter, Garrot, etc. and all of them second hand in very good operational condition. As a fact I buy two and even three cartridges of the same model in some of the cartridges ( so right now I have some samples that I think I don’t use any more. ) to prevent that one of them arrive in non operational condition but I’m glad to say that all them arrive in very fine conditions. I buy one or two of the cartridges with no stylus or with the stylus out of work but I don’t have any trouble because I could find the stylus replacement on different sources and in some case the original new replacement.

All these buy/find cartridges was very time consuming and we have to have a lot of patience and a little lucky to obtain what we are looking for but I can asure you that is worth of it.

Ok, I think it is time to share my performance cartridge findings:

first we have to have a Phonolinepreamplifier with a very good MM phono stage ( at least at the same level that the MC stage. ). I’m lucky because my Phonolinepreamplifier has two independent phono stages, one for the MM and one for MC: both were designed for the specifics needs of each cartridge type, MM or MC that have different needs.

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

we have to load the MM cartridges not at 47K but at 100K ( at least 75K not less. ).

I find that using 47K ( a standard manufacture recommendation ) prevent to obtain the best quality performance, 100K make the difference. I try this with all those MM type cartridges and in all of them I achieve the best performance with 100K load impedance.

I find too that using the manufacturer capacitance advise not always is for the better, till “ the end of the day “ I find that between 100-150pf ( total capacitance including cable capacitance. ) all the cartridges performs at its best.

I start to change the load impedance on MM cartridges like a synonymous that what many of us made with MC cartridges where we try with different load impedance values, latter I read on the Empire 4000 DIII that the precise load impedance must be 100kOhms and in a white paper of some Grace F9 tests the used impedance value was 100kOhms, the same that I read on other operational MM cartridge manual and my ears tell/told me that 100kOhms is “ the value “.

Before I go on I want to remember you that several of those MM type cartridges ( almost all ) were build more than 30+ years ago!!!!!!!! and today performs at the same top quality level than today MC/MM top quality cartridges!!!!!, any brand at any price and in some ways beat it.

I use 4-5 recordings that I know very well and that give me the right answers to know that any cartridge is performing at its best or near it. Many times what I heard through those recordings were fine: everything were on target however the music don’t come “ alive “ don’t “ tell me “ nothing, I was not feeling the emotion that the music can communicate. In those cartridge cases I have to try it in other tonearm and/or with a different headshell till the “ feelings comes “ and only when this was achieved I then was satisfied.

All the tests were made with a volume level ( SPL ) where the recording “ shines “ and comes alive like in a live event. Sometimes changing the volume level by 1-1.5 db fixed everything.

Of course that the people that in a regular manner attend to hear/heard live music it will be more easy to know when something is right or wrong.

Well, Raul go on!!: one characteristic on the MM cartridges set-up was that almost all them likes to ride with a positive ( little/small ) VTA only the Grace Ruby and F9E and Sonus Gold Blue likes a negative VTA , on the other hand with the Nagaoka MP 50 Super and the Ortofon’s I use a flat VTA.

Regarding the VTF I use the manufacturer advise and sometimes 0.1+grs.
Of course that I made fine tuning through moderate changes in the Azymuth and for anti-skate I use between half/third VTF value.

I use different material build headshells: aluminum, composite aluminum, magnesium, composite magnesium, ceramic, wood and non magnetic stainless steel, these cartridges comes from Audio Technica, Denon, SAEC, Technics, Fidelity Research, Belldream, Grace, Nagaoka, Koetsu, Dynavector and Audiocraft.
All of them but the wood made ( the wood does not likes to any cartridge. ) very good job . It is here where a cartridge could seems good or very good depending of the headshell where is mounted and the tonearm.
Example, I have hard time with some of those cartridge like the Audio Technica AT 20SS where its performance was on the bright sound that sometimes was harsh till I find that the ceramic headshell was/is the right match now this cartridge perform beautiful, something similar happen with the Nagaoka ( Jeweltone in Japan ), Shelter , Grace, Garrot , AKG and B&O but when were mounted in the right headshell/tonearm all them performs great.

Other things that you have to know: I use two different cooper headshell wires, both very neutral and with similar “ sound “ and I use three different phono cables, all three very neutral too with some differences on the sound performance but nothing that “ makes the difference “ on the quality sound of any of my cartridges, either MM or MC, btw I know extremely well those phono cables: Analysis Plus, Harmonic Technologies and Kimber Kable ( all three the silver models. ), finally and don’t less important is that those phono cables were wired in balanced way to take advantage of my Phonolinepreamp fully balanced design.

What do you note the first time you put your MM cartridge on the record?, well a total absence of noise/hum or the like that you have through your MC cartridges ( and that is not a cartridge problem but a Phonolinepreamp problem due to the low output of the MC cartridges. ), a dead silent black ( beautiful ) soundstage where appear the MUSIC performance, this experience alone is worth it.

The second and maybe the most important MM cartridge characteristic is that you hear/heard the MUSIC flow/run extremely “ easy “ with no distracting sound distortions/artifacts ( I can’t explain exactly this very important subject but it is wonderful ) even you can hear/heard “ sounds/notes “ that you never before heard it and you even don’t know exist on the recording: what a experience!!!!!!!!!!!

IMHO I think that the MUSIC run so easily through a MM cartridge due ( between other facts ) to its very high compliance characteristic on almost any MM cartridge.

This very high compliance permit ( between other things like be less sensitive to out-center hole records. ) to these cartridges stay always in contact with the groove and never loose that groove contact not even on the grooves that were recorded at very high velocity, something that a low/medium cartridge compliance can’t achieve, due to this low/medium compliance characteristic the MC cartridges loose ( time to time and depending of the recorded velocity ) groove contact ( minute extremely minute loose contact, but exist. ) and the quality sound performance suffer about and we can hear it, the same pass with the MC cartridges when are playing the inner grooves on a record instead the very high compliance MM cartridges because has better tracking drive perform better than the MC ones at inner record grooves and here too we can hear it.

Btw, some Agoners ask very worried ( on more than one Agon thread ) that its cartridge can’t track ( clean ) the cannons on the 1812 Telarc recording and usually the answers that different people posted were something like this: “””” don’t worry about other than that Telarc recording no other commercial recording comes recorded at that so high velocity, if you don’t have trouble with other of your LP’s then stay calm. “””””

Well, this standard answer have some “ sense “ but the people ( like me ) that already has/have the experience to hear/heard a MM or MC ( like the Ortofon MC 2000 or the Denon DS1, high compliance Mc cartridges. ) cartridge that pass easily the 1812 Telarc test can tell us that those cartridges make a huge difference in the quality sound reproduction of any “ normal “ recording, so it is more important that what we think to have a better cartridge tracking groove drive!!!!

There are many facts around the MM cartridge subject but till we try it in the right set-up it will be ( for some people ) difficult to understand “ those beauties “. Something that I admire on the MM cartridges is how ( almost all of them ) they handle the frequency extremes: the low bass with the right pitch/heft/tight/vivid with no colorations of the kind “ organic !!” that many non know-how people speak about, the highs neutral/open/transparent/airy believable like the live music, these frequency extremes handle make that the MUSIC flow in our minds to wake up our feelings/emotions that at “ the end of the day “ is all what a music lover is looking for.
These not means that these cartridges don’t shine on the midrange because they do too and they have very good soundstage but here is more system/room dependent.

Well we have a very good alternative on the ( very low price ) MM type cartridges to achieve that music target and I’m not saying that you change your MC cartridge for a MM one: NO, what I’m trying to tell you is that it is worth to have ( as many you can buy/find ) the MM type cartridges along your MC ones

I want to tell you that I can live happy with any of those MM cartridges and I’m not saying with this that all of them perform at the same quality level NO!! what I’m saying is that all of them are very good performers, all of them approach you nearest to the music.

If you ask me which one is the best I can tell you that this will be a very hard “ call “ an almost impossible to decide, I think that I can make a difference between the very good ones and the stellar ones where IMHO the next cartridges belongs to this group:

Audio Technica ATML 170 and 180 OCC, Grado The Amber Tribute, Grace Ruby, Garrot P77, Nagaoka MP-50 Super, B&O MMC2 and MMC20CL, AKG P8ES SuperNova, Reson Reca ,Astatic MF-100 and Stanton LZS 981.

There are other ones that are really near this group: ADC Astrion, Supex MF-100 MK2, Micro Acoustics MA630/830, Empire 750 LTD and 600LAC, Sonus Dimension 5, Astatic MF-200 and 300 and the Acutex 320III.

The other ones are very good too but less refined ones.
I try too ( owned or borrowed for a friend ) the Shure IV and VMR, Music maker 2-3 and Clearaudio Virtuoso/Maestro, from these I could recommended only the Clearaudios the Shure’s and Music Maker are almost mediocre ones performers.
I forgot I try to the B&O Soundsmith versions, well this cartridges are good but are different from the original B&O ( that I prefer. ) due that the Sounsmith ones use ruby cantilevers instead the original B&O sapphire ones that for what I tested sounds more natural and less hi-fi like the ruby ones.

What I learn other that the importance on the quality sound reproduction through MM type cartridges?, well that unfortunately the advance in the design looking for a better quality cartridge performers advance almost nothing either on MM and MC cartridges.

Yes, today we have different/advanced body cartridge materials, different cantilever build materials, different stylus shape/profile, different, different,,,,different, but the quality sound reproduction is almost the same with cartridges build 30+ years ago and this is a fact. The same occur with TT’s and tonearms. Is sad to speak in this way but it is what we have today. Please, I’m not saying that some cartridges designs don’t grow up because they did it, example: Koetsu they today Koetsu’s are better performers that the old ones but against other cartridges the Koetsu ones don’t advance and many old and today cartridges MM/MC beat them easily.

Where I think the audio industry grow-up for the better are in electronic audio items ( like the Phonolinepreamps ), speakers and room treatment, but this is only my HO.

I know that there are many things that I forgot and many other things that we have to think about but what you can read here is IMHO a good point to start.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas


Dear Balkan Comrade,

You are a clever one. It would appear then that your Judge must believe digital "IS" better than analog and that you are repenting because you have seen the error of your ways! Shurely you were not trying to inpress the Judge with deception, where you!
Dear Griffithds, I am sure Halcro has more than a few question marks that he can spare for you. He may even be willing to trade that last explanation point for a question mark. As for "H"s, I think you should conserve them better.

Dear Raul, No argument here. "Live" can mean many things, which is why I put the word in quotation marks and made no attempt to define it.
Hi Lewm,
You are partially correct. The "where" should have been were. Google might be your friend, but spell check is not. Nandric and I are having a humorous (?), conversation pertaining to his 8 tone arms, 26 cartridges, and a state of the art (?) $100 CD player. The surely (with the "h" injected), was intentional. Shurely (humor), you have heard or that brand of cartridge. This is humor (Balkan style), after all. The statement that you questioned (?), was not intended to be a question. It was a statement of belief, made with a implied tongue in cheek connotation. It was made to convey a statement of belief by me. Not a question by me. Reread the sentence expressing the word " were (where)", to a greater degree than the last word "you". Sort of WERE you! Not were YOU? I do not question Naddric's deceit, I imply it. This all is meant as humor 202, not English 101.
"Shurely" I now get it. Next time, I guess use a sledge hammer. Thx. Sorry to be a pedant, but I too was aiming for a laugh. I missed badly apparently.

I need Nandric to have 8 tonearms and 26 cartridges, otherwise I might be the champion owner of tonearms and cartridges, aside from Raul of course. So, Nandric, I have a few tonearms to sell to you. I am cutting back to no more than 5.
Acman3,
You have no idea how many times that thought has past thru my mind in the last few days. Has to be one of the all time greatest comic line.
BTW, Shurely you jest?
Lewm,

Are you tempting Nandric into becoming Capitalist Pig! The Judge would not look kindly upon him. I wonder if Balkan prison uniform stripes are vertical or horizontal?
Dear Griffithds, If I become Capitalist you are free to use whatever expression you like to 'characterize' my character. But the Judge you mentioned is the wrong kind
for my precarious situation. You see even from a Balkan prison one will get free at some point in time. This however is not usually the case with an asylum. BTW I also understand my sons. They , like the other members of their generation, want the money today and not tomorrow or whenever. Thanks to Lew and his colleaque there is no way
to predict how long 'the old' will be among us. But I am sad to see that he prefer to help my sons with their intention by selling me some of his tonearms which are superfluous in his situation (aka 'above 5'). This is very strange because his situation is exactly the same as my. However he is obviously more optimistic reg. his own sons who only need to show to the judge his electrostatic collection to win their case. That is to say: 1 step>
asylum , 2 step> relieve from parental authority 3 step> division of his property. I intend then to make them an offer for his plinths , some carts and some tonearms. Then I intend to pay him a visit in the asylum and show off with the price I got from the 'apple of his eye'.

Regards,

****....but I am listening for something else in the music, call it visceral, and for another reason.**** - Lewm

Visceral, that's it! How does one measure/quantify "visceral"? Can it be done? I don't think so. But, like Lewm, I sure as hell know it when I hear it; or, more correctly, when I feel it. We are talking about MUSIC; about art. Music is human expression and feeling. In our attempt to tickle our audiophile itch and quest for perfection we want to think that all that is relevant about music and it's reproduction can be quantified and reduced (?) to issues of distortions as we understand them. I don't think that it can be.

What makes reproduced music feel visceral as it does live has very little to do with the position of the microphone, or the location of our ears in the concert hall. Why is it that a band rehearsing in a room with an open window, one block away, can be instantly recognized as live and not a recording? I believe that, more than anything, it has to do with dynamics. Not loudness, but the infectious energy of human musical interaction. Whatever that mysterious thing is that makes a subtle dynamic shading just as exciting as as the big bombastic one.

The more time we spend around the sound of live, the more we understand just how much of that information gets destroyed by the recording process. For whatever reasons (at a certain point I personally stop caring what those reasons are) digital playback does more damage to that sense of visceral than does analog.
Nandric,

I've done a Google search and have not been able to (to my satisfaction), answer some of the questions our good hearted discussions has risen in my thought process. Perhaps you would be so kind as to fill them in for me. For a child to accuse his parent in court for what could turn into a extended holiday in an asylum, what does/would a Judge require as proof from a child? Are we talking about 70 year old parents which would mean the child would be lets say 50ish? Or are we including 13 year old children accusing their parents who would be in their 30's?
In Europe, are children responsible for the debts of their parents after their death? I'm trying to understand from the courts point of view, why children should/would have any input as to how their parents could spend money they acquired in life.
Regards,
Don
For whatever reasons (at a certain point I personally stop caring what those reasons are) digital playback does more damage to that sense of visceral than does analog.
Well said Frogman.
To this day.......I have never heard digital playback which 'moves' me in any way.
And there are no question marks to follow THAT statement!
Dear Griffithds, This is not the right place to answer your
questions. But in short. The family law and succsesion law
are incorporated in the civil law. The kids are not liable
for their parents debts if they don't accept the inheritance
otherwise well. By the capability of acting (signing an contract)
you can think of Alzheimer and similar situations
when the kids need to take over judicial
and other decisions from one or both parents.

Regards,
Dear Frogman: +++++ " in a room with an open window, one block away, can be instantly recognized as live and not a recording? " +++++

that's absolutely true. Months ago in other thread we were discussing precisely what means live music and how we perceive it against recorded one.
In that time I posted one of several experiences that as you several of us already had.
The one I exposed was by coincidence the sound of a music in a horn played for a street-man that goes block after block playing looking for some coins for he can survive ( here in México we have many of this. ).

Yes, you can disguish live music not one block from you but even two or three blocks and it does not matters if what we heard is in an open " stage " like the plain street with all the street noise pollulation.

In that time too I posted that that " visceral " word that used Lewm is absolutely right and is a sinonimus of DYNAMIC, this dynamic is the main difference between live music ( it does not matters seat/micro position and it does not matters at which distance we are. hearing it. ) and any recorded music in any audio system.

Live music DYNAMIC is untouchable by audio system performances and for a wide wide margin.

Frogman, my main target is to have that live music DYNAMICS that's a critical an important factor to feel the MUSIC to feel and develop all kind of emotions that only music can gives us.
So please don't misunderstood when I talk about distortions because IMHO in an audio system we are " fighting 2 against those distortions and as lower those distortions as IMHO we are near to that " live event ".

MUSIC per se even through a Walkman has the capacity to move us in many ways and it does not matters how high are those Walkman distortions but this is not the subject.

The subject is ( at least for me )and my main target in my audio system: to hear first than all the recorded music in a way that " moves " me that wake-up my emotions that wake-up on me the hapiness that MUSIC can gives me ( distorted or not. ). My second target is that that MUSIC I heard/hear through my audio system be at the top quality performance level I can achieve and things are that I think that lowering any kind of distortions I can be nearest to this second main target.

So, in a different way but I agree absolutely with you about. This is not my first post supporting that dynamic main characteristic that music has, I did it many times and did it not only because a music characteristic but because the recorded music can't approach it and this is the biggest challenge for the audio high industry where we are an important part.
In the mean time I think that we have to think how improve what we have, I know because you posted several times that you are not looking for audio " perfection " , well I'm looking that precisely. Tha's why exist this thread that's why I always try to test to explore new " audio roads " and that's why I try to share my findings with all of you.

I respect your position to not look for " perfection ", I can't even imagine it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi Nandric,

Yes, this is not the place but (there is always a but), had it not been for having dinner with a dear friend a few nights ago, I would not have asked. He has cancer, and headed down hill. His (apples of his eye), are fighting, actually have threaten to sue each other over who is going to get what. Hell, the man is still alive and quite coherent! The thought of it all sort of makes me sick. My apology to all for this misplaced inquiry and thank you Nandric for your input.
Regards,
Don
Raul, et al -

It seems this street musician experience is one that many of us have shared. For me it was during my lunch hour in our downtown area. I wasn't even on the same street but had to turn the corner and walk another block before I met up with him. Now some might say that hearing a solo sax was clue enough not to confuse it with something from a boom box or open car window. As a jazz fan I've heard lots of sax music, live and recorded. There was no confusion in my mind the moment I first heard him that it was a live performance. Yes I agree some of that was dynamics, but I believe it is more than an unrestricted range from soft to loud. There is also the complete lack of any distortion. These are not precise words but it is an ease and flow with the music. For me, any recorded music seems to have some varying number of thin veils between myself and the performer.

As the wife of one of my audio buddies expressed to him on their way home after a symphony concert, "I don't care how much money you spend or what equipment you try, it is never going to sound like that!"
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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?
****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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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: +++++ " 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.
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:
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).
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
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.
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, 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.
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.
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!
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.
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?
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.
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,
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,
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.
Yes Chris.........a lot of work?
Do you know what the result was?
I can't seem to find this anywhere?
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...
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.
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.com

He 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.
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?