Why isn’t more detail always better?


Is more detail always better if not unnaturally bright or fatiguing?

mapman

Showing 6 responses by ghdprentice

I actually look at bloom as “lack of attenuation”. Unless it is actually in excess of live sound that is what it means. But I think over representation of midrange was something that happened a lot mid-twentieth century, but not much now… well at least among high end gear.

@cdc +1

 

I find cymbles and bells are good examples for illustration.

When a cymbal becomes a solo instrument and the leading edge is amplified. What is happening is not just the presence of the instrument is turned up but also the forwardness of minute detail is exaggerated. So when detail gets out of control it is as if there is an equalizer set on each instrument and then again on each frequency segment of that instrument… so turning up the cymbles and then turning up the leading edge of the sound of them is often what “hyper-detailed systems” sound like to me. An inexpensive system this is fatiguing and expensive not fatiguing… but kind of a sound spectacular, but very wrong.

 

When I got the cymbles right on my system I was shocked how much of the sound was brassy midrange (like the real thing)… suddenly, after the very brief tick of the drumstick they sounded rich and deeply brassy. A big bell so unbelievably rich and complex and not treble but midrange (I have never calibrated by terms to actual frequencies… but I think I am getting the point across).

Good thought that detail is not only in the treble. Although that is where we think of it. But it is also in the midrange and bass. One of the biggest revelations to me was when changing to tubed amps the nuance of bass that I had never heard before..of course as well as in the midrange as a result of it being fully represented, 

@lalitk

@whart

+1

As a music lover I am not looking for “ forensic” listening or a microscope to examine the fine details and loose track of the music.

Another thought about highlighted details, they can commandeer your focus of attention. Instead of being emotionally involved or allowing the music to evoke feelings (through immersion) they can grab your attention and put you into the analytical mode of examine the detail. They need to be there to get the gestalt and complexity of the musical experience but if too obvious they can destroy the emotional connection.

The way I think about midrange bloom is to consider a system that is very devoid of it. Bose used to sell a woofer (which I think it was used in the Best Buy vinyl section) with separate tweeter in a tiny 4" by 3" by 2" box. It sounded just like that, details and no midrange... the opposite of the full sized Bose systems. This illustrates the end point.

If you get a chance to go to the symphony and just listen as if it is a system, this can illustrate the appropriate role of details and help to show where systems can go wrong. If you listen very carefully, for instance before a concert, and then during the quiet sections and the different concert volumes you realize that the details do not stick out, they are there and if you focus your minds eye (ear) on them you hear them you can hear them... but they don’t stick out. When a piano (my seats were 7th row center... so it is a solo instrument) key is struck... you hear a rich warm resonance without the hammer standing out. Most symponic instruments lead with midrange... softly and not by the details of them being produced. Many systems essentially attenuate the midrange and emphasize the treble and bass. You loose the gestalt and it pulls your hearing away from the music and towards the detail. Many multiple hundred thousand dollar systems are like this.

Some tube electronics, particularly old stuff can overdo it in the other way. Overemphasizing the midrange and attenuating the bass and treble. Audio Research carefully walks the line, presenting a balanced gestalt of the music, so the music leads and the details are in proportion... just like they are in the real world... whether symphony, acoustic jazz, etc. Since it gets these right, it is getting other fully electronically reproduced forms a good neutral rendition.

Detail is definitely not always better. Lots of "high end" systems excel at transparency and detail and completely miss at the music. 

 

The detail must be there, but it should be represented in proportion to the overall presentation. If the detail gets highlighted then the venue and mastering is disproportionalely highlighted. This can make all but the best recordings sound bad, in the worst case fatiguing. 

An important aspect of overly detailed systems is lack of midrange bloom... this makes the details stand out from the basic instruments and vocals. In all but the very best it also dries up the presentation and makes the music soulless.