What determines the character of sound? (1 Viewer)

[Manuel Delaflor]

Well... I do remember when I could just sit and enjoy the music. Now I sit and enjoy it but with my mind telling me all the time:

maybe if we move the sub a few inches to the left the bass will be tighter...

maybe if we move the speakers slightly to the front of the room we will have a wider soundstage...

maybe if we buy that CDP the sound will be more...

So. maybe is time to forget the upgrademania and start to "just enjoy" again.

Oh, well, I will do that after I search for a better damping on my speakers cabinets...

 

[Walt N]

Manuel, I went a whole week recently without adjusting, tweaking, or moving anything. Unfortunately I didn't catch it on videotape so you'll have to take my word for it. Have you thought about trying Soundcoat GP-1 on your speaker cabinet interiors? www.soundcoat.com VMPS uses this stuff to tame cabinet resonances with apparently fine results.
You bring up a good point though. Sometimes it's hard to maintain focus on the idea that the system should serve the music, rather than the other way around.

 

[Jack Briggs]

I'll revisit this thread with more input from my own adventures in "high-end" audio later today. Making the rounds, so to speak, at the moment. Thanks everybody for keeping cool about this volatile topic, which has been around ever since Harry Pearson de facto "invented" the so-called high end.

The short answer to Lee's question: It occurred to me that the buzz phrases about certain sonic characteristics attributal to electronic components simply weren't verifiable in the real world. And, at the time, I wanted so much to "believe" that, having switched from, say, an Audio Research SP-6B to a conrad-johnson PV-5 resulted in dramatic "sonic differences."

Another topic for another thread: true value for your dollar as expressed in the offerings of the so-called "mid-fi" OEMs and those of the "high-end" crowd.

 

[Ted Lee]

i'll have to admit that i always have a pleasant smirk on my face when i hear those descriptive terms. you know: bright, warm, neutral, zing and pep.
what kills me is that it may sound that way to one person, but another person will have an entirely different interpretation. so who is right and who is wrong? obviously neither. that's why i don't understand why people argue about this so much. friendly arguments are fun, but some people get so heated...it's silly.
i always try to tell my friends what is most important is that you enjouy the way it sounds. you are the one who will be spending the money and listening to the gear.
for those who say that people do not have critical ears - i'll ask you to meet my old co-worker when i worked at the good guys on la cienga in la. he was able to determine which speaker was playing in the sound-room while standing outisde on the main floor somewhere! i couldn't do that if my life depended on it. i always think about him...especially when i'm listening to speakers.
oh yeah...regarding the original question: without a doubt, speakers have the most impact on sound.
finally, as already stated, i sometimes wonder if we haven't become slaves to this hobby. i can't go to the movies without analyzing the sound-system. if it doesn't meet my expectations i'm already bummed! i can't go to a friends house without analyzing his ht gear...it's all i can do to not make recommendations.
and my gear? i can't think of how many hours i've spent goofing with the damn thing.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Speaker systems have quite detectable sonic characteristics, and I can tell the difference when speakers are in another room, too.

BTW, I go to that good guys! location on La Cienega quite often.

 

[Ted Lee]

BTW, I go to that good guys! location on La Cienega quite often.

lol. i worked there around 94/95 in the audio dept. we probably ran into eachother!
you wouldn't happen to remember a skinny asian guy who was pushing the extended warranty like his life depended on it do ya?

 

[Yogi]

You agree that the speakers and room contribute the most to the character of the sound.Can you explain why?

Because for me, its the easiest to discern differences between various speaker types and different room placements and treatments with my 'biased' senses. With electronics it gets harder and harder for me to discern differences as I go down the chain of audio reproduction (SS based): Amps/preamps, sources, cables etc.
Hope that makes it clear.

 

[Lewis Besze]

Because for me, its the easiest to discern differences between various speaker types and different room placements and treatments with my 'biased' senses. With electronics it gets harder and harder for me to discern differences as I go down the chain of audio reproduction (SS based): Amps/preamps, sources, cables etc.

No doubt,but one no need to be biased here regarding room accoustics,it's easily demonstratble,with some computer aide which will make it far easier to "nail it down".
The reason I asked this Yogi,because most "objectiviests"[which you're not] would chose speaker/room, over electronics/source.

 

[Yogi]

The reason I asked this Yogi,because most "objectiviests"[which you're not] would chose speaker/room, over electronics/source.

And so would many 'subjectivists' and the reason I say 'subjectivists' is because they dont rely on science experiments to make judgements about their senses
And BTW this thread is about what influences sound most and not about what one would choose as opposed to others.
Hope that clears it

 

[Lewis Besze]

And so would many 'subjectivists' and the reason I say 'subjectivists' is because they dont rely on science experiments to make judgements about their senses

Nor do "we"!
It's just quicker and more precise!
I know what the topic in hand is,thanks for asking!

 

[BruceD]

I think we could all agree that it is quite easy to recognize (hear) different speaker placements within a room. It is also quite easy to see those same changes in a impulse response or frequency response graph taken from an MLS-based audio measurement system.

Now I understand some will say we don't have the right measurement tools, and they could be right, but the above example is still an order of magnitude or larger than any visible changes in response one could see or hear from any change in electronics.

To me melding the science with the senses provides a good system of checks and balances. YMMV

 

[Guy Usher]

I have played with this stuff for more years than I care to admit. Remember "Mono", 1 big speaker a "Dual" turntable. . . Sansuie (sp) Speakers from nam, early Marantz with JBLs that were made according to what a "person" thought sounded good, early 901s (where did that come from??) Large Advents etc. Remember when you were asked to come over and listen to my new "Speakers".
All things equal speakers still are what you connect with, but there is something to be said for "Fairy Dust".
Still the single most important componet is "You" not saying that you don't find a "reviewer" that you trust to help guide you down the path

 

[Chu Gai]

That's why it's important to visit someone with a different system from yours with at least a six pack of a good microbrew...tends to equalize things a bit I think.

 

[Chris Tsutsui]

Hehe, fun read.
Warm, bright etc. mostly describes the sound that your ears pick up, not just a specific component. If a component along the signal chain such as an interconnect exhibits a "bright" sounding signature, then it would have to be bright relative to something else... (It could even be bright relative to the live sound). By using terms such as bright/warm, people try to describe sound with words, then communicate it to others. Sure people can post their opinions on sound, but I don't really know if such terms can be branded on equipment and priority given to items on the sound chain mainly due to its "subjective" nature.
I believe that the subjective nature of sound is related to virtual pitch. Spectral pitch is the audio representation of a specific frequency while virtual pitch is the combination of sounds that are subjectively interpreted. (It would be like playing 4 frequency tones at the same time and asking what frequency do you hear?)
Much like vision, sound helps achieve a subjective representation of the three-dimensional external world. It is because of the difference in anatomy and behavior that people hear differently than others.
This very complex nature of sound interpretation means there may never be a way to judge and label sound quality for products. This is why I believe there are so many different manufacturers out there to offer a variety of their own "signature" sound products. So that one can finally combine components to achieve an overall sound that their brain will likely tell them it's "good" to justify their purchase.
Later their brain tells them to upgrade here and there, or even worse.. start swapping cables for different songs. This may be a case of the disorder: Audiophilia Nervosa.
Something half of the posters here have. JK