Slave to the Source - Think Piece

[rollo]

 We have come a long way in music reproduction. Our systems are capable of extracting all the info on the source material. Wether Cd or LP today's gear especially speakers reveal it all.
   However do we need or this type of system where only a handfull of recordings are executed properly ? I say NO. Now don't get me wrong when the source is right the experience is magnificent.
   This is why for me SET amps with their odd order distortion makes the source more pleasent to listen to. No fatigue. Granted there will be that CD or LP that is just poorly recorded but overall the sound is much more pleasant to my ears.
   Its a double edged sword for us. We need the detail, clarity and dynamics exposed b today's gear but not to the extreme degree we are getting lately.
   There seems to be a push for clarity and truth but IMO the truth hurts. I say bring back equalizers. Analog that is. I want a musical system not a microscope.
   The quality of the recording looms larger than it ever did before so are YOU getting to much info ?


charles

[richidoo]

To me resolution is not the problem, distortion is what irritates.

We don't need cotton balls in our ears to attenuate the infinite resolution of real sound. It is so smooth and natural we don't even think of it as sound. It just is. Only when it is distorted in the many different ways of reproduction chain do we feel irritated by the sound.

To avoid the irritation of distortion just focus on the music content instead of the sound quality. Let the beat, melody and lyrics connect you to the original intent of the creator. Your imagination will fill in the missing details. Reducing distortion in the system makes it easier on the imagination, but it also weakens the musical imagination over time. That's the addiction to "great sound."

[_Scotty_]

rollo,When our loudspeakers have the same levels of distortion as our lowest distortion pre and power amplifiers we will be getting closer to hearing all of the information present in our recordings. Right now we are not even close. My pre-amp and power amp have about 0.002 % THD. My loudspeakers have at best maybe 0.2% THD,which is 100 times more distortion than my power amp and pre-amp.
  I will grant that things are better now then they were in past as far as our levels of resolution are concerned. On a personal level I have owned Genesis' Invisible Touch CD for years and for most of that time I thought it was a rather poor recording that was grungy and not very listenable. About the time I last upgraded my digital front end that opinion changed. The recording I thought was grungy was actually pretty good I just couldn't unravel the amazingly dense mix on the recording into it's component parts previous to the upgrade.
  I have to agree with richidoo, distortion is the problem. Witness the latest tweak,the ground enhancer.
When you have this level of improvement possible in your system it's because the amount of distortion present has been significantly lowered.
 For myself, the more resolution I have the less work my mind has to do to bridge the gap between the reproduction of the event and the reality.
Scotty
I forgot to mention IM distortion. I have never seen a measurement taken of the level of IM distortion produced by a loudspeaker. I suspect it is because the IM distortion levels may be so high that no one wants to look at it or admit to how bad it might be.

[JLM]

I agree.  Most good music is poorly recorded and much of the good recordings is of poor music (or stuff I don't care for).

The systems I enjoy the most suffer from sins of omission, not comission.  I look more nowadays for highly defined, solid imaging more than ultimate detail, extreme spls, or frequency extension.  Seems to me that distortion results from trying to push the detail/spl/frequency limits.

Whatever musicality is, ruthlessly revealing studio monitors don't have it.  Hyper detailed reproduction forces my brain to "go analytical" which is not what I want to do most of the time I'm listening.  So the "safe" way to go would be to preserve the resolution all the way to the speakers and then "dumb down" or have a less revealing speaker option available.

[mac5u]

I'm just curious about this as I don't really know where I stand at the moment as I am rethinking my priorities but having read through this a couple of times, it seems that we are talking about listening to equipment rather than music?

[richidoo]

[snip]... it seems that we are talking about listening to equipment rather than music?

The problem is that you can't do one without also doing the other unless you go to a live gig. The topic is a broad one, including how we listen, distortion, technology as necessary evil, tubes vs SS, use your imagination and jump right in. Thanks to rollo for keeping us thinking....

[rollo]

Richadoo whilst I agree with what you said, if all is right for us as far as gear and system is concerned the source meaning the CD or LP will have more to do with the outcome.
   All the said distortion even the 2% speaker distortion still sounds really good. Over engineered under engineered. Drisp highs, to much bass, too loud, etc.
  We all own recordings that are well done engineering and microphone wise. I do not want a system that we can only play a few discs on without fatigue settling in. We also own reissues most better, some worse off with too much detail and bass.  Just overcooked IMO.
  We want a musical system with a touch of that warm cozy feeling without loosing the transient attack and dynamics. What we do not want is to hear every little detail in your face with brittle crisp highs or a lean or hard midrange.
  I believe that all the tweaking of cables ,  tubes, footers and so on alows us to fine tune the sound we want BECAUSE the program material [ mostly CD and a rare LP ] needs help.
  Opine please .

charles
  

[richidoo]

Yes, I agree. The distortion on the recording is not changeable, and if it is bad you have little option but to pour gravy on it to cover up the problems. But mastering engineers usually get it right, at least that means they accomplish the sound they want. The recording is a work of art in itself, has to be taken that way, including the mix and mastering. Just like occasional bad trumpet solo, occasional bad mix. Some music is deliberately mixed to sound a certain way, that is exciting and intense to 14yos, but not good to 50yos. You can't blame them for pleasing their customer.   When the recording is good, it is nice to have system with minimal distortion to hear more details. When the distortion on the recording is high and/or unpleasant then adding pleasant distortion is usually helpful. I think we are in agreement about that?   My only difference is that the producer is an artist and deliberately chooses to make pop sound like what we would call bad, when actually his paying customers like it that way. Mixes well with raging testosterone and estrogen.

Edit: I also agree with your point that each must choose how much and which flavor gravy he likes best, via tubes, paper cones, transformers, caps, whatever. It's what we do, to make our own kind of music work for us. 100% agree Charles.

When I say distortion this and that, I don't mean to sound snobby. It is distortion, however beautiful it may sound. And nowhere near how much happens when it is crunched to -1dB or mp3ified or PA'd in a concrete stadium, etc. I think we learn to ignore all that, even tubes and paper drivers when we consume music. We can only think one thought at a time, and it is not gonna be how does each not sound with this cap, it is gonna be "I like this groove and lyrics," because the music is more compelling than the sound as long as the sound is tolerable.

[Carlman]

I don't like the sound of compression, when several instruments with their own voice become one, unidentifiable sound playing some weird note.  It clashes into a jarbled cacophony that removes me from the experience, and usually the song altogether... (I skip it or leave)  This happens frequently in symphonic music where all the violins turn into a weird 'sound' rather than instruments with voices.  It happens with the pop mix of top 40 music.  I'm like, 'what is that sound?.. is that my cell phone?'  rather than enjoying the music.  It is the biggest distraction for me.  Intentional distortion sometimes crosses the line into the compressive quality.  My guess is older engineers apply digital distortion like they would've analog.. and it sounds like ass but they don't realize it or care... or they're too befuddled by technology to make it right.  Their artistry days are over.  

I think finding a producer/label that works for you is an important part of this hobby.  It takes more effort than I've had to do this.. because I just find music I like and buy it... rather than make a note and research.. But Rich brings up an important point, the producer is an artist.  And the way we listen, that artist has as much to do with the connection to the music as the musicians.

I like the 'voice' of the system I've created.  We are all system artists.  We've worked hard at creating a system that is beautiful to us.  It is pure art for most of us because we do it mainly to create something beautiful to ourselves.

My system is more resolving than many others I've heard but the way it resolves is 'correct' to my ears.  I recently heard a system that was less resolving and it presented music differently.  There wasn't a sweeping statement I could make that one system sounded better than another because of the resolution or recording.  If you listen to all 1 type of music, system choices get easier.  But if you listen to several, you have to decide what distortion works for you... and just skip the tracks that suck.  Let those artists off the hook, there is plenty more music that was done right.

-C