|
Post by jandl100 on Oct 16, 2015 13:48:50 GMT
They help immensely imho. infact i do believe that Jerry adds a bit of sound shaping at times Yep, it has been known. In fact, in my 2nd system with Maggie 1.6QR speakers I have a permanent bass lift of around 4dB dialled in - the Maggies are a bit bass light otherwise. They sound more turd-like without the lift, imo.
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 16, 2015 16:39:19 GMT
In the present system it is not possible to add tone control or even a pre but have used them in the past
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 16, 2015 18:24:01 GMT
Discovered a setting on Bug Head that allows me to play Black Clouds and Silver Linings with a great big smile on my face yepee! No more system changing
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Oct 16, 2015 22:58:39 GMT
Woo - have I got news for you! - no speaker is strictly accurate. It's something I'm very aware of, it's just that the Quads get pushed forward as a paragon of virtue, when in truth they're anything but. They have few peers with respect to what they do well, but they fall short in other vital areas. As I've already said, they benefit hugely in my opinion from having a supertweeter, the only downside is getting the thing to work properly with the Quads, but it's doable. And I tend to turn your question around - I think people choose their speakers to suit the music they like, not t'other way around. Quads are astonishing on some music, and if you like that sort of music then why not have Quads and be astonished by it? Yes, it does limit musical exploration - and personally I do like to explore - but quite a few folks are more than happy playing what they know they like. Every component and system has its strengths and weaknesses - good at some things, weaker at others. I recall a friend who is heavily into bass-led slammy dance music bringing a revamped vintage Perreaux amp round - it was a real brute of an amp - my god, I didn't know my MBLs could do slam like that - it was awesome, and his dance tracks sounded amazing if probably deafness inducing. But put classical on and it was unbearably screechy at the top end. Horses for courses. All systems are like that to a significant extent, imo, try as we might to kid ourselves otherwise. I have only heard MBL speakers at shows, but I really liked what they they did. Their flagship model driven by their own 5KW amps are the only devices I've heard that can get anywhere close to the sheer physicality of a decent pipe organ with all the stops out in a decent auditorium. I spent a lot of my childhood experiencing pipe organ first hand, 'cos my Dad played piano and organ, and he generally played at Church for services. I did a lot of the Church thing when I was younger, and I turned out an atheist. My Dad was in the RAF, so we moved around quite a bit too, and I got to hear a good number of pipe organs and the spaces they were installed in. Sitting in the choir at Canterbury Cathedral during a live radio broadcast was something else. The musical points of reference are still there.
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Oct 17, 2015 7:14:27 GMT
Well, I hadn't intended my response to be a paeon of praise for MBLs, just an example of horses for courses in my own system.
The main gist was intended to be ...
"And I tend to turn your question around - I think people choose their speakers to suit the music they like, not t'other way around."
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Oct 17, 2015 7:16:58 GMT
I think that migrates into "people choose their speakers to suit all music" once their collections become sufficiently eclectic and they have the means to do so.
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 17, 2015 7:34:08 GMT
Every system I heard has a slightly different take on producing music In the end we end up with a system based on our own preferences
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on Oct 17, 2015 8:06:13 GMT
So, where does making the recording sound like the "real thing" come into the equation ?
Personally, I do like female vocal music, but I hope my system plays everything to a good standard.
|
|
|
Post by zippy on Oct 17, 2015 8:16:50 GMT
Kind of ..
In the sense that the better the speaker the more it shows up any inadequacies in the recording and some artists seem to consistently produce poor sound quality recordings, where others are consistently good. Hence I tend to avoid the bad.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Oct 17, 2015 8:18:46 GMT
So, where does making the recording sound like the "real thing" come into the equation ? It does for me, but that depends on whether you listen to unamplified live music. I strive for the Festival Hall experience: impossible, but it's a good target.
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on Oct 17, 2015 8:20:14 GMT
Kind of .. In the sense that the better the speaker the more it shows up any inadequacies in the recording and some artists seem to consistently produce poor sound quality recordings, where others are consistently good. Hence I tend to avoid the bad. Surely that should be "the better the system" ?
The speaker quality is only as good as the signal fed to it, we have discussed that recently.
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 17, 2015 8:39:59 GMT
So, where does making the recording sound like the "real thing" come into the equation ?
Personally, I do like female vocal music, but I hope my system plays everything to a good standard. For me its the illusion of it. I would say the only way to have a female voalist singing in your room is to actually have the vocalist singing in your room. What we have is something we believe to be realistic.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Oct 17, 2015 10:20:46 GMT
Take, for instance, a saxophone. Have someone play one in your listening room - the experience is intense. Now try reproducing that on your system.
We have a long way to go.
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Oct 17, 2015 18:08:02 GMT
I think that migrates into "people choose their speakers to suit all music" once their collections become sufficiently eclectic and they have the means to do so. No, I don't agree with that. In my experience we all bias our system to suit our listening preferences. If I may be so bold as to contrast MartinT's system and JANDL100's, for example .... MartinT's is awesome at the BIG stuff, while music relying on the subtle interplay of low level dynamics gets short shrift. MartinT likes shock & awe from his system, and, by golly, he gets it. JANDL100's system simply doesn't move enough air to do that. And it doesn't do the jaw-drop impact and slammy speed and razor sharp immediacy of MartinT's either. But it explores the fine detail of low level nuance that simply pass MartinT's system by. MartinT was probably a bit baffled why he was made to listen to a 20 minute Shostakovitch violin concerto slow movement when JANDL100 visited. It sounded fairly dull and tedious, it just droned on going nowhere and seemed like it was never going to end. On JANDL100's system it literally reduces him to tears of grief and sadness. Time stands still - this is the most awesomely heartbreaking playing he has ever heard of anything. He weeps every time. The silences echo like in an empty cathedral, single soft bow strokes coalesce out of the emptiness. It's the most moving musical performance he has ever heard of anything. I have no doubt that some of MartinT's favourite recordings would fall just as flat on JANDL100's system. Two systems set up for quite different purposes. And neither system does full justice to the musical preferences of the other.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2015 19:55:36 GMT
Some good observations Jerry which completely vindicate why you choose your seekers to engage you with how you like you music to sound to your prefernces and why Martin decided on his and John for his choices etc While to quote a famous phrase never the twain shall meet I feel that with the changes that Martin has made al great deal of the shock and awe has been replaced with intrinsic dynamic shading and much greater three dimensional textural layering and tonal rendering which allows much greater insight in to musicians interplay and timing cues. Though fear not it still packs a serious punch dynamically and with top to bottom linearity only now with more refinement and poise. Trying to replicate your delicate intimacy, tonal shading and ultimate spacital information it will not achieve due to the nature of each speaker which goes back to the OP question. You know yourself Jerry as your equipment back catalogue rivals some dealers so you have had the chance to savour many types of amplifiers and speakers and gained a great deal of experience which gives you a good insight plus you know exactly what you like (unlike so many) but in fairness you do like to mix it up a little and try out new presentations. In the same way we all like or have preferences for certain types of styles and presntation of sound we all gravitate towards our personal likes when listening to other systems we use our own reference to benchmark against and judge accordingly which we all do Just to put a thought in the mix since we moved to bucks some 5 years ago I met a kindly chap at the local hostelry who was slightly worse for wear ? turnred out to be a real buff like John anyway upshot was he was made redundant a few months before and had to sell his system to cover his bills and was left with a pair of Neat Petite a naim nait 3 and an old Rega deck. Now 5 years later and an amplifier build reworking of the speakers etc it now makes really engaging music in his converted garage on Saturday afternoon you can sit and listen with out fatigue and it's just plain fun. Conversely some of the more expensive systems produce a purist Hifi sound which beautifies the music with its added sparkle overly sweet mid and presence with nicely rounded and deep bass totally presentation over real musical substance technically very difficult to fault. Does it produce the sort of emotion that Jerry experiences when he is listening to violin concerto not in a million years, that said it works for the owner and to quote that old adage "if it ain't broke don't fix it" This is proving to be a good thread with great experiences being shared
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Oct 17, 2015 20:09:24 GMT
Humorous and, at the time that you visited, pretty accurate. Two things to add: my system isn't so focussed on the big stuff so as to let the fine detail pass by unnoticed any more. As far as I know, what with the number of components that go through your system, yours may well do the slammy thing better, too. More to the point, I still choose my system to cover an eclectic spread of musical styles. It's the presentational style that differs from your preference
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 17, 2015 20:36:39 GMT
Having heard Martins system a few times I can confirm it has a lot more micro detail. I no idea if it do the violin concerto you love however. We all have our musical preferences and on the whole our systems has been tuned to that. I like quite a lively sound based on years of going to concerts, too relax a sound just does not cut it for me. However I still like to seduced too, to feel some of the emotion of the music. Getting the balance is not easy
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Oct 17, 2015 23:07:58 GMT
Over the years my audio system has tended to be built around drums. For me the drums are the foundation. Get the drums sounding good, and the rest falls into place.
Now there's no way on Earth that I'd want to have a drummer and his kit be present in my living room - it's drummers that have caused me the most hearing damage. If you're in close proximity when a crash cymbal is hit you know about it. What I do require is that playback of drums is plausible, rhythmically adept, and with little overhang. Note that I did not mention realistic.
And I like the way my setup plays drums.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Oct 17, 2015 23:19:51 GMT
Chris, the drum sound on the Sheffield Lab recording James Newton Howard and Friends remains my benchmark as the most realistic drum recording I've ever heard. I don't know if you have it but I would love to have your view on it if you do.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Oct 17, 2015 23:31:17 GMT
I don't really like drum solos, but my best recording of a drummer 'going round the kit' is on 'Doggone' by Love on the 'Out Here' album.
|
|