AudioPhiles don't want NEUTRAL, Audiophiles Don't like NEUTRAL (Part Two)

Well Part 2 has certainly started more attractively than the way Part 1 finished

 

Ah ... Yes! ... That really settles the nervous system down a bit!

Speaking of which, my favorite source material for smoothing down the playback system toward "neutral", flat, but full dynamic range is:


This DVD-A is absolutely un-adulterated, straight off of the original master recordings, in a 24-bit/96K multi-channel format.

Set your controls in the middle and listed carefully ...

 

Not!

 

For this reason Ham, I can't wait to share my thoughts on the Valhalla with the HD 580's once it arrives...hang tight!

 

You know, I guess I'm getting old. I would like to hear how those set-ups sound instead of ogling the women! Dear God, I hate getting old!

 

"What is Reality?" "Eat IT! Rat it Raw!" "Rah, Rah, Rah—That's the Spirit."

I apologize in advance to our host for dragging this thread along a bit further.

Noting the squabbling this thread has fomented, my thoughts went directly to the Tao te Ching. If the Tao is about anything, it is about seeing the world as it is and not as we will or wish it to be. So here are some pertinent passages:

I find this passage interestingly paradoxical:

One of those low places that audiophiles disdain is the lower midrange. Because of a number of factors, the record/play chain usually has the lower midrange mis and under-represented. That sonic region usually is regarded as 'murkey' or 'thick' and most cone speakers in boxes really screw up this region. This is also a region of the sonic spectrum where there is a lot of melodic action, with lots of fundamental tones for singers and instruments. Reality is colored more like the 'sound' of a Fisher 500 series receiver than like a pair of Parasound Halo JC 1 monoblocks. But audiophiles [some, not all of course] skew towards clarity and precision [as our host pointed out.] Perhaps on some level that sort of audio presentation is 'better than reality' but by natural extension that means it's torqued out of tolerance as regards sonic 'neutrality'.

 

You raise an interesting point ... to choose a system that a). colors sound to make it enjoyable but then that system is no longer high fidelity by definition of the term or b.) to have a neutral system that conveys all the information on it at the risk of the source sounding bad. Maybe one needs two types of systems...one that colors, one that remains neutral.

 

that is what we call a false dichotomy. It is possible to build a system that does both quite well. No system will be optimised for every recording but once you actually become familiar enough with the choices in audio and the nature of your own music collection then it is possible to build one system to suit your needs.

I would hate to think folks might walk away from this thread thinking they *need* two systems or more. All any audiophile really needs is to manage to get past their presumptions and actually listen and make their choices based on that.

 

I just hope that 3db gets to hear one hi-end system someday, nevermind two or more.

 

^bingo. There is great enjoyment to be had by comparing one's favourite recordings on two such systems to gain perspective and to appreciate the merits of each.

I've upgraded to the point where my system is so neutral it now sucks the enjoyment out of many of my old favourites. But well-mastered material such as Steve's projects sound breathtaking. Sadly, there are fewer excellent masterings in the world than there are bad.

That's why I've ordered a tube amp for my Sennheisers. My system is too polite now...it doesn't add or subtract anything, so if I play an album that underwhelms or bores me, I can slap on the cans and get some colouration to help it along

 

YMMV. I know that you're not suggesting I've made poor synergy choices for my music collection any more than I am suggesting others go out and buy a second system.

We're really not that influential, believe it or not...

 

I want two systems. I want the stereo, analytical system where I can hear the cello player 5 rows back scratching his butt. Then I want a mono system where it sounds like your grandparents console in 1953, big, soft and slushy. I was almost there a few years back, but the wife made me take it down.

 

I've heard some high end systems where I purchased my PSB. I've heared some near top of the line Revels being driven my a Bryston power amp..can't remember the pre-amp and I can honestly say that the sound wasn't something that struck me as being awesome. It did beat my modest system but certainly not as much as I thought it would.

There were two systems that left a much better impression with me and they were certainly not high end. The original Energy 22s being driven by a NAD integrated amp and teh turntable was a Rega Planar 2. The other system was a Yamaha integrated amp pushing out 100Watts per channel driving a pair of Mirage SM-3 and the turntable was an Oracle with Delphi tonearm. The imaging on that system beat the proverbial snot out of the Bryston/Revel combination.

 

I'm just going by the example that Steve had mentioned and you still have trouble with it? I also know my music collection inside and out and I'm going to let you in on a little secret.. I like my system because its very accurate and that it relays information as is without coloring it liek you suggest. I keep saying if you love looking at things thru rose colored glasses, thats your choice. Its not mine.

I hope people walk way from this thread realizing that there a select few in here that push their self righteous opinions on everyone and anyone that has preferences other than those stated get slammed.

 

Move your speakers off of the walls by a couple feet, not permanently, but just to hear how they sound. I think you'll find some enjoyment.

 

It's a small room sadly. Though I corrected the toe-in and placed them straight forward. That made a difference.

 

That's why I got the LCD-2 headphones instead of the HD800. The HD800 is very neutral for a headphone and also accurate and analytical. Possibly one of the most neutral and accurate you'll find in a dynamic headphone. I tried it and couldn't rock out with it. Recordings that used to be whole would dissect to separate pieces that no longer held together as music. The music was lost for the sake of hearing the engineering. I was hearing faults in the recording and faults in the way the HD800 presents the soundstage. Technically the HD800 is a very very good headphone. Too good. They are however awesome for classical and other similar well recorded natural music.

So I got the LCD-2 which is not as neutral as the HD800. It is however very enjoyable with my music. All of it sounds good, even lesser quality recordings. I'm listening to the recordings and hearing music rather than engineering feats. The downside to the LCD-2 is that they are making me want an expensive amp for them. The better amps get the soundstage to open up and helps them to do classical music with a more complete or cohesive soundstage.

In the case of my headphone choices I didn't end up wanting neutral and accurate as much as I thought I would.

 

^great post. Depending on the source material, sometimes I want to hear engineering feats, but most of the time I just want to rock out to music. I can't wait to try out the Valhalla!

 

I know plenty of people in real life who have said that. A few of my friends that are into vinyl tell me that they enjoy the aspects of listening to vinyl that most of us on here find annoying - clicks and pops, belt speed fluctuations, and rumble. They say its part of the experience of listening to vinyl. These colorations are euphonic to them. Although I disagree with their opinions, it proves that your claim "nobody would say that" to be false.

Walk into any record store in the city, find an indie kid and start talking to him/her about vinyl. I guarantee they will say something similar about those euphonic colorations.

No thanks. I'd rather not waste my time.

I disagree with your conceited opinion that people who enjoy the sound of wow and flutter/rumble are idiots.

I would expect it to be frustrating when you're engaging in a conversation with somebody who calls you out on your fabrications.

 

you know someone loves to argue online when they go to the trouble of copying and pasting from an old thread into a new thread to continue arguing.

 

you know someone loves to argue online when they feel the need to try to unnecessarily start an argument with someone who went to the trouble of copying and pasting from and old thread into a new thread to continue arguing.

 

blah blah blah. that's all i hear from you, acdc7369. but, please carry on. i have no intention of engaging you further on any thread we both happen to participate in. life's too short. please do me the same favor from now on and refrain from quoting me and responding to anything i've written, especially when i'm not addressing you....like you did on the last thread...and every other thread i've had the misfortune to encounter you on.

 

They are uninformed, so their views are worthless within the confines of this thread. We wouldn't approach the typical Stiller tailgate (where Bud reigns supreme) to discuss the color, flavor, aroma, etc of craft beer.

Your "conversations" typically go off the rails as soon as a highly informed, experienced member attempts to point you in the right direction. If we were to summarize your views on audio all in one thread it would read as an unprecedented dissertation on how youth and confidence lead to false conclusions.

 

You'll be doing good with the HD580. They're good listening with all sorts of recordings. You can rock out, chill to jazz, engross in classical, it will all sound good and play as music. They don't go to the extreme that the HD800 does, even though I consider both the HD580 and HD800 neutral and balanced.