+1
When resolution gets so high (too high), sound becomes unnaturally obvious and call attention on. That's "enhanced" sound...unnatural. Human ears should not be picking up signals like highly sensitive microphone.
Ron's Speaker, Turntable, Power and Room Treatment Upgrades
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
+1
When resolution gets so high (too high), sound becomes unnaturally obvious and call attention on. That's "enhanced" sound...unnatural. Human ears should not be picking up signals like highly sensitive microphone.
Tango, are you saying that a microphone is more sensitive than a good pair of ears? You may be talking about how a performance is mic'd and recorded and then engineered. I don't hear the first violinist breathing from eight rows back, but a close mic'd recording can pick this up. Do you want the system, or cartridge in this instance, to obscure that detail which is captured in the recording? Clarity and resolution are precisely what I hear when I sit close to an orchestra during a classical concert, though it is not what a microphone which hangs closer to the musician hears. If a detailed sound at the extremes seems unnatural to the listener, I would suggest that there are distortions taking place, artifacts of some kind that do not exist in real acoustic music. Sometimes a very extended and neutral cartridge simply exposes either flaws in the recording or flaws in the rest of the system.
I do understand why some people prefer rolled off highs and lows to what may be the alternative - an unpleasant sound from a system, but, in my experience, live acoustic music is not rolled off at the extremes and resolution or one' ability to hear it all is what the experience of live music is all about. I have heard systems which purport to be transparent and "high resolution", "super detailed" only to feel quickly fatigued and seek refuge in another room. That "detailed" sound is not for me as it is artificial and nothing like the natural sound of live. This whole subject is also very dependent on one's own preferences, perceptions, and exposure to live music.
If Ron prefers a rolled off or "softer" sound, that is fine. There is lots of gear that will satisfy that taste. The question I would ask is where does one introduce the roll off? Is it cumulative with each choice in gear, or is it at the transducers, the cartridge or the speakers. From what I gather, Ron will have an extremely neutral and resolving turntable and speakers. I don't know about the electronics, cables, arm or cartridge.
+1. Agree with Peter.
I don't want to hear the first violinist breathe, but I want to follow the instrument from top to bottom of the note.
I think like with air and seamless, there seems to be a different interpretation of the word details.
Ron I think does not like high level detail as he has experience with certain components that while doing detail do brightness and sterility. Tango probably is thinking about his Lyra on the ortofon arm vs Lyra on the SAT arm
I don't want to hear the first violinist breathe, but I want to follow the instrument from top to bottom of the note.
I think like with air and seamless, there seems to be a different interpretation of the word details.
Ron I think does not like high level detail as he has experience with certain components that while doing detail do brightness and sterility. Tango probably is thinking about his Lyra on the ortofon arm vs Lyra on the SAT arm
IMHO the main question is that resolution should be subjectively balanced along all the spectrum. The details are all there all the time, our attention is however directed mainly to a few. I have listened to systems that sounded bright and sterile just because of poor bass performance.
I agree but I wouldn't describe that as a detailed system. That is an unbalanced system.
I don't think that's what he meant Peter and certainly not desiring rolled off anything or diminished resolution, it's about system competing with the music for attention. I hear many systems that enhance and aspect of the reproduction and wow the listener with their abilities, wether it's impressive bass, soundstage, image, thickness, etc. they're all a type of coloration and you focus on that then music is pushed to the background. It's tough to pull away from such low hanging fruit but that's a type of homogenization and IMO what drives people to tweaking "the system" more & and listening to specific parts rather than the music and it's emotional content without analysis or distraction.
david
david
Higher resolution to me means just that. More ability to hear the smallest musical and instrumental details in the reproduction that otherwise go missing with gear that cannot resolve said details. Therefore, the 'illusion' of creating the real increases with the higher the resolution. This does not mean an increase in 'brightness' or any other artificial artifact of the reproduction chain. So, if a cartridge can resolve more information and bring that to 'life' more realistically, then I'm all in.
Anything else is actually, at least IMHO, adding a coloration to the chain...you might as well say you like 'veiled' sound! ( which if you do, then why be in this hobby??)
Anything else is actually, at least IMHO, adding a coloration to the chain...you might as well say you like 'veiled' sound! ( which if you do, then why be in this hobby??)
+1 to Tango and David.
The fundamental shouldn't be dominated, or even competing with other information that should be many magnitude quieter in actual decibels. But that is how I like it, and it is clear countless audiophiles prefer heightened details.
Detail is not resolution. The fundamental can be very resolving, and have a LOT of character but the fact is it can do this while being 10, 20, 30db louder than someone breathing etc.
Folsom, David, Tango, we are discussing Ron's comment about choosing a cartridge, specifically his post about preferring a cartridge which is less resolving at the frequency extremes. Is this a position with which you agree? Ron is assembling a system which would seem to excel at resolution with the Pendragon and American Sound turntable. I am not advocating for "heightened details". That is often a function of the recording if the system is clean. Sure sonic attributes like staging may be heightened by phase issues and extension may be exaggerated by the choice of gear. I am not talking about that. Those are distortions and colorations as you say. I am talking about resolving the energy and resonances as produced by an instrument and its acoustic environment and then captured on the recording.
Yes, details can be distracting, and artificial/enhanced "detail" is often an artifact and distortion, but if a particular recording happens to capture a solo violinist or bassist breathing because it was close mic'd, would you rather select a cartridge which is not resolving enough to reproduce that breathing, or the full extension and impact of a bass note or a triangle piercing cleanly through the silence with all of its decay?
Perhaps I don't quite follow how a highly resolving system gets in the way of the music. In my experience, as long as it sounds natural and is not distorted with audible artifacts, a more resolving system sounds more like live music to me. I have rarely heard a system which can capture even a large percentage of the sheer energy and harmonic information that an instrument like a cello or piano produces in real life. Don't we want a recording which can capture all of that information and a system which can reproduce it, as long as it sounds natural and not artificial?
Do you think a cartridge (or entire system) should make a close mic'd recording sound more distant and less up front and detailed? Perhaps it depends on whether one prefers to sit up and away in the first balcony or in the seventh row in the orchestra section. I went to hear a cellist and pianist give a concert in a chamber setting with a few of the WBF members from Boston. We were about 15' from the musicians in a large living room with 25 or so people. That sonic experience was all about sonic detail, overwhelming, loud, and clean. And the music came through beautifully. I dream of a system that is able to reproduce that majesty of sound, in all of its detailed glory.
It's the word Resolution that's causing some controversy, I don't think lower resolution is what Ron's after it's a question of presentation and overall balance, more natural and less hifi. He also doesn't want a bright sound which is fair enough and that doesn't mean rolled off.
The system should allow the recording play as it was mastered, close mic'd or whatever without editorializing.
david
Strictly speaking (ah, strictly writing) I agree with each of these four points.
Higher resolution per se at frequency extremes is not brightness (you totally reasonably assumed I meant brightness even though I didn't write "brightness").
But I don't have to mean brightness carelessly to make my point. I can use my writing about "hyper-fast" sound, as exemplified (to my ears) by the Zellaton system we heard in Munich. That hyper-fast sound to me (which I did not care for and which I heard as not very "natural") is wonderfully resolving at the frequency extremes to the many people who loved that system.
This is fair -- as your subjective preference. More detail does not, for me, equal more naturalness or a greater illusion or an easier suspension of disbelief.
I hear attention-grabbing detail as a sonic artifact -- one which takes me away, and not toward, believability.
(In this I think I am agreeing with David.)
Dear Peter,
I have a system that is highly resolving with excellent high frequency extension. I built it that way. And I know how highly resolve the Opus1 is. If the MSL is more highly resolve than this then it is the cart to avoid definitely in my system. Ron is cautious of this while he hasnt listened to both carts in his system.
I do understand the attractiveness of a super high resolution sound system. It is all about personal preferences and one's definition of natural sound. Not trying to make side, but ddk and Folsom seem to understand excatly what I was talking about. I wasnt talking about rolling off some frequency or reducing resolution sothat I would hear less or hear only what I want to hear. I was talking about the right level of high resolution that allow me to hear everything that you also hear but not in a distinct presentation that the musical performance or recording not intnded to.
If I were to make an analogy as to watching a movie. I dont want to watch Saving Private Ryan and see that the dirts on Private Ryan's uniform is obviously fake. My HD TV does that. My audio system can do that too if I donot balance things out. Super high resolution can bring about suspension of disbelif. But I dont want a gear that create suspension of disbelief all the time. I listen to musical performance I dont go wow at every tiny little things I hear. I wow at the musical performance, "Disappears" as ddk might say, but I also hear everything that take place there. So to me when a piece of gear show something too much or enhance something too much, it could be both beneficial but also go the other way to my system...a tool to make "balance."
Tang
Just to give a real example, in my experience the VTL MB750 hides detail. Not only in treble, but also in the bass articulation. Very enjoyable, but once you find what you are missing it is difficult to forget about the whole orchestra.
I see your point Francisco. For me music must be heard and felt and not analyzed and when I'm impressed it's by the beauty, complexity, simplicity, excitement sophistication, noise, etc., etc., etc., of the piece of music and the prowess for the musician, it's kind of physical and mental emotional connection with the live venue which makes the experience and that's what I want from a system, the last thing I want is to be impressed by something that's only by the system even if it's amazing. These turntables and cartridges that I cling to don't have an obvious signature and listening to music from a good recording becomes as real and natural an experience as the original venue even if different. Having these tts and carts allows you to experience that venue slightly differently each time like moving your seat from the orchestra to the rear of the all or in the balcony. This is one those things that one needs to experience rather read.
david
I agree with Peter..the more detailed the less noise or distortion in the system. My experience is the more detailed should not be just in the high frequency range, it should be uniform from top to bottom and should have qualities like live music. Very powerful and weighty with a musical nuance that is very captivating. There is something amiss sometimes,not enough break in time has occurred. That's my experience..lastly never underestimate what a microphone can pickup especially in a well recorded classical recording. YMMV
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |