Shakti Hallographs..

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,040
995
Utah
I had thought that by "black" background we mean a lower noise floor, but I think David is pointing out that there is a distinction and difference between the two. In live events, the background is almost never "black". It can be very quiet accentuating the contrast between sound and silence which increases the sense of dynamics and clarity/detail. I hear this at Boston Symphony Hall and in most studio recordings. But I also think I understand what David means when he writes that there is a background atmosphere or ambiance which one does not want to obscure with a veil that covers over these subtle spacial cues and sense of atmosphere - that which defines the performance space. A quality or black background that a component or tweak imposes universally on all recordings is not good if one wants to understand what the recording actually sounds like. And in this sense, since there is a unique quality to each recording venue, if a tweak or system makes them all sound the same or similar, the system has moved away from sounding natural and or transparent.

So, if I understand David correctly, a system can not sound both transparent to the recording or source and also have a similar black velvety background on every recording. A system can have a lower noise floor with the introduction of a new component, but that is not the same as a blacker background. Most tweaks add a coloration of some kind, so they can make a system sound as if it has a blacker background but not more natural or transparent to the recording. And more natural is not a coloration which makes every recording sound the same but a transparency that makes the best recordings sound very real.

Since this is a thread about a tweak, I presume those who use such tweaks are trying to get a sound which is more pleasing to them. What if some of these tweaks make a system sound more natural to the listener? Is that not a good thing, or do all tweaks add a coloration to the sound which prevent the system from sounding natural, or more real?

The question I have though is does a natural sounding system impose a universal character on all recordings or is it another way of saying that the system is transparent, imposes very little on the recording, and therefore resembles the sound of real instruments in real spaces on the best recordings?

At least this is how I understand David's posts. If I am mistaken, I welcome David's corrections and input.

You're not mistaken Peter, there seems to be an issue with word association here. In regards to backgrounds I see descriptors like "quiet", "silent", "noise free" self explanatory "black" on the other hand is a distinct color and entity, AFAIK it has always been that in the English language. A lot of tweaks and cables claim to remove noise when in fact they're only masking it with a layer of "Black". "Black" backgrounds can be noisy as well as black.

david
 

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,040
995
Utah
Ok, David, let's do a little bit more linguistic dissection and analysis. Black is a color, something that has a clear, simple and direct meaning in visual terms. When applied to audio, it becomes a metaphor derived from that common word. So, its meaning in audio is indirect and inexact. You can look up "black" in 100 dictionaries, starting with the OED, and you will not find a definition of exactly, succinctly and concretely what it means when applied to audio. It may have a clear, unambiguous audio meaning in your mind, but understandably, it just does not have that same crystalline clarity to others. Our individual interpretations of it are likely to vary all over the place, just as our perceptions of sound and music do.

I am not saying "black" cannot and should not be used as an audio descriptor. But, given its ambiguity in an audio context, the word by itself alone is insufficient to convey fully (or nearly so) what it is you are hearing. Additional descriptive language accompanying it might make your meaning clearer to others.

Sorry to digress into this long winded version of "I don't quite understand what you are trying to say." But, yes, trying to communicate what one hears clearly and sufficiently to others in words in English or any other language is, unfortunately, never simple. And, this is not just a problem with describing sound.

I get your point Fitz but on personal association and reinventing the language as we apply it daily but "Black" can have audible noise in the background, "quiet" is simply that.

david
 

JackD201

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
12,308
1,425
1,820
Manila, Philippines

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,040
995
Utah
..as the vaunted OP not quite sure what a discussion regarding black has to do with a Hallograph but hey, knock yourselves out navel gazing fellas

I assure you that we're all trying our hardest only to bring ultimate clarity to your OP :D!

david
 

Ronm1

Member Sponsor
Feb 21, 2011
1,745
4
0
wtOMitMutb NH
I assure you that we're all trying our hardest only to bring ultimate clarity to your OP :D!

david
Interesting cause it appears to be typical effete elite audio verbiage that will strike a death knell to new entries into our hobby. ?;)
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
Interesting cause it appears to be typical effete elite audio verbiage that will strike a death knell to new entries into our hobby. ?;)

Are you talking about how we describe the sound of systems to each other or the effect of some of these expensive tweaks on the interest of new audio/music enthusiasts who are trying to learn more about, and get involved with, this hobby?
 

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,040
995
Utah
Interesting cause it appears to be typical effete elite audio verbiage that will strike a death knell to new entries into our hobby. ?;)

Please post the dumbed down verbiage to enlighten them, starting with "Shakti" & "Holograph"!
david
 

Ronm1

Member Sponsor
Feb 21, 2011
1,745
4
0
wtOMitMutb NH
Are you talking about how we describe the sound of systems to each other or the effect of some of these expensive tweaks on the interest of new audio/music enthusiasts who are trying to learn more about, and get involved with, this hobby?
Just because you want to separate the two make my point.
 

Ronm1

Member Sponsor
Feb 21, 2011
1,745
4
0
wtOMitMutb NH
Please post the dumbed down verbiage to enlighten them, starting with "Shakti" & "Holograph"!
david
What a joke. We have had banter on the shades of black and you want me to dumb this down. You two have done s good job of bringing this to an inane level. You don't need any help from me

A while ago a thread was started to describe 'soundstage and imaging. Over 70-80 pages later all we had were different desciptors from a thesaurus essentially meaning the same thing it's a fools errand.
 

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,040
995
Utah
What a joke. We have had banter on the shades of black and you want me to dumb this down. You two have done s good job of bringing this to an inane level. You don't need any help from me

A while ago a thread was started to describe 'soundstage and imaging. Over 70-80 pages later all we had were different desciptors from a thesaurus essentially meaning the same thing it's a fools errand.

What's the beef Ron?

david
 

Ronm1

Member Sponsor
Feb 21, 2011
1,745
4
0
wtOMitMutb NH
What's the beef Ron?

david
This inane banter on audio descriptors has always been a pet peeve. Discussing Levels of blackness is like discussing levels of 'whisper quiet.' Inane. Most would logically get the point without the need of Power Point.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
This inane banter on audio descriptors has always been a pet peeve. Discussing Levels of blackness is like discussing levels of 'whisper quiet.' Inane. Most would logically get the point without the need of Power Point.

A closer reading of David's posts might indicate that he was actually discussing the difference between a coloration and a lowering of the noise floor. When describing the effect of a tweak, is it not important to understand what the listener actually means?

This thread is about the Shakti Hallographs. The OP asks for descriptions about the sonic effects of these tweaks. I understand that it changes the perception of the scale of the soundstage by exciting certain frequencies and emphasizing them over other frequencies. If that is indeed the case, could someone with more experience with them discuss further their effect and whether or not it is positive?
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
A closer reading of David's posts might indicate that he was actually discussing the difference between a coloration and a lowering of the noise floor. When describing the effect of a tweak, is it not important to understand what the listener actually means?

This thread is about the Shakti Hallographs. The OP asks for descriptions about the sonic effects of these tweaks. I understand that it changes the perception of the scale of the soundstage by exciting certain frequencies and emphasizing them over other frequencies. If that is indeed the case, could someone with more experience with them discuss further their effect and whether or not it is positive?

Peter

To me it would seem it is coloration by virtue of what it does
 

Ronm1

Member Sponsor
Feb 21, 2011
1,745
4
0
wtOMitMutb NH
A closer reading of David's posts might indicate that he was actually discussing the difference between a coloration and a lowering of the noise floor. When describing the effect of a tweak, is it not important to understand what the listener actually means?

Of course it does. That's my point. Effete elite audio verbiage in spades. Heaven help anyone who uses these terms to describe tweaks.
 

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,040
995
Utah
Of course it does. That's my point. Effete elite audio verbiage in spades. Heaven help anyone who uses these terms to describe tweaks.

Don't really see anything effete or elitist here but if it bothers you so much why don't you offer acceptable alternatives?

david
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,601
5,411
1,278
E. England
Dave, you're averse to many tweaks, which I totally get, but make an exception for the Shun Mook Diamond Resonators. Can you say why?
 

Ronm1

Member Sponsor
Feb 21, 2011
1,745
4
0
wtOMitMutb NH
What's your take on the OP? Do you have any experience with the Shakti Hallographs?

I have no take or experience with them, only the Shakti stones. Those I value quite a bit and found very useful. As with anything in this hobby everything should evaluated with care, logic and common sense. It is easy to be fooled whether it's a tweak, h/w or s/w.
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,435
13,467
2,710
London
Dave, you're averse to many tweaks, which I totally get, but make an exception for the Shun Mook Diamond Resonators. Can you say why?

Errr...because they are the bestest - no hyperbole control required there, that's the truth. Jack Nicholson was referring to this truth in a few good men to Tom Cruise (who is a real life audiophile, probably uses Stillpoints)
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing